Academy Mulls Changes in Membership & Categories to Halt Diversity Crisis

Oscar diversity
Rob Latour/REX/Shutterstock

The leadership of the Academy is under the gun, and next week’s board meeting could see a revamp of the best-pic race and an overhaul of membership requirements in the midst of worldwide criticism over this year’s list of nominees.

In Hollywood, image is all-important, and board members at the Jan. 26 meeting will work to fight the perception that the Academy is racist or elitist. The lack of diversity in nominations for the 88th Academy Award has led to plenty of screwball suggestions of what should happen, but the general consensus is that the industry itself needs to make big changes, and that the Academy itself needs some major fine-tuning.

Several insiders predict a return to 10 best-picture contenders, following the widely held opinion that “Straight Outta Compton” would have made the cut if there were more than this year’s eight. Another theory is that the preferential voting system for nominations will be overhauled, since a widely admired film could still fail to score a nom, thanks to the complicated system.

There are also members who want to expand the acting categories to more than five noms. Performances like Will Smith in “Concussion” and Idris Elba in “Beasts of No Nation” failed to gain a nom; many Acad members on Wednesday agreed that there were far too many worthy contenders for the five slots.

The strongest possibility is a rethink of membership rules. As one exec sighed, the lack of “SOC” nomination — like the shutout of “Wall-E” and “The Dark Knight” a few years ago — proved that “the old guard” is still in power.

Each of the Academy’s 17 branches has its own requirements for new members, but several Academy members said those rules are too strict and unrealistic in the current atmosphere, in which studios emphasize tentpoles or sex comedies, leading many thoughtful creatives to embrace TV work.

For example, in the editors branch, applicants must have “a minimum of four theatrical feature film credits of a caliber which, in the opinion of the executive committee, reflect the high standards of the Academy. These credits must be principal position screen credits as film editor with at least two being single card credits.” When impressive feature films are made on iPhones, it’s hard to determine what “caliber” is desired.

On Jan. 18, AMPAS president Cheryl Boone Isaacs said in a statement that the Academy “is taking dramatic steps to alter the makeup of our membership.” She added that there will be “a review of our membership recruitment in order to bring about much-needed diversity…”

Next week’s board meeting is part of the org’s regularly-scheduled calendar, but this one could be a marathon. There are 51 individuals on the board. Since AMPAS is an honor society that puts a premium on experience, a lot of its 6,261 voting members want to stick to the status quo. That’s also true of many governors. However, other governors realize that they are in the spotlight, and they need to take dramatic action now so that the Academy doesn’t lose credibility.

Some suggestions are radical, including the idea of yanking voting rights from anyone who has not worked in 10 years or so. Since Academy membership is for life, there are voters who haven’t been part of the industry for decades; but this idea is problematic since many industry members face sporadic employment and numerous retired members have rosters of impressive credits.

This wouldn’t be the first time the Acad has had an overhaul. The April 13, 1970, edition of Variety reported that Academy president Gregory Peck had led a movement for the “modernization of membership regulations.” In a letter to members, Peck said changes were needed to counter criticism that the Academy has become a “closed shop and young professionals have found it difficult to join.”

Much of the current blame for diversity problems goes to the film industry itself, where executives are mostly Caucasian and male. However, Academy execs like president Cheryl Boone Isaacs and CEO Dawn Hudson are in a tricky position: They can’t publicly finger-point, since many of Hollywood’s key decision-makers are members. So they are trying to effect changes in subtler ways, out of the public spotlight.

At the Nov. 14 Governors Awards, the Academy announced a program called A2020 to work with studios for diversity, but so far, no details have been given.

The New York Times first reported on the Academy’s discussions about possible changes.

Filed Under:

Want to read more articles like this one? SUBSCRIBE TO VARIETY TODAY.
Post A Comment 87

Leave a Reply


Comments are moderated. They may be edited for clarity and reprinting in whole or in part in Variety publications.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

  1. Your Truth says:

    Must be nice to never have to take responsibility for your failures or shortcomings when you have white people to blame for everything – You minorities hide your bigotry behind self apointed so-called ” activist ” titles refusing to admit the real hateful racism is your own –

  2. Paul Bourgeois says:

    Are you serious white people have to walk around on eggshells while all it takes is one black person to cry foul and the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA has to bow down.These people protesting only stir the shit. Well maybe you can tell I’m white but last time I checked I have not had a slave in about 200 years. GET OVER IT

  3. Eric says:

    Awards are and should be given based upon skill and performance. You want to award the best. Getting an award just for being black or brown or a woman or anything else is preposterous.

