After watching the film This Changes Everything, directed by Tom Donahue, I couldn't help but feel intrigued by various aspects that the film highlighted. The film's theme focused on the discrimination that women faced throughout the movie industry. The film makes numerous arguments with supporting evidence that show the types of discrimination that women faced for decades. The types of discrimination that women faced ranged from being hired to exhibit their sexuality, rather than showcase their acting talent, to also being shut out of directing positions by their male counterparts. Overall, This Changes Everything ironically did very little to change anything at all. This is mostly because of the fact that the director, despite his good intentions, missed numerous opportunities to bring to light a wide array of discriminatory acts and not just sexism.
Now, despite the film's shortcomings, there was some things that the film did well. One of the things that the film did well was the film's ability to use the element of ethos in a manner that was conducive to the argument that was being established throughout the movie. One example of this is when we hear Geena Davis' first-hand experience of how she initially interpreted the word feminists. Although she was not old enough to understand at the time, the magazine she read made her believe that feminists were ruining the world and she did not want to become morally or ethically unlikable. As we know, Geena Davis grew up to become a famous Hollywood actress and she utilized her own experiences, often negative, to propel her into a movement dedicated to extensive research in an attempt to gain equality in the film industry. Another thing that the film did well was the film's execution of appealing to logos by providing statistical evidence. For example, the film highlighted that "in 2012, when both Brave and The Hunger Games came out, the percentage of girls taking up archery increased by 105% which was higher than adult men." This showed that there was an obvious and direct correlation between girls taking up hobbies and other interests and the female-centric films.
In relation to areas where the film could have done better, introducing intersectionality as a supporting element to the film's main theme would have further solidified its argument. Just as Kimberlé Crenshaw explains through her various examples of intersectionality, I believe that intersectionality is a multifaceted concept that further disadvantages oppressed individuals by nature of their race, class, gender, sexual orientation, and religion to name a few. Intersectionality, in essence, puts these individuals that meet two or more of the previously mentioned traits at a much greater disadvantage because their oppression is compounded. The fact that This Changes Everything missed such a critical opportunity to address intersectionality makes it so that the chances of actually making a change are diminished. The reason for this is because of the role that intersectionality plays in the everyday lives of the very people who stand on the intersections. For example, if the film fully embraced intersectionality then it would evoke a greater emotional response because it would not only resonate more with other oppressed groups of people, but it would also unequivocally lead to a much larger movement in support of ending discrimination. Let's take people with disabilities for example. If the film had added interview clips from an actress with down syndrome and let them take us through their journey and their struggles, a strong emotional response would without a doubt follow. The audience would be further inclined to realizing the detrimental effects of discrimination beyond just sexism. Again, that is just one example out of so many more that could have been used in the film to improve the overall response from the audience. The possibilities are truly endless and it saddens me that the film executed its well-intended story in such a poor manner.
Now, despite the film's shortcomings, there was some things that the film did well. One of the things that the film did well was the film's ability to use the element of ethos in a manner that was conducive to the argument that was being established throughout the movie. One example of this is when we hear Geena Davis' first-hand experience of how she initially interpreted the word feminists. Although she was not old enough to understand at the time, the magazine she read made her believe that feminists were ruining the world and she did not want to become morally or ethically unlikable. As we know, Geena Davis grew up to become a famous Hollywood actress and she utilized her own experiences, often negative, to propel her into a movement dedicated to extensive research in an attempt to gain equality in the film industry. Another thing that the film did well was the film's execution of appealing to logos by providing statistical evidence. For example, the film highlighted that "in 2012, when both Brave and The Hunger Games came out, the percentage of girls taking up archery increased by 105% which was higher than adult men." This showed that there was an obvious and direct correlation between girls taking up hobbies and other interests and the female-centric films.
In relation to areas where the film could have done better, introducing intersectionality as a supporting element to the film's main theme would have further solidified its argument. Just as Kimberlé Crenshaw explains through her various examples of intersectionality, I believe that intersectionality is a multifaceted concept that further disadvantages oppressed individuals by nature of their race, class, gender, sexual orientation, and religion to name a few. Intersectionality, in essence, puts these individuals that meet two or more of the previously mentioned traits at a much greater disadvantage because their oppression is compounded. The fact that This Changes Everything missed such a critical opportunity to address intersectionality makes it so that the chances of actually making a change are diminished. The reason for this is because of the role that intersectionality plays in the everyday lives of the very people who stand on the intersections. For example, if the film fully embraced intersectionality then it would evoke a greater emotional response because it would not only resonate more with other oppressed groups of people, but it would also unequivocally lead to a much larger movement in support of ending discrimination. Let's take people with disabilities for example. If the film had added interview clips from an actress with down syndrome and let them take us through their journey and their struggles, a strong emotional response would without a doubt follow. The audience would be further inclined to realizing the detrimental effects of discrimination beyond just sexism. Again, that is just one example out of so many more that could have been used in the film to improve the overall response from the audience. The possibilities are truly endless and it saddens me that the film executed its well-intended story in such a poor manner.