What kind of an Oscar is this? At first I thought that it won Best Song for "Let It Be", but now I see that that year the Oscar for Best Song went to the movie "Lovers and Other Strangers", and that "Let It Be" won the Oscar for Best Adapted Score. What Adapted Score?? It didn't have any adapted score!! It was all songs from the album!! And why Ringo won an Oscar?? He didn't write anything! He just played the drums! (Except that he "contributed" to "Maggie Mae" and "Dig It", for which songs all Beatles are credited, I don't know why, I'm sure not all of them wrote/adapted them).
I know this is 2 years but I'm answering it anyway. Best Song Score is an Oscar given collectively to original songs composed for a film. It's technically still actually there but is never activated because not enough films qualify in a given year.
First, it is 2 years since what?? I made this topic 2 months ago!! And second, forgive me, maybe it's me, but I don't really see an answer to my question in your reply. All of these songs were written for the album, which was made into a movie simultaneously. Yes, it's not a common case of a song (or songs) written for a movie, this is a documentary of the Beatles recording the album, but anyway, Ringo Starr wining an Oscar for Best Song Score when he wrote absolutely nothing, is a joke.
So, my question is, why didn't they simply nominate "Let It Be" (the song) as Best Song? And was this category (Best Song Score) active other years too?
Ringo Starr wining an Oscar for Best Song Score when he wrote absolutely nothing, is a joke.
I think they've reworked the rules to avoid this thing from happening.
So, my question is, why didn't they simply nominate "Let It Be" (the song) as Best Song?
It didn't get enough votes, I guess.
And was this category (Best Song Score) active other years too?
Yes, actually. Prince won the same category for Purple Rain and also for a time the Original Score category was split into two categories: Original Dramatic Score (original scores for dramatic motion pictures) and Original Musical or Comedy Score (scores for both comedic films and musical films including the songs from the musical films). Around 1999, they decided to have only one Original Score category and re-instituted the Original Song Score category. But unfortunately, not enough films qualify for it to be "activated". It was a controversial move because the year this happened was when the South Park movie came out and critics say that the song score of that movie deserved an Oscar. It got a nom for Original Song for "Blame Canada", however. reply share
One of the greatest songs ever, didn't get enough votes!!
Yes, I remember that for a few years the Best Music category was split in two, and that was for a single reason, I think: Disney was winning every time the Best Music (and Best Song) categories. The Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, The Lion King. So, the Academy thought "ok, so now every time Disney makes a film, they're gonna win the Oscar for Best Music?". So they split the category in two. But, when they realized that Disney had lost the "magic touch", and the Best Music for Comedy or Musical was going to not so great movies/scores, they brought it back to one category.
I didn't understand though, when was the last time the Original Song Score category happened?
Prince was the last Original Song Score winner. Although one could argue Pocahontas is sort of an Original Song Score winner because that category was also designed to honor original movie musicals.
Since eliminating dividing the Original Score in Dramatic and Comedy/Musical and reinstating the Original Song Score category, it has never been "activated" because there aren't enough contenders in any given year.
Rules state that in order to be eligible for the award, a film has to have at least FIVE original songs written by the same team of songwriters and in order for the award to be "activated", there has to be at least FIVE films that meet this eligibility.
Obviously, there aren't a lot of original musicals or films with a lot of original songs being made in any given year (2 or 3, if we're lucky) so it's never been activated.
Do you know why there were only two songs nominated this year for Best Song? I read somewhere that the other songs didn't get enough votes. But, every year they nominate some songs which didn't deserve even to be considered to get nominated, what happened suddenly this year and they nominated only TWO songs??
The Original Song category is a *beep* of rules the last few years. Now, the rules state that studios submit eligible songs (it must be written for the film, used within the context of the film OR if it's an end credits song, it must be the FIRST song played during the credits). The Academy then releases a list of contenders. Then members of the Academy's music branch must attend special screenings where they show snippets of the original song contenders as used in the film. They must rate the songs from 1 to 10 I think and only songs that score a minimum average (8.5 I think) gets a nomination. If no song meets the average, then the category will be eliminated for the year. If only one song meets the average then that song and the next highest song gets nominations. There will be a maximum of 5 nominations.
This has been a problem because end credits songs usually get the shaft unless they are played over colorful elaborate credits or dance numbers. Also the ratings system of this category allows people to vote AGAINST a song. Since rules state that those who are running for nominations are not allowed to attend the screenings, their friends could theoretically vote against a song they feel is competition for their pals.
This voting structure is the reason why there were only 2 nominations for Best Original Song this year. I'm also amazed that "The Weary Kind" (the beautiful song from Crazy Heart) survived it and won. I guess it means that the song is just THAT good.
I don't know what to say. Why are making things so complicated? It's so stupid to have only 2 nominations in a category, as stupid as it is to have 10 nominations for Best Picture, like there are SO many great films out there!! "Winter's Bone" for Best Picture? Gimme a break.
Well, I guess then that the Academy should re-consider who gets nominated for Best Actor and Best Supporting actor. Remember "Training Day"? Ethan Hawk had MORE screening time than Denzel Washington, but he got nominated for SUPPORTING actor! And as far as I remember, he was in almost every scene of the movie! BOTH actors had LEADING roles! And Judi Dench. As far as I remember again, she played in ONE scene at the end of "Shakespeare in Love", and she got an Oscar for Best Supporting Actress. And William Hurt, the same, they nominated him for Supporting Actor for "The End of Violence" for a scene at the end, where his performance was sort of a parody, and they didn't nominate him the same year for his magnificent performance in "The King". Why don't they make rules for that too? That an actor has to appear for at least a number of scenes or minutes to get a Supporting Actor nomination?
p.s.: How do you know all that stuff about the nominations' system?
Yes! This movie won the Oscar for Best Documentary...and it WASN'T a documentary! It was a speech! Coincidentally, I saw Al Gore doing live the same presentation here in Athens, Greece, in 2008, a year after the "film" won the Oscar. And they didn't actually give it to Gore, they gave it to the director of the film.
Oh, and let's not forget the Oscar they gave to Anne Dudley in 1998 for the score of "The Full Monty". The original score of that movie was only...2 pieces! TWO pieces! About 3 minutes long each! All the other music in the movie was pre-existing songs! And this score won an Oscar for "Best Music, Original Musical or Comedy Score"! No wonder they cancelled this category next year!