First episode is about a black woman celebrity writer whose book is getting optioned for a movie, and how she is treated by the "white Hollywood world".
This is like a women's lib version of Black Mirror. I have to admit it was pretty powerful and well done.
Not sure that sexually the picture here really catches the point of the show. It seems pretty exploitative and objectifying in its sexual suggestion.
yup. all white are evil.
evil for creating a world of glorious wonder, that others can bitch about it not being a part of, even if they are every single day.
3rd world, here we come! WEEEEE!!!!
Careful you don't spit up all that Kool-Aid.
I'm not religious in the least but I'd sooner say God created this world of glorious wonder, and humans, mostly Americans are burning it up. Did you even see the episode of did you just see an opportunity to shit your BS somewhere based on a few buzzwords?
Just read samoanjoes replies. Day speak da true true.
shareYou’re right about God, and you should get to know him more. You’ll find out that humans also created the concept of race, which isn’t mentioned in the entire bible once.
shareI have nothing against women writers or directors, but when an entire series is written by 5 women and directed by 7 women, you know they were only hired for being women and are completely avoiding men of any kind.
shareYou mean, as opposed to 95% of all the movies that have ever been made which were done by men?
Speaking only for myself, I'd rather watch something with some brains and intelligence like this than the never-ending BS violent movies that lowered your IQ.
You've misunderstood. When women writers and directors are far and away the minority compared to men in those professions, and one show entirely has female writers and directors, it's obvious what they're trying to do.
Black people are 13% of the population in the US. If there was a show where all 5 writers and 7 directors are black, it's pretty obvious they were purposely setting out to find black people to fill those positions.
I'm just surprised that this isn't a remake of the 90s show of the same name, which starred Heath Ledger
shareIt's not that you don't understand, you do apparently, you just want the world to go back in time.
shareAgain, you don't understand. As I stated earlier, I'm fine with female writers and directors. But when one show is only hiring one demographic which is a minority within that profession, then it's clear that they are hiring them for being that demographic. If it's 70% women writing and directing this series, cool. But when it's 100% women, their intentions are obvious.
share>> when one show is only hiring one demographic which is a minority within that profession, then it's clear that they are hiring them for being that demographic.
Again ... and so what if they are? What is the problem, assuming that to be true in some cases?
They're choosing demographic over merit.
share. . .and There it is: your complete and utter failure to think clearly.
If a studio decides it wants to produce something by women for women about women, HOW in the wide blue F*CK does that translate to "demographic over merit"???
(Hint: it doesn't.)
You're confusing "genre" with "worth." In point of fact, you're confused in a bunch of ways, but let's try to help you:
If I own a studio, and decide to do a series about Americans, written by Americans, with an All-American cast, am I sacrificing "merit," in some way?
If I decide to do a series about aboriginal Australians, and make sure everyone involved is aboriginal, is "merit" an issue?
If I do a series about Italians, and everyone down to the key grip and best boy are all Italian, has some fundamental error in "merit" occurred?
Heavy handed hint: the answer to all these questions is the same. Corollary: your opinions are ridiculous.
If a studio decides it wants to produce something by women for women about women, HOW in the wide blue F*CK does that translate to "demographic over merit"???
If I own a studio, and decide to do a series about Americans, written by Americans, with an All-American cast, am I sacrificing "merit," in some way?
"If that's the case, I don't want to hear anyone complain that movies only hire white people ever again. I never want to hear anyone complaining about a lack of diversity again. I don't want to hear that women aren't being hired as directors again."
Your confusion continues. Your screed about (legitimate) diversity complaints is more of your same nonsense: Name me a movie that only hires white people, that they're making for Only White People, because they're specifically trying to express a "white" perspective, for a "white" audience to appreciate. I'll wait.
"Yes you are. If you are doing a show and need to hire a director and Tyler Perry and Martin Scorsese both want the job, and if you hire Tyler Perry because he's black, that's not only discrimination, that is flat out sacrificing merit."
Pfft. I happen to like Scorsese (much) more than Perry, but if you're suggesting that Scorsese is better for ANY project, you're straight up delusional. So your example is both ridiculous, and wide of the mark: that's NOT what my statement was explaining.
"Also, you have a shitty attitude. Your response was met with such hostility and self assurance."
Your garbled grammar aside, I have a *great* attitude. In an inflectionless medium, you've made the classic mistake of assuming you know how I feel about any of this.
Not surprising: thinking clearly Ain't Your Thing. Shrug.
