10 days before showtime, a full-on revolt over the Oscars
Would anyone — anyone at all — like to thank the academy?
This is normally the time of year when Oscar hopefuls are readying acceptance speeches that almost always begin with a few words of gratitude for the Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences. But that sentiment has been hard to come by in the torturous and troubled lead-up to the 91st Academy Awards.
After a litany of public-relations disasters, backtracks and missteps, the latest dust-up surrounds the film academy's plans to remove four categories from the live portion of Feb. 24's broadcast, including cinematography and editing, arguably the two most foundational components of moviemaking. The academy, desperate to reverse sliding ratings, says a shortened show must go on.
On Wednesday evening, dozens of Hollywood heavyweights — including Martin Scorsese, Spike Lee, Brad Pitt, cinematographer Roger Deakins and director Damien Chazelle — issued an open-letter to the academy's leadership blasting the decision to not air the four awards, which also include live-action short and hairstyling and makeup, live on the ABC telecast.
"Relegating these essential cinematic crafts to lesser status in this 91st Academy Awards ceremony is nothing less than an insult to those of us who have devoted our lives and passions to our chosen profession," the group wrote. "When the recognition of those responsible for the creation of outstanding cinema is being diminished by the very institution whose purpose it is to protect it, then we are no longer upholding the spirit of the Academy's promise to celebrate film as a collaborative art form."
The academy responded with a letter of its own, blaming "inaccurate reporting and social media posts" for "a chain of misinformation." Signed by academy president John Bailey, a cinematographer, and other officers from the academy's board of governors, the letter sought to assure members that the four winning speeches will be included in the broadcast (just not live, or with a walk to the stage) and that in future years, four to six different categories will be similarly truncated.
After years of #OscarSoWhite backlash, one infamous envelope mix-up and the reckoning that followed the expulsion of Harvey Weinstein from the academy, this year's Academy Awards drama has been self-inflicted. In response to last year's all-time low of 26.5 million viewers, the Oscars — the grandest and most glamorous award show ever created — are shrinking. And nobody likes it.
"People in general have a hard time with change. Change is sometimes hard to swallow. And I think the way that the news came out, it came out in the wrong way," says Mary Zophres, one of the 54 members of the board of governors and a costume designer nominated this year for "The Ballad of Buster Scruggs," at an event celebrating nominees hosted by industry site The Wrap. "But there is a need to make sure that the ratings are competitive."
The academy's headaches began after it last summer trotted out the induction of a "popular film Oscar." The plan sparked such outrage (Rob Lowe pronounced the film industry dead, "survived by sequels, tent-poles and vertical integration") that the new award was scuttled within a month.
Then Kevin Hart announced, himself, that he was hosting this year's awards. When many took issue with his old homophobic tweets, the comedian initially "chose to pass on the apology," inflaming the backlash. Within hours, he withdrew as host and, finally supplied an apology to the LGBTQ community. The Oscars are now host-less for only the fifth time in its 91-year history. The most recent, in 1989, resulted in an infamous duet between Snow White and Rob Lowe.