Fuck the Oscars

[wpqx]

Just found out today that of the 15 films selected to be nominees for the best documentary feature, Werner Herzog's Grizzley Man isn't one of them. After years of the Academy rebuilding their shattered reputation regarding documentaries, this is pushing them back to the days of snubbing Hoop Dreams. Murderball is among those selected, as is Mad Hot Ballroom, and the obvious winner March of the Penguins (because who doesn't love cute animals).

Just wanted to vent, and I couldn't comment on this in the Grizzley Man thread for whatever reason, so I'm putting it here. In due time I can voice other problems with the Academy making this about a 40 page thread.

[arsaib4]

These are the 15 that were selected from 82 submissions:

"After Innocence," directed by Jessica Sanders

"The Boys of Baraka," directed by Heidi Ewing and Rachel Grady

"Darwin's Nightmare," directed by Hubert Sauper

"The Devil and Daniel Johnston," directed by Jeff Feuerzeig

"Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room," directed by Alex Gibney

"Favela Rising," directed by Matt Mochary and Jeff Zimbalist

"Mad Hot Ballroom," directed by Marilyn Agrelo

"March of the Penguins," directed by Luc Jacquet

"Murderball," directed by Henry Alex Rubin and Dana Adam Shapiro

"Occupation: Dreamland," directed by Ian Olds and Garrett Scott

"On Native Soil: The Documentary of the 9/11 Commission Report," directed by Linda Ellman

"Rize," directed by David LaChapelle

"Street Fight," directed by Marshall Curry

"39 Pounds of Love," directed by Dani Menkin

"Unknown White Male," directed by Rupert Murray

[Johann]

That's the spirit wp.

Couldn't agree more.

Herzog has the same problem Kubrick did: he makes impeccable films but the academy doesn't know what to do with him.

[oscar jubis]

My favorite documentary of the year also seems to be out of the running. Has anyone seen it?
Shake Hands with the Devil.
Good thread!

[Chris Knipp]

wpqx:

I can't see why you can't put a comment on this issue in the thread about Grizzly Man. (Actually I just added a long new comment to that thread so I'm trying to lure you over there!)

It isn't anything new to wind up feeling that the Oscars involve many instances of total injustice. I have said something about March of the Penguins. The footage is remarkable, but in the US narration at least, the use made of it is not in the least admirable, and in fact is an egregious example of the cutesyfying of nature that Herzog is addressing in Grizzly Man, with a view to bringing out the very dangerous consequences of that process and way of thinking.

Omission from the Academy's list is often a sign of quality and even more often a sign of independent spirit.

La Chappelle's Rize is a very unsatisfactory, not to say mediocre, effort. I liked Mad Hot Ballroom and the Enron movie, but the latter is not very good filmmaking and Mad Hot Ballroom could be better, though its (in this case justifiable) cuteness saves it. From what I've heard Darwin's Nightmare is excellent. Have not seen Murderball or most of the others and in some cases have avoided what sounded uninteresting. It seems to me that Grizzly Man isn't the only high quality 2005 documentary that is missing from this rather random list -- though it is the most glaring omission, as far as I know. In my opinion, Grizzly Man is a great film, and an important one. I haven't seen Shake Hands with the Devil, another one I've heard good things about.

This is certainly a worthwhile thread, if only as a place for venting. This topic is always an opportunity to hone one's critical faculties -- though admittedly, outjudging the Academy isn't rocket science: the sophistication level is lower than that of any of the big film festivals.

[arsaib4]

Murderball is now available on DVD.

[cinemabon]

Bob Altman, Marty Scorsese, and Orson Welles never won Oscars, nor did my heroes Alfred Hitchcock and Stanley Kubrick. While I have often used the Oscars in the past to point out the level of quality in an artist (like Alfred Newman's record 45 nominations), the annual event has lost all sense of itself to the glitz and glamour of its notorious past, when Oscars were just plain purchased by big studios to promote their films. Now that Hollywood is being run by multinational corporations, we're returning to that ugly promotional past.

[pmw]

Is No Direction Home not considered a feature documentary? That's been among my favorite docs this year. Truly a shame that Herzog is not included. He probably doesn't care though... I can never tell if our "art" directors care about being included in an awards system set up to reward crap...

[Chris Knipp]

Initial presentation on TV disqualifies films for Oscar consideration. That happened to something recently that I really admired -- I think it was Van Sant's Elephant, shown on HBO before its delayed theatrical showings began -- leading to the injustice of its not even being considered. After many protests some of the Academy's Byzantine rules for documentaries were changed, but last year Control Room, The Corporation, Dig!, The Five Obstructions, Guerrilla: The Taking of Patty Hearst, Los Angeles Plays Itself, Metallica: Some Kind of Monster, Tarnation and Z Channel: A Magnificent Obsession were not qualified for consideration. I learned all this from
LA Weekly online of December 31, 2004 , where writer Scott Foundas also says

There are. . . .abundant regulations governing which films are eligible for a documentary Oscar in the first place. While both narratives and documentaries seeking Oscar eligibility must first play qualifying runs of at least seven consecutive days in at least one Los Angeles cinema, where documentaries are concerned that represents but the first step on the long and winding road toward hoped-for Oscar gold. As detailed in the Academy’s official rulebook (available in both pamphlet form and as a download on the Academy’s Web site), having cleared that initial hurdle, documentaries must then either open in theaters in four additional U.S. cities or, failing that, be withheld from television broadcast, anywhere in the world, until the day the Oscar nominations are announced. If a film is Oscar-nominated, it must be withheld from television for an additional nine months following the announcement. As for those films that do roll out to other cities, they too are prohibited from television airings, but only for a comparatively lenient nine months from the date of their first theatrical exhibition.

You can read the Academy's current documentary Oscar qualification hurdles here.

[Chris Knipp]

I don't think that's right about Elephant, though it and Last Days were made in TV format for HBO. It happened with The Believer, with Ryan Gosling (2001), which got delayed theatrical release and came out on TV beforehand. Ryan Gosling was robbed of an Oscar nomination and it was an awesome performance, possibly his best so far -- and the kid is talented. IMDb (The Believer): "Critically acclaimed, grand-jury prize winner at Sundance Festival in January 2001, then appeared on Showtime pay-cable in March 2002, before finally being released theatrically in NYC, May 2002. "

[arsaib4]

Both of Van Sant's films were partly produced by HBO, certainly to appear on their network eventually, but they weren't made for the channel specifically like some of their other original programs. Just wanted to clarify that.

Good point about The Believer and Ryan Gosling.

_____________________

These are the 10 films competing for 3 spots in the Best Animated Feature Film category.

Chicken Little

Gulliver's Travel

Hoodwinked

Howl's Moving Castle

Madagascar

Robots

Steamboy

Tim Burton's Corpse Bride

Valiant

Wallace & Gromit: The Curse of the Were-Rabbit

[Chris Knipp]

Thanks for the clarification. I knew only that Van Sant worked in TV format so the films could go on HBO, so what you say doesn't surprise me. He seems to have enjoyed working in that format and the results are remarkably beautiful and visually rich in the square format, thanks of course in good part to the cinematography of Harris Savides.

[pmw]

Yeah, I think thats right. Elephant did come out in theaters first... Kind of a silly set of rules. But I guess the awards exist in some part to stoke the fires of the industry. Nevertheless, there is no doubt that as far as reach is concerned, No Direction Home got to many (millions?) of people...
Too bad.
P

[cinemabon]

I take it that by television broadcast, the Academy is saying "commercial television." Because the Z Channel (used to be exclusive to Beverly Hills, Bel Aire, and Marina de Rey) broadcast "first run" films every year when I lived there. I had it. Some Academy members used to whine they couldn't get out to see the films and demanded VHS copies to view at home (hence the problems with piracy that started when member tapes were, ahem, stolen). Supposedly the practice with DVD's halted last year and members were told to either get their ass to a theater or they couldn't vote (yeah, like that's going to happen with the older members!) Then they reversed the decision.

This whole emphasis on the A(sshole) Awards has become completely blown out of proportion anyway. Let's create a new ceremony strickly for realistic filmmaking and call it something other than documentary (but definitely NOT real, realistic, or virtual!). Some great young entrepreneur, say Chris Knipp, could start it and call it "The Annual (whatever you call it) Cinema/Film Awards." Invite a few celebrities (entice them with gift baskets) and put it on TBS or something. Who knows? It may have started right here!

[wpqx]

Wow great to have an internet again. Thanks for the feedback and inevitable support. Honestly I'm still a kid at Christmas when it comes to the Oscars, but not to watch celebrities, or to cheer for films, but to know who won so I can instantaneously bitch about it. I was able to pick up Murderball on DVD, but alas have had no chance to watch it, with the moving and all. The animated race is usually a tight one, but some cutesy piece of crap usually wins, I think Howl's Moving Castle has little chance.