Originally posted by JoeNYC
View Post
Inclusion requirements for Oscars
Collapse
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
-
"A screenwriter is much like being a fire hydrant with a bunch of dogs lined up around it.- -Frank Miller
"A real writer doesn't just want to write; a real writer has to write." -Alan Moore
-
Originally posted by Prezzy View PostI feel like this conversation is a massive overreaction. Having 30 percent of your cast being minority individuals or simply women is such a massively low bar to meet that I'm pretty sure only certain war movies, period pieces, and biopics would be excluded.
I mean, it sucks for those filmmakers, but I don't think it's going to lead to the sons of the sons of my White brethren being put in concentration camps.
I do feel that if a film's a period piece and it has a predominantly white cast, it shouldn't go out of its' way to be inclusive. Then again, history's not always accurate.
"A screenwriter is much like being a fire hydrant with a bunch of dogs lined up around it.- -Frank Miller
"A real writer doesn't just want to write; a real writer has to write." -Alan Moore
Comment
-
Originally posted by Madbandit View Post
I used "Birth" as an example of how entertainment can be politicized to influence the masses, not something that should be censored.
D.W. Griffith was very sensitive to the racism criticism, saying, "speech and ideas should not be censored,"
Edited to add:
During the slavery years, art had a huge impact on the culture in the South with paintings and sketches of black slaves being bonded, whipped and auctioned. The most influential art of all that made a huge emotional impact around the world was Harriet Beecher Stow's novel UNCLE TOM'S CABIN. Art depicted the emotional side of slavery that had such an impact on people worldwide that it compelled them to act, which impacted the culture of the South.Last edited by JoeNYC; 10-27-2020, 08:13 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Madbandit View PostAnd that's why RandomBloke doesn't get it...
I do feel that if a film's a period piece and it has a predominantly white cast, it shouldn't go out of its' way to be inclusive. Then again, history's not always accurate.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Prezzy View Post
Literally everyone in a movie can be White and it still qualify so long as 30 percent of the characters are women.
Comment
-
Originally posted by JoeNYC View PostWe understand for the majority of writers there are ways to comply with A.1 and A.2 and not have to resort to A.3, but the point for me is that these rules and demands on an artist's creation is not true artistic freedom, no matter how minor or major to the artist's vision, therefore, I speak against it.
But alas, I'm pretty sure the Academy has rules against nominating such films, so I applied my talents to write something else.
If a writer can't adjust to the very lenient standard of, "Don't specifically mandate that one hundred percent of your characters be straight, White men", then they're probably not talented enough to be in the Oscar conversation in the first place and need to get their artistic vision checked out by an optometrist.
So, we're not going to see as many World War I and World War II movies featuring all White male casts being nominated for Best Picture since that's the only real casualty here. I've seen that movie enough times at this point that it's boring and cliche to me anyway.
But here's the real reason my point is that you're overreacting. Say for whatever reason you feel you must make a movie where it's mandatory that everyone specifically be a White dude.
You can still shoot the f*cking movie and make bank. You're just not going to win Best Picture. Oh, the horror.
- 1 like
Comment
-
Originally posted by Prezzy View Post
You're being naive.
World War 1 film, "1917," released in 2019, "boring and cliché"?
On a budget of $95 million it had a Worldwide gross of $385 million. IMDB: 8.3 rating. Rotten Tomatoes: 89% rating. Nominated for many Oscars, including Best Picture and Best Original Screenplay.
To have diversity, Sam Mendes included a person of color: a Sikh soldier.
Mendes didn't do it to meet any rules and demands of the Oscars. As an artist, he felt it was right to show a person of color being involved in this great war. I do not believe the Film Academy needs to enforce diversity inclusions on artists.Last edited by JoeNYC; 10-28-2020, 04:11 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Prezzy View Post
As a writer, I have the artistic vision of writing an emotional coming of age drama that features two solid hours of raw, hardcore sex. No dialogue. Just people getting freaky deaky.
But alas, I'm pretty sure the Academy has rules against nominating such films
First, if you're not talking about college aged students, then underage actors displaying "hardcore sex" would be against the law.
Anyway, I would just like to point out to you the erotic drama titled “Last Tango in Paris,” directed by Bernardo Bertolucci and staring Marlon Brando.
Released in Paris in 1972 and released in the United States in 1973.
Upon its release in America, the MPAA gave the film an X rating.
IMDB logline: “A young Parisian woman (20) meets a middle-aged American business man who demands their clandestine relationship be based only on sex.”
The film was a critical and commercial success. In the 1974 Film Academy Oscars, it was nominated for two Oscars: Best Director and Best Actor.
Again, the audacity of assumptions.
If now studios and exhibitors feel X rated films are not commercially viable and not produce them, the point was that the Film Academy had no problem with an X rated film as long as the artistic merit was there.Last edited by JoeNYC; 10-28-2020, 05:32 AM.
Comment
-
Joe, you're being naive because you assume that artistic freedom exists in Hollywood in the first place. It only exists so long as the guy (or woman) bankrolling a movie says it exists.
I'll cry for Sam Mendes as he sits on his gigantic pile of money from his movie that made almost half a billion dollars because his WWI film no longer meets Academy requirements for Best Picture.
The Academy is entitled to do what it wants, and no one is entitled to a Best Picture nom even if their movie is awesome. Good movies being snubbed by the Oscars was a thing long before these rules were ever put in place, so it's not like anything has really changed.
Why you always put so much energy into debunking my snarky jokes because you choose to take them literally is beyond me.
For the record, the subtext of that joke was is if you have an artistic vision that you don't think will warrant a Best Picture nom, but your sole focus is getting nominated, then you adjust... Or you don't and just make a ton of money anyway.
Comment
-
Originally posted by JoeNYC View Post
We understand for the majority of writers there are ways to comply with A.1 and A.2 and not have to resort to A.3, but the point for me is that these rules and demands on an artist's creation is not true artistic freedom, no matter how minor or major to the artist's vision, therefore, I speak against it.
And I would never describe 'Last Tango in Paris' as " two solid hours of raw, hardcore sex. No dialogue. Just people getting freaky deaky." So even these individual retorts miss the mark and don't make sense because, as I said above, you could write both of those films if you wanted to.
The goal is inclusion. If you were to take the libertarian view that the market will sort itself out then many groups will be waiting another hundred years. We need real benchmarks to ensure a more just system. Nobody is muzzling you or telling you what stories are permissible.
- 1 like
Comment
-
Originally posted by Prezzy View Post
You can still shoot the f*cking movie and make bank. You're just not going to win Best Picture. Oh, the horror.Advice from writer, Kelly Sue DeConnick. "Try this: if you can replace your female character with a sexy lamp and the story still basically works, maybe you need another draft.-
- 1 like
Comment
-
Originally posted by zetiago View Post
I have yet to see a single theoretical or real example of a movie that would not be made or eligible for an Oscar. YOU DON'T HAVE TO COMPLY WITH STANDARD A. You can comply two of the three other standards.
This isn't about how me or another writer may be deprived of having a screenplay be considered for a Best Original Screenplay Oscar because it didn't meet Standard A. It's about rules and demands being placed on a creative person. It's about artistic freedom. Yes, I get it. A writer doesn't has to participate in the Film Academy's Oscars.
zetiago, I don't care if 100% of the screenplays written could find a way around Standard A.
I just wanted to say, in my opinion, I believe the Academy is wrong to demand to an artist that his script must have this or that, or his theme or narrative must have this or that.
Comment
-
Originally posted by JoeNYC View Postzetiago, I am dumbfounded how you and Prezzy don't comprehend my point.
This isn't about how me or another writer may be deprived of having a screenplay be considered for a Best Original Screenplay Oscar because it didn't meet Standard A. It's about rules and demands being placed on a creative person. It's about artistic freedom. Yes, I get it. A writer doesn't has to participate in the Film Academy's Oscars.
zetiago, I don't care if 100% of the screenplays written could find a way around Standard A.
I just wanted to say, in my opinion, I believe the Academy is wrong to demand to an artist that his script must have this or that, or his theme or narrative must have this or that.
Zetiago's point is there are four standards. A, B, C, and D. A film must meet two of them.
So, while you're complaining about A, they pointed out that a movie could have a Black Gaffer, a Latina DP, and an Asian marketing team, and that alone would satisfy the Oscar B and D requirements, which would be enough to qualify regardless if the movie met ANY of the A requirements.
So, right there, your whole argument and opinion isn't even grounded in reality unless you have something against the idea of minority crew members working behind the scenes.
And my point is even if it did have to meet the very lenient standards of A, who gives a crap?
It basically wouldn't affect anyone anyway, and it's not like the Oscars didn't have rules and creative criteria for what qualified as being Oscar-worthy before that, even if they were unspoken. So, why complain about the Oscars now?
- 2 likes
Comment
Comment