Name me a movie that only hires white people, that they're making for Only White People, because they're specifically trying to express a "white" perspective, for a "white" audience to appreciate. I'll wait.
happen to like Scorsese (much) more than Perry, but if you're suggesting that Scorsese is better for ANY project, you're straight up delusional.
Your garbled grammar aside, I have a *great* attitude.
"I can't. That's my point. Other demographics are doing it."
Make up your mind. Either people are complaining about this, or it's not happening, however every other demo is being mean to white people. See? Confused.
"Tyler Perry has made 21 films. Only one if them is "positive" on RottenTomatoes (61%). He has never directed a film that is higher than 6.1 on IMDb and has been nominated for a worst director Razzie 3 times. So, yeah I'll take Scorsese for every project. By the way, there's a reason I brought up Tyler Perry. He's been accused of discriminatory hiring practices."
If Rotten Tomatoes is your metric, good for you. . .but don't assume there's some Final Word as to how "good" ANYTHING is, or who's done a better job. The concept is ridiculous. Unless you're confused. And miss me with the "he's been accused" nonsense. . .you accused Me of having a bad attitude. Doesn't mean it's true.
"No, you don't have a great attitude. It's shit. You criticize anyone who has a different opinion than you. You keep telling people they're confused. And to think that you criticized my grammar is hilarious when you use colons instead of commas and have grammatical errors yourself."
I criticize people who say blindingly stupid things, and refuse to see reason. Congrats: you made the cut. Your confusion has you drawing a correlation between that and how I *feel* about that. You can continue believe you know what my attitude is about all that; makes no difference to the Universe. You'll still be equally as baffled by simple concepts.
That is all.
I criticize people who say blindingly stupid things, and refuse to see reason.
You're the one w/the problem. . .nice try, tho. Not interested.
shareI don't care if you're not interested. I wasn't asking you out.
shareOf course you care. Proof: you keep replying.
shareYou're the one who said you weren't interested while replying.
shareI'm not interested in your *problems.* I'm fascinated by your stupidity.
shareNotice how I've never resorted to name-calling? It says a lot about your inability to have sound arguements.
shareNah. It says you're. . .wait for it. . .confused. To quote the poet: "Can a cow be insulted by the word ‘bovine’? Can a bird be insulted by the word ‘flighty’? Can. . .bumbling mooncalves be insulted by the word ‘ludicrous’?”
It's not "name-calling." Just an observation.
Your mom should have aborted you. It's not an insult, just an observation.
shareNah. It's an opinion. Completely unfounded, confused, and stupid. . .but that's no surprise.
shareI took consideration of your opinions and came to the conclusion that your mom should have aborted you. Just my observation.
shareMake up your mind. "Observation?" "Conclusion?" Maybe get someone who can think clearly to help you. In any case, as I've said: you're wrong. Should be a familiar circumstance, for you.
shareObservation and conclusion are not mutually exclusive.
Example 1: I've been looking through your files and my observation is that you need psychiatric help.
Example 2: I've been looking through your files and I've come to the conclusion that you need psychiatric help.
He's just trolling as usual.
shareAnd you would suggest they do it how?
shareThe way you're supposed to hire anyone in the entertainment industry... talent. Hire blind. You can't tell me they didn't overlook talented male writer and directors the same way other shows overlooked talented female writers and directors.
shareSo a part of evaluating talent is not that the talent is relevant to the project? Like hiring a talented tennis player to be a football coach? I don't know how it is you seem to miss the torturing of logic that you employ in your every post, but assuming you really do understand the nonsense you promulgate ... I just wonder why you do it?
shareSo a part of evaluating talent is not that the talent is relevant to the project?
> and someone says, "we're not hiring you because you're white".
Do you really think that is something someone is likely to say outside of the sad fantasy world in your head?
Tyler Perry said it. Again, at least he changed his views and is now open to hiring white people and does so.
shareTypically non-responsive to the question asked.
But, Tyler Perry would not task a while person to do a job where the experience of a black person is required.
Why do you always have to be whining at full volume about issues that are not even issues?
Do you really think that is something someone is likely to say outside of the sad fantasy world in your head?
Why do you always have to be whining at full volume about issues that are not even issues?
Black people are 13% of the population in the US. If there was a show where all 5 writers and 7 directors are black, it's pretty obvious they were purposely setting out to find black people to fill those positions.
It's possible. Let's look at soccer. Black people play the game, but there are very few who are goalkeepers. There are also very few who are club managers.
sharePlease show me some old post of yours, where you've complained about something being entirely written and directed by men.
shareMen are the overwhelming majority of directors and writers so it makes sense. That's why I used the black people analogy earlier:
Black people are 13% of the population in the US. If there was a show where all 5 writers and 7 directors are black, it's pretty obvious they were purposely setting out to find black people to fill those positions.
