6 ms·

>> When Spike originally released this list, many noted the lack of female filmmakers. Lee accepted that critique and released an updated list. >Does that mean

>> When Spike originally released this list, many noted the lack of female filmmakers. Lee accepted that critique and released an updated list. >Does that mean that he saw movies that he felt were worthy of being on the list and (perhaps subconsciously) decided not to list them? Or did he end up listing some movies that he didn't feel were as good as the others, just to meet the quota? The charitable interpretation would be statistics: if 90+% of recognised films have been directed by men - and I'd expect more men to have directed films in, say, the 1950s than the present day - it's not terribly unlikely that a list would feature only men through chance alone. Given that such lists are going to be loosely defined - I imagine Lee could come up with several, different, lists on any one day - I don't see why including women directors would be to the detriment of a list and only to meet a "quota."

forgetsusername 11y ago
>I don't see why including women directors would be to the detriment of a list and only to meet a "quota." Obviously women aren't a detriment to the list in and of themselves. It's the fact that Mr. Lee made a list of must see movies, was critcized, then went back and changed the list based on the criticism. So which is the list of must see movies? What movies were "must-see" pre-criticism, that were no longer worthy post-criticism? PC run amok.
- mootothemax 11y ago
  >It's the fact that Mr. Lee made a list of must see movies, was critcized, then went back and changed the list based on the criticism. He added to the list; no films were removed. >So which is the list of must see movies? What movies were "must-see" pre-criticism, that were no longer worthy post-criticism? The current list. And none. >PC run amok. I can't write a sensible comment to this.
  - xyzzy4 11y ago
    Did he specify which films were added in the second revision?
    - mootothemax 11y ago
      >Did he specify which films were added in the second revision? Lee revamped the list to include eight movies by five female directors, bringing the total to 95. The Piano– Jane Campion (1993) Daughters of the Dust– Julie Dash (1991) The Hurt Locker– Kathryn Bigelow (2008) Sugar Cane Alley – Euzhan Palcy (1983) The Seduction of Mimi– Lina Wertmuller (1972) Love and Anarchy – Lina Wertmuller (1973) Swept Away – Lina Wertmuller (1974) Seven Beauties – Lina Wertmuller (1975) http://www.openculture.com/2014/11/spike-lees-list-of-95-essential-movies.html http://www.openculture.com/2014/11/spike-lees-list-of-95-ess...
      - LeifCarrotson 11y ago
        Spike wrote on this change on his Kickstarter blog: > As The Fall Semester Nears At NYU Grad, We Thought We Would Reprint My Revised Essential Film List (With Women Directors). Many Of You Informed Me Of That Omission. > Thank You For That Coat Pulling. > Peace And Love, > Spike https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/spikelee/the-newest-hottest-spike-lee-joint/posts/574874 https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/spikelee/the-newest-hot...
  - forgetsusername 11y ago
    >I can't write a sensible comment to this. Just as I can't write a sensible comment responding to someone-- just one guy remember -- making a "top list" of movies, then having to update it based on a silly criticism. He picked his top movies. Do you think he deliberately left films by female directors off his list? Then who cares. >The current list Thankfully we have the PC crowd around to tell Mr. Lee what movies are his actual top films.
    - mootothemax 11y ago
      >Just as I can't write a sensible comment I'm glad that we can find common ground to agree on.
    - aninhumer 11y ago
