Oscar Rule Changes

Post Reply
Damien
Laureate
Posts: 6331
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 8:43 pm
Location: New York, New York
Contact:

Post by Damien »

I believe that trying to redeem the Foreign Film category is an exercise in futility. I say keep things as they are because the banality of the results perfectly encapsulates the Academy.
"Y'know, that's one of the things I like about Mitt Romney. He's been consistent since he changed his mind." -- Christine O'Donnell
Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 19318
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Post by Big Magilla »

My understanding is that the select group of old fogies select six films, then the overseeing committee adds three more and the full body of eligible voters then choses the final five.
Mister Tee
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 8637
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Post by Mister Tee »

I'm enduring a bad head-cold, which may impede my fully understanding the foreign film rule change. Are they saying the usual gang of sentimental WWII-loving old-timers will be making six of the final nine selections, but that an elite board will see to it that films this group overlooked (read: City of God, Volver, 4 Months 3 Weeks...) are added to the list of finalists?

My question after that: does the original time-on-our-hands group then do the final voting to reduce it to five? Because aren't they just likely to bounce the elitists' three and go with five of their original six?

If I'm Comtrex-misinterpeting, someone please let me know.
The Original BJ
Emeritus
Posts: 4312
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:49 pm

Post by The Original BJ »

Hollywood Z wrote:I personally think this rule is going to do nothing but discourage studios from attempting any new musicals.
I wouldn't really worry about this too much. One thing I think it's always important to remember on Oscar boards is that the rest of the world (including Hollywood) doesn't think about things in terms of Oscar as much as we do.

In other words, there may be many reasons why studios don't want to make new musicals, but the fact that they can only get two song Oscar nominations instead of three is not remotely near the top of the list. Would Disney have decided NOT to make Enchanted a musical knowing that it could only receive (gasp!) two and not three Song nominations? Of course not.
User avatar
OscarGuy
Site Admin
Posts: 13668
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 12:22 am
Location: Springfield, MO
Contact:

Post by OscarGuy »

What purists (and some on this board would contend) will say is that a song's use in the film is just as important as the quality of the film and most would say that end credit songs don't belong in the category since they are only "tangentially" related.

Of course, I say that's bull shit. I think what they REALLY need to do is to provide a CD compilation like Magilla said, of the song as it's actually heard in the film, but accompany that with a book of lyrics contained, possibly some sheet music AND a synopsis of the film itself and, in the words of the songwriter, what the song meant to the film, why it was written and how it speaks to the film's themes. Showing just the scenes in which a song is featured does hurt end credit songs, but it also hurts songs whose thematic connection to a film cannot be fully understood without seeing the film in full.

What would "Goldfinger" be if you didn't know who Goldfinger was and why the words to the song carry resonance. I think these voters tend to let the vacuousness and melody of a song win them over when a comparison of film theme, lyric and intention of the songwriter would help them better understand the subject of the film. If you're not going to have them watch the entire film, then you shouldn't let them watch a snippet.
Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin
Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 19318
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Post by Big Magilla »

There is no requirement that the song has to be performed in the middle of the movie by actors. The requirement is only that the music branch voters have to attend screenings of the songs as they are used in the films. Thus, the presentation of a song sung by actors will have more resonance with the Academy members who have not seen whole films than the background sininging over credits or actors going up a stream in a canoe.

What would make more sense would be to send music branch members CDs of eligible songs as they are performed in a film so that without visual stimulus they are all on an equal footing. The only reequirement would be that the Academy CD woudl have to be without embellishments, i.e. the song as it is actually heard in the film, not on a a subsequent recording.
Hollywood Z
Temp
Posts: 431
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2003 1:07 am
Location: Kentucky
Contact:

Post by Hollywood Z »

I personally think this rule is going to do nothing but discourage studios from attempting any new musicals. Look at the finalist lists from the past three years, it wasn't just Disney movies that were garnering multiple considerations, there were tons of indie fare like Palindromes or Into the Wild that enjoyed championing multiple nominees. Besides, if the Academy voters are so bummed that Eddie Vedder's songs didn't make the list, why not pass over the quickly forgotten August Rush. Sure, the song sounded nice, but did we really need something that fit well into an otherwise forgotten movie?

And another thing, this whole requirement that the song has to be performed in the movie in order to be a serious contender anymore is getting pretty annoying. No more than five years ago, the American Film Institute came out with their Top 100 songs from a movie. Can you imagine how boring that list would be if it only included songs that were performed in the middle of the movie by the actors? Then where would Mrs. Robinson, Stayin Alive, Unchained Melody or Streets of Philidelphia fit in? It'd be pretty boring. Now, I'm not sure if the Academy's to blame for making that seem like it's what they tend to notice more or if it's simply the lack of creativity of the filmmakers and the mucisians for knowing how to combine a fantastic song with a great movie moment. Either way, I think the state that soundtracks have gotten lately is pretty grim. Maybe I was just spoiled in how many great soundtracks, both song and score, there were to choose from during the ninties, but the ones that are out now just aren't that interesting.
"You are what you love, not what loves you." - Nicholas Cage; Adaptation
rain Bard
Associate
Posts: 1611
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 6:55 pm
Location: San Francisco
Contact:

Post by rain Bard »

Aside from the "two song" limit, these changes seem to be aimed at curtailing the undue influence of people with enough time on their hands to go to academy screenings, at the expense of folks too busy to make it to the official Academy screenings (possibly because their job requires them to be at other screenings?)

It will be interesting to see if the changes impact the end results.
Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 19318
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Post by Big Magilla »

The problem with the way songs are now selected is that the music branch nomiantors are required to watch clips of the potential nominees in context which gives the advantage to songs that are performed in musicals over title and end title songs which had the advantage for a number of years.
User avatar
OscarGuy
Site Admin
Posts: 13668
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 12:22 am
Location: Springfield, MO
Contact:

Post by OscarGuy »

Well, if you recall, late in the 90s, the Academy split Comedy/Musical and Drama awards because Alan Menken was dominating the awards and no one else could win. This smells like the exact same situation. Whereas no one bitched about Dreamgirls' inclusion of three, people suddenly think Menken getting three nominations for Enchanted is egregious. It's sour grapes.

I don't like their change to Foreign Language Film. While I can appreciate them trying to do something, they are going about it the wrong way. They need to expand the number of film submissions so that multiple countries can submit multiple films.

The way I understood how they did this that they already had a select, non-full-foreign-film-branch committee select the bake off nominees. So, how is that different than before? Perhaps they should open up Foreign Language Film like they do Best Picture and have the entire body select the nominees? Too messy, I'm sure...but something needs to be done and this smacks of a kind of "we don't like your choices, we'll make our own" mentality, which is dangerous.
Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin
The Original BJ
Emeritus
Posts: 4312
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:49 pm

Post by The Original BJ »

With regard to the foreign film rules -- thank god. I can't say this will solve the problem -- you can't protect against bad taste -- but at least an effort is being made to address what has clearly been issue over the past few years.

As far as the songs go, I think the two-per-film rule is a little silly. Yeah, it's a bummer Enchanted hogged the nominations last year, but I think Dreamgirls and The Lion King deserved their nods, and I think MORE songs from Beauty and the Beast should have been nominated. It's not like we live in an era where there are a wealth of song contenders; sometimes nominating a handful from the same music-based film is the only sane thing to do.


Oscar alters song, foreign film rules

Only two songs per film can be nominated at the 81st Academy Awards. And the foreign language film committee will have more say in determining nominees.

By Mark Olsen, Special to The Times
12:41 PM PDT, June 19, 2008

It's only June, but there's already some intrigue in the impending awards season.

The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences approved the rules for the upcoming 81st Academy Awards at a meeting Tuesday night. Rule changes in the categories of original song and foreign language film seemed to be a direct result from controversies during last year's awards season.

For best song, there is no limit to the number of songs that may be submitted from a given film, but only two songs from any one film may now actually receive a nomination. As you may recall, for the 80th Academy Awards, the film "Enchanted" was nominated for three songs, shutting out such once-presumptive nominees as Eddie Vedder for his songs from "Into the Wild." The previous year, "Dreamgirls" was also nominated for three songs.

The screening event at which music branch members view clips of eligible songs will still be held, but DVDs of the clips will be made available to members unable to attend the screening.

The foreign language film nominations have long been a point of major contention among cineastes, as many of the most lauded titles from the annual film festival circuit are overlooked at Oscar nomination-time in favor of less challenging, more easygoing fare.

Last year, the Romanian abortion drama "4 Months, 3 Weeks, 2 Days," winner of the top prize at the Cannes Film Festival before playing to acclaim around the globe, was unable to even make the pre-nominations shortlist.

The new rules will allow the 20-member Foreign Language Film Award Executive Committee to determine three of the nine films on the shortlist. The other six titles will be determined by the voting of the "Phase 1 committee," any voting member who views a minimum number of eligible films. The executive committee will make their selections after the Phase 1 committee's voting has been tallied, presumably to avoid leaving out certain titles.

Nominations for the 81st Academy Awards will be announced Jan. 22. The live telecast presentation of the awards will be on Feb. 22.
Post Reply

Return to “81st and Other 9th Decade Discussions”