Awards Season 2020

A subforum to discuss film culture and criticism.
Post Reply
Message
Author
felipe
Joined: Wed May 05, 2010 11:06 pm

Re: Awards Season 2020

#51 Post by felipe » Fri Jul 03, 2020 4:11 pm

Nasir007 wrote:
Fri Jul 03, 2020 3:50 pm
felipe wrote:
Fri Jul 03, 2020 3:47 pm
Nasir007 wrote:
Fri Jul 03, 2020 12:22 pm
To my knowledge there’s nothing in the academy’s rules that would prevent Hamilton from being nominated in several categories including best picture etc. except for the score and song categories where it will be ineligible.
Which is kind of a weird loophole. Its score would be ineligible because it was originally created for the show itself and not just for the filmed performance, but so was the costume design or the script...
This is the language around score and song -

Score - An original score is a substantial body of music that serves as original dramatic underscoring and is written specifically for the motion picture.

Song - An original song consists of words and music, both of which are original and written specifically for the motion picture.

Hamilton very clearly and with little ambiguity fails both these tests.
I understand, but it would still be eligible for screenplay even though it was not "written specifically for the motion picture"?
Last edited by felipe on Fri Jul 03, 2020 4:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Ribs
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2014 1:14 pm

Re: Awards Season 2020

#52 Post by Ribs » Fri Jul 03, 2020 4:11 pm

Nasir007 wrote:
Fri Jul 03, 2020 3:25 pm

I feel this criteria is unenforceable and will cause arbitration fights though the academy reserves the right to reject whatever films it wants.

The only language in their rule says - " films that had a previously planned theatrical release but are initially made available through commercial streaming, VOD service or other broadcast may qualify for awards consideration"

Say for streaming content between July 2020 and Feb 2021 (the new Oscar deadline for 2021) - even for films that were always meant to be TV or streaming films, I could still say they were planned theatrical and gin up some fake plans and submit them to make them eligible.
The Academy is going to be lenient with the documentation that can count - for something like this, where a real release was definitely planned and announced, it will have no problem. Something like Da 5 Bloods, IMO, does not have any evidence of any planned theatrical release, and should be expected to provide some evidence of such (it has been qualified so I expect this has happened). But, again, this is not a real movie, it is B-roll footage shot for a documentary about Hamilton, and it would crazy to reward that instead of the many, many movies that are actually real.

Nasir007
Joined: Sat May 25, 2019 11:58 am

Re: Awards Season 2020

#53 Post by Nasir007 » Fri Jul 03, 2020 4:27 pm

Ribs wrote:
Fri Jul 03, 2020 4:11 pm
But, again, this is not a real movie, it is B-roll footage shot for a documentary about Hamilton, and it would crazy to reward that instead of the many, many movies that are actually real.
This is a metaphysical criterion right? How do you write a rule that can be applied in a standard unambiguous manner to everyone.

I dunno if you have been in the politics threads, but I am always a proponent of equal justice for all. A single set of rules should apply to everyone.

Under current academy rules, there is no definition for what is a real movie and what isn't.

So I will be fully supportive of Hamilton and Disney's efforts if they want to do an Oscar campaign and win academy awards.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Awards Season 2020

#54 Post by domino harvey » Fri Jul 03, 2020 4:28 pm

That's enough Galaxy Brain insights for one day

Nasir007
Joined: Sat May 25, 2019 11:58 am

Re: Awards Season 2020

#55 Post by Nasir007 » Fri Jul 03, 2020 4:50 pm

felipe wrote:
Fri Jul 03, 2020 4:11 pm
Nasir007 wrote:
Fri Jul 03, 2020 3:50 pm
felipe wrote:
Fri Jul 03, 2020 3:47 pm

Which is kind of a weird loophole. Its score would be ineligible because it was originally created for the show itself and not just for the filmed performance, but so was the costume design or the script...
This is the language around score and song -

Score - An original score is a substantial body of music that serves as original dramatic underscoring and is written specifically for the motion picture.

Song - An original song consists of words and music, both of which are original and written specifically for the motion picture.

Hamilton very clearly and with little ambiguity fails both these tests.
I understand, but it would still be eligible for screenplay even though it was not "written specifically for the motion picture"?
I tried looking for details rules for the writing categories but couldn't find them. The "written specifically for the motion picture" is the language from the music category rules, so that isn't it for the writing categories.

However, if I were to take a guess, I think just automatically any play/musical etc would be deemed an adapted screenplay. And I think there could be precedent of the original writer of a work getting screenplay credit, awards consideration and even an Oscar nomination - in Fences. August Wilson died in 2005 and wrote the play in 1985, but got posthumously oscar nominated for the screenplay for the 2016 in the adapted category.

So I would say say Hamilton should be eligible for Adapted Screenplay with the credit going to LMM. And adapted not just because the show pre-dated the filming of the show but because the show itself is adapted from Ron Chernow's book.

felipe
Joined: Wed May 05, 2010 11:06 pm

Re: Awards Season 2020

#56 Post by felipe » Fri Jul 03, 2020 11:21 pm

Nasir007 wrote:
Fri Jul 03, 2020 4:50 pm
felipe wrote:
Fri Jul 03, 2020 4:11 pm
Nasir007 wrote:
Fri Jul 03, 2020 3:50 pm


This is the language around score and song -

Score - An original score is a substantial body of music that serves as original dramatic underscoring and is written specifically for the motion picture.

Song - An original song consists of words and music, both of which are original and written specifically for the motion picture.

Hamilton very clearly and with little ambiguity fails both these tests.
I understand, but it would still be eligible for screenplay even though it was not "written specifically for the motion picture"?
I tried looking for details rules for the writing categories but couldn't find them. The "written specifically for the motion picture" is the language from the music category rules, so that isn't it for the writing categories.

However, if I were to take a guess, I think just automatically any play/musical etc would be deemed an adapted screenplay. And I think there could be precedent of the original writer of a work getting screenplay credit, awards consideration and even an Oscar nomination - in Fences. August Wilson died in 2005 and wrote the play in 1985, but got posthumously oscar nominated for the screenplay for the 2016 in the adapted category.

So I would say say Hamilton should be eligible for Adapted Screenplay with the credit going to LMM. And adapted not just because the show pre-dated the filming of the show but because the show itself is adapted from Ron Chernow's book.
This is interesting, I was unaware of this Fences precedent. Was it that Wilson adapted his own play into an screenplay (that was only actually filmed years later) or was it that they used Wilson's original script from the play and therefore he got the writing credit?

User avatar
The Fanciful Norwegian
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 2:24 pm
Location: Teegeeack

Re: Awards Season 2020

#57 Post by The Fanciful Norwegian » Fri Jul 03, 2020 11:32 pm

Wilson did a screenplay draft before his death. Tony Kushner did some additional work on it, but only Wilson was credited.

User avatar
movielocke
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:44 am

Re: Awards Season 2020

#58 Post by movielocke » Sat Jul 04, 2020 3:00 am

Ribs wrote:To qualify for an Oscar you will need to have demonstrable evidence of a planned theatrical release. IMO, this *shouldn’t* qualify because that planned theatrical release was October 2021 and by moving it up from then (when it certainly would be able to open in some capacity) it doesn’t magically make it a theatrical release when you’re depriving it of the plan you had already. But it will qualify. I think for... artistic reasons involving the idea of rewarding a staged play made to be B-roll for a PBS documentary, the Academy won’t really be there for it.
PBS shoots documentary b-roll with an Arri Alexa 65? (That’s a digital camera with a 65mm film sized sensor btw, and usually superb glass for 65mm as well)

There’s not an Oscar for grading but I’m dying to know if this was finished on baselight or resolve, the lighting design is beautiful, but the way they managed foreground and background contrast involved sooo many power windows, this was a massive job in post to make look this good with every shot getting grading TLC that is akin to a 100 mil feature to my eye.

That said, oof, I know it’s a filmed performance not filmed for camera, but some of the angles and eye lines feel so odd when the actors are looking “up” when they would be looking just off camera axis if filmed for camera, it’s still fine, but look at how eyelines are handled in Vanya on 42nd st for example it doesn’t lose the sense of being on stage but everything is subtly gorgeously staged for the camera, people are on axis and the camera is boomed to the right typical camera height (not at singing competition Stedicam operators chest height which is how much of Hamilton is shot).

However there are some magical shots when people are using the rotating floor and the camera is counter moving to them and you’re picking up a sequence of action so incredibly elegantly. Not often, but when it works it elevates the whole experience to the best of the live show.

Odom really is best in show too, the LA show I saw had an excellent Burr but a phenomenal Hamilton and Jefferson, but Burr was not nearly as impressive or compelling as he is here, Odom really just has “it” that star quality charisma that blows everyone else off screen.

User avatar
movielocke
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:44 am

Re: Awards Season 2020

#59 Post by movielocke » Sat Jul 04, 2020 3:32 am

Hah, I didn’t think this had any awards chanches but I just looked and in one day, 17000 watches on letterboxd so far, and a 4.5 rating, that puts it in the top twelve all time films on letterboxd—right next to “a brighter summer day”.

Seems suggestive that hamilton is not (yet) getting down voted for being a filmed stage play, and perhaps people will be somewhat amenable to Oscar nominations, probably just acting and writing, but maybe picture too.

It’s the best film from 2020 I’ve seen... but given covid it’s also the ONLY film from 2020 I’ve seen.

User avatar
Ribs
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2014 1:14 pm

Re: Awards Season 2020

#60 Post by Ribs » Sat Jul 04, 2020 8:07 am

movielocke wrote:
Sat Jul 04, 2020 3:32 am
Hah, I didn’t think this had any awards chanches but I just looked and in one day, 17000 watches on letterboxd so far, and a 4.5 rating, that puts it in the top twelve all time films on letterboxd—right next to “a brighter summer day”.

Seems suggestive that hamilton is not (yet) getting down voted for being a filmed stage play, and perhaps people will be somewhat amenable to Oscar nominations, probably just acting and writing, but maybe picture too.

It’s the best film from 2020 I’ve seen... but given covid it’s also the ONLY film from 2020 I’ve seen.
I don't have exact figures but many, many people were logging Hamilton on Letterboxd over the past five years after seeing any version of the stage production (and, because of this, it was already weighted extremely heavily to 5 star reviews - which is also why random TV shows that get pages get extremely high averages, because most sensible people know not to log a TV show on the platform but those that do are extremely suited to be a big fan and want to give it a full rating). But also Letterboxd does not really reflect anything, especially in how its average user is definitely somewhere in the range of 35 years younger than the average academy member.

While the movies will be eligible I do not believe any of the straight-to-streaming movies will actually go anywhere (except in categories like Doc where there's no stigma about streaming or broadcast windows to begin with). There's no reason to reward these movies for giving up actual releases as though there is actually any rush to get out there.

Nasir007
Joined: Sat May 25, 2019 11:58 am

Re: Awards Season 2020

#61 Post by Nasir007 » Mon Jul 06, 2020 5:00 pm

The Academy apparently told The Playlist that Hamilton is not eligible.

However, their reasoning is bogus and fraudulent. They cite the following rule - Works that are essentially promotional or instructional are not eligible, nor are works that are essentially unfiltered records of performances.

This is BS because this is only a special rule for the Documentary category.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Awards Season 2020

#62 Post by domino harvey » Mon Jul 06, 2020 5:03 pm

Sounds like a great commonsense reading of the spirit of the awards. Sorry your strong desire to see this backdoored into the Oscars has met resistance by the Oscars

User avatar
DarkImbecile
Ask me about my visible cat breasts
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 6:24 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM

Re: Awards Season 2020

#63 Post by DarkImbecile » Tue Sep 08, 2020 11:11 pm


User avatar
Monterey Jack
Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Awards Season 2020

#64 Post by Monterey Jack » Tue Sep 08, 2020 11:13 pm

This is gonna go over as well as that "Best Popular Picture" category they threatened a few years back.

User avatar
soundchaser
Leave Her to Beaver
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 12:32 am

Re: Awards Season 2020

#65 Post by soundchaser » Tue Sep 08, 2020 11:18 pm

Even if you’re on board with the nature of requirements in general (and I, admittedly, have mixed feelings on them), including “people with cognitive or physical disabilities” as one of the groups necessary for representation is surely going to lead to even more terrible inspiration porn getting nominated.

User avatar
Big Ben
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2016 12:54 pm
Location: Great Falls, Montana

Re: Awards Season 2020

#66 Post by Big Ben » Tue Sep 08, 2020 11:25 pm

On someone on the spectrum I eagerly awaiting seeing all the movies were we learn that all people with autism either have super powers or are completely invalid but are totally inspiring anyway.

User avatar
The Narrator Returns
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2011 6:35 pm

Re: Awards Season 2020

#67 Post by The Narrator Returns » Tue Sep 08, 2020 11:31 pm

Note that the entire second half of the standards means that studios can make a few new hires and change nothing about the films themselves and they can still get nominated. I believe every Netflix movie is already Best Picture-eligible by default.

User avatar
Never Cursed
Such is life on board the Redoutable
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2016 12:22 am

Re: Awards Season 2020

#68 Post by Never Cursed » Tue Sep 08, 2020 11:33 pm

These new rules... are entirely fine? They don't demand too much of either the cast or the crew of any given production, and they give those special-case productions where having on-screen minority talent would be more difficult a lot of different ways to fulfill the criteria. I would be shocked if any Picture nominee of the last 10 years would have been disqualified under these rules so long as the film's distributors had taken steps to ensure that guideline C was fulfilled (and I can't imagine that they wouldn't), and surely they will be entirely irrelevant going forward. This is no Best Popular Film.

User avatar
movielocke
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:44 am

Awards Season 2020

#69 Post by movielocke » Tue Sep 08, 2020 11:34 pm

Pretty remarkable, I find the BtL changes the most interesting:


https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-a ... st-picture

STANDARD B: CREATIVE LEADERSHIP AND PROJECT TEAM
To achieve Standard B, the film must meet ONE of the criteria below:

B1. Creative leadership and department heads


At least two of the following creative leadership positions and department heads—Casting Director, Cinematographer, Composer, Costume Designer, Director, Editor, Hairstylist, Makeup Artist, Producer, Production Designer, Set Decorator, Sound, VFX Supervisor, Writer—are from the following underrepresented groups:

• Women
• Racial or ethnic group
• LGBTQ+
• People with cognitive or physical disabilities, or who are deaf or hard of hearing

At least one of those positions must belong to the following underrepresented racial or ethnic group:

• Asian
• Hispanic/Latinx
• Black/African American
• Indigenous/Native American/Alaskan Native
• Middle Eastern/North African
• Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander
• Other underrepresented race or ethnicity


B2. Other key roles

At least six other crew/team and technical positions (excluding Production Assistants) are from an underrepresented racial or ethnic group. These positions include but are not limited to First AD, Gaffer, Script Supervisor, etc.

B3. Overall crew composition

At least 30% of the film’s crew is from the following underrepresented groups:


• Women
• Racial or ethnic group
• LGBTQ+
• People with cognitive or physical disabilities, or who are deaf or hard of hearing
And this is fascinating, trial balloon to improving diversity in actual studio leadership rather than just in a marketing silo.

STANDARD D: AUDIENCE DEVELOPMENT
To achieve Standard D, the film must meet the criterion below:

D1. Representation in marketing, publicity, and distribution

The studio and/or film company has multiple in-house senior executives from among the following underrepresented groups (must include individuals from underrepresented racial or ethnic groups) on their marketing, publicity, and/or distribution teams.

• Women
• Racial or ethnic group:

· Asian

· Hispanic/Latinx

· Black/African American

· Indigenous/Native American/Alaskan Native

· Middle Eastern/North African

· Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander

· Other underrepresented race or ethnicity

• LGBTQ+
• People with cognitive or physical disabilities, or who are deaf or hard of hearing[\quote]

User avatar
kcota17
Joined: Fri Feb 28, 2014 9:05 pm

Re: Awards Season 2020

#70 Post by kcota17 » Wed Sep 09, 2020 12:12 am

Just a quick note but being an LGBT person who isn’t very open about it, how do you plan to hire more LGBT cast / crew members? By asking them about it or just basing it off who seems gay or not? It seems like a messy thing to go about.