      >then having to update it based on a silly criticism. He didn't have to update it. He chose to update it. >Thankfully we have the PC crowd around to tell Mr. Lee what movies are his actual top films. Or you know, we just infer that his most recent statement of his opinion is most likely to be representative?
      - JoeAltmaier 11y ago
        That's how the PC thing operates. "You don't have to revise your opinion. We'll keep piling on the guilt and doubletalk meantime. I'm sure you'll make the right decision, because you're not a bad person right?"
        aninhumer 11y ago
        And equally, the opposition says "He changed his stated opinion[0] after a social justice flavoured criticism? There's absolutely no way he could agree with them, so he must be lying out of fear!" I prefer to assume people are telling the truth about their opinions until shown evidence to the contrary. [0] EDIT: Which, incidentally, was never asserted to be complete, and indeed solicited suggestions for improvement.
- mikeash 11y ago
  You publish some code saying "this is the right way to do things." You get criticized for leaving out some important stuff, so you go back and revise it. Which is the right way to do things? Which techniques were "the right way" pre-criticism, and are no longer the right way post-criticism? PC run amok, or a natural give-and-take that comes from exposing your ideas to other people? In the programming world, we don't expect our first attempts to be perfect. Why would we expect that here?
coldtea 11y ago
>I don't see why including women directors would be to the detriment of a list and only to meet a "quota." It's changing the list post-facto that suggests that he added those extra movies just to meet the quota -- i.g. they were not the ones that he first thought as best.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
dsr_ 11y ago
"The charitable interpretation would be statistics: if 90+% of recognised films have been directed by men - and I'd expect more men to have directed films in, say, the 1950s than the present day - it's not terribly unlikely that a list would feature only men through chance alone." Can we get a statistician here, stat? We have a jar with 9000 blue marbles and 1000 white marbles. We reach in, blindly, 87 times. What is the expectation that we have drawn 87 blue marbles? We expect this one time in ten thousand. When we observe this in real life, we ordinarily suspect that the procedure is flawed in some way, rather than pure luck.
- Retric 11y ago
  10% seems high. From google: "Women Comprise 7% of Directors" .93^87 = 0.0018 However, what's the ratio among films not just directors? (can't find) How about women among top grossing films of all time? http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/domestic.htm http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/domestic.htm vs. http://www.thewrap.com/15-highest-grossing-movies-directed-by-women/13/ http://www.thewrap.com/15-highest-grossing-movies-directed-b... So: Frozen, Shrek, Twilight, Kung Fu Panda 2 .96^ 87 = 2.9% Looking at the top grossing list for women you see a lot of chick flicks and kids films. Arguably that's bias, but not vs. the director.
- tosseraccount 11y ago
  8% of people in prison are females. No. It's not random.
- facepalm 11y ago
  Are women making roughly the same type of films as men? Maybe his list simply reflected his interests?
- mootothemax 11y ago
  >We have a jar with 9000 blue marbles and 1000 white marbles. We reach in, blindly, 87 times. What is the expectation that we have drawn 87 blue marbles? >We expect this one time in ten thousand. When we observe this in real life, we ordinarily suspect that the procedure is flawed in some way, rather than pure luck. Doesn't that presume equal distribution? What if all the white marbles are at the bottom of the jar? Or stacked on one side? Just like me wondering about how many woman directed films in the 1950s, I think that there may be painful numbers of skews and presumptions that'd affect the final result. (although - mea culpa - yeah I was very lazy with that original comment)

