Critics React to Screener ban

[Josh]

As many of you probably already know, many movie studios are planning to ban the distribution of screeners to film critics for them to see before voting for end of the year awards. They CLAIM this is to stop piracy... which is frankly insulting as hell to the press.

Probably this is only interesting to me I guess since it involves me directly.

But it is actually kind of important to everyone, since screeners enable critics to see smaller films that they might not otherwise see... allowing those films to compete for major awards that they might not otherwise be considered for since opportunities to see them are limited.

Anyway... you may be interested to know that many critics organizations are already planning to make a stance against this. For instance, the DFWFCA (Dallas Fort Worth Film Critics Assocation) sent us out a letter regarding this, and is suggesting that it might be a good idea to give viewing preference and reviewing preference to those movies that DO send out screeners at the end of the year.

I think this is a reasonable idea, boycotting I think serves little purpose.

Other organizations are taking bigger stances, several major organizations threaten to completely cancel their awards ceremonies entirely if this policy is really enforced.

[crappertay]

Yeah it is sickening because instead of knocking off a few hundred or so DVDs on the cheap to distribute - which costs next to nothing - the makers of the films must organise their own theatrical screenings for the critics/judges which is fine if you're a major studio but expensive as hell if you are a small indie.

It's not just critics getting banned either... it's this year's Oscar's too which will just INCREASE the already biased "one big-budget sweeper" voting.

[Josh]

Well you see it is mainly critics who do Oscar voting. In fact, the screeners that I get usually say "For your Oscar consideration" even though they are sent to me in the hopes that I will vote for that film in the Dallas Fort Worth Film Critics Association awards.

I know this will probably affect my viewing... I certainly would never have seen "MAX" for instance last year if I hadn't gotten a screener. There just isn't time to see everything. Even full time critics cannot do it if they don't get screeners... and when you are meeting deadlines and writing for other sources, they want reviews of Charlie's Angels 2 not MAX so if you only have time for one and you have to choose, you have to choose to see Charlie's Angels 2.

Sending out screeners is the only way small films can get seen by critics, who may have the best intentions and WANT to give smaller films an equal chance, but would not have the time to do so otherwise.

[crappertay]

The Oscar screener ban has been lifted... er... sort of.


A ban on preview DVDs of new films being sent to Academy Awards voters has been lifted by awards organisers.
Oscar jurors will now be able to receive specially encoded "screener" copies if they sign an agreement promising to protect the films.

Hollywood studios and Oscar bosses hope the move will reduce the number of films being illegally pirated.

But film critics' groups and other awards organisers who were left out of the deal said it was "unfair" that they were still excluded.

The compromise has been reached by the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) and Oscars organisers the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences.

It means DVDs and tapes will be sent to Academy voters only, leaving other award juries unable to receive the screeners.

The Los Angeles Film Critics Association is standing by its decision to cancel its awards ceremony in protest at the ban.

"This is not a rescinding of the ban, so we are sticking with our decision, with great reluctance," president Jean Oppenheimer said.

Lorenzo Soria, president of the Hollywood Foreign Press Association, which runs the Golden Globes, said he viewed the MPAA's move "with dismay and concern".

"We are evaluating our options to have a decision reversed that we regard as unfair, completely arbitrary and an assault on the professional integrity of our members," he said.

The ban had been enforced by the MPAA to crack down on piracy, which is said to be costing the movie industry billions of dollars a year.

Hundreds of leading stars and film-makers, including Sir Michael Caine and Francis Ford Coppola, said it would effectively kill independent movie making.

They said if awards juries - especially the 5,600-odd Oscars voters - could no longer receive their own copies of films, they were unlikely ever to see smaller movies.

That would make it impossible for them to vote for small-circulation independent films.

Film-makers said independent movies such as 2001's Monster's Ball - which got two Oscar nominations and a best actress award for Halle Berry - would have no chance of being made if the ban were strictly enforced.

But the MPAA insisted that defeating digital piracy had to be its priority.

Officials said the compromise plan would be tried for a year. Members found to have pirated a screener or allowed their copy to be pirated could face expulsion from the Academy and possible legal action.




The MPAA really needs to get over confusing itself with the RIAA.

[Josh]

It hasn't been lifted. Now it is even worse because they are giving prefential treatment to a select group instead of treating everyone fairly....

and it STILL hurts smaller films because they can ONLY get exposure through Oscar now, which is better than nothing, but still not good.