Raising the Bar

[LATE UPDATE: I should've done a little more browsing before writing this post. Reading Michael Moore's own explanation on his website (thanks to the link on Oscar Watch) invalidates a lot (though not all) of my premature analysis. What is interesting is that the AP feature clearly makes it sound as though the main reason for not submitting is to focus on the Best Picture race, followed by opening up the category to other documentarians and lastly about the potential television broadcast. Michael Moore's letter (which features plenty of his trademark mingling of veiled self-aggrandizement and pronounced selflessness) however emphasizes the TV airing as the number one rationale, followed by his generousity to his fellow filmmakers and finally mentions, as an afterthought, that it might make a Best Picture run possible. So where are your priorities, Mike?]

Once again, Michael Moore is making it all about himself, even as he says its about others, making him the worst sort of narcissist. Just as at the 2002 Oscars, when he rallied/bullied all the other documentary nominees to come up with him no matter who won, making an even bigger spectacle of himself, he now says he’s taking Fahrenheit 9/11 out of the running for Best Documentary, in part, because he wants to give everyone else a fair chance. Well, isn’t that nice? Of course, by saying so, he smugly assumes his doc was going to be considered one of the five (or even the) best by the Academy. It also puts an unfair asterisk next to whoever actually wins (like Olympians in boycotted Olympics), since there will always be speculation that Moore would’ve won if he hadn’t so “selflessly” removed himself from competition. When someone self-imposes term limits at The Emmys – like Candice Bergen did in 1996 – it’s more a commentary on the tedious repetition of The Emmys.

It is of some note to Oscar-watchers that he and Harvey will be actively seeking the Best Picture award. This was assumed from the get-go, but now it’s confirmed. Not submitting in the Documentary category is an interesting tactic. It could produce similar results as when Foreign Language films haven’t been eligible for that category (the Best Picture nod for Il Postino, as well as the high-profile nominations for Talk to Her, Y tu Mama Tambien and City of God). If this strategy works and Fahrenheit 9/11 becomes the first documentary nominated for Best Picture (or even gets nominations in other categories like Directing, Original Screenplay or Editing – which, if I’m not mistaken, only Hoop Dreams has accomplished with its Editing nom), I wonder if we’ll see this gamble employed by animated films, documentaries or foreign films (of their own volition) in the future. I believe that Finding Nemo could have been a serious contender (though not without a fight) for Best Picture if there were no Animated Feature category.

This could all be misdirection if it turns out that Fahrenheit 9/11 airs on television before the election, as the AP article suggests. Since this would disqualify the film from Documentary contention anyway, Moore wouldn’t likely miss an opportunity to put his own, self-serving spin on the ineligibility– and effectively quit before he can be fired [sort of like Brian on Mr. Personality]. I’m not sure what odds I’d put on a television broadcast between the October 5 home video release date and the November 2 election. First of all, I’m not sure what Moore cares most about – Money, awards, record DVD sales or the potential to impact the election even more by getting his movie seen by as many people as possible and gain a few more seconds of media attention while he’s at it – because airing it on TV in October would directly impede the first three goals on my list. However, based on his urging people to illegally download his movie, I suppose the latter might very well be the most appealing to him. But this raises another question:

Where would it air?

Showtime is handling the pay-TV rights, so most likely it will be shown on Showtime before it can be shown on any broadcast network – and Showtime proved they aren’t squeamish when it comes to politically charged material by airing last year’s controversial The Reagans mini-series. But if Moore’s mission is to have his film seen by as wide an audience as possible, how many viewers can he get on Showtime? The Reagans was only seen by a little over a million in its highly publicized initial airing.

It would seem to make more sense to put it on PBS [and now that I look at the Rolling Stone interview, it looks like Moore has the same thing in mind – though his notion of it airing on a broadcast network is preposterous], which shows many recent documentaries and is capable of reaching millions more viewers (Ken Burns’ The Civil War was seen by a whopping 40 million viewers in 1990). But unlike Moore, Showtime’s only motivation is making money, and allowing it to air on free TV before its Showtime premiere doesn’t do much for their bottom line. So if Showtime has any say in the matter (which I assume they do), I can’t see it airing anywhere else. We’ll know for sure within two months.

One thing's for sure: This certainly breaks the Best Documentary competition wide open in a year already full of promising contenders.