History with the Cap'n- An Eruption of Trivia

For some people if they hear one catchy tune on the radio, they spend the rest of the day annoying people with their repetitious humming. Others find themselves at work getting all the itches and twitches of a rehab patient when they know they have a new gadget to tinker with at home. We all have our tiny obsessions that can dominate our thoughts when the right stimulus triggers them. For the Cap'n, I often find my mind picking up a stray reference to an unusual topic, and suddenly my brain starts craving arcane or trivial knowledge about that subject like a 5 year old craves the taste of paste.

The other day I listened to President Obama address Congress about some silly thing, then tuned in for the response from the Republican representative on behalf of the opposition party. Much to my later vexation, my ears picked up Governor Bobby Jindal of Louisiana mention something in his best "Kenneth the Page"-voice about "something called volcano monitoring". While others went on to bicker about the comparisons between the two speeches and the two yokels, I started to ponder whether history could provide any interesting stories of when volcanic activity was either monitored too little or too much. Well the historical record did not disappoint in the area of volcano related anecdotes. I share the results of my search below, along with some other intriguing factoids related to volcanoes.

• If the general populace already knows about any volcanic eruption in history, they know that Mount Vesuvius unexpectedly blanketed Pompeii with volcanic ash and debris on August 24th in the year 79 CE (or as the Pompeians would have said LXXIX). Every school child gets to look at pictures of the bodies sealed in place by the volcano's spew and enjoy a macabre thrill. No wonder we all grow up so desensitized to violence and fascinated with the morbid. A few things the general populace may not now include the fact that Vesuvius wiped out two cities, famously Pompeii, which has petrified corpses, and the less well-known Herculaneum, which got slowly buried under fifty feet of mud. Actually, considering that, I can understand why Pompeii gets better publicity.
  

• Pompeii actually stands out as a very strong example of people not paying enough attention to the local neighborhood volcano. Even before Vesuvius gradually built up to its main explosion over the course of a few days -shooting steam, causing tremors, and the like- the city of Pompeii had been evacuated just a few year earlier because of massive earthquake. In fact archaeologists found evidence that many people where still in the process of repairing and redecorating their homes when the volcano finally burst. That just proves that truisms of home ownership were as true during the Ancient Roman empire as they are today. As any homeowner knows, once you finally bring a contractor in to start fixing one problem, some new and completely unrelated thing goes wrong.
  

• Excavation of Pompeii revealed more secrets than just buckets of plaster and stacks of tile. Apparently archaeologist uncovered so much erotic art in the remains of the city that they were able to open a special museum focusing on the pornography of Pompeii. If we included that in the history books half the high schoolers would graduate wanting to become archaeologists. I would take this as fairly convincing evidence that the Pompeians did not expect the eruption to strike so quickly. If I thought I was about to be buried in place by a cloud of super-heated pumice, I would not want to be caught holding a dirty magazine.
  

• Pompeii also provided an excellent opportunity for someone to try investigating an eruption far too closely. Legendary Roman scholar Pliny the Elder heard about the eruption and felt overcome by his own curiosity and compassion. As the first natural historian, Pliny decided to inspect the volcano more closely and lead a rescue mission to go right into the middle of the outburst. Apparently feeling no reason to fear the ongoing flare up, Pliny spent the night with a friend who lived near Vesuvius. He ate, bathed and slept as fire rained from the sky, and the mountain spewed ash, rocks, and lava all around. Pliny seems to have developed a sense for the danger he faced, as history records that he had the members of his rescue crew strap pillows to their heads to protect them from falling rock. Unsurprisingly, Pliny died during his ill-planned mission, seemingly from a combination of the volcano's deadly fumes and his own underlying asthma. History would remember Pliny as one of the great minds of his age, all available evidence to the contrary notwithstanding. (I can safely mock Pliny the Elder without having to worry about appearing insensitive or offending anyone, right? It's not too soon is it?)
  

• Now before you go thinking volcanoes are all bad. I should let you know that we get all our diamonds from volcanoes. I know you think of diamonds coming from mines dug into the Earth's crust. In truth, diamonds form several hundred miles beneath the surface of the Earth. It takes volcanic eruptions to drag them to where we can reach them. This is why most rich diamond mines are usually near sites of volcanic activity. Before you start filling your head with get-rich-quick schemes, go reread the section on Pliny the Elder, then reconsider messing around with anything volcanic.

• You might look down on the case of Pompeii as an example of the ignorant people of the ancient world suffering because they lacked sophisticated scientific knowledge. You should know that humans have shown the same propensity to ignore the warning signs of an imminent eruption in modern times. In 1902, the island of Martinique began experiencing some early symptoms of an impending eruption of the island's Mount Pelee. Unfortunately for the residents of Martinique the local governor was more concerned about politics than safety. With his party facing a major election soon, he didn't want the voters getting all anxious and hung up on some minor thing like an impending eruption. If they overreacted to hearing the news that their lives were in grave danger, they might take it out on their elected officials. So instead of evacuating the island the governor suppressed any warnings of the danger, prevented people from leaving and assured people that the city at the foot of Mt. Pelee, Saint-Pierre, was the safest place to be. This led to thousands of people crowding into St. Pierre in the hopes of protecting themselves. When the eruption came in killed more than 28,000 people, including the governor, in about two minutes. One of the few survivors was a prisoner who lived because he had been sealed in the underground holding cell awaiting execution. The prisoner would be pardoned and later travel with the Barnum & Bailey Circus, because any rube would gladly part with two-bits just to see irony of that magnitude.
  

• The nation of Iceland has actually found a way to turn volcanoes to their benefit in an unusual way. Since this nigh-Arctic island rests on a volcanic hotbed as overactive as Philip the Hyper-Hypo, it has found all sorts of uses for geothermic energy. In surely the most unexpected example of this, Iceland uses the geothermal heat to grow bananas. Botanists build greenhouses around hot springs which when controlled can provide ideal conditions for cultivating the tropical fruit. For a time Iceland produced more bananas than any other European nation and even grew enough to begin exporting them. Iceland made so much money from the banana trade, that even Greenland has tried to get into the act. If proper volcano monitoring can allow two nations known for their frigid conditions to become major producers of tropical fruit, then maybe it does merit more attention.

• In all of this I should note that at times people have gotten carried away when watching volcanoes. Once in 1976 some scientists became very concerned about the signals they observed from the volcano on the island of Guadalupe, La Grande Soufrière. (That's French for "big sulfur outlet". Wait, really? C'mon France I thought you were supposed to be more poetic than that.) While some scientists thought any volcanic eruption would do little damage and didn't warrant alarm others suggested evacuating Guadalupe for fear of a Martinique level disaster. Caution won out and thousands of people had to relocate, except for those few individuals who resigned themselves to whatever fate the volcano dispensed. Famed German filmmaker Werner Herzog became fascinated with the idea of an impending catastrophe and took a crew to document the desolated island and the terrible detonation whenever it occurred. In the end La Grande Soufrière barely erupted at all, the geothermal equivalent of a burp. After all that trouble and worry, the ultimate result was a host of inconvenienced people from Guadalope and a very weird documentary. So it just may be the case that some people do take their volcano monitoring too seriously. Then again, maybe we should all read that passage about Pliny the Elder again.
  

