aidan
Very Busy Member
Posts:450
 | | 23 Jan 2008 1:47 PM |
| It featured on the last Frames album ('The Cost') so doesn't that mean it's NOT an original song written especially for the movie? Or is there a loophole re: previous sales, release in certain countries, etc...?
| | | |
|
aidan
Very Busy Member
Posts:450
| | 23 Jan 2008 1:47 PM |
| | I should add that I hope it IS eligible and Glen wins! | | | |
|
Ally
Very Busy Member
Posts:345
| | 24 Jan 2008 2:08 AM |
| | i hate to be obvious in my reply but "yeah... obviously" | | | |
|
Mully
Insanely Busy Member
Posts:846
| | 24 Jan 2008 2:19 AM |
| Posted By aidan on 23 Jan 2008 1:47 PM
It featured on the last Frames album ('The Cost') so doesn't that mean it's NOT an original song written especially for the movie? Or is there a loophole re: previous sales, release in certain countries, etc...?
Its also on Glen's solo album, with Marketa Irglova playing on it.
Had 'The Cost'/'Swell Season' been released in the US before the film was ? | | | |
|
PeterQuaife
Very Busy Member
Posts:340
| | 24 Jan 2008 2:21 AM |
| maybe the movie was a few years in the making, from script to screen and the tune was born then, liked and thrown onto the album?
"Bone Throwing" by P Quaife | |
where the dew drops cry and the cats meow.... | |
|
Binokular
CLUAS Forum Junkie
Posts:1594
| | 24 Jan 2008 4:14 AM |
| Posted By Ally on 24 Jan 2008 2:08 AM
i hate to be obvious in my reply but "yeah... obviously"
Classic reply  | | | |
|
aidan
Very Busy Member
Posts:450
| | 24 Jan 2008 5:01 AM |
| Posted By Ally on 24 Jan 2008 2:08 AM
i hate to be obvious in my reply but "yeah... obviously"
Not so fast, smartypants ;D
The whole issue of eligibility for the song and score Oscars is very problematic. For instance, this article talks about the fact that Jonny Greenwood's recent soundtrack work was considered ineligible for Best Score because it contained too much unoriginal music - and goes on to refer to 'Falling Slowly'.
Some of the regulations seem arbitrary: for instance, apparently a song with more than three qongwriters is ineligible so this would technically disqualify U2 (who share songwriting credits) from Oscar nominations, right? Wrong - 'The Hands That Built America' was nominated.
I'm trying to find a copy of the Oscar eligibility rules... | | | |
|
aidan
Very Busy Member
Posts:450
| | 24 Jan 2008 5:09 AM |
| Here we are:
http://www.oscars.org/80academyawards/rules/rule16.html
'The Cost' was released in Ireland on September 22, 2006. 'Once' was screened at the Galway Film Fleadh on 15 July 2006 but only went on general release (what counts for the Oscars) in early 2007.
My question stands.
| | | |
|
Ally
Very Busy Member
Posts:345
| | 24 Jan 2008 5:32 AM |
| and my answer stands....
...seeing as it has received an oscar nomination, then it is most definitely eligible, regardless of whether the "rules" agree with you... | | | |
|
PeterQuaife
Very Busy Member
Posts:340
| | 24 Jan 2008 5:43 AM |
| should rules not be black and white, whether agreeable or not is neither here nor there?
PQ | |
where the dew drops cry and the cats meow.... | |
|
Peejay
Very Busy Member
Posts:339
| | 24 Jan 2008 6:01 AM |
| Posted By Ally on 24 Jan 2008 5:32 AM
...seeing as it has received an oscar nomination, then it is most definitely eligible, regardless of whether the "rules" agree with you...
I read this sentence four times, I'm still confused. | | | |
|
Ally
Very Busy Member
Posts:345
| | 24 Jan 2008 6:23 AM |
| Posted By Peejay on 24 Jan 2008 6:01 AM Posted By Ally on 24 Jan 2008 5:32 AM
...seeing as it has received an oscar nomination, then it is most definitely eligible, regardless of whether the "rules" agree with you... I read this sentence four times, I'm still confused.
it is eligible because it is nominated - its eligibility has been defined by its nomination...
