[/quote]
Firstly, of course you get to dictate what you watch - your time/money etc. And I have to agree - your viewing habits are gratifyingly broad
But I'm genuinely curious now. AMPAS has point blank stated that films nominated for best picture must meet certain diversity standards. Does that make you less likely to watch their best picture nominees post 2024?[/quote]
It won't stop me watching all the Oscar nominated films because it is something of a habit. However, I had been thinking of stopping of seeing everything that the Academy nominated and only seeing what I wanted to see or fits into my criteria for viewing a film. The 100th anniversary of the Oscars would be a good time to actually stop.
If I only saw the nominated films that actually meet my criteria for watching a film and being an Oscar nominee wasn't one of them I would not have seen Jojo Rabbit, Ford v. Ferrari, Honeyland, Judy, How to Train Your Dragon, Missing Link, Maleficent: Mistress of Evil. I'd be no worse off for it either.
New Oscar Rules
-
Precious Doll
- Emeritus
- Posts: 4453
- Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2003 2:20 am
- Location: Sydney
- Contact:
Re: New Oscar Rules
"I want cement covering every blade of grass in this nation! Don't we taxpayers have a voice anymore?" Peggy Gravel (Mink Stole) in John Waters' Desperate Living (1977)
Re: New Oscar Rules
So nobody has to go through the effort of clicking on a link. Honestly, the biggest issue here is that it has the appearance of sweeping reforms which is enough to panic or outrage one end of the conversation and not actively prevent anything from being nominated. The biggest shift might be if it could dis-encourage certain films from being made in the first place in favor of more diverse fare (oh no...), to which I say that's a big if. The only other argument I'm hearing is THIS IS HOW IT STARTS!!! which is fine because then you know you don't have to continue the conversation.
The Oscars’ New Diversity Rules Are Sweeping but Safe
Although the initiative is meant to encourage major changes, the best-picture qualifications aren’t as strict as they may seem.
by Kyle Buchanan
In 2015, after the Oscars announced a set of 20 all-white acting nominees, the then-president of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences was asked whether the group had a diversity problem.
“Not at all,” the leader, Cheryl Boone Isaacs, replied. “Not at all.”
What a difference five years makes. After a second all-white group of actors was nominated and the activist April Reign’s #OscarsSoWhite hashtag became a rallying cry, the academy began taking great strides to diversify a membership that had been largely white and male for nine decades. Those inclusion goals were met months ago, but this week, the academy unveiled an even more ambitious diversity initiative with the intention of reshaping not just how movies are rewarded, but also who’s hired to make them in the first place.
Meant to take effect by the 96th Oscars in 2024, these new guidelines will require films to meet two of four diversity standards to be eligible for a best-picture nomination. It’s an initiative that could, on its face, encourage studios to enact more equitable hiring practices and broaden the range of stories that are told.
Still, though the announcement has sent shock waves through Hollywood, the new guidelines aren’t as strict as they may initially appear.
The first set of stipulations, grouped as Standard A, has already earned the most attention, and with good reason: It’s meant to encourage diversity in front of the camera for an industry that still defaults to white actors. To satisfy the demands of Standard A, only one of these three criteria needs to be met:
At least one actor from an underrepresented racial or ethnic group must be cast in a significant role.
The story must center on women, L.G.T.B.Q. people, a racial or ethnic group or the disabled.
At least 30 percent the cast must be actors from at least two of those four underrepresented categories.
An emphasis on the latter two criteria would radically change the stories that are greenlit and the people who appear in them. But the first criterion, which mandates that “at least one of the lead actors or significant supporting actors is from an underrepresented racial or ethnic group,” will prove easy for most films to satisfy. Recent best-picture nominees like “Joker,” which is top-heavy with white stars but features Zazie Beetz as the would-be love interest, or “La La Land,” a white-led love story with John Legend in a supporting role, could still sail through Standard A with little to worry about.
[PICTURE OF THE TREE OF LIFE ALSO SATISFYING REQUIREMENTS]
Laramie Eppler, left, Brad Pitt and Tye Sheridan in “The Tree of Life.” Though the film is about a white family, the behind-the-scenes talent would satisfy Oscar rules for diversity.Credit...Fox Searchlight Pictures
Two or more department heads — meaning jobs like director, cinematographer or composer — must be female, L.G.T.B.Q., disabled or part of an underrepresented racial or ethnic group.
