2 SPONS INDEX - GLAAD

2y ago
27 Views
2 Downloads
3.95 MB
23 Pages
Last View : 3m ago
Last Download : 2m ago
Upload by : Ryan Jay
Transcription

STUDIO RESPONSIBILTY INDEX1

contentsONCTI3 METH OD OLOGY5 OVOSTSESUTR8 ERITO2VTR0TEVHAI1BHIE2INMT ULU:CONSCEIVENIONYRSTDLAFNOILOMIASITDDLISTADRI G LA A D’SB E82N2TEESUOD1CSURSOERTHESTE N T M EDIANER BROWA RTHES20NMTEAMSTUDIOS2316Studio responsibility IndexFOURRSETORYCTTOC H A LLE N GECO M MEN DA6 RTIONGSS7INM O U N T PICT UNDFIARAREF9PS1OXHE WALT0D14 TISNEYUWUPIUAIRT2

2013 StudioResponsibilit yIndexFor nearly two decades, GLAAD hascarefully tracked the presence of LGBTpeople and characters on television andremained a constant advocate for moreinclusive programming from the majornetworks. This has increasingly beenachieved through quantified research,which often paints the most detailedpicture of where the major networks standwhen it comes to LGBT-inclusivity intheir programming. With GLAAD’sannual Network Responsibility Index andWhere We Are on TV report, GLAADprovides facts and figures to shape boththe public conversation and our staff’sprogrammatic discussions and meetingswith networks. As a result of these reports,the industry has improved the quantityand quality of diversity on TV.For years LGBT characters were few andfar between on TV, with independent cinema often being the only place the LGBTcommunity could see their stories beingtold. However, a significant shift has happened in the last decade. As television hasbecome increasingly inclusive – including arecord high percentage of LGBT charactersin the 2012-2013 broadcast season – thefilm industry is lagging behind. Thoughindie film still produces some of the mostgroundbreaking LGBT stories, major filmstudios appear reluctant to include LGBTcharacters in significant roles or franchises.This year, GLAAD has adapted ourexisting television research methodologyto take a closer look at Hollywood’s filmindustry. This report illuminates the current state of LGBTrepresentation in the mainstream film industry by examiningour community’s onscreen presence in the 2012 release slatesof Hollywood’s six largest film studios: 20th Century Fox,Paramount Pictures, Sony Columbia, Universal Pictures, TheWalt Disney Studios, and Warner Brothers.Fun Size, Paramount PicturesSTUDIO RESPONSIBILTY INDEX3

Pitch Perfect, Universal PicturesIt might be asked why it’s important that mainstream cinema become more inclusive, when the restof the media landscape appears to be evolving sorapidly. Scripted television now rivals film in termsof quality and scope, and LGBT characters appearwith growing frequency on both broadcast and cablenetworks. What’s more, digital distribution hasmade LGBT–inclusive film and television accessibleto a much wider audience than ever before. Someof us might well remember the days when finding agay-themed film meant nervously hunting throughvideo stores for solitary copies. Now literally anyonecan access hundreds of LGBT titles at the push ofa button through computers, tablets, game systems,and smart phones.Yet the truth is that the cineplex still maintains avery significant and powerful role in American life,and it’s one that remains dominated by the majorstudios. In 2012, 76.4% of the films released theatrically were released by the six studios tracked in thisreport. Going to the movies is part of the Americanmythos and identity, and the stories they tell canhave a deep and lasting effect on our cultural psyche.When minority characters are marginalized or madeinvisible within these films, it not only reminds thosebeing underrepresented that their social position isless than, but also makes it more difficult for themajority to see them as part of that film’s reality aswell as a valid part of our own.4Studio responsibility IndexThe movies we make are also some of our mostwide-reaching cultural exports; accessible and marketed to nearly every person in the United States, butalso to billions more overseas. They carry our valueswith them, even if just in subtext, which is why someof the most restrictive nations ban Hollywood filmsoutright for fear that they will affect a populace’sthinking if they watch them. Meanwhile, othernations (and some of the same) are actively enforcingor attempting to pass laws censoring any media thateven acknowledges the existence of LGBT people.It’s important that Hollywood not be indirectlycomplicit in similar self-censorship, but we must alsoemphasize the tremendous potential for good thatthese films can have. In places where LGBT peoplemust still argue for their right to exist, a popular filmdisplaying even casual acceptance of an LGBT character can help foster understanding and shift publicopinion.Hollywood has long produced what are undoubtedlysome of the most memorable and celebrated sharedmedia experiences of our society. The movies reflectthe world we live in, while also showing us wherewe came from and the endless possibilities for wherewe could end up. It’s important that Hollywoodacknowledges that LGBT people are an importantpart of our society’s past, present, and future throughthe stories that they tell.

MEthodologyFor this report, GLAAD focused its quantitative analysis on the six film studios that hadthe highest theatrical grosses from films released in 2012, as reported by the box office database, Box Office Mojo. Those six studios were 20th Century Fox, Paramount Pictures, SonyColumbia, Universal Pictures, The Walt Disney Studios, and Warner Brothers. These are oftencollectively referred to as the “Big Six” by the entertainment industry and press.Cloud Atlas, Warner Brothers PicturesThe report examined films that were released theatrically during the 2012 calendar year (January 1 to December 31), and under the official studio banners and imprints. Films released byofficially separate studio divisions (such as Fox Searchlight) are acknowledged, but were notpart of the final tally. These distinctions were informed in part by the box office reporting ofBox Office Mojo and other entertainment industry databases. The total number of films thatfall within the research parameters is 101.Each film was researched and reviewed for the presence of LGBT characters. The total number of LGBT characters was recorded for each film, as well as the characters’ race/ethnicity,sexual orientation/gender identity, and identification as either a major or minor character (asdetermined by screen time and importance to the plot).The films were also reviewed for the presence of general LGBT content and anti-gay languageor humor, though because such content must be considered in context, it was not quantified forthis report.Additionally, each film was assigned to one of five genre categories: comedy, drama, family,fantasy/science fiction, and documentary. The family category included animated and children’sfilms, rated PG and under. The category of fantasy/science fiction also included horror filmsand action films not rooted in reality rated PG-13 and up. In the case of films which clearlystraddled genre lines, categories were assigned based on the predominant genre suggested byboth the film and its marketing campaigns.STUDIO RESPONSIBILTY INDEX5

Overview of findingsOut of the 101 releasesfrom the major studiosin 2012, 14 of themcontained charactersidentified as eitherlesbian, gay, or bisexual.Breakdown of LGBT Representation11% bisexual55.6% Gay male37%feMale63% MaleNot one of thereleases contained anytransgender characters.More than half of those inclusive films (55.6%)featured gay male characters, while another 33%featured lesbian characters and 11% containedbisexual characters.Male LGBT characters outnumbered femalecharacters 63% to 37%.33% Lesbian83.9% White43.2% Latino12.9% black/african americanOnly 4 films out of101 (4%) contained anyLGBT characters thatmight be considered“major” as opposed to“minor.” That is, theyappeared in more thanjust a few scenes and hada substantial role in thefilm’s story.6Studio responsibility IndexOf the 31 different characters counted (some of whom wereonscreen for no more than a few seconds), 26 were white (83.9%)while only 4 were Black/African American (12.9%) and 1 wasLatino (3.2%).There were no Asian-Pacific Islander or recognizably multi-racialLGBT characters counted.The most common place to find LGBT characters inthe major studios’ 2012 releases were in comedies, where9 of the 24 comedies released (37.5%) were inclusive.By comparison, 34 genre films (action, sci-fi, fantasy,etc) made up the majority of the 2012 releases, thoughonly 3 (8.8%) of those contained any LGBT characters.Additionally, only 1 of 21 dramas (4.7%) and 1 of 4documentaries (25%) were inclusive, while there were noLGBT characters in any animated or family-orientedfilms from the Big Six.

