MoviesNewsTalk
The annual Oscar nominations are always a point of much debate from many viewpoints with all categories and nominations and for several obvious reasons, but its especially the 'Documentary' related sections that seem to garner extra conversation due to a myriad of factors which include unique or rarely observed personal tales, historical events through authentic methods, different ethical perspectives and deeply insightful perspectives. As the recent shortlist reveals, some hard but very thought out decisions are needed. Some previously anticipated entries do not move onto the next stages as a new selection of films gains the spotlight. Here we aim at dissecting this process with great care while adding context regarding what some may describe as omissions and analyzing why that category is critically important within wider film discourse.
This year's documentary shortlist (with a reduction from an initial 169 into 15 ) highlights, much as always, the power of storytelling but in far different forms of delivery; many chosen projects do approach subject matters from viewpoints that might be seen as "less likely’ for a more mainstream platform which itself raises some level of important questions; from deeply impactful political analysis to more intimate personal profiles showcasing personal issues that affect all types of people throughout various parts of modern world.
The decision to pick films which have 'no US distribution’ seems an obvious indicator regarding selection requirements to value art with clear human value instead of ‘simple product’ since, some very strong content was selected on the list and that alone sends a message. Films about Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu make that selection process very hard for that production to ignore (despite that legal and political fight they’ve created from just making and producing this documentary to begin with). The inclusion indicates the Academy’s willingness to consider not simply traditional approaches and established documentary production styles but that value lies within content, production style, character motivations and most important a shared ‘truth’ with audiences.
Another very important key component is recognizing Netflix projects among that select group. The platform has long established and also changed documentary making ( from start to end cycles) from low end productions to higher and that also is key aspect since those projects all add a certain type of unique perspective towards long running stories or issues that have many underlying important values and details which previously could have been mostly missed or ignored by casual viewers of older non stream type television or production value styles. A few more names to mention also include one documentary short that has one actress Rashida Jones (as co-director) and another doc co-directed by Ruth Bader Ginsburg documentary maker which offers further details for all production quality and for different views from different type of audience approaches.
While the selected documentaries create a solid, compelling landscape for what represents contemporary filmmaking practices many more worthy mentions weren't able to progress that next level. The omission of a production that showed the story behind iconic stars who manage a return after tragedy comes as a big surprise to many and those types of personal narratives generally perform quite well within this particular category in prior awards seasons.
When we look through those titles a pattern begins to form regarding their non inclusion: perhaps a greater preference might exist towards new voices and newer forms to explore long-standing social and global conflicts. Those previously high expected projects do seem very ‘conventional' in comparison to those others selected and perhaps it simply showcases where and what current voters might have been more invested in seeing; the past seems to be over for new styles and themes which usually indicates where creative directors see their own professional objectives moving forward too. That in itself is something to be discussed for greater reflection.
What seems very apparent too is that previous status, fame or ‘well regarded’ names tend to not have special value. While certain directors had previous connections and awards that never seems to count to guarantee them a spot on short lists as even large studio films or films featuring well know celebrities fail completely when it all comes down to this type of vote cycle which forces a deep consideration if name recognition has, and continues to have, far less appeal then an actual story itself. Or more likely than all it highlights what an Academy voter might also find important as content which isn't only a personal viewing choice but a vote based over a clear cut set parameters.
What is important about every selection made within these different production styles is in the themes presented. 'From Ground Zero' shows just how stories get told and shared to a global audience as directors from Gaza shared their accounts of their current struggles with an intimate perspective that rarely surfaces in a traditional production format. From DIY digital style all the way to unique storytelling. That specific inclusion does give some further importance regarding both quality and production approaches and while those themes can certainly shock, inform or change perspectives it does show the greater purpose; their approach often places their personal human struggles ( despite all challenges) above all other production requirements creating new ethical questions when viewers are witnessing them.
This is incredibly powerful. All previously discussed documentaries in many different ways seek a similar structure which, in many ways create further exploration on those very core aspects; 'whose narrative gets more exposure?', 'where can those issues get discussed?', and how those actions help others also find support or solidarity for situations they may also experience. Those underlying elements elevate all selection above simply a well produced and well acted media project as these specific types of documentaries constantly serve far greater objectives for a more engaged audience.
The documentary shortlists selections with its various surprises and omissions from more known high studio production styles to independent unique projects provides all audiences not only for great new content to consume but a much bigger, important message which always serves well to showcase the great value and scope regarding documentaries by revealing just how much they still continue to shift. The choices made often promote conversations over how and what kind of content people deem important at the present time which has been showcased from an ever evolving selection of short list projects with deep connections to real life stories.
That final selection and nomination processes for Academy Awards should not only become viewed as an indication for well-made movies as those selected always seem to offer very different takes; their collective themes and ideas are very rarely ever random. From specific topics, from underreported conflicts, hidden stories, or personal struggles that might also mirror the experience of many, and also highlight that unique power these type of media products often have in transforming society’s understanding over many complex issues which may get overlooked or disregarded within casual observation. Those selected short films, no matter their personal objective or their selected story lines act as a direct challenge to ‘what viewers should take for granted’; and for that the whole Oscar selection for ‘documentary features’ category becomes more essential for film studies as well as general consumption since they seek far greater values beyond generic entertainment alone.