History with the Cap'n- Buffalo!

Happy Buffalo Bill Day everybody!

I'm not entirely clear on when or how William F. Cody a.k.a "Buffalo Bill" climbed high enough up the pantheon of American heroes to merit his own day. Seemingly indifferent to my questions, someone somewhere has declared that Americans should spend February 26th remembering and celebrating the life and works of Buffalo Bill. Since the man headed a traveling frontier themed show -dubbed Buffalo Bill's Wild West Show, in a fit of humility- that popularized the romantic idea of the Wild West, and permanently etched a place of Cowboys and Indians into our popular culture, I cannot begrudge the man a little memorialization. So I will use today's blog post as an opportunity to regale you with historical trivia related to Buffalo the man and Buffalo the animal (though not Buffalo the city in New York, because I feel they have enough problems without some snarky blog taking cheap shots at them).

• Buffalo Bill got his start riding for the Pony Express. He answered an ad that read "WANTED young skinny wiry fellows . . .Must be expert riders willing to risk death daily. Orphans preferred."
  

• Since the Pony Express didn't even last two years as a long distance communication enterprise (and I bet you thought it was a long running institution of the Old West), Cody had to land a new job. He found work hunting food for railroad construction crews. Thus he began hunting American buffaloes, since they were the most plentiful source of good food (re: meat) around. Thus the moniker.

• Actually, I must note for accuracy that Buffalo Bill never had any real contact with buffalo, because there are no wild buffaloes native to North America. Cody hunted and killed bison. You can find buffalo in Africa and Asia, just not the American west. Some might explain this mislabeling of bison as an honest mistake of identification on the part of some early settler. After all they sort of have a similar appearance and some similar attributes. I don't really agree with that -do you even know what a proper buffalo looks like?- and I would equate that kind of error to mistaking an opossum for a koala.
  

• In fairness to Buffalo Bill, he was very successful at hunting and killing bison. Historians estimate that he killed about 4,280 bison in about a year and a half. Hunters had a variety of methods they employed in hunting bison. In fact the hunters has so much success rate that the bison population in North America has fallen from an estimated 60 million when Europeans began settling her to now only 50,000 bison roaming free today. That's actually improvement from the nineteenth century when the bison were down to a few hundred.

• My younger brother once told me that you can make a complete gramatically correct sentence using only the word "buffalo". As in "Buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo." Some have claimed this is the longest English language sentence you can create with just one word. I cannot be certain this is true, but I would love to watch people try to top it. (NOTE: The link does not lead to anything my younger brother wrote, just an article on the same topic.)

• Buffalo Bill would later go into acting alongside another famous Bill of the Old West, Wild Bill Hickok.
  

• The only natural predator of an adult bison, or buffalo if you prefer, is a wolf pack. Just to clarify, I am not talking about a pack of wolves taking on a herd of bison. I mean to say that it takes several wolfs at once to have any shot of killing an adult bison.

• When Buffalo Bill died he was honored by heads of state and then not buried where he had specified in his will. His wife claimed that he had changed his wishes on his death bed. A dispute arose between his proposed burial site (a town he founded) and his actual burial site (a place with a nice view), over who had the more legitimate claim to serve as Cody's eternal resting place. The feud would go on to involve a bounty for grave robbing and it would be settled when the two towns exchanged smoke signals. To give you the proper context for that I should mention that they were proposing grave robbery in 1948, and exchanging smoke signals in 1968.
  

So in case you have any social events planned for today and want to demonstrate your affinity for all things buffalo, I have hopefully left you well prepared to perpetuate the legends of Buffalo Bill and the Wild West.

History with the Cap'n- The unpredictable Edison

As I rummage around the annals of history, my mind will occasionally collect a few odd tidbits of trivia that might suddenly alter my perspective on someone or something. This is an important lesson for any historian to learn. What may seem to be only an interesting factoid alone, may really be a piece of a puzzle describing some weird and wonderful pattern hidden just under the surface. A historian must have the ability to notice these patterns amongst all the clutter of the historical record. I recently had a moment like this when a few details about the life of Thomas Edison stood out from the rest of my research.

Most historians agree that Edison had one of the most brilliant minds of the last 200 years. He had a naturally prolific gift for invention and tenacious work ethic that kept him at the forefront of science for decades. Yet when looking at the man's life putting his missteps besides his successes, I can't help but notice some intriguing contradictions in his work and his personality.

• Edison became known for his constant tinkering, working to improve on his inventions even after he patented and released them. He famously tested thousands of possible filaments for his light bulb until finding one that satisfied him. Of course if Edison wanted to sell everyone light bulbs, he first had to build an electrical grid to power them. Edison crafted a system around direct current. When Edison's rival in the power business George Westinghouse put up his own electrical system run on the superior alternating current, Edison obstinately stuck to his original system. Rather than adapting to the new technology, Edison tried to put his competitor out of business. Granted Edison made some pretty inspired attempts to ruin Westinghouse's reputation. He publicized and marketed an electric chair that utilized alternating current, declaring that anyone exposed to AC would suffer instantaneous death.
  

• Because Edison worried that the telephone was too expensive for the average person to buy, he wanted to create a way that everyone could use the service affordably. He proposed a network of telephone stations where people could go to drop off and pick up messages, sort of like telegrams. Of course to take advantage of the telephone's main feature -the ability to hear a live human voice from a great distance- Edison tried inventing a "telephone repeater". His device would allow people to record the sound of their voice and then play it back later. He also called it a phonograph. Since no one else was trying to create a "telephone repeater", Edison had the only patent on a sound recording device. He had incredible foresight and a unique creation, but he apparently never gave the idea of recording and distributing music a moment's thought. Edison had a reputation as a shrewd business man, yet it took years before he believed that the phonograph had a commercial future. Of course he was mostly deaf, so maybe he just didn't have any musical appreciation.
  

• In a similar episode, Edison directed the creation of an early motion picture device. He released the kinetoscope which could capture and display brief movies, and from which most modern filmmaking technology descends. Yet he thought it would only appeal to small children, a toy that would provide visual accompaniment to his phonograph (by this time he had learned that people liked music). His assistant Laurie Dickson had to convince him that people would watch movies that told a story. Edison eventually conceded that people might like educational films, though he insisted that creating a film projection device would kill public interest in motion pictures. Once again, Edison had a genius for identifying gaps in existing technology and developing gadgets to fill those gaps, but no sense of what people would find most useful about his apparatuses.
  

