-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Bafta changes criteria for two awards to increase diversity
- Thread starter Enzom21
- Start date
- Status
milanbaros
Member?
I agree. I just have to remember that this isn't what their voting block think is the best British film but the best British film which meets diversity criteria.
My response was to biggersmaller. I multiquoted you while forgetting to respond.
To answer your question - no. That person would be a qualifying factor, and the studio could do one of a dozen other things (both pre or post production) to gain another qualifying factor.
It's actually quite an accomplishment for your film not to qualify.
Make sure you read all these documents too. http://www.oscars.org/oscars/rules-eligibility
That way you know the Best Film Oscar isn't the best film, but the best film that meets their criteria.
the_batman
Banned
when i read "diverse" i only thought about ethnicities being represented by actors instead of all the other things it refers to.
and the freedom thing, how the BAFTAs are peeking into filmmakers' processes reminded me of the new laws that let police search your web history whenever they want and the one that restricts access to adult material.
let's just say a group of friends, all guys, makes an amazing film about their lives and friendship in England. would it be eligible?
MikeHattsu
Member
Well, that's just 1 part of 1 requirement. You can read the full leaflet and the FAQ if you need all the details
Charles Brandon
Member
Well, that's just 1 part of 1 requirement. You can read the full leaflet and the FAQ if you need all the details
...Maybe later.
Read through the thread, the question has been answered multiple times.
Judging by the assumptions you just admitted making, might be worth putting some effort into acquiring information independently?
MikeHattsu
Member
sammyCYBORG
Member
Diversity is obviously good in most cases but it shouldn't be required.
Not everything requires or benefits from it.
A work of art certainly shouldn't be penailsed or snubbed due to a lack of diversity.
But ultimately who cares about awards anyway.
Not everything requires or benefits from it.
A work of art certainly shouldn't be penailsed or snubbed due to a lack of diversity.
But ultimately who cares about awards anyway.
Doc Holliday
SPOILER: Columbus finds America
"Hey was that guy who walked by the screen black or white?"
excelsiorlef
Member
Monitor is literally know whose working on the show, what it's about. They do that already by virtue of knowing who to nominate.
They arent likely going to be sending out messages to productions, they'll just let them do what they want and if they don't meet the qualifications so be it.
Sweeney Tom
Banned
Excellent idea and I'd love to see it spread
Honey Bunny
Member
Agreed. But unfortunately these awards can be important financially.
And hot chicks
And cocaine. All the cocaine.
Gotdatmoney
Member
It's amazing that with requirements that loose people are acting like this is some blow to creativity. If filmakers cant neet thlse requirements i dont understand how the fuck anyone can claim it was to meet an artistic vision. So your vision is all rich 30-40 white males doing everything?
Why shouldn't it be required? Why should we allow white-only technical crews, male-only writing staff, straight-only production teams?
Name me one thing that doesn't or couldn't benefit from greater diversity, from a wider and deeper pool of talent, from new and interesting perspectives. Please. I'd love to know.
Why not? Greater diversity is a goal that should be strived for, so why not punish those that choose not to pursue it? Why pander to the racists, sexists and homophobes that seek to stamp out diverse voices at every turn?
I don't know, you obviously do because you came into this thread.
Riposte
Member
The Slate article is crappy and there's no reason to read it over the BBC one that's linked in it (and I linked in my post), because the latter has more information and a less combative tone.
Why should they be prohibited? The UK is pretty homogeneous.
The thread title is fine and things would be "clearer" if people read more than just the title before tripping over themselves to express their outrage. Like the_batman for example.
Perhaps in some industries,which this is seeking to address
What would be your suggestion on helping to diversify the film industry
No, no I'm not a fan of this at all.
Like, a white person should still be able to make a film starring white people for white people. I'm on board with the senior roles part but the other two I'm not a big fan of.
And yes, I know most films are already made by white people for white people, that's not my point. My point is that two of those three requirements could not be met by a film doing exactly what it is setting out to do and succeeding in it. Unless I'm misunderstanding them (which is entirely possible)?
Like, a white person should still be able to make a film starring white people for white people. I'm on board with the senior roles part but the other two I'm not a big fan of.
And yes, I know most films are already made by white people for white people, that's not my point. My point is that two of those three requirements could not be met by a film doing exactly what it is setting out to do and succeeding in it. Unless I'm misunderstanding them (which is entirely possible)?
What are "movies for white people"?
No-one is stopping anything from happening,two awards have had their requirements changed in order to promote diversity in film making.
I'd assume movies made by white people that are mostly marketed towards white people.
Are you trying to paint me as saying that movies can only be watched by a certain group? Because target audiences aren't exactly reinforced by law and I'm pretty sure most people know that.
