ROTI’s top gun when it comes to awards season, DB, is back to predict the winners of tonight’s ceremony. You always can find his work at his own site, I-am-DB.com, where this article premiered on Friday. After you get done trouncing everyone at your Oscars party picks contest by relying upon DB’s prognostications, I highly recommend you add his intelligent stylings to your bookmarks bar or RSS feed, like, pronto.
Alright, we’re two days from the big night and it’s time to lay the cards on the table. As usual, the outcome of some categories seems set in stone, while others still have some suspense going for them. Other Oscar pundits are saying that all but two or three categories are completely sewn up, yet it’s never as cut and dry as they’d like to claim it is. There are always more races that could fall in different ways than anybody ever seems willing to admit. Which are which this year? Let us see…
BEST PICTURE
When the Academy announced last summer that they were reconfiguring the Best Picture competition such that the number of nominees would fall somewhere between a minimum of five films and a maximum of ten, they pointed out that they applied the calculation model to the previous ten years worth of ballots and found that some years would still have yielded only five nominees, while others would have seen six, seven, eight or nine make the list. Considering that this was a somewhat underwhelming year for movies, most pundits were expecting seven, maybe eight. But we got nine. And now that the ceremony is upon us, there’s only one being talked about. With the full muscle of Oscar maestro Harvey Weinstein behind it, The Artist is the film to beat on Oscar night. It collected plenty of critics awards during the season, and its standing was affirmed by wins from the Producers Guild of America, the Directors Guild of America, the British Academy of Film and Television (BAFTA) and its win for Best Picture (Musical or Comedy) at the Golden Globes. Some might argue that The Help has a chance as well, based on its three wins at the Screen Actors Guild Awards and the fact that it’s the most commercially successful film of the bunch. It clearly has the love of actors – the largest voting block within the Academy – but that won’t be enough to carry it all the way, especially when it missed out on key nominations for Best Director, Best Screenplay and Best Editing. The only nominees that might surprise are The Descendants and Hugo, but The Artist is the movie that seems to be making everyone and their mother feel that special feeling. As a paean to the early days of Hollywood and the magic of moviemaking, I think Hugo is a more successful film, and certainly one with more depth than The Artist. But by this point the silent charmer’s victory seems assured. And I suppose it’s nice that the movie was made without any aspirations for awards whatsoever. It’s a small film made from a place of love and affection, whose entire creative team has been genuinely overwhelmed by the outpouring of acclaim. That’s kinda nice.
Prediction: The Artist
Personal Choice: None of the nine movies truly captured my heart, but Moneyballis the one that most closely meets my barometer for what a Best Picture winner should be.
BEST DIRECTOR
This award, of course, usually goes hand in hand with Best Picture. I don’t imagine this year will see a split, despite some saying that Scorsese may win his second. The legendary lion did take the Golden Globe, but the better indicator is the DGA award, and that went to Michel Hazanavicius for The Artist. I expect the Academy will follow suit.
Prediction: Michel Hazanavicius
Personal Choice: The Tree of Life is too imperfect to deserve Best Picture, but in this category I’m less inclined to fault a movie’s flaws than I am to reward a director with vision and ambition. In that respect, none of this year’s nominees can match Terrence Malick.
BEST ACTOR
A category that was looking reasonably predictable in mid-January is much more in flux now. George Clooney had been out ahead, but Jean Dujardin has closed in tight. Not only did he snag trophies from SAG and BAFTA (both of which share some members with the Academy), but he’s kept visible these last couple of weeks with an amusing Funny or Die video in which he auditions for the villain role in a number of high-profile franchises, as well as a cameo in an Artist-inspired, French-themed Saturday Night Live sketch. Clooney and Dujardin are both charmers who would be enjoyable at the microphone, so no help determining who has the edge on that score. And even with the two of them seemingly neck and neck, this is the category that feels to me most poised for an upset. Brad Pitt stars in two Best Picture nominees, did great – many have said career-best – work in both of them, and has continually pushed himself as an actor. The personal investment he had in getting Moneyball made and the struggles he endured in doing so were well documented, and they add a nice, emotional narrative to his nomination. Toss in his charity work and general good humor and graciousness, and I think he could pull off a surprise victory. Gary Oldman is a longer shot, but some voters may want to reward him for an incredible career thus far. As for Demián Bichir, his nomination and the attention it brings to a film that puts the complex immigration issue in a personal light will be the extent of his reward. (An essay by journalist Jose Antonio Vargas about the importance of Bichir’s film and his nomination was published recently in Entertainment Weekly.) So…Dujardin’s victory in the more recent contests may tip the scales in his favor, making him the smart bet. But whether it’s because my gut tells me Clooney has broader support, or because I personally don’t see Dujardin’s performance as Oscar-caliber (not that personal feelings should ever govern these picks) or because I’m an idiot…I’m sticking with Clooney for the win.
Prediction: George Clooney
Personal Choice: Again, there’s nothing here that I can passionately go to bat for, but I was probably most affected by Bichir’s performance. And if Pitt somehow takes it, I’ll be all smiles.
BEST ACTRESS
This year, it’s the Best Actress category that best exemplifies the change of winds that can occur between the first half of the awards season – dominated by the regional critics awards – and the second half of the season, where the guilds, Golden Globes and national critics awards (mainly the Broadcast Film Critics Association prizes) are handed out. The first half of the season indicated that Michelle Williams was the force to be reckoned with for her impressive take on Marilyn Monroe in My Week with Marilyn. But it only takes a few key events to change the course the race; it’s down to Meryl Streep and Viola Davis now. Davis took the awards from SAG and the BFCA, while Streep won the BAFTA award and the Golden Globe (for a drama; Williams won the musical/comedy Globe). So this thing is pretty evenly split.
Streep gives another great performance (no surprise), especially in her many scenes as the elderly Margaret Thatcher. This is her record 17th nomination, and she hasn’t won since 1982; she’s lost the last 12 times. The Hollywood community has undying adoration and reverence for her, and whenever she wins an award at another event (and she’s won many in the last decade alone), she’s always funny and down to earth. The crowd loves seeing her up there. But they always know that Meryl Streep will be back within a couple of years and they’ll have another chance. The same can’t be said for Viola Davis, who will have a much harder time finding another lead role that could put her back in the Oscar race anytime soon. It’s unfortunate, but that’s the way the industry works. Davis is a wonderful actress who has earned the love and respect of many filmmakers over the years, but the opportunities for her to play rich leading roles are few and far between. She might not have even gotten the part in The Help if it hadn’t been for 2008′s Doubt, which earned her a Best Supporting Actress nomination for just two scenes (both opposite Streep). Davis has given heartfelt and moving speeches at her other wins this season, and her peers seem thrilled that she’s finally getting her moment to shine. And lest we forget, she’s excellent in The Help as a maid weary from years of service and dehumanization. She carries it in every step she takes, suggesting so much more internally than she ever has the chance to say out loud. Meryl Streep’s time could be upon us again, but it feels more like Davis’ moment…and I’d wager that even Streep is voting for her.
Prediction: Viola Davis
Personal Choice: Streep is overdue for Oscar #3, and she rocks it in The Iron Lady, but I’m rooting for Davis. I’d be fine with Williams too. She’s terrific in a part that seems so unlikely for her. It’s easy to imagine Meryl Streep will hit a bullseye playing Margaret Thatcher. It’s harder to imagine Michelle Williams hitting a bullseye as Marilyn Monroe, but she absolutely does.
The Oscar nominees drop tomorrow morning at 8 eastern, and at the 11th hour, ROTI’s official Oscars expert — DB, the eponymous author of I-am-DB.com — is here to give you tomorrow’s news today. His guesses are below. Check back at ROTI for more Oscars crossposts from this great new movie & TV site.
Predicting the nominees has been a bitch this year.
For starters, everyone seems to agree that 2011 wasn’t all that strong a year for movies. There was a lot of good and not much great…yet almost every category sports an abundance of worthy nominees. And while a few frontrunners are starting to emerge, no win feels inevitable. Usually by this time, the countless critics awards and initial guild nominations have helped clarify the field a bit, with at least one or two categories sporting a sure-fire winner. Not so this year. Without the usual sense of passion centered around a handful of films, things seem more prone to change between now and late February. All of which makes it an exciting race, but not an easy one to forecast. The new Best Picture rules don’t exactly help either. What new Best Picture rules, you may ask? Well let’s get the party started and find out…
Oh, a note for the nine of you that have actually read these in the past: normally I include my personal nomination picks for each category, but I’ve decided to hold off on that this year since there are still a few key movies that have yet to arrive in the Bay Area or which I just haven’t had a chance to see. They include The Iron Lady, We Need to Talk About Kevin, Coriolanus and Albert Nobbs. I missed the boat on a few others, including the acclaimed indie Tyrannosaur, but once again I’m pleased to say that I’ve seen pretty much everything that’s part of the conversation (I even saw Margaret during its super-quick theatrical run! ). Anyway, at some point between now and the awards, I’ll be sure to publish my own picks. Because I’m way smarter than the Academy.
BEST PICTURE
The Artist The Descendants The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo The Help Hugo Midnight in Paris Moneyball The Tree of Life
Now then: rule changes. Note that on the list above, I’ve included eight movies. The especially astute among you will further note that eight is less than ten. Remember two years ago, when the Academy decided there would be ten nominees for Best Picture instead of the traditional five? The change benefited movies that, it’s safe to say, wouldn’t have made the cut on a five-film list. (Think The Blind Side, 127 Hours and District 9, to name a few.) Well last June, the Academy announced it was shaking up the process even further. The number of nominees will now fall somewhere between five and ten, and we won’t know the tally until the nominations are revealed.
Those of you familiar with Johnny Dangerously will understand if I pause at this point to quote Roman Maroni, who always had a colorful way of putting things.
Based on how many of the roughly 6,000 Academy members return their ballots and make selections in the Best Picture category, the accounting aces at PricewaterhouseCoopers will determine what percentage of first place votes a movie needs to earn in order to secure a nomination. According to the Academy’s press release on the topic, this new system means that the nominated films will more accurately reflect Academy members’ favorite movies. The downside is that because of the way the calculations work, a significant number of voters’ ballots will essentially be tossed out. It’s a system that favors consensus but means not every voting member will have their voice heard. For statistical nerds out there, Steve Pond of TheWrap.com is an expert in crunching Oscar numbers and has examined and explained the process in detail.
What this boils down to for schmucks like me is that predicting the Best Picture nominees just got a lot trickier. But schmucks we are, and predict we shall.
Count on The Artist and The Descendants, which have grabbed the lion’s share of the critics awards and each took home top Golden Globes recently (the former in the musical/comedy category, the latter for drama). The Help and Hugo are close to certain, and Midnight in Paris is probably in there too. After that, the real guesswork begins. Two movies with late December releases that were widely expected to be contenders are War Horse and Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close. But War Horse, despite strong reviews and good box office, has failed to gain traction with the industry. While cited by the Producers Guild of America and the American Cinema Editors, it went unnominated by the Writers Guild of America, the Directors Guild of America (which has been generous to Steven Spielberg over the years) and the American Society of Cinematographers. Those omissions hurt. Has War Horse been left out to pasture?
As for Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close, it was the last move of the year to screen for critics and guilds, with some of the season’s first voting critic circles convening before they’d seen it. The lack of recognition by the Golden Globes and Screen Actors Guild could be due to ballots being cast before the movie was seen. But mixed reviews and the same lack of guild support slowing down War Horse‘s chances indicate the movie just hasn’t caught on. There have been a smattering of nominations from this group or that, and it could factor into a couple of races further down, but Best Picture no longer seems in the cards.
The unlikely beneficiary of those two movies’ lackluster showings appears to be The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, which in contrast to both, has scored big time with the guilds. It’s been nominated by the PGA, ACE, ACS and most surprisingly, the DGA and WGA. With all that support, its Oscar chances look better than anyone would have expected (and better than it probably deserves, but that’s another story). Then there’s The Tree of Life, Terrence Malick’s poetic rumination on life, death, the universe and really gorgeous swirls of color. It was admired by critics, and no doubt it has ardent supporters within the Academy. The question is whether it has enough to earn the necessary number of first place votes.
An assured ten-picture field might have opened the conversation up to movies like The Ides of March, My Week With Marilyn, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, Drive, or even some populist choices like Bridesmaids, Rango or Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2. (Don’t laugh; Potter was one of the year’s best-reviewed movies, and even within the industry a lot of people feel it deserves recognition as the closing chapter of the most financially successful franchise ever.)
War Horse could still muster the support it needs, while The Tree of Life may not have the necessary backing. Moneyball is a question mark too. But this is the list I’m going with.
BEST DIRECTOR
Michel Hazanavicius – The Artist
Alexander Payne – The Descendants
Martin Scorsese – Hugo
Woody Allen – Midnight in Paris
Terrence Malick – The Tree of Life
This category has three sure things: Hazanavicius, Payne and Scorsese. Two spots remain, and a lot of people are in the mix for them. The affection for Midnight in Paris will probably carry Woody Allen, but I wouldn’t call him a lock. Although The Help is a safe bet for Best Picture, its director Tate Taylor has been largely ignored throughout the season. The film’s direction isn’t especially dynamic (not that it needed to be), so he’ll probably fall prey to bigger names and bolder visions. If War Horse misses in Best Picture, it will kill any chance Spielberg has…which I sense isn’t much at this point anyway. David Fincher, on the other hand, could benefit from the lovefest that has swarmed Dragon Tattoo.
If the Academy goes with Hazanavicius, Payne, Scorsese, Allen and Fincher, it will match the DGA’s nominees five-for-five. That rarely happens. In the last 25 years, it’s only happened three times (1998, 2005, 2009). When the two bodies diverge, the Academy often favors an auteur or an indie filmmaker. (Mulholland Drive‘s David Lynch, City of God‘s Fernando Meirelles, The Sweet Hereafter‘s Atom Egoyan and Red‘s Krzysztof Kieslowski are among those who scored Oscar nods but weren’t cited by the DGA.) This year, that could mean good news for Drive‘s Nicolas Winding Refn, who took the Best Director prize at the Cannes Film Festival last summer. But Drive is feeling more like a critic’s darling and less like a movie that’s connecting within Hollywood. The more likely nominee would be Terrence Malick for The Tree of Life. While the movie is divisive and it certainly isn’t perfect, Malick is a visionary filmmaker and one who has the admiration of many colleagues. Whatever the movie’s chances in the Best Picture race, I think it has a good chance of landing here.
The great DB returns with his predictions for this year’s Oscars. Find more of his work at I-am-DB.com.
“New Rule: If they’re going to make a historical epic full of British actors in period costumes about Queen Elizabeth II helping her father get over his speech impediment, why bother having the Oscars at all? You win.
Unless someone in America is making a movie where Meryl Streep teaches Anne Frank how to box, we give up.”
-Bill Maher on Real Time, 9/24/10
BEST PICTURE
Bill Maher may have called it earlier than anyone. It would seem that The King’s Speech is poised to be the big winner on Sunday night, with a Best Picture win and several others along the way.
Despite The Social Network conquering the first half of the season, its chances are now slim to none. Ditto for everything else, even though True Grit and The Fighter, in particular, are bound to have their supporters. So…not a lot to say here.
Well, one thing. It’s been irritating over the last three or four weeks to see Oscar pundits suddenly jumping on The King’s Speech bandwagon and saying that they really knew all along it would be the favorite and that The Social Network never really had a chance.
