• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Mila Kunis told 'you'll never work in this town again'

Status
Not open for further replies.

Herne

Member
Didn't see a thread, lock if old and all that.

Mila Kunis speaks out on her experiences with sexism in the industry.

Mila Kunis has claimed a male movie producer told her that her career was finished when she refused to pose half-naked for a men's magazine.

The Black Swan and Bad Moms star talked about her experiences in Hollywood in an open letter published on A Plus, the website co-founded by her husband Ashton Kutcher. The letter is titled You'll Never Work in This Town Again, with Kunis writing: "A cliché to be sure, but also what a producer threatened when I refused to pose semi-naked on the cover of a men's magazine to promote our film."

"I was no longer willing to subject myself to a naïve compromise that I had previously been willing to," she continued. "'I will never work in this town again?' I was livid, I felt objectified, and for the first time in my career I said 'no'.

"And guess what? The world didn't end. The film made a lot of money and I did work in this town again, and again, and again. What this producer may never realise is that he spoke aloud the exact fear every woman feels when confronted with gender bias in the workplace."

Kunis said that throughout her career, there had been times when she had been "insulted, sidelined, paid less, creatively ignored, and otherwise diminished based on my gender".

"I taught myself that to succeed as a woman in this industry I had to play by the rules of the boys' club," she explained. "But the older I got and the longer I worked in this industry, the more I realised that it's bulls***! And, worse, that I was complicit in allowing it to happen."

"So from this point forward, when I am confronted with one of these comments, subtle or overt, I will address them head on; I will stop in the moment and do my best to educate.

"If this is happening to me, it is happening more aggressively to women everywhere. I am fortunate that I have reached a place that I can stop compromising and stand my ground, without fearing how I will put food on my table. I am also fortunate that I have the platform to talk about this experience in the hope of bringing one more voice to the conversation so that women in the workplace feel a little less alone and more able to push back for themselves."

This is pretty fricking awful. I'm glad more people are standing up against and talking about this.

Edit - back home so could add more to the op than the battery time in my phone could allow.
 

DeathyBoy

Banned
Bad Mums changed comedy the same way Bridesmaids did - namely Hollywood will learn nothing about why it worked.
 

Busty

Banned
She can Mila my Kunis anytime she likes.

She can Kunis my Kunis anytime she likes.

She can MIla my Mila anytime she likes.

She can π my π anytime she likes.
 

Apt101

Member
Pretty ironic given she continues to play a character like Meg on Family Guy.

She gets paid something like $225k an episode to recite several lines for a stupid character on a dumb show. I think she's doing rather well in the Hollywood game.
 

Herne

Member
Pretty ironic given she continues to play a character like Meg on Family Guy.

I found it also ironic she mentioned having to worry about putting food on the table since, as a film star she makes hundreds of thousands or even millions depending on the film she's in, but her point stands that wage inequality between the sexes is a very real and unfortunate thing.
 

Sapiens

Member
It's gotta be so hard to rake in a quarter mil per episode on Family Guy.

Worth 30 mil based entirely on her looks.

In a power marriage where combined net worth is near 200 mil.
 

Busty

Banned
It's gotta be so hard to rake in a quarter mil per episode on Family Guy.

That's probably, at most, an afternoon's work. Even when she's on set filming a movie she can record her lines between takes.

Preeeeeeeeeeety sweet.
 

bman94

Member
Mila Kunis is like my celeb crush, so I'm obviously bias but I would throw as much money as I could for her to be in a role. She's always super comfortable in her roles and she's always the most noticeable actor out of all her roles.
 

Frodo

Member
It's gotta be so hard to rake in a quarter mil per episode on Family Guy.

Worth 30 mil based entirely on her looks.

In a power marriage where combined net worth is near 200 mil.

So, handwave a real problem because the person bringing it to light is rich?

Edit: just to quote Mila herself:

Mila Kunis said:
"If this is happening to me, it is happening more aggressively to women everywhere. I am fortunate that I have reached a place that I can stop compromising and stand my ground, without fearing how I will put food on my table. I am also fortunate that I have the platform to talk about this experience in the hope of bringing one more voice to the conversation so that women in the workplace feel a little less alone and more able to push back for themselves."
 

Sapiens

Member
So, handwave a real problem because the person bringing it to light is rich?

Coming from a poor ass immigrant family where my uneducated father had to scoop slag out molten metal while standing on a burning piece of lumber and my mother had to sweat in a fur factory 12 hours a day on her feet, I do see the problem with inequity in western society.

I just don't think Kunis has a real grasp on suffering. The point you quoted also does not make sense. She only felt she could push back once she was raking in a quarter mill per ep to play some pushover woman on a horrible fucking show that isn't even funny? I'll go tell my grade 8 educated, toilet cleaning mother that. It'll really inspire her.
 