User avatar
Monterey Jack
Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Awards Season 2020

#71 Post by Monterey Jack » Wed Sep 09, 2020 12:19 am

soundchaser wrote:
Tue Sep 08, 2020 11:18 pm
Even if you’re on board with the nature of requirements in general (and I, admittedly, have mixed feelings on them), including “people with cognitive or physical disabilities” as one of the groups necessary for representation is surely going to lead to even more terrible inspiration porn getting nominated.
[has nightmare vision of another Peanut Butter Falcon winning Best Picture]

User avatar
Monterey Jack
Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Awards Season 2020

#72 Post by Monterey Jack » Wed Sep 09, 2020 12:21 am

kcota17 wrote:
Wed Sep 09, 2020 12:12 am
Just a quick note but being an LGBT person who isn’t very open about it, how do you plan to hire more LGBT cast / crew members? By asking them about it or just basing it off who seems gay or not? It seems like a messy thing to go about.
"Excuse me, but are you gay? We need at least one more homosexual person to meet our quota..."

Nasir007
Joined: Sat May 25, 2019 11:58 am

Re: Awards Season 2020

#73 Post by Nasir007 » Wed Sep 09, 2020 9:56 am

The Narrator Returns wrote:
Tue Sep 08, 2020 11:31 pm
Note that the entire second half of the standards means that studios can make a few new hires and change nothing about the films themselves and they can still get nominated. I believe every Netflix movie is already Best Picture-eligible by default.
I'd go so far as to say that no film BP nominee in the last 20 years - say in the 2000s would be disqualified. Let's as an exercise try to name a single one.

Easiest to meet is B. "At least two of the following creative leadership positions and department heads—Casting Director, Cinematographer, Composer, Costume Designer, Director, Editor, Hairstylist, Makeup Artist, Producer, Production Designer, Set Decorator, Sound, VFX Supervisor, Writer—are from the following underrepresented groups: Women, Racial or ethnic group, LGBTQ+"

As for C, that is not a requirement that we can retroactively apply but going forward every film could easily do C. Basically hire a few interns on-set or during any phase.

D is also easy to meet. "The studio and/or film company has multiple in-house senior executives from among the following underrepresented groups (must include individuals from underrepresented racial or ethnic groups) on their marketing, publicity, and/or distribution teams: Women"

A is the trickiest. Like Irishman wouldn't meet A. But then again, if you want to extend the definition of ethnic group, it could meet that.

---

I initially thought these were more stringent than they were. But they offer so many opportunities that even after a film is made they could make a few tweaks here and there and qualify a film.

This will be easy to meet and implement and will allow Hollywood to once again pat themselves on the back.

And guess who benefits the most when big corporations set tepid diversity goals for themselves? The already booming diversity consultant industry.

They could expect a major windfall as now every film will perhaps include a diversity consultant to make sure they meet these requirements. The hiring of a diversity consultant would itself contribute to the quota.

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: Awards Season 2020

#74 Post by therewillbeblus » Wed Sep 09, 2020 10:55 am

As others have stated, I have a problem putting parameters around invisible demographics with stigma attached. There's also a strange precedent set by implementing this for a BP Oscar but not throughout the industry, not that I'm championing such a cause. The idea that the artistic merit of the best picture of the year rests on also meeting inclusive working conditions based on an arbitrary system of political correctness violates the merit of art for the sake of leftist grand gestures of 'fixing' problems that are structural. Time would be better spent initiating changes elsewhere on the systemic latter in a proactive manner, like putting quotas on casting directors seeing a certain amount of people who identify as [blank] for a role to give a fair shot at inclusivity and supporting people's rights to not disclose if they don't want to be a part of that quota, as opposed to assuming that the best pic is going have already gone ahead and done that. I'm not even advocating for that, but at least it would be a step in the right direction of providing opportunities as opposed to a retroactive faux-liberal move that means nothing and doesn't help build towards those ideals. I don't really care if this actually "changes" anything or not, and I don't mean to suggest that this will force people to disclose information, but it's a typical 'wipe our hands clean' progressive move that doesn't actually care about putting in the work to actually promote progressive change. At worst, this could still imbue microaggressions of a divisive us v them atmosphere, 'other'-ing people under the looming threat of quotas and pressuring equality for the wrong reasons.

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: Awards Season 2020

#75 Post by knives » Wed Sep 09, 2020 11:44 am

To be fair originally the academy violated artistic merit for right wing gestures all the time.

Post Reply