Hello Robyn,nice to see an in-the-trenches-female perspective on horror filmmaking.
Your rant does not really surprise me,I mean of course there is always THAT person who will say one thing and then jump at the chance to be on camera no matter how degrading.There was a scene like that in Hollywood Shuffle I remember.
As for the director,it all depends on what they want to accomplish.How do I say this,as for horror,there is a difference between putting women in your film and men.With women you have the sex factor,so right there you've drawn some people in.You also have the notion that women are more vulnerable than men.We expect a certain amount of vulnerability from women,no matter how tough and clever,whereas with men we always expect they will not back down and will fight to the finish.We are the HUNTERS after all!
It's a simple way to spice up your product by putting a hot female in the film.I personally would have no problem putting naked females in one of my films simply to increase it's chances of more viewings by those audiences.I would,however make sure the female character,or the scene was made out to be either strong or completely natural and comfortable with the reason for the nudity.By that I mean I wouldn't have some bimbo just take her top off at a party,I would show the audience that this chick is really fun loving and has an I don't give a shit attitude.It's hard for me to explain,especially when I haven't even MADE a film,but I think you can titillate while NOT being exploitive.A woman with her tits out is not necessarily-easy,a victim,a whore,stupid,degraded.
What I have a problem with is the by the numbers appproach,you know the cut to a girl taking a shower for no reason.If you're going to go for the T&A then do something different!But that type of stuff appeals to our primal urges,so it IS in fact enough,just to have blatant nudity,a part of the audience expects it,and part of the audience I'm sure knows they are being pandered to and don't mind.
I do sort of agree with Boys opinion that horror should pull no punches.Films that I can recall actually disturbing me to some degree would be The Ugly and Deep Red.Seeing alot of Argento's stuff I have to admit I DO question if the guy has issues with women.The Ugly made me wonder if the director/writer have a fascination/admiration for serial killers and throat cutting.Is that good that people make disturbing films that DON'T have endings where the "hero"prevails?I don't know if it's good,but it's certainly valid because obviously life can be shit at times and the bad guys do get away with destroying people and their friends and families.But if is just relentless torture and degradation of victims,then what good is it?Are we simply enjoying the plight of the victim or admiring the villain in a convoluted anti-hero fashion?
When I see some films like The Ugly and Argento's,if I see more and more like that I'm thinking,what is the point?It's just suffering that your promoting.You're just dwelling on the sadistic,there is no subtext.It's a snuff film without questioning "why is there an audience for the snuff film?"
Wow,I reply to Robyn's rants with Fat Dragon's rants.AHHHHHH!
Anyway Robyn,I hope you stick with CC for awhile,I'm sure many of us would like an insider's perspective.Perhaps someday you could write about your experiences in low budget films that might help some of us aspiring to work in the field?I mean maybe you could write about the ten biggest mistakes low budget filmmakers/directors make,ya know because looking at your resume' you've run the gamut from low budget to mainstream soaps.That would be fantastic.
Also,your IMDB bio is pretty amusing.