RecoMmendations Genre films like comic-book adaptations and action franchises are where major studiosseem to commit the majority of their capital and promotional efforts these days, but theyremain very reluctant to include LGBT characters in them. Amongst the three inclusivegenre films counted by GLAAD, one (Cloud Atlas) was initially developed outside thestudio system and another (The Avengers) included an appearance by out gaynews anchor Thomas Roberts that wasso brief it was likely missed by manyviewers. Until LGBT characters aredepicted in these films in a substantialway with more regularity, there willremain the appearance of purposefulbias on the studios’ part. As mentioned, LGBT characters needto not only appear with greater regularity in a range of film genres, but alsoin more substantial roles. Arguably themost prominent example of this was themale antagonist from the Bond film,Skyfall, who was strongly suggested toSkyfall, Sony Columbiabe bisexual. While it’s good to see anLGBT character in such a high-profilerole in a major franchise, depicting a bisexual person as villainous is an unfortunate cinematic tradition, and raises the question of whether a major studio would ever depict a maleprotagonist of an action franchise as anything other than straight. In the absence of substantial roles for LGBT characters, filmmakers should at the very leastinclude them in the world their film is depicting. Even when LGBT people or couplesare simply part of a larger ensemble or featured in a brief, casual manner, the audience isreminded that those characters are a part of the film’s world, and by extension, our own; itcreates a more detailed and accurate reflection. As it does in many other areas of narrative-based entertainment, diversity continues to bean area in which the entertainment industry needs to improve. Not only should there bemore LGBT people depicted on screen, but those depictions shouldn’t be uniform in race,gender, socio-economic background, religion, or even age. For all the great improvements there has been in LGBT characters being depicted ontelevision, transgender representations remain at least 20 years behind the curve. This isespecially true in film, where transgender characters are rare even in independent cinema,much less major Hollywood productions. Not only does this lack of transgender imagesreinforce the marginalization of the trans community, it must also be seen as a missedopportunity by studios and screenwriters to tell fresh stories and better flesh out the worldsthey create. GLAAD has observed a noticeable increase in media coverage of the transgender community in recent years, demonstrating that the public interest is there.STUDIO RESPONSIBILTY INDEX7

A Challenge to the Studios: The Vito Russo TestThere was a time when a major Hollywood studio would have been seen as “provocative” or “brave” forsimply including an LGBT character in one of their releases, much less featuring one in a major role. But agreat deal has changed in our culture in even the few short years since Brokeback Mountain proved to be a surprise commercial hit. A majority of the country nowsupports full marriage equality for same-sex couples,which has paved the way for tremendous legislativevictories. Gay, lesbian, and bisexual service memberscan now serve openly in the U.S. armed forces, andanti-discrimination laws protecting the LGBT community are being passed all over the country. But ifthe major Hollywood studios want a real barometerof how much has changed in our society and howmuch catching up they have to do, they need onlylook at what’s become one of the greatest threats totheir viability: television.While there may be room for improvement in afew key areas, the truth is that LGBT characters areThe Five-Year Engagement, Universal Picturesmore present than ever on our nation’s airwaves. Notonly have they increased in number, but prominence as well. Couples like Modern Family’s Mitch and Cam orGrey’s Anatomy’s Callie and Arizona are heavily featured on TV programs whose weekly ratings the big filmstudios would love to see translated into ticket sales at the cinema instead. The “novelty” of these charactersbeing LGBT has long since passed, and now they’re simply unique personalities making up part of uniquecharacter ensembles. It’s high time that the major film studios follow suit in their own productions.Taking inspiration from the “Bechdel Test,” which examines the way female characters are portrayed andsituated within a narrative, GLAAD developed its own set of criteria to analyze how LGBT characters areincluded within a film. “The Vito Russo Test” takes its names from celebrated film historian and GLAADco-founder Vito Russo, whose book The Celluloid Closet remains a foundational analysis of LGBT portrayalsin Hollywood film. For filmmakers looking to include LGBT people in their stories, these criteria can helpguide them to create more multidimensional characters. This test also represents a standard GLAAD wouldlike to see a greater number of mainstream Hollywood films reach in the future. To pass the “Russo Test”,the following must be true:TheVitorussoTest1. The film contains a character that is identifiably lesbian, gay, bisexual, and/or transgender.That character must not be solely or predominantly defined by their sexual orientation or2. gender identity. I.E. they are made up of the same sort of unique character traits commonly used to differentiate straight characters from one another.The LGBT character must be tied into the plot in such a way that their removal would have3. a significant effect. Meaning they are not there to simply provide colorful commentary,paint urban authenticity, or (perhaps most commonly) set up a punchline. The charactershould matter.Though these criteria are regularly met on television, less than half (6) of the 14 major studio films GLAADcounted LGBT characters in managed to pass the Russo Test. The LGBT community may be increasinglywell represented on television, but clearly there is a lot of work remaining in Hollywood film. With thisreport and its future editions, GLAAD will track their progress.8Studio responsibility Index

