In a move to trim the number of documentaries submitted annually for Oscar consideration, the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences is poised to require a movie review from The New York Times or The Los Angeles Times to qualify a documentary feature for the Academy Awards.

Ric Robertson, the Academy?s chief operating officer, confirmed the plan on Sunday after word of it began circulating among documentary filmmakers and their supporters. In a phone interview Robertson said it would be made public this week and would apply to films qualifying for the 2013 ceremony.

The review requirement is an unusual twist in a long list of qualifying standards that apply to the various Oscar categories, including best picture, best animated feature, best foreign language film and others. It will trim the number of films that must be viewed annually by the Academy?s small documentaries branch, which narrows the field to 15 qualifying movies, and then 5 nominees. In 2011 the branch considered 124 movies, up 23% from 101 films from a year earlier.

But the rule might diminish the prospects of those who make smaller and less prominent movies; these filmmakers have often qualified their documentaries without the kind of commercial release that typically leads to reviews by the two news organisations.

Particularly hard hit will be DocuWeeks, a programme sponsored by the International Documentary Association, which for more than a decade has let filmmakers pay a fee to have their pictures shown briefly in New York and Los Angeles, thus qualifying for awards. Under the new rule those films would be considered only if a movie critic for one of the two newspapers chose to review it, something that typically does not happen.

At least one film on this year?s Oscar qualifying list, the documentary Semper Fi: Always Faithful about the Marine Corps and tainted water at Camp Lejeune, was shown through DocuWeeks and appears not to have been reviewed in either publication before its submission. Another dozen films ? including The Mexican Suitcase, The Power of Two? and Unfinished Spaces ? qualified for Oscar consideration through the program, but also appear not to have had the reviews that will be required for next year?s awards. ?This will be a disappointment to a certain number of filmmakers,? said Thom Powers, the documentary programmer for the Toronto International Film Festival, on learning of the policy.

Powers called it ?a strange thing indeed? for the Academy to shift decision making to third parties, in this case the newspapers. But he added, ?I can understand that the Academy wants to focus its recognition on films that have had a kind of legitimate theatrical release.?

Roberts said the rule was part of an effort by the Academy to ensure that Oscars go to what he called ?genuine theatrical? movies, rather than to films that might be made primarily for television but given brief theatrical exposure.

Asked whether worthwhile films might be cut out, he said: ?We may indeed lose worthy films. But I don?t think we?ll lose worthy theatrical films.?

A draft of the proposed rule did not specify whether the review had to be included in a print edition, or might run only online. It also did not specify length, or distinguish between the sort of capsule review, which sometimes introduces festival films, and a more elaborate piece of criticism. Reviews by television critics were specifically ruled out. The review policy comes atop other major changes that will be announced this week, according to Michael Moore, a member of the Academy?s board of governors.