  4. erichcheung says:

    I think the solutions the Academy proposes are a little insulting. Expanding Best Picture to a mandatory 10, and expanding the number of actors in the acting categories, implies that non-whites couldn’t get nominated on their merits now. Certainly, statistically, 10% of films have non-white leads, therefore theoretically, there should be an average of 2 nominees of color every year.

    The focus needs to be more on the rules for Academy membership. Get more women in, at least. 70-something percent male is ridiculous. 90-something percent white? And an average age of 63? Maybe there should be term limits or something.

  5. Tom says:

    Move inactive members to associate status. The inactive members are still members (they are not being purged) but they can’t vote for current films if they are not currently in the industry. An Academy membership is a lifetime privilege and they should still get all the perks, but asking old white men to change their ways is not the best strategy.

  6. TheBigBangof20thCenturyPopCulture says:

    Snub bias is not just a reverse majority quota system of math, numbers, finance and business. Before Hollywood cleanses award show voters of racism, it has to limit stereotypes in production and spread fair and equal opportunity among those who are underrepresented and treated differently so that film content reflects more positive themes that attract all moviegoers. The usual victims are not the only ones and there are smaller minorities that suffer even worse. This is why Marlon Brando sent that Native American girl to issue an award refusal statement back in the 1970s. He knew what was going on way back when and took a stand. Since it is only now again topical, I expect the same at this Oscar show which will make it a must see.

  7. HollywoodGuy says:

    This reminds me of how David O. Russell just destroyed a great original script (by a woman) in order to write new parts in it for his buddies, which weakened the film greatly (but he did get to put his name in the credits as ‘screenplay by’). The original script for ‘JOY’ written by Annie Mumalo is great, the film and it’s final script… not so much. (JLaw should be appalled, as a vocal advocate for women in her industry.) I think the ‘Diversity’ movement in film is more than just another form of reverse discrimination, it can easily lead to changing scripts for the worse to accommodate the demands of a spate of minorities. It’s an assault on the writer and filmmaker as artists, dictating story elements to them. And it’s stupid since pushing unpopular actors, less talented actors, or actors unnecessary to a story upon a paying public MUST result in lesser revenue potential for any project. It is the duty of the producers to cast for the good of the project always… it’s not their job to force ‘diversity’ on the paying public for the sake of minority agitators. Do it, and you won’t get our money, the disposable income of many of the majority population. Producers proceed at their peril, since they may have to read their numbers and weep…

    • Malcolm says:

      On the other hand, scripts have been revised to combat the exact opposite situations, too. For every script that has been revised to downplay women/minorities, you can find one that has been weakened by shoehorning characters *in*.

      A good film is a good film regardless of the diversity of its cast. That many such good films would continue to be good films if characters changed race, gender or sexuality is a fair point, however. Fewer stereotypes and more random casting would be a great help – not “black themed films” for black actors: just FILMS for ALL actors.

  8. Obi not Kenobi says:

    We need to have 1000 nominees for every category. It’s that simple. Everyone gets a trophy.

    • techartisan says:

      Yeah right! Just like those “participation trophies” they give to school kids. That’ll do zilch except maybe get rid of multiple xerox copied award shows.

  9. ovillegator says:

    Good grief, let’s just give out participation medals to everyone so no one’s ego is bruised.

  10. Kim says:

    There are two issues at play here. A) were certain films or people snubbed in the nomination process because the process is biased against non-white films and people? This is tricky to prove. After all you can argue that Will Smith was snubbed, but you can also argue that Tom Hanks and Michael Shannon were also snubbed. Could it be that they were all snubbed for the same reason? That the academy just liked other performers better? Many people are arguing that because the Academy is mostly white, then there is de-facto racism. That’s a little racist in itself. B) the second and more believable issue is that there needs to be more Oscar worthy movies and roles for people of color than there currently are. Minority performers need their own ROOM, CAROL, etc. I will say that as a movie goer, it does seem that there are more leading parts these days in the movies and on TV for minority actors – and many of them seem to do well — THE WAR ROOM, RIDE ALONG, THE PERFECT GUY, THE BEST MAN, THINK LIKE A MAN, STRAIGHT OUT OF COMPTON, ANNIE, DOPE, EMPIRE, BLACKISH, HOW TO GET AWAY WITH MURDER, SCANDAL, etc. So, it’s hard to call racism on an industry where there are more roles, especially in the lead categories, for minority performers – and these actors are surely making a lot of money. Isn’t EMPLOYMENT the key issue for all of us, not whether we win awards? The Oscars are such a rarefied affair – most white actors/producers will never be nominated. Is this really a major civil rights issue when we are talking about police shootings, water poisoning in Flint Michigan, etc.? It feels a little disingenuous of Jada Pinket Smith to be crying about racism when she and her husband have made more money in this industry than most people will see in a million lifetimes. Hollywood has always been color blind when it comes to Will. In addition, the Academy does not act as a single being. All the members do not get in one room and decide not to vote for black people. We are talking about thousands of people all over the country, many of which who do not see all of the movies, and most of which I assume are probably liberal in their politics. In addition, since you are a member until you die, it is not going to be that easy to de-white the academy. All in all, although I think it’s disappointing that at least one minority wasn’t nominated this year, I think we have bigger fish to fry when we come to the civil rights war.

  11. The acting nominations are decided by the acting members of the Academy. Surely that is already a diverse group and are members that are non-white always expected to nominate and vote for non-white nominations or they are Uncle Toms etc. That is not progress either.

    The other question is are Academy members taking seriously the nomination process and the voting process in the first place or is it just frankly impossible for all the members to view all the performances and movies so they all just vote the names they are familiar with whether they are white or non-white because I still don’t get how Stallone got a best supporting actor nom whilst the star of Creed did not, a black actor and rather than blaming racism, maybe lazy people just vote for the names they recognize, their friends, the few performances they did get to watch?

  12. the two keys, really, are to avoid having the largest studios control the nomination process, and to assure that those choosing the nominees actually watch the eligible films and actors, etc.

    the annual, costly oscar campaigns at the nomination stage generally haven’t resulted in the best work being nominated much of the time, although the ultimate winners generally have been worthy.

    how to do that? as other awards systems work, the academy should appoint special, not over-sized (maybe six-eight members each) committees, with rotating membership, whose members are required to actually watch (at special screenings) and then discuss the eligible films and performances, before voting to choose the nominees. these nomination committee members have to be “non-partisan” to the extent possible, at least in the aggregate, and should include non-academy members.

    too many wonderful films and performances just aren’t seen by the majority of voting members before submitting nomination votes. this year is no exception. in other words, while increasing membership to expand those eligible to vote for winners makes sense, at the earlier nomination stage the selection process should be done in much much smaller, collaborative groups who undertake to put lots of time into the process.

  13. Flosse says:

    Let’s say they had 10 nominations for best picture this year, does that mean Straight Outta Compton would have been included? What about the fabulous Inside Out? Black Mass? The Hateful Eight? Sicario?
    Last year, we had a best picture nomination for Selma and it won best song and nevertheless blacks were complaining.

  14. Jacob says:

    I’ve always thought that they should have stuck to 5 nominees from the very beginning. There have been a couple great BP nominees which would not have gotten in without the expanded ballot, like District 9 and Whiplash.

    However, it also gives the Academy a chance to look lazy and utterly clueless, like nominating The Blind Side, Extremely Annoying & Incredibly Gross, and IN MY OPINION Zero Dark Thirty for Best Picture, when they had no business being nominated over Star Trek, The Hangover (YES, even that!), Drive, Wreck-it Ralph, and Skyfall.

    There are pros to the expanded BP ballot, but I strongly believe the cons outweigh the them. If you don’t have enough votes to make the Top 5, you don’t get nominated. It used to always be that simple, make it that way again, PLEASE. :)

    Even if Whiplash, District 9, and The Dark Knight do end up getting tragically snubbed.

  15. capslocke says:

    This is ridiculous. Don’t like don’t watch. Sorry for slavery but the movie business owes you nothing.

  16. Bill B. says:

    A set 10 nominations in the best picture category is necessary as it leaves the door so wide open for complaints & criticism when there could be 10 nominations and there are not. Their screwy voting rules eliminating a full 10 only says one thing to the public: They didn’t think there were two more films last year that were worthy and we know that is not true. 10 nominations in the acting and directing categories could also help, and not just with minorities (hello Ridley Scott!), but I am clueless what else they can do. At this point in time, they will always get less nominations/wins because, well, they are minorities meaning that there are less of them. They can add more minorities into its membership and that could help a little, but I really don’t think we want to promote that people vote along racial lines over quality and the current membership didn’t hurt 12 Years a Slave recently. Quality rules. Film makers could help a lot by casting more minorities in roles that could go to any race, but I don’t think the entertainment industry is racist, but it is a big business. When film makers put up millions to make a movie they want the biggest audience they can get and with 77% of the US identifying themselves as white, minorities are usually not their primary focal point to recoup their investment. This is not about the Oscars, but I worked in the theater industry in NYC for a decade and met thousands of people in the entertainment industry and I have never met more liberal, open-minded and accepting people of all colors, shapes & sizes anywhere in my life & I have lived all over the country. I don’t see anything racist in this year’s nominations as I didn’t see any minority performer who was better than those who were nominated. Some were very good, but with only 5 in each category, it’s tough for every highly praised performance of any color to be nominated. Sometimes you get lucky, sometimes you don’t.

