Starting with the viral #OscarsSoWhite in 2015, the Academy’s tendency to disregard diversity in nominees has been a constant subject of debate and criticism. The Oscars are generally regarded as the highest honor in cinema, and yet its voting body has historically seemed to ignore certain communities.
At the very least, a few important strides have been made since 2015. At the 2017 ceremony, “Moonlight” became the first movie with an all-Black cast to win Best Picture, as well as the first LGBTQ+ story to do so. In 2020, “Parasite,” which starred an all-Asian cast, was the first foreign language film to win Best Picture. In 2023, “Everything Everywhere All at Once” practically swept the entire ceremony, with several wins for its Asian cast and creatives.
And yet, just one year later, the critically acclaimed “Past Lives,” which made tens of millions at the box office , only received two Oscar nominations. The film’s Asian leads Greta Lee and Teo Yoo , both of whose performances in the film received immense praise , were widely ignored by mainstream awards ceremonies . Asian director and writer Celine Song experienced a similar lack of recognition.
Could this have anything to do with “Everything Everywhere All at Once” sweeping in the previous year? Was the Academy signaling that it needed to take a break from … recognizing Asian people?
Of course, “Past Lives” came out in a stellar year for movies. Maybe that ceremony was just too competitive, with bigger, bolder films making it in instead. (Though that doesn’t exactly explain how “Maestro,” a critically polarizing box office failure compared to compared to other films nominated, received a significantly larger number of nominations than “Past Lives.”) But “Oppenheimer,” for example, was undeniably deserving of the accolades it received, being a blockbuster hit and an overall triumph of a film.
You can’t talk about “Oppenheimer” without talking about “Barbie” – a fun summer film directed and co-written by a woman, telling the story of one of the most famous female figures of all time. But where “Oppenheimer” did not win, another movie that signals a more troubling message won – “Poor Things.”
Directed by Yorgos Lanthimos, “Poor Things” tells the story of a woman with the mind of an unborn fetus initially learning the pleasures of sex and then growing to understand philosophy and politics. Played by Emma Stone, the lead woman becomes a prostitute at some point; her naked body shown off in full form at multiple points. Stone, who put forth a fantastic performance, took home Best Actress for the film. (Pointedly, Stone beat out fellow nominee Lily Gladstone, who could have been the first Native American to ever win an Oscar.)
In no way to discredit the quality of her acting, Stone’s win does somewhat indicate that the Academy likes seeing women be naked and sexual without restraint – specifically, when these women are directed by heterosexual men. (And this is seen in 2025 Best Actress winner Mikey Madison as well.) After all, why was it so important to Lanthimos to reveal Stone’s full, naked body, specifically as a childlike character fascinated with her anatomy?
Although “Barbie” may not have been at the same caliber as its fellow nominees that year, it was still an impressive technical feat, from the meticulously crafted sets that recreated the world of the iconic character tothe costumes that may have been ripped straight off of a doll’s body and made human-size.
Even Greta Gerwig’s directing was an outstanding effort. But with Justine Triet already taking up a slot in Best Director that year, it was probably out of the Academy’s comfort zone to nominate more than one woman in Best Director. (In only one year has there been more than one woman nominee for Best Director). Only three women have won Best Director throughout the history of the Oscars.
On principle, “Poor Things” taking home four times the amount of Oscars won by “Barbie,” including both Best Production Design and Best Costume Design, just seems like a slap in the face to women.
On one hand, it is important to destigmatize the bare female body, to empower ideas of women’s autonomy and independence. On the other hand, it is so frustrating and almost backward that heterosexual men seem to have taken this as a responsibility of their own.
On Sunday night, “Anora” took home five Oscars at the 2025 ceremony. Written, directed and edited by Sean Baker, “Anora” tells the story of a sex worker who marries a wealthy Russian man and gets temporarily swept away in a fairy-tale life, before losing essentially everything when her lover’s parents force annulment.
Sure, Baker’s wife, Samantha Quan, also received the Best Picture award for “Anora” as a co-producer. But the historic sweep of “Anora” at Sunday night’s ceremony was all about Baker. He alone received the Academy Awards for Best Director, Best Editing and Best Original Screenplay, winning four total awards in one night for himself – a feat only achieved by Walt Disney up until Sunday night.
Baker is a talented filmmaker. His movies are not only entertaining but also undeniably well-made. It’s the social messaging that comes into question. According to Baker, he wants to destigmatize sex work and highlight marginalized communities – on principle, a noble and necessary cause.
But in the opening shot of “Anora,” there is a swarm of naked breasts and perfect six-packs. Perfectly rounded posteriors, tiny waists and long, luscious hair. There are neon lights and glittery costumes, women dancing in men’s laps in slow motion. Throughout the film, the titular character Anora, the sex worker and the only key woman in a story surrounded by three men, seems to lack any sort of dimension. Her motives are muddled, fringing on unrealistic – in one scene, she seems to be in total control of her relationship with the Russian lover, appearing to be in full pursuit of his money and money alone. Then, an hour later, she begs him not to leave her, because apparently they’re in “love.” There is no explanation or buildup for this development.
“Anora” seems to be just another story “about” women (specifically sex workers) told by a heterosexual man, so self-righteous in his pursuit of social justice, that utterly fails to make any real progress for women in general, or sex workers specifically. The character of Anora is not real. She is physically attractive and well-acted by Madison, but she is ultimately a tool propped up in front of a camera to execute Baker’s vision.
It should also be noted that at this very ceremony, “The Substance” was up against “Anora” in quite a few categories. Written and directed by a woman, “The Substance” tells the story of an aging celebrity desperate to be viewed as beautiful and therefore lovable by the masses once more. It is a bold and ferocious body-horror film – the directing, editing and makeup are all unique and successful in telling a refreshing tale.
“The Substance” received one singular Academy Award.
It seems like we are being told that the only stories about women that win prestigious awards are the ones told by heterosexual men getting behind the camera and making young, conventionally attractive white women strip down naked and perform erotic sex scenes. Some will claim that they are stories about women claiming their “autonomy” or “owning their sexuality,” and so they throw the films their flowers under the guise of being “progressive.”
But there is nothing progressive about men telling stories about women having sex. That might as well be a tale as old as time.
Why is it that the current state of “prestigious cinema” often involves the bare naked bodies of women, directed by the careful, watchful eyes of heterosexual men? What is stopping the Academy from fully embracing women and other communities that have been historically underrepresented in mainstream film?
And it’s not just about men and women. Only two women of color have won Best Actress in the history of the Oscars. Only three women have won Best Director. No Black person has won Best Director. The statistics could go on and on. The amount of snubs for these awards, regarded as the highest and most honorable, is egregious. And this shouldn’t just be about checking off boxes for the sake of inclusivity. It’s when high-quality work by deserving individuals is flat-out ignored in favor of the idealist and yet often backward visions of nonminorities.
—
Featured Illustration by Alexis Raquino/BruinLife
