This month is dedicated to the theme of work and the cinematic depiction of different types of jobs done by women. On this occasion, we have also turned the mirror (not surprisingly) to the film industry and the representation of women behind the camera, on the movie set, as well as in the multiple roles which stand at the basis of the final product we see on the screen.
We set out with the aim of mapping all the roles on the movie set (as well as beyond it, in pre-production and post-production), wanting to illustrate each of them through a different interview. We are thus launching an ongoing research project and a series of interviews with some awesome ladies working in film, whether it be sound, cinematography, location management, direction, production, costumes, you name it.
We’re starting the series of interviews with Ana Drăghici, cinematographer (Two Lottery Tickets, dir. Paul Negoescu, The Story of a Summer Lover, dir. Paul Negoescu, Otto the Barbarian, dir. Ruxandra Ghiţescu) and co-founder of FILM PLUS.
Can you briefly take us through a day of work as a DOP?
It all starts out with a good cup of coffee. The shooting day has a very organized structure to it. The day is tightly divided according to its schedule. You can’t negotiate the time at which you want to eat or when to take a break. It’s slightly militarized, because it can’t function otherwise. To a certain extent, a good shooting day is a matter of unpredictability. If things go well as far as the production is concerned, meaning that nothing breaks, no crises occur, and the weather fits the aesthetic demand of the shot, then the fulfillment comes from the creative challenge that I have to solve regarding the scenes in question. A good shooting day is when I feel like I have captured a truth on camera and when I’m content with my contribution at an aesthetic level. However, this is an assessment that I can draw at the end of the day at the earliest. That’s pretty much what my favourite day would look like.
Otherwise, the order of things during a day of shooting goes something like this: I get to the set, I chat with the crew for a while, because things are pre-established. Afterwards, I start framing the shots, we rehearse, I work with the grip and electrical crew, we set up the lighting and start shooting. The same process is repeated scene by scene.
*(This is how things play out in the case of a shooting day per se, and it does not cover pre-production, scouting, post-production, rehearsing, etc, all of which are still working days).
What does the concept of the female gaze mean to you? How would you define it? Can you give us an example of a film you’ve worked on (or would have liked to work on) where this female gaze is present, and you think that it makes a valuable contribution?
I find it to be a pretty difficult term to define, since the concept came about as a reaction to Laura Mulvey’s term, the „male gaze.” The female gaze is largely understood as the feminine perspective undertaken in films directed by women and which shows a different vision to that of the men regarding the subject. I find this definition to be slightly reductive, because it exists as a comparison to the masculine vision. I think this concept is still at the stage of being defined and is not yet complete; it’s more of a road, a trip, if you will, towards a separation from the male gaze and the attainment of a more well-defined identity of the concept.
Of course, there are similarities between the ways in which women treat a subject, with a different sensibility that manifests itself through stories which are pretty different from those generated by men. However, I think that, at the moment, nobody can draw a clear line and say that the female gaze means this or that.
With “The Story of a Summer Lover”, the art direction was designed from a feminine perspective precisely with the intent of striking a balance within a perspective that risked being exclusively masculine, given that the protagonist was male, and the whole story was focused on the experiences of a man in relation to women. Therefore, the director had the intention of working with a woman cinematographer from the very start, precisely to assist the dramatic discourse in this direction.
Lately, the majority of the projects in which I have been involved are headed in this direction to a gratifying extent. However, it is not that simple. You cannot tell every story or depict every situation from this point of view, even if that is what you want to do. Some scenes fit better within other conventions. I try to make each shot adhere to some kind of personal female gaze, but it doesn’t always work out for me. I am still engaged in a personal quest to appropriate this female gaze for myself. It’s complicated, because it’s not just a matter of one or two things; it’s rather an entire ensemble which needs to be harmonized.
To what extent is this female gaze present in your films?
It’s present, insofar as it manages to exist organically, at the intersection where the author’s intentions meet the interpretation and the film camera. In my movies, I think it’s present enough to make itself felt on the screen, but this is also because I have collaborated with male and female directors who are interested in this direction.
What techniques or approaches do you employ in order to bring a female gaze to your movies? Is it something you do consciously?
There aren’t any specific techniques. There isn’t a recipe. I use the tools of the craft to give a scene a twist, but there are certain issues which are too technical for me to talk about. In the beginning, I used to intervene rather unconsciously, and then I would only realize it later on, after I would see the shot. However, for some time now, when I am given the possibility and it is asked of me, I do it in a calculated way.