DJKhaled

Member
It's gotta be so hard to rake in a quarter mil per episode on Family Guy.

Worth 30 mil based entirely on her looks.

In a power marriage where combined net worth is near 200 mil.

Lol wtf. So you're saying she has a voice acting job because of her looks?
 
Coming from a poor ass immigrant family where my uneducated father had to scoop slag out molten metal while standing on a burning piece of lumber and my mother had to sweat in a fur factory 12 hours a day on her feet, I do see the problem with inequity in western society.

I just don't think Kunis has a real grasp on suffering.

Surely you can see she's not comparing the two
 
Coming from a poor ass immigrant family where my uneducated father had to scoop slag out molten metal while standing on a burning piece of lumber and my mother had to sweat in a fur factory 12 hours a day on her feet, I do see the problem with inequity in western society.

I just don't think Kunis has a real grasp on suffering.

Yeah no...don't do this.

This is equivalent to "there are children starving in Africa" line of dismissal to a real issue.
 

Frodo

Member
Coming from a poor ass immigrant family where my uneducated father had to scoop slag out molten metal while standing on a burning piece of lumber and my mother had to sweat in a fur factory 12 hours a day on her feet, I do see the problem with inequity in western society.

I just don't think Kunis has a real grasp on suffering.

Your point being?

How suffering and/or poverty would make her opinion more or less valid than your opinion or your family's?


Isn't the subject of the discussion the inequality of the treatment of people on the workplace based on gender? Wouldn't her voice be welcomed, since people are more likely to listen to her than the average factory worker, to help raise awareness of a problem that problem affect those same factory workers as well?
 

bman94

Member
Yes. She only got the job because she was already established as part of a crew of good looking people on a hugely popular tv show.

...or maybe she was just a good actor on the show and people saw potential in her? She was like 16 when That 70's Show started and she did a damn good job of being an annoying character on the show. I would hope that would be the reason she got the job with family Guy and not that she was a hot 16 year old.
 

Gattsu25

Banned
It's gotta be so hard to rake in a quarter mil per episode on Family Guy.

Worth 30 mil based entirely on her looks.

In a power marriage where combined net worth is near 200 mil.
How does this apply to what she is saying about the film industry?

The only reading I am getting from your post is "She has it made outside of film so she has no right to complain about the film industry."

What am I missing?
 

DJKhaled

Member
Yes. She only got the job because she was already established as part of a crew of good looking people on a hugely popular tv show.

Lol she started on family guy a year after that 70s show started and judging how long it takes to make an episode of family guy I really doubt that 70s show had anything to do with it. Keep talking out of your ass though.
 

Herne

Member
Here's a link to the thing she wrote: http://aplus.com/a/mila-kunis-sexism-gender-bias-workplace-producer?c=17621


She's saying she's fortunate enough to not have to worry about that. How is it ironic?

Sorry, my phone battery was dying and I read through a bit too quickly while posting. As I said, though, I feel that the point very much stands. This is something that really needs to stop. It's been going on for far too long and I'm very glad that people are drawing attention to it, not to mention actively fighting it.
 
Coming from a poor ass immigrant family where my uneducated father had to scoop slag out molten metal while standing on a burning piece of lumber and my mother had to sweat in a fur factory 12 hours a day on her feet, I do see the problem with inequity in western society.

I just don't think Kunis has a real grasp on suffering. The point you quoted also does not make sense. She only felt she could push back once she was raking in a quarter mill per ep to play some pushover woman on a horrible fucking show that isn't even funny? I'll go tell my grade 8 educated, toilet cleaning mother that. It'll really inspire her.

This right here is what we call Problem Olympics. "Hey I had it bad so you can't possibly understand any type of struggle cause you're totally rich."
 

DJKhaled

Member
Lol she got the job on family guy at 15 after being turned away after auditioning because she couldn't enunciate properly. So she worked on it and got hired. But yeah man, all about the looks.
 

Sanjuro

Member
Lol she started on family guy a year after that 70s show started and judging how long it takes to make an episode of family guy I really doubt that 70s show had anything to do with it. Keep talking out of your ass though.

The original Meg was Lacey Chabert and she just wasn't clicking with the show. It was probably a combination of her performance, voice, and being in the FOX stable at the right time.
 

ezrarh

Member
Coming from a poor ass immigrant family where my uneducated father had to scoop slag out molten metal while standing on a burning piece of lumber and my mother had to sweat in a fur factory 12 hours a day on her feet, I do see the problem with inequity in western society.

I just don't think Kunis has a real grasp on suffering. The point you quoted also does not make sense. She only felt she could push back once she was raking in a quarter mill per ep to play some pushover woman on a horrible fucking show that isn't even funny? I'll go tell my grade 8 educated, toilet cleaning mother that. It'll really inspire her.

