New Oscar documentary rules stir outcry (and some cheers)

The documentary world has been abuzz this week with the news that the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences is changing its Oscar rule yet again for the long-vexed documentary feature category.

To be eligible for a Best Documentary Oscar, movies now must be reviewed by either the New York Times or the Los Angeles Times during a qualifying theatrical run of at least one week in both cities. In addition, the academy will send DVD screeners or stream films online for documentary branch members four times a year, rather than require that they see the films in theaters, as has been the case in the past. A short­ list of eligible films and the final five nominees will be voted on by the entire branch of 166 documentary filmmakers, rather than by selection committees.

(Courtesy of Warner Bros./Filmmaker Michael Moore suggested the rule changes to the documentary feature category of the Oscars.)

Looking for things to do?
Select one or more criteria to search
Get ideas

Finally, the entire academy will vote on the final Oscar winner — putting nonfiction films in the same realm as the movies that compete for Best Picture.

(Qualifying films still must play for at least one week in Manhattan and Los Angeles, accompanied by ad campaigns in the New York Times, the L.A. Times, the Village Voice or L.A. Weekly.)

Nearly every year, the academy has tweaked and refined the rule governing documentary submissions, often following outcries about an opaque and labyrinthine selection process that results in newsworthy omissions. But this year’s modifications are different, having been suggested by academy governor and filmmaker Michael Moore, whose 1989 film “Roger & Me” was notoriously snubbed by the academy, along with Errol Morris’s “The Thin Blue Line,” Steve James’s “Hoop Dreams” and Terry Zwigoff’s “Crumb,” among several others. (This year’s most talked-about oversights were the highly regarded films “Senna” and “The Interrupters.”)

In many quarters, Moore’s changes have been met with enthusiasm by filmmakers and fans who have long lamented the Oscar branch’s unwieldy structure and arcane guidelines, which made it difficult to screen the large number of entries (124 films qualified for consideration in 2011).

The process was so time-consuming and inconvenient that, historically, only retirees had the time to commit to it, resulting in nominees and winners that were often deemed too safe, too conventional and, as documentaries began achieving purchase in the marketplace, woefully out of step with audiences.

“Tightening the definition of what a theatrical film is will also help this other part of the process, where the whole branch is obligated to look at all the entries,” said Ric Robertson, chief operating officer of the Academy. “Hopefully . . . that 124 number goes down, making it more workable for our branch members, too.”

But if streamlining the viewing and voting processes bodes well, plenty of nonfiction filmmakers expressed concern — if not outrage — at the rule requiring a New York Times or L.A. Times review, noting that films such as “Semper Fi: Always Faithful,” which is on this year’s short list, would not have qualified (the film played at the Silverdocs documentary festival in 2011).

More movies content

Show more

Loading...

Comments

Add your comment
 
Read what others are saying About Badges