Study: On-Screen Gender Inequality Persists in Hollywood

NY - A survey of the top 100 grossing movies of 2009 showed that male speaking roles continued to clearly outweigh female roles and that females showed more skin on-screen, the LA Times reported. Providing latest evidence that gender inequality persists in Hollywood, the study by the University of Southern California's Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism found that only 32.8 percent of the 4,342 speaking characters in those movies were female, a percentage unchanged compared with the top-grossing movies of 2008, it said. In films directed by women, 47.7 percent of on-screen characters were female, while male directors featured fewer than a third of female characters, according to the Annenberg study. When it came to behind-the-camera jobs though, only 3.6 percent of the directors and 13.5 percent of the writers of the analyzed movies were female, according to the survey. "We see remarkably stable trends," USC Annenberg associate professor Stacy Smith told the LA Times. "This reveals an industry formula for gender that may be outside of people's conscious awareness." The inequality persisted even though women bought more than 50 percent of movie tickets sold in the U.S., in 2009, the report said citing MPAA data. Among the movies analyzed in the Annenberg study were Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince and The Twilight Saga: New Moon. When it comes to on-screen clothing, the Annenberg study found that women continued to be much more likely than men to wear sexy outfits. For example, instances of actresses shown in swimwear and unbuttoned shirts (25.8 percent, compared with 4.7 percent for men) or showing exposed skin (23 percent versus 7.4 percent) showed the imbalance, the Times highlighted. Also, female characters were more often described by another character as attractive in the top 2009 films - 10.9 percent versus 2.5 percent. Revealing clothing and partial nudity was just as prevalent among 13- to 20-year-old female characters as among women aged 21 to 29, the study shows, highlighting that women are sexualized on-screen at young ages, Smith said. Email: Georg.Szalai@thr.com Twitter: @georgszalai Related Topics

The 3D journey of "Immortals"

