Inclusion requirements for Oscars

[figment]

Takes effect in 2024.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/ra...effect-in-2024

QUOTE: To encourage equitable representation on and off screen in order to better reflect the diversity of the movie-going audience," films will have to meet minimum requirements pertaining to representation and inclusion to be eligible for the best picture Oscar beginning with the 96th Oscar race (which will recognize achievements from 2024 and be held in 2025), the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences announced Tuesday.

Kyle Buchanan of the NYT in a small thread on Twitter says less may change than you think:

https://twitter.com/kylebuchanan/sta...93197767651330

[RandomBloke]

It's plain stupidity and I hope the idea gets binned long before it comes into effect.

Whenever I've voiced this elsewhere, people have called me a racist... which must be great for them to have such awesome telepathic powers (even if they give constant false positives)!

Anyway, Parasite was one of the best films of the past decade, but could you imagine if the Koreans had to run around trying to find blacks who could actually act and speak fluent Korean?
And then they'd have had to have found speaking roles for pan-sexual and trans characters...

At the end of the day, I write film scripts for the same reason I watch films: to be entertained.
The agenda Hollywood seems to have is driving foreign audiences away by the masses (as well as Americans), so perhaps refocusing on actual decent content would be the better option?

[DDoc]

It's plain stupidity and I hope the idea gets binned long before it comes into effect.

Whenever I've voiced this elsewhere, people have called me a racist... which must be great for them to have such awesome telepathic powers (even if they give constant false positives)!

Anyway, Parasite was one of the best films of the past decade, but could you imagine if the Koreans had to run around trying to find blacks who could actually act and speak fluent Korean?
And then they'd have had to have found speaking roles for pan-sexual and trans characters...

At the end of the day, I write film scripts for the same reason I watch films: to be entertained.
The agenda Hollywood seems to have is driving foreign audiences away by the masses (as well as Americans), so perhaps refocusing on actual decent content would be the better option?

Agreed. I feel the same but it's beating a dead horse at this point. Also, wolf criers have abused that word so thoroughly that they've robbed it of its power (and in the process hurt actual victims, ironically enough).

I wouldn't mind seeing Hollywood split up to be honest. I get that the industry isn't a monolith as it is but more competition and multiple industry hotbeds would only improve content imo. It seems like we're on that track already.

[sc111]

It's not limited to Black talent diversity. A film with a Korean lead and cast would meet the requirements:

A1. Lead or significant supporting actors At least one of the lead actors or significant supporting actors is from an underrepresented racial or ethnic group.

• Asian
• Hispanic/Latinx
• Black/African American
• Indigenous/Native American/Alaskan Native
• Middle Eastern/North African
• Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander

[DDoc]

Latinix...

I wonder, did that term originate with Hispanic/Latin people? How do most of them feel about it?

Cool. While we're at it we should start imposing these requirements on Bollywood and Nollywood and Japanese anime and Tiktok. I wonder how quickly they'll tell us to piss off? And rightfully so.

It's a strange, almost backward message these actions are conveying if you think about it. I don't even really care anymore though. I'm not sure what credibility the Oscars still have with most of the populace.

I do, however, think that the world and its peoples will find balance at some point, if I may speak in broader terms.

[sc111]

When writing a role, unless race/ethnicity is specified, white is usually the assumed race. There's something wrong with that, imo.

My suburban single-family home street in Central Florida is more diverse than most movies.

[Mark Somers]

So are they going to include comedy at some point?

[RandomBloke]

When writing a role, unless race/ethnicity is specified, white is usually the assumed race.

Only if you're in Scandinavia.



Edit: typo.

[JoeNYC]

The Film Academy is an organization that honors the best films. If the Film Academy wants to set inclusion requirements and standards into films for what they will judge/consider to be amongst the “best,” then they have every right to do so.

With that being said, in my opinion, and with all due respect to the Film Academy, this is the most asinine RULE I ever heard of.

Decreeing, where you’re giving creative artists “rules” to be able to play in your house, is just a lack of good sense and goes against the spirit of honoring art.

The film will be considered amongst the best -- only if it conforms with the inclusion elements that we perceive a great film should contain.

Hey, Oscar, you’re not commissioning my art, so please don’t give me directives!

The Legislative Branch of the U.S. Government past one of the most important legislation in the history of our country: the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that banned discrimination in our society based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin.

Now it seems the Film Academy believes such strong legislation is required in the art world to ensure diversity.

The problem is that the Academy is stepping on my right to Artistic Freedom, which Wikipedia defines as: “the freedom to imagine, create and distribute diverse cultural expressions free of governmental censorship, political interference or the pressures of non-state actors.”

The Academy wants to control and to censor artists and their creative expressions.