• In a truly unexpected twist, Edison never earned a cent from his most frequently used invention. This creation he did intend for wide spread use and people used it in exactly the way he predicted, as well as in several other contexts. Almost no one who uses it daily in modern times has any idea Edison invented it. In fact if you asked most people where it came from, they probably wouldn't even think that at some point someone had invented it. It has become so common place its existence is take for granted. Edison invented the word "hello". He proposed it as the word people should use when answering the phone. The man we know of a s the inventor of the telephone, Alexander Graham Bell used "Ahoy-hoy" (a nautical expression I personally use when answering the phone). True there were other similar words to "hello", but they all had different meanings and never would have fit into the context in which Edison used "hello". Edison actually tried his hand at creating other words too. Reportedly it was Edison who first called for a word to describe death by electricity - a term he undoubtedly would have applied to alternating current. Edison's suggestions included "ampermort" and "dynamort". An assistant would land a little closer to the mark with "electrocide".

When you survey all those strange stories of Thomas Edison's life, you cannot resist the urge to label him a strange person. Certainly, his mind worked in a unique and wonderful fashion. His thinking process and occasionally odd behavior have led some to theorize that he had some kind of mental disability or disorder. I don't think any of Edison's oddities amount to a mental defect. In fact I think Edison nicely demonstrates that no individual can truly be all things. Edison may have had one of the most inventive minds humanity has ever seen. Despite that he lacked the imagination to fully realize the potential of some of his inventions or the insight to know what people wanted out of their technology. To put it simply, just because someone is a genius doesn't mean they're always going to be all that bright.

History with the Cap'n- Supreme Beginnings

For any American who complains about activist judges or courts that interpret the U.S. Constitution as a "living document", today marks a dark anniversary. On the other side of the coin, anyone who feels the judicial branch should have a prominent role in the checks and balances of the U.S. government, today give cause to celebrate. On February 24th, 1803 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on the case of Marbury v. Madison, the first Supreme Court case important enough to merit inclusion in a high school textbook. With this opinion, the high court actually proved they had a role to play in the national government by using their power to screw around with another branch of government and create a complicated mess. And they haven't stopped since.

For a summary of the actual legal case you can follow this link. Though for our purposes you don't need to know much more than you read in your high school text book. The case involved a complaint by civil servant, Marbury, against the U.S. Secretary of State James Madison, for not granting Marbury the commission previous president John Adams had promised him. He went to the Supreme Court -which up to this point hadn't really done much worth talking about- because Congress had passed a law giving the Supreme Court the power to issue a special kind of court orders. The Supreme Court ruled that Marbury had a right to the commission, but the Supreme Court would not be issuing the order forcing Madison's hands. At which point I imagine Marbury said "Ummmm . . . Thanks?". Chief Justice, John Marshall made clear it was not simply to uphold the Court's tradition of being useless, but because the law that Congress passed establishing the special court orders was illegitimate. The Court's opinion states that under the rules of the U.S. Constitution Congress does not have the authority to create special powers for the Supreme Court. This was an amazing bit of legal maneuvering, especially when you consider that no one had ever declared a law unconstitutional before. Faced with a court case that demanded the Supreme Court act as a referee for an intra-governmental squabble, Marshall found a way to elevate the Court to the level of the other branches. Rather than let Court become caught up in political bickering, Marshall used this case to declare that the Supreme Court was above messing with this sort of nonsense, that the ultimate standard for what was right and legal was the Constitution, and that the Court was the only body empowered with say whether or not something met the Constitutional standard. If you are a legal scholar, this case represents the kind of legal judo move that you dream about.

Everyone can find a very entertaining collection of backstories connected to this case, especially for the man in the middle of it all Chief Justice John Marshall.

• A lot of strange twists to this story arise from the fact that during the early years of the United States the federal government was composed of a pretty small collection of people. For instance, when John Marshall joined the Supreme Court, all the Justices lived in the same house by themselves (none of them brought their wives). Apparently they didn't have much to do except discuss the cases and drink heavily. I think this sounds like the basis for a great reality TV series.

• In one of those touches so ironic it has to be true, John Marshall likely had only himself to blame for creating this mess. Before he was Chief Justice John Marshall he was Secretary of State John Marshall. That means when John Adams ordered for Marbury to receive the commission it was supposed to be John Marshall's responsibility to issue it. However, Marshall was busy at the time, and when he was appointed by Adams to become Chief Justice he passed along the responsibility for Marbury's commission to his successor. We can only guess if he would have done anything differently had he known what was coming.

• Marshall was the cousin of Thomas Jefferson, yet repeatedly found himself angering his blood relative. President Jefferson did not care for the Court's ruling in Marbury v. Madison. Not only was his administration chastised in the Court's opinion for mistreating Marbury, who got the commission because he was a supporter of Jefferson's longtime rival John Adams, but Jefferson was also opposed to the federal courts gaining any power. With this case the Supreme Court put itself in a position of power strong enough to directly challenge the actions of the president himself. Jefferson held such a grudge about this decision that he would try to appoint Supreme Court Justices loyal to him to undermine Marshall. Yet Marshall was such a persuasive legal debater that the other Justices kept backing Marshall's arguments in the Court's rulings. Apparently the relationship between these cousins got so bad that Jefferson later declared he would never agree with any position Marshall took, even if he was just saying it was daytime.

• It had been widely believed that the last time the Liberty Bell rang before it irreparably cracked was to mark the death of John Marshall, after he had become the longest serving Chief Justice in the history of the Supreme Court. However current historical scholarship suggests that it rang at least a few more times before it was cracked sounding a celebratory chime in honor of George Washington's birthday.

History with the Cap'n- Thinkin' bout Lincoln

While I run a blog under the name Cap'n History, I haven't actually written much about historical topics or the study of history itself. Well that changes starting with this post.

This year in the United States, many historians, professional and amateur alike, have taken up the legacy of Abraham Lincoln. The topic has risen in the public conscience mostly because 2009 marks the Lincoln Bicentennial, and many have caught Honest Abe Fever (which sounds like a mild, but persistently annoying disease). I also attribute some of this phenomenon to the recent election of the second president from Illinois, and all the legacies that represents. Since we are still in the month of Lincoln's birth, I thought some genuflection on my part to our tallest president might be in order.