forgetsusername 11y ago

>I don't see why including women directors would be to the detriment of a list and only to meet a "quota." Obviously women aren't a detriment to the list in and of themselves. It's the fact that Mr. Lee made a list of must see movies, was critcized, then went back and changed the list based on the criticism. So which is the list of must see movies? What movies were "must-see" pre-criticism, that were no longer worthy post-criticism? PC run amok.

mootothemax 11y ago
>It's the fact that Mr. Lee made a list of must see movies, was critcized, then went back and changed the list based on the criticism. He added to the list; no films were removed. >So which is the list of must see movies? What movies were "must-see" pre-criticism, that were no longer worthy post-criticism? The current list. And none. >PC run amok. I can't write a sensible comment to this.
- xyzzy4 11y ago
  Did he specify which films were added in the second revision?
  - mootothemax 11y ago
    >Did he specify which films were added in the second revision? Lee revamped the list to include eight movies by five female directors, bringing the total to 95. The Piano– Jane Campion (1993) Daughters of the Dust– Julie Dash (1991) The Hurt Locker– Kathryn Bigelow (2008) Sugar Cane Alley – Euzhan Palcy (1983) The Seduction of Mimi– Lina Wertmuller (1972) Love and Anarchy – Lina Wertmuller (1973) Swept Away – Lina Wertmuller (1974) Seven Beauties – Lina Wertmuller (1975) http://www.openculture.com/2014/11/spike-lees-list-of-95-essential-movies.html http://www.openculture.com/2014/11/spike-lees-list-of-95-ess...
    - LeifCarrotson 11y ago
      Spike wrote on this change on his Kickstarter blog: > As The Fall Semester Nears At NYU Grad, We Thought We Would Reprint My Revised Essential Film List (With Women Directors). Many Of You Informed Me Of That Omission. > Thank You For That Coat Pulling. > Peace And Love, > Spike https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/spikelee/the-newest-hottest-spike-lee-joint/posts/574874 https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/spikelee/the-newest-hot...
- forgetsusername 11y ago
  >I can't write a sensible comment to this. Just as I can't write a sensible comment responding to someone-- just one guy remember -- making a "top list" of movies, then having to update it based on a silly criticism. He picked his top movies. Do you think he deliberately left films by female directors off his list? Then who cares. >The current list Thankfully we have the PC crowd around to tell Mr. Lee what movies are his actual top films.
  - mootothemax 11y ago
    >Just as I can't write a sensible comment I'm glad that we can find common ground to agree on.
  - aninhumer 11y ago
    >then having to update it based on a silly criticism. He didn't have to update it. He chose to update it. >Thankfully we have the PC crowd around to tell Mr. Lee what movies are his actual top films. Or you know, we just infer that his most recent statement of his opinion is most likely to be representative?
    - JoeAltmaier 11y ago
      That's how the PC thing operates. "You don't have to revise your opinion. We'll keep piling on the guilt and doubletalk meantime. I'm sure you'll make the right decision, because you're not a bad person right?"
      - aninhumer 11y ago
        And equally, the opposition says "He changed his stated opinion[0] after a social justice flavoured criticism? There's absolutely no way he could agree with them, so he must be lying out of fear!" I prefer to assume people are telling the truth about their opinions until shown evidence to the contrary. [0] EDIT: Which, incidentally, was never asserted to be complete, and indeed solicited suggestions for improvement.
mikeash 11y ago
You publish some code saying "this is the right way to do things." You get criticized for leaving out some important stuff, so you go back and revise it. Which is the right way to do things? Which techniques were "the right way" pre-criticism, and are no longer the right way post-criticism? PC run amok, or a natural give-and-take that comes from exposing your ideas to other people? In the programming world, we don't expect our first attempts to be perfect. Why would we expect that here?

coldtea 11y ago

>I don't see why including women directors would be to the detriment of a list and only to meet a "quota." It's changing the list post-facto that suggests that he added those extra movies just to meet the quota -- i.g. they were not the ones that he first thought as best.

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

dsr_ 11y ago

"The charitable interpretation would be statistics: if 90+% of recognised films have been directed by men - and I'd expect more men to have directed films in, say, the 1950s than the present day - it's not terribly unlikely that a list would feature only men through chance alone." Can we get a statistician here, stat? We have a jar with 9000 blue marbles and 1000 white marbles. We reach in, blindly, 87 times. What is the expectation that we have drawn 87 blue marbles? We expect this one time in ten thousand. When we observe this in real life, we ordinarily suspect that the procedure is flawed in some way, rather than pure luck.

Retric 11y ago
10% seems high. From google: "Women Comprise 7% of Directors" .93^87 = 0.0018 However, what's the ratio among films not just directors? (can't find) How about women among top grossing films of all time? http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/domestic.htm http://www.boxofficemojo.com/alltime/domestic.htm vs. http://www.thewrap.com/15-highest-grossing-movies-directed-by-women/13/ http://www.thewrap.com/15-highest-grossing-movies-directed-b... So: Frozen, Shrek, Twilight, Kung Fu Panda 2 .96^ 87 = 2.9% Looking at the top grossing list for women you see a lot of chick flicks and kids films. Arguably that's bias, but not vs. the director.
tosseraccount 11y ago
8% of people in prison are females. No. It's not random.
facepalm 11y ago
Are women making roughly the same type of films as men? Maybe his list simply reflected his interests?
mootothemax 11y ago
>We have a jar with 9000 blue marbles and 1000 white marbles. We reach in, blindly, 87 times. What is the expectation that we have drawn 87 blue marbles? >We expect this one time in ten thousand. When we observe this in real life, we ordinarily suspect that the procedure is flawed in some way, rather than pure luck. Doesn't that presume equal distribution? What if all the white marbles are at the bottom of the jar? Or stacked on one side? Just like me wondering about how many woman directed films in the 1950s, I think that there may be painful numbers of skews and presumptions that'd affect the final result. (although - mea culpa - yeah I was very lazy with that original comment)