Fandango has asked a question this week that really highlights how complicated life has become. You could make good arguements for either side of this debate.

Do you think that the metrics the Academy Awards will start applying in 2024 regarding composition of at least 30% of the cast and crew by under-represented groups in order for a film to even qualify for a Best Picture Oscar nomination is appropriate? Or, do you share Richard Dreyfuss’ opinion that because filmmaking is an art form, imposing such criteria in order for a film to even be considered for an Oscar is inappropriate?

I don’t really watch new movies and I don’t really take any notice of the Academy Awards but I thought that they were supposed to be about choosing the best picture. Shouldn’t that be about whether the script is good, whether the acting and directing is good?

It would be an interesting exercise to look at Oscar winning films of the past. If you applied that criteria to them would they have qualified? Would Casablanca have qualified, Gone With The Wind?

I am not saying that I think that film making should not be ethical. I’m saying that if there are so many criteria to satisfy the judging might become more about that and less about the actual film. A mediocre film could win while a brilliant one was not nominated because only 29% of the cast and crew were from under represented groups.

I think that there should be recognition of film makers who do have diversity amongst their cast and crew. Maybe a special award category. But no, I don’t think not fulfilling that criteria should prevent a film from even being nominated. So I guess that maybe I agree more with Richard Dreyfuss.