STUDIO RESPONSIBILITY INDEX 2018 STUDIO RESPONSIBILITY INDEX 2018 2018 Studio Responsibility Index 1 STUDIO RESPONSIBILITY INDEX 2018 Hollywood is at a tipping point. The past year has seen the rise of the Time’s This inconsistency from year-to-year, even Up and #MeToo movements, which have sometimes within a single year across a studio’s transformed the conversation in the industry and slate, is something we have noted in several among the movie-going public, and are driving editions of this report. We cannot let these signs change behind the scenes and in the media. On of improvement be a blip in the radar; we need screen, record-breaking films like Black Panther real and sustained progress, and GLAAD is a and Wonder Woman prove that not only does resource to the industry in making that change. inclusion make for great stories – inclusion is Our GLAAD Media Institute is driving a culture good for the bottom line. It is time for lesbian, revolution through research, consulting, and gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) training to help creators and industry leaders stories to be included in this conversation and in be better prepared to produce compelling, this movement. entertaining LGBTQ characters that do not reinforce harmful and outdated stereotypes. (Call GLAAD is calling on the seven major film studios us, we’re happy to help!) to make sure that 20% of annual major studio releases include LGBTQ characters by 2021, and Films like Love, Simon have helped accelerate that 50% of films include LGBTQ characters by acceptance around the world with many outlets 2024. This is the first step in creating a barometer covering the stories of LGBTQ young people that will move them from a “Poor” or “Failing” who were inspired and empowered to come out rating, to a “Good” or “Excellent” one. after seeing the movie. This is the unique power of entertainment – to change hearts and minds According to the MPAA’s most recent THEME by sharing our stories, and helping people find report, in the U.S. and Canada people aged understanding and common experiences with 18-39 made up 38 percent of the “frequent people who may not be exactly like them. moviegoer” audience in 2017 – meaning they went to the cinema once a month or There are many exciting LGBTQ-inclusive projects more. Meanwhile, GLAAD’s own Accelerating that have already been announced as heading Acceptance report shows that 20 percent of into development, and the studios have many Americans aged 18 to 34 and 12 percent aged opportunities ahead in their already scheduled 35-51 identify as LGBTQ. If Hollywood wants to slates for authentic and meaningful LGBTQ remain relevant with these audiences and keep representation. The lifecycle of a film is long, them buying tickets, they must create stories that and the next two to three years are critical, as are reflective of the world LGBTQ people and we will begin to see more films hitting theaters our friends and family know. This needs to take that were greenlit following the beginning of place in the major studio releases that play in GLAAD’s SRI tracking. GLAAD will be holding wide release all over the country – and indeed, dedicated pressure on studios to fulfill their social all around the world - as well as in the indie films responsibility for LGBTQ inclusion, and we are that have long been home to stand out queer here as a resource to help them achieve their and trans stories like Moonlight, Call Me By Your goals. Name, and A Fantastic Woman. We hope that next year’s report is able to paint We have started to see some welcome progress a more promising picture than GLAAD’s 2017 in 2018 – major studio films like teen rom-com findings. While the films mentioned above are Love, Simon (Fox 2000), sci-fi action Annihilation impressive, three films are still only a small (Paramount), and raunchy teen comedy Blockers percentage of the total. With this report and (Universal) all opened in thousands of theaters future editions of the SRI, GLAAD will continue to across the country and included central queer hold Hollywood accountable for the stories they characters who have agency over their own are – or more notably, are not – telling. stories. The protagonists do not simply exist as prop devices for someone else’s development. However, you would not know this from what GLAAD’s SRI found for films released during the 2017 calendar year: there was a significant drop from the previous year (2016), representing a tie for the lowest number and the lowest percentage ever of LGBTQ-inclusive films amongst all mainstream releases since GLAAD began tracking Sarah Kate Ellis in 2012. Only 14 major studio releases in 2017 President & CEO, GLAAD had LGBTQ characters. Of those 14, only 9 passed GLAAD’s Vito Russo Test. STUDIO RESPONSIBILITY INDEX 2018 KEY CONCLUSIONS There was a significant decrease in While the number of queer characters Film continues to lag far behind the number of LGBTQ-inclusive dropped substantially year over year, other forms of media when it comes films distributed by major there was a welcome increase to nearly every type of inclusion of studios in 2017 – down to 14 from in racial diversity of LGBTQ underrepresented voices – but one 23 the previous year. This is a tie for characters following the previous glaring way that mainstream film fails the fewest number of inclusive releases two years of decreases. In 2017, to be inclusive is the complete lack since GLAAD began tracking in 2012 the majority of LGBTQ characters were of transgender characters in and represents the lowest percentage people of color (57 percent, 16 of 28). major studio releases in 2017. ever of LGBTQ-inclusive films of all However, there were no Asian/Pacific (The subsidiary label Sony Pictures mainstream releases (12.8 percent). Islander LGBTQ characters in major Classics distributed the history making, studio releases in 2017. Oscar-winning Chilean drama A Fantastic Woman.) 2017 OVERALL FINDINGS, BY STUDIO 20th Century Fox 14 TOTAL FILMS / 2 LGBTQ-INCLUSIVE FILMS RATING / INSUFFICIENT Lionsgate 19 TOTAL FILMS / 2 LGBTQ-INCLUSIVE FILMS RATING / FAILING Paramount 11 TOTAL FILMS / 2 LGBTQ-INCLUSIVE FILMS RATING / POOR Sony 25 TOTAL FILMS / 1 LGBTQ-INCLUSIVE FILM RATING / POOR Universal 14 TOTAL FILMS / 4 LGBTQ-INCLUSIVE FILMS RATING / INSUFFICIENT Walt Disney 8 TOTAL FILMS / 1 LGBTQ-INCLUSIVE FILM RATING / POOR Warner Brothers 18 TOTAL FILMS / 2 LGBTQ-INCLUSIVE FILMS RATING / FAILING STUDIO RESPONSIBILITY INDEX 2018 Methodology 5 The Vito Russo Test 6 Overview of Findings 7 Observations & Recommendations 8 20th Century Fox 10 Fox Searchlight 12 Lionsgate Entertainment 14 Roadside Attractions 17 Paramount Pictures 18 Sony Pictures 21 Sony Pictures Classics 24 Universal Pictures 26 Focus Features 29 Walt Disney Studios 30 Warner Brothers 33 Additional Film Distributors 36 Acknowledgements 39 4 STUDIO RESPONSIBILITY INDEX 2018 STUDIO RESPONSIBILITY INDEX 2018 Methodology For this report, GLAAD focused its The films were also reviewed for the analysis on the seven film studios that presence of general LGBTQ content had the highest theatrical grosses from and anti-LGBTQ language or “humor,” films released in 2017, as reported though because such content must be by the box office database Box Office considered in context, the language was Mojo. Those seven are: not quantified for this report. • 20th Century Fox Additionally, each film was assigned to • Lionsgate Entertainment one of five genre categories: • Paramount Pictures • Comedy • Sony Pictures • Drama • Universal Pictures • Family • The Walt Disney Studios • Fantasy/science fiction/action • Warner Brothers • Documentary This report examines films that were The family category included animated distributed theatrically during the 2017 and children’s films rated PG and calendar year (January 1 to December under. The category of fantasy/science 31) under the official studio banners fiction/action also included horror films and imprints. Films distributed by these and action films not rooted in reality studio’s “art house” divisions (such rated PG-13 and above. In the case as Fox Searchlight) were analyzed of films that straddled genre lines, separately and not part of the parent categories were assigned based on the studio’s final tally or grade. The total predominant genre suggested by both number of films released by major the film and its marketing campaigns. studios that fell within the research parameters is 109. Based on the overall quantity, quality, and diversity of LGBTQ representation, GLAAD separately analyzed the films a grade was then assigned to each released under four smaller studio studio: Excellent, Good, Insufficient, imprints that are sometimes referred Poor, or Failing. to as “art house” divisions. This was done to compare the quantity and quality of LGBTQ representations in these studios’ releases directly to parent companies. These specialty films are We must also recognize that some of the typically distributed and marketed to a films counted here as LGBTQ-inclusive will much smaller audience than their major not necessarily be seen as such by everyone, studio counterparts. These distinctions and vice versa. Every year GLAAD finds were informed in part by the box office characters that must be subjectively interpreted reporting of Box Office Mojo and other to be understood as LGBTQ, require external entertainment industry databases. The confirmation of the filmmakers’ intentions, total number of films that fell within or rely on pre-existing knowledge of source the research parameters is 40. These material or a public figure on whom a divisions include: character is based. • Focus Features • Fox Searchlight While in past GLAAD has often counted these characters, our methodology is now shifting • Roadside Attractions to only count characters as LGBTQ based on • Sony Pictures Classics what is presented on screen as part of the film, or through wide and commonly-held cultural Each film was researched and reviewed knowledge of a figure.