For African cinema, the pathway expansion is a blessing in disguise at first glance. It takes away absolute, unquestionable powers from respective national Oscars’ selection committees, since strong African films do not necessarily need to go through the committee anymore to be favoured.
By Adedamola Jones Adedayo
As is widely known, the reputation and influence of the Academy Awards, or the Oscars, stretch beyond the United States, where the show is held. Every year, the world turns its gaze towards what is consensually considered the highest honours in film anywhere, with Hollywood as the primary beneficiary by a wide margin and only a tiny fragment left to the rest of the world. The Oscars appreciate outstanding artistic and scientific achievements in theatrically released feature-length motion pictures, which may also include recognition of other achievements as announced within its rules by the Academy Awards’ Board of Governors.
On 1st May, 2026, the Oscars modified its rules for the 99th edition set to take place in 2027. Among these new rules are substantive changes in its International Feature Film category, which influences how cinemas across the world relate to the Oscars. The Oscars describe an international film as any feature-length motion picture, with a runtime of over 40 minutes, produced outside the United States of America and its territories, with a predominantly (over 50%) non-English dialogue track. This includes animated and documentary feature films. Prior to the recent modifications, to be eligible for consideration in this category, a film must be selected by a country or region’s Academy-approved Selection Committee.
Additional rules, however, introduce alternative pathways. A film may now also be up for consideration in the 2027 International Feature Film category when it wins any of these qualifying film festival prizes: Berlin International Film Festival Golden Bear for Best Film, Busan International Film Festival Best Film Award, Cannes Film Festival Palme d’Or, Sundance Film Festival World Cinema Grand Jury Prize, Toronto International Film Festival Platform Award, and Venice International Film Festival Golden Lion. The film will be credited as the nominee, and if it sails through and wins the award, the director will accept the award on behalf of the creative team. According to the Oscars, the director’s name will be listed on the statuette plaque after the film title and, if applicable, the country or region.
The Oscars’ modified rulebook also takes a proscriptive standpoint on Artificial Intelligence. The Academy’s Board has affirmed that its Acting categories must be “demonstrably performed by humans with their consent”, just as Writing categories will only entertain “human-authored” screenplays. At a time in history when the effect of AI is prominent across media and all forms of content creation, the Oscars’ anti-AI policy raises concerns around the intersection between AI and filmmaking. Concerns include a possible disruption to established film and TV formats, authorship and rights ownership, limitations in available tools, and consumer preferences, as noted in a 2026 McKinsey report.
Where, then, do Africa and its cinemas stand within these developments? Over the decades, Africa has registered its presence at the Oscars, particularly in the International Feature Film category (formerly Best Foreign Language Film), even if it is to a very limited extent. Racking only a few nominations so far, the continent has produced three winners: Z (Algeria-France, 1969), Black and White in Color (Ivory Coast, 1976), and Tsotsi (South Africa, 2005). This reinforces the impression that Africa is not the centrepiece of the Oscars’ policies and institutional reforms. Yet, the latest changes will indubitably affect how the continent’s filmmakers and industries engage with the Oscars, either positively or otherwise.
For African cinema, the pathway expansion is a blessing in disguise at first glance. It takes away absolute, unquestionable powers from respective national Oscars’ selection committees, since strong African films do not necessarily need to go through the committee anymore to be favoured. Wanuri Kahiu’s Rafiki is probably the clearest example of an African film whose Oscars chances were limited by national systemic resistance. Released in 2018, the film became the first Kenyan film screened at Cannes but faced a ban by Kenyan authorities back home for its LGBTQ theme. Though the film was initially on the Oscars committee’s radar, with the court temporarily lifting its domestic ban so the film can meet theatrical release requirements, it eventually got snubbed for Likarion Wainaina’s Supa Modo.
Now, countries with developing film industries such as Nigeria, Kenya, South Africa and Egypt can potentially enter the Oscars race with more than one film each. This could mean increased cinematic prestige to any country from which two or more titles emerge, opening the doors to co-production and international investment opportunities.
Consequently, African filmmakers may now prioritise the festival circuit as a gateway to international visibility and an Oscars positioning. This particularly benefits arthouse or auteur filmmakers who normally perform better at international festivals rather than domestic theatrical runs. Where national selection committees are biased, compromised, or politically motivated, deserving filmmakers can successfully bypass them through strong performance at any of the designated festivals, thereby improving chances of earning honours for their works beyond the country of production. Directors could gain greater recognition like never before.