20th C entury Fox2012 R ATING: failing15 0 0% 936mFilms releasedtheatrically in 2012under studio &official imprintsTotal number ofLGBT-inclusive filmsPercent ofLGBT characterappearancesGross box office revenueof films tracked in 2012In 1935, the Fox Film Corporation (founded by producer WilliamFox in 1915) merged with Twentieth Century Pictures (foundedin 1933) to form 20th Century Fox. It was in the mid-1980s thatRupert Murdoch bought out the studio, making it a subsidiary ofNews Corporation, and now 21st Century Fox. Among Fox’s mostfamous films are early blockbuster franchises like Star Wars, Alienand Die Hard.Aside from Walt Disney Studios, 20th Century Fox has one ofthe slightest track records when it comes to inclusive films, butit includes a few standouts in its repertoire. Myra Breckinridge(1970) and The Rocky Horror Picture Show (1975) contain someof the earliest significant transgender characters, though bothdepictions are arguably more sensationalized than truthful. In1982 the studio released the drama Making Love, which was oneof the first (and only) realistically depicted gay love stories evermade by a major studio. Other inclusive films they’ve releasedover the years include Silkwood (1983), The Object of My Affection(1998) and The Family Stone (2005). Sister company Fox Searchlight has released more recent inclusive classics such as Boys Don’tCry (1999) and Kinsey (2004).In 2012, 20th Century Fox released15 films, none of which includedappearances by LGBT people.The sci-fi comedy The Watch contained a jokein which one of the male characters assumes heis being hit on by a male neighbor, who turnsout to be an orgy enthusiast instead. The characters also joke about being forced to have sexwith another man.Looking ForwardNews Corp is known for having a very poor track record when itcomes to covering LGBT stories, and it’s a shame that 20th Century Fox’s films seem to demonstrate a similar reluctance to tellLGBT stories more than once or twice a decade. The situation isbetter on the Fox Broadcasting Network, where highly rated inclusive shows like Glee have helped Fox attract a younger audience.They should keep that in mind for their film division as well.STUDIO RESPONSIBILTY INDEX9

Par a mount PictureS2012 R ATING: Adequate14 3 21.4%Films releasedtheatrically in 2012under studio &official imprintsTotal number ofLGBT-inclusive filmsPercent ofLGBT characterappearances 760mGross box office revenueof films tracked in 2012Established in the earliest days of the American film industry, Paramount Pictures traces its lineage all the way back to 1912 and thefounding of the Famous Players Film Company, which was one ofthree companies that would merge in 1916 and eventually become Paramount. In recent years, many of its most recognizable releases havebeen big-budget, mass appeal franchises including Star Trek, Transformers, and Mission Impossible.If one only look at Paramount Pictures’ most recent crop of films, itmay not appear that the studio is particularly fond of taking risks, butthat hasn’t always been the case. Starting in the mid-nineties, Paramount released a string of films that were either LGBT-themed orLGBT-inclusive, including Home for the Holidays (1995), Clueless (1995),The Brady Bunch Movie (1995), Brain Candy (1996), Kiss Me Guido(1997), Election (1999), The Talented Mister Ripley (1999), and The NextBest Thing (2000).In 1997 the studio partnered with Scott Rudin Productions to releasethe mass-appeal gay-themed comedy In and Out, which garnered agreat deal of publicity for a kiss between lead Kevin Kline and loveinterest Tom Selleck, and became a box office hit. In fact, In and Outalong with fellow Paramount releases Mr. Ripley and The Hours (2002)are 3 of the top 10 highest grossing gay or lesbian themed films in theUnited States.10Studio responsibility Index

PARAMOUNTPICTURESIn 2012, Paramount Pictures released 14 films (some in partnership withDreamworks), of which 3 contained appearances by LGBT people, amounting to 21.4%. Only one of these films passed the Russo Test.Katy Perry: Part of MeSinger-songwriter Katy Perry wasthe latest pop act to release a concert documentary last year, and itincluded several out individuals. Inaddition to cameo-length appearances by talk show host EllenDeGeneres and singer Jessie J, thefilm also included appearancesby Katie’s gay stylist and makeupartist.A Thousand WordsThe Eddie Murphy comedy abouta man who will die after saying onethousand more words, included adaycare scene that featured a biracialgay couple among various otherparents, and two scenes featuring aman in a hotel who initially mistakesMurphy for a prospective “date.” Thelatter character was included exclusively as a punchline.The DictatorThe Sascha Baron Cohen comedy The Dictatorcontained a character who boasted that he paid malecelebrities for sexual favors, but said it was purely apower trip for him and that he wasn’t gay. The filmalso featured several jokes about a female character’sgender identity.Fun SizeThis teen comedyco-produced by Nickelodeon Films probablyhad the most substantiveLGBT content of anyParamount r

being underrepresented that their social position is less than, but also makes it more difficult for the majority to see them as part of that film’s reality as well as a valid part of our own. The movies we make are also some of our most wide-reaching cultural exports; accessible and mar-keted to nearly every person in the United States, but

Related Documents:

has become a hot-button topic in news and pop culture. JULY In conjunction with Pride Month, global fashion destination ASOS partners with GLAAD once again to release a new gender-inclusive, 22-piece capsule collection focused on the themes of pride, unity, and acceptance, with 25% of the proceeds going to GLAAD. JUNE

Abbreviations xxix PC Carli price index PCSWD Carruthers, Sellwood, Ward, and Dalén price index PD Dutot price index PDR Drobisch index PF Fisher price index PGL Geometric Laspeyres price index PGP Geometric Paasche price index PH Harmonic average of price relatives PIT Implicit Törnqvist price index PJ Jevons price index PJW Geometric Laspeyres price index (weighted Jevons index)

attitudes [ ] than any other celebrity or public figure." Several academic studies dating back to the mid-1990s have also continually proven that inclusive entertainment or news media has a significant effect on viewer's perceptions of the LGBTQ community.² GLAAD has seen LGBTQ characters and couples

S&P BARRA Value Index RU.S.sell Indices: RU.S.sell 1000 Growth Index RU.S.sell 2000 Index RU.S.sell LEAP Set RU.S.sell 3000 Value Index S&P/TSX Composite Index S&P/TSX Venture Composite Index S&P/TSX 60 Canadian Energy TrU.S.t Index S&P/TSX Capped Telecommunications Index Sector-based Indices: Airline Index Bank Index

3 GLAAD MEDIA REFERENCE GUIDE CONTENTS Introduction: "Fair, Accurate, & Inclusive" 4 Glossary of Terms Lesbian / Gay / Bisexual / Queer 6 Transgender 10 AP, Reuters, & New York Times Style 15 In Focus Covering the transgender community 18 Covering the bisexual community 20

LGBTQ. There were an additional 28 recurring LGBTQ characters counted. There was an increase in the number of regular LGBTQ characters on cable, up to 92 from 84. However, LGBTQ recurring characters dropped year-over-year from 58 to 50. This is a total of 142 LGBTQ characters, regular and recurring. After GLAAD introduced its first count of

3 GLAAD MEDIA REFERENCE GUIDE CONTENTS Introduction: "Fair, Accurate, & Inclusive" 4 Glossary of Terms Lesbian / Gay / Bisexual / Queer 6 Transgender 10 AP, Reuters, & New York Times Style 15 In Focus Covering the transgender community 18 Covering the bisexual community 20 Nondiscrimination laws & the LGBTQ community 21 Marriage & parenting 23

Korean language is an agglutinative language and is sometimes recognized tricky to learn by the people who speak a European language as their primary language. But depending on how systematical the education method is, it can be efficiently learned with the aid of its scientific letter system Hangeul. This book aims to provide the comprehensive rules and factors of the Korean language in a .