The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Science is going to follow new inclusivity standards while considering the Best Picture nomination. Notably, a movie will be considered for the Best Picture nomination only if a lead or significant supporting character in the film is from an “underrepresented racial or ethnic group”; the main storyline of the film has to focus on an underrepresented group or at least 30 per cent of the cast is from two or more underrepresented group. By definition, a person from an underrepresented group will be a woman, a member of an ethnic minority, LGBTQ or disabled.
The online form required to be filled out to submit a movie for Oscar consideration now requires information about race, gender and sexual orientations of the cast and crew members. Additionally, filmmakers also have to answer questions about their health, like whether they had autism, or dealt with chronic pain or mental illness, etc. These questions are part of the Academy’s new representation and inclusion standards for Oscar eligibility (RAISE), announced in 2021.
The Oscar voters are not happy with the inclusivity standards. A director, speaking to The Post, expressed his displeasure over it. Notably, the director is also from a diverse group. “I am for diversity, but to make you cast certain types of people if you want to get nominated? That makes the whole process contrived. The person who is right for the part should get the part. Why should you be limited in your choices? But it’s the world we’re in. This is crazy”, said the director.
During an interview, Jaws fame Richard Dreyfuss expressed his displeasure during an interview in May 2023. He said on PBS, “They make me vomit”. He called movies an art form and a form of commerce. He said, “No one should be telling me as an artist that I have to give in to the latest, most current idea of morality.”
While quoting an unnamed but apparently relevant producer from Hollywood, The Post noted that only a handful of people are in favour of the new rules. However, unlike Dreyfuss, people are not speaking up out of fear of cancel culture. “Everyone thinks the Academy went too far. It’s ridiculous to tell us we have to regulate our work. We talk about it amongst ourselves, but it’s not worth speaking up publicly,” he said while speaking to The Post.
If looking at the winners from the past few years, the criteria have already been met. For example, in 2023, ‘Everything Everywhere All at Once’ had Michelle Yeoh as the lead, and most of the cast was Asian. In 2022, the story of ‘CODA’ revolved around a deaf family. In 2021, ‘Nomandland’ was based on a widowed character that travelled to the US in a van. In 2020, ‘Parasite’ was based on the story of two South Korean families.
Notably, the 2019 academy award ‘Green Book winner was circled by controversies as it was accused of “spoon-feeding racism to white people”.
The other movies from the list of nominations this year had several films that would have failed to meet the criteria. For example, All Quiet on the Western Front had a historically accurate white male cast as it was a World War I period film.
From ‘Elvis’ to ‘Schindler’s List’, ‘Gladiator’, ‘All the President’s Men’ and several other movies from the past would have failed to qualify for the Oscars if the new standards were in place.
“Imagine if great films were not made because of studio or corporate mandates that every film has to conform to the [inclusionary] standard for the Best Picture nomination?” the director said while speaking to The Post.
If not the cast, a film can, however, meet the criteria by hiring people from underrepresented ethnic or racial groups in the making of the film, providing training opportunities, working on publicity, paid internships, marketing or distribution.
A film critic and historian who was a member of the Academy said in a statement to The Post, “I’ve never witnessed such a thing happening in the world of the arts. I’ve never seen restrictions on what you can do to receive a certain recognition [for one’s art].” Calling the new guidelines “bold and audacious”, he said it would be groundbreaking in a way that can be tough to navigate. He added that some of the most talented people in the industry may even forgo Oscars recognition. He said, “If a truly outstanding film comes along that does not meet those requirements for a best picture nomination, then the producers will have accepted that.”
A veteran Hollywood executive said it is essential to make the best movie. He said, “I want to be inclusive, but I don’t want to put in a person from a certain ethnic group who doesn’t belong there because of the story being told. And I don’t want to make a movie with an LGBT character who does not make sense of the narrative. You can’t do this without hurting the movie. It’s ridiculous to be told what to do at the expense of getting people into movie theatres.”
Suggesting the Academy has gone overboard, a top studio executive said, “I knew this was coming, obviously. But they’ve been going overboard on this, in my opinion, for quite some time. Casting is getting less organic and more about checking [the diversity] boxes. It’s hurting the product, not helping, and I don’t think it’ll be good for anyone in the long run.” “I think the Academy got itself into a corner with inclusivity, and now it can’t get out,” he added.
Notably, the inclusion standards were introduced by the Academy back in September 2020 as part of its Academy Aperture 2025 initiative. As per the press release by the Academy, while 2022 and 2023 nominations were required to submit a confidential academy inclusion standards form for the best picture consideration, meeting those thresholds was not required. In 2024 nominations, a film must meet two out of four of the standards listed by the Academy.
However, the Academy president Janet Yang has dismissed the criticism of the new rules. According to her, not a single movie will be disqualified due to the rule, and even all the past movies nominated for the award would qualify.
