Academy Award Fraud

[innerSpaceman]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

But, the key rule is 5-d and the definition of "diluted". Is using it once, but during a pivotal moment, enough to brand whole score, beginning to end, as "diluted"?

Well, if one cue is from Deadwood and another (as per mousepod) from The Insider, I'd say Santaolallo's score for Babel is sufficiently diluted by his earlier compositions to be disqualified from Oscar competition.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

Well, if one cue is from Deadwood and another (as per mousepod) from The Insider, I'd say Santaolallo's score for Babel is sufficiently diluted by his earlier compositions to be disqualified from Oscar competition.

If he had used Happy Birthday instead, would that have been enough to dilute it? That's been used in thousands of different places, but is 2 minutes of re-used music in a 120 minute score enough to disqualify it? If not, what's the dividing line? Obviously changing one note of a score isn't enough to be original and reusing 3 notes isn't enough to be not original. Is the pivotal-ness of the scene a factor or not?

In the end, it's a judgment call on the Academy's part. They obviously felt that one segment of recognizable music did not invalidate the entire 120 minutes as being a original work "as a whole". You obviously disagree and feel that the prominent use of the pre-existing music is enough to taint the whole. I've seen neither Deadwood nor Babel (nor The Insider), so I have no point of reference. But in terms of blatant rule violation, I don't see one as it's a subjective definition.


(ETA: The cue from The Insider is the same one that we're talking about. It's in all three)

[mousepod]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

The cue from The Insider is the same one that we're talking about. It's in all three

That makes it even funnier.