Oscar Opens Door for Possibility of No Original Song Category
I actually like this change... it makes sense
The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has announced yet another Oscar rule shake up in their latest press release announcing a significant change in the Music – Original Song category, which says if no song achieves a minimum average score of 8.25 in the nominations voting, there will be no original song nominees and thus no Oscar presented for the category.
The way the new rule is worded this makes for the possibility for as few as two nominees, as many as five and the unlikelihood of none. If only one song achieves the required minimum, it and the song with the next highest score will be deemed the nominees. If two or more songs achieve the minimum score, they will be the nominees though no more than five nominees can be selected. Previously, the rules dictated that there be no more than five but no fewer than three nominees in the category.
Last year there were two obvious choices for Original Song in Slumdog Millionaire's "Jai Ho" and "O Saya". Peter Gabriel's "Down to Earth" from WALL•E was the other nominee, but many were upset Bruce Springsteen's "The Wrestler" from The Wrestler wasn't included and unfortunately for those folks this rule change does nothing to affect that outcome as the judging scale remains the same. "The Wrestler" was played over the end credits and as a result the music branch felt its artistic impact on the film was negligible.
Now all the Academy has to do is figure out a way to make the performers happy so they don't pull out of singing their songs at the ceremony as Gabriel did last year. The three nominated songs were reduced to a short medley to which Gabriel was quoted saying, "I don't feel that is sufficient time to do the song justice, and I have decided to withdraw from performing."
For the most part I like this change, but I would like to see the Academy's music branch address the issue of songs that play over the credits and allow them to be considered for Oscar eligibility. While I wasn't necessarily a big fan of Springsteen's "The Wrestler," I know there were many moviegoers that were. And any song that can keep an audience in their seats while white text scrolls across a black screen must be given its due.
The Academy's release also says other modifications of the rules include normal date changes and minor "housekeeping" changes.
Showing 11 Comments
~ PLEASE NOTE ~
If, in any way, your comment is an attack on the author of this post or a previous commenter, your comment will be deleted without question.
Add a New CommentNOTE: The Facebook login option has been disabled. We apologize for any inconvenience. |
Click to Read Our Commenting Rules & Guidelines
Brad,
Are you sure the fact that "The Wrestler" played over the end credits was the reason that it was ignored by voters? Because, technically, "Jai Ho" and "Down to Earth" were played over the end credits of their films as well…
Overall, I like the possibility of there being no Original Song nominees, as it'd be a step towards eliminating the category altogether. It's the worst category, and when we have no Oscars for voice over work or stunt work, well, it's a little nonsensical.
@Carson Dyle: My understanding is difference — in the minds of the music branch — is "The Wrestler" was only played over black and not at all during the film. While "Down to Earth" played over a credit sequence that actually continued the story with an animated sequence, and "Jai Ho" was played with the dance sequence that was loved by everyone and I would say was believed to be "part" of the film (although we're really stretching it).
It's basically an invisible line with no real distinction, but that's my understanding.
The worst category! You have got to be kidding me! Music and movies have gone hand in hand since before they began talking in movies. They go to 10 Best picture nominations citing that's what they did in the good old days and eliminate a category that has existed since 1934.
@Steve: Unless I am mistaken I assumed when Carson said that he was referring to the way it is handled, not necessarily the category itself. I could be wrong.
@Steve: No, I… abhor the category. Best Original Score, sure. Most films have a score. But Best Original Song only applies to a select number of films in a given year… I dunno, I've just always hated it. It's also the slot through which awful films seem to get an Oscar nomination (exceptions being makeup for Norbit…ugh.)
While a lot of songs are integrated into films beautifully, they're usually musicals, which were all over the place when the category was introduced, but have been a rarity since the collosal failure of Hello Dolly and the like. It's an arcane category that seems to have survived because a lot of excellent choices are made in it, paradoxically enough. It'd be like having… Best Title Sequence or something. Sure there are a few, and they're sometimes brilliant, and it would be great to reward the creators of those sequences, but most films are shut out.
To that end, I know that most films don't have special effects, either. But, to me, special effects is an intrinsic part of filmmaking (for those given films). An original song is, 99% of the time, something incidental.
Grammy awards are given out for best compilation soundtrack, score, and original song for motion picture, television, and other visual media (though movie songs tend to dominate). The redundancy is a little much.
Since both Grammy and Oscar shows could benefit from some cuts, I'd like to see the Recording Academy be the sole awarder of soundtrack and song while the AMPAS award for score.
I wonder how Beyonce's taking the news.
I think some good arguments have been made above that support the trend to eliminate, by a slow attrition it seems, the category of best song. But I am loathe to think that the Academy would start to shrug off the collaboration between film and music that dates, as as been previously alluded to, back to the silent era when a piano was played during the screenings. There would still be Best Sountrack I assume. But I would hate to see a year where it wasn't possible for events like the young song writers, Glen Hansard and Marketa Irglova from "Once," having a win for their marvelous song, "Slowly Falling."
I think the award show has been doing a poor job on the songs for a long, long time. Remember the burning car on stage for "Into the Deep" from "Crash"? And then it didn't win, the best movie song in years, IMO. Those over choreagraphed numbers that turn songs into Las Vegas acts are just awful. So the question is, is this truly a move to upgrade the awards, or the awards show?
P.S. I loved "Slumdog Millionaire" but thought that song and dance number at the end was hardly part of the film. The actors broke character, they were clearly just themselves and not playing their parts. It was a credit sequence without the credits. That song being nominated was the equivalent to awarding a song from a play in which the song was only used when the actors took their bows.
How about removing this category and instituting categories which recognize voice work and stunt work?
Awww, that would suck if the Original Song category was omitted, even for one year. I really like that category! As for songs being played over credits, remember that "Into the West" was played over credits only in LOTR 3, and it still won Best Song. But it did have an artistic impact on the movie in question.
Honestly I'd rather have them mandate it to be 5 songs. I don't think there was a lack of good original songs last year and we still only got 3.
So far this year no great songs come to mind, but I'm sure by the end of the year there will be 5 worthy of a nomination.
Wasn't there controversy this year over "Jai Ho" anyway, since it was originally written for another movie? The exact same rule disqualified "Come What May" from Moulin Rouge (it was originally written for "Romeo and Juliet" but was never used or even recorded), so the "Best Original Song" category has kind of lost its credibility now anyway.