\n<\/p>\n
If you\u2019ve watched this year\u2019s Oscar-nominated films \u2014 actually, if you\u2019ve been in a movie theater at all recently \u2014 you\u2019ve almost certainly seen the work of a choreographer.<\/p>\n
Some of the most prominent dances have earned critical praise: Constanza Macras\u2019s delightfully unhinged duet<\/a> for \u201cPoor Things.\u201d Justin Peck\u2019s ardent dream ballet<\/a> for \u201cMaestro.\u201d Fatima Robinson\u2019s showstopping love letters to Black social dance<\/a> for \u201cThe Color Purple.\u201d Jennifer White and Lisa Welham\u2019s fizzily heroic numbers<\/a> for \u201cBarbie.\u201d<\/p>\n Other choreographers contributed in quieter, though no less essential, ways. Nobody would call the \u201cKillers of the Flower Moon\u201d fire scene \u2014 in which workers stoke a hellish blaze as part of an insurance fraud scheme \u2014 a dance number. But the choreographer Michael Arnold shaped the actors\u2019 demonic movements<\/a> for maximum biblical effect<\/a>.<\/p>\n Collectively, the films above earned 37 Oscar nominations. None of their choreographers will be honored, or likely even mentioned, at the Academy Awards ceremony on Sunday.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n Why isn\u2019t there an Oscar for best choreography? It\u2019s a question people in the dance world have been asking for decades.<\/p>\n And there\u2019s no satisfying answer.<\/p>\n Imaginative, world-expanding dance helped make Hollywood what it is, defining the movie musicals of its golden age. So many classic movies live and breathe through their dance numbers, marvels of choreographic wit and technical ingenuity. Today\u2019s <\/strong>film choreographers also <\/strong>shape far more than steps, creating scenes that propel plot in ways that dialogue can\u2019t. It makes sense that dance scenes frequently go viral: Good film choreography can capture, succinctly and with striking clarity, the essence of a character, relationship or problem.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n \u201cA well-choreographed movie scene can have a huge cultural impact,\u201d said Kathryn Burns, a film and television choreographer. \u201cThat deserves recognition.\u201d<\/p>\n While outstanding choreography in television, theater and music videos is recognized \u2014 by the Emmy Awards, the Tonys and MTV Video Music Awards \u2014 movie dance essentially goes unheralded at the major awards ceremonies. The Oscars omission carries a special sting: The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, which presents the Academy Awards, used to<\/em> celebrate choreography. From 1936 to 1938, the Oscar ceremony included an award for best dance direction.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n Over the years, various artists and allies have unsuccessfully campaigned for a best choreography category. One hurdle: Choreographers are significantly underrepresented in the academy. As of early 2023, it counted just one choreographer among its 10,000-plus members, Vincent Paterson, known for his work on \u201cEvita\u201d and \u201cThe Birdcage.<\/em>\u201d<\/p>\n Then came a breakthrough. Last year, the academy announced the creation of its new Production and Technology branch, the first to explicitly include choreographers. At least on paper, it should help more dance artists become members, potentially creating inside support for the establishment of a regular choreography award. Robinson was invited to join the new branch last June.<\/p>\n Choreographers also now have an organization to lobby on their behalf, the recently formed Choreographers Guild<\/a>, for which Burns serves as president. In November, she and other members of the guild met with academy representatives to discuss the new branch and the issue of choreographer representation. Both parties described the meeting as positive.<\/p>\n These are all just baby steps toward the establishment of a best choreography category. And on the long list of issues dance artists face \u2014 from improper crediting to inadequate compensation \u2014 you might assume awards recognition ranks relatively low. (Worrying about an Oscar? In this economy?)<\/p>\n But Paterson said the powerful symbolism of an Academy Award could help film-industry choreographers achieve their more practical goals.<\/p>\n \u201cIt comes down to legitimacy,\u201d Paterson said. \u201cTo give us an award would be to recognize us as equal to the other creative people we rub elbows with on film sets. An Oscar-winning choreographer is going to get a different kind of respect.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n Film choreography emerged as a distinct art in the 1930s, when Hollywood started churning out musicals. Spectacular dance routines became a major selling point for audiences, and studios fought over the highest-profile dance directors: Busby Berkeley, Seymour Felix, Hermes Pan. As they devised and coached elaborate scenes, dance directors \u2014 the term \u201cchoreographer\u201d would become more common later \u2014 helped create some of the techniques of modern filmmaking, choreographing the movements of the camera along with the dancers.<\/p>\n The success of dance-forward musical films prompted the young academy to introduce a best dance direction category, beginning with films released in 1935; the first prize went to Dave Gould (1936) and later ones to Felix (1937) and Pan (1938). But the award was discontinued, and the reasons remain murky.<\/p>\n In his book \u201cFilm Choreographers and Dance Directors\u201d (1997), the writer Larry Billman suggested that the mighty directors\u2019 union objected to the term \u201cdance director,\u201d seeing these increasingly influential artists as potential threats to their power. \u201cThey refused to accept that audiences had come to see a film because of its dances,\u201d Billman wrote.<\/p>\n Without a union of their own, dance directors weren\u2019t able to fight back. The dance direction category was suspended just as Hollywood entered its most prolific musicals era. In the decades since, the academy has offered four honorary awards for excellence in choreography, to Gene Kelly<\/a> (1952), Jerome Robbins<\/a> (1962), Onna White<\/a> (1969) and Michael Kidd<\/a> (1997).<\/p>\n Shortly after receiving his award, Robbins sent a strongly worded letter to the academy\u2019s board of governors, demanding the establishment of a best choreography category. The academy \u201chas been negligent,\u201d he wrote. \u201cAn industry which honors its technicians must also acknowledge all of the artists whose contributions have helped make the American cinema\u2019s reputation.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n In her polite but firm response, Margaret Herrick, the academy\u2019s executive director, said there simply wasn\u2019t enough dance happening on film to merit a regular award. It\u2019s an argument that choreographers still hear. It\u2019s also a misperception, said Claire Ross, a dance artist and the founder of the social platform Credit the Creator<\/a>, which celebrates screen choreographers.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n The problem, Ross said, is not a lack of dance, but a lack of awareness. \u201cSince not every film needs a choreographer, choreographers aren\u2019t consistently on set,\u201d she said. \u201cSo the industry doesn\u2019t have a consistent language about what our job is and how we do our job.\u201d<\/p>\n That\u2019s particularly frustrating because film choreographers can shape so many aspects of production. Burns said she\u2019s often asked to turn a one-line prompt \u2014 \u201cAnd then they dance\u201d \u2014 into a fully fleshed-out scene. \u201cIt\u2019s like being in a writer\u2019s room with one writer,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n Choreographers coordinate with casting directors and stunt teams, advise on camera angles, and train and coach nervous actors. Robinson noted that on the film \u201cSave the Last Dance,\u201d her duties even extended to wardrobe styling: In the now-famous club scene<\/a>, \u201cJulia Stiles would never have had that head wrap on if it wasn\u2019t for me.\u201d<\/p>\n When the academy revealed last spring that it would be including choreographers in its new Production and Technology branch, Paterson felt a surge of hope. \u201cInitially it seemed, truly for the first time, like real forward progression,\u201d he said. Perhaps now more choreographers would be able to join the academy, lending their voices to the call for a regular award.<\/p>\n Then came creeping dismay. The new branch essentially functions as a catchall for the disparate artists and technicians previously orphaned as \u201cmembers at large\u201d: script supervisors, colorists, line producers. Most of these workers have no involvement with dance. That\u2019s a problem for choreographers hoping to join the academy. Each prospective member must be sponsored by two members of the branch to which they seek admission, and each academy member may sponsor only one candidate a year.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n \u201cTo ask a colorist or a post-op music supervisor what a choreographer does is absolutely absurd,\u201d Paterson said. \u201cHow can choreographers be expected to get sponsors?\u201d<\/p>\n Additionally, while directors need two film credits, and actors three, to join their academy branches, the Production and Technology branch requires eight credits. Bob Fosse (seven credits), Agnes de Mille (five) and Robbins (five) wouldn\u2019t have qualified.<\/p>\n Last year, Robinson was able to secure her academy spot with sponsorship from Paterson and a colorist who happens to be a friend. The veteran choreographer Mandy Moore wasn\u2019t so lucky.<\/p>\n Moore, whose \u201cLa La Land\u201d choreography inspired a 2017 campaign to award her an honorary Oscar<\/a>, would seem a shoo-in for academy membership. But while Robinson sponsored Moore\u2019s candidacy during the most recent membership review, Paterson had already agreed to sponsor another choreographer \u2014 and Moore couldn\u2019t get anyone else in the Production and Technology branch to sign on.<\/p>\n \u201cI\u2019ve got the clout, I\u2019ve got 15 or 16 credits,\u201d Moore said, \u201cI have all the things the academy says I need. And I still couldn\u2019t do it.\u201d<\/p>\n Moore, by the way, is creating multiple dance numbers for this year\u2019s Oscar ceremony. \u201cNever a choreographer honored, always a choreographer hired,\u201d Burns said.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n Moore plans to seek sponsorship again next round. And the cause isn\u2019t hopeless. Paterson and the dance agent Julie McDonald, who have led the recent pushes for a choreography Oscar, said the academy seems receptive to feedback. The Production and Technology branch\u2019s admission criteria might evolve over time.<\/p>\n Change of any kind tends to take a while at the large, bureaucratic and conservative Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. A proposal for an annual choreography award would have to go through the Production and Technology branch\u2019s executive committee, then to the awards committee, and finally to the board of governors for approval. The recently announced Oscar for casting direction<\/a> was the academy\u2019s first new award in more than 20 years.<\/p>\n Even those eager to get more choreographers into the academy aren\u2019t sure an annual best choreography Oscar is an attainable goal. \u201cI understand that we have to zoom out and see us as the industry sees us,\u201d Moore said. \u201cYes, there are plenty of films with dance coming out. Is there enough with Oscar-worthy dance to sustain an annual category? I don\u2019t know.\u201d<\/p>\n Moore, Burns and Ross all suggested more frequent honorary Oscars for choreography as a likelier option.<\/p>\n \u201cWhatever it is, we deserve something<\/em>,\u201d Burns said. \u201cPeople remember things because of either awards or lawsuits. Can dance get more of the awards side?\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n