“Streamers are all run by accountants. They’re not creative people anymore.”
In my recent interview with Camille Hardman and Gary Lane, the filmmakers behind the 2022 documentary, Still Working 9 to 5, we discussed how streaming services are creating what independent filmmakers call a “volatile” environment when it comes to buying films. In our discussion, I learned that, while trying to sell their film to streaming services, they were receiving feedback that their film is “too old,” “not relevant,” and “not for their target [teen] demographic.”
It was very clear in the interview that Hardman and Lane, whose film has won over 10 Best Documentary awards, critical acclaim, and holds a 92% on Rotten Tomatoes, believe that the Hollywood “boys club” and the money-centered streaming services are deliberately unwilling to show a feminist-centered film to their audiences. After talking with them about their rather disheartening attempt to sell their film, I began to wonder if it’s true that the new major players in film—Netflix, Amazon Prime, Apple TV and other streaming platforms—are manipulating the media we see. In short, of course, they are, they control what they show. But are they deliberately leaving female-led or centered films out of their portfolios?
In a recent interview, Dakota Johnson discussed how “people who run streaming platforms don’t trust creative people or artists to know what’s going to work.” She discussed this in the context of her recent film Daddio, with her production company TeaTime—a company, she stated, whose “movies and shows have really powerful female characters at the center.” Johnson is also known to be very outspoken about reproductive rights and sexual wellness.
In my interview with Hardman and Lane, we discussed how Johnson, who has star power, really had to fight for her film. (It was recently sold to Sony Classics.) If a star like Johnson has to fight for her independent projects, what hope do smaller filmmakers like Hardman and Lane have?
Still Working 9 to 5 not being bought isn’t necessarily the smoking gun, proving that streaming services are all run by male chauvinists purposely choosing to ignore certain films, loved by the audiences they were shown to because they are afraid of the female empowerment messages they carry. However, my discussion with the directors and the situation of Still Working 9 to 5–a documentary focusing on the continuous fight for equal rights for women—brings up a few, complex key questions:
Are streaming services continuing the patriarchy by excluding certain films? Why do streaming services choose to ignore certain independent, female-centered films? Are we as a society still not ready to accept female-empowering movies? So in turn, do streaming services have to react to what general audiences are saying?
These questions have two central realities at the center: Either streaming services ignore feminist films or female-led films because they don’t believe in the messages, or they ignore the films because they think their audiences don’t believe in the messages.
I will go ahead and put the male chauvinist “because I don’t like it” idea to the side—although, I think we all know that’s a reality. Streaming services have published female-led, centered or directed films in the past. Netflix produced The Lost Daughter (2021) and The Power of the Dog (2021). Amazon Prime produced Radioactive (2019) and Pink: All I Know So Far (2021). Apple TV produced Billie Eilish: The World’s A Little Blurry (2021) and Causeway (2022).
Let’s play devil’s advocate and accept that maybe streaming services are not actively avoiding female-centered films. It comes down to money. If you don’t believe the film will make money, then you won’t publish the film. So why do streaming services think that some female-centered films, like Still Working 9 to 5 or Johnson’s Daddio will not make money?
Recently, the super feminist film of the year Barbie managed to earn even more attention following the Academy not nominating Greta Gerwig for Best Director or Margot Robbie for Best Actress. Before that, the 2023 remake of The Color Purple and Netflix’s Fair Play (2023) received some major buzz, but quickly fell into the shadows of other, higher-profiting and more successful films. Funny enough, Warner Bros produced Barbie and The Color Purple—one is a billion-dollar movie and one made about 60 million at the box office. Netflix’s Fair Play might have fizzled out, but according to Screen Rant, The Mother starring Jennifer Lopez broke Netlifx records in viewership.