Recently, I have become fascinated with one of Lincoln's central justifications for engaging in the U.S. Civil War. He spoke and wrote often an passionately about the absolute necessity of preserving "The Union". He held that the Union did not exist merely as a corporate entity composed of sovereign states. He argued instead that the concept of the Union stood beyond questions of politics, border, or sovereignty as an eternal ideal. Further he regarded an attempt at secession as a direct affront to the Union ideal, as grave a sin as any American could perpetrate. It seems he believed in the Union so fiercely that he would use the pursuit of its preservation as a justification for any number of transgressions. Clearly he felt the Union's continuation warranted the largest war the United States had yet seen and a staggering amount of bloodshed. He even went so far as to claim that he would not care if none of the slaves went free so long as the Union prevailed. Yet it remains a little unclear exactly what Lincoln meant when he spoke of "The Union".

Lincoln must have had very powerful vision in his own mind of what "The Union" was when he thought of it. Yet he had a hard time communicating exactly what he envisioned to others. Famed historical essayist and author of a novel about Lincoln, Gore Vidal described Lincoln's thinking as "mystical", suggesting an ephemeral or esoteric element to Lincoln's thinking. From this point of view Lincoln could never properly explain his position because his thoughts lacked a substantive core that others could grasp. We even have a hard time tracing what inspired Lincoln's concept of the Union. Many American conservatives point out that Lincoln apparently ignored the principles of the founders in arguing for a Union that existed independent of the states' consent. Some have even accused him of taking a revolutionary position -such as in the comments seen here- and replacing the union describes by the Constitution with his own ideal of the Union. So that leaves modern historians trying to comprehend an ideal without origin and without accurate description. Lincoln's Union remains the unique product of a unique mind.

Though there is a hole in the historical record, I feel we have just enough hints from Lincoln's own words to try to estimate some of Lincoln's thoughts. In his First Inaugural Address he claimed that the founders had designed the Union to exist perpetually regardless of the shifting relation between states. He held that since all states had entered into the Union together by ratifying the Constitution no one state, nor any group of states could leave it unilaterally. Taken along with later statements this attitude places the Union on the level of a sacred bond or covenant, a promise made to and overseen by a higher authority. In his famous Gettysburg Address, Lincoln would push the beginnings of the Union back beyond the Constitution, dating the origin of the Union to 1776 with the Declaration of Independence. To some degree he paints the Union as an ideal that will exist until the end of time and had existed since the beginning of time just waiting for the United States to arise and claim it. Also he connects the ideals of the nation to the concept of the Union itself. Lincoln was the first prominent U.S. politician to hold the concept of the Union as equivalent to a core American value.

I believe Lincoln, possessed of a unique minds and a unique perspective, sensed just how unique a nation the Unites State actually is. He knew that other nations had a clear reason for existing. The citizens shared a common ethnicity, or culture, or were all subjects of the same throne, or simply had occupied a particular piece of territory for as long as anyone could tell. The U.S. had none of those things. We were the only nation that tried to frame its sovereignty and right to existence on a thesis of political philosophy. Lincoln knew this. He realized that all of the authority the nation had to claim territory, pass laws, and even wage wars derived not from divine right, but from the social contract all citizens agreed to -if only implicitly- to belong to the Union. Once citizens abandoned the Union, the power of the Union diminished. Essentially if any state successfully seceded from the Union, the entire Union's authority and right to exist would be permanently undermined. My impression would be that Lincoln held "The Union" as sort of a Platonic ideal for the nation. It was both the primordial source of its power and the standard by which it was judged. For Lincoln the Union apparently stood for everything the nation had been and would be, and if any part of it were lost then the United States as the world knew it would never truly exist again. That could have been what drove Lincoln to do the unthinkable, to war against his fellow Americans. He had to uphold a sacred bond he had entered into -if only implicitly- to preserve the nation and its values for all of his fellow citizens and all of those who would come after.

Rolling out the Red Carpet- Completing your Oscar Ballot

Let anyone who reads this blog know, The Cap'n is nothing if not helpful. I want those silly few who read this blog to gave the chance to reap some kind of benefit from it. Since, Oscar-watching is one of the few topic I can routinely focus on and have any form of expertise in I thought I should provide you with the best prediction advise about the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences I could muster to help you win your Oscar pools. Earlier this month, The Cap'n gave you a complete breakdown of the major categories with detailed explanations about who was favored and who could pull an upset in each one. In this entry I will provide you with information to help you predict the rest of the categories.

Often called the minor categories or the technical awards these prizes go to the people who actually do the bulk of the movie making. The nominees in these categories may not be as visible or tabloid-worthy as the actors. They may not be as identifiable and self-aggrandizing as the writers and directors. If they do their jobs well we never even think about them, but when the screw up the film is irreparably damaged. (Personally I felt Get Smart was ruined by awful lighting. And I seriously mean that.) So I feel that they deserved at least a fraction of the attention of the major categories.

If you want to use these predictions to help fill out your ballot at this Sunday's Oscar party, I suggest you go with the favorites (taken from the consensus of expert opinions available here) unless you have a special reason why you might suspect an upset. Since my previous entry on the Academy Awards took about 8,000 words, and we have about twice as many categories to get through in this round, I will try to address these categories in a more rapid fire manner. So get your pen and paper ready, because here we go . . .

BEST ANIMATED FEATURE
Current Favorite: Andrew Stanton for WALL-E- This is one of the easier picks, as WALL-E is the only nominee to receive support in other categories as well a sure sign that lots of voting members of the Academy loved this movie.

Tremendous Upset Potential: John Stevenson and Mark Osborne for Kung Fu Panda- There is almost no chance that WALL-E doesn't win this award, but if for some crazy reason the voters choose to pick another nominee they will likely pick the more financially successful Panda over Bolt.

BEST FOREIGN LANGUAGE FEATURE FILM
Current Favorite: Ari Folman (Israel) for Waltz with Bashir- This animated feature focusing on some of the attrocities of the Lebanese Civil War and Israel's precarious relations with its neighbors stands out as one of the most original pictures of the year. Critics love it and it has garnered many notable awards already.

Tremendous Upset Potential: Laurent Cantet (France) for The Class- If you fear that the animated movie that's also a pseudo-documentary about violence in the Middle East might be a little too esoteric for the voters, then you might want to consider The Class as an alternative pick. The French film is full of things the Academy traditionally loves, such as social commentary, powerful acting, and actual human people in live action. The Academy can be a conservative group at times, so it might be prudent to select the more traditional option in your prediction pool.

BEST ART DIRECTION
Current Favorite: Donald Graham Burt and Victor J. Zolfo for The Curious Case of Benjamin Button- Movies like Benjamin Button tend to have a heavy advantage in the "technical awards", because they cover such a wide scope of material. Films like this give the filmmakers a chance to show off how well they can create a variety of time periods and settings on the screen. The story of Button spans several decades, multiple nations, and visits such visually captivating cities as New Orleans and Paris. The voters eat up that sort of stuff with a spork.

Tremendous Upset Potential: Nathan Crowley and Peter Lando for The Dark Knight- Sometimes AMPAS likes to reward films that create their own world like Sleepy Hollow, Moulin Rouge, or Pan's Labyrinth. Even if the members aren't in love with super-hero movies in the major award the do like their visual splendor enough to give them the occasional craft award. Almost everyone has praised Dark Knight for the originality and grandeur of its vision. A lot of that grandeur comes from the successful forging of Gotham City into a believable and realistic metropolis (no not the Metropolis where Superman lives). Also Mr. Crowley has previously been nominated while folks from the Button team are Oscar newbies, sometimes having a pre-existing group of supporters can help tilt the voters away from a frontrunner.

BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY
Current Favorite: Anthony Dod Mantle for Slumdog Millionaire- The prize for the best director of photography usually goes to the DoP who draws the most attention to his work. In Slumdog you can't ignore the bright visuals or daring shot selection that gives that film its visual edge. Also this trophy often comes along with the winner of Best Picture or Best Director. Since, Slumdog is the favorite to win each of those major awards, you have to expect that the members respect the film enough to reward the person responsible for its distinctive look.

Tremendous Upset Potential: Wally Pfister for The Dark Knight- When it comes to creating eye-catching shots few this year could come close to the people who made Dark Knight. The film has numerous visual moments and sequences that had people buzzing ever since this summer. The Academy may see fit to acknowledge the person who made to fantastic images a reality. There is certainly a lot of love for The Dark Knight considering its numerous nominations, and this is one of the categories where the members might feel compelled to give it at least one trophy as a token of appreciation. Another advantage Pfister has over most of the other nominees is past nominations. The hive mind of AMPAS may decide that this is his year and leap frog him over first timer Mantle.

BEST COSTUME DESIGN
Current Favorite: Michael O'Connor for The Duchess- You can't do much more to appease the voters in this category than to put on a lavish period film and let your costumers dress up a star as widely ogled as Keira Knightley. As far as most members are concerned this award exists to reward people for putting beautiful actresses in elaborate outfits.

Tremendous Upset Potential: Jacqueline West for The Curious Case of Benjamin Button- Working on a movie like Benjamin Button allows the costumer to create a wide variety of different looks. The actors have to be dressed to reflect changing fashions over the extensive course of the story. You can reflect styles befitting everything from scrappy sailors, to elegant ballerinas, to freaked out beatniks. The voters may feel so overwhelmed by the sheer quantity of costumes that went into making Button that they'll feel forced to hand its fashion crew the trophy.

BEST MAKEUP
Current Favorite: Greg Cannom for The Curious Case of Benjamin Button- AMPAS has to reward the makeup department for this film. The whole reason Benjamin Button was made was to try and pull off the audacious makeup feat of aging a person in reverse. On top of that Cannom also had to do makeup on the characters befitting changing fashions. On top of that he managed to transform Cate Blanchett into an old woman so convincingly, the star was practically unrecognizable under all that goop. Most importantly of all though Cannom is one of the most respected makeup men in the business and after multiple previous nominations and past wins in this category he has a lot of long standing support among the voters.

Tremendous Upset Potential: John Caglione, Jr. and Conor O'Sullivan for The Dark Knight- While the makeup done creating the character of Benjamin Button may have been the grandest makeup work this year, the re-imagining of classic characters like the Joker and Two-Face, principally though makeup, may have been the most iconic. Both of the makeup men for Dark Knight have their own history with the Academy, so that could give them a foothold against the tide for Cannom. Also, given the luke warm response Button has received from many, I could easily imagine the voters turning against it, especially in the category where it should have been the most impressive.

BEST FILM EDITING
Current Favorite: Chris Dickens for Slumdog Millionaire- I know it will sound really weird to say this, and only absolute cinema nuts like me will have an opinion on the topic, but I thought this was a really great year in film editing. I don't know how to properly convey my sincerity about that through a blog, other than to say that I would be happy if any of these films won. All of them did a wonderful job of pacing the film, blending diverging elements, and keeping the shots coming at you in a engaging but organized manner. Dickens has to be considered the favorite since he's riding on the Slumdog coattails. Sometimes predicting the craft categories only requires you to find the film that has drawn lots of AMPAS love and bet on a sweep.

Tremendous Upset Potential: Kirk Baxter and Angus Wall for The Curious Case of Benjamin Button- A corollary to betting on a sweep kicks in when you watch for an upset. When one film seems destined to win a ton of awards like Slumdog has been, but another film has gobbled up more nominations like Benjamin Button did you can usually expect the top-nom getter to break the grip of the awards darling in at least a few places. Given the way Button's editing kept an epic story moving along briskly -while containing several weird elements, like the backwards moving sequence, and the alternate time lines in Paris- I say it has the best chance of taking home the trophy of any of the other nominees in this category.

BEST SCORE
Current Favorite: A.R. Rahman for Slumdog Millionaire- If you want an easy way to tell which score will attract the voters, find the score that has the most unique sound. The Academy can't always distinguish between two scores that have well-done but traditional music. If a score has some kind of exotic musical flavors mixed in or uses an unusual set of instruments, then you know that will catch the ears of the members. They'll adore the combination of traditional Indian music and modern dance/hip-hop styles Rahman uses in the score. That's the sort of thing the Academy can label as bold or innovative and the feel proud of themselves for giving it an award.

Tremendous Upset Potential: Thomas Newman for WALL-E- Only one film has had as much success giving members of the Academy the warm and fuzzies as Slumdog, WALL-E. Newman may get the hat tip here for having to carry a lot of the emotional wait of the film that has very little proper dialogue in it. Also, Newman has had numerous nominations in the past, yet still hasn't taken home a trophy. If the voters feel Slumdog will receive enough love from other quarters, watch out for them to reward Newman because he's due.

BEST SONG
Current Favorite: "Jai Ho" by A.R. Rahman and Gulzar from Slumdog Millionaire- With two of the three nominees for Best Original Song this year, the songwriters from Slumdog seem to have the odds heavily in their favor to win. The fimmakers have decided to put all their backing behind just one song likely giving it a the support of fans of both songs. Indeed it seems as though most pundits expect the final musical number from Slumdog to win. (What you didn't know it closed on a big musical number? Don't you know anything about India cinema.)

Tremendous Upset Potential: "Down to Earth"byPeter Gabriel and Thomas Newman from WALL-E- In this category I really feel very strongly that the common wisdom has it wrong. The Academy may be the elites of Hollywood, but that doesn't mean their immune from brown-nosing celebrities from outside of the industry. This sycophantic side of AMPAS usually arises in the voters giving the songwriting award to the biggest music star that snags nomination. For Pete's sake Eminem has an Oscar because of this. Also the Academy has shown a strong tendency to associate the Best Original Song prize with animated films. Disney has a whole bunch of them for just this reason. If you think Slumdog is in for anything less than a total sweep of all the categories in which it has nominees, than you should definitely pick this as the one category where it will lose. The members all probably love Peter Gabriel and own lots of his albums. Because my guiding principle is that the members give trophies to the people they wish they could hang out with, I seriously believe Gabriel has good odds to win this award.