Because that’s not what they were saying at all before the Producers Guild of America, Directors Guild of America and Screen Actors Guild awards all turned the tide away from Social and toward King’s Speech. Although The Social Network did kick ass amongst the critics awards like few films have (in recent memory at least), it was never an obvious Best Picture choice; not to anyone who has actually paid attention to the kind of movies that appeal to the Academy.
DB is ROTI’s resident Oscars expert, and he is back to analyze the nominees for this year’s ceremony. His wisdom has long been revealed to the lucky recipients of a private email list, but he’ll soon be launching his own blog, which we intend to pimp relentlessly. But for now, he’s here to analyze the nominations with an award junkie’s eye. For reference, here is the Complete List of Nominees.
With the announcement of the Oscar nominations now nearly two weeks past, you’ve obviously been aching with anticipation to hear my thoughts. My apologies for the delay, but I figured it would take this long to read that piece anyway, so I had a little time to play with.
Ready to get back into it?
BEST PICTURE
This list shaped up pretty much as expected, with 127 Hours muscling in to replace The Town, which I thought would make the cut. I’ve got no problem with that. The Town was a fine movie and another welcome component of the Ben Affleck Career Reboot, but I was surprised it got elevated to the Best Picture conversation in the first place.
Despite the presence of eight other movies, most still see the contest as boiling down to The King’s Speech and The Social Network. Based on recent events, I have to agree. What recent events, you ask? Well, in the Oscar race, things can change awfully fast. And so they have. The first half of the season clearly favored The Social Network, but in the days since the nominations were revealed, the Screen Actors’ Guild honored The King’s Speech with their top prize – for best cast – and the Director’s Guild selected Speech‘s Tom Hooper as Best Director. (I’m having trouble making sense of that one, but I’ll say a bit more below.) Taken individually, neither of these awards necessarily shore up a Best Picture win for The King’s Speech. But taken together – along with a win from the Producer’s Guild – that scenario now looks likely.
I’m about to go off on a tangent here, but longtime readers know this is nothing new. I possess no filter. The day of the nominations, this article appeared on CNN.com and promptly pissed me off. The author, one Lewis Beale, calls The Social Network an “also-ran” behind The King’s Speech and True Grit because Speech led the way with 12 nominations, Grit followed with 10 and Social tied for third with eight. He says the numbers make Speech and Grit the frontrunners.
No, Lewis. No they don’t.
Lewis Beale: also-ran
Speech may well be the frontrunner now, but not because it has the most nominations. And sorry, but Grit isn’t a frontrunner at all. The number of nominations a movie gets has nothing to do with whether it will win Best Picture or whether the Academy thinks it’s the single best movie of the year.
Some years, you can go into the Oscar race feeling pretty confident that your predictions are largely safe bets, save for a few toss-of-the-coin categories like last year’s Penn vs. Rourke Best Actor race.
This is not one of those years.
And don’t listen to anyone who claims otherwise (sorry Ebert).
Instead, we’re facing a year with a small batch of heavy favorites and a whole lot of races, down through the below-the-line categories, that could go a few different ways. So I’m not feeling as confident in my predictions this year as I often have in the past, but I am really looking forward to Sunday night and seeing how this topsy-turvy Oscar season comes to an end. I’m happy to sacrifice bragging rights for some genuine suspense…and I’m not really inclined to brag anyway. So here’s where my head is at as the big day rapidly approaches.
WARNING: My fondness for talking (and writing) about movies can lead to a lot of rambling, sometimes more than the category in question really justifies. My Best Picture commentary really goes off on some tangents, but I couldn’t keep it all in! Anyway, I tried to keep it shorter as I worked my way down the list, but proceed at your own risk.
ANOTHER WARNING: This is just some advice. If you’re planning to Tivo the show, be sure to set whatever is on after the Oscars to record as well, because you can bet that the show will run over the three-hour time that your DVR has allotted for it.
BEST PICTURE/DIRECTOR
To those who’ve been paying attention since last November-ish (i.e. mega movie awards nerds like me), this year’s Best Picture race has been the most schizophrenic in recent history. Heading into December, I would have said that Up in the Air was going to be the movie to beat. A serious film that still has lots of laughs, plus effervescent performances and a sharp script that nailed the zeitgeist. But as the critics awards actually started to roll out, The Hurt Locker turned out to be the dominant film. Then came mid-December and the release of Avatar, which left everyone slack-jawed, Academy members far and wide included (or so it was reported). When the Golden Globes anointed Avatar, it officially became the movie to beat. Until the guilds came around, that is, and suddenly The Hurt Locker was back on top with wins from the producers, directors, writers, and editors.
And still there are many who think that with the new voting system, this isn’t just an Avatar-Hurt Locker race. To go along with the switch from five to ten Best Picture nominees, the Academy is also switching to the preferential ballot system for its top category. This is the system by which they’ve always determined the nominees, but the actual winners were voted by straight up popularity: the movie with the most votes wins. Not anymore. If you want to understand this game-changing element, read this article wherein the preferential system is clearly and thoroughly explained through a fantasy scenario that has Inglourious Basterds winning Best Picture.
Let’s start with Director though, because that race seems to have become more certain. At this point, I’d be surprised if Kathryn Bigelow doesn’t take it. Even her fellow nominees James Cameron and Quentin Tarantino have said they’re voting for her. She would be the first woman to ever win Best Director. She’s only the fourth to be nominated, and the only one who has come this close, thanks to wins from nearly every major critics group, plus the Director’s Guild and the British Academy. I would be really happy if she wins - The Hurt Locker is a superbly directed movie.
But will it win Best Picture? This could definitely be one of those years when the two top prizes are split. The irony there, if we stick with the Hurt Locker vs. Avatar scenario, is that it would probably make more sense for the split to go the other way. I think more people look at The Hurt Locker as a better film overall than Avatar, but even those who take shots at Avatar’s story have to admit that Cameron is a true visionary and a brilliant craftsman. Whether you’re bothered by his dialogue or not, there’s no arguing that the man can direct the shit out of a movie. Nonetheless, the opportunity to help Bigelow make history seems to be the overriding feeling, and it’s not like The Hurt Locker is undeserving of a directing Oscar.
So what about Avatar? Despite the staggering box office, I know many people were underwhelmed and disappointed in the story and can’t believe that the Academy would give the film its top honor. But think about this: most movie fans of my age group, if not beyond it as well, look at 1977 and still can’t believe that Annie Hall beat Star Wars for Best Picture. Star Wars, after all, defined a generation. Its box office success was unprecedented, its affect on culture was unparalleled, and its impact on visual effects was revolutionary. Star Wars changed movies forever. Yet it was a simple story, one whose detractors – and yes, it had plenty of them – dismissed as childish as they sneered at the dialogue and wrote it off as silly, faux-spiritual hokum. Those “serious” filmgoers and Academy Award watchers probably didn’t think Star Wars deserved it either. But I’ll bet that a lot of the people who decry Avatar as a Best Picture winner do think that Star Wars should have won. Now I’m definitely not saying that Avatar is as good as Star Wars or that it will spawn the same degree of undying fervor, but its impact is similar…maybe not as much on the culture, but for better or worse it is seen as changing movies forever. Like it or not, Avatar is the movie of the year. Not necessarily the best movie of the year, but the one that more than any other defines 2009. Is it crazy to argue that the Best Picture Oscar should recognize exactly that?
Still, I really don’t know which way this is gonna go. For every article I find that says the preferential ballot system will favor Avatar, there’s another claiming it will favor The Hurt Locker while yet another claims that Inglourious Bastards will actually be the beneficiary. And the stream of idiotic arguments for or against a given movie’s chances are laughable, as everyone spins whatever numbers or stats they want in order to bolster their film’s chances. Some say The Hurt Locker won’t win because it grossed so little money theatrically.Seriously? It’s not going to win because it only made $12 million? Who cares? Okay, fine – maybe producers and studio executives think that way. But does anybody really think that a composer, makeup artist or cinematographer is going to not vote for a movie because of how little money it made? That’s what they’ll ask themselves when they fill out their ballot? It’s absurd. The Hurt Locker will apparently be the lowest grossing Best Picture winner if it wins. So? No fantasy film had ever won Best Picture until The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King. And come to think of it, I don’t think any science-fiction film has ever won it either, so there’s Avatar’s chance to make history. There’s a first time for everything. (Hear that, gay cowboys? Your day will come!)
Or then there’s Harvey Weinstein, who is convinced that Inglourious Basterds has Best Picture in the bag, citing the film’s win of Best Ensemble at the Screen Actors Guild awards as one of his chief reasons (actors being the largest branch of the Academy). Harvey, there are 1,205 actors in the Academy. There are nearly 120,000 in SAG, and they all get to vote. Do the math. Not to mention that every year, people try to draw a connection between the SAG Ensemble prize and Best Picture despite the fact that they have only matched up six times out of 14.
There are also the run of recent stories about various acts of dirty campaigning (The Hurt Locker incident being the most prominent), or accusations against the nominees ranging from anti-Semitism (shots ludicrously thrown at Basterds, An Education and A Serious Man) to story inaccuracies (real soldiers suddenly attacking The Hurt Locker months after its release). I hear that helium balloon vendors are incensed over Up’s reckless suggestion that their product could allow a house to be safely navigated through the air. Unfortunately, this kind of behavior mars every Oscar season, even if the sordid depth of the shenanigans are not highly publicized. Really, when you hear how much manipulation and politicking goes on behind the scenes by studios and producers to win Oscars, it paints the whole thing in such a tawdry, disheartening light. There are so many reasons that the Oscars often have little to do with recognizing and celebrating the best in film, and yet despite being fully aware of that, I eat it up like candy. I can’t help it. Years later, fans like me – and some of you – are still muttering about the snubbed performer or the movie that should have won this or that award. But I suppose it’s all part of the fun.
God, have I stalled long enough? Okay, here goes. I’m practically throwing a dart here, but I’m going with The Hurt Locker. It seems like a less polarizing film than Avatar, and so I’m thinking that with the preferential ballot system, people who choose another film as their favorite still might have Hurt Locker high on their list, which could help it in subsequent rounds of voting. I can honestly say that I’ve never had such a hard time trying to predict a winner in any category about which I’m reasonably well informed, ever. I have absolutely no idea what’s going to happen.
Personal Choices: Picture – Precious; Director – James Cameron.
