Aren't most of the voters living in retirement homes? Of course a lot of possbile voters are still working, but the voting body is so huge, because so many retired professionals get to vote.

Tommy Lee Jones once said, that he watches every nominated movie in his trailer, while on set, because waiting is what's taking up most of the time on set and you can still cheat, if you really want to. If you know that you hate musicals, just turn on Wicked and Emilia Perez and go to bed.

It still just pisses me off that the Stunt Oscar kicks in for 2026 movies and here we have Tom Cruise climbing all around the wings of a biplane in a 2025 movie. Dude is gonna die for us on camera. Can't we get him the first-ever Stunt Oscar before he does??

I don't even watch the Oscars for a reason, they are mostly a popularity contest, decisions are made based on who had the best Oscar campaign, or because such and such director is well known. Well, at least this explains the Emilia Perez mystery, i.e. how the fuck did such a mediocre film completely out of touch with it's subject matter, manage to garner 13 Oscar noms. Because of Audiard's reputation, the same reason why the film won 5 Cesars including best film.

I’d still have even more stringent requirements, like if you’re going to allow streaming it has to be with a good sound system and decent size screen, not on a computer.

The Razzies needs to require this also. I’m sure many voters hadn’t seen all the Worst Picture winners, they just voted on their reputation.

That's sure to make the voters even happier.

Computerized ballot sheet:
"Did you see this on a phone?"
(Checks "Yes")
"Your vote is invalid."
(Stream of profanity from frustrated would-be voter)

Yup, that's what they do.

X - Formerly Twitter

Oh my God, shut up

Then what's the fucking point of even participating?

I took bowling for a semester in college. It was a 9AM class Tue and Thur. It was really fun - I could get in two and a half games in during classtime. The class always filled up quickly so I was lucky to get a slot.

I'll never forget our TA said on the first day, "this is BOWLING. If you're going to skip this class, just drop it because other people want to take it."

That's how I look at this - if you can't be bothered to watch the movies or have to do some kind of workaround to meet the requirements, just get out of the process altogether.

Yeah, but for Alan, that decent sized screen can be crookedly propped up on a litter box and some old porn VHS tapes. The screen itself can have a fine layer of kitty litter and dust on it. You know, a reference quality display.

Now watch them add a webcam requirement to the app, with eye tracking software.

I'm guessing a lot of Academy members like the perks of free screenings, free lunches and other events and find voting an absolute slog, except when a friend of theirs is nominated and they can throw a vote their way to support them. I imagine a lot of old-timers, when voting in categories filled with movies they've never seen and people they've never heard of, simply call out to their spouses, "Pick a number between 1 and 5" and the spouse's choice determines their vote.

The opposite is my big issue with Alan's "requirements". Like if you're a younger working filmmaking professional, you've most likely got a few jobs, and being able to pop stuff on your computer or phone is a great way to be able to get in more watches. One of my favorite films I first saw on my phone on a plane. I watched Mission: Impossible - Fallout on a plane. I watched 12 Angry Men on a plane. Great films both and the setting/setup didn't detract from my enjoyment. My old roommate was an Academy member and while he did have a great setup at home, he also saw a lot of stuff on his devices while he was on location.

Mobile watching is such a boon to people who are actually putting in the work to make these movies and they allow a broader range of voters than some old guys picking the same kind of shit over and over again.

Are these people able to vote in only certain categories? Like, they don’t NEED to watch every movie in every category to vote, they just need to watch every movie in the categories they vote in, right? So if they watch all the best picture nominations they CAN vote for Best Picture but if they don’t get around to seeing all the movies for Best Actor, they CAN’T vote for best actor.

Is that right or is the expectation that they see ALL the nominated movies to vote at all?

My understanding is it's always been the former, and it's ridiculous that even the bare minimum of 5-15 movies for the biggest award in your industry gas been too much for some people.

Don't want to vote? Fine. I'll take your place!

I didn't know where to put this news but Tom Cruise is getting an honorary Oscar at the Governor Awards this fall for his contributions to film. I thought he would have won an Oscar eventually but it's still deserved.
https://www.aol.com/tom-cruise-recei...180100176.html

Good for him. I wanted him to win the Stunt Oscar, but that won't be in effect for 2 more years. This is a decent start at least. Jackie Chan won the same Oscar in 2016.

Tom accepted his honorary Oscar tonight.

Very happy about these new rule changes :





​​​​​​​

Decker how can they prove a human wrote a screenplay though? Seems like a tough verification step…?

I'm not sure they can, 100%. But it's future proofing. And it's precedent‐setting -- No AI.
This probably came about because of The Brutalist, which was nominated for Set Decoration & Production Design (the Oscar formerly known as Art Decoration). It was the heavy favorite to win (it was a film about an architect with brilliant original sets) until it was revealed that there was AI used in the set decoration (blueprint designs on the wall of an art exhibition celebration of the lead actor, in the coda) were made with AI. The backlash kept it from winning that Oscar and there was a bit of panic -- understandably-- that thwy never want to award an Oscar to an AI. This is a step to remedy that by making a film that uses AI screenwriting tools ineligible.
The Brutalist should have still won that Art Decoration Oscar. AI didn't design those incredible sets.

I'm not really sure there's any way to prove that a writer didn't use AI to assist with a screenplay unless they actually admit it. A fully AI generated script might be detectable, but either using AI to assist in the writing or rewriting an AI written script would likely be impossible to detect or prove.

As I mentioned elsewhere regarding visual art, AI is getting better all the time and human artists will start being influenced by AI, so it seems like something that can become a feedback loop.

Thats probably the best we can hope - that an obvious full-AI script can be detected. Otherwise, I bet they can use AI for some things and you wont be able to tell.