Look, if 100% or close to 100% of people in any given profession are of one race, ethnicity, or sex, it's pretty damn certain you're looking at a pattern of discrimination. That's in general, and anyone who knows anything about the history of the film industry knows that there absolutely was massive, large-scale, deliberate discrimination against women and minorities, when it came to certain positions. For the first half of the 20th century, the studio hierarchy deliberately kept women and anyone who wasn't white out of positions of authority, including directing films and becoming top executives. Sure, a few were allowed to be actors, if they could accept the limitations on the kind of roles available to them, and some white women were hired as screenwriters, and Dorothy Arzner was allowed to direct some low-budget films. That's just the way it was for a long time, long enough for people like you to accept it as normal, or even right.
So much so that now, if the occasional film or show makes a point of hiring people of a traditionally excluded group to run things, because the show is about the POV of traditionally excluded group... well guess who throws a shitfit! Because I swear, straight white men don't just want to be "...he baby at every christening, the bride at every wedding, and the corpse at any funeral", they really think it's normal that they are.
I agree with what you're saying and am also aware of it, but doing what men have been doing for years just starts a different cycle. Just look at film schools. The overwhelming majority of attendees are male. Purposely hiring women to "even the playing field" isn't realistic.
I find it hard to believe that 100% of writers and director on this specific show happen to be women. If it was 70-80% women, I would think "okay, they're not against have men direct and write", but 100% is a clear indicator they overlooked someone qualified.
It's ONE project, and I bet if you dig through IMDB, I'm quite sure you will find many current and future releases whose writers and directors are all male.
But you aren't complaining about them, your stand shows that you believe a staff of all-male writers and directors is normal, and that a staff of all-female writers and directors is abnormal, discriminatory, and objectionable. And that is why some of us are having a big problem with you here, because your position implies an acceptance of discrimination against females, and objects only to discrimination against the males who are already getting the vast majority of writing and directing jobs.
acceptance? acceptance of reality? he gave valid real world examples.
why aren't more women auto mechanics? why are more women into mining? why? because we are into different stuff, and FORCING some sort of fake equality does not ACCPETANCE of discrimination, it simply is how it is.
nothing wrong with women doing film stuff... if they are so great at it, box office will show the truth. so far, it is showing the truth they are not as good at it.
Okay, your last paragraph shows that you aren't to be taken seriously, so I'm not going to waste my time talking with you.
So fuck off, shut your trap, go piss up a rope, etc. I got no time for you.
> if they are so great at it, box office will show the truth.
Box office shows nothing. It's like saying spending billions on junk food automatically makes it healthy and nutritious.
I'm quite sure you will find many current and future releases whose writers and directors are all male.
But you aren't complaining about them, your stand shows that you believe a staff of all-male writers and directors is normal, and that a staff of all-female writers and directors is abnormal, discriminatory, and objectionable.
Do you think that perhaps, women being shut out of film directing since the film industry began might have a little something to do with the number of women in your film school? In real life, it's common enough for people to be interested in something, but to decide not to pursue dreams, if its clear that they'll face hardcore discrimination or be unable to make a living at it.
Women have been writing fiction ever since they were loved to learn how to read and write, so if there are fewer female scriptwriters now, it's definitely not because women aren't interested in writing!
So IMHO it's likely that as many women are as interested in directing as men, but it's only in the last few years that there have been more than a tiny handful of female directors, so film school just wasn't a sensible investment. (Hopefully that's changing now.) Tell me, would *you* go into debt for an early childhood education degree, knowing there's discrimination against men in the field, or would you decide you had to study something more sensible?
First I want to thank you for having a reasonable discussion on this. Not like the Goliard poster above who has a questionable post history.
Do you think that perhaps, women being shut out of film directing since the film industry began might have a little something to do with the number of women in your film school?
Women have been writing fiction ever since they were loved to learn how to read and write, so if there are fewer female scriptwriters now, it's definitely not because women aren't interested in writing!
Tell me, would *you* go into debt for an early childhood education degree, knowing there's discrimination against men in the field, or would you decide you had to study something more sensible?
No, thank *you* for being sane about this... unlike SOME people!
