Oscar Omissions Provoke Outcry, In Any Language

Stylistic elements of "4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days" (with Anamaria Marinca and Laura Vasiliu), including a graphic depiction of an abortion, may have turned off Oscar voters. (By Adi Paduretu -- Ifc Films)

What went wrong this year? Observers suggest that "4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days," with its stark neorealist design, real-time pacing and graphic depiction of a late-term abortion (including a shot of a fetus on a bathroom floor), turned committee members off. "Persepolis," an animated film with a bold, black-and-white look, might have been dismissed by some as "only" a cartoon.

Whatever the reasons, Johnson avers, the process is clearly in need of tinkering. He intends to approach the Academy's Board of Governors, which oversees rule changes, soon after the awards ceremony on Feb. 24. "I think we have to do some kind of radical change and hopefully we can come up with a system that works better," Johnson said.

The shortlist wasn't the first source of controversy for the committee, which has long been accused of having arbitrary rules. For one thing, foreign-language films aren't submitted for Oscar consideration by their filmmakers or studios but by countries, opening up the submission process to accusations of politics and cronyism. "Each country does it differently," said Picturehouse President Bob Berney, a longtime critic of the nomination process. (Picturehouse's film "Mongol" has been shortlisted for the foreign-language film Oscar, whereas "La Vie en Rose," which the studio also distributed, was overlooked by France in favor of "Persepolis.")

"In France there are only six or eight people on the [submission] committee, whereas in Spain, 1,000 people vote," Berney said, "which only adds to the ambiguous nature of this process. And the fact that a country can nominate only one is very tough."

Johnson said that the rules are revisited on a regular basis: "We've asked, should we have a wild-card entry, where we take the winner of, say, four or five of the most important film festivals? We've talked about things like that, and it's ongoing. I just think right now, for me, the bigger problem is the one we've been talking about."

Rules and regulations aside, at a time when cinema seems to be becoming only more globalized, the notion of ghettoizing films into a foreign-language category is seen by many as problematic. Last October "The Band's Visit," a highly regarded Israeli film, was disqualified from competing because more than half its dialogue is in English -- ironically, because that's the only language its Egyptian and Israeli characters can communicate in. Tom Vick, film programmer at the Freer and Sackler galleries, notes that "Mongol," which was submitted by Kazakhstan, was made by a Russian director (Bodrov), stars a Japanese actor and features Chinese and Mongolian supporting actors.

"It's clear these distinctions about what constitutes a foreign film are starting to break down," said Vick, adding that "the idea that you have these borders separating movies" might be one whose time has passed.

Johnson agrees, to a point. "It's very hard in today's world to assign a country to a film or a film to a country," he said, citing last year's "Lust, Caution" and 2004's "The Motorcycle Diaries" as two that fell through the cracks. "In a perfect world, this category wouldn't exist. But I can still defend it, and my biggest defense is that foreign-language films are an endangered species in America." The foreign-language Oscar race, he said, serves as a reminder "that there are people around the world who are making films as good as anything we make here and sometimes much better."