Ummmmm because it was placed in the documentary catagory. Not saying it would have won or even been nominated if it was not considered a documentary but since it was that argument has no merit.
Not sure, just assumed they couldn't. If I am wrong than that just changed from a meritless argument to one with merit. See how easy it is to admit you're wrong.
I'll tell you what. Abolish Fox News (and ban all subsequent writers, talking heads, and executives from the media forever) and they'll revoke the Oscar and we'll call it even.
A student of proctology is in the morgue one day after classes, wanting to get a little practice in before the final exams. He goes over to a table where a body is lying face down. He uncovers the body and, to his surprise, he finds a cork in the corpse's rectum. Figuring that this is fairly unusual, he pulls the cork out and, to his absolute surprise, music begins playing: "I was born...on the Llano Estacado..." The student is amazed, and pops the cork back into the anus. The music stops. Totally freaked out, the student calls the Medical Examiner over to the corpse. "Look at this, this is really something," the student tells the examiner as he pulls the cork back out again. They hear: "...don't break my heart, my achy, brakey heart..." "So what?" the Medical Examiner replies, obviously unimpressed with the student's discovery. "But isn't that the most amazing thing you've ever seen?" asked the student. "Are you kidding?" replied the examiner, "Any @sshole can sing country music."
Under Academy rules, a feature film must run for more than 40 minutes and have been shown on at least a few Los Angeles-area commercial cinema screens on 35mm or 70mm film during 2002 in order to qualify for an Oscar nomination. BFC met all the requirements. It is possible that Moore felt it had no chance of getting a best picture nod, so he didn't submit it, but just as likely, he submitted it and it wasn't nominated. I couldn't find any rule that says a film can't be nominated in more than one category.