As for fields that discriminate against men, I have no idea how many men are interested in early childhood education, but there really is prejudice against adult men being left in charge of young children, so any guys that want to do that are going to face challenges. And I'm sure that there are other fields that discriminate, such as nail salons and bikini waxing places, and Hooters (a man sued for discrimnation but lost)... but not so much in healthcare. There are more and more men in nursing and allied professions now, as people are catching on that a respiratory therapist or ER nurse can earn a good living and make benefits, and hospitals and particularly the elder care industry is trying to attract men to hands-on healthcare... as there's heavy lifting involved in some jobs.
As to whether women are disinterested in directing or are shut out, well, that's not a question we're going to be able to answer here. It may be true that more men than women are interested in directing, but I can't believe that women are completely disinterested! Especially that now that the gates have grudgingly been opened, female directors are becoming more common, which shows that yes, some women are interested. I'd bet real money that if you visited your old film school today, you'd see female students.
Don't get me wrong, I'm sure there are a lot more women into directing than Hollywood is giving a chance. People say 4% of the 100 highest grossing films each year are directed by women. I'd say it should be more like 20-25%.
shareWhat I see is almost none of these men making self serving "Men are better blah blah blah" films, jsut films that are better at ENTERTAINING, which, to me, is what it is all about.
shareBetter at entertaining YOU.
shareim confused. shouldn't movies be entertaining?
my comment reflects Bank's Charlie's Angels first dialog in that movie:
"I think women can do anything"
https://youtu.be/JOB4qUYpecA?t=15
I never heard a man's movie say something like that
I liked the trophy wife and the duck episodes. Others were pure trash imo
shareI don't think I would call it "powerful" writing, it's not too bad though. I've only seen 4 episodes so far, duck boyfriend, trophy wife, invisible black girl and the one with Nicole Kidman.
If you want the opinion from my intuitive male mind, and I'm sure you do, here it is... so far I've enjoyed the duck boyfriend episode the most. It has the funniest ending, I was laughing my ass off during that scene. Although, the love scene might have pushed the envelope a little too far in my opinion. lol..
Black girl was pretty good but too cliche, we get enough racial crap from turning on the evening news every day. Do we really need this in our TV shows now? Besides that, it's too easy to create a script based on this topic, it's just not very creative writing to be honest.
Trophy wife is another bizarre story but I kinda liked it. Although, I think they could have used a better looking woman to play the lead role. Nothing against her though, she's nice looking but not exactly drop dead gorgeous.
That leaves us with Nicole's episode. Watching Nicole eat photos was quite gross, but as always, Nicole's acting is top-notch in this. However, I think just simply touching her head with the pictures would have been enough rather than eating them. Uggg... puke!
In addition to this, they list this as comedy/drama. But I think they need to add fantasy to this list.
Anyhow, I have to agree with the previous poster for now, duck and trophy wife have been the best so far. Not sure if or when I will watch the others. I'd rate everything I've seen so far a solid 6.8 out of 10. Good stuff but nothing powerful or great. Women might like it more though, it seems more geared towards those of the female persuasion.
I saw just the one about the invisible black woman ... she seemed of age to me so I would not call her a girl for a few reasons, but it gives a hint about your mental framing.
It was the kind of think that hit of a visceral level, but it was painful. I think I understand the point, from a long time ago, and I might come back and watch more at some point, but as I said it's not really my cup of tea, other than I think it is good for various groups to be able to express about their experiences.
I don't know what I am supposed to do about these episodes but sound like the white guys in the pitch meeting?
LOL! I hear women calling each other girl all the time. Especially black women. Ever heard that phrase "girl, you got it goin' on"...
There's a couple of songs out there with this title too. So, lighten up, Francis....
If you haven't watched any of the other episodes, the duck one is probably worth watching, mainly for the ending. It's pretty damn funny.
And sure, it's alright to show someone's experience, but I don't know how accurate it is. It's pure fiction for the most part. Although, the teleplay was written by a black woman, the book this episode is based on was written by a white woman. And, I would bet almost anything that in the original story, race was never mentioned.
When you are writing for public consumption is a different context than out for a night of drinking with the girls. Wise up Francis and quit being a talking mule.
Just for you information, after someone who lectures me on a stupid subject which they are wrong about but doubling down on ... how do you think I am going to receive your critical response to some episodes on a TV show?
I honestly don't care what you think. For the most part, I can't take anyone serious that gets triggered by the word "girl". Talk about pathetic.
The bottom line, this is just not very powerful writing, in fact, it's not even a black person's story, it was written by someone that's from Ireland and white. But like I said in my previous post, I thought this episode was actually "pretty good" but nothing great. Although, to be honest, it's not always about the writing, the execution by the director can make up for weak writing. That being said, the stories in Roar are somewhat bizarre to begin with, how people interpret them is probably going to depend on several factors. And I would say gender plays a pretty big role here. I do think girls are going to like this more than men.
