Subject: Re: BAFTAs Go Batty
Ed Stasiak<firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> DEC. 19 2016
> Starting in 2019, if Your Film Isn't Diverse, It Won't Be Eligible for a
> BAFTA Award
> In an incredibly bold move,
There are a lot of words for this. "Bold" is not one of them.
the British Academy of Film and Television Arts
> announced last week that,
> beginning in 2019, works that do not demonstrate inclusivity in their
> production practices will no longer
> be eligible for the Outstanding British Film or Outstanding Debut by a
> British Writer, Director, or Producer
> awards at the annual BAFTAs, often considered the U.K. equivalent of the
> Eligible projects must showcase this in two of the following ways, as
> the BBC reported: On-screen
> characters and themes, senior roles and crew, industry training and career
> progression, and audience
> access and appeal to underrepresented audiences. BAFTA will also remove the
> requirement that newly
> admitted voters be recommended by two existing members.
> Back in 2014, the British Film Institute established similar standards for
> projects seeking National Lottery
> funding in an effort to improve representation within the filmmaking
> industry. BAFTA's decision is particularly
> striking, however, when you hold it up against its American counterpart, the
> Academy of Motion Pictures Arts
> and Sciences, which, of course, faced an embarrassing PR backlash with the
> #OscarsSoWhite campaign
> this year. Not long after the Oscar nominations revealed, for the second year
> in a row, a slate of all-white
> acting nominees, the academy announced that it was changing its membership
> rules in an effort to address
> the issue. This included shortening members' voting statuses to 10 years
> (able to reactivated so long as
> they remain active within the industry) and adding three more governors'
> seats filled by people from
> underrepresented groups.
> But that change was nowhere near as radical as BAFTA's, which directly
> addresses the bigger and more
> pressing concern for representation, from acting to directing to executive
> opportunities, and everything in
> between. Stating, point blank, that you cannot even think about receiving
> these accolades from one of film's
> most prestigious institutions unless you make an effort to bring in a wider
> variety of collaborators is to light
> a much-needed fire under the filmmakers' butts. It won't solve every issue
> overnight—surely somewhere
> out there there's a filmmaker, or a funder, who really, truly doesn't care
> about awards—but it's a step in the
> right direction. As we've seen countless times, counting on people in power
> to do the right thing while letting
> them go unchecked does not lead to progress, and even hinders it.
> Many people will undoubtedly find this move to be blasphemous, leaning on the
> tired crutch of "artistic freedom"
> to label BAFTA as intrusive. They can live and die by that sword if they'd
> like, but they'll only be proving that
> they're not quite as creative or imaginative as they claim to be.
So whoever wrote this was a retard.
Join your old RAT friends at