Who would have thought Jesus Christ and Che Guevara would have so much common? They are the subjects of two of 2004's most-talked-about releases, but neither Mel Gibson's Newmarket drama "The Passion of the Christ" nor Walter Salles' Focus Features biopic "The Motorcycle Diaries," respectively, will compete for the coveted foreign-language feature statuette come Oscar night.

Thanks to complex -- some might say arcane -- rules that continue to baffle and enrage many in Hollywood and beyond, those films and three other acclaimed releases -- Joshua Marston's Fine Line drama "Maria Full of Grace," Jean-Pierre Jeunet's Warner Independent Pictures romancer "A Very Long Engagement" and Pedro Almodovar's Sony Pictures Classics drama "Bad Education" -- are not among official submissions in the foreign-language Oscar race.

High-profile contenders have been excluded in years past -- most notably ahead of the 2003 ceremony, when Alfonso Cuaron's "Y Tu Mama Tambien" and Almodovar's "Talk to Her" were ineligible for various reasons -- but never before has the category been this devoid of logical choices.

It appears, finally, that the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences is preparing to address the situation: The organization is reviewing its rules governing foreign-language Oscar entries and expects new regulations to be in place ahead of next year's awards.

Speaking from New Zealand, where he is filming Buena Vista's "The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe," producer Mark Johnson, chairman of the Academy's foreign-language film selection committee, confirms that meetings have taken place among several AMPAS members and governors. He plans to address the issue more fully upon returning to Los Angeles.

"I'll wait until after the (upcoming awards) ceremonies," Johnson says. "I'd like to have a broader cross-section (of voters), and I'd like to find different ways of making sure that the demographic of the committee is much better -- that it much better reflects the Academy at large."

The Academy has been criticized by its members and by specialty filmmakers for allowing a process that does not always recognize the best movies. Almodovar, who won an original screenplay Oscar for "Talk," calls the foreign-language contest "humiliating," adding that because of the arcane rules, "it is treated as a minor category, when it should be up there with best director, best actor (and) best picture."

This year's five high-profile ineligible films are so for two reasons: Three did not meet eligibility requirements to represent a single nation -- "Passion," "Maria" (whose writer-director is American and star is Colombian) and "Diaries" (Brazilian director, Mexican-American writer, Mexican star) -- and two were not the official submissions of their respective nations (Alejandro Amenabar's Fine Line drama "The Sea Inside" was picked ahead of "Education" to represent Spain, and Christophe Barratier's Miramax romancer "Les Choristes" was picked ahead of "Engagement" by France).

The absence of such acclaimed films has provoked an unusually vocal outcry from Academy critics.

"I don't think much of how the system works," says Endeavor partner John Lesher, who represents such top-flight foreign directors as Salles, Fernando Meirelles and Hector Babenco. "This whole idea of countries nominating films is ultimately about laziness on the part of this group because they can limit it to one film per country; that doesn't take in the reality that in any given year there may be more than one film in any given country that's worthy of consideration, like the Amenabar and Almodovar movies this year."

Adds Samuel Goldwyn Films president Meyer Gottlieb, "There are a number of things that need to be at least revised." Still, he acknowledges, "this is a process; it is not something that can change overnight or over a brief period of time because it is a complicated issue."

Two aspects of the foreign-language Oscar issue have elicited the most flak: the manner in which films are selected by nations -- each may submit only one a year -- and the manner in which the Academy then chooses nominees and winners. On the former point, each nation may select its own candidate, and while AMPAS vets each nominating board to ensure fairness and occasionally has added a film of its choosing after deeming a panel politically biased, such intervention has been rare.

The problem with that, as Lesher notes, is that nations such as Spain, Italy and France might boast an embarrassment of riches during a given year, while other nations might possess so few candidates that a film gets submitted nearly automatically.

A second problem relates to movies that do not qualify for submission by a single nation, as happened in this year's race with "Passion," "Maria" and "Diaries." Johnson defends the status quo, noting that the foreign-language Oscar is given to a nation rather than a producer or director, but what separates an eligible film from an ineligible one nonetheless can be a very thin line.

Ecuador's "Cronicas" and Chile's "Machuca" were deemed eligible this year, for example, even though both movies possess somewhat mixed nationality pedigrees. "Cronicas" director Sebastian Cordero, a USC graduate, notes that his film stars American actor John Leguizamo alongside Mexico's Damian Alcazar and was produced with the help of Mexican companies belonging to Cuaron and director Guillermo Del Toro.

"We had a very diverse crew -- very international, from different parts of Latin America," Cordero says. "We barely made it in terms of the elements that needed to be there, but we did qualify as an Ecuadorean film."

