The Academy Awards’ most devout enthusiasts were scandalized—some of them even outraged—by shocking news regarding the annual cinema fête that came out this last week.
It’s not that Lady Gaga won’t be at the ceremony—at least not as a nominee, as most expected. It’s not that the telecast is moving from zero hosts, its modus operandi of the last two years, to perhaps too many—at least three anchoring their own respective acts, according to a new report. No, the bombshell that’s left critics baffled and exasperated is a different exclusive: That producers won’t require attendees at this year’s Oscars to be vaccinated.
What is Hollywood, after all, if not the manufacturer and refuge of escapism and fantasy; in this case, the fantasy that the coronavirus no longer exists. It’s a rather obtuse, irresponsible, and out-of-touch message to send, and as such, perhaps entirely expected from this industry.
ADVERTISEMENT
The Hollywood Reporter broke the news, which was then corroborated by other trades, though the Academy hasn’t given an official statement about their COVID-19 protocols. If true, the decision would go against the trend of upcoming award shows like the SAG Awards and the Critics’ Choice Awards, both of which will require proof of vaccination. In Los Angeles, where, obviously, the Oscars will take place and many of the nominees are based, proof of vaccine is required to even see a movie. One would imagine, then, that an indoor gathering of a few thousand people who make those movies in the city might operate under the same requirement as well.
This isn’t exactly against California or Los Angeles policy, so the “here are celebs getting special treatment again” eye-roll of it all both is yet isn’t warranted.
There is a “mega event” loophole to even L.A.’s comparatively strict COVID guidelines, which allow for attendees of events like Lakers games at the Crypto.com Arena to present a negative test result in lieu of vaccine proof.
More, according to reports, the Academy Awards will likely be considered, like the Emmy Awards last year, a television production instead of a “mega event,” which not only presents a different list of COVID compliance policies, but also relaxes mask mandates. Despite various union battles over what some union members want to be stricter mandates on film and TV productions, as Deadline reports, “The current Return to Work agreement allows for performers to be maskless while performing.”
In other words, the crowd at the Dolby Theatre for this year’s Oscars, all 3,400 of them, will be considered performers in the show. Whether or not Los Angeles decides to lift its mask mandates in time for March 27’s ceremony, it’s likely that the beautiful faces of Hollywood will be on display without them—whether or not a person is vaccinated.
Just because any of this is technically allowed doesn’t mean it’s how the Academy should operate. When the news broke that a glitzy award show wasn’t going to abide by the same vaccine requirement that most of us adhere to just to do things like get a haircut, eat at a restaurant, and even go to work, there was plenty of aggravation. Not only is it another example of privileged opportunism that has long plagued Hollywood—taking advantage of loopholes in order to celebrate itself—but it’s a missed opportunity to send a message of solidarity and empathy during a pandemic that is very much still affecting us all, to the tune of thousands of deaths a day.
Then came the juicy part of The Hollywood Reporter’s scoop: “Some industry insiders have speculated that the Academy is being less stringent than it could be because more than a few high-profile industry figures—including at least one of last year’s acting winners and prominent members of the casts of multiple best picture nominees, as well as nominees in other categories—would otherwise be precluded from attending the Oscars.”
Gossip hounds picked up their mugs of scalding hot tea and sipped with a smug arched eyebrow. “Mhmmm…” they purred. “Now it all makes sense.”
Social media immediately played host to a slew of wannabe Carrie Mathisons, mapping out theories and clues to who these unvaccinated actors could be. To get the juices flowing, the four acting winners from last year were Anthony Hopkins, Frances McDormand, Daniel Kaluuya, and Youn Yuh-jung.
For what it’s worth, I was at a New York Film Festival event that required vaccinations from all attendees where McDormand participated in a Q&A. That may be neither here nor there, as there have been industry whispers of award-season cast members participating in promotional events at vax-mandated venues even though they haven’t been vaccinated. And that, too, is to suggest nothing about McDormand either way. In fact, that’s the murkiness of all these conversations. While rumors fly and gossip buzzes, none of us have firm confirmation one way or another as to which celebs aren’t vaccinated. Those details from the Hollywood Reporter article, however, are just dishy enough to titillate.
The reopening of TV and film productions have been both inspiring, with studios and networks pioneering safety protocols during the most chaotic and risky days of the pandemic, but also a bit of a mess. There have been numerous scandals involving stars fired from, or who stepped down from, their shows because of their refusal to be vaccinated. And we’ve all read the countless reports of COVID outbreaks on various film and TV sets.
This parlor game of identifying the unvaccinated celebs is just another part of all this. Those same keen eyes who speculated over anybody who was conspicuously absent from the Met Gala, which required vaccines, will likely be on high alert again during the SAG and Critics Choice Awards, especially since those are traditionally mandatory stops from actors on the hunt for the Oscar trophy.
But why kowtow to the smattering of unvaccinated celebs? Maybe it’s not a smattering at all. As my colleague Laura Bradley recently observed, this Academy announcement vindicated her “theory that a lot more of Hollywood than you think is unvaxxed.”
Maybe that’s the tension here. What is the responsibility of the Academy, if not necessarily to the actors and nominees, but also to the general public?
Especially as ratings plummet for the telecast, it’s hard to imagine any single actor for which tuning in would be make-or-break for a viewer. Who would really say they weren’t going to watch the Oscars because so-and-so unvaccinated celebrity won’t be there? What is the point of facing this inevitable bad press to accommodate whatever random Hollywood vaccine skeptic?
There are pundits who believe that the Academy is shielding itself from being the narc, exposing, as Bradley posits, just how many unvaccinated celebrities there actually are. On the one hand, one would argue that’s the celebrities’ cross to bear, not the Academy’s issue. But others argue that’s the exact panic here. As writer and Oscarologist Joe Reid pointed out on Twitter, “If the Academy are meant to be stewards of the industry as a whole, it becomes their problem if the standard bearers of said industry, which has prided itself on being progressive and socially responsible, turn out to be selfishly regressive in shockingly high numbers.”
In other words, this whole thing is a mess. Good luck to any unvaccinated celeb who thinks they’ll make it through skipping SAG and Critics Choice but still attend the Oscars unscathed. And the Academy, in an attempt to retrofit a classic star-studded ceremony of yore into the parameters of rapidly-changing COVID regulations and allowances, misses out on an opportunity to send a message about the importance of vaccines and continued pandemic precaution. All in the name of another hallowed Hollywood tradition: allowing its industry’s bold-faced names to save face.
