NEW YORK — For a significant number of filmmakers, winning an Oscar seems like an unattainable dream. However, this isn’t necessarily due to the quality of their films being inadequate. A prominent example is Iranian director Mohammad Rasoulof, who recognizes that his home country is more inclined to imprison him than submit his film for Oscar consideration. In Iran, much like in some other nations, such as Russia, a government entity is responsible for choosing the films that will represent the country at the Academy Awards. This system effectively sidelines filmmakers like Rasoulof, who have openly challenged the strictures of censorship imposed by their government, making Oscar aspirations seem unrealistic.
“A lot of independent filmmakers in Iran think that we would never be able to make it to the Oscars,” Rasoulof shared during an interview via an interpreter. “The Oscars were never part of my imagination because I was always at war with the Iranian government.” Unlike the other categories at the Oscars, the selection for the Best International Film category is not directly controlled by the Academy; each nation submits a single film of its choice.
In some instances, this selection process might be straightforward. The inaugural winner of the category, which was originally called “Best Foreign Language Film,” was Federico Fellini’s “La Strada,” representing Italy in 1957. However, disputes are often commonplace regarding which film a country should submit, particularly when undemocratic regimes are in charge of the selection. Other filmmakers, such as Iranian New Wave director Jafar Panahi, have also felt disheartened about the chances of their films being chosen. Panahi’s 2022 film “No Bears” remained ineligible while he was imprisoned in Iran, only being released after he engaged in a hunger strike.
Rasoulof’s film, “The Seed of the Sacred Fig,” was eventually nominated for Best International Film, but it will be representing Germany at the Oscars. He had to flee to Germany after being sentenced to flogging and a lengthy prison term in Iran. “The film, to a large degree, is now a German film,” he stated, attributing this to the influence of the distribution company and the collaborators who joined in post-production. “I’m a person who’s been ripped of his Iranian national identity.”
The international scope of the Oscars has expanded significantly in recent years. This year’s leading nominee is “Emilia Pérez,” recognized as the most nominated non-English language film in history. This Mexican film, filmed near Paris, underscores the increasingly global nature of cinema. Notably, for the seventh consecutive year, a foreign-language feature has made it to the Best Picture category—this time, with two films contending for the top honor: “Emilia Pérez” and the Brazilian film “I’m Still Here.”
The Academy’s historic win in 2020 for “Parasite” marked a pivotal moment, being the first non-English language film to take home the Best Picture honor. This victory, as director Bong Joon Ho remarked, represented overcoming the “one-inch-tall barrier of subtitles” and indicated a significant transformation within the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. Increasingly, the Academy has welcomed overseas voters to enhance its diversity, moving the Oscars toward a more global representation.
Nonetheless, the Best International Film category has faced ongoing criticism, with numerous commentators describing it as unbalanced, obsolete, and susceptible to political meddling. Critics have called for sweeping reforms to the category. The Academy has attempted to make adjustments, such as rebranding the category in 2020, and establishing rules regulating the languages of submissions. Furthermore, selections from countries now require committees made up of at least 50% “filmmakers, artists, and craftspeople,” which raises questions about who truly reflects national identity.
One notable absence from this year’s Oscar nominations is the Indian film “All We Imagine As Light” by Payal Kapadia, which many reviewers deemed the finest film of 2024. It marked the first Indian film to compete at the Cannes Film Festival in three decades. The Film Federation of India chose Kiran Rao’s “Laapataa Ladies” instead, a decision that sparked backlash as critics felt it was more glossy than substantial. Following this selection, Kapadia expressed her gratitude for “Laapataa Ladies” yet challenged the criteria the jury applied.
In Greece, discontent over the selection process prompted 20 filmmakers to withdraw their submissions in protest against the unforeseen replacement of committee members by the Ministry of Culture. Renos Haralambidis, one of the withdrawing filmmakers, argued for an independent selection committee that would enable art to thrive without government interference.
For the Academy, crucial questions arise: Should the Oscars continue to witness this annual strife in the international film category? Should governments, whether authoritarian or not, influence which films emerge as contenders for these prestigious awards? While the Academy chose not to comment for this article, these ongoing dilemmas underscore a longstanding awareness of such complexities. In some cases, the Academy even assisted countries in establishing their selection processes, such as with Bhutan’s nomination for “Lunana: A Yak in the Classroom.” Located amid geopolitical tensions, the Academy may consider various potential solutions to improve the current system—possibly forming its own selection committee, expanding the pool of nominees, or allowing select Academy committee-chosen slots to mitigate external influences.
This landscape remains contentious, as illustrated by frustrations that emerged when some believed that France should have submitted “Anatomy of a Fall” or India should have backed the acclaimed “RRR.” These shifting political tides and evolving perspectives on national identity complicate the Oscars—the Best International Film award is increasingly reflective of a complex and often tumultuous international landscape. One potential exception exists in Latvia’s submission, “Flow,” a unique animated film that boasts nominations in both the Best International Film and Best Animated Film categories; intriguing due to its lack of spoken dialogue, relying solely on animal sounds.