BEST SOUND EDITING
Current Favorite: Richard King for The Dark Knight- In recent years the sound awards have basically become consolation prizes for the summer blockbuster movies that are technically accomplished. Clearly Dark Knight best matches that criteria among these nominees. It was a film with a lot of big visuals and a big time audio experience to match.

Tremendous Upset Potential: Ben Burtt and Matthew Wood for WALL-E- The sound wizards behind WALL-E also worked on box office success, and they had to make a lot of characterization happen through only the sound effects. This actually might be a close call.

BEST SOUND MIXING
Current Favorite: Lora Hirschberg, Gary Rizzo and Ed Novick for The Dark Knight- Y'know what I don't know why these are seperate categories. Just copy everything I said above down here.

Tremendous Upset Potential: Tom Myers, Michael Semanick and Ben Burtt for WALL-E- And dittos again (jeez, I sound like a Limbaugh listener).

BEST VISUAL EFFECTS
Current Favorite: Eric Barba, Steve Preeg, Burt Dalton and Craig Barron for The Curious Case of Benjamin Button- With a film like Button, where the film primarily exists to accomplish a certain task the voters can have a hard time separating which elements of the film to credit for the central gimmick. In the case of Button, the praise ranged from the director, to the makeup, to Brad Pitt as an actor, and to the visual effects team. For as much as the makeup carried the scenes where Benjamin was played by Pitt, the visual effects carried the earlier scenes where child actors where made to look decrepit and Pitt's face was superimposed onto Benjamin's shriveled body. Just as the Academy would have to give Button an award for makeup if nothing else, they may feel compelled to reward the FX if only because they have almost as large a role in the picture. To whatever degree the film overall worked you have to acknowledge that the visual effects played a crucial role.

Tremendous Upset Potential: Nick Davis, Chris Corbould, Tim Webber and Paul Franklin for The Dark Knight- The visual effects category has traditionally served as only Oscar big action movies could hope to win. With two superhero movie vying to upend Button, bet on the voters leaning toward the film with the more sweeping vision and bigger box office. When the Academy deems fit to honor films made primarily for commercial reasons, they want the trophy to go for a film that did really well commercially. Also the wide-spread support Dark Knight has received for its visual wonders may find an outlet in this category where the voters won't feel as obliged to honor the more artistic craftsmen of other films.

BEST DOCUMENTARY FEATURE
Current Favorite: James Marsh and Simon Chinn for Man on Wire- One of the sad secrets of AMPAS always comes to the surface when they hand out the documentary awards. Truthfully, Academy members watch documentaries about as often as the average movie goer, which is to say hardly ever. You can usually pick the leader in the feature length documentary feature by think of the only documentary you've heard of this year. Man on Wire has had all the buzz. Critics gobbled it up. The filmmakers even got their subject, a famous high wire artist, out on the TV chat show circuit. Count on most of the voters just checking the box next to the one title they know

Tremendous Upset Potential: Werner Herzog and Henry Kaiser for Encounters at the End of the World- The only other documentary to receive much mainstream attention stand the best chance of pulling the upset. The film has gets neat concept and a lot of stunning visuals out of taking cameras to the Antarctic and recorded the diversity of life human and otherwise that survives in the extreme condition way down south. Also Herzog has long stood as one of the most respected and daring filmmakers around the world for decades, yet this is his first Oscar nomination. The voters may take this chance to recruit him into their elite circle, so they can brag about how they always honor the great filmmakers in some way.

BEST DOCUMENTARY SHORT
Current Favorite: Adam Pertofsky and Margaret Hyde for The Witness- From the Balcony of Room 306- Now we've delved into the territory where even the Cap'n and the pundits don't have a clear opinion on the categories. Since almost no one who doesn't get the Academy's special screening DVD's ever sees the nominated short films, we have only a vague sense of what might strike a chord with the voters. Members of the Academy like rewarding documentaries that address very serious social issues. With a focus on the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr., this film may strike what few members actually cast a vote in this category as the kind of meaningful film approriate for the Year of Obama.

Tremendous Upset Potential: Steven Okazaki for The Conscience of Nhem En- While the history of racial politics in the United States certainly carries a lot of wait with the voters, they also tend to find themselves drawn to films about genocide (see also all of the nominations for The Reader). The story of a servant of the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia sounds like the kind of tale that could really grab the members attention. Also the filmmaker has a history of earning Oscar nominations and wins, so he may have an advantage in playing to the Academy's preferences.

BEST SHORT FILM (ANIMATED)
Current Favorite: Doug Sweetland for Presto- Pixar has traditionally placed an animated short before each of their big time animated features. Since the features usually turn into big hits, that typically means most people only ever see their animated shorts -let alone admire another enough to grant it a prestigious award. So the Pixar short this year, Presto, automatically finds itself the heavy favorite.

Tremendous Upset Potential: Emud Mokhberi and Thierry Marchand for Oktapodi- The other animated shorts all seem to have some notable merit that would suggest an ability to sneak into a win. However Oktapodi stands alone as short for which I have heard a little positive buzz. While that may not give it enough ammunition to take on the Pixar powerhouse, it may give it the opening it needs to rise as the rebelious choice, if any anti-Pixar backlash forms among the voters.

BEST SHORT FILM (LIVE ACTION)
Current Favorite: Jochen Alexander Freydank for Spielzeugland (Toyland)- The short films from foreign countries usually seem to have a high success rate. I think that's mostly because they still treat short films seriously in other countries. Plus Toyland deals with the Holocaust. When in doubt count on the Academy to pick the film with most serious topic.

Tremendous Upset Potential: Steph Green and Tamara Anghie for The New Boy- If the voters want a film with a serious topic but feel a little worn out with the Holocaust as a topic, they may select New Boy. It deals with racial tensions in the microcosm of a classroom. With racial politics playing such a huge role in the U.S. over the last year-plus, the members may find this film especially timely and poignant.

Well that should cover all the categories (Wait, did I talk about art direction? Better go back and check . . .), again if you take all of the favorites in the categories for your prediction you should have a pretty good night. Best of luck to everyone in their Oscar pools. Let's all hope for an entertaining ceremony on Sunday. I always look forward to Oscar night so much that its almost like a holiday for me. Since I've written about 14 typed pages of material about it this year alone, you can tell I have some kind of strong feelings about it. I hope you enjoy it as much as I do.