Similarly, "Machuca" helmer Andres Wood notes: "The film is a co-production with Spain, with some capital from England and France. There was also an English co-writer and producer, Mamoun Hassan."

In an indication of how complicated and global the movie business has become, Wood adds, Hassan was born in Saudi Arabia and lived there for several years before moving to the United Kingdom (other producers on "Machuca" hail from France and Spain, where the film's sound mix was done). There are relatively few current foreign-language Oscar entries like Norway's "Hawaii, Oslo," which was made entirely with a Scandinavian cast and crew (though director Erik Poppe notes that a Swedish cinematographer and a Danish producer worked on the film).

While most foreign directors describe relatively fair nominating processes in their respective nations, they face vastly different levels of competition. "Choristes" was up against dozens of other eligible films, but "Cronicas" faced hardly any competition -- and Wood says "Machuca" was chosen from a pool of eight entries.

Lesher believes that such inequalities could be overcome simply if the Academy deemed eligible any foreign-language title released in the United States.

"Keep the system the way it is -- one film, one country -- but add to that any film in domestic release in the (United States) in the year of selection," he says. "This takes care of the idea that Academy members are going to have to look at 13 Brazilian films in any year because they are not going to get (domestic) distribution. It will democratize the system, and it will take care of a 'Motorcycle Diaries' situation."

But AMPAS executive director Bruce Davis believes that adding 20 or 30 foreign-language films to the 50 or so now in contention each year would make it even more difficult to find members willing to watch them. "It is already a problem to find a committee to sit through 50 or more films," he says.

Nearly everyone involved admits that fixing the category's problems will not be easy.

"The Academy is faced with an almost-impossible situation," says James Schamus, who wrote and produced the 2000 foreign-language Oscar-winning release "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon." "There are about 4,000 foreign-language movies made every year, if you count Egypt and India in the mix. Here is the issue: You desire to be inclusive, but how do you see all the films?"

More complicated still is refining how AMPAS selects nominees and winners from the pool of candidates. Any Academy member is now allowed to join the foreign-language committee, so long as he or she agrees to see a hefty percentage of the films screened. AMPAS breaks the contenders into three groups, and a voting member must agree to see 70% of the movies in their group.

What that means in practice, though, is that only members who are not too busy have time to see the necessary number of films -- a matter complicated further by a rule stating that anyone involved with any of the entries, no matter how tangentially, is barred from voting. Gottlieb notes that because his company is releasing South Korea's "Tae Guk Gi" domestically, he cannot vote on any of this year's foreign-language entries -- even though, like other Academy members, he can vote in other categories.

"There are so few members who qualify to vote; around 250 Academy members vote (in the foreign-language category), and 80 votes gets you an Oscar," Gottlieb says. "But this is an Oscar for best film, a best-picture Oscar! The Academy's obligation is to expand the number of members who participate in the process."

By excluding members involved in making foreign-language entries, the Academy in effect limits the voting to older, often more-conservative members. Those who see the requisite number of entries assign them points on a 1-10 scale, and the five that receive the most points receive Academy Award nominations.

But the problem does not stop there: Unlike other major Oscar categories, those voting in the foreign-language race must agree to see all five nominees at specially arranged screenings -- not on DVD.

That practice has divided experts. Fredell Pogodin, a publicist who has represented several foreign-language entries, defends it.

"I don't think using screeners is a good idea because not everybody has a big screen, and with foreign-language films they have to read the subtitles," he says.

Gottlieb counters that if screeners are sent for other films, then they should be allowed for foreign-language titles.

"We have to deal with reality, and the reality is that in all general categories, members can see films on tape or DVD," he says. "More important, they don't have to see all the films to vote."

Gottlieb also believes that it is too much to expect Academy members to see all foreign-language nominees during the newly shortened annual window between the Oscar nominations announcement and ceremony.

"You are asking 6,000 people to see the five nominated films in a movie theater on dates they don't control, and all within a period of three to four weeks -- and they can't," he says.

But Davis remains skeptical.

"The people who attack the system say the same stupid things they were saying 20 years ago," he says. "The complaints come from distributors who clearly have an agenda, which is to eligibilize anything that opens (in the United States)."

Nonetheless, Johnson notes that moves toward change are under way.

"My goal is to somewhat radically revamp the whole selection process," he says. "We have already started discussing ways of addressing change, and the board of governors has been extremely supportive of investigating ways to revamp it and revitalize it. This a pretty involved and lengthy process, but the foreign-language film award, I know, will be much richer in the process."