Academy Awards are changing the rules again....

Tools    





Can you expound on that a bit? Saying something is an "important step" but that it "won't change anything" sure seems mutually exclusive, to me.

Could you also just expound more in general? This seems to be following the same path as saying Green Book is "racist," in that you're saying very stark things without explaining your thought process, even though some explanation would obviously help (and in some cases is clearly necessary).
It's not an important step and it won't change anything...

ummm ok so Green Book is a movie made by a white director in a time when racism is really still ongoing in America, and I think it's super great the white directors are still making these types of movies. Anyways lol I think it's pretty obvious that Green Book ended racism right??
__________________
Lists and Projects
Letterboxd



I really, really don't think it is.


Perhaps you should lead with your definition of "racist," then, if you at all desire to be understood?
"And I suffer that slight alone, because I'm not accepted by my own people 'cause I'm not like them, either. So, if I'm not black enough and if I'm not white enough and if I'm not man enough, then tell me, Tony, what am I?"

- Peter Farrelly



It's not an important step and it won't change anything...
Sorry, "step in the right direction" was the actual quote. Otherwise, same point: how can this not change anything but also be a "step in the right direction"?

ummm ok so Green Book is a movie made by a white director in a time when racism is really still ongoing in America, and I think it's super great the white directors are still making these types of movies. Anyways lol I think it's pretty obvious that Green Book ended racism right??
I don't follow. Green Book is racist because it was made by a white director and/or because it didn't end racism?



"And I suffer that slight alone, because I'm not accepted by my own people 'cause I'm not like them, either. So, if I'm not black enough and if I'm not white enough and if I'm not man enough, then tell me, Tony, what am I?"

- Peter Farrelly
I'm pretty sure that quote comes from a character, right? Possibly from the man the character is based on, actually (though maybe dramatized even if so).

Either way, this in no way tells me what your definition of racism is. All it really does is imply (though still doesn't simply say, oddly enough) that you inherently object to a white person writing dialogue about race for a black character. Is that what you're saying?



Sorry, "step in the right direction" was the actual quote. Otherwise, same point: how can this not change anything but also be a "step in the right direction"?


I don't follow. Green Book is racist because it was made by a white director and/or because it didn't end racism?
But it did end racism. sorry if you misinterpreted.



The trick is not minding
But it did end racism. sorry if you misinterpreted.
No it didnít, last I looked racism was alive and well, sadly.
Which was never its goal to begin with, mind you.

A white director helming a film about racism doesnít make it inherently racist.



Trouble with a capital "T"
I hope this new Academy rule will equally apply to black film makers who make all black actors and all black film crew movies. I mean if films are to to be diversified than all black or all Hispaic or all Asian film need to include a number of white people. Otherwise it's just a **** rule designed to pander.



I hope this new Academy rule will equally apply to black film makers who make all black actors and all black film crew movies. I mean if films are to to be diversified than all black or all Hispaic or all Asian film need to include a number of white people. Otherwise it's just a **** rule designed to pander.
Bingo.

Oscars are and have been compromised for awhile. If your white especially a straight white male and win you might as well give an apology speech instead of an acceptance one.

Parasite was so diverse. Moonlight cast personifies diversity. Black Panther was so diverse it had 2 white guys.

I literally think Hollywood thinks diversity means a big wooden ship.
__________________
I came here to do two things, drink some beer and kick some ass, looks like we are almost outta beer - Dazed and Confused

101 Favorite Movies (2019)



The trick is not minding
I hope this new Academy rule will equally apply to black film makers who make all black actors and all black film crew movies. I mean if films are to to be diversified than all black or all Hispaic or all Asian film need to include a number of white people. Otherwise it's just a **** rule designed to pander.
Well, it is absolutely pandering. Yes. We can agree here.
However, last I saw, white people werenít under represented in film, which is the point
This does unintentionally raise an interesting question however. How does a country such as South Korea, that doesnít have many people of color in any way, represent that? Obviously casting is out the window, but of the other 3 criteria (and remember they only need to meet 2 of 4, so casting can be ignored) how can they meet those requirements?



Trouble with a capital "T"
Well, it is absolutely pandering. Yes. We can agree here.
However, last I saw, white people werenít under represented in film, which is the point
This does unintentionally raise an interesting question however. How does a country such as South Korea, that doesnít have many people of color in any way, represent that? Obviously casting is out the window, but of the other 3 criteria (and remember they only need to meet 2 of 4, so casting can be ignored) how can they meet those requirements?
I didn't say anything about South Korea.



How does a country such as South Korea, that doesnít have many people of color in any way, represent that? Obviously casting is out the window, but of the other 3 criteria (and remember they only need to meet 2 of 4, so casting can be ignored) how can they meet those requirements?
If I understood the requirements correctly, it isn't just a race thing. Right? It doesn't have to be people of minority races being represented. Women, LGBTQIA people, and people with disabilities count as minorities as well. Unless I missed something.



The trick is not minding
If I understood the requirements correctly, it isn't just a race thing. Right? It doesn't have to be people of minority races being represented. Women, LGBTQIA people, and people with disabilities count as minorities as well. Unless I missed something.
No, youíre correct. I forgot to include them. Thatís my mistake.



That yellow stick wants to stay relevant, I see...
__________________
"Фильм призван вызвать духовную волну, а не взращивать идолопоклонников."



Trouble with a capital "T"
I had a hunch about why the Academy Awards were making a diversity rule in 2020, when it's been half a century or more since minorities had a hard time breaking into movies.

The Academy's decision is not about making things better in America and it's not about making things fairer for under represented people. It's about the Oscars as a money making TV show having the ability to make more money by targeting those who watch TV the most. It's about profit.

After seeing this thread, I asked myself how come so many of the newest TV shows and movies have become more diversified with many more black actors...BUT Hispanics and Asian American actors are all but left out?

I guessed that Black Americans watch more TV and are more likely to watch the Oscars than White & Hispanic or Asian Americans and so the Oscars needed to attract black viewers to their dwindling TV ratings and this poll bears that out.

Source: https://www.statista.com/statistics/...-us-ethnicity/



We can pretend this all about making a better world but it's really all about tapping into the demographs of who watches TV the most.
Attachments
Click image for larger version

Name:	Screenshot from 2020-09-10 18-52-21.png
Views:	268
Size:	136.8 KB
ID:	67751  



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.
They already did this. It's called 'The Golden Age Of Hollywood'

For all the worthiness and how much it may or may not be called for/necessary, CR's last post is correct, IMO. As with most things commercial, this is about money and publicity, but I repeat myself.

If I genuinely thought there was an ounce of sincerity in this I'd be glad to see it. Not because I think it has to happen or that it's right or wrong, but just because it'd be real and could lead to further change(s) in culture and atmosphere because there'd be someone in charge who wanted to see it happen and was prepared to use their power to make it possible.

This is just a headline or a black square on a twitter account. It's easy, it costs nothing and it risks nothing.
__________________
5-time MoFo Award winner.



The trick is not minding
Oh, itís absolutely performative. Rather then actually doing anything about it, theyíre putting the onus on the studios and film makers and patting themselves on the back.
Itís an illusion that theyíre doing some high productive.



Its an interesting topic. I agree with those who have said that representation behind the camera is potentially more important than in front of it. For example, using LGBT films as an example rather than race/ sex, it is very much a thing that when the Oscars go gaga for LGBT films, they very rarely star queer actors, and even more rarely, writers/ directors etc. These films exist, they are just rarely given any attention and have to exist in the indie world. I think Im right in saying to that no out gay actor/ actress has ever been nominated for playing an LGBT character. It is a complex thing with LGBT people, in the sense that not everybody is 'out,' and no they shouldnt have to show their gay card before they can get a writing gig on a gay film. And there are some very good LGBT films out there that are completely created and acted by straight people. But, the fact they are gay should not expel them from telling these stories. LGBT people at some point should have the same opportunities to tell their stories too, and not just save the ones you want to win big prizes for for straight people.

Going back to race too, I agree too that it is not only down to black writers and directors to be giving opportunities to black casts. But at the same time, you write/ create what you know, and being any kind of minority automatically makes you a political figure for the community you represent, whether you like it or not. So of course a black writer director wants to give more opportunities to black actors. It is an awful catch 22 situation that has been created by an industry that has fought against diversity for so long. Hopefully long term change will come as you naturally get people from more diverse backgrounds like Del Toro, Barry Jenkins etc. becoming part of the academy.