“Burnce is on my side and that’s all that matters”
BEST ACTOR
Morgan Freeman should have been a force to be reckoned with as Nelson Mandela, but unfortunately the film didn’t meet expectations and the role gave him little to work with. George Clooney, though he dominated the field of critics awards, doesn’t really have a chance either. Colin Firth picked up the BAFTA award, but he had a home field advantage and while he and his work in A Single Man are widely admired, this just isn’t his year. I’d say Jeremy Renner has a shot for an Adrien Brody-style upset, but Brody wasn’t going up against a heavy favorite who had never won before. Renner is.
This is a category where sentiment will rule the day. The industry hath deemed it time for Jeff Bridges to win an Oscar, and win an Oscar he shall. Does he deserve it? Sure. Bridges has longed topped my list of actors long overdue for an Oscar (a spot he shares with Ed Harris and Sigourney Weaver, so get crackin’ Academy…), and he does great work in Crazy Heart. Is it the best of his career? I wouldn’t say so. Is it even the best of the year? Debatable. But it’s good, and he’s universally respected and appreciated in the business. His time has come.
Interestingly, Bridges is about to re-team with the Coen Brothers, who directed him in The Big Lebowski (a film that, in hindsight, should totally have earned him a nod), for a remake of True Grit. John Wayne won a Best Actor Oscar for the original in 1969, and with the Coens at the helm, Bridges may well be back in the race next year.
As for my own pick, if I strip away all the external factors and just judge the performance alone (which is always how it should be and always how we want it to be but rarely how it is…even for purists like me), the nominee whose work left the strongest impression is Firth. But I’ll be thrilled to see Bridges finally win.
Personal Choice: Colin Firth
BEST ACTRESS
Way back in the fall, long before the race had fully taken shape, it already seemed like we were headed for a two-woman showdown: Meryl Streep and Carey Mulligan. At the time my feeling was that a Streep-Mulligan race was no race at all; the Academy was not going to overlook Meryl Streep again in favor of some fresh-faced ingénue with her whole career ahead of her. I actually thought that if anyone could beat Streep, it was Gabourey Sidibe. True, like Mulligan, she’s a fresh, new face at the start of her career, but she had a role and a movie that stirred people deep inside – much more so, I guessed, then Mulligan, whose performance was admired and engaging but not nearly as moving.
But then something happened. The film community collectively put their heads up their asses and somehow moved Sandra Bullock to the front of the queue for her entertaining-but-hardly-award-caliber work in The Blind Side. I talked about this when I commented on the nominees, so I won’t dwell again on how she even wound up in the race. But I will dwell on how she has turned into the frontrunner, because it continues to baffle me.
Bullock is extremely likable, and word on the street is that everyone who has worked with her, cast and crew, adores her. I like her too, but she has hardly given us a career full of great films and performances, so any argument that it’s “her time” is complete bullshit. It’s Jeff Bridges time. He’s someone who has been around for years, done consistently excellent work, been nominated multiple times but never won and this year found himself a role that perfectly suited his stage in life and his career. If this were the aforementioned Sigourney Weaver, or Julianne Moore or Laura Linney, then there might be some credence to the argument that “she’s due.” But we’re talking about Sandra Bullock, whose filmography has a smattering of good movies and a lot that are mediocre to bad. I could see likability factoring into things if the performance really dazzled, but I just can’t see how enough people could be more impressed by her performance than any of her fellow nominees.
I readily admit that numerous factors other than quality of performance enter into Oscar voting and that all kinds of political factors are taken into account, from how much a nominee works the campaign circuit to how good their speeches are throughout the season. Bullock has worked the circuit, and her speeches have been funny, humble and all around terrific. But despite all signs pointing her way for the win (including The Blind Side’s shocking Best Picture nomination, which suggests reasonably broad support), I just can’t go there. My mind can’t wrap around it and my fingers can’t type it. While it may cost me in the pool, I’m holding onto the idea that enough Academy members pulled their heads out of their asses in time to actually watch these performances side by side and recognize that while Bullock does a good job, she doesn’t hold a candle to her competition.
Meryl Streep, on the other hand, is still defying expectations and proving why she is widely regarded as the greatest actress alive. There’s nothing this woman can’t do. She is a force of nature. Julia Child is such a recognizable and distinct personality that any actress would be daunted trying to portray her. Streep not only does it, but deepens our understanding and appreciation of someone we knew only as a TV personality. It may not be the biggest stretch of her career, but this was hardly an easy or throwaway performance. The film marks her 16th nomination, and her 12th since the last time she won. She’s due…and there’s nobody else but Meryl Streep who could already have two Oscars and still be called overdue.
I also want to throw this out there: Streep and Bullock tied at the Critics Choice Awards; they both won Golden Globes (Bullock for Drama, Streep for Musical/Comedy); and although Bullock took the SAG, that group tends to spread the wealth around rather than awarding people multiple times, and Streep won last year for Doubt. I’m just saying. So despite the prevalent opinion – and probably the accurate one – I’m predicting Meryl for the win.
That said, if Gabourey Sidibe pulls an upset, I’ll be on my feet cheering.
