Brainwashed: Sex-Camera-Power (2022) - full transcript

As a filmmaker and as a woman,

I found myself drowning
in a powerful vortex

of visual language,

from which it is very difficult
to escape.

Yeah, Lara, are you there?

I'm just sitting here
hoping to hear from you,

I don't care if it's three
o'clock in the morning

because, I've been thinking
about all the things

that could possibly happen
to you because of this,

and I don't want you to ruin

your whole acting career
over it.



You know, all they have to do
is call sag

and pull your card
and from now on,

for the rest of your life,

you'll come up not cleared
for work and that's the end.

This visual language,
this cinematic visual language,

dictates to us ways of seeing

that are so specific,
it almost feels like a law.

The great writer
James Baldwin once said,

"not everything can be changed,

but nothing can be changed
until it is faced."

What we're gonna do today is
look at a series of film clips

from a list movies,

the ones that win cannes
and the academy awards,

as well as cult classics,
and other notable works.



And what we're looking at is
how shot design is gendered.

That means that male lead actors
and female actresses

are filmed very differently,

consistently differently and
consistently in a certain way

that can be labeled
and tracked and named.

Now, I personally see
a very clear connection

between this visual language
of cinema,

employment discrimination
against women,

particularly
in the film industry,

and an environment of pervasive
sexual harassment, abuse,

and assault.

I had the chance to meet
Laura mulvey last year,

the "original gangster"
film theorist

who identified the male gaze
for all of us.

I only actually used the
male gaze once in the essay,

I think, but it's become
its dominant memory.

The essay really came
out of my love of cinema.

Well, having left university
in 1963,

I really spent a lot of my time
just going to the movies.

Only retrospectively realizing
that part of my pleasure

in this film going was that
I was watching these movies

as a male spectator.

Almost all of us are
familiar with the phrase

the objectification of women,

but it's worth taking a
moment to break that down.

What exactly is an object
and what is a subject?

So let's get back
to basic grammar

in like an English sentence
for a second.

The cat eats the mouse.

The cat is the subject,

he's eating the mouse,

the object is acted upon.

Similarly,
the man sees the woman,

the man is active doing
the locking

and the woman is looked at.

Here she comes.

We'd like a statement from you...

This phrase,
to-be-looked-at-ness,

was made famous by
Laura mulvey back in 1975

and used to describe
the basic essential position

of women in cinema.

That dress will be ahead
of fashion a hundred years

from today.

You ain't seen nothing yet.

The accessories are even cuter.

J” I can hear the river call j“

j” no return, no return j“

Through time, the woman's body

becomes more and more sexuahzed,

but the basic structure of
looking remains the same.

Even though mulvey's
foundational work

was written in the '705,

we still totally normalize
the male gaze in cinema.

You know, I think
the majority of people

don't ever really question
that form of looking.

It's so normal it's like
the idea of a fish asking

if it's wet.

It's the stuff that
I think you thought,

and maybe I thought,
well, everybody knows this,

it's in the ether,
but it's the ether.

And so to name it and
to show it is, you know,

something that I believe
can change the world.

The poet philosopher,
Ralph Waldo Emerson

once made a beautiful remark
that I feel speaks very well

to the situation.

He said, "perception is
not whimsical, but fatal.“

you know, this is something
that people like to say,

like they think creative work
and films are whimsical.

It's just my vision. It's
just my idea. It's whimsical,

but no, it's really serious.

It's fatal, and it impacts us
on the deepest possible level.

As filmmakers
we have to be courageous

and be willing to be that force.

Willing to speak our minds,

willing to say,
"hey, wait a minute,

what's wrong with this picture?

What are you telling me?

What's the visual rhetoric
that we're looking at?

It doesn't feel good.
It doesn't feel correct.

Let's rethink this."

I think sometimes with films
that are considered

part of the canon,
part of, you know,

what are the best
quote unquote films,

there is a reticence to even
question how they were made

and the stories that they tell.

And I think that it's okay to
still love and to see a film

and say it's great,

but that it has some issues.

And I think
without questioning it,

we're doing a disservice
to our own humanity.

Now most of you guys
are probably aware

of the idea that there's
a sexist element to script,

dialogue, and character.

You know, we know that
we'd prefer not to see women

always playing a maid
or a sexy babe,

as opposed to being a ceo
or something like that.

That's something that
we're well acquainted with.

What's less well known
is how shot design itself

is perpetuating these
different positions of power.

So when we talk about
shot design,

what exactly does that mean?

We're talking about
subject, object,

the visual relationship,

framing, camera movement,
and lighting,

and how all of these techniques

contribute to the narrative
position of the characters.

So the first thing
is subject, object.

When we see a shape like this,

we know it means that
this guy here is looking

at this person over here,

who happens to be a woman.

- Haven't I seen you
somewhere before?

This pov shot can be done
in one shot, like this.

It's dropping down.
We need to get that adjusted.

It's ridiculous.

I should just drop my brushes,
and just, fuck it. Oh!

It's amazing what do
you think about that, man?

Pretty amazing. Jerry! Jerry!

Or in two separate shots.

- Hey!

I think a lot about how
to create points of view.

It's not just optical,
it's perceptual,

you know,
we are experiencing the...

You're putting the audience
in the character's shoes

so that they aren't
just seeing directly

what the character sees,

but they are aligned
with them emotionally

and in their thought process.

What's interesting
about Robert Montgomery's,

"lady in the lake" is that
it's an extreme example

of what subjectivity is.

So it becomes
this point of view shot

throughout the whole film.

It aligns with my ideas
about a male point of view

and what is the male gaze.

And about sort of the image
of a certain kind

of Hollywood beauty
or Hollywood victim.

Framing of shots.

Women actors are often shot
with fragmented body parts.

And that fragmented body
can be part of, of course,

a pov situation.

So you have one shot
somebody is looking,

second shot, fragmented body.

- What is that noise?

What noise?

Really, sir,
there wasn't any noise.

Or it can be in one shot.

And again,
repeating the pov structures.

