Berlinale goes for genderless acting prizes
Thursday, August 27, 2020 at 10:39PM 
There were quite a few comments the other day wondering why we hadn't shared the news that Berlinale, one of the world's top film festivals, will no longer be giving out separate Best Actress and Best Actor prizes. Instead they'll now be giving out two genderless acting prizes, one for a leading role and one for a supporting role. The reason we hadn't yet shared the news is that we found it self-sabotaging and depressing. A disclaimer before we continue: Before yet another angry comment explosion wherein we're accused of not having any perspective -- 'the world is burning, who cares about movie awards,' etcetera, you know the drill -- we must state upfront that we're fully aware that film awards are not the most important thing going on in the world. To which we must also state "duh!" reflectively and pre-emptively. But this is a film site, and a film site that is obsessed with film awards so please just let us do our thing. If you want to read about the world burning, you're at the wrong website anyway. This one is built for talking about arts and entertainment with a heavy emphasis on the filmed kind.
Now let's continue to the Berlinale topic...
One of our great joys in life has always been film awards. They can be maddening, sure, but they're also fun and glamorous, and we'd argue an important piece of cultural history when it comes to the arts. Through awards, whether they're audience polls, sales driven, selectively juried, or voted on by large invite-only groups, you can often see what industries and the general public and the critical community valued in art, what styles of performance they cherished, and even which countries were in vogue and the like. It's endlessly fascinating. This is why any movement to reduce this great pleasure is upsetting.
Those who share the view that acting should be genderless are likely praising the decision and we understand, at least in part, why. Gender doesn't determine skill or worth as an actor (though we'd argue that generally speaking women are better actors, perhaps because they're more practiced at meeting more complex emotional demands within the roles they're given) and more people are identifying as non-binary. So why shouldn't awards be free of gender? Or as Berlinale puts it "gender sensitive". It's a reasonable question except that it ignores the subjectivity of awards in the first place. It also ignores that gender equality already exists in the traditional film awards system for actors (except for the small percentage of actors who don't want to be considered men or women).
All awards for art are, by their nature, completely subjective. There can be no single "best" and there can't even really be two "bests" or even five to ten bests as no one will ever agree on what "best" means. Gender is just a handy and, yes, binary way to divvy things up. And we'd argue that you do have to divvy awards up in some way to attempt even the tiniest sliver of objectivity within a subjective contest. Even within the current binary method of Best Actress and Best Actor prizes you're still comparing apples to oranges within those separate fields. Once you've combined all of them, you have apples and oranges and .. oh, let's say, meat products since men and women rarely play the same kind of role. And even within both male and female acting prizes, as movie prizes have been splitting them for nearly a century, you can easily see the misogyny and patriarchy of the world in the types of roles that are honored (i.e. valued). Having male and female actors compete together in a single category will not remove these biases. What's more it will absolutely decrease gender equality, since as it stands now, acting awards in most organizations honor an exactly equal amount of men and women.
What's more if you don't divvy up categories, you're limiting the prizes that can be given for leading performances which is a strangely stingy stance for any kind of arts organization. For a film festival it seems particularly odd since they have such limited cultural power to begin with. Now, the Television Critics Association has famously gone gender-free in their awards for years. And while they've historically preferenced female actors for the win, they've honored far fewer actors in total, of either sex (given their very small amount of prizes). And, given that the world is still so sexist, we absolutely do not believe that women would be as frequently honored as men in the hands of other much larger voting bodies. The perfect obvious example of this is the enormous gender disparity in Honorary Oscars and most below-the-line Oscar categories (which are all genderless) which are given out to far far more men than women every single year.
As much as we love the idea of honoring Supporting thespians, as the festival now intends to do, if history is any indication they'll still likely get stiffed with co-leads taking that "supporting" prize. What's more a "supporting" prize will do far less for a film in terms of getting it media attention. So everyone loses, really. Except the one actor, male or female or non-binary, who is thus honored that year.
