Cinematical Seven: Outrageous Oscar Disqualifications
Filed under: Classics, Comedy, Documentary, Foreign Language, Independent, Celebrities and Controversy, Fandom, Cinematical Seven, Michael Moore, Oscar Watch

With the news that the musical score from The Dark Knight has been disqualified from Academy Awards consideration on the grounds that too many people were credited with composing it, outrage against the Academy's stringent, complicated rules has erupted afresh. In the interest of fueling this indignation and making the world an angrier place, let's take a belligerent march down memory lane and look at seven other controversial disqualifications.
The Jazz Singer disqualified for being a talkie. When the very first Academy Awards were held in May 1929, honoring films released between August 1927 and July 1928, everyone was talking about The Jazz Singer -- the first feature-length movie to use recorded sound in some of its talking and singing scenes. So great was the attention that the Academy disqualified the film from the inaugural Best Picture category, reasoning that its use of sound put it on an uneven playing field against the films still stuck in silence. Instead, the Academy gave Warner Bros. a special award "for producing The Jazz Singer, the pioneer outstanding talking picture, which has revolutionized the industry." It's true, too! I don't know if you've noticed, but pretty much all movies nowadays have talking in them.
Young Americans disqualified from Best Documentary category ... after it already won. Whoops. This is a sad case, and a unique one. The documentary, about the peppy Young Americans show choir, won the Oscar at the 1969 ceremony for being the best feature-length documentary of 1968. But a few weeks later, the Academy discovered that the film had screened at a theater in October 1967, making it eligible for that year's awards and not for 1968. The Academy actually took back the Oscar statues from the filmmakers, Alex Grasshoff and Robert Cohn, and gave the award to the film that had been first runner-up. When Grasshoff died earlier this year, his widow told the Los Angeles Times how heartbroken he'd been. Can you imagine?
Musical score from The Godfather disqualified because some of it was from an earlier score. Nina Rota's haunting score from The Godfather actually got as far as being nominated for an Oscar before someone discovered that its love theme had been previously used in another film Nona had scored, Fortunella. The rules say the music must be written specifically for the movie at hand, so Nona was disqualified and the score from Sleuth was added as a nominee in its place. Two years later, Rota was co-nominated with Carmine Coppola for their Godfather Part II score, and actually won. How could that be, though, when much of the music was simply reused from the first Godfather? Because the Academy had changed the rules in the meantime. Arrgh!
"Come What May" from Moulin Rouge disqualified because it was actually written for a previous project. This is the one that irks me, personally, the most, since the song is gorgeous and actually fit the story of the film. But to be eligible for the Best Song category, the song must have been written specifically for the movie. (That's why screen versions of Broadway musicals usually toss in a couple of new, just-for-the-movie tunes -- because the preexisting songs can't win Oscars.) "Come What May," as it turns out, had been written for Moulin Rouge director Baz Luhrmann's Romeo + Juliet. He wound up not using it, but it didn't matter. The fact that it hadn't been written with Moulin Rouge in mind made it ineligible. I always wondered why "Come What May" songwriter David Baerwald didn't just, you know, lie about it. I mean, who would have known that he'd actually written it for something else? Apparently he's a more honest person than I am. Oh, and as usual, the Best Song winner that year was something that played over the closing credits and had nothing to do with the movie. Happy, Academy?
Fahrenheit 9/11 disqualified because it aired on TV too soon. The Academy gets a break on this one -- it was Michael Moore's own damn fault. The rules said that to be eligible, a documentary cannot air on television any sooner than nine months after its theatrical debut. Fahrenheit 9/11 was released in the summer of 2004, and Moore chose to show it on pay-per-view TV on Nov. 1, hoping it would influence the election in John Kerry's favor over George W. Bush. He knew it would disqualify him from the documentary category, though he hoped it might still get a Best Picture nomination. (The eligibility rules are different in that category.) Well, as it turns out, the film didn't get nominated for anything, and Bush still won the election. Nice try, though, Mike.
The Band's Visit disqualified from the Best Foreign Language Film category for having too much English. In the foreign-language category, the rules are pretty simple. The film must be predominantly in a language other than English, and it must come from a country other than the United States. The Band's Visit, an optimistic, can't-we-all-get-along? comedy from Israel in 2007, seemed like a shoo-in for a nomination, and many considered it a good bet for the win. The problem was this: The movie is about an Egyptian police band getting lost in a small Israeli town. The characters don't speak each other's languages, so they communicate in the smattering of English that they do have in common. It makes sense, and it enhances the film's overall theme of learning to understand and communicate with one another. Doesn't matter, the Academy said. Since the English spoken in the film adds up to more than 51% of the dialogue -- and yes, people from the Academy sat there with stopwatches -- it didn't qualify as a "foreign-language" film.
Jonny Greenwood's There Will Be Blood score disqualified for not being original enough. It would seem that the music categories are the ones that cause the most trouble, and this sting from last year is still fresh in a lot of people's minds, especially fans of the Radiohead guitarist Greenwood. The Academy ruled that his haunting, unusual score for There Will Be Blood was ineligible because it was "diluted by the use of tracked themes or other pre-existing music." Greenwood wrote about 35 minutes of original material, used about 15 minutes of some of his own previously written music, and incorporated music by the likes of Arvo Pärt and Johannes Brahms. Whatever the combo was, the Academy nixed it -- but not before the preliminary ballots had already gone out with the score listed as being eligible. Still, at least they made up their minds before the thing actually got nominated -- or, heaven forbid, before Greenwood actually went home with the trophy. One take-back in an 80-year history is enough.










Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
11-15-2008 @ 8:58PM
Gary said...
It is a tough one really, especially as you rightly said in the category of original music. As both a huge Radiohead fan and someone who adores There will be blood I was most disappointed that Jonny Greenwood never got the opportunity to be recognized for his amazing score for said film.
But I must say I never blamed the Academy but Mr Greenwood himself for not caring enough to read the published rules and ensuring his score was 100% original. It is very hard to blame the Academy when all their eligibility rules are there for all to see.
The alternative would be films getting nominated is music categories for old popular songs, classic pieces of music and even re-hashes of previous scores. This would have an adverse affect on the job of scoring a movie as a whole and would see wholly original scores overlooked. There are people who work damn hard to score movies and I would not like to see them miss out, even to someone I admire as much as Jonny Greenwood if he cannot be bothered to stick to the rules.
I think this goes to all the examples you gave (okay, maybe not the Jazz Singer). Sometimes people will fall foul of the rules despite the good intentions they may have had, this sometimes does seem unfair and I will admit on occasions it is unfair. But when the rules are there you have to be pretty stupid not to adhere to them and even more stupid to bitch about it afterwards.
Reply
11-18-2008 @ 12:40PM
Ironlung said...
although i agree i would love to see greenwood with an oscar, i very much doubt he thought to have the rule book by his side while he was writing it. with all the accolades and respect this guy has, why would he need an oscar?
11-16-2008 @ 12:45AM
Richard said...
Dude! No love for The Last Seduction?!
I stopped watching the Academy Awards in '94 when Linda Fiorentino got passed over.
Reply
11-16-2008 @ 12:49AM
Eric D. Snider said...
Gary: True, up to a point. The problem with the music rules, in particular, is that they're vague. The Academy rules are full of imprecise words that indicate a judgment call will be necessary: "predominantly," "substantially," etc. How do you know what that means? The Academy is also notorious for applying some of these rules arbitrarily -- what one person got away with one year, someone doing the same thing the next year might not.
Richard: Yep, Fiorentino was terrific in that movie. Unfortunately, it aired on TV before it played theatrically, which made the whole thing ineligible for Oscar consideration.
Reply
11-16-2008 @ 2:16AM
Gary said...
I will take your word for it. Not actually ever reading the rules but knowing how the Academy operates sometimes it is not hard to believe you have a point.
I also wanted to add that "and even more stupid to bitch about it afterwards." was directed at "them" and not you. I think you know that but just wanted to make sure. We are allowed to bitch about it, we are the ones that tend to get an emotional attachment to these things sometimes and are often the ones who are left disappointed by the mistakes of others.*
*Okay, I know there are many people who dislike the Oscars but I for one love them. There is something great about sharing the success of a film that you love with the people who were responsible for making it. Maybe a little sad but I don't care one bit.
11-16-2008 @ 9:43AM
Rich Drees said...
You forgot when the Academy disqualified SHALL WE DANCE?, the original Japanese version not the absolutely wretched American version starring Richard Gere and that "singer"/"actress", for some fool reason I can't remember off the top of my head.
Reply
11-16-2008 @ 9:45AM
Greg said...
If the Academy Awards truely indicated quality and represented the merits of ALL films produced in a given year, then I might have a concern about these issues. However, the Academy Awards is pretty much the biggest Marketing Campaign ever concocted.