I know everyone's piling on you but I'll use this to make a point - one of the major issues we have in this country is empathy. Look at all the Republicans that started denouncing Trump after the pussygate video. "I have a daughter and a mother and a wife so I know this is bad" - like no shit, you don't need to be close to a woman to understand he mistreats them and we shouldn't respect him as a person. Just like you don't need to come from a poor ass family or wherever to empathize with the people dealing with the issues she's talking about.
 

DJKhaled

Member
The original Meg was Lacey Chabert and she just wasn't clicking with the show. It was probably a combination of her performance, voice, and being in the FOX stable at the right time.

Okay? Not really the point of my comment and doesn't go against anything I said.
 
It's gotta be so hard to rake in a quarter mil per episode on Family Guy.

Worth 30 mil based entirely on her looks.

In a power marriage where combined net worth is near 200 mil.

Ignore an issue because you're salty someone is richer than you. Very grownup.

Edit: Also very fine of you to reduce her success to solely her looks and marriage.
 
The issues she's raising have little to do with the amount of money, so it's a bit more universal than what Sapiens is grinding against. She's not your enemy. The solutions and improvements that come from this would benefit women of all classes, not just the upper class.
 

SpaceWolf

Banned
i don't understand the irony - meg is a cartoon character..not a real person. why would this matter?

It's ironic because Meg is a character who's entire shtick on the show is to be insulted, sidelined, creatively ignored, and otherwise diminished based on her gender, so much so that it's become a running gag, and came about as a result of the writers freely confessing they didn't know how to write a teenager girl.

The parallel doesn't matter and certainly doesn't diminish Mila's point, I was just commenting on the irony of it.
 

Cipherr

Member
Coming from a poor ass immigrant family where my uneducated father had to scoop slag out molten metal while standing on a burning piece of lumber and my mother had to sweat in a fur factory 12 hours a day on her feet, I do see the problem with inequity in western society.

I just don't think Kunis has a real grasp on suffering. The point you quoted also does not make sense. She only felt she could push back once she was raking in a quarter mill per ep to play some pushover woman on a horrible fucking show that isn't even funny? I'll go tell my grade 8 educated, toilet cleaning mother that. It'll really inspire her.

What the fuck?

Yes. She only got the job because she was already established as part of a crew of good looking people on a hugely popular tv show.

You wanna provide a source or any proof for this shit at all?
 

muu

Member
I found it also ironic she mentioned having to worry about putting food on the table since, as a film star she makes hundreds of thousands or even millions depending on the film she's in, but her point stands that wage inequality between the sexes is a very real and unfortunate thing.

?? She's saying she's glad she is beyond that stage where she has to worry about being able to make enough money for living wages and therefore call people out on this bs. As you hopefully know already the folks able to make a living acting are the exception...
 
Because Meg is a character who's entire shtick on the show is to be insulted, sidelined, creatively ignored, and otherwise diminished based on her gender, so much so that it's become a running gag, and came about as a result of the writers confessing they didn't know how to write a teenager girl?
If you're equating reality with fiction for your irony argument, then there are hundreds of examples you can bring up of actors playing characters that are opposite to them or their issues in real life. Which then makes it kinda moot.
 

Peltz

Member
Pretty ironic given she continues to play a character like Meg on Family Guy.

It's pretty clear that Meg is an ironic character. The abuse she receives is amusing because it's not what you'd expect. She's a parody of gender based discriminatory issues, not some sort condonation of gender based discrimination.
 

SpaceWolf

Banned
If you're equating reality with fiction for your irony argument, then there are hundreds of examples you can bring up of actors playing characters that are opposite to them or their issues in real life. Which then makes it kinda moot.

The actor in question is discussing women as a whole within the entertainment industry finding themselves getting insulted, sidelined and otherwise diminished because of their gender.

The actor in question's most famous role also happens to be a character who's entire shtick is getting insulted, sidelined, creatively ignored and otherwise diminished because she happens to be a teenage girl as opposed to a teenage boy, and as such has become among one of the show's most famous long running gags.

I don't think it's reaching to point out the irony of that connection at all. Do you feel I'm in someway trying to dismiss the arguments that Mila is trying to make by pointing out the irony, because that's really not what I was doing.

It's pretty clear that Meg is an ironic character. The abuse she receives is amusing because it's not what you'd expect. She's a parody of gender based discriminatory issues.

First of all, whether or not the treatment of Meg is supposed to be satirical on the show doesn't really make the parallel any less ironic.

Secondly, the creators of the show already admitted that Meg is written on the show that way because they didn't really know how to write for a teenage girl character and as a result, just decided to use her as something of a punching bag on the show for comedic effect.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom