MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

The Academy Scores Another Event

This is one of those additions that will most likely end up in a subtraction.

Basic question; If you are going to do a live event for the scores competing for Oscar, why would you do it 3 days before the show… after nominations?

Likely answer: Because the real goal is to take the hour-long event and turn it into 90 seconds on the live Oscar telecast, eliminated “wasted” time on the air playing movie music, getting the award given out in no more than 3 minutes.

With score being a tough category in which to vote thoughtfully, wouldn’t Academy voters be thrilled to have an evening in which to listen to the music live and to decide what score they actually like best?

Duh. Rhetorical question.

Of course, if things go well, expect the live score show to end up on PBS by next season, if not this season.

And thank goodness they have come up with a way of getting that boring old score category out of the show, so they can focus on whatever celebrity is the biggest singing a song from a movie and to do more and more musical numbers in which the host is self-reflective and insults people comedically. That is, obviously, what America wants. (Last graph in the voice of Academy leadership.)

I think the event should be wonderful, in and of itself. But does it add to Oscar? No. Does it distract from the real purpose of the event, to love and honor film? Yes.

Be Sociable, Share!

5 Responses to “The Academy Scores Another Event”

  1. ghost says:

    > more musical numbers in which the host is self-reflective and insults people comedically

    Are you referring to MacFarlane and his musical number “We Saw Your Boobs” (among others)? If you are, how do you feel about Charlize Theron’s cameo in the skit?

    I think if it were that offensive (seemed to get quiet a bit of attention), she’d be savvy enough to avoid it.

  2. chris says:

    I agree with your central argument, but disagree with the concept of voting based on hearing the scores in a concert setting. The award is for movie music — ie, not just the music but how it exists with the movie, rather than separate from it. (Imagine, for instance, Reznor’s “Social Network” score in a concert setting.)

  3. palmtree says:

    Any attempt to highlight film scores is fine by me. Maybe that will make it a competitive category and generate better work.

  4. Sam says:

    Ditto what chris said. This event will be good for the medium of music, but not so much for the medium of movies. You wouldn’t do this with any other aspect of film, right? You don’t roll the 30 minutes of Andy Serkis mugging in front of a green screen and judge from that whether he needs a supporting actor nomination. You don’t look at stills of the movie sets and decide if the art direction needs your vote. You have to look at all these things in the context of the whole film to determine if the elements correctly serve the whole.

    The one exception, I guess, is with the screenplay, since that comes first and is the one part of filmmaking that can stand alone, sort of.

  5. cadavra says:

    So the concert will be a maximum of 50″ of music, plus some chat. And for just that the tickets will probably be in the range of $75-$250, plus $15 parking. Pass.

The Hot Blog

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon