Pakistanis angry over detentions in Times Sq. case Monday, May 24, 2010
ISLAMABAD – Relatives of three men detained by Pakistan for alleged links to the suspect in the attempted Times Square bombing say the men are innocent.
They
AFP - Thursday, August 6TAIPEI (AFP) - - Taiwan's Beijing-friendly government on Wednesday denied boycotting an Australian film festival amid a row over the e
BERLIN (Reuters) - Chancellor Angela Merkel suffered a double blow on Thursday as a senior party ally in east German
Minister seeks closure of anti-Berlusconi websites Wednesday, December 16, 2009
ROME (AFP) - – The Italian government moved Tuesday to close down Internet sites encouraging further violence against Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, who
By ELAINE KURTENBACH,AP Business Writer AP - Wednesday, March 18SHANGHAI - Asia's stock market rally seemed to be running out of steam Wednesday, despite an
My Profile
Holiday Gift Guide
Gift ideas & reviews for this holiday season
Start Browsing
You are here:
Home
>
News
>
Entertainment
>
Article
Home
Business & Finance
News
U.S.
Politics
International
Technology
Entertainment
Film
Music
People
Television
Arts
Industry
Sports
Lifestyle
Oddly Enough
Environment
Health
Science
Special Coverage
Video
Pictures
The Great Debate
Blogs
Weather
Reader Feedback
Do More With Reuters
RSS
Widgets
Mobile
Podcasts
Newsletters
You Witness News
Make Reuters My Homepage
Partner Services
CareerBuilder
Affiliate Network
Professional Products
Support (Customer Zone)
Reuters Media
Financial Products
About Thomson Reuters
Foreign-language Oscar a magnet for controversy
Tue Dec 23, 2008 4:24am EST
Email | Print |
Share
| Reprints | Single Page
[-]
Text
[+]
By Steven Zeitchik
LOS ANGELES (Hollywood Reporter) - Pity the foreign-language committee of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. No group works as hard watching so many difficult films. And yet no group takes as much grief for its choices.
That's what happens when the normal discontentment about Oscar choices goes global. The complaining can get loud.
This year, the rules for the foreign-language category again have been tweaked to limit oversights, and committee leaders generally are trying to learn from past flare-ups. No language controversies, the Academy hopes, a la the one over Israel's "The Band's Visit" last year. No debates over whether a submission actually comes from a bona fide country, like the flap over Palestinian entry "Divine Intervention" in 2002. No snubs of difficult material, like Romania's abortion-focused "4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days" last year. This year, it's going to be different.
But given the history of this difficult category -- voters, after all, have to compare dozens of divergent films and film cultures -- should we really be surprised if the announcement of the shortlist of nine next month brings more hand-wringing?
First, a quick history. After years of getting tarred with the tag of predictability, the foreign-language committee two years ago overhauled its system. Instead of having several hundred members choose five nominees, that group could now name nine. A separate body of 30 members would then be convened to narrow the list to five nominees. The premise was that by allowing nearly twice as many films on the shortlist, there'd be fewer possibilities for an oversight.
That seemed like a good idea -- until last year, when such edgier films as "4 Months" and France's "Persepolis" were excluded from the nine by the seemingly conservative voting committee. It turns out that giving a group more nominee slots doesn't change their sensibility; it just gives them more chances to make head-scratching choices.
So this year, the executive committee of the foreign-language committee -- yes, the bureaucratic names can be more impenetrable than a Fassbinder film -- is taking back some of the power it delegated. It's allowing the larger group to choose only six of the nine. Then the executive committee is coming in and choosing three films of its own.
"Historically, the general committee has a particular kind of member that may overlook something formally or thematically new or different or challenging. And though I don't love the word, I think we might be able to correct that a little," says Mark Johnson, chairman of the Academy's foreign-language film committee.
The foreign-language group is like a constant gardener: It's always pruning, hoping the field looks better today than it did yesterday. And in many ways, it does. The lists of five nominees now, as a rule, contain fewer gaffes or serious omissions, even as the Academy must cope with a mindblowingly large pool of films thanks to burgeoning film regions including Eastern Europe and Latin America.
But this year's rule changes, while solving one problem, open the door to another.
If the executive committee's three slots are meant as a corrective, might it be tempted to use that power for reasons of politics instead of substance? Let's say the initial group doesn't choose "The Class." French filmmaker Laurent Cantet's picture is, undeniably, a great film and should be nominated. But will the executive committee feel pressure to choose it simply because it would be too embarrassing to omit a Palme d'Or winner? What happens, then, in a year when a more questionable Palme choice is made?
There's another long-standing problem that the new rules don't address: Unlike the Globes, the Oscars use a "one country, one submission" procedure. The system is designed to manage the overall number of films (a record 67 were submitted this year) while giving every country an ostensibly equal shot at the prize.
That's all well and good. The problem, though, is that it means worthy candidates are overlooked even before the Academy gets a chance to weigh in. Last year, France had to decide between "Persepolis" and "La Vie en Rose"; this year, Gauls had to pick among "The Class" and the equally worthy "A Christmas Tale" and "I've Loved You So Long." Filmmakers like Pedro Almodovar have been snubbed by their country. One film per country means some of the best movies are eliminated right off the bat.
The Academy leadership acknowledges the problem but says there isn't much it can do; it doesn't want to wade into the politics of each country by choosing for it, and it can't throw open the doors to multiple submissions because it can't reasonably be expected to consider hundreds of films.
But why not do something else? Why not allow a country to claim a wild card, say, once every five years? If France feels it has a particularly strong year -- or, for that matter, if the Academy does -- it could use the card to get two French films in that year. This way, the number of films stays manageable but a great film isn't excluded simply because it shares a homeland with another strong title. Continued...
View article on single page
Share:
Del.icio.us
Digg
Mixx
My Web
Facebook
LinkedIn
Next Article:
An appreciation of some underrated movies
Also on Reuters
Spacewalkers install probe outside space station
Interpreters break down language barrier on the border
Slideshow
Slideshow: Jews mark the start of Hanukkah
Video
Talk of the Town:Johansson's sneeze
Play Video
More Video...
Editor's Choice
Slideshow
A selection of our best photos from the past 24 hours. Slideshow
Most Popular on Reuters
Articles
Video
Recommended
Eyes on U.S. GDP as world economies limp to Christmas | Video
Two dead in Texas freeway shooting spree
Housing crisis worsens as economy weakens
Emerging market consumers hurting with rest of world | Video
Police probe assault on 50 "witches"
Grumpy miracle pig voted most popular animal
Downturn hits vacation enclave of New York elite
Buffeted "quants" are still in demand
Madoff scandal stuns Palm Beach Jewish community
Decapitated soldiers new blow to Mexico in drug war
Most Popular Articles RSS Feed
Video
Mexico's drug war claims 9 lives
Report:Braking caused crash?
Obama presses for large stimulus
Talk of the Town:Johansson's sneeze
Toyota falls into red
Obama raises job target
Bout trial begins
FARC 'will free six hostages'
Illinois Governor arrested
Rivals vow to end Hamas rule in Gaza
Most Popular Videos RSS Feed
Reuters Deals
The global destination for corporate leaders, deal-makers and innovators
Knowledge to Act
Reuters.com:
Help and Contact Us |
Advertise With Us |
Mobile |
Newsletters |
RSS |
Interactive TV |
Labs |
Reuters in Second Life |
Archive |
Site Index |
Video Index
Thomson Reuters Corporate:
Copyright |
Disclaimer |
Privacy |
Professional Products |
Professional Products Support |
About Thomson Reuters |
Careers
International Editions:
Africa |
Arabic |
Argentina |
Brazil |
Canada |
China |
France |
Germany |
India |
Italy |
Japan |
Latin America |
Mexico |
Russia |
Spain |
United Kingdom |
United States
Thomson Reuters is the world's largest international multimedia news agency, providing investing news, world news, business news, technology news, headline news, small business news, news alerts, personal finance, stock market, and mutual funds information available on Reuters.com, video, mobile, and interactive television platforms. Thomson Reuters journalists are subject to an Editorial Handbook which requires fair presentation and disclosure of relevant interests.
NYSE and AMEX quotes delayed by at least 20 minutes. Nasdaq delayed by at least 15 minutes. For a complete list of exchanges and delays, please click here.