At least six other crew members must be from an underrepresented racial or ethnic group.
At least 30 percent of the film’s crew must hail from the four underrepresented groups continually laid out in these guidelines.
The first criterion initially appears easiest to satisfy, as department heads like costume designers, makeup artists, hairstylists and casting directors skew heavily female, though there is a further stipulation: At least one of those jobs must also go to someone from an underrepresented racial or ethnic group, which means that simply hiring white women won’t fulfill the requirement. Still, largely white best-picture nominees like “The Irishman” and “The Tree of Life,” which each employed female casting directors and Mexican cinematographers, would have no problem meeting the demands of Standard B.
If it’s starting to dawn on you that most best-picture contenders wouldn’t have to change a thing under the new guidelines, just wait until you get to Standards C and D. Standard C requires one of two criteria be met:
The film’s distributor or financing company must have at least two interns from an underrepresented group.
The film’s production, distribution or financing company must offer training or work opportunities to people from those underrepresented groups.
Just about any studio with a robust internship program would already meet those stipulations, and Standard D is even simpler: It merely asks that some of the senior marketing, publicity and distribution executives on a film are from an underrepresented group. Given the number of women and gay men who work in the field of publicity, that is an easy bar for any studio to clear.
Since only two of the four standards must be met for a film to qualify for the Oscars top prize, and Standards C and D are so easy for most studios to satisfy, best-picture contenders could remain fairly homogeneous both behind and in front of the camera. In other words, if a filmmaker still wants to make a war movie about white men like “1917” or “American Sniper,” that’s permitted by the new Oscar guidelines as long as the studio distributing it has done the bare minimum when hiring interns and marketing executives.
Given that, will anything truly change? Yes, but it’s something far harder to measure: perception. Even if the new guidelines allow ample workarounds, they will probably spur filmmakers, financiers and studio executives to take the issue of diversity more seriously, and could especially be a boon to department heads of color. And now that the issue is on the table, Oscar voters may be interested to learn just how specifically a contender’s diversity standards were met, and which films skated by with a handful of interns.
At the very least, all this is a tacit admission that the academy is not a passive participant when it comes to diversity in Hollywood, merely beholden to films made outside the organization’s purview. The Oscars can bestow a mighty significance, and their imprimatur has long influenced the films that are greenlit and the filmmakers trusted to tell stories. If these new guidelines say anything loud and clear, it’s that a lack of diversity isn’t just the Oscars’ problem. It’s everybody’s.
The Oscars’ New Diversity Rules Are Sweeping but Safe
Although the initiative is meant to encourage major changes, the best-picture qualifications aren’t as strict as they may seem.
by Kyle Buchanan
In 2015, after the Oscars announced a set of 20 all-white acting nominees, the then-president of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences was asked whether the group had a diversity problem.
“Not at all,” the leader, Cheryl Boone Isaacs, replied. “Not at all.”
What a difference five years makes. After a second all-white group of actors was nominated and the activist April Reign’s #OscarsSoWhite hashtag became a rallying cry, the academy began taking great strides to diversify a membership that had been largely white and male for nine decades. Those inclusion goals were met months ago, but this week, the academy unveiled an even more ambitious diversity initiative with the intention of reshaping not just how movies are rewarded, but also who’s hired to make them in the first place.
Meant to take effect by the 96th Oscars in 2024, these new guidelines will require films to meet two of four diversity standards to be eligible for a best-picture nomination. It’s an initiative that could, on its face, encourage studios to enact more equitable hiring practices and broaden the range of stories that are told.
Still, though the announcement has sent shock waves through Hollywood, the new guidelines aren’t as strict as they may initially appear.
The first set of stipulations, grouped as Standard A, has already earned the most attention, and with good reason: It’s meant to encourage diversity in front of the camera for an industry that still defaults to white actors. To satisfy the demands of Standard A, only one of these three criteria needs to be met:
At least one actor from an underrepresented racial or ethnic group must be cast in a significant role.
The story must center on women, L.G.T.B.Q. people, a racial or ethnic group or the disabled.
At least 30 percent the cast must be actors from at least two of those four underrepresented categories.
