Academy Awards are changing the rules again....


Starting in 2024, would-be Oscar nominees must meet specific representation and inclusion standards in order to be eligible for the Best Picture category.

The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences unveiled the requirements on Tuesday, saying they are intended to "encourage equitable representation on and off screen in order to better reflect the diversity of the movie-going audience."
Change starts now. We've announced new representation and inclusion standards for Best Picture eligibility, beginning with the 96th #Oscars. Read more here:
— The Academy (@TheAcademy) ?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw" target="_blank">September 9, 2020
The Academy had promised the introduction of such standards earlier this summer, as it faced a fresh wave of criticism over the lack of diversity among its honorees and in the filmmaking industry more generally.

In June, it announced an initiative called "Academy Aperture 2025," which includes a number of new policies aimed at fostering a more inclusive organization and film community going forward.

"The aperture must widen to reflect our diverse global population in both the creation of motion pictures and in the audiences who connect with them," they said.

The new standards require films to fill a certain percentage of on-screen and behind-the-scenes roles with people from underrepresented groups, including women, people of color, people with disabilities and people from the LGTBQ community.

The requirements fall into four categories: on-screen representation, creative leadership and project team, industry access and opportunities and audience development.

Starting in 2024 — for the 96th Oscars — a film must meet two out of four standards to be considered.

And beginning in 2022, films vying for Best Picture must submit a confidential "Academy Inclusion Standards" form, though they do not need to meet the criteria in order to be eligible.

The Academy said its new rules were drawn from the British Film Institute Diversity Standards and adapted to serve its specific needs, in consultation with the Producers Guild of America.

Other elements of the Aperture 2025 initiative include making annual unconscious bias training mandatory for Academy staff and setting a fixed number of ten Best Picture nominees starting in 2021.

The 93rd Oscars will take place in April, two months later than originally planned due to the coronavirus pandemic.

This is one of those good intentions thing that is actually disgusting. What happens with historical films...HAMILTON style works for Hamilton a musical not going to work for 1917. It's supposed to be about the art...disqualifying films because they don't pass a morals test in the staffing just seems antithetical to the award...Best Picture of XYZ.

Haha. Good joke, bro. Really nice! Oh wait, today is not April fool's day!!!

mattiasflgrtll6's Avatar
The truth is in here
This is frightening. I have definitely always been open to more diversity in the film industry, but this will just continue furthering the devolution of movie making becoming a factory-produced process. Instead of telling good stories which happen to include diverse groups, directors and producers will include them just to fill a criteria.
And if it makes no sense in a historical context to include some groups of people, that movie will immediately stand no chance of ever getting nominated.

I'm glad I decided to never give a **** about the Oscars/Academy Awards or whatever, but even then I can't help feeling angry reading this. It's beyond parody.

We've gone on holiday by mistake
Jesus Christ!

Please someone take the piss out if them for this, like a Black historical epic set in Africa with white, Hispanic, Asian and LGBT all in there, or something like Braveheart/ with all black leads.

I think the Academy and the film industry in general need to be more inclusive and represent a broader range of the human experience, but I'm not in favor of forcing this kind of thing.

To me, this just reads as Affirmative Action: Oscars Edition.

Welcome to the human race...
In fairness, they mention that a film just has to meet at least two of the four bolded categories, of which on-screen representation is only one and can therefore be circumvented as long as the production meets the (arguably more important) behind-the-scenes requirements. After all, one of the existing problems with prestige films centred around minority groups is that they may feature people from said groups but have behind-the-scenes creatives who aren't and are therefore liable to make poor use of them - Crash is a good example of that.
I really just want you all angry and confused the whole time.
Iro's Top 100 Movies v3.0

Just so y’all know, this doesn’t really change anything at all. Basically every nominee from the last decade passes 2/4 of these requirements. It may be irksome that the rules exist in the first place but I wouldn’t worry too much about the actual nominees having a drop in quality. Hell, Green Book and Crash - Two of the most racist and bizarre Best Picture Winners - pass the requirements. At least it’s a step in the right direction for Hollywood, even if doesn’t change anything.

Please someone take the piss out if them for this, like a Black historical epic set in Africa with white, Hispanic, Asian and LGBT all in there
And end up winning 10 Oscars! Haha!

Who cares? Hollywood's been dead for years now, and Europe has long lost its charm. Asia is where it's at nowadays.

1. "These requirements are necessary."

2. "No reason to get worked up, films already do this without trying."

Pick one.
The requirements aren’t necessary because they won’t actually change anything in Hollywood. We need something that ACTUALLY implements diversity in Hollywood itself, not just awards ceremonies.

And end up winning 10 Oscars! Haha!

Who cares? Hollywood's been dead for years now, and Europe has long lost its charm. Asia is where it's at nowadays.
Yes yes yes. I will also add independent studios like A24 that are thriving.

That's something a lot of people don't appreciate in other spheres, either: regulations often have the net effect not of constraining businesses, but of creating hoops that the little guys have a lot more trouble jumping through than the big ones. Which is one of the reasons why large corporations often advocate for them, contrary to what people might expect.

Yes yes yes. I will also add independent studios like A24 that are thriving.
See above. Most straightforward interpretation is that this will hurt smaller studios (and hurt indie filmmakers most of all).

The trick is not minding
I knew when I saw this announced last night people would be up in arms about this. A few knee jerk reactions.
Thankfully it’s only 2 categories that need to be checked off. You can still cast as you wish as long as you fulfill your requirements in other areas.
It’s a shame it has to be forced like this, and I understand quite often change has to be forced, but I feel the Oscars are wrong here.
Good intentions, could have been implemented better.

Then how are they a "step in the right direction"?
In this case it’s the “thought that counts”.

If the thought counts, then it will change Hollywood, though. It either helps in some important way or it doesn't.

It's possible to think it will help in a purely symbolic way but not place burdens on most major productions (though, again, I emphasize "major"), but I think it's impossible for it to be a step in the right direction but also not change Hollywood.