2023 Oscar-Nominated Documentary Shorts

Edwin Arnaudin: We've now reached the black sheep of the shorts offerings, a program so commercially unfriendly that the Fine Arts Theatre is only running its Animated and Live-action counterparts. Is the caution warranted or is there enough firepower here to recommend people head to Grail Moviehouse and check it out?

James Rosario: I'm not sure about firepower, but I think this year's shorts have enough going for them to merit a recommendation, at least for viewers who already enjoy documentaries. Even while nothing really stood out to me, I believe there is at least something for nearly every taste to get behind.

From a purely cinematic standpoint, I'm not sure you can do much better than “Haulout,” about a Russian marine biologist studying walrus migration in the Arctic Ocean. It might not seem like much, but there's a moment in the film where the size and scope of this research are brought into such startlingly sharp focus that I was literally taken aback by it. Moments like these are what make me love well-made documentaries.

Did “Halout”'s big reveal hit you like it hit me?

Edwin: Can't say that it did. A slow-cinema-style documentary is not exactly my thing and, though the film's cinematography is lovely, the overall experience was an endurance test.

I had the opposite experience with "Stranger at the Gate," the chronicle of a Muncie, Indiana man's plans to blow up the local Islamic Center. The film plays like an old-fashioned spy thriller and kept me guessing up to its stunning revelation. Even then, it feels like something is missing to round out the story, but it's easily the most engaging of the bunch for me.

James: I did not see that swerve coming. Where I originally thought the story was going, and where it eventually ended up were on near-opposite ends of the dramatic spectrum. The filmmakers did a great job of manipulating expectations, but not in a way that made me feel cheated. I agree that something is missing — a more developed emotional conclusion, perhaps — but that doesn't take away from the film's overall power.

I also found myself rooting for "The Martha Mitchell Effect," about the Nixon-hating wife of Attorney General John Mitchell. I almost always enjoy deep dives into historical events, especially when they concern aspects of those events I was previously unaware of. "Martha" is chock full of highly entertaining archival footage and audio recordings that paints both a damning picture of the Nixon White House, and the exuberance of a woman on a mission. It doesn't break any molds, but it's made well and tells a hell of story.

Edwin: I was likewise enthralled with "Mitchell" — a Watergate story I didn't know at all — and think it does a terrific job delving into her life during the Nixon era. But then it kind of falls apart in covering her final years. Her decline was swift, but here it falls off a cliff and left me feeling somewhat empty at the end.

It's one of two nominees from Netflix, the other being the touching "The Elephant Whisperers," about an Indian couple who raise abandoned pachyderms on a preserve. The animal and nature photography is wonderful — baby elephants are so cute!! — but I kept wondering why this story was being told now. Not that every film needs a sense of urgency, and one is sort of present, but it ultimately feels a bit frivolous and probably not Oscar worthy.

James: I certainly enjoyed watching "Elephants" — I mean, come on, what's not to love about baby elephants? — but I find it a bit hard to believe there weren't any other options for Oscar contender-ship. As much as I appreciate the subjects and subject matter, I couldn't shake the feeling that I'd seen "Elephants" before. Maybe all nature documentaries are starting to blur together for me — who knows?

Edwin: That leaves "How Do You Measure a Year." As a father of a daughter, did this Boyhood-like experiment wreck you?

James: Unfortunately, it did not wreck me in any way. I was intrigued by the premise, and was looking forward to some emo-teen cringe, but it never happened. This kind of experiment only works if there is some level of family tension. Lacking that, we aren't left with much to latch onto. As it stands, "Year" doesn't offer any insight into generational differences or family dynamics. I'm sure everyone involved are perfectly nice people, but they're kind of boring. Some sparks would have been nice. It isn't a bad film, just not very profound.

Edwin: I wasn't necessarily looking for drama; just something more than what's offered. The passage of 16 years in less than 30 minutes is fascinating on a visual level, and I enjoyed seeing young Ellie's mood shift from year to year, sometimes in surprising ways — hey, I'm child-free. What do I know? — but her answers to her filmmaker father's same set of questions aren't exactly revelatory and the film doesn't feel like Oscar material, either.

Nevertheless, I find myself not nearly as pissed off by this program as I was with the others, yet the lack of a true stunner keeps me from giving it the highest grade of the three. So, B it is.

James: I think a B is fair. There aren't any complete duds, and some of the films even have some memorable moments. Honestly, after the mostly complete bummers from the last handful of years, 2023's doc entries are refreshing by comparison alone.

Grade: B. Not rated, but with adult themes and language. Now playing at Grail Moviehouse