“These are not pills from the mountain,” said Paramount Pictures chairman Jim Gianopoulos He told me this morning to explain how Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences About creating new standards of inclusion and representation to enter the Best Picture Contest. The controversial new requirements, which will take full effect in 2024, are the result of what he says is the industry taking a broader pulse. It was specifically discussed with the industry to get their input and make sure people accepted them. It was meant to help all studios, all independent companies, all guilds, all players, and all industry partners to gain their input and understand the purpose for which everyone is moving from the best intentions to objectivity and progress. ”
‘Knight of the Kings’ Neon wins Ivory Coast’s Oscar presentation after Venice premiere
Gianopoulos, who serves as treasurer of the academy, co-chaired with the producer Devon Franklin The panel created a new set of four criteria that affect all aspects of filmmaking, behind the scenes and behind the camera. To qualify for a Best Picture nomination, at least two-fourths of the audience must visit groups that do not represent everything from hiring a hero or a notable actor to major creative leadership, from crew composition to marketing and distribution of jobs and opportunities (including women). But do not call them quotas. When I mentioned that a longtime academy member called me this morning to lament the changes and told me about his favorite movie, the 1953 play WWII Stalag17 (Paradoxically, a paramount film) did not qualify, and Gianopoulos disagreed.
“It simply came to our notice then. We didn’t completely ignore movies like 1917 And Dunkirk Other films like this, if not thematic in nature by nature, had no diverse people in front of the camera, so what the CD criteria (against the A and B criteria) wanted to do was ‘yes’ there are films that did not qualify in front of the camera or even on their thematic components, but in internships, mentorship, marketing, marketing, and marketing. You can make progress by institutionalizing access to the industry through Purpose. ‘Is this perfect?’ To say that – does each film have different elements according to its nature? Certainly not. But there are other ways to measure progress and make progress, ”he said. “All studios are more or less the same All rights reserved Focuses on these topics, including diversity and human resources departments. We feel what this is doing at the highest levels of the industry in the academy, with some objective criteria by which we can all measure our progress. That is the purpose, to create them both with ambition and objectivity. ”
There have been over 250 comments (so far) on the story I posted on Deadline yesterday announcing the new venture, many of which were negative. The reaction in the industry has been mixed, but some have strongly opposed the new changes. In a deleted tweet, actress Kirsty Allie called them “insults to artists everywhere”. Franklin said the setback from some angles was not unexpected.
“It simply came to our notice then. Every time you implement change it comes with dialogue, it comes with conflict, it comes with consideration, so we would not be surprised, ”Franklin said when asked about his reaction on social media. “When people take a moment and read the standards and see that there is a lot of flexibility, we think it helps to let them know how they see it. It’s easy to react when you read a headline, but how flexible filmmakers, studios and many major distributors really are when you actually reach the standard Improving The creative process. It is not regulated. ”
I pointed out one of the comments I posted on the original deadline story that came from a black filmmaker. It said: “I am black and I believe deeply in telling different stories, but this is the dumbest, most anti-art idea I have ever heard. I really hate the deep level of deep delusion! Best Picture After 2025 Good job destroying the experience of any Oscar-winning MP (s), anyone who wants to make a movie the way they want to make a movie! Don’t talk about content, just think about it. You do not have to ask for it with quota !!!! The academy should be ashamed! ”
Franklin faced that criticism. “We expected conversations with people with different perspectives. What can I say to that black man who wrote it, I think the Oscars will make more sense after 2024 and 2025, because excellence had equal consideration. The academy has been in operation for over 90 years. The institution has a history of not giving equal opportunity and consideration to art creators, especially from different backgrounds, so it is hoped that this will change. So if there is anything after 2025 this award will make sense And moreBecause that consideration would have been given, ”he said. “It’s not about tokenism, it’s not about control, it’s about Inclusion, Which is approx Excellence, Which is approx Merit. It’s about giving everyone equal consideration for their art. The fact is that we are becoming one of the best by-products of this, especially since many of the best artists with great color are not recognized in front of the camera and behind the camera. We hope this will change that. This black filmmaker who wrote this will be part of this process and will see and observe, I hope this is actually a good move in the right direction and adds more meaning. There is nothing more meaningful than doing the same job, but there is nothing worse than having your skin color different or being from a group that is not traditionally represented. So we are trying to fix it, we hope. ”
The phone conversation also includes the AMPAS president David Rubin AMPAS CEO Don Hudson, Resisted group moves that were outdated and necessary. “Creative society, of course, is socially and collectively focused on inclusion and diversity. It is an attempt to define the academy’s ability to influence its membership and the filmmaking process, and to make progressive progress, ”said Gianopoulos.
Some of the academy members we heard mentioned that they had not been asked Their Input, but Rubin seems to be fully represented by the organization. Board members are selected by their branches and assigned as trustees of the mission of the academy, and we always liaise with our branch members and the board is focused. The board is made up of creative artists and artisans who understand creative freedom and any concerns about it, and the need for creative freedom, and what is involved in all aspects of a filmmaking process. Said.
Hudson commented that the British Film Institute standards for inclusion in 2016 were a template used by AMPAS, but that it was tailored to its own needs. They are currently working with groups such as BFI and the Producers Guild to find out how to implement paperwork practically and how to process new requirements. But they say this is nothing new to academy members. All the members of the academy are in the process of making a film. Our members have the opportunity to train more, to spread the wider network across the industry, to cast a film from the beginning of writing a film, to produce and distribute a film. Our members have always been involved in that process, ”she said, emphasizing why it is important for AMPS to take a more proactive stance on the journey towards industrial diversity.
Although the outline of the new standards is very specific, it does not use the term “qualification” to refer to the appointment of under-represented people. This is a term that the academy has always said when talking about diversifying its membership, ensuring that they meet the standards established at AMPAS. I asked Franklin, the producer of the hits based on faith Miracles from heaven And Diversion, About the word.
“Why should there always be an adjective? For some reason people historically think that when we talk about giving people an equal shot it somehow makes sense. Decreasing Criteria. It was a deliberate move. We did not lower the standard, nor did we feel the need to qualify for adjectives. Of course the academy recognizes and recognizes excellence Qualification Why should we use that adjective to describe artists who do not have equal opportunity to be included? We felt it would be trivialized and degraded, so we wanted to qualify for what it was about, and as a result the word was not intentionally mentioned because it implies everything we mean, ”he said.
Gianopoulos said he would monitor the outcome of their efforts to take further action in this regard. “This is an ongoing process in the sense of continuing to evaluate the response of the filmmaking community to standards, their effectiveness and the progress they represent,” which is largely optimistic for the pandemic-affected industry. “We’re all going to get into work. Expect. ”