  17. OB says:

    This is all so stupid. Boo-hoo. Idris and Will didn’t get nominated. Neither did Michael Keaton. The fact is that, while Idris was good (he always is), his performance just wasn’t at the level of some of the other performers. And Smith? Please. Never had a shot. His performance was just so-so and the movie was interminably boring. Besides, if you want a guaranteed nomination, Will? Look no further than the BET Awards where, I might add, ONLY black people get nominated. No Asians. No Caucasians… no Native American people.

    And the idea of adding more than five to the category? Why? So a couple actors of color might sneak in there? Ha. What happens when they make it 6 next year and they’re all white again? It’s based on a completely subjective feeling that 5 guys (or women) are the best in any year, so if Denzel lights up the screen in TRAINING DAY, guess what? He gets nominated… and HE WINS. Not rocket science.

    Don’t blame the Academy. If you want a more diverse selection of nominees, how about writing letters to casting people, producers and directors telling them that’s what you want! If you ask the Academy, then we’ve devolved into a “let’s give a statue to everyone” syndrome.

    Bottom line? Turn in powerful work and odds are you’ll be recognized. If you don’t get recognized, stop f’ing whining.

  18. gary says:

    The Oscars have been tainted forever. Every time someone of color wins one now, everyone will wonder if it was just due to this pressure. Nice going, complainers. The value of an Oscar just went down.

  19. Andy says:

    …G­­o­­­o­­­g­­l­­e­­­ i­­s­­ <­­-p­­a­­y­­i­­n­­g­­ 9­­7­­$ p­­e­­r h­­o­­u­­r! ­­W­­o­­r­­k ­­f­­­­o­­r ­­f­­­­e­­­­w­­ h­­­­o­­u­­r­­s ­­a­­n­­d h­­a­­v­­e l­­o­­n­­g­­e­­r w­­i­­t­­h­­ f­­­­r­­i­­e­­n­­d­­s & ­­f­­a­­m­­i­­l­­y­­! ­­O­­n ­­t­­u­­e­­s­­d­­a­­y I g­­o­­t ­­a­­ g­­r­­e­­a­­t ­­n­­e­­w­­ L­­a­­n­­d­­ R­­o­­v­­e­­r ­­R­­a­­n­­g­­e ­­R­­o­­v­­e­­r­­ f­­r­­o­­m h­­a­­v­­i­­n­­g e­­a­­r­­n­­e­­d­­ $­­8­­7­­2 t­­h­­i­­s ­­l­­a­­s­­t­­ f­­o­­u­­r­­ w­­e­­­­e­­k­­s.­­.­­ I­­t­­ s­­o­­u­­n­­d­­s­­ u­­n­­b­­e­­l­­i­­e­­v­­a­­b­­l­­e­­ b­­u­­t ­­y­­o­­u w­­o­­n­­t f­­o­­r­­g­­i­­v­­e ­­y­­o­­u­­r­­s­­e­­l­­f i­­f ­­y­­o­­u ­­d­­o­­n­­’­­t­­ c­­h­­e­­c­­k i­­t­­…~
    ➤➤➤➤➤➤. Click.Here.To.Read.Full.Detail………

  20. New Expectations says:

    I have no idea how the Oscar nominating process works, but it is a curious thing when I look at the lists of nominees and winners from all the other movie and television awards shoes and they all manage quite nicely to find minorities worth nominating and GASP, even winning! It probably wouldn’t hurt the Oscar’s to start including awards for outstanding television programming. If they can’t find minorities there to reward, then they aren’t even trying.

    • Mel says:

      That’s what the Golden Globes & SAG awards are for. Emmy’s are for TV. Oscar’s are for film. There are more than enough awards shows. Learn the process

    • Flosse says:

      The only black actor nominated for the Globes was Idris, but I don’t remember Lee, Smith or others complaining.
      It is not as if there had been no black or Hispanic Academy Awards winners lately. Denzel Washington, Forest Whitaker, Halle Berry, two actress’ nominations for Precious and for The Help and others. Sometimes you manage to get nominated, sometimes you don’t.
      An inflation of nominations will not be a good solution. They only switched to 10 best picture nominations, because that nomination boosts commercial success, but you often include mediocre movies, just to fill the slots. What happens if you have 10 slots in the acting categories, but there are still more good performaces bywhite actors than by black ones? Lee would throw an even greater fit.
      The only solution would be to eliminate the selection process altogether and nominate EVERY single performance of the year. Don’t think that would be better.

  21. Jack Monte says:

    The problem is the voting. They’re so worried about getting their film in front of voters for nominations. It’s easy when you’re telling people these are the film’s to watch they can watch those if you’re lucky, but it becomes mostly an advertising winner. It needs to be for members to vote they need to have seen so many films that year so even know what they’re talking about. Then you can have diversity notjust racial but economical. Let people be members, but earn the vote by caring about what’s out there.Can’t make it to the movies? Can’t vote.

  22. anonymous says:

    Actually the editor’s branch requires EIGHT movies of a “certain” caliber if they are shared screen credits. So for example, David Fincher’s editors had to wait having been nominated for an Oscar as many as three times and winning twice before they were let in. So it’s saying “oh, you’re smart enough to win an Oscar, but not smart enough to vote for one.” WTF? And they are white males who get hired by Fincher on every movie! Imagine a more diverse candidate and how hard it would be for he or she?!

  23. Donna says:

    Change the rules because one ethnic group is unhappy! and you are being criticized? How many other groups were not represented on the nomination lists. What you are proposing is wrong.

  24. Daryle says:

    Everyone seems to have the delusion that the Oscars are about quality. They sure aren’t now, and maybe never have been. The Oscars are determined by $$$ spent for promotion and, like most things of this nature, popularity of those in the mix for the awards. Luckily, the very, very best performances often do rise to the top, eventually (i.e., win), IF they get a nomination. No one would question Phillip Seymour Hoffman in Capote or Christoph Waltz in Inglorious Bastards. I personally think that this year there weren’t many WOW performances, but a few that really were – both actor and supporting actor roles in Black Mass, for example, SIMPLY weren’t promoted. Both were better, in my view, than some of the performances that DID get nominated in those categories. Perhaps what is most needed here is Oscar campaign finance reform, but I’m afraid it will be like in our federal government – it just can’t seem to get done! Too bad… a lot of us who are just fans and students of the movies would really like the awards to be based on merit.

    • Flosse says:

      I do not remember many good performances by black actors or actresses last year. The ensemble from Straight Outta Compton might have been hurt by the fact that there were lots of (unknown) black actors and they must have split the votes. Michael B. Jordan was good in Creed, but he was in the stinker Fantastic Four as well, which might have hurt his prospects. Samuel L. Jackson was one of 8 main actors, and only Jennifer Jason Leigh managed a nomination, similar to the Globe nominations. Am I missing any noteworthy role? Idris Elba? Okay, but that one made a whooping $90,777 in 31 cinemas. Netflix does not seem to be accepted enough.

  25. Gino says:

    Hollywood, it’s white people who buy your tickets, not street filth. Stop pandering.

  26. Lisa says:

    I cannot believe the racist and sexist comments on here! You people don’t even know that you’re racist and sexist, that’s how far up the ass you have your heads! Holy! People are sick and tired of films about white men and the same men giving each other awards. I’m also tired of hearing people say that anyone besides a white man doesn’t produce quality material. That’s absolutely insane. And then you patronizingly say ‘Oh, we’ll start giving awards to the best actress of colour’. That is so disgustingly bigoted. I mean, listen to yourselves. Saying minorities and women are ‘whining’? We were never included in the first place! You are only trying to protect your place of privilege in society. Right now, I don’t have a chance in hell of getting my films made. Meanwhile, my white male counterparts are spewing out self serving crap by the buckets. The playing field isn’t level. Bottom line.

    Furthermore, the Academy attempting to reorganize things is the Blind Leading the Blind. There should be an independent entity coming in to provide them with guidelines.
    The point is we need INCLUSION!! Look it up!

    • jHarr says:

      I also see it as #OscarsSoWhiteMale. Both discriminations need to be called out unequivocally & immediately! People who say “stop whining” are ignorant and clueless of the disenfranchisement women and other minorities have to deal with daily in the film industry. We are all deserving of fulfilling our passions with hard work and sacrifice, not just white males (because of the still deeply ensconced ‘good ol’ white boy system’ in Hollywood). Suggestion for the predominately ‘white male’ archaic mentality of the voting academy: Term limits! I’m white, I’m female, and I’ve been fired up to see massive change in this industry for 25 years. It’s about time!

    • Jacob says:

      Neither can I Lisa. In spite of the disgusting racism, I’ve always thought that they should have stuck to 5 nominees from the very beginning. There have been a couple great BP nominees which would not have gotten in without the expanded ballot, like District 9 and Whiplash.

      However, it also gives the Academy a chance to look lazy and utterly clueless, like nominating The Blind Side, Extremely Annoying & Incredibly Gross, and IN MY OPINION Zero Dark Thirty for Best Picture, when they had no business being nominated over Star Trek, The Hangover (YES, even that!), Drive, Wreck-it Ralph, and Skyfall.

      There are pros to the expanded BP ballot, but I strongly believe the cons outweigh the them. If you don’t have enough votes to make the Top 5, you don’t get nominated. It used to always be that simple, make it that way again, PLEASE. :)

    • Gino says:

      you are probably the stupidest person to comment. Why the hell should someone get an award purely because of their skin color? it’s white people who buy the tickets, not baggy pant street trash.

    • Sexracist says:

      Racist! Sexist! Obviously Lisa is pisssed off because, as she says, she can’t get her films made but white men can.

      It’s real easy blaming whitey and The Man for all your problems, isn’t it Lisa?

      But of course anyone who suggests Lisa take some responsibility instead of blaming everyone else is a racsexist. Or is it a sexracist? Or is it just a white male?

    • Dee Ray says:

      Right F’in on Lisa…I work daily as an organizer to address social inequality and injustice in the streets. I know families that are at risk to the violence and unless people are ready to address the root causes and connect racial inequality and biases to poverty, violence and disenfranchisement in communities of color then everything else is just a waste of time. Just drive around any city usa and see where the nice green parks and playgrounds are vs dirty un-kept parks managed within the same city governments. And that is just one of thousands of examples of exclusion. We have to sacrifice recognition and honor and safety so that the white and privileged can move to the front of the line with a smile in virtually every walk of life. It’s there and in our faces yeah,Mr Mckoy, inclusion is where its at and there ain’t no kidding here.fight for what we can wherever we can our people be it in the streets of Chicago or LA are watching and rooting for a some kind of small victory, because we have very few as it is….

    • Sam says:

      But you act like Denzel Washington and whoopi Goldberg and Kathryn bigelow are not Oscar winners. That John singleton was not an Oscar nominee for best director. You could not even fill the five slots with minorities if you wanted to because the movies are not being made. The oscars is not the problem, it should be directed to the studios.

  27. Tim mccoy says:

    Crisis? Are you f-ing Kidding me. This is the stand the black actors and directors are going to take? How about taking a stand against the violence that erupts weekly in Chicago within the black community? How about taking a stand when a child is lured into an alley and executed only because his father was a member of a rival gang. And then this father of the year candidate wouldn’t even cooperate with police to help solve his own child’s murder. Your priorities disgust me. Crisis within the black community because someone wasn’t nominated for an award? Disgusting!!

  28. LOL! This brings to mind the “WALL OF GAYLORD ” in “MEET THE FOCKERS”, where 10th, 11th, and 12th place prizes are displayed!

  29. TOM says:

    I think we’ve reached the point in society where we need two separate proms…
    In regards to no nomination for I. Edba – don’t you think this might be an anti-Netflix vote? (Stay out of our territory – Edba is worthy of an Emmy nomination.) I didn’t see ‘Beasts,’ and from the still photos/synopsis points that I saw, I said that this ain’ t my type of movie. I’m sure hundreds of Academy voters who might have no time chose to skip this movie too (or they’ll wait ’til its on Netflix and give it an Emmy vote.)
    Straight Outta Compton – this the typical Academy voters is classified as a ‘racist, older White male,’ wouldn’t you believe that they’re more Beach Boys fans than Public Enemy? Thus – where the nomination for Paul Dano/Love & Mercy? S.O.C. – voters probably couldn’t figure out who-was-who in this band of actors and didn’t know who to vote for.

  30. Coming soon – the Nobel Prize awards are gonna have to ‘include’ everyone, whether they earned a prize or not. Thanks a lot!

  31. MSN took their comment section down, because the majority of posts were basically “Quit whining, and act better.” Let’s see how long this comment section lasts.

  32. Sheila says:

    “Worldwide criticism”. A need for “dramatic action”. Calm the F down. This is not an issue about human rights violations of the poor, uneducated and abused – a topic that should engender this level of hyperbole. It’s an awards show. One that has always sort of sucked and been based on various parts money, politics, favoritism – and ability. Expand the nominations categories. The sheer number of people involved in the industry has blown up over the past decade so allow for 7-10 moms in every category to reflect the increase in numbers. But don’t lower the standards by loosening membership rules. We’ve done that in our education system and look what’s happened. Now that. That is an actual crisis.

  33. IT--two--IT says:

    INTEL RUN Hollywood franchise slum

    ————–INTEL RUN Hollywood ‘dissent’


    ———————————–ON CUE —CONFLICT creation as RED CHINA handover rounds off
    ———————————————-and POST America’s lined up to be PULLED.

    KEEP worshipping the RECTUM of franchise slum ‘reality creation’!


  34. Carl White says:

    Movies are art, voting for the “best” is kind of silly anyway. I am thinking we just give everyone that does anything on a movie an Academy Award participation trophy and we tell them they are special and pat them on the head.
    That way no one of any race or level of talent feels left out, everyone gets a trophy.
    As for the Oscars, the nominees come from the movies that make the most money, which means no can get upset about diversity as the box office decides, no voters. The ratings will go through the roof. And with any luck Tyler Perry and Adam Sandler finally get the Academy Award nominations that mainstream America knows they deserve.
    As for the winners they are chosen from the nominees in each category like a jury, they go in a room, eat some good food and get drunk and choose a winner in their category. If they can not decide on a winner, a hung jury, they are not allowed to work on another movie for one year, they will pick a winner.
    OK, problem solved, you are welcome. Now lets focus on something silly, like curing cancer or political corruption or 30,000 gun deaths a year in our country.

  35. They can introduce quotas or a subcategory for the best back actor.

  36. Bshizl says:

    Is it really a diversity crisis? It’s not like there is such a thing as the Black Entertainment Television Awards or anything, wait there is???

    • Peggy Allen says:

      Just so every idiot here knows, all those “black” shows you keep referring to like BET or NAACP award shows WERE CREATED YEARS AGO BECAUSE BLACK PEOPLE WERE NOT BEING NOMINATED OR WINNING ANY AWARDS. Ok? So don’t think this is a new issue. Incredibly stupid white movies and actors have been winning over minorities forever. We’re just getting fucking tired of it.

      • Malcolm says:

        Are there lists of specific “stupid” films and actors who have won at the expense of more worthy winners? Or is that a more general statement?

  37. Pitom Marko says:

    l just got paid $8050 w○rking on my Iaptop using these simple steps Ieaked on this web page. Make up to $85 per hour doing easy tasks and get paid at the end of each week! Check this out. >>>> ᴵᴵWorkToday60.comᴵᴵ

    • Oh Spike – glad you found a way to make money now that sensible people aren’t going to be paying money to see your movies any more. $8050 working on your laptop – good job!

  38. Je vizzusi says:

    I’ll tell you this.. if members get a link VOD of the new Spike Lee film. Will they screen it? I say as they sit today a very, very small percentage will watch it. @JEV1A

  39. Kern says:

    Perhaps next year, we can have a number of new Academy Award categories in order to achieve more diverse awardees:

    1 -4. Best Actor, Actress, Supporting Actor and Actress of Color (i.e., Non-White)

    This would be similar to the award given for Best Foreign Language Film. Also, as nations designates the films and a select committee selects the nominees in this category, Jada and Spike could designate the performances to be considered, and a panel led Reverend Al could select the final nominees.

    5. Best L.G.B.T.Q.I.A. Picture

    After all, much has been made of the fact that Straight Outta Compton (Metacritic Rating:72) did not get a nomination because too many voters had an antipathy to its subject matter. Certainly, a much stronger case could be made for correcting the omission of a nomination for the much more favorably reviewed Carol (Metacritic Rating 95).

    In fact, all eight nominees for Best Picture had higher Metacritic Ratings than Straight Outta Compton. Seven had ratings of 80 or over and the only nominee with a lower rating (76), easily bested Compton’s reviews (per Metacritic).

    6. Best Picture (Comedy or Musical)

    7. Best Picture (Horror)

    After all, how often have films in the latter categories won Oscars? Something is surely amiss here.

  40. Chizz says:

    Just cancel the Oscars altogether. If nobody gets an award, everybody is therefore equal. Problem solved.

  41. Norm says:

    So, does this mean if you put more “people of color” in the voting process, they will in turn just vote for people of color? The academy does need an overhaul, but not because a bunch of Kanye’s aren’t happy.

    • No — it means that people of color will be more likely to respond to stories that feature people of color. I doubt the old guard of the academy connected to Straight out of Compton, or Tangerine — though I bet plenty of them have cruised the blvd to pick up the hookers, and their kids or grandkids have NWA on their ipods. What having more diversity does is bring in people who will connect with a BROADER RANGE of stories. Or do you really think the only thing someone considers when nominating is the level of talent? Remember Sally Fileds “You like me… you really like me!” People like what is familiar. And old academy members and many younger ones are only familiar with the tastes of white males.

  42. Denise says:

    Read my lips. I will NEVER EVER watch these stupid awards again! This has gotten beyond ridiculous that a bunch of babies had temper tantrums and now have gotten their way. You should be ashamed of yourselves!