This change is, however, unlikely to have profound or consistent effects because African films hardly make it to the main competition in the designated festivals, let alone win the prizes that would make them eligible for possible Oscar nominations. Mohammed Lakhdar-Hamina’s Chronicle of The Years of Fire (Algeria, 1975) remains the sole African winner of the prestigious Cannes Palme d’Or. Similarly, the only two African films to have won Berlinale’s Golden Bear are Mark Dornford-May’s U-Carmen eKhayelitsha (South Africa, 2005) and Mati Diop’s Dahomey (Senegal, 2024). Other qualifying festival prizes have never produced African winners. What, then, are the chances that African films will truly benefit from this change?
On the other hand, the anti-AI position may not adversely affect Africa’s chances at the 99th Oscars since the rule currently applies to Acting and Writing categories, in which African talents are rarely contenders. As of 2026, no African has been nominated in these Oscars’ categories for performances or scripts in genuinely African-produced films. Only a small number of African-descended or African-born talents have been recognised for their contributions to non-African international films. These include Egypt’s Omar Sharif who received a Best Supporting Actor nomination for Lawrence of Arabia (1962), Benin-born Djimon Hounsou who earned two Best Supporting Actor nominations for In America (2002) and Blood Diamond (2006), Somalia’s Barkhad Abdi who was nominated for Best Supporting Actor nomination for Captain Phillips (2013), and Kenya’s Lupita Nyong’o, who won the Best Supporting Actress award at the 86th Academy Awards for 12 Years A Slave (2013).
There’s a possibility of the decision on AI trickling down to other categories in the coming year and even beyond. On the positive side, the decision may help to preserve the artistic integrity of African filmmaking and protect human creativity against unauthorised and manipulative use. That way, African stories and oral traditions retain originality and appeal with real-life human characters that embody sociocultural realities. Diluted artistic performances and lazy, sloppy scriptwriting will be discouraged.
However, thinking long-term, AI restrictions could hamper technological experimentation in filmmaking. Some African filmmakers turn to AI tools to work around limited budgets and technical infrastructure, which enhances their craft. There are even some that actually see such tools as resources for enhancing quality, not necessarily a shortcut of sorts. With the Oscars’ anti-AI policy, such filmmakers will be restrained and discouraged from further undertaking, which in itself constitutes a setback to creative experimentation, the essence of being an indie filmmaker. A major concern with the Academy’s position here is its failure to make exceptions for experimental films like Damien Hauser’s Memory of Princess Mumbi (2025), which thematically and stylistically incorporate AI within ethical boundaries that do not detract from creative integrity.
Africa’s current relationship with the Oscars can best be summed up as aspirational but uncertain. Many of the continent’s finest filmmakers dream of winning a statuette, or at least securing a nomination, as a form of validation that would place them among the most celebrated filmmakers in the world. However, the same level of regard cannot be said to exist in the Oscars’ treatment of African cinema, given the Academy’s predominantly, and understandably, Hollywood-centric orientation and the historical limitations of its recognition of African films. In the last twenty editions, five African films—Rachid Bouchareb’s Days of Glory (Algeria, 2006) and Outside The Law (Algeria, 2010), Timbuktu (Mali, 2014), and Kaouther Ben Hania’s The Man Who Sold His Skin (Tunisia, 2020) and The Voice of Hind Rajab (Tunisia, 2025)—have made it to final shortlist of the Best International Feature Film category. With yet another opportunity approaching in 2027, it is expected that Africa will once again compete for a place on cinema’s most hallowed global stage.
Considering these Oscars changes, African filmmakers and stakeholders have a responsibility to intentionally and consistently curate and deliver quality audiovisual content, bridging the gap between local realities and international standards. This should be done with a view towards engendering an overwhelmingly positive image and authoritative positioning of the continent’s screen industries in the global film ecosystem.
It is equally important to note that excellence in African filmmaking is best acknowledged and appreciated through African-led initiatives themselves. The continent already has a plethora of film festivals, awards and markets that cater to African audiovisual content and draw attention from the international community. Amongst them are the Panafrican Film and Television Festival of Ouagadougou (FESPACO), the continent’s foremost film festival, held biennially in Burkina Faso, and the effervescent Africa Magic Viewers Choice Awards (AMVCA), organised annually in Nigeria. Since such film programmes are already in motion, efforts should go into making them of veritable quality. Rather than relying on unsustainable Western validation and grovelling for crumbs which shows like the Oscars offers Africa, the continent’s screen stakeholders must develop self-sustaining and self-sufficient ecosystems that prioritise and amplify African screen excellence while attracting significant appeal and opportunities from the rest of the world.
Adedamola Jones Adedayo is a film journalist and critic with special interest in African cinema. Through writing and audiovisual mediums, he creates conversations around cinema in Africa and the Diaspora. You can find him on Instagram @jonesthegoodboy and X on AdedamolaAdeda4.
Cover photo credit: Digital Trends