.png)
3 hours ago
6
The Oscars in memoriam segment is a firmly lodged Academy tradition – albeit one that is not as longstanding as you might think, having only been introduced in 1994. Almost as established a tradition is that of the outcry following a major film industry figure being omitted from the segment. This year seemed particularly notable in that regard, with Brigitte Bardot, TV stars James Van Der Beek and Malcolm-Jamal Warner, and the celebrated Bollywood actor Dharmendra among those left out, to varying levels of outrage on social media.
Critics of these omissions will usually imply they are down to forgetfulness or neglect on the part of the Academy. Such claims, though, overlook the fact that the in memoriam process is a painstaking one, adjudicated on by a committee tasked with whittling a longlist of hundreds down to a final list of around 30. As Bruce Davis, former executive director of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences told the LA Times in 2010, the process “gets close to agonising by the end. You are dropping people who the public know. It’s just not comfortable.”
That so many familiar figures were missing from this year’s in memoriam is particularly striking given the prominence it was afforded in the ceremony. Along with 34 names mentioned in the main segment there was a standalone tribute to Rob Reiner and Michele Singer Reiner from Billy Crystal and a collection of stars from Reiner’s films; a celebration of Claudia Cardinale, Catherine O’Hara and Diane Keaton by Rachel McAdams; and a tribute to Robert Redford from Barbra Streisand that culminated in a tearful performance of the theme from The Way We Were.
Bardot’s omission, though perhaps the biggest, is complicated by the reception that her memorial received at France’s Oscars equivalent, the Cesar awards, where her name was greeted with boos. The actor had become an increasingly controversial figure in France in her later years due to her involvement with the far right, and had received multiple convictions for inciting racial hatred. There has been speculation that the Academy, expecting a similar response to a Bardot tribute in the Dolby theatre, purposely opted to omit her name.
Personal conduct is thought to play a role in the decision whether to include a star in the segment. Following the omission of another renowned French actor, Alain Delon, from last year’s ceremony, Variety chief film critic Peter Debruge claimed that the committee had disqualified him due to his “bad boy behaviour”. (An earlier decision by the Cannes film festival to award Delon an honorary Palme d’Or in 2019 was criticised by women’s rights group due to what they termed the actor’s “homophobic, misogynistic and racist statements”, as well as accusations of domestic violence.)
More routinely, though, omissions will be down to space issues. With such large numbers of industry deaths every year, and only a few minutes made available to the segment, not everyone can be honoured. (And those who argue that the solution would be to extend the segment are perhaps forgetting that the Oscars ceremony is routinely criticised for its length as it is.) As well as actors and directors, less public-facing though hugely significant roles such as casting directors and producers need to be accommodated, along with figures not usually associated with cinema who nevertheless made a significant impact. Included this year, for example, was Giorgio Armani for his design work on films such as The Untouchables and American Gigolo.
Conversely, the Academy will omit some figures who are better known for their work in other areas of the entertainment industry than cinema: after all, those areas have their own awards shows. That may have been a factor in the decision to leave out Van Der Beek (primarily known for his work in TV show Dawson’s Creek) or Warner (likewise, for the Cosby Show) or the Grey’s Anatomy actor Eric Dane. As Grey’s Anatomy creator Shonda Rhimes noted when asked about the omission of Dane: “He’s not a movie star, and I feel like when the Emmys come around he will be immortalised the way he should be.”
Still, decisions about who should or shouldn’t qualify for the segment can sometimes feel a little arbitrary. In 2010 the Academy omitted Farrah Fawcett, who although best known for the TV series Charlie’s Angels, also appeared in more than 15 films across her career, because the organisers felt that her “remarkable television work” was better suited for an Emmy tribute. Meanwhile, Michael Jackson (a handful of film parts and some limited soundtrack roles) was included in the same segment, despite an extended tribute at the Grammys a fortnight before.
Such margin calls, whichever way they land, are always likely to irritate someone, and next year there no doubt will be another omission prompting howls of protest online. Perhaps it’s best then to heed the general advice given to Oscar producers by Gilbert Cates, the long-time Oscars telecast mastermind and the man who first introduced the in memoriam segment, back in 1994: “Do what you want. Whatever you do, you can be certain that half the people who comment on the show are not going to like it.”