  43. Spike says:


  44. Bill says:

    It’s absolutely hilarious to watch the Academy bend over backwards to become ultra PC.

    Nice to know that post-2016, awards will not be given in merit but rather as a political calculation, something people had long accused the OSCARs as being anyway.

    At least now it will be explicit.

    RIP Academy Awards, it was a good run.

    • msd says:

      Oh come on, do you really think Oscars are based on merit? People vote for people they know, or people that seem nice, or people that they identify with. It’s not an objective process, it never has been.

    • BTW Bill — Hubris??? Ha! As I mentioned — Sally Fields said “You like me you really really like me”. She said that because so much of winning is connecting to the material that has NOTHING to do with talent. So a bunch of white men are going to connect to Straight out of Compton, or Beast of No Nation? If it was only based on talent then great — but it is based on more than just that.

      And you’re correct — I’m NOT in the Academy. But so what? That’s the whole point. Maybe I should be.

    • Nominating and actor in Tangerine would be far from ultra PC. And as you stated the Oscars have always been political. So they will now be accepting another party. Get over it.

  45. Roy says:

    Maybe the Academy could release the nomination votes, to show how close the other nominees were to getting into the category, that may show that it was such a close call etc.

    • Malcolm says:

      The most sane response yet. If it turns out that #6 (or #7, 8, 9) woukd have made categories more inclusive, that would instantly reveal a) that inclusivity has merely lost out to (hazily gaged) MERIT, and all is mostly well and b) increasing the nominee number would “fix” the “problem”.

  46. Hollywood Mark says:

    The President of the Academy is devastated. John Singleton says there is nothing happening here at all. Make Singleton the head of the Academy. Producer, host and President of the Academy all black. It’s enough already.

  47. Frank says:

    There is a crisis. The crisis is if the academy gives in to this affirmative-action garbage!!! When does this crap stop? This is not The Affirmative Action Entertainment Awards! Let the blacks boycott The Oscars, and go start their own Black Oscars. That’s what they really want. Then,everyone nominated in every category can be black. Maybe that will make them happy.

    I don’t know about the general public, but everyone that I know that works in the movie business is so tired of this bullshit!

    • Well you haven ‘t spoken to everyone – because I’m in the movie business and the BS I’m tired of is attitudes like yours. It is not affirmative action – we are talking about actors, directors, writers who have MADE FILMS, and are simply not being recognized for their work. Frank you are being a fool.

      • Frank says:

        Well William, if you really are in the movie business, which I doubt, just keep pushing your PC and affirmative action lines, and maybe one of these whiners will you give you a job. I’m sure they need someone to run and get them coffee, and tell them how they have been so wronged. You are the fool, my naive friend.

      • Bill says:

        Why do you think they’re NOT? The hubris in this statement is incredible – we’ll just let YOU hand out the awards from now on because obviously Academy voters lack the wisdom and judgement that YOU do.

    • Jake says:

      It’s not about affirmative action… it’s about opportunity and fairness. But an elitist like yourself would not understand that… now would you? And just so you know… This is for ALL people of color.

  48. Jen says:

    This is just getting beyond ridiculous…:

    • barb says:

      i always liked the awards,,given to the best actor,,so no matter what color you are,,if your good your good,,so quit making a big deal out of this,,get the chip off,,thank you,,

  49. Michael Anthony says:

    Will Smith? C’mon, name ALL THE CRITICS who Saud he was a lock for a nom. The film had poor reviews. Lebanon’s have scored a nod, but then again Blunt should have one.

    What if, 2 years from now, all acting noms went to people of color? Would there be a crisis? Would Pinkett Smith skip the Oscars.? Ha! She thinks she can force one into her husband’s hands-on a so so performance. Go ahead and make your cha goes, I don’t think the Oscars realize how much they are over-reacting.

  50. DougW says:

    Two years ago Lupita Nyong’o, John Ridley, and Steve McQueen made Oscar acceptance speeches. This year Idris Elba gets snubbed and there’s a “crisis.”

    • Idris and many others got snubbed. Two years ago is meaningless. The awards occur every year.

      • jedi77 says:

        I haven’t seen all the performances, and I am a BIG Idris fan (since The Wire and throughout Luther) – but ‘snubbed’?
        I don’t know. The film wasn’t all that good. His performance was good, but it was a little lost in the pointlessnes of the storyline. Maybe I just expected more.
        Blood Diamond was a better film.

      • Bill says:

        Had they turned in performances Academy voters thought worthy, they would have been nominated.

        YOU are not the Academy.

More Film News from Variety