Another thing that's very
common is a female body

on direct display
for the audience

without a specific person
looking.

This is just like
general audience display.

I think we have to consider

that it is through
the formal visual language

that we are effectively
communicating meaning.

And we inherit
so much subliminally

that comes from this language

and it has to do with how
shots are composed and framed,

how they're assembled and
ordered in a sequence of shots.

All of that becomes
the grammar and syntax

by which meaning
is conveyed to a viewer.

So in a visual culture,
such as ours,

in which there's
a ravenous appetite

towards the female as object,

if the camera is predatory

then the culture
is predatory as well.

Camera movement.

A common thing that we've
all seen a million times

is a pan of a female body.

And that can, of course,
be a horizontal pan

or a vertical pan.

Furthermore, what you
very often see is slow-mo,

as a way to emphasize.

And with men,
when do we get slow-mo?

Action, military, right?

- Heel kick to diaphragm.

80 men get slow-mo for action,

and women get slow-mo
for sexualization.

The dissemination of
these kinds of shots

is actually a sort
of global hypnosis

around how masculine
power brings satisfaction.

Whether it's objectifying women

or killing
or pretending to kill.

This is propaganda
for patriarchy.

Lighting. Lighting
is a bit more subtle.

Normally a male lead actor
gets to have 3D lighting

with shadow and depth,

and he's located somewhere real

in a space that we understand,

whereas Rita Hayworth here,

this is two frames

from Orson welles'
"lady from Shanghai,"

Rita Hayworth is shot
in this timeless zone

of female beauty.

Women are not allowed to age

and they're not really allowed
to have full-on

lives as subjects.

Myself and other directors,

we have been conditioned
to present women, actresses,

in the best light possible.

So we put nice soft lights up

and use a nice long lens
and, you know,

set it at a high angle,
not looking up at something.

And, you know, all the
different ways to film women.

I don't worry
if a guy has wrinkles,

because that just makes them
look rugged as they get older,

but you don't wanna think
about that for women.

Can I kiss you?

You know, I got this
great movie recently,

it would've moved the needle,

it was very great for me,

and they decided to go younger.

And, what can you say?

So, that happens a lot,
that happens a lot.

I have a lot of sadness,

and just even talking about it,

I have a lot of, oh.

'Cause I love to work.

I think this visual
language really contributes

to female self hatred
and insecurity in a way

that is not insignificant.

What is normalized as beauty
is really seen specifically

and dominantly
through a male gaze.

I think that really changes how

we relate in the world
in general

and not necessarily
in the best way.

Shot design is the meta message,
right?

It's the aesthetic
that is normalized,

and it's very sneaky
kind of in that way.

- Priest, let me in.

Here in "super fly"

the cult classic
by Gordon parks Jr.,

we can see a number
of the techniques

that we've been discussing
so far.

We have the man
in the subject position.

Although, the two heads are
photographed quite the same,

suddenly we get the music,

fuzzy lighting,

slow-mo,

body pan.

One of my students
when she saw this clip,

she said, "the minute
you see the two heads

in the bathtub,
you start waiting for the pan

of the woman's body."

Obviously they're both naked
in the tub.

We do not see the male body.

Watching this "superfly"
bathtub scene,

yeah, I mean, that's
an actor's worst fear.

That, you know,
they are given a script

that they've agreed to work on,

and the director
totally objectifies her

by the choice of shots,
the placement of the camera,

and the editing choices.

All of these techniques
that we've just reviewed

contribute to the narrative
position of the characters.

And very often in ways that
seemed strangely irrelevant

to the story.

- More!
- No more.

In an ideal world, we would
be able to see a huge amount,

a huge variety of films
getting kind of equal amount

of play.

You know, so if you are
a heterosexual male,

and you want to photograph
some woman's behind,

I am certainly
not the sex police.

I am not telling you what to do.

I'm not saying do not do that.

I'm just pointing out
the fact that a whole lot

of majorly acclaimed
directors through time

have done just that.

And since 96% of the films
through time

have done just that,

there isn't a whole lot
of wiggle room

for those of us who are
sick of seeing these things

and are sick of the result
of that kind of attack

on our selfhood.

For women, because you're
looking at those films,

for instance, she would
like to shape herself

to be that object of the gaze.

But she thinks,
some part of me, which is me,

is not matching to that,
you know, image.

So I would just,
kind of toss it out.

So, in that case,
she loses her own self,

she feels empty.

All of her, you know,
attention or energy

is spent for the external,
you know,

establishment of her image.

But when she sits down,
she feels empty.

That's the problem.

So here we have very clearly

the narrative position
of the woman

and her to-be-looked-at-ness
place delineated,

while we hear on audio,

the names of all
the male filmmakers,

and we see the male
cinematographer shooting her.

"Our desires," of course,
they're not referring to me.

Traditionally
the audience has been assumed

to be a cis male heterosexual

lined up with the cis male
heterosexual director,

lined up with the director
of photography,

who controls all the shots,

lined up with a male subject
in the frame.

And they are all looking
at the female object.

This is the standard
line of identification.

Now, obviously, if you are
not a male heterosexual,

you're going to inhabit this
process of identification

in somewhat a different way.

And depending on
where you're located,

you know, for example, if you
are a female heterosexual,

which would be me,
how does this play out?

How does this affect us?

When I was a student
at the ucla film school,

I was very completely
obsessed with my work

and I was surrounded by
my films on every level

and I was a complete go-getter.

And if somebody
would get in my way

and I needed to get into
the mix room or something,

I would just be like,
"here's $20 move, go, go.

I need to do my work."

I was a complete subject.

I had no problem with that.

But what happened when
I tried to be romantic

or go on a date,

that's when I got into trouble.

I experienced myself
as to-be-looked-at-ness.

I experienced myself
as an object.

I didn't know how to act.

It was very confusing for me.

And I had a very hard time
integrating those things.

So I sort ofjumped
from object position

to subject position
where I identified

with a male subject
as an active mover.

