The Oscars’ In Memoriam segment, a poignant part of the Academy Awards, has once again sparked heated debate following the 2026 ceremony. This year, the absence of several prominent figures—most notably Brigitte Bardot, James Van Der Beek, and Bollywood star Dharmendra—has led to widespread discontent among fans and critics alike. As the film industry grapples with how to honour its departed, the complexities surrounding these omissions reveal deeper issues within Hollywood’s tribute practices.
A Tradition of Controversy
Introduced in 1994, the In Memoriam segment has become a staple of the Oscars, designed to honour the legacies of those who have passed away in the previous year. Yet, with each ceremony comes the inevitable outcry over which luminaries have been left out. This year, social media was ablaze with dissatisfaction over the Academy’s choices, highlighting a broader conversation about who gets remembered and why.
The decision-making process behind the segment is anything but simple. A dedicated committee meticulously sifts through hundreds of names, striving to narrow it down to a final list of around thirty honourees. Bruce Davis, a former executive director of the Academy, has described this process as “agonising,” revealing how difficult it can be to choose between well-known figures. This year, the segment featured 34 names, alongside a special tribute to director Rob Reiner by Billy Crystal, which also included contributions from actors featured in Reiner’s films.
Personal Conduct and Public Perception
This year’s omissions have ignited discussions about how personal controversies can influence an individual’s inclusion in the tribute. Brigitte Bardot’s exclusion is particularly noteworthy. Despite being a legendary actress, her political affiliations and controversial statements in recent years have tainted her legacy in France, resulting in a mixed reception at the César Awards, where her name was met with boos. Some speculate that the Academy may have wished to avoid a similar backlash by omitting her from the Oscars’ tribute.
The question of personal conduct has also affected other stars. Alain Delon faced exclusion last year, reportedly due to his contentious past. Variety’s chief film critic suggested that the Academy disqualified him based on his “bad boy behaviour,” reflecting the growing scrutiny of public figures and their actions off-screen.
Space Constraints and Industry Dynamics
Beyond personal controversies, practical limitations play a crucial role in determining who makes the cut. With an increasing number of industry deaths each year, the segment is constrained by time—usually just a few minutes. This reality means that not every deserving individual can be honoured. Moreover, the Academy must also consider those whose contributions may not be widely recognised but are nonetheless significant, including casting directors and producers. This year’s list even included fashion designer Giorgio Armani for his impactful work in cinema.
Conversely, the Academy often omits figures primarily associated with television or other entertainment sectors. The exclusion of James Van Der Beek and Malcolm-Jamal Warner, both known for their television work, exemplifies this trend. Shonda Rhimes, creator of Grey’s Anatomy, defended Eric Dane’s omission by stating that he would receive due recognition at the Emmys, suggesting an unspoken hierarchy within the industry regarding tributes.
The Inevitability of Discontent
The Oscars are no stranger to criticism, and the In Memoriam segment is a focal point for disappointment. Decisions about who to honour often appear arbitrary, as evidenced by the inclusion of Michael Jackson—known more for his music than his film roles—while Farrah Fawcett, who had an extensive yet television-centric career, was left out. Such contrasting decisions can leave audiences frustrated, and it’s clear that no matter how the Academy approaches the segment, there will always be dissent.
Gilbert Cates, the mastermind behind the introduction of the In Memoriam segment, once advised Oscar producers to take a relaxed approach: “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.” This wisdom underscores the reality that the Oscars will continue to elicit varied responses, especially as society evolves and expectations shift.
Why it Matters
The ongoing debate surrounding the Oscars’ In Memoriam segment not only reflects Hollywood’s struggle to honour its departed but also highlights broader societal issues concerning legacy, recognition, and the complexities of personal conduct. As audiences grapple with who deserves remembrance in an increasingly diverse entertainment landscape, the Academy faces the challenge of balancing tradition with contemporary values. The choices made during this poignant tribute will continue to resonate, influencing how future generations perceive the figures who shaped their cinematic experiences.