I'm not trying to paint you as anything. I wanted clarification about a particular part of your ridiculous post.
Aizen.S.Kennedy
Banned
This thread tho lol. No need to read the OP apparently. Would somebody PLEASE think of the middle class middle aged white men!!? They already have such a hard time winning awards. This will force then to tell stories about diverse subjects and gasp hire a diverse crew to make it!! Who wants that!!??
I'll ignore all the numerous requirements that were already in place for years.. those don't matter these creatives found ways to make it work, but THIS is so hard and unfair.
Some of my favorite movies excluded minorites/disabled people/women in the writing staff and crew. Only a white dude can hold a boom mike.
I'll ignore all the numerous requirements that were already in place for years.. those don't matter these creatives found ways to make it work, but THIS is so hard and unfair.
Some of my favorite movies excluded minorites/disabled people/women in the writing staff and crew. Only a white dude can hold a boom mike.
Could you point out what part is ridiculous? I don't mean that as in I'm right, I mean what part is like, laughably wrong? Cause I'm starting to think I've missed something here.
I guess my main point is I'd prefer they just give more points to movies that hit the requirements then not even consider movies that don't, but at the end of the day it's their awards and if they think this'll help then they probably know more about it than me.
The clickbaity title and the very selective quoting in the OP in terms of leaving out the exceptions for small studios probably didn't help.
I'm still not entirely sure how I feel about this, but to BAFTA's credit they are basically saying diversity can be found in front of the camera or behind, it's not like they're demanding quotas or certain subject matter. The only weird bit to me is the "well if it panders to some minority group that counts as diversity" bullet point. But maybe that's just their tacit admission that the BAFTAs like all awards are full of shit and it's still celebrating a money-making business as much as it is celebrating art.
And yeah, if you don't want a BAFTA you don't have to do a thing. I'm wondering if the awards have enough heft to make a difference broadly, whether domestic or abroad.
And yeah, if you don't want a BAFTA you don't have to do a thing. I'm wondering if the awards have enough heft to make a difference broadly, whether domestic or abroad.
It's probably the highest honour you could receive in the UK film industry,will help open doors,spread notoriety, if this is helping that happen in a diverse group of people,those people finding success would then be able to try and help others further. At least that seems to be the idea
maquiladora
Member
It's a very small step in the right direction.
Oh I definitely understand the reasoning, and BAFTA makes its own rules, if they want to prioritize this more power to them. The overall effect or not doesn't make that a poor choice, I'm just wondering how much tangible impact it'll actually have, and whether or not they'll be enough data to validate their decision down the line.
Not to bother. Fill gaps in provision way earlier as needed.
I don't understand what you mean by fill gaps in provision way earlier as needed
It's not even the lack of reading comprehension that bothers me. It's the reflexive defensiveness against seeing colored faces on screen at all, as well as the erasure of gender, sexual, disabled, and lower class minorities from the discussion (which can be white too but w/e) all culminating in a sneaking suspicion that people think only the best films can be made by and be about straight, white, middle class guys while ignoring that certainly such systemic biases may have actually prevented the best films from winning awards beforehand. Certainly BAFTA hasn't gotten it right every single time before, but seemingly no one had a problem with the way the awards were conducted before. Hmmmmmmmmmm.
Also, tell me more about what you think about poor and black people.
Also, tell me more about what you think about poor and black people.
George Oscar Bluth II
Banned
My very foreign name can actually gonna help me land a production job instead of the opposite? Good.
Time to play up my Iranian side.
Time to play up my Iranian side.
There's nothing stopping them from making an all white film with and all white cast with no women, disabled people, etc, about upper middle class issues. Nothing at all. They just aren't going to get a BAFTA. Like all awards, the awarder decides the criteria for consideration, and, like all awards, edge case movies wind up not being eligible sometimes. This is another criteria if you want to win a BAFTA. It doesn't stop anyone from making whatever movie they choose to make.
Your weird inclusions aside, The King's Speech had a major role for a woman actor, a woman co producer, a woman casting agent, production designer, set decorator, costume designer, multiple women assistant directors, etc. I imagine, without seeing a photo of the cast, that some of the major or senior roles behind screen are also filled by people of color. As has been pointed out before, you'd have to work hard to create a modern movie capable of winning a BAFTA that doesn't get over the hurdle.
After reading it over again it seems that the quota is actually very loose. Like, as long as you either feature in front of or behind the camera at least some (doesn't even define what percentage) disabled people or minorities you qualify. I think. Seems good in my book, just encourages more outreach and isn't terribly strict in the first place.
It's clear you didn't read the OP or any of the thread.
It appears a lot of people didn't so the mods appeased them and changed the thread title.
Salty Rice
Member
This sounds terrible and not the way you should enforce diversity.
- Status