an Oscar alternative

With a ceremony that lasts hours and awards that can be disappointing to some, the Academy Awards become the target of more complaints than filmmaker Michael Moore makes about the war.\nBut some IU alumni are not simply sitting voicing their disgust; they are acting on it.\nFollowing 1989's Oscars in which "Pulp Fiction" won barely any awards, IU alumni Brian Owens, Andy Billings and Julie Thompson chose not to stand for any more lame Oscar picks and to put on an award show of their own. Thirteen years later, their creation -- the Bubakar Awards -- is still making an effort to recognize the films that deserve it.\nBirth of Bubakar\nThe name for the awards comes from a nickname Owens was given in college. In 1988, after watching countless hours of NCAA basketball in college, he and his friends would joke about the name of Georgetown guard Boubacar Aw to the point that one of his friends began to call him "Bubakar" (the spelling was changed).\n"When we decided to have our own award show, someone suggested it be called the Bubakar Awards," Owens said. "Lucky for us, we later found out it is Swahili for "noble." So, it all worked out."\nUnlike massive 6-foot-7-inch Aw, the first ceremonies held by the committee were on a small scale.\n"It was just a party in Bloomington in my apartment, not really a big deal," Owens said. \nOwens said after a while many of the participants moved away, causing him to have the ceremony in places across the country such as Peoria, Ill., and San Francisco. \nWith all of the Bubakar Awards nomination committee members separated from each other across the nation, Owens decided to create a Web site, www.bubakar.com, to tally the votes.\nThrough the magic of search engines, the site received substantial hits. So far the site has received more than 27,000 visitors and nearly 128,000 hits overall.\nEventually the media caught on and in the March 2001 issue of In Style, the Bubakar Awards were featured in an article on Oscar parties.\nAfter this attention, Owens decided to kick his show up a notch.\n"So we thought, 'If In Style thinks we have elaborate galas, then why not have them,'" he said. "So we went all out."\nWith national attention, the Bubakar Awards made some influential friends in the film industry. Today, the group's 25-member nominating committee consists of not only friends of the founders, including eight alums, but movie experts such as Nat Rogers, editor of The Film Experience, Rick Curnette, founder and editor of The Film Journal, and Sasha Stone, editor of www.OscarWatch.com.\nEach member simply submits his or her top five picks for each category ranked in order of preference. The group tallies the scores making the nominees available to the public for voting.\nUpstaging the Academy\nThe types of movies that usually win Bubakar Awards separate this alternative ceremony from the Academy Awards.\nFor past Best Picture nominees, the Bubakar Awards group selected "In the Bedroom" to beat "A Beautiful Mind" in 2001, "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon" to beat "Gladiator" in 2000, "Good Will Hunting" to beat "Titanic" in 1997 and "Fargo" to beat "The English Patient" in 1996. \nOnly three times since their inception have the Bubakar Awards agreed with the Oscars in the Best Picture category, but founders say the contrast is not intentional.\n"Most often we agree on many of the nominees, but not the overall winners," Owens said.\nThough it may be hard for some people to believe, Billings said part of the reason why the Bubakar Awards are so different is because the nominees see far more films than many Academy Award committee members who are merely selected because of their prestige.\n"The people of the Oscars simply need to actually see more movies," he said. "A lot of them vote based on what they are told is going to win or for political reasons. Also, many smaller films do not get a fair deal because some other more popular film is seen by more of the committee members."\nThe Bubakar Awards group also makes certain changes from the Academy Awards' rules. The actor, director or screenwriter nominated in one category may be nominated for different movies in the same category, while the Oscars only allow only one nomination per person per movie. For example, this year John C. Reilly was nominated for Best Supporting Actor for his performance in "Chicago," "The Hours," "Gangs of New York" and "The Good Girl."\nIU speech team coach and doctoral candidate David Moscowitz, who sits on the nominating committee with his wife Leigh, said one aspect that makes the Bubakar Awards unique is a category the Academy doesn't have -- Best Casting, which recognizes, "the film, and the casting director, that assembled the right people for each part."\nComplaints with the Oscars\nMost years, the Bubakar Awards disagree completely with the Oscars, but despite some voting differences, many of the members said they were pleased with this year's Oscars.\n"This year I walked away from the awards not really upset about them," Billings said.\nStill, the committee swayed from the Academy on some issues.\n"My biggest complaint was giving so many nominations to 'The Hours' and hardly any for 'Far from Heaven,'" Owens said. \nWith rumors circulating before the Oscars that director Martin Scorcese would take home the golden trophy for "Gangs of New York" simply because he didn't win years before for "Goodfellas," many committee members said they oppose the Oscars' policy of giving make-up awards.\n"It isn't his best," Billings said. "And giving make-up awards causes so much trouble."\nBoth Owens and Billings said giving an award to someone one year because he or she did not win in the years before, but does not deserve it now, causes an endless cycle.\n"A couple years ago Al Pacino won for 'Scent of a Woman,' because he didn't win for all of these other films, but really Denzel Washington should have won for 'Malcolm X' that year," Owens said. "Now, years later, Denzel wins for 'Training Day' when really Russell Crowe really should have won for 'A Beautiful Mind' instead, but it's OK because he shouldn't have won the year before for 'Gladiator.' It's just a huge cycle and it wouldn't happen if they just give it to the person who deserves it that year."\nSteps in the Right Direction\nNot only does the Bubakar Awards group try to make a difference by giving films the credit they deserve, but the founders are trying to use their sway to make a difference in the lives of others.\nAt their ceremony at Rock Lobster restaurant in Indianapolis this year, they charged a $10 cover fee that would be donated to Primary Colors, a fellowship of Indianapolis artists bringing the arts to underprivileged and under-represented youth. \nOwens said Robert Evans, a Primary Colors board member served in Afghanistan. Evans was stunned to discover that children in Afghanistan have no concept of what art is. As a result Primary Colors distributes the supplies to Afghani youth and gives them art instruction through Evans. \nBubakar future\nOverall, Owens said he is satisfied with the growth of the awards. He recently added reviews to the site and coverage of this year's Toronto International Film Festival. If the influence of the Bubakar Awards catches on, the Oscars may become quite different.\n"We, the Bubakar nominators and voters, are what the 'popular' in popular culture is all about -- a group of industry outsiders expressing how we feel about a source of art and culture that excites us," Moscowitz said. "Movies are probably the most effective barometer of popular culture; if anybody can vote for school board president, then it's nice that anybody can also vote for what movies were deemed successful, too"