An emphasis on the latter two criteria would radically change the stories that are greenlit and the people who appear in them. But the first criterion, which mandates that “at least one of the lead actors or significant supporting actors is from an underrepresented racial or ethnic group,” will prove easy for most films to satisfy. Recent best-picture nominees like “Joker,” which is top-heavy with white stars but features Zazie Beetz as the would-be love interest, or “La La Land,” a white-led love story with John Legend in a supporting role, could still sail through Standard A with little to worry about.
[PICTURE OF THE TREE OF LIFE ALSO SATISFYING REQUIREMENTS]
Laramie Eppler, left, Brad Pitt and Tye Sheridan in “The Tree of Life.” Though the film is about a white family, the behind-the-scenes talent would satisfy Oscar rules for diversity.Credit...Fox Searchlight Pictures
Two or more department heads — meaning jobs like director, cinematographer or composer — must be female, L.G.T.B.Q., disabled or part of an underrepresented racial or ethnic group.
At least six other crew members must be from an underrepresented racial or ethnic group.
At least 30 percent of the film’s crew must hail from the four underrepresented groups continually laid out in these guidelines.
The first criterion initially appears easiest to satisfy, as department heads like costume designers, makeup artists, hairstylists and casting directors skew heavily female, though there is a further stipulation: At least one of those jobs must also go to someone from an underrepresented racial or ethnic group, which means that simply hiring white women won’t fulfill the requirement. Still, largely white best-picture nominees like “The Irishman” and “The Tree of Life,” which each employed female casting directors and Mexican cinematographers, would have no problem meeting the demands of Standard B.
If it’s starting to dawn on you that most best-picture contenders wouldn’t have to change a thing under the new guidelines, just wait until you get to Standards C and D. Standard C requires one of two criteria be met:
The film’s distributor or financing company must have at least two interns from an underrepresented group.
The film’s production, distribution or financing company must offer training or work opportunities to people from those underrepresented groups.
Just about any studio with a robust internship program would already meet those stipulations, and Standard D is even simpler: It merely asks that some of the senior marketing, publicity and distribution executives on a film are from an underrepresented group. Given the number of women and gay men who work in the field of publicity, that is an easy bar for any studio to clear.
Since only two of the four standards must be met for a film to qualify for the Oscars top prize, and Standards C and D are so easy for most studios to satisfy, best-picture contenders could remain fairly homogeneous both behind and in front of the camera. In other words, if a filmmaker still wants to make a war movie about white men like “1917” or “American Sniper,” that’s permitted by the new Oscar guidelines as long as the studio distributing it has done the bare minimum when hiring interns and marketing executives.
Given that, will anything truly change? Yes, but it’s something far harder to measure: perception. Even if the new guidelines allow ample workarounds, they will probably spur filmmakers, financiers and studio executives to take the issue of diversity more seriously, and could especially be a boon to department heads of color. And now that the issue is on the table, Oscar voters may be interested to learn just how specifically a contender’s diversity standards were met, and which films skated by with a handful of interns.
At the very least, all this is a tacit admission that the academy is not a passive participant when it comes to diversity in Hollywood, merely beholden to films made outside the organization’s purview. The Oscars can bestow a mighty significance, and their imprimatur has long influenced the films that are greenlit and the filmmakers trusted to tell stories. If these new guidelines say anything loud and clear, it’s that a lack of diversity isn’t just the Oscars’ problem. It’s everybody’s.
"How's the despair?"
-
nightwingnova
- Assistant
- Posts: 516
- Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2011 4:48 pm
Re: New Oscar Rules
Silly.
Sure, it may be rare...but a film made in Poland on Lech Walesa may not qualify. Or, perhaps a filmed historical novel from Great Britain. Would Dev Patel's David Copperfield even qualify?
Utilizing diverse production professionals is great. But not only do they have to be available, they also have to have the specific skill set you need for the particular production. Can all set designers produce a quality early 20th century NY or all costume designers produce quality Renaissance dress?
Just silly. Ok, the Oscars are only partly interested in art, the other important part is marketing the industry. Nevertheless, just a nonsensical approach to promoting good filmmaking.
Sure, it may be rare...but a film made in Poland on Lech Walesa may not qualify. Or, perhaps a filmed historical novel from Great Britain. Would Dev Patel's David Copperfield even qualify?
Utilizing diverse production professionals is great. But not only do they have to be available, they also have to have the specific skill set you need for the particular production. Can all set designers produce a quality early 20th century NY or all costume designers produce quality Renaissance dress?
Just silly. Ok, the Oscars are only partly interested in art, the other important part is marketing the industry. Nevertheless, just a nonsensical approach to promoting good filmmaking.
Last edited by nightwingnova on Thu Sep 10, 2020 11:15 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
Big Magilla
- Site Admin
- Posts: 19336
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
- Location: Jersey Shore
Re: New Oscar Rules
I suspect all major Oscar contenders will find a way to incorporate the new rules.
On the other hand, there may be a formidable contender at some point that wins all the major critics' awards but fails to qualify for a Best Picture Oscar nomination under these rules. I can't imagine that happening, but anything is possible.
On the other hand, there may be a formidable contender at some point that wins all the major critics' awards but fails to qualify for a Best Picture Oscar nomination under these rules. I can't imagine that happening, but anything is possible.
Re: New Oscar Rules
Firstly, of course you get to dictate what you watch - your time/money etc. And I have to agree - your viewing habits are gratifyingly broadPrecious Doll wrote:Why should I? It is my time and my money and I'll use my criteria to determine what I will watch and what I'll pass on. I don't think anybody can point the finger at me for the 'lack of diversity' in my viewing habits.Okri wrote:Precious Doll: why don't you take into consideration issues of representation when deciding or evaluating what you watch?
And what criteria do I chose what to watch: if a director that is an established person of who's work a wish to follow, any films nomination for an Oscar, selected for Cannes, Berlin & Venice and any film from a new filmmaker that is attracting a lot of positive attention.
Also, if a film looks or sounds good in its own right that will grab my interest.
I will not watch a film solely because it is directly by a man, woman, a person of colour, disabled or gay, etc if it does not meet my criteria.
But I'm genuinely curious now. AMPAS has point blank stated that films nominated for best picture must meet certain diversity standards. Does that make you less likely to watch their best picture nominees post 2024?
-
Precious Doll
- Emeritus
- Posts: 4453
- Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2003 2:20 am
- Location: Sydney
- Contact:
Re: New Oscar Rules
Why should I? It is my time and my money and I'll use my criteria to determine what I will watch and what I'll pass on. I don't think anybody can point the finger at me for the 'lack of diversity' in my viewing habits.Okri wrote:Precious Doll: why don't you take into consideration issues of representation when deciding or evaluating what you watch?
And what criteria do I chose what to watch: if a director that is an established person of who's work a wish to follow, any films nomination for an Oscar, selected for Cannes, Berlin & Venice and any film from a new filmmaker that is attracting a lot of positive attention.
Also, if a film looks or sounds good in its own right that will grab my interest.
I will not watch a film solely because it is directly by a man, woman, a person of colour, disabled or gay, etc if it does not meet my criteria.
"I want cement covering every blade of grass in this nation! Don't we taxpayers have a voice anymore?" Peggy Gravel (Mink Stole) in John Waters' Desperate Living (1977)
Re: New Oscar Rules
Insulted? Not at all. Okri seems insulted.OscarGuy wrote:Yeah, mlrg, you really do seem to be playing up being insulted over this issue. You also don't seem to care about what the criteria actually state and how they would be applied. You really sound like you're shouting All Lives Matter at a Black Lives Matter protest.
The film must meet only TWO of these FOUR criteria.
A. ON-SCREEN REPRESENTATION/THEMES/NARATIVES
B. CREATIVE LEADERSHIP & PROJECT TEAM
C. INDUSTRY ACCESS AND OPPORTUNITIES
D. AUDIENCE DEVELOPMENT
Have an all-white cast? No problem. Hire Rachel Morrison to do photography and Ruth Carter for costumes and you have B covered. Pick some interns, production assistants, and others of color, women, LGBTQ, or with disabilities to work behind the scenes. You have C covered.
All the bitching and moaning about the attempt to encourage the training of a new generation of actors, creatives, and filmmakers who don't look like the all-white, nearly-all-male productions of the past should be beneath ALL of us.
I only feel all this is pretty ridiculous. But hey... your country is only 250 years old. Compared to European countries you are just entering teenager territory and we all know the struggles teenagers go through (themselves and the ones that have to bare with them).
We’re not much better in Europe. We are entering dementia territory.
-
OscarGuy
- Site Admin
- Posts: 13668
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 12:22 am
- Location: Springfield, MO
- Contact:
Re: New Oscar Rules
Yeah, mlrg, you really do seem to be playing up being insulted over this issue. You also don't seem to care about what the criteria actually state and how they would be applied. You really sound like you're shouting All Lives Matter at a Black Lives Matter protest.
The film must meet only TWO of these FOUR criteria.
A. ON-SCREEN REPRESENTATION/THEMES/NARATIVES
B. CREATIVE LEADERSHIP & PROJECT TEAM
C. INDUSTRY ACCESS AND OPPORTUNITIES
D. AUDIENCE DEVELOPMENT
Have an all-white cast? No problem. Hire Rachel Morrison to do photography and Ruth Carter for costumes and you have B covered. Pick some interns, production assistants, and others of color, women, LGBTQ, or with disabilities to work behind the scenes. You have C covered.
All the bitching and moaning about the attempt to encourage the training of a new generation of actors, creatives, and filmmakers who don't look like the all-white, nearly-all-male productions of the past should be beneath ALL of us.
The film must meet only TWO of these FOUR criteria.
A. ON-SCREEN REPRESENTATION/THEMES/NARATIVES
B. CREATIVE LEADERSHIP & PROJECT TEAM
C. INDUSTRY ACCESS AND OPPORTUNITIES
D. AUDIENCE DEVELOPMENT
Have an all-white cast? No problem. Hire Rachel Morrison to do photography and Ruth Carter for costumes and you have B covered. Pick some interns, production assistants, and others of color, women, LGBTQ, or with disabilities to work behind the scenes. You have C covered.
All the bitching and moaning about the attempt to encourage the training of a new generation of actors, creatives, and filmmakers who don't look like the all-white, nearly-all-male productions of the past should be beneath ALL of us.
Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin
Re: New Oscar Rules
I also think your question to Precious Doll is totally ridiculous so we’re even.Okri wrote:mlrg wrote:So next time I take the time to appreciate a painting from Monet, Dali, Picasso, Turner, Velazquez or Pollock first I need to check if the usage of blue represents 20% of the painting, red another 20%, white 20% and so on... that’s exactly the point Okri your taking with your question to Precious Doll.
You're being insultingly ridiculous and willfully obtuse.
Re: New Oscar Rules
mlrg wrote:So next time I take the time to appreciate a painting from Monet, Dali, Picasso, Turner, Velazquez or Pollock first I need to check if the usage of blue represents 20% of the painting, red another 20%, white 20% and so on... that’s exactly the point Okri your taking with your question to Precious Doll.
You're being insultingly ridiculous and willfully obtuse.
Re: New Oscar Rules
Sabin wrote:So, which films last year (or the last five) would this rule have excluded?
Probably Parasite. Not diverse enough. Only South Korean cast and crew.
Manchester by the Sea comes to my mind.
But Green Book is completely eligible so there you go.
Re: New Oscar Rules
So next time I take the time to appreciate a painting from Monet, Dali, Picasso, Turner, Velazquez or Pollock first I need to check if the usage of blue represents 20% of the painting, red another 20%, white 20% and so on... that’s exactly the point Okri your taking with your question to Precious Doll.
Re: New Oscar Rules
Precious Doll: why don't you take into consideration issues of representation when deciding or evaluating what you watch?
Mlrg: Wildly disagree. But its such an obvious cudgel to use against diversity initiatives and affirmative action programs, though.
Mlrg: Wildly disagree. But its such an obvious cudgel to use against diversity initiatives and affirmative action programs, though.
Re: New Oscar Rules
So, which films last year (or the last five) would this rule have excluded?
"How's the despair?"
Re: New Oscar Rules
Of course there are. It’s just ridiculous to evaluate art and creativity, which is already pretty subjective, based on a checklist of pre established criteria.OscarGuy wrote:There are plenty of talented people of color, women, LGBTQ, and disabled individuals. This is just making sure that the film industry doesn't continue to marginalize them. You guys are starting to sound like Republicans.