Today the Academy announced that new Oscar representation and inclusion standards for eligibility for Best Picture from the 96th Oscars (2024). However, films will have to complete a confidentiality form for consideration for the 94th (2022) and 95th (2023) Oscars. Films that want to be considered for the category will have to meet two of the four standards to be eligible. We will break down the Academy’s inclusion and representation standards and talk about what it means for films going forward. (spoiler, it really won’t mean much)
The Standards
STANDARD A: ON-SCREEN REPRESENTATION, THEMES AND NARRATIVES
To achieve Standard A, the film must meet ONE of the following criteria:
A1. Lead or significant supporting actors
At least one of the lead actors or significant supporting actors is from an underrepresented racial or ethnic group.
Asian, Hispanic/Latinx, Black/African American, Indigenous/Native American/Alaskan Native, Middle Eastern/North African, Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander, Other underrepresented race or ethnicity
A2. General ensemble cast
At least 30% of all actors in secondary and more minor roles are from at least two of the underrepresented groups:
A3. Main storyline/subject matter
The main storyline(s), theme or narrative of the film is centred on an underrepresented group(s).
Women, Racial or ethnic group, LGBTQ+, People with cognitive or physical disabilities, or who are deaf or hard of hearing
STANDARD B: CREATIVE LEADERSHIP AND PROJECT TEAM
To achieve Standard B, the film must meet ONE of the criteria below:
B1. Creative leadership and department heads
At least two of the following creative leadership positions and department heads. Casting Director, Cinematographer, Composer, Costume Designer, Director, Editor, Hairstylist, Makeup Artist, Producer, Production Designer, Set Decorator, Sound, VFX Supervisor, Writer. Are from the following underrepresented groups:
Women, Racial or ethnic group, LGBTQ+, People with cognitive or physical disabilities, or who are deaf or hard of hearing.
At least one of those positions must belong to underrepresented racial or ethnic groups
B2. Other key roles
At least six other crew/team and technical positions (excluding Production Assistants) are from an underrepresented racial or ethnic group. These positions include but are not limited to First AD, Gaffer, Script Supervisor, etc.
B3. Overall crew composition
At least 30% of the film’s crew is from the following underrepresented groups:
Women, Racial or ethnic group, LGBTQ+, People with cognitive or physical disabilities, or who are deaf or hard of hearing.
STANDARD C: INDUSTRY ACCESS AND OPPORTUNITIES
To achieve Standard C, the film must meet BOTH criteria below:
C1. Paid apprenticeship and internship opportunities
Film’s distribution or financing company has paid apprenticeships or internships that are from the following underrepresented groups and satisfy the criteria below:
Women, Racial or ethnic group, LGBTQ+, People with cognitive or physical disabilities, or who are deaf or hard of hearing.
Major studios/distributors are required to have substantive, ongoing paid apprenticeships/internships inclusive of underrepresented groups. In most of the following departments: production/development, physical production, post-production, music, VFX, acquisitions, business affairs, distribution, marketing and publicity.
The mini-major or independent studios/distributors must have a minimum of two apprentices/interns from the above-underrepresented groups. At least one from an underrepresented racial or ethnic group). In at least one of the following departments. Production/development, physical production, post-production, music, VFX, acquisitions, business affairs, distribution, marketing and publicity.
C2. Training opportunities and skills development (crew)
The film’s production, distribution and/or financing company offers training and/or work opportunities for below-the-line skill development to people from the following underrepresented groups:
Women, Racial or ethnic group, LGBTQ+, People with cognitive or physical disabilities, or who are deaf or hard of hearing.
STANDARD D: AUDIENCE DEVELOPMENT
To achieve Standard D, the film must meet the criterion below:
D1. Representation in marketing, publicity, and distribution
The studio and/or film company has multiple in-house senior executives from among underrepresented groups on their marketing, publicity, and/or distribution teams.
To read more about the standards check the official words here.
Our Thoughts
The Academy’s inclusion and representation standards can only be a positive in the future of representation. It’s no secret that Hollywood and film studios, have been a tad (putting it nicely) to get going in making it a level playing field. It would be very interesting to see what films from the past decade that have been nominated for Best Picture would have met these new standards, especially A and B.
This is pretty great
Across the board, the Academy’s inclusion and representation standards have been sought after and while Standard A needs to be there. I think the true important standard is Standard B. The importance of having representation behind the camera cannot be overstated. We need to see where the next generation of filmmakers are coming from and with this, we can at least see some progress and have some presentation in roles that we normally wouldn’t see.
In this instance, the importance in C has to be highlighted, but there needs to be thought into what happens to the people who get these internships after the production ends. I half expect that these young, hopeful souls to be tossed to the side as their use is over. We know how ruthless Hollywood is and it would be a disaster if down the line this is what happens.
Of course, there is nothing that the Academy can do regarding that aspect. Yet, there need to be assurances that those who are on these programmes find opportunities to succeed down the line. Or really what is the point of having standard C. (Though that argument can be made for internships and programmes in general.)
Is it enough?
There could be the argument that a good percentage of films up for nominations or even consideration comply already with these standards (it would be difficult to see past instances of C & D, though not impossible to check). So is this more a PR exercise than anything else? I would like to think not regarding that, but crazier theories have existed. As we said, one day soon we will look back at previous years nominations and see if those films did comply, but I would hazard a guess that 80% have.
It is not surprising to see people complain already
I mean, we had to expect that right, also I am not surprised at the number of people who did not read all of the articles or official statement about it… Obviously, it is quite clear that it is not just about the acting side folks. Sigh.
Has the Academy given studios a crafty little get-out clause?
When I first read the Academy’s inclusion and representation standards standards, what struck me was the Two out of Four to be eligible for consideration statement. If you look carefully at A through D, you will notice that A and B are focused on areas that audiences have been hoping for. Representation in front of the camera, but also behind it as not everyone just wants to be an actor. It is key to cinema that we have important representation for ALL of the production side of a film.
But where the get-out clause (in my eyes appears) is in C and D. C is effectively interns and training. While important it is an area that is very easy for film studios to budget and allocate to underrepresented groups. It is much simpler to hire a few interns into the departments that are required than to make sure you are hiring department heads for the listed areas. Not only is it easier, but a tonne cheaper.
D focuses on marketing, publicity and distribution, which is possibly far easier to manage representation due to this being staff for the production, distribution companies and the studios. Another area where (no offence) it is a far sight easier to find people to fill those roles than in the production side.
My issue is that while Standard C is great in creating new waves of talent to come through the film systems for future decades, it is from this negative few point an easy get out. Studios can simply just hire some interns from these groups and they have a tick. In my opinion, that is just a tad too easy.
Is there a better solution to this?
Honestly? Standard D should be integrated into Standard C. Then we still keep the two from the three instead from A, B and C. The little caveat that they can get away without focusing on A B isn’t good enough. Representation needs to be integrated now. Not when interns have gotten through and then broken into the industry.
By reducing the standards from four to three and then picking two from that, the Academy could then really force studios hands into making change better. While this is a good start, I think they have slightly missed a step here. Without being skeptical, it almost seems as if it has been purposefully done to allow certain studios to get away with it. For now.
We could go more into this, but we need to see how everything lies a few days down the line first. So, that’s all we have to say on the matter right now, what do you think? Do you think about Academy’s inclusion and representation standards will affect films positively or negatively? Let us know.