What if I want to tell a story about a white supremacist group of Southern rednecks out in the deep woods doing assault weapons’ training to prepare for a race war? The leader receives a satellite phone call that the protagonist, Jake Anderson, is an undercover FBI agent. For training purposes, the leader decides to do Cornel Wilde’s “The Naked Prey.” Jake is stripped naked. To give Jake a head start, an arrow is fired off into the distance. Once Jake passes the arrow, it’s on. He tears off. He is chased by one redneck until he reaches the arrow, and then the next redneck joins the chase and so on.

How do I explain an "significant supporting actor" who is of color? I can’t, so according to the Film Academy, this film will not be worthy of their consideration for an Oscar. Is this action fair/right to the art world just because the Academy is looking to be politically correct to the world?

"Standard A: On-Screen Representation, Themes and Narratives" has no business being forced on an artistic person.

By the way, in 1967, “The Naked Prey” was nominated for best original screenplay in the 39th Academy Awards.

[zetiago]

Everyone step back from the ledge and take a deep breath. This has nothing to do with civil rights nor infringement on anyone's artistic vision.

First off, and this should be fairly obvious, anyone could choose to not comply with the standards and render their movie ineligible for an Oscar. At least 75%, if not many more, movies made in this country are done knowing they will never be nominated for an Oscar, nor do they really care I would think.

Second, if you want to be eligible, there are many provisions that have nothing to do with the on-screen talent that will allow a film to be eligible. Those include providing opportunities and having a staff that more closely mirrors the general population of the United States in Creative and Project Teams, Internships, and Audience Development. So the white supremacist example cited by JoeNYC, though obviously would never be Oscar worthy anyway, it could still be eligible by meeting 2 of the 3 requirements in areas not related to on-screen talent.

These rules are a form of affirmative action. And why do affirmative actions rules exist in a variety of areas? Because without them we've seen in multiple industries, and very clearly in Hollywood, that minority groups do not gain access to the same opportunities as the majority. It helps us as a society balances the scales and essentially combat systemic and unconscious racism.

So, to summarize, everyone can still make whatever movie they want. If you want to be eligible for this one award then you need to ensure you have diversity in two of four areas of your organization. And at the end of the day those two areas will happen to look like the whole of the United States in terms of race and gender.

[JoeNYC]

So the white supremacist example cited by JoeNYC, though obviously would never be Oscar worthy anyway

Oh my lord. Says you. The audacity of assumptions, but does its potential worthiness of an Oscar really matter in this discussion? It was an example of a possibility. Of the interference of the Academy's edict and an artist's vision.

zetiago, your opinion of need, should, could, etc., is making me fearful as an artist. I've said in the beginning that the Academy had every right to impose Standard A on artists, but that doesn't mean I am to applaud them.

I feel strongly that unless an artists is being paid to write according to someone's preference, then that someone has no business dictating to the artist how he should execute his vision.

[zetiago]

Did you actually read what I wrote or just fixate on the one part that mentions your post? Your example, even if it was fully fleshed out (though I do appreciate that your theoretical example has characters with names) is basically a straw man. But it does not achieve what you want it to do. It doesn't speak to the kind of censorship you are arguing against. You could still make that movie, not comply with standard A for all the reasons I cited in my post, and still be eligible for an Oscar.

Nobody is limiting anyone's artistic vision. Period.

[JoeNYC]

Did you actually read what I wrote

Your point is that if the business people of the film live up to two of the three Academy Standards of B, C, or D, then Standard A will have no bearing on the Academy's acceptance of the writer's story.

My point is that the Academy is wrong to even consider Standard A on a writer. Artistic freedom is just that. Free to create as the writer deems fit to express his artistic/creative vision.

[sc111]

Years ago, I received a studio reader's note on a script asking if there was a "story reason" why a lead character ( an Army drill sergeant) was specified as Black. I asked my manager what the heck that meant.

He said if the character's race wasn't necessary to the story the role would likely be cast with a white actor. Huh? No Black drill sergeants in the military? Did I need to change the role to a retired gang banger from Compton?

BTW it was a comedy. I'm glad things are changing.

And I applaud the Academy for this. Studios make all sorts of promises about increasing diversity on screen and in production yet the demos change at a snail's pace. Now, if they want to make an Oscar-bait film, they need to deliver on the promise.

[sc111]

My point is that the Academy is wrong to even consider Standard A on a writer. Artistic freedom is just that. Free to create as the writer deems fit to express his artistic/creative vision.

How is it affecting you as a writer? Is it that none of your lead characters can be played by non-white or female talent?

Do you specify "White Anglo Saxon" in your character descriptions to ensure casting directors don't mess with your vision?