Oscar's New Criteria For Consideration

Just recently, the Academy who gives away sizeable figurines of a naked man with a big............... sledgehammer to anyone who completes production of a movie before the submission deadline released a list of the new standards to be met for their approval.  They are as follows:

And, here is their mission statement:

  

Ok, I can understand the notion of giving people chances who had very little chances before.  Nobody should be denied work experience because of immutable characteristics of themselves.  We should all be encouraging every creative person follow their passions and reach their full potential. However, I'm not so sure that imposing this criteria is the best approach.  As a for instance, I present a tweet from one Justine Bateman.

Many of you might remember her as Mallory Keaton from Family Ties.  These days, she's got a nice career as a film director going for her.  Here's her response to the Academy:

Ok then.  It looks like this film director, who happens to fall under the approved criterium of being a woman, finds the Academy's initiative more insulting than empowering.  My guess is that she would prefer to have her films honoured for their quality and not simply because her identity helped her appear on some diversity checklist.  Are there other industry professionals who feel this way?  Let me know in the comment section below if you so desire. 

Anyone who has followed my blogs or social media feeds for any length of time knows full well that I HAAAAAAAAAATE these kinds of things being imposed on creative people. One of the biggest problems with the entertainment industry (especially mainstream establishments like Hollywood) is that there are more executives and lobby representatives making decisions than there are creative people, whether the production is for theatres, TV, streaming services or otherwise.  It's been like that for decades too long.  Currently in many creative industries, there is actually a position called a "Sensitivity Reader". It is apparently their job to look for anything that anybody anywhere would find offensive or disturbing and insist that the content be removed.  OOOOOOOOOH HO HO HO HOOOOOOOO would I love for one of these people to give a read to either one of the comic books I've published (still very much available on Amazon here and here by the by). They'd innocently start with, "Okay I can see right here where lots of people will be upset..." and my response will be "GOOD!! FUCK 'EM!!" 

"...but they could feel attacked by such dialogue..."

"GOOD!! FUCK 'EM!!"

"...but they could maybe..."

"GOOD!! FUCK 'EM!!"

And that's how it would go until that person quits in disgust and that job position itself is abolished forever.

In 1934, some horrible place called the Hays Office imposed a code on Hollywood movies dictating all the stuff they would NOT allow into movies. In the late 1960's, that code morphed into the rating system of G, PG, etc...  Any movies made before that imposition in 1934 are considered "pre code" movies.  I am looking forward to a "Post Code Hollywood". This will be a utopia where a creative person or a group of creative persons come up with an idea for a movie........ and then proceed to make that movie which is then shown to anyone who wants to see it.  There will be no obnoxious meddlers in the middle of that process inflicting all sorts of demands for censorship based merely on stifling agendas and insatiable egos.  It'll be an uncomplicated world where people tell stories and other people enjoy stories. My God! It'll be beautiful.

Oh but hey!!  This environment of certain anarchy would lead to all sorts of immoral debauchery such as the recent Netflix offering Cuties!!  

HEY HEY!! Whoa there, forthcoming backlash!  No it would not! If something is illegal to do for real in real life then it's illegal to do in a movie.  Yes, murder is illegal, but of course people you see "murdered" in movies aren't actually murdered.  It's all acting, forced perspective, possibly some amounts of red corn syrup (or chocolate syrup) in order to simulate someone being murdered.  The underage girls in Cuties were actually made to do some erotic dancing with the camera getting close ups of their bodies thus they were actually exploited.  

Thus, regular law enforcement would and should get involved in this case.  If police, FBI, or any other actual law enforcement organization need not be involved in the patrolling of a show's production, then no other body should be there either. NOBODY should have any authority over a production except the artists involved.  That's it.  Everyone else should just leave the set, the writing room, the editing room, etc.  If there are any "grass roots" vigilante-type groups that are upset at a show's existence, the proper response to such sentiment is of course "GOOD!! FUCK 'EM!!!" Are we clear on this? Alright!

Ok, now that I've expressed my displeasure about the Academy's new criteria, I'll now give my full assessment of it.  I think that it's................ not that big a deal.  There's no way they're going to retract this now so it looks like it's going to be a part of their organization for a long time.  So, there's no point in trying to do away with it.  What's done is done.  Besides that, I don't think it's nearly as insidious as some people have made it out to be.  I say this for a number of reasons:

1. Keep in mind that this is merely criteria for movies to be "selected for Oscar consideration" not for movies to be made.  Movies like Dude, Where's My Army Tank? or Pauley Shore Joins a Nunnery or any other movie that has absolutely no chance of being looked at by the Academy would need not bother trying to meet this criteria.  Only those that give a shit about winning that golden nudist would have to adhere to any of that.  Besides, I see a loophole that can be used by any all white cis able-bodied male creative group in Hollywood that can't afford to hire new staff or let go of any current staff.

There you go.  To meet the new criteria, just break one of your bro's legs and/or blow an airhorn right in his ear.  You'll fulfill the requirements without any changes in staff.

"Ok then. Our group's diversity has been achieved.  Let's get back to work, honkies!"

2. This is hardly the first time the Oscars have been affected by politics.  One such time was back around 1947.  That was the start of Senator Joe McCarthy seeing up his House Unamerican Activities Committee to blacklist any communist subversives in the USA.  Hollywood was of course one of the hardest hit institutions.  Whether there were communist subversives skulking around is moot.McCarthy's approach was a breach of human rights. Because of this, many professionals in Hollywood felt the icy grip of the HUAC and so were unable to participate in the Oscar ceremony.  The categories for every award was thereby tainted. Rather than for instance "Best Actor" it was more like "Best Actor who managed to avoid being blacklisted............ for now".  So you can see, they were awarded less on merit and more on politics which slanted the Oscars for that year and years to follow during that red scare.

3. This revelation is based on a snarky tweet I saw when this was announced.  I can't for the life of me find it and I'd rather not waste several man-hours trying.  It said something like, "Oh! So now only films from Korea will win Oscars since they certainly won't have too many white people on their creative teams".

I looked at that tweet and thought........ y'know what? I really LIKE this new development.  I would love it if the next winners of Best Picture did go to movies from countries where white people are a minority or virtually nonexistent. I'd love for countries like Korea, Nigeria, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Argentina, Mongolia, Jordan, or any other place with a similar population type to be dominating the Oscars for years to come.  For too long Hollywood has been too favoured.  For decades it's always been the same sacks full of hubris running the same bloated studios who compete in a creatively-inbred jamboree patting each other on the same backs they'll stab minutes later all the while bending over just to see if the sun does still shine out of their lipo-suctioned asses.  All too often, any film from outside of Hollywood are thrown the smallest bone with a "Best Foreign Picture" nomination and/or win.  Well, now it looks like they'll be getting all of the meaty bones while the fading Hollywood moguls will have to beg for table scraps.

This development is not just great for knocking big shots off their pedestals, it will also revive the joy of making movies again.  The entire world has felt intimidated by Hollywood's bombast making it look like they're the ONLY place to make movies in the world.  Every other filmmaker everywhere else had to just be content with making small unassuming little films that only managed to entertain their own country's population.  But now things are different.  These "little sprout" artists have been given a chance to grow into "jolly green giants" of the film industry while all the Hollywood dinosaurs can only sit back and watch it happen.

I guess I should end this blogpost with one all encompassing statement about this new list.  I'll just say that I personally am not entirely supportive of such a thing, since it's something way out of my control I can always find a bright side.  I leave you now with a short film that DOES indeed meet this list's criteria since a good 90% or more of the cast is hispanic AND it did even win an Oscar.  Enjoy!