What Movies Qualify for Best Original Screenplay and Adapted Screenplay Oscars, Explained
In light of the upcoming 96th Academy Awards, there has been much praise and criticism surrounding the nominations. Amidst a widespread discussion about whether or not director Greta Gerwig was snubbed of a best director nomination for Barbie, a smaller conversation has circulated on social media, including an article by The New York Times.
The question lingers on whether or not Barbie was incorrectly nominated for Best Adapted Screenplay while the Leonard Bernstein biopic Maestro was nominated for Best Original Screenplay. I have an explanation.
Due to standards by the Writers Guild of America and the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, biographical films can qualify as original screenplays if they’re not based on pre-published material. There are two types of original films: Ones with stories entirely written from scratch (which comprise the majority of Oscar nominees for Best Original Screenplay) and films that reinterpret real people and events.
Why aren’t they considered concrete adaptations? Because original biopics or films depicting factual events, such as King Richard (2021) or Titanic (1997), respectively, are different from screenplays adapted from tangible material. They also tend to be more subjective, if not entirely fictional, while books or documentaries often serve as the basis for adapted biopics.
Original biopics are the equivalent of an artist painting a portrait of a person or event from scratch. If the painter used a book or previously created painting as a reference, it’s an adaptation.
UPDATE (02/27/2024): Before 2003, the Oscars category for original screenplays was titled Best Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen.
As for Barbie, writer’s guilds and the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences consider sequels and remakes as adaptations, often referred to in a collective group as intellectual property or I.P. films. Even if they differ substantially from their original material, they’re legitimate adaptations. Film fans may consider Charlie Kaufman’s Adaptation original in its authentically unique and wild interpretation of the creative process and transcending its source material, The Orchid Thief by Susan Orlean. But it remains loosely based on Orlean’s novel — an adaptation of an adaptation about the process of adaptation (wink). Debatably, the same clause applies to Barbie.
Mattel Films is one of Barbie’s backers, and the story reinterprets the characters of Barbie and Ken in new ways. I can see the argument for it being an original film, which was determined by the Writers Guild of America. I was happy to see it win Best Original Screenplay at this year’s Critics’ Choice Awards, but its nomination for Best Adapted Screenplay makes sense, too.
Given this year’s screenplay nominees and the past, the Academy Awards have been mostly consistent in nominating original and adapted material. Two notable blind spots were selecting Boogie Nights, based on a short film, and Memento, based on a short story, for Best Original Screenplay in 1998 and 2001, respectively.
Original films released by Hollywood and indie studios outnumber I.P. films yearly, yet despite this and their annual awards, they continue to be erased or brushed aside. The quality of individual films is a subjective matter. If the Writers Guild of America and Academy Awards — one of the most beloved and entrusted symbols of accomplishment for cinema — have consistently determined these standards for originals and adaptations, I hope they follow through again for 2024.
I will continue to advocate for original films being made visible and seeing them if their quality warrants as such, biopic or not. I anticipate seeing all the nominees and winners on Oscars night, including which film wins among the nominees for Best Original Screenplay: Anatomy of a Fall, The Holdovers, Maestro, May December, and Past Lives.