The producers of Relativity Media's "Immortals," which opened to a better-than-expected $32 million this past weekend, always intended for the film to be released in 3D. Once production got underway with Tarsem directing it was clear that with the exception of a small amount of footage the film would be shot on 2D and later be converted to the stereo medium. Cinematographer Brendan Galvin - who's also shooting Tarsem's Snow White film "Mirror Mirror" - entrusted much of that task to a fellow d.p., David Stump, who has the credit of senior stereographer on the film. Galvin and Stump both talked to Variety's Inside Production's Peter Caranicas about the thinking that went into the shooting and conversion of the swords-and-sandals actioner.***Peter Caranicas: How long have you worked with Tarsem?Brendan Galvin: Over 20 years, mostly on commercials. Caranicas: Talk about how you shot "Immortals."Galvin: We shot it all digitally on the Genesis camera system from Panavision. We shot many tests before deciding whether to shoot real 3D or to shoot 2D and do a conversion. We ended up shooting just little part of the film on 3D; the rest is a conversion. One of the considerations was the speed with which Tarsem likes to work. Our schedule was very challenging in terms of the amount of material we had to shoot in the time available. Some people say there's no time difference shooting 3D, some say there's 10% difference; personally I think there's quite a bit of difference.Caranicas: How fast does Tarsem work?Galvin: There are times when we've done just a small amount of work in a day, and other times when he's just manic, just go, go, go. I prefer to work with him when he's working faster. He gets a different energy. I can't exactly explain it. As he shoots, he puts the film together in his head. I've never met anyone who does it like him. He'll remember visual things, every shot we do on a film, exactly. Caranicas: What's your view of conversion vs. stereo shooting?Galvin: I've seen both good and bad conversions and good and bad native 3D shooting. Personally, after doing this conversion, I would do the same thing again. I'm not saying I wouldn't shoot 3D with stereo cameras. I can see situations where that would be a far better to do. But on this particular film, with the ingredients we had, that wasn't the way to go. I don't regret the decision we made.Caranicas: What was the intent at the outset?Galvin: It was always to release in 3D, so when we photographed in 2D we did so with that in mind. I think 3D is still a medium completely in its infancy, even though it's been around for donkey's years. People are still learning a lot about what's possible and what's not. They're learning a completely new language for filmmaking. Caranicas: Where did you shoot "Immortals"?Galvin: We shot 100% in-studio in Montreal. We did lots of greenscreen work, but we did have sets. The greenscreen was largely for set extensions. We shot for 62 days, so for about three months allowing for weekends. We finished in early July, 2010.Caranicas: How involved were you in post and DI?Galvin: A lot. Because we were shooting digitally we wanted to take advantage of what digital can offer over film. One of the things we could do was set up our grading suite in the studio where we were shooting, so we had a full color correction suite in with digital projection, and most nights we watched dailies there. We also did basic color correction on the set as we were shooting.Caranicas: Who handled the conversion?Galvin: One of the most important aspects was to have the whole process monitored by a cinematographer. David Stump handled all of it managing a team of people. The fact that he's a d.p. was hugely advantageous, technically and esthetically. David would do certain things and show them to me and Tarsem. When he saw what we liked in terms of depth, perspective, convergence, etc., he would then start applying that. He also contributed some very helpful ideas. The brief was that this has to be a very comfortable 3D experience. We wanted people to forget that they were watching 3D.***Peter Caranicas: Were you a stereographer just in post?David Stump: Yes, only in post, I wasn't part of the photography process.Caranicas: What kind of look were you striving for?Stump: One of the commitments we made to Tarsem was to give the characters "human volume" so they didn't look like flat cardboard cutouts placed in space. And that kind of volume is really hard to achieve in a conversion. We paid special care and attention paid to putting things in the right place, and getting things built with volume - volume of the characters and volume of the space. That's been a reach for most previous conversions and I think we reached a pretty high mark in terms of achieving volume in this conversion.Caranicas: How did you do that?Stump: You have to create depth maps that include roundness in faces and the background sets. You have to do more than just cut out a wall and place it in depth. We added indentations for windows, doorways, architectural features. We did a ton of depth mapping in detail - I've always noticed the absence of it on other conversions.Caranicas: Where did you do the work?Stump: The lion's share went to Prime Focus. They did most of the work in India. Small sections were given to 3DRevolution in Pasadena and Mikros Image in France.Caranicas: Where did you spend most of your time?Stump: My team and I spent several months in Mumbai, as well as in Paris, Montreal and L.A.Caranicas: Is going the conversion route expensive? Stump: Not really. It was probably ultimately cheaper to convert than to shoot native 3D, especially with the number of cameras, the amount of technology and the longer schedule (required) to shoot in 3D. And you would have had to knock Tarsem down from 60 setups a day to 20, with all those extras standing around the block for the battle scenesCaranicas: Did the greenscreen work make the conversion any easier?Stump: No, it was just another variable that made it a little harder. In order to properly covert a greenscreen vfx shot you have to have the final version of the shot done, so it just pushed more of those shots deeper into the schedule - which ultimately makes it harder to have the 3D consistent from shot to shot and scene to scene.Caranicas: Was the color correction done after the conversion?Stump: In this case, yes, because it was a live cut - the edit wasn't locked until after I got back from my last trip to Mumbai. There were many things I had to re-jigger; new shots going into the pipeline as late as September of this year, so I had to be involved in the color correction process. Caranicas: What is it about a d.p. that best qualifies him as a stereographer?Stump: Probably the level of obsessive-compulsive image manipulation and control that d.p.'s are capable of. The real advantage of conversion is that it gives you is an enormous amount of control that you don't have in natively shot 3D. If you shoot something in 3D and you aren't committed to converting anything, and you get a shot wrong, there's not a lot you can do about it. You can't go back and say, I want to pull the cameras closer together and make this a less deep scene. (All you can do is) resort to converting the shot - throw away one eye and convert the other.Caranicas: Is 3D here to stay?Stump: Some predict is will last, others that it won't. In the last 10 years since the advent of digital cinema everyone has become a prophet saying film is dead, film will last forever, 3D will last forever, digital will never catch on, digital is the future, etc. People love to say "I told you so," so people are making all kinds of predictions and in the future they'll dust off correct ones. Contact Peter Caranicas at peter.caranicas@variety.com

Anna Kournikova Wont Return To The Biggest Loser

First Published: November 15, 2011 4:31 PM EST Credit: Getty Premium LOS ANGELES, Calif. -- Caption Anna Kournikova steps out at the Grand Opening Celebration of JW Marriott Marquis in Miami, Florida on November 4, 2010Anna Kournikova will not be returning to The Biggest Loser next season. I enjoyed my time on The Biggest Loser ranch. Although I will not be returning as a full time trainer on season 13, I will always be a part of The Biggest Loser family and my commitment to bettering lives through health and fitness will continue, the tennis player said in a statement on Monday to The Hollywood Reporter. It was back in May that Anna first revealed she was joining the show as Jillian Michaels departed to focus on family. According to The Hollywood Reporter, which broke the news, Anna and those behind the scenes at the show had their differences. Staffers on the NBC reality series told THR there were clashes with the athlete and added she was unsympathetic with contestants. Copyright 2011 by NBC Universal, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

And Now a Final Word About Jack and Jill

Glenn Kenny didn’t quite make the cut in last week’s scathing critical responses to Jack and Jill, but his withering postscript deserves a look: “One thing I did not get into in my review of Jack and Jill for MSN Movies was just how (ostensibly) insultingly sub-pro forma is its actual filmmaking. It isn’t even just a matter of how obviously its indifferent redemption-narrative structure is the Avid-enabled equivalent of a very sloppy butter sculpture. The indifference is felt in almost every aspect [… T]his is the first time it really hit home for me just how mindful Sandler, director Dennis Dugan, and the rest of the perpetrators are with respect to keeping overhead down. Good lord.” [Some Came Running]

ABC, New Bands Association Extend Broadcast Deal Through 2021

NY - Wally Disney's ABC network as well as the New Bands Association have extended their broadcast agreement through 2021 within new 10-year deal which keeps your CMA Honours, the CMA Festival: Country's Evening to Rock as well as the CMA Country Christmas on ABC. Financial terms weren't revealed. There's a 3 network investing in an offer war for your new bands shows, with CBS and NBC in this mix furthermore to ABC. The honours show particularly is really a key ratings driver for your Disney network, which won the show from CBS six in the past and came greater than 17 million audiences for last fall's edition. The completely new ABC arrangement was created by ABC Entertainment Group leader Paul Lee and CMA Boss Steve Moore. "We are thrilled the CMA and new bands is constantly on the call ABC their property for an additional 10 years,In . mentioned Lee. "We've built an incredible partnership together, which partnership will simply grow more effective over the following decade." Mentioned Moore: "ABC has proven a real love for the format and our television characteristics. We percieve the CMA Music Festival special grow to three several hours, we've added a holiday special, CMA Country Christmas, and our crown jewel, the CMA Honours, has showed up in a completely new, passionate audience." The 45th Annual CMA Honours, situated by Kaira Paisley and Barbara Underwood, will air survive ABC tonight. Founded in 1958, the country Music Association was the initial trade organization produced to market a type of music. Email: Georg.Szalai@thr.com Twitter: @georgszalai Related Subjects ABC NBC CBS

Chuck's Chris Fedak Defends Morgansect, States "No a person's Safe" This Final Season

Joshua Gomez The best season of Chuck is certainly going ahead, and nervous fans are puzzled by items to type of the titular Nerd Herder dealing with no Intersect. "I'm a little not wanting to really tell you if he'll genuinely have it fixed or else,In . co-executive producer Chris Fedak told reporters around the call to market Friday's episode, "Chuck Versus the Bearded Bandit" (8/7c, NBC). "Chuck while using Intersect was a touch too easy. We preferred to share more enjoyable this season coming back to Season 1 and Season 2 Chuck where things were difficult and sophisticated which he required to develop their very own Chuck techniques to problems." Rather, the series' authors posted laptop computer to the brain of Chuck's nearest friend Morgan (Joshua Gomez). Yes, not aware, bumbling, frequently embarrassing Morgan. Fans have not yet warm-as much as Morgansect, and Fedak did his easier to reassure them. "I like Josh Gomez while using Intersect. In my opinion that what he's finished with it truly is funny and there's really funny stuff approaching," he mentioned. "It's testing the bounds in the show... The Chuck-Morgan bromance is greatly the show, and the way Morgan acquiring the Intersect affects that...The initial three instances of year are very relating to this.In . 12 things you need to see in Chuck's final season Although Fedak wouldn't say whether Morgan could possibly get not-Intersected, the show doesn't hold the luxury to remain with any plot line for extended considering its limited final season. "Within the finish of each and every episode, the core dynamic will probably be changing, it is therefore nothing beats we're settling in," mentioned Fedak. "Not for just about any second when the audience be generating, 'This might be the show to any extent further.A You will discover 13 episodes. We're trying to screw it up out each episode this season. ... You need to tell most likely probably the most exciting tales possible. With no a person's safe. There's no reason around the program that's not [fair] game at this time around.Inch There's buzz that one or more major character will die by series' finish, and Fedak recommended this might affect not able to any ongoing story lines through comics or other media. "I must, if Chuck survives Episode 13," he mentioned. "I like the level of smoothness which i really like the show so when there's an additional way to [continue] it, that could be awesome. At this time around, we're just focusing on delivering popular finale for the show. But you never know what is going to happen out afterwards ... that's clearly if Chuck and Sarah and Casey and Morgan as well as the relaxation in the team survive Episode 13. You never know how cruel a author I really could be." Yikes! Have a look in the other inspiring things Fedak needed to say of Sarah's back story, Lester prone to prison and what else you may anticipate this season: Casey meets his (love) match. "On Friday, we've Barbara-Anne Moss the first time playing Gertrude Verbanski and he or she runs Verbanski Corp. ... [which] might be your competition to Carmichael Industries, Chuck's new private spy company," Fedak mentioned. "Which we now have a wonderful time while using competition between these two companies. Barbara-Anne is wonderful. She's funny and she's frightening, and he or she has the prettiest relationship with John Casey and Adam Baldwin. It's like the chemistry between Adam and Barbara-Anne is amazing. Inside our third episode there exists a fight between each of them probably the most erotically charged factor we've done around the program.Inch Chuck final season scoop: Morgan and Chuck's new "Intersect"ion together with a potential Casey romance? Expect less Chuck Fu, more Chuck CPU. "After we had Chuck doing progressively more Chuck Fu and fun Intersect stuff, we have got in the computer side of Chuck," Fedak referred to. "And inside the initial couple of instances of year we will probably have a wonderful time with coming back to Chuck because the amazing computer guy. Zachary Levi directed Episode 5 of year that's referred to as 'Chuck versus. the Hack Off' and its likely one of the nerdier episodes we've done but it's got a little of amazing hacking sequences. We really needed our lead from Swordfish. We actually learn that Chuck was known to as Piranha that the film Swordfish required it's origin from him. ... Also, I like Episode 4, that's about Chuck and Sarah going undercover inside a Buy More convention." Sarah reunites along with her mother and old handler. "We made a decision to give consideration to Sarah for [Episode 8]. Cheryl [Ladd] is wonderful and warm and caring and fantastic as her mother," mentioned Fedak. "Which we now have Tim DeKay as Sarah's original handler, and Tim is fantastic inside the show. He bring incredible gravitas with this back story. Which is not our funniest Chuck story. This is an amazing epic story that unveils plenty of secrets about Sarah you can not have access to imagined that are really back there. I have to admit for people fans who love Sarah Master, it'll be your chosen episode ever. It will likely be a jaw-losing episode." Betty and Awesome step-up and proceed. "They have large success inside their future," mentioned Fedak. "And it's time to permit them to start to make options about where they wish to go and what they desire to accomplish. For Betty, to think about, 'Is it time to cut the strings and not appear like she must take proper proper care of her brother each and every turn?' ... She's possibly the better of those two siblings and siblings, and ... it might be helpful to Chuck as well as the things that'll be happening inside the spy world together with the mythology in the Intersect." 1 / 2 of Jeffster! can get reserved, while not for just about any gig. "They're an incredible duo. Regarding this rock band, their story can change in a really large strategies by the next number of episodes," Fedak taunted. "Everything can alter inside the Buy More, particularly when it involves Rob and Lester. ... There are many really crazy things happening there. You need to be worried because by Episode 5, we will probably see Lester jail time. That's it. A genuine spoiler. I mentioned something." From Alias to Chuck: A review of TV's shadowy organizations Stephen J. Bartowski (probably) won't be elevated in the dead. "He's dead," Fedak confirmed. "In my opinion for that show [his dying] was ... kind of popular. I possibly could not imagine trying to undo that through getting him to existence. However, you realize, you have to take using a touch of suspicion because I have been shown being untrustworthy if the involves spoilers, who knows a few things i might do." The series finale will probably be epic, emotional and... being determined. "The particular question at this time around is what are we able to do that for your finale," mentioned Fedak. "That's what we should are concentrating on at this time around the board inside the writer's room. It's kind of like my panic attack that's just waiting for me each day. I realize I have to use there which i understand I have to concentrate on that episode which i understand we now have to make it happen, but it's a significant difficult factor to uncover that perfect ending which we now have many them at this time around. "Another 1 / 2 of year really drives us to the Chuck finale, which is some large, emotional epic things," he ongoing. "We now have mysteries would discover in regards to you realize Sarah, and Casey, and Chuck. We're really searching to screw it up out with techniques that people haven't done before. So there's numerous tales that are presently in play. However when I'd my druthers I'd make an effort to try everything, which is a few things i think I will try to do." Chuck airs on Fridays at 8/7c on NBC. Are you currently presently aboard with Morgansect? You think a principal character will die this season? Who? What can you desire to see inside the Chuck series finale?