Personal Choice: Streep or Sidibe
BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR
Sorry guys. You did good work, but this category is owned by Inglourious Basterds’ Christoph Waltz, who will become the third performer in a row – after Heath Ledger and Javier Bardem – to win Supporting Actor by giving us an antagonist for the ages.
Personal Choice: Christoph Waltz
BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS
Anybody who thought that Mo’Nique’s behavior during the awards season was controversial – oh my God, she didn’t run around kissing Academy members’ asses! – has been silenced by her moving, grateful acceptance speeches at the Critics Choice Awards, Golden Globes and Screen Actors Guild awards (where her graciousness extended to acknowledging some of the actors from Precious who were not included in the film’s nominated ensemble cast). With all respect to her fellow nominees, especially the ladies of Up in the Air, Mo’Nique cannot be stopped. Nor should she be.
Personal Choice: Mo’Nique
BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY
While Oscar voters sometimes want to keep the Best Picture space relatively serious, the writing awards are where they are more likely to vote for something fun. Movies like Little Miss Sunshine, Juno, Fargo and Ghost have all triumphed here rather than in Best Picture, so I think Inglourious Basterds stands its best chance at a major non-acting award here. Some will point to The Hurt Locker’s Writer’s Guild Award win as a sign in its favor, but keep in mind that Basterds was ineligible for a WGA nomination, clearing the way for The Hurt Locker. Not that Locker isn’t a good script and couldn’t pull through, but I think all the support for Inglourious Basterds – Christoph Waltz aside – will be channeled here to Quentin Tarantino, giving him his second screenwriting Oscar.
Personal Choice: Inglourious Basterds
BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY
Up in the Air has earned gushing love for its writing and Jason Reitman has cemented his status as one of our finest young filmmakers. This category is full of great work, but Up in the Air is too smart, too “of the moment” and too appreciated to go home empty handed. I would be shocked if anything else wins. It’s kinda lame though that this dude Sheldon Turner gets to pretty much ride Reitman’s coattails to an Academy Award win, but what can you do?
Personal Choice: Up in the Air (with In the Loop nipping at its tail). Seriously, have you not seen In the Loop yet? WTF are you waiting for?
BEST ANIMATED FILM
It was such a good year for animated features that even this category could have had close to 10 worthy nominees. Fantastic Mr. Fox could pull an upset, but it’s hard to imagine that Up isn’t going to bring another Oscar to the halls of Pixar.
Personal Choice: Up…but I’d have no complaints about Mr. Fox
BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY
The black and white imagery of The White Ribbon took the prize from the American Society of Cinematographers and won some notable critics awards as well, but I don’t think enough Academy members have seen it. And nice as it is to see Harry Potter here, Colin Creevey stands a better chance of killing Voldemort than this movie does of winning. Basterds will have a lot of support, but I think it will fall by the wayside. It could go either way with Hurt Locker and Avatar, and while I don’t necessarily think most voters understand the technical challenges involved in shooting Avatar, I think they understand enough – and admire the film’s prettiness enough – that I’m giving it the edge.
Personal Choice: Avatar
BEST FILM EDITING
I think Academy members tend to vote for editing they can notice or at least intuit, so I’m ruling out Precious and Basterds, finely edited though they may be. Even more so than its cinematography, The Hurt Locker’s editing creates its powerful tension and helps the movie hold the viewer in a vice-grip. In Avatar’s favor, it is the rare action movie that is edited so cleanly that even during the rapid cuts of big battle sequences you never lose your bearing or feel like you’re watching a blur. And District 9 actually bridges that gap as an action movie that is also dramatically intense.
I have a number of friends who are editors, and I have to think they’re laughing their asses off at my ignorant commentary. Hey, I admit I don’t really understand what makes editing great and that I too tend to be wowed by editing that I notice…even though any editor will tell you that the best editing is invisible. So knowing full well that I don’t really know what I’m talking about, my gut tells me this one goes to The Hurt Locker.
Personal Choice: The Hurt Locker
BEST ART DIRECTION
This category often favors period pieces and historical recreations, which bodes decently for Sherlock Holmes and even better for The Young Victoria. But if there’s anything that can trump something from a history book, it’s something imagined and fantastical. So while Victoria could be crowned, I think the floating mountains, celestial skyscape and lush, eye-popping botany of Avatar’s Pandora will take the gold.
Personal Choice: Avatar
BEST COSTUME DESIGN
Period frocks do even better with Oscar than period sets. Both Coco Before Chanel and Bright Star fit that bill (and I wouldn’t count out the latter), but The Young Victoria is the higher profile of the period films, and also required a greater number of costumes to dress all those royals at court. I expect it will rule the day.
Personal Choice: Bright Star
BEST ORIGINAL SONG
It’s not the strongest category this year, but then again, how often is this really a strong category? You usually find one or two good songs each year, and a few others – often cheesy ballads – that fill space. Perhaps that’s why this year, Oscar producers decided not to include performances of the nominated songs during the show.
The Princess and the Frog has two nominees and there was a time when a song from a Disney animated musical would have this sewn up, but while the movie is a welcome return to form for Disney animation, the songs by Randy Newman don’t live up to the Alan Menken/Howard Ashman tunes that scored wins for The Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast and Aladdin.
No one has heard of the movie Paris 36, let alone it’s nominated song, so we can safely discount that one. And the number from Nine? Ehh.