For instance, how would you reconstruct a typical opening scene presenting a female character?
For me to reenact a scene, I need to know it beforehand. How would I shoot a scene in which a female character is introduced? Here, the screenplay holds the key to the direction, as do the directorial conception, the dramaturgy and the meaning of the character, rather than its gender. When I’m filming a person, I’m not filming a woman or man; I’m filming a person. I try to avoid getting into a scenario of overcompensation and shoot women in one way and men in another, if that is not what is being asked from a dramatic standpoint. However, I would certainly not shoot the chest or the legs, regardless of how beautiful they might be 🙂
What was it like for you to work with your partner? What is the dynamic and how are the results usually assessed?
We had fun the first time we ever set out to work together on a more extensive project, because everyone around us got nervous. They were afraid that the two of us wouldn’t get along, that we were going to fight on set. There is this tendency in people to adopt some general „scenarios.” However, we communicate a lot, and we don’t have the type of unresolved couples’ issues which would echo into our workplace relationship. Therefore, we weren’t worried, we were actually glad. We get along very well during shooting, we are comfortable, and we trust one another.
Since we know each other very well, we skip over certain stages of the discussion because oftentimes it’s clear to me from the very beginning what Paul is looking for as a director. And then we get into a more intimate work process where we confront one another when we have doubts;we often have discussions and we give each other feedback.
What barriers do you think a woman has to overcome in your line of work?
As frustrating as it is, we are a transitional generation, at least in Romania. At the moment, we don’t benefit from an organic form of equality, and so we have to face some uncomfortable things, but we can’t not make this transition, we can’t elude our cause – it would be unjust towards womens’ history.
One important issue is the question of pay. One step at a time, we have to acknowledge our own value and showcase it on the market without making any comparison to one colleague or another. Then there are the barriers set up by systemic sexism and misogyny. It’s unfair and extremely unpleasant. I turned these things into a sort of personal everyday revolution. In my case, these issues are not a one-off or exceptional occurrence; rather, they’re a given, and I try to address them with the same cadence with which I drink my coffee.
According to many studies, the percentage of women working on big budget movies is much smaller than in the case of independent films. Why do you think that women don’t get to work on big budget movies? What are the entry barriers?
I think it’s also a matter of people in key positions being afraid of the unknown: male directors, producers, and, paradoxically, female directors and producers. They have simply never worked with women before, and they don’t want to take the risk or give it a try. It’s a form of traditionalism which has no place in modern society anymore, but which is still maintained through the fear of change.Either that, or they can’t conceive of the idea that a woman can be a cinematographer. Besides, women are great at making indie films, documentaries, with little money, so the industry has found a role for them to fulfill. It’s cynical, but it’s not far from the truth.
A man can get an offer for a big budget movie at the starting point of his career, while a woman has to prove herself capable via multiple projects, and over the span of several years. Even then, if she does succeed in demonstrating this fact, many planets have to align in order for her to receive the offer of a bigger project.
How do you explain the smaller number of women working in very technical jobs? Do you see it as a result of early gender socialization, or is it rather an industry barrier?
It’s both, and I think there are other factors at play as well. The cultural legacy and the division of roles with which we are born are essential. It’s extremely difficult to contest the reality of one’s childhood as an adult, and then changing the patriarchy is a long-term process. We’re at the fourth wave of feminism, and there are more to come.
How did you build your authority on the set?
Through friendship, firmness, and humour.
Precisely because it is a mostly male environment, do you think there is an increased camaraderie among women in the film industry? Or rather, on the contrary, is there more of an internalized misogyny?
Femininity on set is not a walk in the park. And it depends on what this femininity is supposed to mean. I feel neither woman nor man when I’m on set. For instance, during the production of the second to last film I’ve worked on, we did a skirt day. There were a lot of women on set, and I talked to Boroka (camera assistant) about all of us coming to work in skirts. It’s the type of stratagem we came up with in order to affirm and to celebrate femininity; it was like a game.
Camaraderie and internalized misogyny among women are not mutually exclusive. I’ve been noticing them become interwoven as of late, even though that may seem contradictory.
I think that’s part of the transition I was talking about. And I think that the relationships are heading more and more towards a natural sorority, and it’s super great.
Beyond this gender angle, because we are not defined by that, what’s an example of a challenge and a form of satisfaction you find in your work?
The challenges which give me satisfaction are when I have to shoot something new – a complex and unique situation with which I haven’t been faced beforehand, and I do a good job of it.