We've droned on too long but we don't like this development. Equality between the sexes has always been a difficult concept for the world (and awards bodies) but at least in the traditional system, there was already equality of the sexes, at least numerically. Male and female actors won the exact same prizes in exactly equal amounts. This will no longer be the case in Berlin and anywhere else when this new sensitivity is deployed.
Reader Comments (37)
I absolutely hate it.
While I understand the apprehension regarding these changes, I prefer to be positive about them. If this was something done by the Oscars, I'd be more fearful, but it's the Berlinale. They've long proven to be more open to rewarding women in places were AMPAS won't - women directors, for instance. They also represent a great annual showcase for queer cinema where non-binary performers are more likely to be found.
Thinking back to the festival's previous editions I can think of a lot of great feats of acting that missed a chance at being rewarded because the awards are so focused on lead performances. As previously detailed here, one of my favorite Cannes acting wins ever was Samuel L. Jackson's trophy for his supporting performance in Jungle Fever. I can imagine some Berlinale-competing supporting players who could have been amazing winners. People like...
Valeria Golino in DAUGHTER OF MINE
Patricia Clarkson in THE PARTY
Sandrine Kiberlain in BEING 17
Antonia Zegers in THE CLUB
Patricia Clarkson in BOYHOOD
Diane Kruger in FAREWELL MY QUEEN
Vanessa Redgrave in CORIOLANUS
Olivia Williams in THE GHOST WRITER
Samantha Morton in THE MESSENGER
Viola Davis in SOLARIS
Isabelle Huppert in 8 WOMEN
Cate Blanchett in THE TALENTED MR. RIPLEY
etc., etc., etc...
The world's changing, bringing about the just validation of identities that weren't even seen as real by society when the Berlinale started. I think it's fine for movie awards to change along with the world. In a certain regard, I think they should, though it's obvious that change isn't easy. In the incoming years, we'll see how this works for the Berlinale.
Also, promotion-wise, with all this kerfuffle surrounding the changes, the first few winners of that supporting trophy will probably get more press than the average leading actors who win the prize every year. So, it'll probably work out fine for their distributors and creators.
Sorry if my words sound dismissive. I'm honestly just trying to see the bright side of this.
This is performative and pointless on Berlin's part.
I fully agree with many of the points made here by Nathaniel. I think it is a very bad decision on the part of the Berlin Film Festival to try to solve a problem that does not exist and that can lead to future problems.
I already imagine if two men win both awards, no matter how well deserved, this will lead to a lot of criticism. Strangely if two women win both awards then this will lead to a lot of applause, I bet on that.
Again, a very bad decision that I hope that in the future, hopefully, the Best Actor and Best Actress will be awarded again.
That is a bad fucking idea. It's fucking stupid.
This is probably a good idea in the long run. I mean gender is real--it's socially constructed but real--but it's also a way to enforce hierarchies, with the sex with an -ess at the end of their job description valued less than the other.
Here's what I'd do: There's still four awards.
1) Best Lead Performer (really has to be the absolute lead Patton in PATTON or true co-lead THELMA *AND* LOUSE both count).
2) Best Ensemble Performer (the main players in THE BIG CHILL, OCEANS 11, etc.)
3) Supporting Performer (we know what this is)
4) Best ... don't know the word, but a one or two scene wonder. Something that sounds better than cameo or bit player. There are a lot of people who steal movies with one or two scenes. Here's the chance for them to win a big award every year.
Not perfect, but nothing in life is. The current situation isn't.
Totally unacceptable!!!!
Jesus Christ, when are you far leftist sexists going to admit that you all just hate men? As a gay guy who doesn't swallow this neo-Marxist bullshit, it's been really frustrating to read this blog for the last four years. All of the contributing writers to this blog have demonstrated such a deep but disturbingly casual disdain for men. I swear to God I'm not trying to be antagonistic, but this obsession with identity categories in every single sphere in America is beyond nauseous that it's actually pathalogic.
Yes Claudio, the world is changing with relation to gender but none of it is organic.
