IDA Invites Filmmakers to Crown the 21st Century's Greatest Docs

By BlockReel Editorial Team Documentary January 1, 2026

IDA Invites Filmmakers to Crown the 21st Century's Greatest Docs

The IDA's announcement of a poll to identify the 25 Greatest Documentaries of the 21st Century isn't just another listicle for film buffs. This is a moment, I think. It's a statement about our craft's evolving impact, a pulse-check on where we've been, and a potential signpost for where we're headed. For working documentarians, for those of us mired in funding pitches or the grind of a prolonged edit, it's an opportunity to collectively define our canon, or at least, a significant chunk of it, as we navigate an increasingly complex media landscape.

The significance here isn't just in the 'greatest' moniker itself, but in the institutional weight of the IDA behind it. This isn't some online forum's ranking. This is an organization that champions the documentary form, that advocates for its practitioners, and whose imprimatur carries genuine industry clout. A list like this, particularly one shaped by the community itself, inevitably informs curriculum, influences grant committees, and perhaps most importantly, provides a critical touchstone for us all. When a film lands on a list curated with this level of rigor and community involvement, it elevates its profile not just culturally but, quite frankly, economically. It’s part of the conversation when acquisition teams are looking, when curators are programming, and when educators are teaching. I've often seen how a nod from a respected body can shift a film's trajectory, from niche festival darling to a recognized classic that finds its way into licensing deals years down the line. It's the difference between a film being seen and a film being remembered.

The Architectures of Influence: How Your Vote Reaches the Canon

The IDA's methodology for this poll is crucial, particularly its emphasis on community participation. They're inviting filmmakers, critics, festival programmers, academics, and, yes, documentary enthusiasts, though I suspect the loudest voices will come from within the professional ranks. This democratic approach is both a strength and a potential minefield. A strength because it aims for a broad consensus, moving beyond the tastes of a select few gatekeepers. A minefield because, frankly, our industry is as susceptible to recency bias and algorithmic echo chambers as any other.

Participating isn't just about ticking boxes for your favorite films; it's an act of critical engagement. The IDA hasn't yet detailed the exact mechanics of submission beyond inviting nominations, but I imagine it will involve a tiered process, an initial call for a wide range of nominations, perhaps followed by a curated longlist, and then a final voting round. For those of us with strong opinions, and I know many of us do, this is where precision matters. Don't just list any old film. Think about _why_ a film resonates, _how_ it pushed the boundaries of form or content, _what_ its lasting impact has been. Perhaps you remember the conversations after seeing `Man on Wire` or `Bowling for Columbine` for the first time. Or the ethical debates ignited by `Capturing the Friedmans`. These are the films that fundamentally altered how we thought about non-fiction storytelling.

My advice to colleagues participating: go beyond your personal favorites. Consider the films that forced shifts in our perception of what a documentary could be. Films that broke technical ground. Think about `Leviathan` (2012), the immersive, non-narrative, sensorially overwhelming experience crafted by Lucien Castaing-Taylor and Véréna Paravel. Shot primarily on small, consumer-grade digital cameras like a GoPro HERO (some sources say even a Canon 5D Mark II was used, though very unconventionally), often attached directly to equipment or dangled into the churning sea. This wasn't about pristine image capture; it was about raw, visceral experience, about sound design that pulls you into the deep, and about an anti-anthropocentric perspective. It was a technical and aesthetic departure.

Or consider `For Sama` (2019), a masterclass in deeply personal, urgent filmmaking under unimaginable duress. Waad al-Kateab, a citizen journalist, filmed her life, her love, and the horrors around her on a Canon 5D Mark III, a camera designed for relatively stable environments, not war zones. The intimacy achieved, the sheer nerve of her camera operation and the unflinching gaze, created a document of profound human resilience. These aren't films chosen just for their narratives, but for their _how_, how they were made, how they embraced limitations, how they used the medium itself to amplify their message.

Defining 'Greatness': Beyond 4K to Lasting Resonance

What truly defines a "great" 21st-century documentary? It's a question I often wrestle with. The 21st century has seen an explosion of documentary output, driven largely by accessible digital technology, initially MiniDV, then DSLRs, now mirrorless and affordable cinema cameras. This technological democratization meant that stories from every corner of the globe, often told by those traditionally excluded from mainstream media, could find an audience.

I believe greatness in this era isn't just about production value or a compelling story, though both are undoubtedly important. It's about a film's ability to transcend its immediate context, to spark ongoing conversations, and to demonstrate a profound understanding of its subject matter, often through innovative form. Look at `Searching for Sugar Man` (2012). Malik Bendjelloul, working on a shoestring budget, famously used an iPhone app to simulate Super 8 film when he ran out of money for traditional film stock. The emotional journey, the narrative twist, the pure filmmaking ingenuity, that's a criterion that belongs on any "greatest" list. It shows that vision can overcome budgetary constraints.

And then there's the evolving nature of the genre itself. We've seen the rise of subjective, essayistic docs. The hybrid form, blurring lines between fiction and non-fiction. Immersive, experiential cinema. These aren't just stylistic quirks; they are fundamental shifts in how we understand and present reality. Consider Kirsten Johnson's `Cameraperson` (2016), a meta-documentary that deconstructs the very act of filming, questioning the ethics of the gaze, the relationship between filmmaker and subject, and what it means to bear witness. Johnson, a veteran DP, pulled footage from her decades-long career, shot on everything from Betacam to RED, to craft a deeply personal and intellectually rigorous treatise on documentary practice. It's a film about the craft itself, an insider's look at the compromises and choices we make every day behind the lens.

Technical criteria, for us, will often intersect with these broader artistic considerations. Has a film pushed the boundaries of cinematography in non-fiction? Think of Bradford Young's work on `Arrival` (2016), a narrative feature, but his approach to natural light and texture, his understanding of faces and spaces, profoundly influences documentary DPs. Or closer to home, the way certain films have utilized drone technology not as a gimmick but as an integral narrative tool, like in `Honeyland` (2019), where the aerial shots of Hatidze's arduous journey with her bees are not just beautiful, but communicate scale and isolation. We've gone from bulky Arri SR2s (which I'm still fond of, for obvious reasons) to nimble RED Komodos or Sony FX9s that allow for previously impossible access and visual fluidity. A "great" 21st-century documentary uses these tools not just for higher resolution, but for deeper insight.

Ethical considerations, too, play a monumental role. The documentaries that have sparked the most intense debates, `The Act of Killing`, `Leaving Neverland`, `Collective`, are often those grappling with profound moral dilemmas, not just in their subjects but in their very making. How were subjects treated? What risks were taken? What biases were inherent in the framing? These are questions that filmmakers endlessly dissect, and they're undoubtedly part of a film's lasting impact.

The Ripple Effect: Societal Impact and Industry Recognition

The films that make such a prestigious list don't just gain a shiny badge. They gain renewed visibility, influencing distribution, streaming platforms, and educational institutions. This isn't abstract for us. Increased visibility translates to increased demand for certain types of stories, certain approaches, and importantly, certain filmmakers. A film's placement on such a list can significantly prolong its shelf life, leading to new screenings, retrospective programs, and more academic study. For the filmmakers involved, it's a profound validation, potentially opening doors to new projects, new funding streams, and greater recognition within the industry.

I believe this recognition also serves as a critical feedback loop for emerging filmmakers. When you see films like `My Octopus Teacher` (2020) making waves for its intimate, first-person narrative approach, shot with specialized underwater cameras like the RED Monstro with custom housings, it validates a certain kind of personal, visually sophisticated storytelling. When `Free Solo` (2018) blows minds with its astonishing aerial and vantage-point cinematography, a feat of precision rigging and camera operation, utilizing everything from high-end cinema cameras like the Sony Venice or RED Epic Dragon to smaller accessible cameras like the Panasonic GH5 with custom stabilization, it sets a new bar for adventurous, high-stakes documentary work. These aren't just entertaining films; they are technical marvels that push the boundaries of what's logistically and cinematically possible in non-fiction.

But the impact extends beyond the industry's closed-door conversations. Documentaries, at their best, shape public discourse. A film like `An Inconvenient Truth` (2006), often criticized for its didacticism, but undeniable in its reach, shifted the global conversation around climate change. `RBG` (2018) introduced a generation to a legal icon in a way that dry biographies never could. These films, when recognized and championed, have the power to educate, persuade, and motivate social change on a grand scale. They're not just art; they're instruments of societal reflection and, sometimes, catalysts for action.

So, when the IDA asks for your vote, don't take it lightly. This isn't just a survey. It's an opportunity to shape the narrative of our craft, to champion the films that have truly moved the needle, both artistically and culturally. It's a chance to highlight the films that demonstrate how powerful, how challenging, and how utterly essential our work as documentarians truly is. And I, for one, will be paying close attention to what films emerge at the top. Because what we celebrate as "great" today often dictates what gets made, and remembered, tomorrow.

---

Related Guide: Get your documentary in front of audiences with our Film Festival Strategy Guide.