The 96th Oscars

take1

Member
It has just been announced that the 96th Oscar Awards, in 2025, will have to meet certain diversity standards when awarding the title "Best Picture."
This is causing controversy, not least with Kirsty Alley, who has used some colorful language when explaining her views!
She believes that it will restrict artistic freedom, and may cause the most deserving picture to not win.
What do you think? Are the critics of this new measure justified?
 

LifeCaptured

Well-known member
The only thing I know about Kirsty Alley is that she's a Scientologist, so I can't speak to her opinions on the diversification of the Oscars, but maybe she doesn't know that the Oscars have always been biased. What's wrong with leveling the playing field a little? I'm all for it.
 

take1

Member
Yes, it is surprising that although this one category, "Best Picture," has to conform with at least two out of four diversity guidelines, none of the other categories have any changes at all. Still, I suppose it is a step in the right direction.
 

Len S

Well-known member
I can see her point, but she could have worded it better. I see it as a group of people who don't have to try as hard to make a quality film because they will be, by the new rules, be automatically qualified for an award simply based on their ethnicity.

On the other hand, there have been many quality movies made over the years that have been snubbed for no good reason. So..........I don't know what the answer is.
 

Portrait

Well-known member
Well, this was going to raise controversy, but 2025 is a few years away, and a lot could change before then. I saw Kristy Alley retract her earlier statement and state that she was 100% behind inclusion and tolerance.
 

take1

Member
Wow, @Portrait. I didn't know Kirsty Alley has retracted her statement. Talk about a complete U-turn! She was so adamant with what she said earlier. Maybe her first reaction was a spur-of the-moment comment, or perhaps she was advised that it would be better to change her view to avoid a bad press.
 

Beck

Well-known member
The Church Of Scientology can make people do strange things. She's a member, so she has zero credibility in my eyes.

I don't even think she was a good actress.
 

Portrait

Well-known member
Wow, @Portrait. I didn't know Kirsty Alley has retracted her statement. Talk about a complete U-turn! She was so adamant with what she said earlier. Maybe her first reaction was a spur-of-the-moment comment, or perhaps she was advised that it would be better to change her view to avoid a bad press.
I agree that she could have posted what she did without giving much thought to the impact. Already, there were countless reactions to her tweet, that later got deleted. Did you see Ava Duvernay's (a member of the Board of Governors for the Academy) reaction to her post?
 

Vid Syd

Well-known member
I think it's a bad idea. I think it will lead to nominations and possibly wins based solely on a persons skin color, sexual orientation or something else. Nobody wants anyone to win based only on that. We want winners based on talent.
 

ClickExpert

Well-known member
I think it's a bad idea. I think it will lead to nominations and possibly wins based solely on a persons skin color, sexual orientation or something else. Nobody wants anyone to win based only on that. We want winners based on talent.
Which makes me wonder, what are these so-called 'new diversity standards'? I don't want to speculate, but if the changes lead to some bias, then it is time to start having a conversation.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
927
Messages
4,162
Members
101
Latest member
Pippercc
Top