On Sunday most movie fanatics will be paying attention to the Oscars. I know we’ll be here live-blogging the event with Breaking News alerts for the winners, Twitter posts and the like, but for me the only real joy I get out of the show is attempting to predict all of the winners.
When I first started covering film on a day-to-day basis here on RopeofSilicon.com back in 2003 I looked at the Oscars as if they meant something. I wasn’t naive enough to believe they always picked the “best” films for their winners, but I had an overwhelming respect for the process.
Nine years later and it has just become a guessing game, and, if anything a new article from the Los Angeles Times will now help with those predictions as it sheds a bright light on who the people voting for the Oscars actually are.
John Horn, Nicole Sperling and Doug Smith have posted an article that closely examines more than 5,100 of all 5,765 voting members of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. If you thought you knew the Academy before, you’re about to become a lot more familiar.
It’s often been said the Academy is largely made up of a bunch of old white men, but no one really had the actual numbers. As the Oscar-nominated Viola Davis (The Help) says in the “Times” piece, “I have to tell you… I don’t even know who is a member of the Academy.” Thanks to said piece we now have a little more information for Viola.
Here are some facts based on the research done by the “Times”:
- Oscar voters are nearly 94% Caucasian and 77% male… Blacks are about 2% of the academy, and Latinos are less than 2%.
- Oscar voters have a median age of 62, the study showed. People younger than 50 constitute just 14% of the membership.
- Nearly 50% of the academy’s actors have appeared on screen in the last two years.
- Membership is generally for life, but some members haven’t worked in the industry for years including “a nun, a bookstore owner and a retired Peace Corps recruiter.” These people still vote on the Oscars.
- Some of the academy’s 15 branches are almost exclusively white and male. Caucasians currently make up 90% or more of every academy branch except actors, whose roster is 88% white. The academy’s executive branch is 98% white, as is its writers branch.
- Men compose more than 90% of five branches… Of the academy’s 43-member board of governors, six are women; public relations executive Cheryl Boone Isaacs is the sole person of color.
The piece does a good job presenting these numbers while also remaining fair, allowing for both sides to speak and acknowledging that “some film crafts show that the academy’s demographics mirror the industry’s.” They also note:
Women make up 19% of the academy’s screenwriting branch, and a 2011 analysis by the Writers Guild of America, West found that women accounted for 17% of film writers employment. The academy’s producers branch is about 18% female, and the directors branch is 9% female, figures comparable to those in a study by San Diego State University’s Martha Lauzen. She examined the 250 top-grossing movies of 2011 and found that women accounted for 25% of all of the films’ producers, and 5% of all their directors.
Academy President Tom Sherak is quoted saying, “I’m hoping your story runs and 7,000 phone calls break the lines here… We’ve been trying to reach out to the constituency and we’re looking for help. You want to be on a committee? Tell us what committee. If you are sitting waiting for us to find your name in our make-believe book and we are going to call you, we are not going to do that. Come to us, we’ll get you in. We want you in. That would help us a lot.”
Of course, this all goes back to the continued discussion each year on how to “fix” the Oscars. And beyond race demographics I think one thing is quite clear from the study conducted where it’s revealed “nearly 50%” of the members have appeared on screen in the last two years. It’s time to end the lifetime membership and make sure you’re membership consists of people currently working in the industry.
Actually, don’t “end” the membership, just “end” the voting privileges. I don’t think this is asking too much and I don’t think it’s an insult to anyone. You haven’t made a movie in over two years? Sorry, you can’t vote. You’re still a member, but you can’t vote. Get back to work and we’ll re-evaluate in a couple more years.
Taking that “Are you currently working in the industry?” rule a little step further may, however, reveal the biggest problem that remains. Who is getting all the jobs in Hollywood? Is it largely white, male actors?
Judging by the names that top-lined February’s releases so far this year we have white actors that include Drew Barrymore, John Krasinski, Daniel Radcliffe, Josh Hutcherson, Michael Caine, Ryan Reynolds, Rachel McAdams, Channing Tatum, Nicolas Cage, Reese Witherspoon, Chris Pine and Tom Hardy.
Safe House did star Denzel Washington and Journey 2: The Mysterious Island was the most diverse of the bunch as it included Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson, Vanessa Hudgens and Luis Guzman. Chronicle featured Michael B. Jordan and Ghost Rider included Idris Elba, but based on percentages I think you see what I’m getting at, though Tyler Perry will help tip the scales this weekend with Good Deeds.
Outside of Good Deeds and the Amanda Seyfried-led Gone directed by Brazilian helmer Heitor Dhalia, all of February’s new wide releases were directed by white, male directors, and in the case of Ghost Rider and Act of Valor this week, they were directed by two white, male directors.
Can we take anything away from this month’s demographics? To be honest, there was a bit more diversity than I actually expected and it may give good reason why films such as Safe House and Journey 2 continued to do so well at the box-office this past weekend.
The big question, I guess, is to ask how much of this is the Academy’s fault? How much fault should be placed on the industry as a whole?
What do you think of the quote from Sherak when he says, “If you are sitting waiting for us to find your name in our make-believe book and we are going to call you, we are not going to do that. Come to us, we’ll get you in. We want you in. That would help us a lot.” Is this a case of someone essentially saying they won’t be proactive in fixing the problem, but is open to it should people come to them? Wouldn’t it be a signal to the industry if the Academy was to step up and lead the charge?
You can get more on the subject by reading the complete “Los Angeles Times” article right here, which also includes a two-minute video with reporters John Horn and Nicole Sperling introducing the eight month study and their findings.
You’ll also want to check out this interactive look at Academy demographics right here.
Illustration at the top of this post is credited to Michael Glenwood from the Los Angeles Times
