A letter from Academy president John Bailey states that "misinformation" is at the root of the recoil. But how did we get here really?
Everyone would like the Oscars to be shorter. Almost everyone would like to see the Academy become responsive to the culture and needs of the 21st century. But if those efforts translate into more than 90 filmmakers and filmmakers estimated to kindly say to the Academy and the Oscars to make it, someone will do it the wrong way.
Members of the Academy Roger Deakins, Quentin Tarantino, Spike Lee, Spike Jonze and Dee Rees are among those who signed the letter, stating that the Academy needs to reconsider its plan to present the cineography, editing, hair and make-up and short categories of live actions during advertising breaks, stat. (The letter's money line: "To quote our colleague Seth Rogen," What better way to celebrate the results in the film than to publicly honor people whose job it is to film things literally. " 😉
The Academy has already written an answer, marking the misbegas towards communication problems. Could be? I am starting to feel sympathy for the Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences, which has become the band that has failed to shoot straight. Many would like to blame CEO Dawn Hudson, who sought to modernize the Academy by pushing for greater inclusion (but has removed many institutional knowledge along the way). Under his supervision, the last Oscar shows went well, although the last show was three hours and 45 minutes and the ratings went to the bottom. (The famous "Moonlight" envelope was clearly the fault of PriceWaterhouseCooper.)
The Academy continues to tinker with the messaging of the changes it wants to make, failing to recognize how Twitter Movie in particular can become viral. And while the president of the Academy John Bailey can fire social media, his membership is not.
How did we get here? In August 201
When I spoke to Bailey, then, he warmed up for the Academy's need to accept change. "The concept of these awards is not an iconic ritual, implemented year after year in the same way," he said in an interview last September. "The history of the Academy and this award is a constantly moving entity, the awards have been added and released, the branches have been added and dropped.It is a living entity, as is the # 39; whole concept of any art form, especially movies, by virtue of being technologically defined. "
In the following months, Bailey worked behind the scenes to align cooperation of trades with the plan to shorten the show. He persuaded his Cinematography subsidiary to register, while his governor's wife Carol Littleton brought the editors. The costume branch also went on. Everyone saw the video of how the modified versions would go.
"There they presented," said a costume designer. "When we met, the cinematographers decided not to be alive." You as a branch can vote as you feel. "They showed us a clip of what it would look like," OK, it's okay. "
But when Bailey sent an e-mail to the members of the Academy on February 11, describing in detail the four categories – cinematography, editing, hair & makeup and short live action – that would be distributed in commercial breaks, all hell broke loose. "If I can, I would not presume to suggest which categories to cut during the Oscar show but – Film and editing are at the heart of our profession", wrote Toro on Twitter. "They are not inherited from a theatrical tradition or from a literary tradition: they are the cinema itself."
Perhaps the backlash was inevitable, that there is no way that the members of the Academy would not resent the change. But many people in the Academy and in the Twitter Film did not realize the details of how the prizes will be presented. They thought they had been taken out of the transmission altogether. And of course they went to the mercy
The Academy did not institute interviews with the press to explain the details of the move, and now accuses inaccurate reports to disseminate incorrect information. How much damage does the academy inflict?
And now the inscription at the Academy has a message: they are angry at this ancient, disordered, unconscious institution and those who run it. And many of these people are ready to get rid of the Oscars.
Only after a list of over 40 directors of photography, led by Deakins, and author directors including "BlacKkKlansman" nominated for Oscar Lee and the Oscar Tarantino, challenged the decision of the Academy in a letter, urging Bailey to change course, answered the Academy. The protest letter stated:
"The Academy was founded in 1927 to recognize and support excellence in the cinematographic arts, inspire imagination and help connect the world through the universal medium of film. Unfortunately, we have drifted away from this mission in our pursuit of entertainment, rather than in presenting a celebration of our art form and the people behind it.The relegation of these essential kinematic arts to a lower status in this 91rd Oscars ceremony is nothing but an insult to those of us who have dedicated our lives and passions to the chosen profession.
(See the complete protest letter below.)  Here is the answer of the Academy:
As officers of the Academy, we would like to assure you that no prize category at the 91st Academy Awards will be presented in a way that and describes the results of his candidates and winners less than any other. Unfortunately, as a result of imprecise reporting and posting on social media, it was a chain of misinformation that has understandably shocked many members of the Academy. We would like to reaffirm and explain the plans for the presentation of prizes, approved by the Board of Governors of the Academy.
