Is Once ineligible for Best Original Song Oscar?

View image The Oscar-nominated song "Falling Slowly" (the only one not from "Enchanted" or "August Rush") may have been recorded for a Czech film -- and appeared on two albums in 2006, before "Once" was finished.
Not sure why this has become an issue now (does nobody at Fox Searchlight or the music branch of the Academy do any research until the last minute -- or beyond?), but Dublin film critic Paul Lynch passes along this report from his Sunday Tribune critical colleague Una Mullally:
The Sunday Tribune understands that the Academy query relates to whether the song, from the John Carney-directed movie "Once," was written specifically for the film, as the eligibility rules for the Best Original Song category demand.
"Falling Slowly" was originally recorded by the film’s co-stars Glen Hansard and Marketa Irglova when Czech director Jan Hrebejk asked the two musicians to contribute songs to his 2006 film "Kráska v nesnázích" ("Beauty In Trouble"). Hansard and Irglova ended up recording the album "The Swell Season," of which "Falling Slowly" was a key track. That album was released in April 2006. Hansard’s band, The Frames, then rerecorded the song for their September 2006 album "The Cost. "Beauty In Trouble" was released in October 2006, with "Falling Slowly" played almost in full over the film’s trailer [above].
The rules for eligibility in the Best Original Song category state that: “An original song consists of words and music, both of which are original and written specifically for the film.” The rules go on to state: “The work must be the result of a creative interaction between the filmmaker(s) and the composer(s) or songwriter(s) who have been engaged to work directly on the film.”
"Falling Slowly" is the electrifying acoustic duet performed in the music store in "Once." The Czech soundtrack album for "Kráska v nesnázích" ("Beauty in Trouble") includes "Falling Slowly." "Beauty in Trouble" played the Karlovy Vary Film Festival July 2, 2006 and was released in the Czech Republic in September, 2006; "Once" played the Galway Film Fleadh July 15, 2006, and was theatrically released in Ireland in March, 2007. It's unclear when the song was written, or which film it was written for (if either!), since both were first publicly screened around the same time. Which does the Academy think is the most important consideration: the writer's intention, the soundtrack recording date, or the film's screening/release date?
- - - -
UPDATE (12/27/08): Irish journalist Adam Maguire questions whether the Academy's reported "investigation" is necessary -- or even actually happening:
"Once," which was filmed over a 17-day period in January 2006; months before "The Swell Season" or "Beauty In Trouble" came out - something that wasn’t mentioned in The Sunday Tribune article. From this muddled time-line it seems as though the only revelation that could disqualify the song would be if it could be proven that either "Beauty In Trouble" or "The Swell Season" were wrapped and fully produced before Hansard was approached by John Carney in relation to "Once." Given the respective release dates of the two, that seems unlikely.- - - -After all, even if the reality is far different, Hansard can easily claim that he wrote "Falling Slowly" for "Once" at any time as long as it can be shown that he was aware of the film’s production. It doesn’t matter where or when the song was used after that fact.
The scores for "Into the Wild" and "Enchanted" were ruled ineligible by the Academy due to “predominant use of songs” -- although three of the latter's tunes were nominated in the Best Original Song category. I know, it's confusing.
If you care to learn more about the history of the Academy's Original Score/Original Song Score rule changes, see this article from the New York Times in 2000, "Squeezing Music Into Pigeonholes":
Alan Bergman, the chairman of the academy's music branch and the winner of three songwriting and scoring Oscars, believes that academy voters were being distracted by their memories of catchy tunes. ''People were voting for the songs, not the underscores,'' Mr. Bergman said. ''We felt that academy members outside the music branch didn't distinguish between the two. So when a score like 'The Lion King' is competing against a drama like 'Forrest Gump,' it's apples and oranges -- not in the quality of the score, but in the way it functions in the movie. There's a big difference.'' [...]So early last year [1999], after a vote of the academy's board of governors, the Oscar music categories reverted to the system used in 1984: awards would be given, as usual, for the best song; dramas and comedies would compete for best original score; and musicals would compete for best original song score.
