Filmmaking / Directing : Criterion President Says Lack of Black Directors in Collection is Harmful by Karen "Kay" Ross

Good article. Once again, I have a mainstream-versus-independent viewpoint. I must say in truth that Criterion is among the least of offenders, being mainly a historical catalog. As such, it naturally seeks to reflect what was seen in major media in the past, and that has generally blocked Black film, at least in North America. The film industry - particularly mainstream studios and distribution - have traditionally and effectively locked out Black filmmakers en masse. The exceptions, including (with respect) Ava DuVernay, are in fact those which prove the general rule for various reasons acceptable to mainstream. It's not because they make large waves or show a radically different viewpoint. Let me say without qualification and without equivocation that mainstream PERMITS very specific Black filmmakers into its circle, for very specific industry purposes. I am currently involved in a retrospective project which goes back to the 1930s in film and TV, considering casting and voices, and I can tell you that in 2020 practically nothing substantial has changed in the images and symbols we are permitted to see and the way they are articulated. In fact, the 1950s and 1960s were in many cases reaching to be more real and meaningful in it's diversity and inclusion. I can give specifics, but will not here as this is already too long a comment...

Diversity means diversification. (all races, genders)

Paul Grammatico Loved that movie

"Lack of BLACK Directors in collection is harmful" - let me play the Devil's advocate here an ask; WHY? What's race (or gender) have to do with knowledge and competence? When it comes to getting the job done; a person can or can't - regardless of race, color, gender or any other snowflake melting political buzzword. Can someone explain it to me?

Real simple...because if you ARE knowledgeable and competent and are being passed over because of the color of your skin then it's all too wrong.

Doug Nelson Because it is part of an intentional exclusion of the voices of Americans. It is not about competence, right? It's about showing what has already been created. So... you know.

I suppose it's just me because I just look for folk who can/will do the job. That's it. I don't care about race, gender, sexual preference or anything else. I never have & never will - I carry no shame and no guilt. History is history - not all of it was good; but I think that if we erase it, we will be more likely to repeat it (good, bad or indifferent). Can we all just get back to makin' movies?

Re-watching one of my favorite TV shows, 'The Good Wife', and one of the early episodes deals with "implicit bias". Sometimes it's not about acknowledging a bias that is absolutely present but rather assuming that the bias is readily accessible, so making a well-rounded collection of films available is in an effort to offset a potential "implicit bias". That is to say, don't wait to smell smoke before creating a fire escape plan.

I'm with Doug Nelson in one sense: I don't care who/what you are as long as you're competent and professional. On the other hand, the conscious exclusion of competent work based on ANYTHING (race, gender, etc., etc.) other than the competence of the work, should be redressed. And should be redressed within the framework of why the work was excluded in the first place (race, gender...), so that the context is not lost, that the history is remembered - and not repeated.

John Ellis and Doug Nelson You both make good points. I assert that if we "just make films" and ignore the power of the medium, we are lying to ourselves. Because we know what the early filmmakers learned and got excited about: that the moving picture (with or without sound) film is possibly the most powerful artistic medium ever created. As directors and producers, we are articulating symbol and image and attitude. We are promoting those things by definition, and we are revealing our own attitudes, no matter what we think we are saying on screen. It is important then for us as creators to be aware of the messages we are implying and well as stating outright.... that's a bit distant from the "inclusion in a catalog" subject, but the same thing applies. And I believe without qualification that catalogs and the symbols within them are created intentionally.