- All 24 prize categories are presented on the Dolby Theater stage and included in the broadcast.
- Four categories – Cinematography, Film editing, Make-up and hairstyle, and Live Action Short – were voluntarily offered by their subsidiaries to make known the names of the nominees and winners to the presenters, and included later in the broadcast. The time spent walking on stage and outside, will be changed.
- The four winning speeches will be included in the broadcast.
- In the years to come, from four to six different categories can be selected for rotation, in collaboration with the show the producers. The categories of this year will be exempted in 2020.
- This change in the show was discussed and agreed by the Board of Governors in August, with the full support of the executive branch commissions. These decisions are completely taken into consideration.
Our show producers have taken great pride in both the tradition of the Oscars and our vast global audience.
We are sincerely convinced that you will be satisfied with the show and we are looking forward to celebrating a great year in films with all the members of the Academy and the rest of the world.
John Bailey, President
Lois Burwell, First Vice President
Sid Ganis, Vice President
Larry Karaszewski, Vice President
Nancy Utley, Vice-President
Jim Gianopulos, Treasurer
David Rubin, Secretary
The academy will return again? With the Academy museum looming like a financial albatross, keeping the lucrative ABC television broadcast alive has become more crucial than ever. (The Academy had more influence before the $ 388 million project was started.) ABC wants to make the show shorter and more profitable from a business perspective. Historically, the show's rankings improve when popular films are able to win major prizes, from "Titanic" to "The Lord of the Rings". This year, "Black Panther" and "BlacKkKlansman" are among the successes for the best film against the "Green Book" and "Roma."
So far, the Academy has not just supported the concept of the most popular film, but on the viral responses to its attempts to perform only two tracks (it will all do them) and not the winners of last year's acting. Oscar to the harvest of this year (they were subsequently invited to do so). And when the Academy failed to find the first Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson as a guest, and then its costar "Jumanji" Kevin Hart after a storm of protests against Hart's offensive tweets, producers of the Donna Gigliotti show and Glenn Weiss stayed with nobody. No guests Only presenters.
At the annual dinner of the Oscar nominees the producers tried to make the best of it, but they asked the candidates to come down on stage to accept their Oscars. Someone at my table said they should wear running shoes.
Here is the complete protest letter:
An open letter to the Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences and to the producers of the 91st Annual Academy Awards:
Monday 11 February 2019, John Bailey, President of # 39; Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences, announced that this year's Oscar presentations for best photography – along with Film Editing, Live Action Short and Makeup and Hairstyling – will not be broadcast live but rather presented during an advertising break. This decision was made to reduce the duration of the show from four hours to three. The voice response of our colleagues and the immediate backlash of industry leaders over the Academy's decision makes it clear that it is not too late to reverse this decision.
The Academy was founded in 1927 to recognize and support excellence in film arts, inspire imagination and help connect the world through the universal medium of movies. Unfortunately, we drifted away from this mission in our pursuit of entertainment, rather than in presenting a celebration of our art form and the people behind
. Relegating these essential kinematic arts to a minor state in this 91rd Oscars ceremony is nothing less than an insult to those of us who have dedicated our lives and passions to the chosen profession.
The director of the show, Glenn Weiss, stated that he will determine which "emotionally resonant" moments from the speeches of the four winners will be selected for air later in the broadcast. The show will cut any additional comment from the presenters, as well as any recitation of the nominees as they see fit.
Since its inception, the television show of the Academy Awards has been modified over time to keep the format fresh, but never sacrificing the integrity of the original mission of the Academy. When the recognition of those responsible for creating an exceptional cinema has diminished by the institution itself whose purpose is to protect it, we are no longer supporting the spirit of the Academy's promise to celebrate cinema as a collaborative art form. To quote our colleague Seth Rogen, "What better way to celebrate results in cinema than to publicly honor people whose job it is to film things literally."
Robert Elswit Greig Fraser
Anthony Dod Mantle
Newton Thomas Sigel
Hoyte van Hoytema
Kees van Oostrum
Cary Joji Fukunaga
Alan Edward Bell
Sophie De Rakoff
Mary Jo Markey
John O ttman
Sa ndy Powell
Tatiana S. Riegel
Anna B. Sheppard
Terilyn A. Shropshire