And I had no idea how to be
a woman as an active mover

and also be sexy.

And this kind of is just
a little tip of the iceberg

about how this stuff
affects us personally.

So here's the next scene
in “contempt."

I'm aware that this scene
is supposedly a comment

on female objectification.

Supposedly the producers
forced godard

to show more of
brigitte bardot's behind,

but whether he had an intention
to be sarcastic or not,

the impact on a gut level
of seeing a film like this,

and being told
that this is a masterpiece

along with all the other films
that we'll be seeing today,

that it's one masterpiece
after another,

think about how that affects us
deeply, internally as women.

It's pretty intense.

You know, this talk is
kind of confrontational

and all this stuff,

but I want people to know,

you know,
it's built on my sadness.

I know.
It's built on my struggle.

It's built on my sadness.

You know,
it's not a beautiful thing

that I'm talking about here.

But Nina, don't you think
all women feel that sadness?

All of my own
narrative fiction films

have been centrally
concerned with expressing

the abject feminine

and the wound
that is carried deep inside.

It's really such a sacred
place to make cinema.

It is a sacred act.

You are really entering
people's imaginations

and their psyches
in such a way that

it should be treated with care.

It's a place of magnification,

it's almost like speaking
on a microphone.

Whatever you say it's amplified,

so just being aware of that,
it's so important.

The researchers green and Brock

coined a term,
which is transportation,

transportation is the effect
of movies and television

on viewers that moves us
from where we are,

when we walk into a theater,
into a new world.

It takes us from the
familiar along a continuum,

into a new place.

And we go into a state of
suspension of disbelief,

and in that state, we have
the highest knowledge gains,

the biggest shifts in attitude,

and the greatest changes
in behavior

or behavioral intention.

This is the power of
storytelling on the screen.

In "lady from Shanghai,"

we can see so many
of the basic gendered

shot design techniques

that continue to inform
filmmaking today.

Lover, this really concerns
you more than anyone else.

J” don't take your arms away j”

so here you can see
the men in 3D lighting

and 3D space controlling
the story,

controlling the narrative.

Did you know about that, lover?

No I didn't.

Shut up, George.

Rita Hayworth, of course,
is in a bikini

while everyone else
is fully clothed.

And of course, we have
the ever present male subject

looking at the female object.

Rita Hayworth is floating in
a strange dislocated space.

Maybe we'll call it
male fantasy space.

In this clip
and in subsequent clips,

the beauty of the woman
can be seen

as having a certain power,

you know, the power
to attract the gaze.

This is what we're always told,

like the way to be powerful
as a woman is to be beautiful.

But to answer that
and to respond to that,

I would like
to quote Angela Carter,

who says that women have to
be seduced into femininity.

And what does she mean by
seduced into femininity?

She really means seduced
into powerlessness.

And how are we seduced
into powerlessness?

By glamor.

That's it, keep it up.

Lovely.

Love, love, head up. Head up.

Yes. Yes. Yes.

So glamor, in my opinion,
is a coverup,

is a veil and is a sort of bait

and switch for powerlessness.

A woman's agency
is always interrupted

by the way that we
frame her as a spectacle

at the same time.

Whatever action she's doing
it's super important

to make sure that she
has a certain aesthetic

and a certain look that is
specifically sexually attractive

for a heterosexual male gaze.

Who's that girl?

Which one?
The one I was talking about?

- Yeah.
- The blond? Yeah.

You went with her?
You didn't try to fuck her?

I try to fuck anything,
you know that.

She didn't go with it?

No, she didn't go for it.

Naturally, she knew better.

What do you mean
she knew better?

She knew you were an animal.

She knew it was no good
if you go with her.

Her reputation will be ruined.

I thought he was talking to you,
Vicky.

- That's the same guy?
- Yes, it's the same guy.

- I gotta break his neck.
- He was over here yesterday.

- He was here yesterday?
- You missed him.

I was at the house yesterday

and he was over here.

So as usual,
we have the men in 3D space.

We have the men talking to
each other about a woman.

We have her legs fragmented.

We have her legs in slow-mo.

Same old, same old.

There is one interesting
thing though about this scene

that I want to dissect.

And that is the way
that audio is handled.

When you look at the scene,
you notice that,

Robert De Niro
is looking at Vicky

and she's far away from him.

So you think that it makes sense

that we hear Robert De Niro
and his friend talk,

but you don't hear Vicky talk
because she's far away,

but maybe not, okay?

We actually did
some research on exactly

how the scene was shot
and laid out the dimensions.

Here's Robert De Niro,
he's with his friend

on one side of the pool,

and here's Vicky way far away.

That's why we can't
hear her talking, right?

But maybe not, because how
come the other two guys

who are sitting exactly
right near Vicky,

we can hear them perfectly well.

And they are equidistant
from Robert De Niro.

So basically what we
have here is something

that when we watch the movie,

we would have absolutely
no awareness of this.

It infiltrates our consciousness
in a subconscious way.

And maybe that's why when
a young woman shows up

to pitch a film
to a male executive,

he just sees her mouth moving,

but he doesn't hear
a single word that she says.

Absolutely objectification
of women

impacts hiring practices.

I think for all of us
who were exposed

to sexually objectifying media,

we all be embed it a bit
in our perception

of how women should be.

It becomes this way
of dealing with women

that is primarily around
their sexual value,

that if they're attractive
to you.

And so absolutely has everything

to do with certainly how
you're treated on the job.

The challenge is that employment
discrimination in general

in the entertainment industry
is not enforced.

Coming out of film school,
we have 50/50 gender parity

and we've had that for a while
in the top us film schools,

and yet the top 250
films directed by women

back in 1998 was 9%.

And moving up to 2018,
we're down to 8%.

People are really happy
for women

to be attending film schools
50/50 at parity with men,

as long as they're paying
money into the system.

But when we move into
the professional playing field,

and we're asking the industry
to pay money out to women,

well, that's where
the doors get closed.

At the very heart of the issue

and the work that I've
been doing is title vii,

which is equal employment
opportunity law.

Hollywood has been
the worst violator of title vii

of any industry in
the United States of America.

Even worse than coal mining.

It wasn't always this way,

in fact, the very first
narrative film,

the very first use of film
to tell a story

versus just documenting
an existing event,

features a woman subject,
a woman protagonist

and was created by a woman
producer, writer, director,

Alice guy blaché, in 1896.

During early Hollywood,
during the silent era,

there was a significant amount
of women

working in the new industry

that had a significant amount
of power, of artistic agency.

This is a really special
moment for women directors.

“The red kimono"
by Dorothy Davenport

expresses the inner
subjective experience

of the main character,

who was forced into
prostitution.

Once the transition
to sound takes place,

wall street is brought in
because the transition

to sound has significant
financial demands

and so the masculinized culture
of wall street then begins

to structure Hollywood.

The most pressing need today

is to start the flow of capital

which turns the wheels
of industry.

Women are maneuvered
out of these positions

of artistic, creative power,
and then for 40 years

there were only two women making
feature films in Hollywood,

Dorothy arzner and ida lupino.

Go ahead and stare,
I'm not ashamed.

Go on, laugh,
get your money's worth.

Nobody is going to hurt you.

I know you want me
to tear my clothes off

so that you can look
your 50 cents worth.

50 cents for the privilege
of staring

at a girl the way your wives
won't let you.

So that you can go home
when the show is over

and strut before your
wives and sweethearts

and play at being the
stronger sex for a minute?

I'm sure they see through you
just like we do.

Dorothy arzner's
women defined themselves

and very beautifully so.

Sadly, she was a rare exception

and a male perspective
continued to control cinema

for decades.

I think the history of
Hollywood often times, you know,

has made it so that the word
director is synonymous

with a male director.

You know, that's what it
has been for many years

and still is, I think,
to this day.

I, you know, I never thought,

oh, I'm going to go to school
and be a film director.

You didn't say that back then.

Maybe I could be an editor
or a script supervisor

or some other job that
girls could do on a movie.

Never occurred to me
when I was in school,

went all the way through
and got a master's degree,

never occurred to me that
I could be a director.

No, actually I wanted
to talk to you

about dawn's project,
"real life"

it could be exactly what
Cyrus is looking for

and I was thinking we get
somebody really big to direct,

maybe penny Marshall?

What? Shut up, listen,
and learn.

Avoid women directors,
they ovulate.

By the time I started prepping
to make "daughters of the dust"

I was very much aware I was,
you know, a graduate of afi,

a graduate of ucla,

and I was very much aware of
point of view camera placement.

So I very much placed my
camera within the circle,

within the culture of women.

I wanted to depict something

that had never been seen before.

Once I saw a pink satin case
for jewelry for each woman

in a shop window.

I couldn't afford
that case for myself.

And I didn't ask nobody
to buy it for me, you know.

But in my mind I put
all those bad memories

in that case
and I locked them there.

I don't let nothing in that case

or nobody outside the case
tell me who I am

and how I should feel about me.

Yeah, in 1991, when we did,
when we were at Sundance

and I had
"daughters of the dust"

and you had "queen of diamonds,"

we were kind of like
pushed to the background,

it was like "nice job, girls.
See you later."

And all of the other
filmmakers who were there

who were male did go on
to make, you know,

many, many films after that.

I would've sworn that
by the turn of the century

that there will be 50%
of people making films

would've been women.

And due to that,
the whole way of thinking

about the image and about gender

would've been
completely transformed.

And it just seems
extraordinary thinking back,

how little progress
has actually been made.

You know, when I went to
Sundance with my first feature,

I couldn't get an agent and
I couldn't get a distributor.

You know, and I would
have male agents write me

to see the film and then they
would say, "it's not for me

or it's not what
I'm looking for."

And then you would look
at their rosters,

like this was just 2013,

you know, I would look
at their rosters

and their rosters were all male.

Then it's like "okay, well, I
know what you're looking for."

You know, what kind of
coded language is that?

There's still only 3 women

in competition out of 21 films.

And that's because the director
of the film festival said,

"we just look
for the best films.

It has nothing to do
with gender,

we just look for
the best films."

With all due respect,

this comment does not reflect
very much understanding

of the concept of diversity

and the way that the idea
of good film is created

through identification
with what is being shown,

that's how we...

I love this film,
I relate to this film

because,
because it talks to me, right?

That's how we define
what a good film is.

Burn 'em!

Put down the cellphone.

Get out of the way.

I can't get a shot!

So Kathryn Bigelow's film
"hurt locker,"

which was the first film
where a female ever won

best director, was a film
about men, featuring men,

watching men in action blowing
things up in slow motion.

It's also quite interesting that
every single department head

in this movie was male.

Gender is a huge factor
when you look around the sets.

Things haven't changed
that much,

I feel like
it is mostly white men

and even in my own productions
where I've funded myself,

I'd hire a white man
and he hires all white men

and I was like, "oh, did I
have to communicate with you,

like, to make it inclusive?"

There's no question that,

because so many men are
directors of photography, 95%,

the male gaze is definitely
normalized in our society.

Even when a woman is the
protagonist of a film,

she is still often
objectified and exploited.

Here's the opening scene
when we are introduced

to Carrie, who's the
protagonist of this film.

We're learning about her
as a person,

she's klutzy at sports,

you can't win a game
with her on the team.

She's bullied a bit.

You eat shit.

Then suddenly,
we cut to the interior

of the girls' locker room.

Slow-mo, fuzzy lighting,

naked women.

All while we have the names
of the male filmmakers

superimposed over the scene.

You have to wonder,
I mean, the last time

I was in a woman's locker room
I wasn't prancing around.

- When you see what's happening
is completely predatory.

It takes the development of
that, as bell hooks says,

oppositional gaze
to really kind of like,

not just take things
at face value

and to investigate a little
further and ask, like,

what is this communicating?

So here we get the girl
who was being bullied,

who was the subject of the story

in a completely
non-sequitur scene.

This one student told me,

"when I'm in the shower,

I'm imagining how I look.

When I'm alone in the shower."

You can't even have
an experience of your own body

without seeing your own body

from this like weird
perspective of, you know, that.

So many of the examples, I
wanted to watch and just enjoy,

the way that
they are supposed to be,

the way that they
are supposed to be fun,

the way that they are supposed
to be tantalizing or sexy.

My first reaction was to
just ingest it that way,

because that
was the easiest thing

and I had to consciously
decide to lift the veil

of my perception
and it brought up anger

and it brought up the way
my own mother taught me

to think about my body
and the way she thought

about her body.

And I'm thinking about
the way I'm being taught

to think about my body on
a minute by minute basis.

We've secured the perimeter

but I don't think we should
hold it for too much longer.

Well, in watching
the avengers movies,

even when I'm watching Scarlet
Johansson play "black widow"

and she's taking a very
active role, right?

It still makes me
feel like women,

even at their most empowered
in culture right now

are still subject to this
predatory way of looking.

We're seeing this woman
maybe as a boss,

but we are seeing, you know,

yes, details of her chest
or, you know, boobs, or butt,

or whatever.

So it is working on your
brain in a subliminal way,

like, in a subtext.

I think it does have an effect

and we all are susceptible
to this.

Communists claim to leadership

can't be upheld much longer

and if rapid change
is not forthcoming,

today's relatively calm protests

could be seen as the calm
before the storm.

I've had a pretty shitty day
so far

but it looks like
it just got worse.

Even in Patty Jenkins'
"wonder woman"

the actress almost looks
like she's walking down

a model's runaway.

It's ridiculous when you
have these wonder women,

power women,
and yet they are shot

and they're stylized, and
they're costumed to look like,

you know,
another post modern Barbie.

If that's all we're seeing,

it's invisible, it's the air,
you don't notice the air.

So that, it's just as likely
for a woman to reproduce

those tropes as it is for a man.

Notice bill Murray,
we get his face,

we get his feelings.

He's in 3D light.

He's having an experience,
a human experience of his own,

whereas the lead actress
is introduced

via see-through underwear,
fuzzy lighting,

fragmented body.

And one might wonder if this
is supposed to be her face.

"Bombshell" is interesting
because the content of the film

is ostensibly feminist.

It's about women who were
sexually harassed on the job.

Then they went into a
lawsuit against Roger ailes

and they actually won.

There's only one scene
where we see

sexual harassment happening
in front of the camera.

- Let me see your legs.

So let's watch how that
scene was constructed.

- It's a visual medium, Kayla.

Come on.

Higher.

Come on, higher.

That's fine, Kayla.

Needless to say this shot
is not from Kayla's point

of view, right?

How would you shoot that
scene where you really felt

like we're feeling
what margot is feeling,

but not being exploitative
about it or objectifying her?

Could it have been better
if we just implied it

and stayed on her face?

I mean, that would've been
another choice

or if we showed her gaze
on the guy

and just watch her watching
him more, you know.

There could've been
other ways to do it.

As audre lord said,

"the master's tools
will never dismantle

the master's house."

We could apply that quote to
the male gaze way of filming.

When you use those tools to
reinforce, reenact, rekindle

objectifying women,
then there's a problem.

Here's another film,

in this case directed by a woman

that has been described
as feminist.

It features the objectification
of very young girls.

And while your topic
such as in "cuties"

can be about the objectification
of women and girls,

in the case of "cuties,"

you can still perpetuate
a way of shot design

that really appropriates
the male way of looking

and really just
regurgitates that male gaze,

even though you're a female
director.

It's important to
remember that the male gaze

onto young girls
is not a new phenomenon.

Pretty baby was nominated
for the palm d'or

at the cannes film festival.

Leon, I think I'm kind of
falling in love with you.

It's the first time
for me, you know.

How do you know it's love

if you've never been in
love before?

'Cause I feel it.

Where?

In my stomach.

The reversal of desire
with younger women

is completely...

It's ubiquitous, it's
pervasive and it's so erroneous

and it's so harmful.

I mean, you see it
time and again

in the way that, like,
courts will rule in favor

of the predator because
they'll say, you know,

"it was consensual."

This whole consensual thing,
right?

I don't know.

I don't think the 13 year-old
even knew what to consent to.

It's difficult to
think of any examples

where boys are shot like this.

In fact, boys are recruited
into the male gaze

at a very young age.

Hoochie mama.

What does that mean?

I don't know but it feels right.

Nice.

This right here
is a long standing

and very popular shot design
angle on a woman's body.

Of course, we have many
sexy male stars.

How are they shot?

Almost always full body and
involved in some sort of action.

In "crazy rich asians"
there's a scene

where the woman character
looks with desire

on her boyfriend.

- Hubba, hubba!

Notably, his body is full frame
and he moves into action.

Her ' e m cuarén's " roma"

there's an unusual case
of full frontal nudity

for a male actor.

And yet consistently
it's full frame on his body

and he's involved in
a military style action.

Here's even a further example

where we have an overt
sexualized object of the gaze,

men performing
in a club for women.

And yet amazingly their
bodies are not fragmented

for an extended sequence.

I do know and I've been told!

Big dick
ritchie got a cock of gold.

- Big dick ritchie
got a cock of gold.

- Now, let's give it
up for the virgin king.

- Let's give it up
for the virgin king!

- There's a kind of taboo
on the male body

being exposed
as the object of the look.

So he has to be protected by
having this energetic drive.

Ho, ho, ho, ho!

On the other hand,
the female protagonist

takes on this role of spectacle.

General anesthetic?

General anesthetic.

And the male protagonist is
often controlling the movement

of the story forward,
controlling people,

controlling the woman
and subordinating her

to his will and determination.

How's that?

Perfect.

You know, I always think
of the sleeping beauty story

where you have, you know,
the fairy tale

that we read as children.

The prince is galloping
along and he chops down

all the thorns and he
reaches the sleeping beauty.

You look back on a movie now,
like "sixteen candles"

"oh my god, that was
like a date rape drug."

I mean, trying
to get people drunk,

I mean, stuff that we've been
programmed to just accept

and actually not accept,
embrace, you know, emulate.

In fact, the position
of the passive object

is so deeply coded as feminine

and the passivity
of that feminine object

is seen as highly sexual,

to a point where, for
example, in this scene

from "after hours"

the sexy passive object is so
passive, she's actually dead.

I'm dead, in bed, and the
camera does go slowly down

the stream of my body.

Yeah, and I look back at
that now and just like

"wow, what was I...

It was just part of
what you did, you know?

It was part of the storytelling.

Stories about very
beautiful, unconscious women

continue to exert
a certain fascination.

I didn't realize that
as a young man,

I was, in a way, trained
to objectify women.

What I found in watching
this talk was,

if this woman is the object
and we're looking at this woman

from this lens,

we will see so many women
from that lens,

which makes us think
we can just have

whichever one we want, right?

And when that woman doesn't
have the speaking roles,

we see her, like in "raging
bull" we can't hear her talk.

So we have no idea
of her emotion.

You have no idea of
who she is as a person,

to what you were saying.

So it's like, of course I can
just objectify these women

and just use them
and do whatever I want.

Because even in the
imagery that I've seen,

I've never had to think
about how she feels

about my actions.

Harry Dean Stanton in
complete 3D lighting.

His eyes are closed.

We can hear
Natasha kinsky's voice

but we can't see her
because we're completely

in his point of view.

When he looks up, we
get to see the 2d vision

of the young woman.

If there's anything
you want to talk about,

I'll just listen, all right?

I'm a real good listener.

The way we look at films
will always change

and there will always
be a cultural moment

that may allow us to
reflect on a film's impact

in different ways.

There's a nostalgia
that is dangerous.

That when you're putting a
film in a moment of nostalgia

you are saying that
everything it says is perfect

and I think that's where
we get into trouble.

Take your clothes off.

Mooki, I already told you
it's too fucking hot

to make love.

It's too fucking hot? Yeah.

Why are you always cursing?

I don't fucking curse that much.

Of course you fucking
curse that much.

What the hell are you
talking about, mooki?

- All you do is curse.
- I do not.

Anyway, no rawness is jumping
off tonight, all right?

And that's it.

No rawness?

Mooki, come on.

I mean it. I'm not playing.

I'm not playing.

Spike Lee is, of course,
the director of this film,

as well as being the main
character and the subject.

So, controlling the
story on multiple levels.

Look, freeze, don't move,
I'll be right back, okay?

Just stay there.

Just stay there.
Freeze. Don't move.

I'll be right back.

What the hell you got me
standing on the bed for?

Where the hell are you going?

Thank god for the neck.

Thank god for the knee caps.

Thank god for elbows.

Thank god for thighs.

Thank god for the right nipple

thank god for the left nipple.

It feels good.

Ah, you likes
you likes you likes.

In this clip, first
of all, you, of course,

have the male voice
describing the female body

while she's silent.

But there's another interesting
aspect to this clip.

The beginning of the scene,

spike Lee is trying
to convince this woman

to have sex with him and she's
pretty strong in saying no,

but by the time we get
to the end of the scene,

she's decided to agree.

And she appears
at the end of the scene

to be actually very happy
that she said, yes.

This kind of scene
where a woman says no,

and the man insists and
then in the end she's happy,

this kind of scene we could
make a 10 hour lecture,

just going from one example
to another,

showing kazillion examples of
where that kind of behavior

is normalized
and even celebrated.

And this too
is a very important reason

why we have an epidemic of
sexual abuse and sexual assault.

The sudden change in
music tells us exactly

how we're supposed to
feel about this scene.

Music is a super important
element of every film,

but only 5% of film composers
are women.

Will you kiss me?

Did you hear me?

"365 days" was one of
the top watched films

in 2020 on Netflix and they
are now making 2 sequels.

Excuse me, miss.

Shut up. Shut up.
Shut up. Shut up.

Shut up!

You're hurting me.

Shut your mouth
or I'll really hurt you.

Remember you promised me
you'd come back.

I promise.

I just want you to know

I think

you're the sweetest guy
in the world

and the most handsome.

This kind of scene
certainly contributed

to Yale fraternity men shouting

this in front of a woman's dorm.

The challenge with media
images around sexual assault

and around rape culture and
around how women are portrayed,

is that it normalizes
those types of behaviors

and so what people absorb
is through those images,

then they absorb those
behaviors as normal,

which then translates
to how they treat people

in the actual world.

Extensive research
over decades has shown

that after watching
sexually objectifying media,

men are more likely to
engage in sexual harassment

and abuse.

If you have systems
of representation

that always subjugate
certain people and frame them

and shoot them and always
makes them the objects

of the gaze rather than
self acting agents,

you're more likely to have
a culture that is susceptible

to rape myths.

The male protagonist is the
subject, he is not the object,

he's the hero,
he's who we revere.

That's very hard
to dislodge then,

when you're faced with a
woman telling her truth

and her story.

80% of the entertainment
media content

that is distributed around the
world is made in Hollywood.

These images are coming
from an industry

that is built
on power imbalances,

which results in sexual
harassment and abuse

in the work place.

And the cycle
goes round and round.

One of the people

who was involved with the studio

asked to meet me for dinner.

He was like,
"you could play her roles,

you'll be like the next one."

And I'm thinking, yeah, he's
right. I could be like that.

And I do, I love her.
She's great.

But you know, he was like,
but you have to do this.

I was just thinking like,
"oh, I can't wait to get home.

I wish I hadn't had talked
to this guy tonight"

because I couldn't
see it ending well.

He was still talking
the whole way

and he was getting more and
more agitated as we drove

because I was still just
politely declining his offer.

And he said, "I want you to
take a nude jacuzzi with me.

Can you just come right
now and take this?"

This is ridiculous.

I started to get out of the car

and he reached across me

and palmed the window

on my side and put it,
and blocked me with his arm.

And he said, "look, I can help
you or I can fuck you up!"

Through the me too movement,
we know that 94%

think about it,
94% of women in Hollywood,

whether they're actresses
or behind the camera

experienced sexual harassment
or assault.

Because people think
the entertainment industry

is magical,

they don't remember
that these are workers,

that these are actual human
beings who are on your screen.

The thought pattern
or the assumption

that the actor's body
is fair play,

both within the role
and outside of the role,

has been part of, you know,

sort of the industry's mindset.

It absolutely was that
if an actor said no,

in any way shape or form,

they were absolutely considered
a troublemaker, certainly,

and they would absolutely
be in fear of their job.

They were disposable.

Yeah, Lara are you there?

I'm just sitting here,
hoping to hear from you.

I don't care if it's three
o'clock in the morning.

I can't imagine
what would be so important

to cause you
to do that to yourself.

Please think very seriously
and call me tonight

because I think we can fix this.

If we can get you back
to work in time

to not have it destroy
your life.

So that is the message I
came home to back in 1989

after refusing to do a sex
scene that was not in my script.

And it basically, effectively,
ended my acting career.

Exactly what she said.

I think there's always
gonna be a power dynamic

with people on set
unconsciously,

whether they wanna verbalize
it or not, intellectually

and I feel it
and I've experienced it.

I've been in a couple
of situations

where I'm like trying
to improvise

and someone, the director,
chimes in and says,

"okay, now get down
on your knees

and give this man a blowjob."

Which is like non-consensual,

they didn't talk
to my representatives,

they didn't talk to me

and so I'm like a deer
in the headlights,

that's like pressure,

that's like,
the crew is watching,

what are you gonna say?

Cry and go like,
"please don't make me do this?"

This problem is not
limited to Hollywood.

Léa seydoux, star of
"blue is the warmest color"

said that the excessive hours
spent naked filming sex scenes

was humiliating and left her
feeling like a prostitute.

The film won
the top prize at cannes.

Maybe that's why
in his next films,

the "mektoub, my love" series,

which premiered
at the prestigious

venice international
film festival,

director kechiche
felt empowered to use

even more coercive methods
on set.

Reportedly including the
very heavy use of alcohol

in order to obtain his
unsimulated sex scenes.

And then the statements
from directors

saying "oh, I wanted to
get an authentic reaction

from somebody."

Well, that's not the
realm of make believe,

that isn't the realm of drama.

That's the realm of actually
choosing to assault somebody

for the sake of art,
or in the name of art.

How is rape culture normalized?

- Its ok, don't mind me,
keep on going.

There are really
three key elements

that we see on the
screen and in real life.

One is the objectification
of women's bodies,

another is the glamorization
of sexual assault,

especially on the screen.

And the third is disregard
for women's rights and safety.

Even if a hand is not
laid on another person,

these are all of the elements
that create an environment

that allows one group to
gain and maintain power

over another.

I look back at my encounter
with Harvey weinstein

at the Beverly Hills hotel.

He was in his white bath robe

and he wanted me to...

His penis was coming out
of his robe

and he wanted a massage.

I was like no,
but I'll get you a masseuse

and heart racing,
how do I get out of here?

And he says I'm making
a very big mistake,

"you're making
a very big mistake."

And I said
"I'll never be that girl."

The me too movement
spoke out loud about

what so many of us
had experienced privately.

In my own fiction films I often
tried to express cinematically

how it really feels
to be a sexualized object.

"Magdalena viraga"
was my first feature film,

which I made
at the ucla film school.

It stars my own sister, actress,

and long time collaborator,
tinka menkes.

This is one of 5 films
we made together.

Here, she's playing a
highly alienated prostitute.

The issues that
we are talking about,

they are not just, you know,
the images that we see

in films,

you know, they are not just
who's behind the camera.

The issue is also
in this larger context

of who decides what gets seen.

You know, we have mostly
men making decisions

around what gets distributed.

It's what gets out into the
world is curated by a male gaze.

- Hello, handsome.

Even in this Sci-Fi
vision of the future,

we get the same old
male subject,

sexualized female object
once again.

- You look lonely.

I can fix that.

This cinematic visual language

which surrounds us on all sides

can really feel like the bedrock
language of rape culture.

In fact, the name of the female
lead character in this film,

played by Ana de armas, is joy.

But they spelled it
interestingly, j-o-i.

In porn culture, j-o-i stands
for jerk off instructions.

So just think how women feel
when they go see this film,

then they hear about all
the academy award nominations

that it's getting or got.

- It's this horrible cycle
that Hollywood has,

because it takes in what the
population has that's toxic

and then it feeds it right back,

which then energizes it
and brings it right back.

So there is this
circle of violence.

This is all connected,
it's all connected.

- One key principle of feminism
was that the female body

was a sight of struggle.

But, it shifted to
realizing that the image

of the female body was
also a sight of struggle.

The image does not
refer to women.

This image is being
appropriated and produced

by male consciousness.

All of these techniques,

they're definitely deliberate.

We don't know if they're
conscious or unconscious,

but they're deliberate.

Deliberate decisions.

Someone made a decision
how to shoot that person.

It's worth taking a moment
to consider

that the objectifying
camera techniques

we've been discussing
can also sometimes be seen

in other types
of very telling contexts.

For example,
in "silence of the lambs"

the character buffalo bill
is in the masculine zone

with the goggles as the murderer

with Jodie foster as
the object of his gaze.

But, when he is
feminizing himself,

when he's in the
so called feminine position,

he is shot just like a woman.

- Watching the scene
with buffalo bill

when you have this almost
deformation of self

to uphold this white male
gaze behind the camera,

it was the internalized sexism
and internalized misogyny

that was showing up in that
space for that character.

It's not only for cis women,

but also trans folks
and other folks

who don't fit the boundaries.

As I was re-watching the scene
and just remembering

how much trauma has been
caused by a scene like that.

So I'm gonna show you a film now

that is not an a list movie.

In fact, it's probably an f.

It's been called racist trash
by Roger ebert.

And I would agree with that.

But I'd like to take a look
at the scene today,

as it's quite relevant
for our analysis.

We have a white plantation owner
who calls a black slave

to come to her room.

She informs him that if
he doesn't have sex with her,

that she will report him
as a rapist,

which would be
a death sentence for him.

So basically she's raping him.

The camera pans up
from a fragmented body part.

Notice who's wearing the clothes
and who is being undressed.

The woman is in control of
the scene on many levels.

-Ah, ah!

And finally we get
a long sexy body pan.

The reason I've included
this clip as cringe worthy

as it is,

is I feel it's the exception
that proves the rule.

And when we're talking
about these scenes,

they're not really about sex.

They're about power and the
person who is shot like this

is not empowered.

So the example
of "mandingo" shows that

shot design
systematically perpetuates

these power dynamics that
exist within our society.

So in that film you see
the same like sweeping pans

of his body,
the fragments of him.

The true essence of like
what we're talking about here

has to do with power.

And commodification of bodies
and how bodies relate

to each other in terms of power.

When you have,
as foucault says, webs,

webs of ideology

and they are all interlocking

and they're all reinforcing
a certain way of looking

and a certain way of experience
that you're locked out of,

it takes a lot of strength
to say,

"I don't see things this way

and I'm going to create
something that is different."

The sexual predators
in amirpour's film

meet a very unexpected avenger.

There's a saying that
people say that if people

were to get rid of all
the sexual predators

that there would be
no film industry.

And they would have to
start from the ground up

and they laugh about it.

They're like,
"haha you know, we would have

to start from scratch."
And I'm like,

then let's fucking start
from scratch.

You have to build your own house

and you need your own
tools to build your house,

and your tools are your
creativity, your work,

your work ethic and your ability
to produce above and beyond

what someone else is
clamoring for, let's say.

Women directors often
depict their characters

as full on subjects with
their own intense desires.

Nature, nature, I am your bride.

Take me.

Dunye's "watermelon woman"
makes the close ups so close

that we feel the
sensation of the experience

and we are blocked from
gazing in the traditional way.

Without question, throughout
the history of cinema,

sex scenes have been shot with
the male gaze appropriating

and objectifying women's bodies.

If that's what we do

then there's a lack
of imagination

that we'll have to make up
for ourselves.

In this scene, Gus Van sant

shoots male and female bodies

very equally.

Van sant may have been
influenced

by Agnes varda's film,

"happiness."

In my own film, "phantom love"

the sex scene tries to
focus on the woman's psychic

internal experience.

For tarkovsky lovers,
you'll notice my homage.

I think of this poem
by Gwendolyn Brooks that,

it's "still do I keep
my look, my identity."

And she talks about how
each body has its art

and how they're like, whether
they're in a state of abject

whatever, or they're
in an exalted state,

they still maintain this
intrinsic human quality

within them.

In "Juniper tree"
nietzchka keene focuses on

the inner life
of her characters.

People often feel, you know,
I should be freed

from all those things that
are unconsciously soaked

into our own mind.

Those emotions are always
accumulated somewhere hidden,

so that's the part which
is anger or, you know,

the sadness or dissatisfaction,

all these emotions are,
I imagine, like cooking,

these things are ingredients
of your meal.

So you chop, you know, you cook,

you do all these things,

but, by the end, you'd like
to get some nice dish.

So it's a transformation
of this raw material.

Which has lots of
creative energy in there.

Ugh!

Films about female rage
have been made by women

for many, many generations.

So there's a history,
there's a legacy,

but today there's something
very different in the climate,

social, political climate

that is connected
to mainstream media.

And so, it's a really
unique moment for filmmakers

for women filmmakers
who are interested

in taking on these issues.

What are you doing? It's okay.

What are you doing?

What are you doing?

Hey, I said what are you doing?

When it comes to money and
when it comes to opportunity,

things don't change
unless you force change.

My having been able to take
this issue to the aclu,

who began their campaign
for women directors in 2014,

and the eeoc, equal employment
opportunity commission,

that began
their investigation in 2015,

attacking the pocketbooks
of the studios for violation

of title 7, which is equal
employment opportunity law.

So right now, in 2021
we are beginning to see

the results of this action.

In a historic sign
of real change,

Chloe zhao, a woman of color,
won the academy award

for best picture
and best director.

Hey, find anything interesting?

Rocks!

Her film features
the perspective

of a woman in her 605.

What does desire look like

when it's not about subject
and object?

I think we're in a process
of discovery, you know.

Each of us obviously is
in a process of discovery

for ourselves in our own lives.

So now as a filmmaker,
as a non-binary filmmaker,

I'm asking myself,
where does the camera go?

These questions
that you're asking,

well, where does the camera go?

And who am I looking at?

Am I showing how
it feels to be looked at?

And am I showing
how it feels to see

while I'm being looked at?

What is the heroine's journey?

"Portrait of a lady on fire"

is concerned with the issue

of subject and object
in the case of two women

who seem to desire
each other equally.

Here we get the question
of, what is a subject,

what is an object?

And how does the object
find a way of becoming,

discovering their own
subjectivity,

having their own subjectivity
and becoming a subject,

which changes the power dynamic.

In my own films,
working with tinka,

she often broke through
the 4th wall

and confronted the camera,

claiming her own
subjective perception

of both herself and the world.

Would you like a ride?

Whether you're
a heterosexual man

or you're a woman or
you're anything in between

or on the sides or whatever,

you know, how do I
actually experience desire?

How do I actually experience
my day?

You know, because we've
been taught, what is time?

What is sex?

What is a man? What is a woman?

We've been taught
all these things

and if we just accept it,

we're trapped in the
collective consciousness

which tends to be on
a kind of low level.

What happens if you try
to listen inward,

if you try to tune in on
a very, very, very delicate

and quiet way to what
you're actually experiencing

and what would be actually
the true expression

of that experience as
translated into a shot.