Power of Story: Serious Ladies | 2015 Sundance Film Festival

Overview

The panel at the 2015 Sundance Film Festival focused on how women’s storytelling is changing across TV and independent film—along with the barriers women face in Hollywood. It also examined the kinds of questions creators are asked, and the creative choices that shape tone, humor, and “too far” boundaries.

Women at Sundance and why the panel matters

The discussion opened by framing Sundance’s “women’s initiative” as an institutional effort driven by executives including Kerry Putnam and Carolyn Labresco. It positioned the event as part of a broader cultural shift: storytelling—especially in TV—has become more sophisticated and socially resonant, with women’s creators playing a central role.

TV as a faster-growing space for female-centered stories

A major theme was that television currently offers more opportunity for women than movies, particularly because TV’s commercial model (networks selling to audiences) can incentivize female-led programming more consistently than mainstream film studios do. Panelists argued that:

• Film tends to chase a narrower male audience.
• Even progressive independent film can be harder to sustain without larger institutional backing.

The “chick panel” vs. real kinship among creators

As television critic Emily Nussbaum introduced the panel, creators discussed how women are often grouped into token categories—such as “women’s issues” and “female comedy.” Panelists described this as double-edged:

• It can foster community among women.
• It can also lead to shallow, ghettoizing media framing and repetitive, lazy questions—such as:
  • Whether work is autobiographical
  • Whether creators are likable
  • Motherhood/children
  • “Vagina”-coded interrogations

Their counterargument: these topics aren’t inherently limiting—the intent and quality of the questions matter.

Diversity and who gets centered

Orange Is the New Black was used as an example of female ensemble storytelling with broad diversity (race, sexuality, age, gender identity). The panel emphasized that this isn’t only about “women’s lives” in a narrow sense, but also about:

• Memorable humor
• Character variety

The panel also tied this to a broader critique: major film awards and nominations often skew overwhelmingly toward white men, feeding ongoing debates about diversity.

Hiring, credit, and creative power dynamics

Panelists debated whether collaboration with men is inherently limiting or whether the real issue is who gets credit and decision-making power. Experiences ranged from:

• “Utopia” writers’ rooms, where women have real control
• Industry norms where women’s contributions are minimized or misunderstood

One example discussed included Björk’s comments about being heard only after men received credit for her work. Some stressed they don’t want a “women only” constraint, while others emphasized that structural incentives and cultural bias can still block women’s recognition.

Humor, offense, and “too far” creative boundaries

A substantial portion covered comedic risk—how writers decide when a joke is justified by character and story versus when it’s only shocking or “sloppy.” Panelists discussed frameworks such as:

• Don’t rely on cheap provocation if it doesn’t serve the narrative.
• If you can’t clearly explain why something works, it probably shouldn’t be on screen.
• Audience reaction matters, but writers still need artistic justification.

They also noted that streaming/network constraints shape what gets said directly, sometimes pushing writers toward more subtle—and more artistically effective—choices.

Romantic comedies and how they shape women’s expectations

Panelists analyzed romantic comedy’s cultural influence, especially how the genre often treats couple-formation as the “end” of character development. They argued that modern female storytelling sometimes rejects or deconstructs that structure, showing that women’s relationships and emotional lives are more complex than rom-com payoff formulas.

The Mindy Project by Mindy Kaling was discussed as both using and critiquing rom-com tropes.

Sex scenes and negotiation as craft (not just spectacle)

The conversation addressed how sex scenes are written and filmed, emphasizing:

• Vulnerability
• Consent
• Negotiation
• The practical reality that actors must feel comfortable enough to perform

Panelists described approaches like communication, treating actors as collaborators, and ensuring sex scenes serve character and story rather than becoming pure titillation. They also discussed how constraints—and censorship boundaries—can force more creativity.

Social media, public misunderstanding, and responsibility

On political engagement and public perception, the panel argued that creators shouldn’t automatically be assumed to represent their character’s views or to speak for all women. Panelists described social media as:

• Time-consuming
• Often misunderstood

Despite that, they generally supported having a voice while acknowledging the responsibility that comes with influence. They also noted that audiences often confuse the self with the character—projecting a creator’s “philosophy” from fictional dialogue.

Political issues they personally emphasized

In audience-style roundtable comments, panelists cited a range of causes:

• Food quality in schools and its impact on learning/health
• Fundamentalism and black-and-white thinking
• Reproductive rights and justice, including ongoing fights despite historical legislative milestones
• Campus sexual assault, framed as part of a broader pattern where survivors often go unheard even in privileged settings
• Broader inequality affecting women of color, body image, and representation

Career lessons: “tipping points” and creative insistence

The panel ended with “tipping point” stories—moments when careers nearly derailed or when creators had to take full control, such as:

• Writing their own material
• Running their own creative directions
• Refusing to shape work for industry approval

Advice centered on:

• Tell the story closest to you rather than predicting what the industry wants.
• Keep creating even after failures (e.g., writing new pilots, continuing to “throw your hat in the ring”).
• Don’t let external approval be the primary creative goal—authenticity builds a voice that resonates.

Presenters / Contributors

• Emily Nussbaum (panelist; television critic, The New Yorker)
• Mindy Kaling (panelist; creator of The Mindy Project)
• Lena Dunham (panelist; creator/producer/actress associated with Girls)
• Genji Cohen (panelist; associated with Orange Is the New Black; note: subtitle spelling may be incorrect)
• Kristen Wiig (panelist; actor/screenwriter associated with Bridesmaids)
• Carrie Putnam (referenced as Sundance executive director)
• Carolyn Labresco (referenced as Sundance programmer/executive contributor)