Anyhow, according to updated ratings on IMDB, the verdict is in. Not that I care about ratings that much but the general consensus is this... Roar is not wowing people that much. It's now currently rated 5.4.
Rotten Tomatoes has the critic review of 75 and fan score sitting at a dismal 36. ouch...
But there's not very many reviews up on RT at the moment... so we'll see how it plays out.
> I saw just the one about the invisible black woman ... she seemed of age to me so I would not call her a girl for a few reasons, but it gives a hint about your mental framing.
You wrote at length using insult and went on and on over it ... triggered, yeah, I'd say.
She's wasn't a girl. If you like using inaccurate language, it just makes you a lesser communicator.
You're crazy if you think I meant that as a slight. You know, when a black person says the words "white boy" that's always meant to be an insult or cut down.
People say "girl" all the time. Get over yourself, stop acting high and mighty. As if you have some kind of authority over what kind of words people are allowed to use. It's ridiculous...
And I'm not the one writing at length over this, you're the one that stopped talking about Roar and decided that "girl" is more important.
You're stupid if you think it matter how you meant it - the point is you didn't give a damn how it would be received, dummass.
Further, people like you mostly do that stuff deliberately and then pretend they didn't mean it and go on and one for post after post wasting everyone's time, as you are doing here. Who cares. To be a member of a society you need to think about how your actions and words affect other people.
Let's review, shall we. First, I posted a comment, to which you replied:
>> I don't think I would call it "powerful" writing, it's not too bad though. I've only seen 4 episodes so far, duck boyfriend, trophy wife, invisible black girl and the one with Nicole Kidman.
I replied with one line, to which you flew off the handle and could not stop talking about it trying to force your point of view on me - just on and on.
> I saw just the one about the invisible black woman ... she seemed of age to me so I would not call her a girl for a few reasons, but it gives a hint about your mental framing.
You were miffed because I made a person perception about you that you didn't like, but either you don't realize that or you can't talk about it honestly. I stand by the perception that your use of the word girl says something about you. It just does. I don't care what you do or say, but I and most people notice things, and you seem to be more used to people who use that kind of terminology freely, without thinking about it.
You went on and on about how it is OK to use the term girl to refer to a grown black woman - where the word "girl" is a known pejorative. I suppose that is supposed to be some great liberating strike against "Wokeness" in your mind perhaps? Also points out that to most people who rant about this wokeness issue are really ranting about how they lost the ability to be rude and not responsible for it.
What kind of perception can you have to be an adult in this country and not know that? I think either you are clueless about how you come off talking to people, or you know that and decided to use girl anyway.
Which is it?
You idiot! You can't even spell "dumbass".
I didn't fly off the handle, I laughed over you comment. I've actually made a few attempts to move on from the topic but you refuse not to, but rather, you feel the need to lecture me about the word "girl" and how I meant it as some kind of major insult. Even though this word is widely used in our music, TV programs, movies, literature, and by all races and ages too. In fact, I even said "black woman" in a later post and you still couldn't let it go.
But just for fun, here's a few examples of the word "girl" being used in music and whatnot...
Girl On Fire by Alicia Keys
My Girl by Smokey Robinson
Golden Girls (TV show)
Gone Girl (book and movie)
You're just being stupid at this point. But whatever, it's obvious we're never going to agree on this topic. This conversation is over...
Quentin Tarantino would be very disappointed in you.
Dummass is slang you dummass. You know, like when people write phuckhead?
You're predictable dummass, you did just what I said you would, look for fake examples that are out of context.
The conversation is not over until I say it is, and that is when you give up trying to have the last word! Hahahaha
ppffftt... you're such a dork. But I am starting to like you. lol..
You have demonstrated that you can't handle the truth. I proved you were wrong about this being "powerful" writing, it's not even a black person's story. It was written by a white girl.
I also explained how you were wrong about the word "girl". To be honest, I don't use that word very often but occasionally I will, I seem to toggle back and forth between woman and girl. The real issue is this, you can't even define what a "woman" is. Your kind is now waging a major war on "women" and it's starting to tick people off. Just drop it, you can't win, words are just words, my friend.
I'm only interested in two episodes because I'm a fan of Betty Gilpin and Alison Brie. Are theirs any good?
shareI haven't seen Allison Brie's episode but I think Betty Gilpin's episode is perhaps the best one. However, they're only about 30 minutes long, so even if you don't like it, you didn't waste much time watching it.
share