You are viewing an archive of the old fxhome.com forums. The community has since moved to hitfilm.com.

The Dark Knight score ineligible for Oscar

Posted: Thu, 13th Nov 2008, 11:12am

Post 1 of 23

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

Bureaucracy and politics has an annoying habit of getting in the way of art, as illustrated by the news that The Dark Knight's score has been disqualified from Academy Award nomination due to five different musicians being credited. It seems rather daft that the system isn't flexible enough to deal with this kind of collaborative situation.

Should the Best Score Oscar be about the music or about the musician?
Posted: Thu, 13th Nov 2008, 11:20am

Post 2 of 23

Garrison

Force: 5404 | Joined: 9th Mar 2006 | Posts: 1530

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

The Best SCORE needs to be about the music and NOT the creators.

Don't they have Best Composer for something like this?
Posted: Thu, 13th Nov 2008, 12:57pm

Post 3 of 23

Rockfilmers

Force: 2182 | Joined: 10th May 2007 | Posts: 1376

VisionLab User PhotoKey 4 User FXpreset Maker FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

that's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Why would you disqualify a film for that? I swear, the oscars aren't about the art of a film, it's about politcs and controversies.
Posted: Thu, 13th Nov 2008, 3:51pm

Post 4 of 23

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Should be about the music if you ask me. Which is why there should be no way in hell for the Dark Knight Score to be nominated for an oscar anyways. smile

But well, it's like with every other competition. There are rules, and rules need to be respected. If the rules don't make sense, like maybe the case here, they should be changed when the time comes.
Posted: Thu, 13th Nov 2008, 3:54pm

Post 5 of 23

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

Sollthar wrote:

Should be about the music if you ask me. Which is why there should be no way in hell for the Dark Knight Score to be nominated for an oscar anyways. smile
Heh, you just can't let it go, can you? razz

What are people's favourite scores of the year? I've not really seen enough films to say, unfortunately, though I seem to recall really liking the Hellboy 2 score.
Posted: Thu, 13th Nov 2008, 4:09pm

Post 6 of 23

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Tarn wrote:

Sollthar wrote:

Should be about the music if you ask me. Which is why there should be no way in hell for the Dark Knight Score to be nominated for an oscar anyways. smile
Heh, you just can't let it go, can you? razz

What are people's favourite scores of the year? I've not really seen enough films to say, unfortunately, though I seem to recall really liking the Hellboy 2 score.
Speed Racer by Michael Giachinno, I'd have to say. Playful and fun, yet powerful and cinematic.
Posted: Thu, 13th Nov 2008, 4:31pm

Post 7 of 23

Jabooza

Force: 2743 | Joined: 21st Jul 2006 | Posts: 1446

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Wow, that's ridiculous. Though it would probably be more ridiculous if the score were eligible and ended up being nominated while Danny Elfman's score for the '89 Batman wasn't.

Who were these five different musicians anyway? I thought there were only two. unsure
Posted: Thu, 13th Nov 2008, 7:26pm

Post 8 of 23

Mellifluous

Force: 5604 | Joined: 6th Oct 2002 | Posts: 3782

EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

They should make the award for the best score, not composer - however, the award goes to the composer. But multi-composer films present difficulties. What if only particular sections of the score is liked by the Academy? What if one composer puts in a lot of effort and another one came on for a few day's work? Are all of them deemed Oscar-winning composers?
Posted: Thu, 13th Nov 2008, 10:57pm

Post 9 of 23

Mantra

Force: 1888 | Joined: 25th Nov 2002 | Posts: 551

EffectsLab Lite User MacOS User

Gold Member

This is crazy news! The connection between the film and the music are the two key ingredients that should be emphasized when picking the nominations, not who or how many created it.

The lead composer(s) should be nominated just like the way the head of a VFX team will be nominated, not the hundreds of artists that he/she represents. If it works for VFX, why not music?

I'd nominate the DKnight score on the basis that it fits the films style perfectly, which is what I look in a score as opposed to only it's symphonic merit.

Mantra
Posted: Sat, 29th Nov 2008, 5:56pm

Post 10 of 23

MB3 Productions

Force: 1750 | Joined: 27th Sep 2006 | Posts: 17

VisionLab User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Unbelievable! That is such crap. That score is outstanding. What's next? No Oscar nomination for Heath Ledger because he's dead and can't appear at the awards? Sometimes I think the hierarchy in Hollywood has disdain for anything Sci-Fi or comic book related, especially when the "artistic", high brow flicks get whooped at the box office. Go figure. At least they can get an MTV or People's Choice award.
Posted: Sat, 29th Nov 2008, 8:44pm

Post 11 of 23

Bflat5

Force: 1788 | Joined: 30th May 2007 | Posts: 206

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 User Windows User

Gold Member

Since it is specific to the "best score" I'd say it should be about the score, but when the Oscar is presented it is given to the composer, but I don't see why more than one composer would disqualify it though. Sounds kind of goofy to me.

Maybe I'm over thinking this, but wouldn't that be about the same as a movie being disqualified because more than one producer is credited?
Posted: Sat, 29th Nov 2008, 9:58pm

Post 12 of 23

Axeman

Force: 17995 | Joined: 20th Jan 2002 | Posts: 6124

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker MacOS User

SuperUser

There are limits in all categories as far as how many people can be represented. For example, when Return of the King won Best Picture, not all of the producers got an oscar (there were like, 12). Only 5 of them did, I think. I don't know whay the same principle wouldn't apply to multiple composters, though.
Posted: Sat, 29th Nov 2008, 10:19pm

Post 13 of 23

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Whether it's fair or not, producer input can be measured by dollars spent per producer, whereas it's difficult to tack a percentage to the intellectual property of multiple artists.
Posted: Sun, 30th Nov 2008, 6:13am

Post 14 of 23

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

I'd agree here, although I find it puzzling that they'd put so many names on the sheet they turned in (although I remember hearing it had something to do with all 5 or 6 collaborators being able to get royalties)- as I'm pretty sure the only names I've seen, heard, and know well on The Dark Knight and Batman Begins soundtracks are composers Hans Zimmer and James Newton Howard.

There's gotta be something to the way they only put Hans Zimmer and James Newton Howard's name on the merchandised soundtrack (perhaps a different set of intellectual property/composer/copyright rights?) that can be applied to the Academy Awards.

Either way, it doesn't really matter in my mind. Michael Giacchino for Speed Racer has been the most memorable soundtrack this year for me (a very ranged but cohesive set of playful but triumphantly emotional tracks- kinda The Incredibles meets Braveheart, maybe?).

Giacchino deserved a nod for The Incredibles and a win for Ratatouille, hopefully they'll see him through to a nod/win this year; just as Batman Begins overwhelmingly deserved a nod AND win back in 2006.
Posted: Tue, 9th Dec 2008, 7:52am

Post 15 of 23

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Rating: +1

The Academy overturned the decision to disqualify The Dark Knight's Score from nomination.
Posted: Wed, 10th Dec 2008, 3:06am

Post 16 of 23

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Not to look like a newbie triple-posting, but I found this newsworthy as well. I picked up my copy of The Dark Knight Special Edition last night at midnight and wanted to for-warn everyone here that it is not worth it in the least. In fact, I was really pissed that DVDs make you pay extra for special features these days to begin with. I mean......wasn't that the initial appeal to DVDs entirely? That you didn't have to rewind them and could watch how they were made?

Pffft, you can't take away something already given for free and then expect money for it years later; if you ask me.

Anywho, the DVD (dunno about the Bluray yet, but I assume it's about the same) claims to have '3 hours of features!' but this is only 16 total minutes of actual behind the scenes/voiceovered stuff- the rest is 'Gotham Tonight' mock TV interviews with obscure characters in the Dark Knight and extras playing 'citizens' and such talking about Batman to the reporte, Anthony Michael Hall. I found that extremely deceiving and EXTREMELY, extremely disappointing.

Nothing on Heath Ledger or the Joker, nothing on the production of the film. Just a 6 minutes short documentary on the creation/idea behind the new costume (mostly consisting of pictures moving in After Effects-y, no real video) and a 10 minute doc on the score. (which was cool, but MTV had already released it on their 'Splash Page'.)

I dunno what to expect next. MAJORLY bad, there's no commentary on either DVD. Period. I mean, are they kidding?

_____________________________________
/rant.

In other really cool news, if you buy a BluRay copy of the film before December 18th (exactly 5 months after the initial release, actually wink) then on the 18th you can talk via BDLive on chat with director Christopher Nolan. (limit to the first 10,000 or so on the chat) I found that aspect of the BluRay pretty damn spiffy.

But as far as features, I'm pissed all-around. I'm not one to really buy 'deluxe' sets of anything, but movies I genuinely like I don't bother renting, I just buy. But when I buy them, I expect to get oodles of features with them. Especially when they cheap-shot me and make me pay extra for the features I used to get for free, then skimp out on the to the extent of not even having a commentary, Director's or otherwise.
Posted: Wed, 10th Dec 2008, 9:31am

Post 17 of 23

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

Sounds pretty lame. sad This is a film that demands lots of behind-the-scenes stuff, both because of its quality and because it would be a good way to pay tribute to Ledger.

On the plus side, the Iron Man DVD is utterly awesome.
Posted: Wed, 10th Dec 2008, 11:45pm

Post 18 of 23

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/film/news/e3iea59cb79796a9dff9b5711a369472f3d?imw=Y

Well, that's it for this issue, then. The score has now been judged eligible.
Posted: Thu, 11th Dec 2008, 12:20am

Post 19 of 23

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

You're like 5 posts too late, Pooky.
Posted: Thu, 11th Dec 2008, 12:20am

Post 20 of 23

jawajohnny

Force: 1965 | Joined: 14th Dec 2007 | Posts: 829

VisionLab User VideoWrap User MuzzlePlug User Windows User

Gold Member

The Blu-ray does have more special features.

http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/movies.php?id=743&show=review

Good thing it does too... because I had just ordered a copy before Atom posted his complaint. Without special features, it wouldn't be worth the money.
Posted: Fri, 12th Dec 2008, 6:02pm

Post 21 of 23

Atom

Force: 4300 | Joined: 9th May 2004 | Posts: 7014

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

The only thing added to the Blu-Ray special features is the 'Gotham Uncovered' documentary, which I would hope for your sake is actually pretty lengthy and substantial.

All the other 'features' that page lists come on the special edition DVD, but those summaries make them look deceivingly good/worth it.

Long story short, once again, they aren't. No one I know cares about 'galleries' with pictures of the posters and screencaps- anyone with Google can find those these days. And no one I know cares about a 2-hour long mock news special.

Buyer beware, even with the Blu-Ray.
Posted: Fri, 12th Dec 2008, 6:28pm

Post 22 of 23

Jabooza

Force: 2743 | Joined: 21st Jul 2006 | Posts: 1446

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Since this movie is too good not to buy, I'm just gonna buy the single-disc edition without any special features 'cause it's cheaper, then I'll probably just rent the second disc from Netflix at some point so I can watch what features there are.
Posted: Sat, 13th Dec 2008, 1:28am

Post 23 of 23

jawajohnny

Force: 1965 | Joined: 14th Dec 2007 | Posts: 829

VisionLab User VideoWrap User MuzzlePlug User Windows User

Gold Member

Yeah, while the Blu-ray picture alone was definitely worth the buy, the special features do indeed, suck. Not sure I like the changing aspect-ratio either, but it isn't really a big deal.