I'd rather they institute an ensemble prize, tbh. I understand the desire to do this, but there'll always be "Well a woman was the jury president of course they gave awards to women" thing whenever a female director is given a big prize in a female ied festival. But open to seeing how it goes.
Breaking news..
The Film Experience hates men!! You heard it here first! LOL
For anybody who thinks this is a good idea, the Oscars will definitely end up with a 15/5 men/women split one year. I can actually see this working in reverse at the juried Berlinale - women winners will far outnumber male winners. Also bad.
I hate it. If others follow... Ugh.
I hope that no other awards body will do this. It's awful.
I agree with Nathaniel and I don’t think it’s such a great idea, even if I understand who sees a bright side in it. No-binary people needs respect but I will miss Best Actor/Best Actress prize at least for a bit...regarding supporting prizes I would like European Film Award will add this category (as they did during the first years), more than Berlinale
cue them only giving the awards to cisgendered men after all this BS
The stupidest idea ever. Berlinale - come to your senses!
I'll wait and see. As a general rule I dont like narrowing the number of people who get recognized.
I'm initially wary about it, because I do prefer following the actress races, but I understand the rationale.
I like Dan's suggestion about broadening the types of performances that could get nominated even further than lead and supporting as a way to avoid narrowing the scope too much.
My main concern is that right now Women have an automatic 10 spots guaranteed at the Oscars, if they were to go genderless, what's to say that of the 20 nominees 18 would be men and only 2 women get in.
You know that's where we're heading.
It's a No from me.
Mallinckrodt -- it's obviously where we're heading if Oscar adopts this. We know for a fact that they prefer movies about men (the nominations prove this statistically by a huge margin) so naturally more of the acting nominations would go to men -- since male-centric movies tend to have less female characters. And that's the ones they would be watching/considering if the Best Picture field is indication (and it is... since Best Picture nominees tend to dominate acting conversations)
think of the statistics of how few Best Actress nominations come from "Best Pictures" .
This is pretty much a terrible idea. Does Berlin do "nominations?" I don't think so, and that is really the problem for other awards groups. It's easy to throw everyone into consideration if you're not actually nominating them. There just aren't as many big roles for women out there, at least not in movies that get seen and talked about. Some years you really have to dig around to find worthwhile performances.
My feeling is that until "women's" roles and stories are at 50% or better, then you shouldn't be limiting opportunities for women to be recognized. And I don't think that 50% or better has ever been breached except maybe something like 1977, and some early years in Hollywood.
The good news is that I think the actor's branch of the Oscars would never go for something that cuts down the categories they are allowed to compete in. If anything, they would probably want to expand categories or at least honorary awards like "best juvenile performance" or "special contribution" a la Maurice Chevalier or Harold Russell.
I think fearing that something won’t work is not a reason to stop doing it, especially if your goal is to achieve equality and leave behind certain ideas that are damaging to a part of the community.
Will they reward only men? We don’t know. Probably. Will they reward more women? Maybe. I can also see that happening. The answer is we don’t know, but as these choices are made through the years people will be reflecting on them and improving. It’s an evolving conversation.
If what we want is to not exclude anyone, resistance is not the way to go, even if we hit some bumps along the way.
I think I disagree with you on this.
I think we're both on the same page that having no designated field for non-binary performers, or forcing them to choose a lane (which seems cruel), is not the answer. And I assume they're aren't enough sizable roles for non-binary performers to create a third award (and "Male/Female/anybody else" feels like a bad look).
But maybe giving two (or even three!) genderless awards per category would work toward increasing the amount of recognition? The chance for sexism and bias toward male roles/performances still exists, but we should hope that a group that thinks about these issues in the first place can be trusted to be more thoughtful and inclusive in their awarding. And if they consistently aren't, then that's when they should be taken to task.
I personally don't think the Berlinale Best Actor/Actress prize is a career maker or anything, so giving them 2-3 years to prove their merits doesn't seem like TOO costly a proposition.
Maybe in ten years every awards body can just give out one award, period, and then in fifty years, do away with awards altogether.
Hahaha! What a bunch of lunacy.