This year, justice will be served as the one great song in the category takes the prize: The Weary Kind, from Crazy Heart, by T-Bone Burnett and Ryan Bingham. Since you won’t hear the song on the show, check out the video or just let the mp3 play in the background. I love the underlying percussion that enters in the second verse. It’s unobtrusive, yet gives the song an added depth.
If you’re interested in hearing the competition, here are links to Quicktime mp3′s via incontention.com:
BEST ORIGINAL SCORE
I suppose it’s possible that James Horner could get caught up in an Avatar sweep, but I think Michael Giacchino’s whimsical score for Up will float to the top.
Personal Choice: Up
BEST MAKEUP
There are three nominees. One is Il Divo. Ever heard of it? Neither has anyone in the Academy. One is The Young Victoria. I still can’t figure out how this got nominated. Even the artist admits there isn’t much in the way of makeup. Seriously. In a Variety article about the set design, costumes and makeup for the film, this is all hair and makeup artist Jenny Shircore could say:
But it’s especially in her dewy, makeup-free skin that Victoria’s youth shines through — although this is as much of an illusion as anything, Shircore reveals. “Emily did wear quite a lot of makeup, but that’s the skill of doing it, really, to make her look lovely.” The trick, she says, is “not to powder it into oblivion so that you get a dry, matte look. You’ve got to allow a little bit of sheen to come through.”
That leaves Star Trek, which features some fine makeup work, sure. Oscar worthy? In this weak field, I guess so.
Personal Choice: Can I still say The Road? No? Okay, then Star Trek.
BEST VISUAL EFFECTS
Star Trek and District 9 both feature excellent work, but when James Cameron movies are nominated for Best Visual Effects, they win Best Visual Effects. And how can this one not? It changed the rules. One of the night’s surest bets.
Personal Choice: Avatar
BEST SOUND MIXING/SOUND EDITING
As usual, I have no idea how to make a well-thought out prediction in these categories because not only do I not understand either of them, but that obviously means I don’t understand how they differ from each other. So as always, my guess is pretty blind. I’m picking Avatar for both, but who knows? The Hurt Locker could easily get one of them.
Personal Choice: None. As in, I don’t have a personal choice. Not “none” as in none of them deserve win. That would just make me a dick.
BEST FOREIGN LANGUAGE FILM
Now we’re getting into the categories where I haven’t seen any or all of the nominees and can only go by what I hear, so I’m looking to professional journalists who’ve all been covering the Oscars for years to guide my choices.
The two highest profile films are A Prophet and The White Ribbon. From what I’ve heard, the former is the preferred choice, but few think it will win and neither do I. It’s a violent movie, and the thing to remember about this category is that only Academy members who have attended screenings of all five nominees can vote. That means the deciding members are likely older and retired, and they don’t like violence. My concern around The White Ribbon is that it almost seems too obvious. Being one of the most recognized and critically acclaimed of the bunch would appear to give it an edge, but this category seldom follows traditional logic. So while Ribbon may well be the victor, I’m going with what many in the field are predicting: El Secreto de Sos Ojos, or The Secret in Their Eyes.
BEST DOCUMENTARY FEATURE
The most well-known of the nominees are Food, Inc. and The Cove. The latter has collected the majority of pre-Oscar prizes and seems to be the favorite, so I’ll follow the pack.
BEST DOCUMENTARY SHORT
These documentary categories are often so hard to pick because each one tells a story more devastating and heartbreaking than the last. It almost comes down to which one moves people the most. It looks like the majority of pundits are predicting The Last Truck: Closing of a GM Plant. I’ll probably make up my mind at the last minute, but both Music By Prudence and China’s Unnatural Disaster: The Tears of Sichuan Province also sound like they could be winners.
BEST ANIMATED SHORT
Oscar history favors the Wallace and Gromit short A Matter of Loaf and Death. Wallace and Gromit have earned their creator Nick Park four Academy Awards (three for short animation, one for feature length). The only time he lost was in 1990 for A Grand Day Out. That year’s winner? Nick Park for Creature Comforts.
BEST LIVE ACTION SHORT
My friend Brantley recently saw these five films and posted a brief write-up on his blog, if you’re interested in seeing what they’re all about. The Door is the most widely expected to win. But every now and then this race favors something quirky and funny over something doomy and gloomy, so Instead of Abracadabra might pull it out of the hat.
And there it is. It will be fun to see how Steve Martin and Alec Baldwin handle co-hosting chores, and after last year’s really well-produced show, I’m curious to see how this year will go. Adam Shankman’s involvement has worried me from the beginning, but I read some interviews with him that led me to give him the benefit of the doubt. We’ll see. Enjoy the show, and we’ll meet back here one last time for a post-mortem…as soon as I can write it.
Is anyone still reading this, or have I pulled a Ted Striker?
ROTI is not responsible for the content of any comments, nor will be held liable for anything anyone says on this blog in the blog comments, nor the laws which they may break in this country or theirs through their comments’ content, implication, and intent.
Comments from first-time posters will be held for approval. Comments will be approved at our own sole discretion; non-related (off-topic), tasteless and insulting comments may be deleted. Personal remarks and attacks may be deleted. Spam and/or marketing messages will be deleted.
“Burnce is on my side and that’s all that matters”
Recent Comments