The Academy’s Reckoning: From Backroom Whispers to Required Viewings
Spotlighting glitz and ambition has always come naturally to Hollywood, but for nearly a century, the glimmer of Oscar gold has sometimes masked an uncomfortable, unspoken truth: You didn’t necessarily have to see the movies to help decide who took home the industry’s greatest prize. Anyone who’s ever scanned the results of past awards nights has likely wondered: did every voting member seriously manage to watch all of the year’s nominated films — or was Best Picture sometimes just the best-marketed?
This is no longer a theoretical concern. The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences (AMPAS) has finally mandated that all voting members must watch every nominated film in a given category before they can cast their final ballot for the 98th Oscars, coming March 15, 2026. It’s a stunning acknowledgment that openness and informed engagement, rather than tradition and convenience, need to define the Oscars in an era when streaming provides easy access and public scrutiny can go viral within hours. “The fact this wasn’t already a rule is insane,” echoed one viral comment online, summarizing the general shock among film fans on social media.
Of course, the Academy’s new rules are as much about the perception of fairness as the actuality. For years, critics and even Oscar voters themselves whispered about “blind votes,” particularly in crowded categories or with international films lacking the marketing muscle of big-budget studios. This shakeup doesn’t just offer a cosmetic fix. It’s a clear shift, tilted toward restoring faith in an institution that stakes its reputation on artistic discernment.
Redefining Recognition: Casting Directors, AI, and a Broader Creative Circle
Wholesale change at the Oscars rarely comes swiftly or quietly, yet the 98th ceremony will mark more than a procedural update. For the first time, an Academy Award for Achievement in Casting will honor those whose discernment shapes every ensemble. This new category doesn’t merely expand the trophy count — it aims to correct an oversight highlighted by advocates for years. Casting director David Rubin, himself a former Academy president, called the move “a recognition that casting is foundational to a film’s identity,” speaking in 2022 to Variety after long campaigning for respect for the craft.
The future of movie artistry is not just about who appears on screen, but who gets to decide who does. Achievement in Casting will feature a unique, rigorous process: a ‘bake-off’ style event with shortlisted casting directors presenting their work, followed by a Q&A session. Only Casting Branch voters who attest to viewing all ten shortlisted films can select the five nominees. This ensures, at least within this branch, a depth of commitment — a far cry from past years when major crafts, like hair and makeup or editing, languished in the margins of the telecast and the discourse alike.
Yet the new rules are not simply additive—they’re adaptive. In a landscape swirling with fears and hopes about generative artificial intelligence, the Academy is taking its first steps to outline guidelines for AI’s use in filmmaking. Their verdict? The use of AI or digital tools, alone, will neither help nor hinder a film’s Oscar eligibility or achievement. Instead, voting bodies will focus on whether human creativity “is at the heart of the creative authorship of a film.” Harvard film scholar Dr. Anna Wilson notes, “What’s most significant here is the Academy’s insistence that humanity, rather than technology, will define cinematic excellence — a stance that keeps the Oscars from becoming a technical arms race.”
“The Academy’s insistence that humanity, rather than technology, will define cinematic excellence, keeps the Oscars from becoming a technical arms race.”
That progressive spirit extends to broader eligibility — the Academy now permits individuals with refugee or asylum status to be counted as creative controllers for the International Feature Film category, potentially elevating marginalized global voices.
Unanswered Questions: Enforcement, Transparency, and the Weight of Change
The most glaring unknown, though, remains enforcement. The press releases and hastily circulated new rules do not specify how Academy members will prove they’ve watched the required films. The promise: the Academy’s online Screening Room will track viewings. The reality: some categories demand in-person festival attendance or include films with limited digital distribution. “Without credible enforcement, this could wind up a well-meaning gesture rather than a revolutionary change,” cautions IndieWire’s Eric Kohn, referencing similar challenges faced in the BAFTAs before their streaming mandates improved transparency.
What’s clear is that deliberate inaction is no longer tenable. Public scrutiny around voting integrity has forced the Oscars to confront issues once swept under red carpets. Earlier deadlines for music categories — October 15 for Best Original Song and November 3 for Best Original Score — likewise signal greater seriousness about process, aiming to prevent last-minute campaign blitzes from overshadowing genuine merit.
Expanding shortlists in categories like Animated Short Film and introducing a preliminary round for Cinematography are further nods to democratizing recognition. This is more than administrative tinkering. Taken with the new, more explicit regulations on film promotions to Academy members, it’s a recognition that democracy in art requires openness, not just tradition.
Will these changes work? If the Oscars succeed in encouraging deeper engagement — requiring voters to sit through every nominee rather than just scanning the highlight reel — the institution may yet regain some of the legitimacy it has bled over years of controversy and industry cynicism. As film historian Leonard Maltin recently remarked, “The Oscars still matter — but only if they demand the best of both their filmmakers and their voters.”
