Yesterday HE commenter “Lazarus” suggested that others might want to “raise their hand if they think ‘New Academy Kidz’ is the dumbest HE catchphrase in…5 years? Ever?”

HE response: The NAKs are (a) new members, (b) their views are for the most part politically and culturally distinct, (c) they’ve heavily impacted the Best Picture game, (d) traditional boomer-friendly Oscar bait movies have all but lost their cachet, (e) they’re as invested in representation as much as this or that definition of quality if not more so, and (f) earlier this year a good percentage of them insisted with a straight face that an Ira Levin-styled satirical spooker about how wealthy, Barack Obama-loving whiteys might be just as odious as Charlottesville supremacists…many NAKs declared un-ironically and with total sincerity that this decent-enough film was the most deserving Best Picture contender.

They’re a major new award-season factor and deserve some kind of shorthand that describes who they are & where they’re coming from. What do you want to call them? Crusty traditionalists? The harumphs?

They were invited into the Academy specifically to bring about change and inject organizational viewpoints that would counter-balance those of the older-white-guy, OscarsSoWhite heirarchy (average age of 62), and that’s what they’ve done. Since the initial formation of the Motion Picture Academy in the late 1920s, there’s never been a voting bloc brought into the fold this suddenly, especially one this invested in representational change. The New Academy Kidz (including the NAK acronym) are here to stay. Get used to it.