Current Events > New rules from Academy to win best picture Oscar: must be diverse and inclusive

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/race/film-academy-sets-inclusion-requirements-for-oscars-will-take-full-effect-in-2024

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.

Is it really best picture anymore if there's a bunch of check boxes for skin colors and genitals? Not that best picture really meant anything anyway, just seems overboard now.
---

Sigh

voldothegr8 posted...

Is it really best picture anymore if there's a bunch of check boxes for skin colors and genitals? Not that best picture really meant anything anyway, just seems overboard now.

is it that hard to include a black person in your movie

---

They just dont want another South Korean movie to win again smh
---

Is it really the best picture if it only has straight white people in it?

---

Female make-up artist of any color? Boom box checked

It's not all about the people on the screen

---

I feel that stuff like this isn't really helping.
I'm all for diversity, but this is just going to cause movies to become diverse for the sake of being diverse instead of it happening naturally.

---

Smashingpmkns posted...

They just dont want another South Korean movie to win again smh

They can win again as long as they include black person next time. I dont see what would be so difficult about it.

---

iPhone_7 posted...

I dont see what would be so difficult about it.

I don't think there are that many black actors in the South Korean film industry

Turbam posted...

I feel that stuff like this isn't really helping.
I'm all for diversity, but this is just going to cause movies to become diverse for the sake of being diverse instead of it happening naturally.

Theyve had decades for it to happen naturally

the criteria here is extremely easy to meet. section A requirements are met by having one minority actor in a lead or significant supporting role

this isnt going to stifle creativity or some shit


---

Someone call Scorsese and ask him how many black Italians he knows
---

Award shows are stupid.

---

Reading it, this is pretty awful. Being nominated for an oscar should have nothing to do with the diversity of the cast.

Luckily, there are other standards that can be met. I could at least get behind inclusive diversity of the production team.

---

Baffling decision. I'm all for more diversity, but did they ever consider maybe they should just nominate better/more foreign movies instead?

---

Lmao. Can Hollywood just go bankrupt already? Seriously, these people are fucking losers.

---

What a stupid decision

---

TheDyslexicGuy posted...

What a stupid decision

ironically this is going to hurt some foreign movies more than it will hurt hollywood. America has actors of every race. but not every country does. this is an unfair rule for nations that are 90% 1 race

As a guy who is very pro diversity, this is very stupid and not the way to go about it at all.
---

Next best pic needs more pacific islander and intuit representation

---

iPhone_7 posted...

They can win again as long as they include black person next time. I dont see what would be so difficult about it.

Literally affirmative action, but instead of SAT/ACT scores, it's having poor acting/performance skills.

Zikten posted...

TheDyslexicGuy posted...

What a stupid decision

ironically this is going to hurt some foreign movies more than it will hurt hollywood. America has actors of every race. but not every country does. this is an unfair rule for nations that are 90% 1 race

It actually wouldn't effect foreign films if you read through the criteria. This is just to avoid overwhelmingly white production* nominations, which is a good thing imo.

Added production* cuz there's so many different 'groups' in these new rules where it basically doesn't change much.
---

So we're not judging the film anymore?
---

Did anyone actually read the criteria?

to meet requirement A you need to have ONE of the following

-have one lead or supporting actor be of an underrepresented race
-have 30% of minor/background characters be of an underrepresented race OR be women, LGBTQ, or disabled
-be a story about a minority group, women, disabled, or LGTBQ

literally the only films this will disqualify is movies that are exclusively about straight white men. It should not be a stretch AT ALL to meet one of these criteria

---

Woody Allen & Terrence Malick: oh no!

---

well the affirmative action oscar jokes will be interesting at least.

---

People laughed when they said there would be quotas

---

TheGoldenEel posted...

Did anyone actually read the criteria?

to meet requirement A you need to have ONE of the following

-have one lead or supporting actor be of an underrepresented race
-have 30% of minor/background characters be of an underrepresented race OR be women, LGBTQ, or disabled
-be a story about a minority group, women, disabled, or LGTBQ

literally the only films this will disqualify is movies that are exclusively about straight white men. It should not be a stretch AT ALL to meet one of these criteria

Even then it gets more ambiguous with the other groups. Its encouraging employment of minorities and ethnic groups throughout the production team of films. This is a good thing. The more diverse Hollywood becomes the better stories we'll get. But "damn they have to have a Mexican guy on the marketing team for the next Nolan film!" doesn't sound as extreme nor headline worthy as pretending like the leads for movies have to be from an minority group.
---

Maybe this will lead to better movies being nominated. Choosing the whitest possible movie has always led to the worst movies getting nominated, and their best wins in recent years have been the most diverse ones.