So now the issue is more complicated: Some female-centered films do really well and some don’t. Is it a marketing issue? As we all know, Barbie’s marketing was unmatched. Is it a story issue? Fair Play and The Color Purple are more rooted in reality than the comedy fantasy Barbie and the assassin-thriller The Mother. And where do independent filmmakers leave their mark? They don’t have million-dollar budgets, A-list star power or marketing teams.
Despite the fact that streaming services don’t completely ignore female-centered projects, I won’t rule out that they aren’t hurting grass-roots movements. In the case of Still Working 9 to 5, the Equal Rights Amendment and female movements are at the forefront. It’s a fight that continues to this day, and filmmakers like Lane and Hardman believe that the message needs to get out to a wider audience. And why not? This isn’t the first time or the last time that a film was concerned with the current societal context or the rights of women.
According to the numerous awards and positive reviews from audience members who have seen the film, Still Working 9 to 5 holds a lot of potential. What’s stopping the services from picking up the film?
“It’s too old.” Women who fought during the 1970s are still alive, and still fighting. Personally, I don’t think equal rights for women can get “old.” Films on war are still produced: I guess freedom and peace don’t get “old.”
“It’s not relevant.” News flash: The Equal Rights Amendment has still not passed in the United States and in light of the #MeToo movement, female treatment in the workplace is still very much relevant.
“It doesn’t target our [teen] demographic.” Now this might actually be true in the eyes of streaming services. Films like Fair Play, a film heavily focused on women in male-dominated workplaces, flop, but a female assassin movie—The Mother—is viewed for 249.9 million hours.
In the eyes of services focused on the numbers, Still Working 9 to 5 might seem like a risk. Are teens really interested in a cast from a 1980 comedy reuniting or its connections to the workplace movements of the 70s or the nonexistent constitutional protection? I’m not sure, when I was 16, my favorite movie was The Dark Knight—and it still is.
What I can say is that, based on my discussion, the few teens who have viewed the documentary loved it and learned something.
“You know, we’re going to be gone, and it’s going to be them who continue to have their rights stripped away.”
Lane was right. Maybe equal pay isn’t at the forefront of teenagers’ minds. They aren’t in the workforce yet, but they will be. And women in their 20s, 30s, and 40s, those of us who weren’t fighting on the front lines in the 1970s and 1980s, are still affected. All women are, and they will continue to be until there is more legal protection from the United States. So no, it’s not the film for the “target” demographic, but maybe it should be.
So are streaming services actually hurting women’s movements? I don’t know. Streaming services back projects they think will make money and earn them awards and acclaim. Streaming services are continuously growing in power, able to back their own in-house projects—some of which are doing or have done very well in the awards circuit.
While it might not be 100% a male chauvinistic decision, the hard truth is that independent filmmakers now have to fight even harder to get their films bought. Let’s not forget that Forbes still reported that women are underrepresented behind the camera, and The Hollywood Reporter found that female-directed films receive 63% less distribution than male-directed films. Female-led and centered projects are still systematically given fewer opportunities than male-led and centered projects. The Hollywood “boys club” still exists, even if some “feminist” films scrape through.
So what’s next? Do we accept this ambiguous truth and move on? Not necessarily. As Hardman brought up in our interview, the easiest way to support an independent film and the women’s equal rights movement is to communicate. Share the film with your network, talk online, write an article, and speak up as much as possible. Although streaming services and studios control what is put on their platforms, we, in the social media age, control what goes on our platforms. You can donate and volunteer, act in any way that takes a step forward rather than back–no matter how small the step is.
I cannot definitively say that the recent refusal of Still Working 9 to 5 is because of money, systematic inequalities, or a combination of multiple factors. What I can say is that a film, showcasing the continuous fight for women’s equality, is ironically being shut down by a system that is historically very prejudiced towards women. More importantly, I do believe that this film needs to be seen by a wider audience, and I hope a streamer or studio picks it up soon. Until then, speak up, speak loud, and share films with others.
Article Courtesy of Sara Ciplickas
Recent Comments