Beyonce Disqualified for Oscar Songwriting Category- Page 2

[bugsers]

Posted: 1/3/07 at 1:45am

"It seems to me that songs with more than 3 writers should be evaluated on a case by case basis. I understand not wanting repeats of the situation with the SHREK song (7 writers) but if a reasonable explanation can be shown that 4 writers contributed significantly to a song (and LISTEN is a long song) then they should be eligible..."

But it is very important to note that the Shrek song was written by a BAND. It had 7 credits for music because there are 7 members of the band Counting Crows. The writing credit on the song belonged to Adam Duritz and Dan Vickrey, two band members. How would you disqualify members of a band? If one member gets an Oscar, shouldn't they all?

As for Beyonce, like was stated above, it is highly doubtful Beyonce made any significant contribution to the writing of the song given her past track "record." IMO, it is sad that you would want credit for something you had no part of making. Sure, any performance award would be rightfully hers, but not an award for writing.

[Fenchurch]

Posted: 1/3/07 at 2:07am

I don't see the problem with a group of people working together on a song.
In fact, it can be traced back to the roots of Jazz, the American Musical form and one of the parents of R&B, namely the call and response of farm workers on plantations, as well as in black churches in the south, not to mention blues, often performed and improvisationally written by a group.

The real problem is that the Academy is following an artistic model that reflects the Western classical artistic tradition, where the creation of art seems to be mostly a solitary effort, while in non-western cultures and subcultures, the creation of art is a communal effort.

At the very least, it's ethnocentric. But anyway, the point is that it seems unfair and arbitrary, regardless of anyone's opinion on how many people it takes to write a song, or rather to create any piece of art. What difference does it make? Does more people involved in the creation of a work of art somehow dilute the creativity and the artistry?

It makes me think of something, I don't want to hijack the thread, but can someone quickly answer this question if they know off the top of their head:

With movies like This Is Spinal Tap, Waiting for Guffman and Best in Show, where most of it is improv, who gets the writing credit if nominated?

Just my opinion

[Vespertine1228]

Posted: 1/3/07 at 2:58pm

To answer some questions in posts above mine:

Yes, the song is nominated for a Golden Globe. I believe it stands a good chance of winning too.

Limiting the number of people who get credit for writing the song does matter. For example, producers could offer co-writing credit on any new songs to entice stars to be in their films even if they don't actually do any of the work. Thus, we could be handing out Oscars to people for essentially doing nothing. This is a problem.

Finally, billing has absolutely nothing to do with whether someone is nominated as Best Actor or Best Supporting Actor. It all has to do with politics. A recent example is that Julianne Moore was nominated for Best Supporting Actress for The Hours, despite having more screen time than Nicole Kidman, who ended up winning Best Actress for the same film. Moore's placement was to allow her a Best Actress nominated for Far From Heaven. The same thing also happened with Jamie Foxx and Ray/Collateral.

I think Beyonce would be better suited for the Best Supporting Actress category, but the producers don't want to ruin Jennifer Hudson's excellent chances there. I think we may end up seeing Beyonce empty handed on the morning the nominations are announced.

[Fenchurch]

Posted: 1/3/07 at 3:17pm

The Academy's been handing out Oscars to people who do nothing for years...