Oscars: acting or mostly for singing/dancing?
also, the split on director/picture is always interesting
shareI haven't seen CABARET in it's full entirety, but most of it. It never really appealed to me, in spite of all the acclaim. It could be considered largely a drama film though and the singing and dancing is regulated to performances in the night club. I would not label it a 'musical' per-Se. It is film, with musical elements\numbers. Minelli's award, would be for her dramatic performance and also for her musical talent. Joel Grey, was all MC, from what I recall.
I think acting and singing can be interchangeable and are not mutually exclusive. As for dancing, this is when awards become phoney, like nominations for Mikhail_Baryshnikov and Leslie Browne, in THE TURNING POINT-77'. They had dramatic scenes, but were not really award worthy performances and their dancing was recognised more.
The way you feel about dancing, I feel the same about singing. Singing comes from a different part of the brain (so to speak). Notice how some very intense emotional singers are not good actors. Singing is basically "acting solo". When it does coincide, it could be luck
and the split for direction/picture? It doesn't happen often, and I'd like to think there is more merit to it than just wanting to recognize both projects
Notice how some very intense emotional singers are not good actors.
__________________
I would say there are some very intense emotional singers like Streisand, who are also very good actors. I suppose it is a fine line and I can't recall any of Minelli's musical numbers here, so can't comment on my opinion of her singing\dancing\acting numbers. If you were to base the award on acting dramatic merit, then Minelli would have been more deserving than Grey, who wasn't 'typically' acting his role. He was nominated and won and 'impressed' at the time. That onus is on the academy, if they can't give dish out their awards appropriately.
The split thing has happened the last 2 years....ARGO AND SLAVE. Affleck, wasn't even nominated director, so he was never going to win anyway. If he was, would he have won? I think it happens, because 2 films are favourable and voters can't decide. I am not 100% certain; but I think all eligible academy members vote for picture and only the director's branch vote for director. There are bound to be some conflicts and hiccups.
It would have been a big surprise for the producers of both CABARET AND GODFATHER, when GODFATHER was announced as best picture. CABARET had already won 8, including director and GODFATHER, only 2. It could have appeared that CABARET was going to win at that last stage. Similar for GRAVITY, last year.
'I am not 100% certain; but I think all eligible academy members vote for picture and only the director's branch vote for director.'
-----------------
That's limited to the nominations.
With Argo winning Picture and Afflek not being nominated is even more rare and I think it's happened only a few times. I wonder what he was thinking when this happened
3 times:
Since the first Academy Awards ceremony in 1929, only three films have won Best Picture without a corresponding nomination for Best Director: "Wings," which earned the equivalent of Best Picture at the first Oscar ceremony in 1929, "Grand Hotel" and "Driving Miss Daisy."
That's limited to the nominations.
________________
Thanks!
Found this on The Economist website.
....Once the shortlists are announced in each category, Academy members are sent a second ballot, and simply pick their favourite in each category. In this second round they are allowed to cast votes in categories outside their branch, but they are advised to avoid those where they lack expertise.
Another site ses, that members can vote the nominated films, in NEARLY ALL the categories. It means nothing then, if they haven't seen all the films and can still vote for them and wouldn't know a good sound mix from another, or expertise in cinematography. I feel then, that voting for each nominated category should be in that 'specialized' field, like the nominations.
..Argo winning Picture and Affleck not being nominated is even more rare.....I wonder what he was thinking when this happened
_____________
I found this a surprise, because he was touted as a forerunner. In all due respect, how can a film that WINS picture, not at least have a director nod, win\lose, as he is the one who is largely responsible for its finished product and prestige value? I would see it as an 'insult'. I think all films up for Best Picture, should automatically have a director nod and then let the voters decide...split or not. share
Aahhh . . . The Oscar Lord works in mysterious ways! One can have a Best Picture yet not get a Best Director nod. Check Oscar history . . .
share