MPAA Ban on Screeners

Hi all,

I'm a member of the Academy, and no, you don't have to see all of the movies to vote in most catagories. Indeed, sadly, you don't have to have seen any! Only when voting for best
foreign film and (perhaps) documentaries, do you have to have reciepts or other proof that you have seen all the films under considersation. Other than that, it's wide open.

That's why screeners are so critical for smaller films. It's no coincidence that it was with the rise of screeners you suddenly saw films like 'Boys Don't Cry', 'Shakespeare in Love' ,'Monster's Ball', 'In the Bedroom' or 'The Pianist' getting nominated and winning awards.

This is for a few reasons. First, many in the Academy are older, and only get out to a few films a month. Not surprisingly, they (like everyone) often get to the big 'event' films instead of the smaller, quirkier films.

Many others are working the long and odd hours that film demands, which makes getting out to theaters very challenging. When I'm directing there's no way I will get to a movie theater, but there's a good chance I might watch a screener at the end of a day.

Also, a surprising number of Academy members don't live in either New York or LA. Some have retired to smaller towns and cities, etc, so they get smaller films later, or sometimes not at all.

Also, some in the Academy are by nature 'old-fashioned' in what they think they like, only to be pleasently surprised when they pop in a screener of a film they might not make the effort to go out to see.

The 'big' films can afford to make up for the lack of screeners by spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on trade ads, special screenings all over the place, etc. But for small films and companies, the comparative lack of expense of screeners was the only way to compete.

So, this screener ban is devistating for films like 'Singing Detective' or 'American Splendor' or 'Thirteen' or 'Whale Rider' etc.

Personally, I don't believe the real issue is piracy, but annoyance on the part of the 'big' studios that their films are more and more often overlooked for awards. I have no proof of this, but I've heard lots of studio folk bitch about how the awards have slanted towards 'little' films, and very little complaint about piracy associated with screeners.

Indeed, according to a recent LA Times article, it was pointed out that it was only last year that Jack Valenti said that screeners were not a significant problem in this area.

Beyond that, there were far less draconian suggestions made and ignored. For example, it was suggested that each screener be 'watermarked' with an individual number. That way, if a copy showed up for sale in, say, China, it could easily be traced back to the person it was originally sent to, thus making piracy not worth the risk.

It also could have been left up to each studio. Piracy isn't a problem for the very films that need these screeners most. No one is running around trying to pirate 'Singing Detective' or 'American Splendor' or 'Thirteen' or 'Whale Rider' etc. If the big studios want to be extra careful on 'Lord of the Rings' or 'Master and Commander', fine, great. They have other ways to get those films to Academy members. But I, and every producer, director, etc who makes 'smaller' films would gladly risk losing a few thousand dollars if some idiots sell their individual academy copies on e-bay, versus the upside of (say) the chance of getting an Academy nomination for Robert Downey.

Without the chance of these awards (and the money and prestige they bring) it will become infinately harder to get these films made in the modern American film system. Stars (and even more, their agents), will lose interest in trading up front cash for a chance at an 'award winning' role. The parent studios will make less money on their classics divisions, and you might well see Fox Searchlight and Paramount Classics and Sony Classics, and Focus, etc. start to scale down, or ever shut down in the coming years.

I would indeed urge any of you who are interested in supporting these types of smaller, or different, or brave films to write to Jack Valenti - either as individuals or as a group. I know virtually every critic's society in America has done so, as have many film-makers. But if the public's voice is also heard, I believe that could really have an impact.

Thanks,



Keith Gordon