This is one of those categories that has always confused me. Why? Well, put it next to Sound Mixing and the names just strike me as being very similar. So, I did a little reading and I think I have come to an understanding about these two categories. Editing covers the recording and creation of the sounds, including voices, sound effects, and other incidental noises. On the other hand, Sound Mixing centers on those who take all of the recorded sounds and mix the levels and make the movie work from a sound perspective. It is an interesting distinction and one that seems to make sense considering how important both of them are to the finished product.
In any case, this look into the 2010 Oscars centers on the Sound Editing category. Knowing more about what it entails made me realize just how fascinating a category it can be. It also goes by the name Sound Design and involves the work of a lot of people including the foley artists who create so many of those sounds. You see, not all sound is recorded on location; while that is a part of the process, it is not always usable and some sounds need to be recorded in a studio while others need to be created from scratch.
The award first appeared in 1963 and It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World won. The first few years saw two films nominated each year until the award disappeared for seven years before being replaced with a special achievement award for a few years. Nominations reappeared in 1982 when E.T. defeated Das Boot and Poltergeist (wow, I didn't realize it was quite that old). It would then run nearly uninterrupted with two or three nominated films each year until 2006 when the number of nominees expanded to five films.
This year has a pretty good crop of films up for the award. In alphabetical order: Avatar, The Hurt Locker, Inglourious Basterds, Star Trek, and Up. Although, I do have to admit that one of those films seems to stick out. Can you tell which one it is? If you do, what would you replace it with? I would replace it with District 9.
Now, here they are ordered in the way I expect them to finish:
Inglourious Basterds
This is a fantastic film and I really believe that it will only grow in estimation in years to come. That said, I do not really see it as a contender here. Yes, the sound is very good and I am sure a lot of work went into creating these sounds and making it sound authentic. However, when I see it next to the other nominees, it does not seem all that impressive. Perhaps I need to revisit Tarantino's revisionist/ode to film movie. It really is fantastic and delivers on all counts. Still, I do not see it winning here. I suspect, aside from Supporting Actor, its best hope for victory lies with its screenplay.
.jpg?t=20130517094513)
Article comments
1 - El Bicho
So are you starting off every Oscar article stating you don't know anything about the category? Seems rather an odd choice.
I don't get how you can have them "ordered in the way I expect them to finish" since the results are not revealed other than the winner.
2 - Chris Beaumont
Pretty much, yeah. Many of these things I know when I see/hear but so far as the specifics, gotta start somewhere.
Also I am sure I mentioned it my ordering doesn't really matter since we only get the number one. It is my way of discussing them in a fashion that makes sense to me, based on my thoughts of their likelihood to win.