WGA Takes Some Goodness Away
All of the year’s great scripts have been deemed ineligible. A few remain. But alas. It’s hard not to feel some butt-hurt over this. Usually the WGA is the best predictor of the writing awards at the Oscars, but now that many of the best writing we’ve seen won’t even compete at the WGAs, how in the heck are we supposed to use them? So I guess this will just be one of those years where the WGA is not really relevant. Then again, wasn’t Up in the Air supposed to win in Adapted anyway? Original seems like The Hurt Locker’s to lose with Basterds and Up out especially.
Kris Tapley reports that District 9, In The Loop, Fantastic Mr. Fox and UP have been excluded from the WGA as well.
Rob Y says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 1:28pm
The WGA is doing everything they can to make themselves irrelevant. Seriously.
guany says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 1:32pm
We should place bets to see what else they deem ineligible by the end of the day!
RearWindow says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 1:32pm
Now I understand how Antwone Fisher and Bowling for Columbine got nominated for best orignal screenplay in 2002.
John says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 1:34pm
District 9 and In the Loop, too?
This is INSANITY.
Does this happen every year and we don’t know about it?
daveylow says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 1:35pm
I just read why Nick Hornby was disqualified. Since the WGA made the rule that he had to belong to his local WGA Britain as well as the WGA-USA after An Education finished production, shouldn’t he get some kind of waiver?
The whole thing sounds fishy to me.
Tom says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 1:37pm
Based on the recent disqualifications, I’m looking at these Adapted Screenplays to get nominated:
Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Squeakquel
Confessions of a Shopaholic
G.I. Joe: Rise of Cobra
He’s Just Not That Into You
The Twilight Saga: New Moon
Does anyone have a problem with these?
Thomas Sentina says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 1:39pm
lol what?! how is this possible? In my memory for as long as i’ve been oscar watching i’ve never seen anything like this from the wga. yes, there’s usually discrepancies for ineligible films but it’s more directly related to the actual oscar awards regarding the notorious short lists of the foreign film and documentary categories or they’re ridiculous song and score eligibility rules. i’ve never seen anything as ridiculous as this from the wga or from any of the guilds for that matter. they have to be trying to make some kind of point. like reported earlier even tho quentin isnt part of the wga they still managed to nominate him for the episode of csi that he did so maybe they just didn’t care if you were a card carrying member or not but are now just recently getting offended or cracking down on non-card carrying members. but all this does is lose a ton of credibility for the wga recognizing ALL of the best films that had come out in 2009, but instead they’ve decided to make themselves an exclusive club where they’re making themselves out to be cooler than the people they haven’t invited to the party, whereas, the writers of such great films like inglourious basterds, up, district 9 and fantastic mr. fox to name a few, are in fact way cooler than the people that are actually going to be at the party. what a joke especially in a year where the writing categories are very wide open. thanks for making our jobs easier wga u douche bags.
babalabalu says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 1:39pm
Lol, who cares now?
WGA Oddities says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 1:41pm
This is good news, some lesser hyped scripts can now get noticed! By the way, I’m sure these people probably had the oppotunity to join the WGA, but they chose not to.
What about originals “Moon” or “Drag Me to Hell” Sam Raimi’s horror come back that echoed the recession banking problems?
What about adaptations like Julie & Julia? Meryl didn’t just act in a vacuum, she had a good script and good direction. What about another female-centric film “Sunshine Cleaning?” with great performances from Emily Blunt and Amy Adams? They had some script to chew on. What about the adaptation from that Italian film that Robert DeNiro was in? “Everybody’s Fine?” It didn’t get much critical praise, but he and Rockwell had some good script to deliver there. Very real characters.
So this just means some of the hyped films go quietly away for a while. It doesn’t mean they are down for the count. Inglorious Basterds and Fantastic Mr. Fox are clever and quirky. They have a good chance of getting nominated elsewhere.
Marlon says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 1:44pm
What about 2012?!!?!?!!?! please let it get in!!
just kidding…this sickens me…why do they have to be so exclusive?! who cares if a film isn’t part of the guild?! just nominate because it is the best writing, then try to cater to the writers to get them to join!!
Marlon says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 1:46pm
well, animated films have never been eligible…so no surprise that Up and Fantastic Mr. Fox are ineligible…animated films are now yearly favorites at the Oscars.
Ryman says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 1:47pm
Okay so for all the movies eliminated:
-District 9
-An Education
-Fantastic Mr. Fox
-In the Loop
-Inglourious Basterds
-The Road
-A Single Man
-Up
That pretty much eliminates half our estimates. All that’s left is:
Original:
-500 Days of Summer
-Avatar
-The Hangover
-The Hurt Locker
-It’s Complicated
-The Messenger
-Moon
-A Serious Man
Adapted:
-Bright Star
-The Damned United
-The Informant
-Invictus
-The Lovely Bones
-Precious
-Up in the Air
-Where the Wild Things Are
There, that makes 8 of each. I say make your picks now and good luck to the nominees who hopefully will not be eliminated in the next few minutes.
Marlon says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 1:49pm
does this open up the chances for THE BLIND SIDE? It was nominated by the Washington D.C. critics….
but it’s kind of a cliche, bland script….(though her performance keeps the film alive)
iggy says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 1:51pm
Go, Whatever Works, go!
Just kidding, not even as an Allen die-hard fan I’d be rooting for it.
But, shouldn’t all this make them question themselves why such big names don’t care to become members or comply with their rules?
Zach says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 1:58pm
This reminds me of Mars Attacks! when the best characters got killed.
percy says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 2:07pm
sounds they are just being spiteful to who is not in their club
Charlie says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 2:13pm
@gauny,
At this rate, my money’s on this to be deemed ineligible *knocks on wood*
Movie……………WGA reason
The Hangover………too raunchy
500 Days Of Summer………….too indie
Where The Wild Things Are………too monstery
Seriously, the list of mass WGA ineligibilitie. is ridiculous.
Loyal says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 2:18pm
“Where The Wild Things Are………too monstery”
LMAO.
That was pretty funny.
So ballots aren’t due until Friday. Do members get to revote or did they already know what was eligible and we’re just late to the party?
Also, where does this leave Avatar? If it gets in, is it by default? And if it doesn’t, then what?
Charlie says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 2:22pm
I meant to say “these movies” instead of “this movies”, and “ineligibilities” instead of “ineligibilitie”.
Carry on…
Ryman says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 2:25pm
@Charlie
You must be five years old or something.
The Hangover, I can understand though it’s my most favorite film of the year.
500 Days of Summer, too indie? Dude, it’s won 5 critic awards for Best Original Screenplay. You think the movie is too hipster for you? Also, Little Miss Sunshine won the Oscar for Best Original Screenplay, I’m sure 500 Days of Summer has as much of a chance.
Where the Wild Things Are, too monstery? I’m sorry, you lost me there. Have you SEEN the movie? It’s terrific. I don’t even think monstery is even a word. Get a frickin dictionary.
Dine says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 2:27pm
How exactly do you join the guild anyway? It seems like the performing unions in this industry just can’t get there act together.
SaltireFlower says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 2:31pm
No In the Loop? These people are crazy.
percy says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 2:32pm
ryman must be a WGA member
Charlie says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 2:35pm
@Ryman
It was simply a joke reflecting on the obscure reasons why the WGA shut out loads of great scripts at the last minute.
Gregoire says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 2:38pm
Ryman, you too are disqualified.
babalabalu says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 2:47pm
Ryman is almost as large of a failure as the WGA.
Nick K. says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 2:59pm
This is absurd. I hope the Guild realizes just how stupid they’re coming across as.
Ryman says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 2:59pm
You all are just jealous that I’m right. You know for a fact that most people say “fail” because they’re the ones that are the failure. I don’t do that, because I’m not a failure. To be a failure would be like what you guys do, call someone else a failure and push the hate on someone else because you have NOTHING to say to stick up for your own actions. Also, read comment number 12 that I wrote as well, you’ll all see how wrong you are.
Laura says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 3:06pm
Wow, WGA – What the Hell?? This makes no sense at all. Their reasons for disqualifying An Education are especially fishy. Do they have a secret blacklist or something? Because it really sounds like they’re just making the rules up as they go along.
WalterNeff says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 3:09pm
The WGA is only irrelevant to Oscar punters. It’s a union award for union members; why would they give an award to writers not members? If the exclusion of certain screenwriters screws up your office pool, I’m sure their apology will be forthcoming.
Charlie says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 3:11pm
Quick Question: Has anyone won Best Original Screenplay or Best Adapted Screenplay without getting a WGA nod? If so- who, for what movie, and when?
Ryan Adams says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 3:20pm
Some writers are reluctant to deal with WGA because of their peculiar hazing and initiation rituals.
daveylow says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 3:21pm
Talk to Her (Pedro Almodovar) won the Best Original Screenplay award without a WGA nomination.
Morton Fan says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 3:25pm
Some writers are reluctant to deal with WGA because of their peculiar hazing and initiation rituals.
I could see how that would make someone like Ryman bitter.
Ryman says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 3:52pm
@MortonFan
I take it you don’t get my sarcasm. You really think someone would actually say all that bullshit on this board? It’s a joke. That’s why I actually don’t take half the people on Earth seriously. If you read comment number 12, that’s actually Ryman speaking, not Ryman pretending to be a sarcastic prick.
Ethan says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 3:53pm
This is total bullshit.
Laura says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 3:57pm
@WalterNeff
Except that the DGA and SAG seem to have no problem nominating and even awarding people who do not strictly fit into their guild, and who did not strictly follow their rules. So that’s why the WGA are coming off so badly in this situation.
Dine says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 3:58pm
Actually you don’t have to be a union member to be nominated you just have to write your material under there certain guidelines. A process which some may understandably and unfortunatley by-pass in favor of working on there material with out knowing all of the future consequences.
Looking at the list of ineligible contenders again I can’t really say that I’m going to miss some of these films getting nominated. Up and Fantastic Mr. Fox are both great films no doubt, but it was clear that they weren’t eligible from the start.
District 9 on the other hand may be one of the most overrated films of the year. It was basically a shoot-em E.T. that took a major political and social issue and managed to make me and most people I know who saw it care less about. I have never seen a film with such serious subject matter that manged to detach me form it completley on top of this wild-out-there premise which I could not suspend my disbelief for a second from.
Inglorious Basterds may be one of the most entertaining films of the year but there are huge flaws in the writing. It goes on for far too long and has stretches of slef-indulgent dialouge that doesn’t always benefit the film and isn’t essential. I can’t speak for the quality of the Road, but a Single Man is more of a film about the character and the perfromancees than it’s screenplay.
This now leaves room for a number of other great scripts. 500 Days of Summer, The Hurt Locker, Moon, A Serious Man, The Messenger, Invictus, The Damned United, among others. These omissions to me don’t really diminish the credibility of the guild.
Jasco says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 3:59pm
Just to provide some info and maybe offer a different viewpoint:
The WGA did not suddenly deem films ineligible as people seem to think. These films never qualified for a nomination. There’s a difference. These writers were not members of the guild and their films were not produced under a guild contract. (The case with “An Education” is odd and, personally, I would let that slide [plus I would have voted for it.] I would also allow animated features in but they have a separate category. But these aren’t changes. This is how the award has always been. At least as long as I’ve been voting…)
As for the ballots, they list all the films produced under a guild contract. There is no way to vote for a movie unless it is on the list. Each member can vote up to five films in each category (adapted and original). So no worries about people voting for “Inglourious” only to find their vote wasn’t counted, etc.
Speaking of Tarantino, I assume his previous WGA nomination for a CSI script made it because of the other three writers credited on the script who I presume are in the WGA.
Also, as a WGA member, the awards are specifically meant to celebrate the contribution of WGA members to the film industry. From the WGA’s perspective, it is not their responsibility to be a precursor to the Oscars, although that is often how the award is often interpreted. There are dozens of critics awards and other awards that can be used as precursors. These films presumably have ballots similar to the Oscars. Look at those to make your predictions.
The guild is important for writers working in the industry and if the award somehow provides additional incentive for writers to join, in my opinion that’s all for the better.
Many years there have been great films that were not on the WGA ballot. This year seems unusual however in that so many films with strong scripts are not on the ballot.
Mayukh says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 4:05pm
This SUCKS — so, so, so, so much — but I would cry and throw a party if Bright Star got a nod.
Jeremie says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 4:09pm
“Also, as a WGA member, the awards are specifically meant to celebrate the contribution of WGA members to the film industry. From the WGA’s perspective, it is not their responsibility to be a precursor to the Oscars, although that is often how the award is often interpreted.”
As far as I was pissed off with the exclusion of these films, this sole sentence just put things into perspective. I think you made a very good point.
And we keep complaining about the repetition of the precursors, always choosing the same films.
This rule of ineligibility might help some less celebrated films and put them for a day in the spotlight (Two Lovers, Bright Star and Moon I am looking at you).
Jon R says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 4:40pm
At this point, these are my predictions for the WGA nominations (unless there are more films that will be deemed ineligible)
Adapted Screenplay:
Up in the Air
Precious
Invictus
The Lovely Bones
Where the Wild Things Are
Original Screenplay:
Avatar
500 Days of Summer
The Hurt Locker
A Serious Man
The Hangover
Harmonica says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 4:41pm
Wait, so Avatar is still eligible for the WGA? Didn’t Cameron write that like a billion years ago?
guany says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 4:41pm
Clearly Ryman should be deemed ineligible for AD.
@ Charlie: Tarantino for Pulp Fiction comes to mind. Someone else mentioned Almodovar. But yeah, it has happened numerous times, and I suspect it’ll happen again this year (i.e. Tarantino)
Also, last year, only 1 of the WGA’s nominated Original Screenplays was also nominated for the Oscar. It was Milk – the winner.
My WGA predictions:
(500) Days of Summer
Avatar (while the Academy didn’t nominate Titanic, WGA did)
The Hurt Locker
The Hangover (ala Mean Girls, 40 Year Old Virgin, Knocked Up)
A Serious Man
Invictus
Julie and Julia
Precious
Star Trek (ala The Dark Knight, also Abrams’ TV connections)
Up in the Air
Ryman says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 4:43pm
Clearly guany should be deemed ineligible for life.
guany says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 4:49pm
LMFAO.
Great comeback. Seriously. I’m impressed.
Clayton says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 4:49pm
I hope The Damned United can sneak in now, though I doubt it will
daveylow says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 4:59pm
Much as I enjoyed 500 Days of Summer I’m surprised some find it a great script or a great movie. A lot of it depended upon the charm of the two leads. I can barely remember the rest of the cast, and the film was quickly out of my head about a week later.
m1 says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 5:51pm
WGA, HOW many films are you going to kick out? What’s next, The Hangover?!
Bernardo S says:
Wednesday, January 6, 2010 at 5:59pm
So… then…
Original
• (500) Days of Summer
• Avatar
• The Hurt Locker
• It’s Complicated
• A Serious Man
Spoiler: The Hangover
Adapted
• Bright Star
• Invictus
• Precious
• Up in the Air
• Where the Wild things are
Spoiler: Julie & Julia