You don't know that men are being hired just because they are men.

The idea that I didn't get hired because I'm Jewish has as much relevance as a woman saying she didn't get hired because she's a woman. There has to be proof in the form of a memo or e-mail that conclusively proves that's the case. Everything you're saying is speculation at this point. But I would totally agree…

It stinks on ice!

What has happened dozens of times? An equally qualified male and female director were up for the same job and the man got the job? Or is it just suspicious looking situations where a seemingly unqualified male director got a directing job? You have to show true prejudice to say it exists. There's a huge disparity in…

You're being simplistic and going for the easy answer
that, of course, vilifies white males. Again, if a group of female directors came forward and presented a smoking gun, then we'd all be on boards with the ACLU study. But until you know the whole story you can't just assume that women are hitting a glass ceiling…

A studio puts hundreds of millions on the line for these movies. They have to be secure in the fact that a director can take care of the baby. The point is that there are a lot of intangibles involved and without the smoking gun of a female director coming out and saying she was passed over for a less qualifid…

There are a number of factors involved, many of which we're not even aware of. I'm not saying that Hollywood is an egalitarian meritocracy, but if a chimpanzee could deliver a major blockbuster, he'd be a very busy monkey.

Her film grossed only 6.5 million. But who knows what meetings she's taken and decisions she's made since then. I'd really need to hear her side of it to determine that she's the victim of discrimination.

Maybe they just liked the cut of his jib. With all that money on the line, I can't believe they would risk it on a director/writer who they thought would fail. So he must have shown them something. I refuse to believe it was an example f the good old boys club. There's too much at stake to hire on that lazy basis.

There are plenty of talented directors of both genders who never get their shot due to bad luck and timing. Hollywood always jumps on what's hot and will make them a shit load of money. When we reach a critical mass of female directors producing profitable films the tide will turn.

Effective in changing people's actions regarding discrimination but not necessarily changing their minds. In a way, you get even more discrimination by forcing people to do things they don't want to do.

Studios do everything based on how much profits they think they'll make. They have to decide who is best qualified to bring them a good return on their investment. If a woman or a minority director have the goods, they have no problem getting work. The problem is finding those people. For me to place any…

I thought Zero Dark Thirty settled all this.

The trailer doesn't look promising. CGI should be good, though.

Furious 7 was big, loud and dumb. Leave your brain at home. Avengers was kind of a meandering mess with some great action set pieces and not as emotionally satisfying as the first. (Though they tried!)

Sucker! But at least you got to see the boob with the beautiful boobs acting like a complete boob.

It's the first time I've sen a movie under mind altering conditions in a long time. I decided I don't like 3D, for one thing. The movie was long and meandering. Some of the action set pieces were exhilarating but overall the film had less focus and drive than the original. I can see why Whedon wants to give it a…

She does have the perfect body. But then, she's elastic, so why not?

They're the Pixar movies that are actually for kids.

She is one of the producers, fella.