...whether it should be eligible is a different matter
| | | |
|
Peejay
Very Busy Member
Posts:339
| | 24 Jan 2008 6:40 AM |
|
...whether it should be eligible is a different matter
No, thats the actual matter that aidan is talking about. Its nominated because it was deemed eligible, but is it really eligible or was it slid in because of the buzz it created. | | | |
|
Ally
Very Busy Member
Posts:345
| | 24 Jan 2008 7:08 AM |
| Posted By Peejay on 24 Jan 2008 6:40 AM
...whether it should be eligible is a different matter
No, thats the actual matter that aidan is talking about. Its nominated because it was deemed eligible, but is it really eligible or was it slid in because of the buzz it created.
i do realise that you know...
| | | |
|
starbelgrade
Very Busy Member
Posts:654
| | 24 Jan 2008 7:37 AM |
| Posted By Ally on 24 Jan 2008 7:08 AM Posted By Peejay on 24 Jan 2008 6:40 AM
...whether it should be eligible is a different matter
No, thats the actual matter that aidan is talking about. Its nominated because it was deemed eligible, but is it really eligible or was it slid in because of the buzz it created. i do realise that you know...
Again, the prize for most abstruse poster goes to...
As pointed out in the Johnny Greenwood thread - just because it IS eligible by virtue of the fact that it's been nominated, doesn't mean that it SHOULD be eligible. Case in point being the score for the Godfather, which was nominated, then pulled...
'Nino Rota's score for "The Godfather" in 1972, which was pulled from the list of nominees after it was discovered that the film's love theme was used in another film, 1958's "Fortunella." '
Personally I'd pull Hansard's effort out on the grounds that it's too dangerous for human consumption, but that's just my opinion. 
| | | |
|
Ally
Very Busy Member
Posts:345
| | 24 Jan 2008 7:47 AM |
| my point being that when he wins this here oscar thing, will it still be apt to ask "is it eligible for an oscar?"... yes of course it is.... he's just won it.... will you still ask it in twenty years?.... history writes itself... rules and standards are made up restrictions that have no relationship with what actually happens... they are irrelevant to this conversation...
by all means discuss whether the song SHOULD have been eligible but it's a bit of a dead argument.... it's hardly a scandal... the best song category has always been at the whim of the academy and regularly breaks its own "rules" | | | |
|
starbelgrade
Very Busy Member
Posts:654
| | 24 Jan 2008 7:55 AM |
| | Apparentely not in Johnny Greenwood's or the Godfathers case. | | | |
|
starbelgrade
Very Busy Member
Posts:654
| | 24 Jan 2008 7:57 AM |
| | And it's hardly "irrelevant to this conversation" seeing as the conversation topic is "'Once' song: is it actually eligible for Oscars?" | | | |
|
Ally
Very Busy Member
Posts:345
| | 24 Jan 2008 8:00 AM |
| Posted By starbelgrade on 24 Jan 2008 7:57 AM
And it's hardly "irrelevant to this conversation" seeing as the conversation topic is "'Once' song: is it actually eligible for Oscars?"
YES IT IS ELIGIBLE.
IT'S BEEN NOMINATED
| | | |
|
starbelgrade
Very Busy Member
Posts:654
| | 24 Jan 2008 8:07 AM |
| Posted By Ally on 24 Jan 2008 8:00 AM Posted By starbelgrade on 24 Jan 2008 7:57 AM
And it's hardly "irrelevant to this conversation" seeing as the conversation topic is "'Once' song: is it actually eligible for Oscars?" YES IT IS ELIGIBLE. IT'S BEEN NOMINATED
Yes, I f**king know that... but like I said, Godfather was also nominated then pulled coz they discovered it WASN'T actually eligible. Now, I don't have a clue whether or not Once SHOULD be eligible.. that's why he started the topic - to ask if it indeed IS eligible. Maybe, perhaps - the body who check eligibility didn't fully check it out & perhaps, maybe... they might discover that it's not & then pull it. I don't know.. neither do you, so stop being such a f**king arsehole...
"YES IT IS ELIGIBLE. IT'S BEEN NOMINATED" is simply not the case as has been show with the Godfather precedent. It may stay nominated, and it may indeed be fully eligible, but to ask the question is pretty f**king relevant seeing as something similar already happened before. | | | |
|