PSA: Why Oscar movie contenders are always in the inconvenient stage between theaters and DVD

First, I believe that studios release films they believe will be Oscar contenders so that the blackout period between silver screen and widescreen falls over Oscar night.

I believe they do this because they understand the Academy and its vagaries.

The problem is one of primary concern during and memory of the viewing of the movie.

Around Oscar time, Academy members must be thinking "is this an Oscar-worthy movie?" in that last-minute panic of a teenager who hasn't quite finished his homework five minutes before class. I imagine it cuts down on the ability to judge objectively ("I'll write an essay on how the Friday the 13th movies are just like Far From the Madding Crowd!") and makes the faded memories of movies that came out earlier in the year even more distant ("I don't have time to consult my notes -- this one's good enough!").

But having a movie out in the theater during the Oscars is also a problem, in case you have Academy members who are "serious" about their "choice." They might do actual research if given the chance, and see the movie multiple times. If they do so, they might realize that it doesn't hold up to multiple viewings, where another movie might. All the worse if the movie is already out on DVD, away from the glamour and overwhelming nature of the big screen, and available for a thousand viewings including commentary tracks.

So there's the panic factor, which is the whole raison d'etre for timing.

There's also the basic thematic content factor, which is what most people talk about when they talk about "Oscar-worthy" films.

The trick to getting an Oscar, in other words, like the trick to writing a best-selling nonfiction book (Abraham Lincoln + puppies), is more about the scanability of the major themes in hectic once-overs than about the movie itself:

They should make vague gestures toward gravitas -- the Holocaust is often a winner, or, failing that, war in general (though in that order: Schindler's List's "Best Picture" vs. Saving Private Ryan's "Best Director") -- but not say anything that could be intelligently disagreed-with ("war is bad," "the Holocaust was bad," or exceptionally, "the Holocaust was bittersweetly funny and Italian").

Winning themes should appear to be controversial without actually being controversial. (Remember Crash? "Racism is bad"? Cutting edge stuff, there.)

All the better if they feature an actor who's been nominated several times but not won; Hollywood loves an underdog, even one it's created itself.

In other words, Kate Winslet as a nun during the Holocaust, released over Christmas? Gold.