Don't get me wrong, I love to watch the Academy Awards, and I would absolutely love to win an Oscar! However, I'd say that hundreds of great performances never get nominated because they occur in smaller films. Hundreds of great screenplays never get nominated for the same reason.
But, I still look forward to "Oscar" season every year!
Reply
11-16-2008 @ 11:08AM
Toby said...
I got a kick out of the absurdity of Combustible Edison's song "Vertigogo" being disqualified for Original Song (Four Rooms) because "the lyric was not intelligible". The band even submitted a lyric sheet ("Do yah dot'n duy ba da dot'n duy yah oo-ee dot'n duy" & etc.)
Reply
11-16-2008 @ 12:44PM
thomlyons said...
hows about this one ............ Glen Hansard and Marketa Irglova just won the best song award for "Falling Slowly", but the song was not written for the film; in fact the vast majority of the songs were not, and were actually songs from Glen's band The Frames. "falling slowly" was on both the frames album "The Cost" and the record Glen and Marketa put out called "The Swell Season", both of which came out in 2006.........now i love the band and the movie, and was happy to see it get some attention, but surely this shouldn't have been allowed...
Reply
11-16-2008 @ 6:27PM
john said...
There's a quick synopsis of the Once controversy here:
http://carpetbagger.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/29/once-again-a-legit-nominee/
Basically Once took a long time to create, film, and release. The songs were written for the film but appeared in various other media between creation for the film and the film's release.
I think the biggest concern they had to clear up was not the song's inclusion on a Frames album but that it had been used in a Czech movie released the year before.
11-16-2008 @ 12:47PM
Mr. R said...
The Academy overlooked Stanley Kubrick in every film he made, that is enough for me to loose faith in a system that supposedly rewards high quality jobs in the art of film making. 2001, Clock Work, Full Metal Jacket, Dr. Strangelove, Lolita...seriously, the Academy sucks.
Reply
11-16-2008 @ 4:51PM
Jeff said...
Tron was disqualified for Best Visual Effects because by using CG effects, they "cheated".
Reply
11-17-2008 @ 6:47AM
fanboy d said...
you forgot andy serkis
Reply
11-17-2008 @ 7:41AM
Ivan said...
Nobody remembers the disqualification of the uruguayan film "A place in the world" in 1992, AFTER being nominated for best Foreign Film?? (It means it was accepted and selected by the Academy rules and it's Foreign branch, but... ooooops! after getting the nomination, we think you're not uruguayan enough!) That's outrageous! And to add injury to insult or viceversa, the Academy, kept the nomination for Russia (on the same year) to "Urga" (Close to Eden) the mongolian film, filmed there, with mongolian actors, spoken in mongolian, which only had a russian director!!! It seems that Nikita Mikhalkov is such a big name for oscar that his only involvement in a movie, turns it to his own nationalility, no matter what! Talking about shameful disqualifications, I Think this one is the worst!!! And a shame; "A place in the world" is a great film that maybe could have won the award and help latin american cinema to get out of the slump in wich it was in the 90's
Reply
11-17-2008 @ 11:55AM
HAWTaction.com said...
What about Hoop Dreams not being nominated for best documentary?
Reply
11-17-2008 @ 11:52AM
Patrick G said...
How about the disqualification of Liv Ullman's performance in "Scenes from a Marriage." I think it was because the film as part of a mini-series on SWEDISH television.
Reply
11-17-2008 @ 2:31PM
lw said...
I never took the Oscars all that seriously anyway, kind of like the Grammys. But after Saving Private Ryan lost to Shakespeare in Love for best picture a few years back; well that tells you all you need to know about the Oscars. (At least I think it was Shakespeare in Love, I can't even remember now. That is how noteworthy that Best Picture was.)
Reply
11-17-2008 @ 2:59PM
The Average White Guy said...
I would have thought Farenheit 9/11 would have been disqualified, because it was a piece of propaganda trash, and it sucked.
-The Average White Guy
http://www.theaveragewhiteguy.com
Reply
11-18-2008 @ 1:15PM
Jenn Brown said...
Moore doesn't make documentaries, he proselytizes. I don't get how he is considered a documentarian when at the very best, he editorializes.
Reply
11-18-2008 @ 5:42PM
Dan said...
ALL documentaries have a story to tell and are skewed by the filmmaker...Moore maybe moreso than others, but don't act like he's the only one.