But only two films -- ''Tarzan'' and ''South Park: Bigger, Longer and Uncut'' -- were submitted this year for the song score award. And the Oscar rules state that if four or fewer films are submitted in a category, the branch can recommend that no award be given. When the composers of both films tried to submit their underscores -- that is, all the music except the songs -- for the original score award, they were rebuffed; both received letters saying that their underscores -- about 45 minutes of music -- did not constitute what the academy considered an original score.
(tip: Sunday Tribune film critic Paul Lynch @ The Vast Picture Show)



















Comments
Exhibit #284 of why this category is such a pointless embarassment that it shouldn't exist at all. Really, why does the Academy still bother? To inflate the nomination tally of mediocre musicals? To drag the telecast out with groan-worthy toilet-break musical interludes? To suggest that the contributor of a pop song is as integral to the filmmaking process as the cinematographer or editor (who get far smaller chunks of the awards show)? Really, the existence of arcane rules suggests that the category is actually taken seriously.
That said, even though "Falling Slowly" is a lame song in itself, its presentation in "Once" was ingenious - convincingly spontatneous, improvised, awkward, displaying the exhilaration of both a work-in-progress coming togther and a flirtation deepening. If the award were for Most Original Use of A Supposedly New Song, it would beat everything since the last shot of "Dancer in the Dark." Alas, we'll instead be treated to hearing the polished, Celine Dion-esque version of the ballad everywhere until our ears bleed.
Posted by: A. Bridgedown | January 27, 2008 05:16 AM
I'm really surprised this has only become an issue NOW.
I had first heard about this possibility a while back, and I think most signs point to the song NOT being eligible, as good as the song is. I thought it was obvious after the whole "Come What May" Moulin Rouge/Romeo + Juliet deal.
Posted by: pacheco | January 27, 2008 07:16 AM
That's a shame, but probably true. "Falling Slowly" is great, especially to its importance in the film - but was not written for the film specifically. Silly since "If You Want Me" and "The Hill" are also powerful, and could've been included. Both are sung by Marketa Irglova only, so maybe that's why they weren't considered.
It's also possible those appeared elsewhere before hand too. I can't remember which songs were on prior albums and which weren't.
Posted by: Adam W. | January 27, 2008 08:07 AM
I was personally shocked to see "Falling Slowly" nominated since I was sure it was ineligible. Most of the songs from the film can be found on both "Swell Season" and "The Cost". I figured "If You Want Me" would be chosen since it appears on neither and is to my ears also Oscar-worthy.
Posted by: Leif | January 27, 2008 09:45 AM
Am I reading this right? They've nominated a song in a successful movie only to discover that it had previously been used in an obscure one? What, it was a better song in 2007 than in 2006?
I'm not saying I've heard of "Beauty in Trouble," but this is still a little embarrassing, no?
Posted by: Jared | January 27, 2008 07:13 PM
Everyone: Shhhhhh. This movie needs to win something, dammit, and this appears to be its only shot.
Posted by: Ken Lowery | January 27, 2008 07:20 PM
I have long advocated the introduction of a third category, something like "Achievement for best musical production/symbiosis," where the film can be celebrated for its incorporation of previously existing musical material. This can be a particularly good musical number, or the way Mahler is used in a given scene.
I know it sounds stupid, but it will celebrate a part of film making which goes unnoticed currently.
Posted by: Ali Arikan | January 28, 2008 03:18 AM
Well, this whole issue was put a light by Czech news web Tyden.cz. See this: http://www.tyden.cz/rubriky/kultura/irglove-s-hansardem-hrozi-vyrazeni-z-boje-o-oscary_40908.html
Posted by: Alan | January 28, 2008 12:52 PM
Well, this whole issue was put a light by Czech news web Tyden.cz. See this: http://www.tyden.cz/rubriky/kultura/irglove-s-hansardem-hrozi-vyrazeni-z-boje-o-oscary_40908.html
Posted by: Alan | January 28, 2008 12:53 PM
Turns out it's eligible! Glad to see they worked out the nonsense. It's such an integral part of the movie that it seemed silly there was any question of whether or not it should be eligible. Not it just remains to be seen if the academy's voters are smart enough to make it win.
http://carpetbagger.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/29/once-again-a-legit-nominee/
Posted by: NTinsley | January 29, 2008 07:25 PM