MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

FINAL UPDATE: The Academy Feature Doc Short List

The final list is:

Born Into Brothels
Home of The Brave
Howard Zinn: You Can’t Be Neutral on a Moving Train
In The Realms Of The Unreal
Riding Giants
The Ritchie Boys
The Story Of The Weeping Camel
Super Size Me
Tell Them Who You Are
Touching The Void
Tupac:Ressurection

Twist of Faith

Expected contenders left off the Academy list include:

Bright Leaves
Guerilla: The Taking of Patty Hearst
Imaginary Witness: Hollywood & The Holocaust
Metallica: Some Kind Of Monster
Tarnation
Z Channel: A Magnificent Obsession

Almost all of the "political docs" of the season were left off the list, disqualified for TV airplay.

Be Sociable, Share!

14 Responses to “FINAL UPDATE: The Academy Feature Doc Short List”

  1. Greg says:

    Didn’t Tupac come out LAST year? Oh no. The Oscars are slowly mutating into the Grammys!!!!!

  2. According to the Academy’s rules:
    “To be eligible for award consideration for the 2004 awards year, a documentary film must qualify via theatrical exhibition (within two years of the film’s completion date) between September 1, 2003 and August 31, 2004.”
    Since Tupac was released on November 14, 2003, I guess that makes it eligible. Proving once again that Tupac defies expiration dates.
    But why was Some Kind of Monster disqualified?

  3. David says:

    Why is Touching the Void considered a documentary?

  4. Mark says:

    I don’t think this category has much excitement going for it.

  5. JimmyConway75 says:

    Did “Control Room” air on TV somewhere?

  6. Dan R% says:

    And no love for ‘The Yes Men’…

  7. Sam Adams says:

    Why no Bright Leaves? A brilliant movie that could really use a push from someone, somewhere.

  8. jeremy says:

    I can’t think of a single political documentary that would’ve been worth a nomination anyway. *Maybe* GOING UPRIVER.
    Also, could Z CHANNEL’s affiliation with IFC have hurt its chances? Despite having produced a number of notable docs (e.g. MY BEST FIEND and MR. DEATH), they’ve never snagged a nomination. How detrimental is the television stigma?

  9. bicycle bob says:

    at least we don’t have to hear another fat pig michael moore speech. even though the boo’s are comedy

  10. TL&DB says:

    One little piggy should not be insulting another.
    Little piggy. But Morgan Spurlock will probably
    get booed, because even Brad Pitt loves the McD’s!

  11. Mark says:

    The relevance of this category is low right now.

  12. bicycle bob says:

    metallica all the way!

  13. tmp says:

    Wasn’t “Touching the Void” on television as well? On PBS?

  14. Bruce Sinofsky says:

    There is no telling for taste….. I am used to the snubs by now. Metallica got screwed.
    Co- director of the Metallica film

The Hot Blog

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon