Confused Academy Members Turn to Noted Blurb Whore For Counsel

In a textbook case of the blind leading the blind, Oscar maven and noted critical pushover Pete Hammond reported Monday that he's been advising Academy members having difficulty sorting through the early awards-season crop. It turns out that some voters are too bewildered by the Academy screenings currently on offer, especially with their new ballot demanding 10 Best Picture nominees. There's just nothing big enough! For some reason they've turned to Hammond, who, in fairness, has a point in suggesting that Jennifer's Body (no matter how underrated) probably isn't Best Picture material. But in doing so he takes down a few other perfectly fine smaller films that he hasn't even seen, let alone heard of.

On one hand it's Oscar business as usual. On the other, there's no reason we can't break the cycle here at Movieline -- starting now.

First, let's hear from Hammond:

The other day I got a call from an academy member who had just received a list of October entries in the official academy member weekend screening series. She asked if I thought particular titles she had never even heard of were worth checking out.

Those included We Live in Public, a documentary about the Internet; Disgrace, a barely released post-apartheid drama; Good Hair, a Chris Rock riff on African American hairstyles; Bronson, a violent prison drama about a guy whose altar-ego is the actor Charles Bronson; Gentlemen Broncos, a teen comedy; Astro Boy, an animated film based on an old TV cartoon series; the multi-segmented New York I Love You and a horror film, Cirque du Freak: The Vampire's Assistant.

None of these movies are likely to be found on any pundits list of potential Oscar contenders.

Well, let's see here. That depends. If you're talking about Best Picture contenders -- the one category in which all members can vote -- then sure. Astro Boy probably won't be in the running.

But Hammond hits on the usual radical oversimplification that drives me crazy about Oscar season, and that's to dismiss the value of underdog films that have as much (if not more, in some cases) "awards potential" as the more monied, traditionally hyped darlings of the studio and critical elite. I don't know if I've seen a more affecting documentary this year than We Live in Public, which is about so much more than simply "the Internet." It's about how the Internet created and destroyed one man who saw our new technological age coming -- and how it has the potential to both re-create and destroy us. It's comprehensive, profound and quite entertaining, and anyway, even if the vast majority of the Academy has nothing to do with the Documentary Branch's short-listing process, justice would dictate that a body in charge of distributing qualitative awards every year should just see the stuff before calling up Pete Goddamn Hammond of all people to ask about what's what.

Look at it this way, if awards creds are so important: Public won the Documentary Grand Jury Prize last January at Sundance. Two of this year likeliest Best Picture nominees -- Precious and An Education -- won that fest's jury and audience awards respectively. Call it prestige, call it the benefit of the doubt, call it whatever you want, but by any rational standards, any Academy member with a clue should be calling Hammond to tell him that Public is worth seeing. Trust me, he wouldn't know otherwise.

Same for Disgrace and Bronson, a couple of flawed dramas featuring excellent lead performances by John Malkovich and Tom Hardy. The latter is especially fearsome as Bronson's title character, who in fact has nothing but a shared name in common with the American actor. It's exactly the kind of work that the Academy should be racing to check out -- and again, even if you can't vote in the acting category, you probably know someone who can. Tell them about it!

This insider word-of-mouth potential is why the member screenings are held -- not as a barometer of why this week or next's free movies bode poorly for the Best Picture race. Even as the Academy's shallowness is a reputation it has earned and seems determined to keep no matter how many windmills I scream at, it doesn't make it any less of an embarrassment to me as a film lover. Nor does it mean the Academy can't change.

So I'm offering Movieline's aid. If there's something you're not sure about as an Academy voter, e-mail any of us at any time and we'll help anyway we can -- whether it's our own insights about a film, a few fest reviews with accurate plot and character descriptions, literally anything you need to help make you both a happier and more informed awards-season filmgoer. We're here and we're ready, effective immediately. Help us help you. Please.

· Oscar contenders missing at academy screenings [Notes on a Season]