If this is done to equalize gender disparity, it’s actually only going to make it worse. In fact, that’s perhaps the one true guarantee here.
Go figure.
I have mixed feelings. If I thought they would judge objectively then I feel I can't object to breaking gender barriers.
So as not to reduce the awards available, maybe they could have awards by age such as under/over 25 years old.
My opinion might be influenced by experience of being a female in a technical "male" field and being judged differently.
I have my own version of movie prizes and i have three acting categories: best leading performance, best supporting performance and best ensemble performance with 10 slots by category. (I'm tempted to copy your idea Dan Humphrey)
I actually understand the decision because I honestly think that gender is no relevant for any work, and if we talk of movie awards is absurd that just the acting categories are divided for sex gender, I know, I understand they do it like that for the star power of actors but if you gonna recognize the people that works in the movie industry you should treat equally the people that compose the cast an the crew, at least that is how works in my mind.
And I wouldn't be worry about other festivals or awards copying this, I really don´t think others do the same. In fact I think is more possible that Berlinale returns to the "traditional" way in some years.
These people are sick.
Really sick.
The thing is, this industry is not post-gender. Gender is still a issue, women are treated differently, fact. The awards shouldn't pretend otherwise, this would actually reinforce the sexism that exists.
"it's been really frustrating to read this blog for the last four years."
Have you ever tried stopping reading it then? I mean....does someone points a gun to your head and makes you do it?
The Grammys have been doing genderless categories for years now. It's been a fairly even divide between men and women overall, but in some fields, women have won more than men. That might continue or not. Their reason for doing it was to decrease the number of categories, not some noble gesture of gender equality or something. Just something to throw out there.
Going genderless with their acting awards may mean that people who don't identify as either female or male won't feel left out anymore. That's got to be a good thing.
Dumb, dumb, dumb.
All you have to do is look at the Grammy Awards to see the problem with this idea. At first when they first went with gender-less categories, the prizes were given out to both genders somewhat equally. Yet as time what on, not only where women getting much fewer nominations but men were also taking the majority of the awards. I just think at this point of time it's a bad idea
Whooooooooooooooo cares!
Just popping in to register my dissent. I can see this is a charged issue here!
I think you're right that awards bodies favour male performances, but I don't think the best solution to that problem is to maintain a binary that doesn't truly correspond to the work itself (there is no fundamental difference between male acting and female acting) and that excludes nonbinary performers. I'll add that I don't think it's fair to dismiss these artists as a "small percentage...who don't want to be considered male or female" or to so glibly shrug at the notion of a nonbinary performer taking home a Supporting Acting prize, as though that wouldn't be history-making.
There are many other groups of artists traditionally undervalued by awards bodies--racialized performers and female directors spring to mind. No special category exists for either group. A "Best Female Director" prize would certainly end the Academy's penchant for solely awarding male directors, but it would seem absurd and patronizing because, of course, female directing is no different from male directing.
Other awards bodies, like the Dora Awards for Toronto theatre, have successfully de-gendered their acting awards. The nominees are selected by a specialized jury, whose names are public, and the nomination lists have featured incredible diversity (and inclusion of nonbinary performers) in both years since the change.
Solutions exist! No need to cling to the out-dated tradition of crowning actors the Prom Kings and Queens of Hollywood.
While I understand your devotion to acting- specially female performers and stars, I have to strongly disagree with you that choosing to give out awards for distinction, independent of gender binary ideas, somehow diminishes awards or recognition in general. I won’t get into an in-depth analysis of why and how binary systems plays out in our times and their historical relevance and critiques, but needless to say that in awards related to filmmaking and cinema male and female categories were made up to reiterate the comercial star system (wich I fully appreciate the reverence for), but as acting goes, from Greek theater to modern TV, gender is indeed irrelevant or should be, in terms of handing out one distinguished award for achviment in acting. Usually from a selection from film festivals it becomes a consensus and obvious choice wich actor, male or female, has risen over the top and merits a ‘recognition’, and that’s totally outside the boundaries and relevance of gender..