---

Idk if forcing diversity is the move here. A good movie is a good movie, if the story is there and the message is there or even if its something you can enjoy its good and it should be given its accolade.

Having to fill up checkboxes isn't the way.

---

IShall_Run_Amok posted...

Maybe this will lead to better movies being nominated. Choosing the whitest possible movie has always led to the worst movies getting nominated, and their best wins in recent years have been the most diverse ones.

Which ones are you talking about?

Smashingpmkns posted...

They just dont want another South Korean movie to win again smh

Parasite would pass the new requirements.

Are we pretending that there wasn't already movies made specifically appeal to the Oscars

---

TheGoldenEel posted...

is it that hard to include a black person in your movie

It is if you're filming a period piece.
I get what you're saying, but how would this affect movies like Apocalypto? Highly "regional" pieces, I feel like diversity would be too transparently forced in a film about, say, the Russian revolution. Would liberties be taken by directors to include minority actors where they literally do not belong for the sake of checking the boxes, and would it detract from the immersion of the film? I think so.

Now a post industrial revolution to modern film absolutely, there's really no excuse to not have some diversity as it adds to the immersion/believability vs an all white cast

Smashingpmkns posted...

They just dont want another South Korean movie to win again smh

RAW a South Korean movie still qualifies.

---

Turbam posted...

I feel that stuff like this isn't really helping.
I'm all for diversity, but this is just going to cause movies to become diverse for the sake of being diverse instead of it happening naturally.

Its pretty much racism in a way and its not good. Or reverse racism, thats a better word for it.

Youre gonna get people happy they won an award, but then the vast majority of people will be saying its a bogus award only won because they checked more boxes. Just more junk that wont help this country.

---

forced diversity isn't diversity, this is absurd

---

PoundGarden posted...

It is if you're filming a period piece.
I get what you're saying, but how would this affect movies like Apocalypto? Highly "regional" pieces, I feel like diversity would be too transparently forced in a film about, say, the Russian revolution. Would liberties be taken by directors to include minority actors where they literally do not belong for the sake of checking the boxes, and would it detract from the immersion of the film? I think so.

Now a post industrial revolution to modern film absolutely, there's really no excuse to not have some diversity as it adds to the immersion/believability vs an all white cast

Apocalypto would still be eligible as is. So would most movies. As long as the entire production and post production team isn't just white people it would be eligible. They're not restricting it purely by cast.
---

This shit is so dumb. If there's a bias issue, then toss out all the voters and start fresh. If there's a lack of diverse movies making it to the voting circle, push out initiatives to fund them. Setting up arbitrary gatekeeping quotas solves fucking nothing.

was it ever best picture? People are acting like this changes anything. Oscar bait already ruined the award. This is really no different.

---

so what happens if you have a really good movie based on the spanish inquisition?

---

Tyranthraxus posted...

RAW a South Korean movie still qualifies.

I was being facetious lol
---

"Oscar" is such a white name, why don't we change the name to "The Jamals"?

---

Smashingpmkns posted...

Apocalypto would still be eligible as is. So would most movies. As long as the entire production and post production team isn't just white people it would be eligible. They're not restricting it purely by cast.

Ah, thanks for clarifying. That sounds pretty reasonable then tbh

PoundGarden posted...

I get what you're saying, but how would this affect movies like Apocalypto? Highly "regional" pieces, I feel like diversity would be too transparently forced in a film about, say, the Russian revolution. Would liberties be taken by directors to include minority actors where they literally do not belong for the sake of checking the boxes, and would it detract from the immersion of the film? I think so.

The new rules don't require diversity they just require representation from at least one of their listed underrepresented racial or ethnic groups.

So Apocalypto and Parasite would pass but something like Schindler's List would not.

so a movie like 1917 would never be nominated for best picture again?

thebatz posted...

so what happens if you have a really good movie based on the spanish inquisition?

Would meet the A1 criteria.

Broseph_Stalin posted...

So Apocalypto and Parasite would pass but something like Schindler's List would not.

Schindler's List could still use the standard B and C categories.

DarthAragorn posted...

so a movie like 1917 would never be nominated for best picture again?

B and C categories

---

brotrrwinner posted...

"Oscar" is such a white name, why don't we change the name to "The Jamals"?

no need to respond with what you might view as racism with even more racism

---

Zikten posted...

so then Braveheart would not be eligible

I'm not too knowledgeable about the innerworkings of team involved in making Braveheart. But they literally just have to have a few people from ethnic groups working in different departments of the production so I dunno. Very possible that it doesn't though because Mel Gibson is a racist.
---

My dreams of having a movie focus about a rural Irish family during the potatoe famine is officially over. I have no dreams anymore.

I'm filled with potatwoe

---

lol i didn't even notice that you only need to meet 2 of 4 standards

so basically every movie is still going to qualify