Rolling out the Red Carpet- The Cap'n shares his early thoughts on the Oscars

Conventional wisdom and routine observation of human behaviour tells us that no social grouping, however small and elite, can exist that will not develop internally a sub-group that promotes a select few group members into a position of prominence over their peers. (Many can speculate on the exact cause of this phenomenon. I can only conclude that the pleasures of exclusion don't diminish with repetition.) We could all tell who the cool kids in school were.

This tendency arises even amongst the supposedly elite members of the other-worldly culture of the Hollywood film industry. Naturally Hollywood's select few do stand out from other social elites in one important aspect: their sub-group has a name and an awards show. In the end the Academy Awards and all Oscar-related madness reduces down to the cool kids giving out invitations to their big party. As much as cineastes like myself would love to see the Oscars truly becoming a ceremony for rewarding artistic achievement in film, we have to settle for the Oscars as they are. Certainly, the ceremony showcases the greatness in movie making. Usually though the awards go to those who have made mainstream films well-enough that the members of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences want to be associated with them. Again think about the popular girl in school taking a sudden interest in the rising star of the basketball team. So in the end the Academy Awards tell us less about the honored films and more about the people handing out the accolades. Every golden trophy handed out helps define what kind of films the elites wish they were making, usually a combination of artistic accomplishment and commercial success. Imagine a room full of Hollywood elites socializing, what individuals and movies will they brag about having a hand in? Those are the people and pictures that walk away winners. One should never attempt to predict the Oscars without this rule at the front of their mind.

I tell you all this, because I am about to offer my own predictions about for the 81st Annual Academy Awards, and I have to earn your trust somehow. Now that all the ballots are out and most of the less famous award shows have had their say, Oscar fans now have a pretty firm grasp on which of the nominees have the best chance to claim a little golden man. While you can find many other websites with far more credibility, such as the savvy Carpetbagger, the beloved Gold Derby, or the vital Awards Daily. If you want to get the best guess by common consensus, you can even utilize charts that combine the opinions of many respected Oscar-watchers. However, I cannot guarantee that all of those prognosticators utilized my essential rule for Oscar-prediction that I outlined above. If you want the kind of prediction that treats a collection of about 6,000 of the most powerful and successful individuals in show business like they're a snooty high school clique, then you have to come to the Cap'n.

For your benefit I have written a preview of the 8 "major" categories (that is to say, the 8 categories that cover things the hoi polloi understand and have an opinion about)- Best Picture, Best Director, the 4 acting awards, and the screenplay awards. For each category I'll share the nominee generally considered favored to win -with an explanation as to why- and my own pick for a nominee that could potentially pull the upset. This is the Hollywood after all, where "No one knows anything," so you should always keep an eye out for something surprising.

BEST PICTURE
Current Favorite: Slumdog Millionaire- In some years the race of the top prize becomes a hotly contested race between several candidates of equal merits but diverging philosophies, pitting Academy members against each other in contests that sometimes help to define the very soul of cinema itself. This is not such a year. Slumdog has been gobbling up the awards this year, and seems to be on cruise control heading for a Best Picture win. This may be the easiest route a film has ever taken to winning Hollywood's most coveted prize. It seems that all you really need to do to make the Academy swoon is make a movie about poverty, love, and game shows, set in India. Oddly this may actually be the most traditional movie among the nominees (local boy does good, get girl, gets rich, puts on lavish musical number), which may explain why the voters are responding to it so strongly.

Tremendous Upset Potential: Milk- This movie may not seem like the sort of picture old-time industry insiders would want to embrace. Especially in light of the previous failure of Brokeback Mountain, another film featuring homosexual characters, to capture Best Picture. However underneath the surface it could resonate with the sort of themes voters want to see in a film. It concerns the struggle of a community activist who rises to a political position no one else in his minority group had ever attained. So it has a certain topical relevance. Plus it is more of an "actors' picture" where the actors' and their performances are the focus more than special effects wizardry or stylistically daring filmmaking techniques. That proved to be an advantage in the past for previous best pictures like Crash. Also Milk was an American film, about American characters, made by American filmmakers, starring American actors pumping more lifeblood into the tottering American film industry. In contrast, Slumdog was based on an Indian's novel, made by Brits, and filmed in India, whose native movie industry may be Hollywood's closest competitor on the global film market. The Academy might not be so keen on outsourcing Oscars to India too.

BEST DIRECTOR
Current Favorite: Danny Boyle for Slumdog Millionaire- In much the same way that sports players who win Most Valuable Player awards tend to come from teams vying for the championship, the winners of Best Director tend to have directed the winner of Best Picture. While you and I can certainly imagine instances where a stellar athlete may be stuck on a weak team or an outstanding director being let down by other members of the production, the voters in AMPAS haven't seen it that way very often. They have rarely honored a film that was not directed by a nominee, and even less frequently have they honored a director that didn't helm a nominated film. Therefore you can safely assume that as goes Slumdog's Oscar glory so goes Danny Boyle's. As things stand right now that looks good for Mr. Boyle.

Tremendous Upset Potential: David Fincher for The Curious Case of Benjamin Button- True not all the critics have fallen in love with the film, and some in the audience may find it excessively long. In spite of all that Fincher has received nearly unanimous praise for the picture's polished look and technical splendor. Simply overseeing the movie's central conceit -a person "aging" from young to old- required a talented and experienced filmmaker like Fincher. The Academy members could feel that a craftsman like Fincher who turns a concept that by rights shouldn't fill more than a few pages and spins it into a feature length film that actually turns a profit. After a couple of years of nominating films with little box office success, the voters may wish to reward a filmmaker with proven commercial success to go with his artistic accomplishments.

BEST ACTOR IN A LEADING ROLE
Current Favorite: Sean Penn for Milk/ Mickey Rourke for The Wrestler- Yes, it seems like a cheat to claim the race has two leaders. However these two actors really seem to be neck and neck coming into the home stretch. They have each won some of the less famous awards. They each have a strong reason why the voters should like them. The usually gruff and terse Penn embodies Harvey Milk's passion and gives him an effulgent effeminacy that, while not historically accurate, does endear him to the audience. Rourke takes on a role that comes a little close to autobiography as a beat up old soul trying to reclaim past fame and glory. You could even reinterpret the previous17 years of his life were like a massive exercise in method acting. Of course the Academy could also have some compelling (at least to them) reasons not to honor each of them. Penn won Best Actor not long ago, and the people at AMPAS like to spread the wealth and dole out multiple awards to the same person over the course of their career (Tatum O'Neal is due to get her second any year now). On the other hand the members usually like to reward fellow Hollywood insiders, and some like Rourke -who spent a long time away from or on the fringes of show business- may seem to strange and different for them. Any Oscar maven would have little confidence in predicting which of these two men stands the best chance to win at this moment. So I will list them both as favorites. It wouldn't be sporting of me to claim one as the favorite then claim the other as my upset pick. Instead I have a real dark horse candidate for you. . .

Tremendous Upset Potential: Frank Langella for Frost/Nixon- When the reviews came in for Frost/Nixon everyone seemed to be in awe of Langella's portrayal of a post-presidency Richard Nixon. Langella struck an amazing balance between resurrecting the popular image of Nixon we all remember -sweaty, manipulative, hungry for glory- and the more grounded character of history -cunning, charming, multifaceted. He also accomplished an impressive acting feat by translating a theatrical performance rightly acclaimed for its larger-than-life grandeur on the stage into a cinematic performance that captures wonderful subtlety and nuance on screen. While he hasn't garnered the buzz of the two leading nominees, Frankie boy seems to have widespread respect, especially among his fellow thespians. Remember the actors cast a large percentage of the ballots for the Oscars, and their respect can go a long way towards tilting the scales. Langella may yet join the exclusive club of actors to win both a Tony Award and an Academy Award for the same role.

BEST ACTRESS IN A LEADING ROLE
Current Favorite: Kate Winslet for The Reader- You may have that critics were unimpressed with The Reader. You may have heard surprise that The Reader was even nominated for Best Picture. You may have even seen some of the backlash against the film on Internet. I want you to know that one of the most important lessons you can learn for predicting the Oscars is to ignore all of that. Ms. Winslet has something on her side that trumps all of that this year. She's due. The Academy clearly has a deep affection for her. She's only 33 and she's been nominated 6 times already. Yet, despite all the love and praise she still hasn't won once. As I've said before the voters like to spread the wealth around, so sometimes deserving individuals have to wait for "their turn". After all becoming an "ACADEMY AWARD WINNER" (imagine that's being read by the voice-over guy who does all the movie trailers) puts you in a pretty exclusive club, so AMPAS can be stingy when it comes to handing out those little golden dudes. The general consensus seems to be that Kate will finally be welcomed into the cool kids' circle this year. That means no matter what anyone else thinks about any other aspect of The Reader, you should still consider Winslet a near lock.

Tremendous Upset Potential: Meryl Streep for Doubt- Many people may find the idea of Meryl Streep being an underdog in any race of an acting award quite strange. After all, she's already won two Oscars. She seems to be nominated every year. Plus, if you were alive in the 1980's you remember when she was every critic's favorite actress. Yet it has been 25 years now since she last won an Academy Award. A lot of the Academy members respect that kind of consistent achievement without any encouragement from the Academy, maybe enough to reward a more veteran actress who they see as a peer. If enough voters have soured on The Reader and/or start to feel contrarian about the whole "It's Kate's year"-thing, then Streep seems to have the strongest credentials of any of the other nominees. The critics lauded her work in Doubt (as always). Her performance has garnered some trophies already. The film has more support from AMPAS than any of the films in which her competitors starred. If none of that helps, she could still get a boost because she has a lot of friends casting ballots. Never forget the old Hollywood adage "It's all about who you know."


BEST ACTRESS IN A SUPPORTING ROLE
Current Favorite: Penelope Cruz for Vicky Cristina Barcelona- When utilizing my "AMPAS is the Cool Kids in school" principle, you have to incorporate a few other rules as corollaries. A very relevant rule arises when predicting awards for actresses. Male members of the academy will overwhelmingly vote in favor of an actress they want to sleep with. They seem to assume that by granting a beautiful woman entrance into the circle of Oscar winners, they will have more opportunities to socialize with her. If they meet her at a party after the ceremony, and mention they voted for her, they logically conclude that she will be so flattered by this kind gesture that she will immediately engage them in various intimate acts. So when a woman like Penelope Cruz, universally considered one of the most slobber-inducing beauties on the planet, earns a nomination, even if only for a film with less than stellar reviews and modest box office figures, you should consider her the front-runner by a large margin. When you understand this rule, the victories of certain actress, once considered unbelievable upsets, become almost obvious. Never underestimate what a group of powerful men will do for the company of a good looking woman.

Tremendous Upset Potential: Viola Davis for Doubt- Naturally any hive-mind as large as AMPAS will be driven by a variety of competing urges, of which the desire to cuddle with the new hotness is only one. Occasionally the Academy will also pursue more political agendas, such as righting our nation's cultural wrongs. Unfortunately for the fine people at AMPAS they tend to be a little slow to join a cause. By giving a Best Picture Oscar to In the Heat of the Night, they managed to proclaim their support for the civil rights movement just after Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated. After hearing complaints for decades that the Academy hadn't recognized enough minorities, they have recently taken more opportunities to share the love with African-American nominees. An elite clique like AMPAS doesn't survive this long without learning how to adapt, and when to freshen their membership with new blood. This category represents this year's only chance to give a major award to someone of non-European descent. Between Ms. Davis and Taraji P. Henson, Viola has the more talked about performance. Also Doubt has five nominations all in major categories. The voters clearly liked this film a lot, and might give the golden man to Viola as a way of honoring the film as a whole. None of this should be misconstrued to imply Ms. Davis doesn't deserve an Oscar, but, as you are beginning to learn, the Academy doesn't real base these things on merit.


BEST ACTOR IN A SUPPORTING ROLE
Current Favorite: Heath Ledger for The Dark Knight- Rarely does any canny and experienced Oscar-watcher call anything a sure thing. So it seems strange to me, that amongst all the Oscar chatter this year the pundits appear certain that Heath Ledger has a lock on the prize for Best Supporting Actor. Somehow, I find the assured nature of these predictions perplexing. To be sure, I loved his performance, and believe it warrants mention among the greatest examples of acting in film history. With that said though, you must realize that the Academy would break with a lot of traditions to honor Heath with this award. First the Supporting Actor trophy has had a bit of a legacy as a veteran's award, an honor reserved for those who have risen through the Hollywood system and after several years proven their worth. Young stars aren't usually rewarded with a big prize, especially if the voters don't feel they've seen the actor achieve his maximum potential yet. Much of the buzz for Ledger stems from the tragedy of his early death, and a sense that this gifted young thespian had a very promising career cut short. Yet, in the past outstanding talents have received posthumous nominations (albeit rarely) and very, very few of them have won. In fact only once has an acting prize gone to a non-living actor. The case of James Dean seems to bear the closest resemblance to the situation surrounding Ledger. He was also a promising young start who died young and was nominated after his death. He lost. Twice. On top of all that Heath had the misfortune of leaving his last, best performance in a super-hero movie. The academy likes genre pictures, like super-hero flicks, for awards like Best Sound Editing and Best Visual Effects, but they have resisted giving acting awards to these broad entertainments. Widely respected actors like Sirs Alec Guinness and Ian McKellen have both received nominations for their work in genre pictures, and both been denied. I still say that every indicator shows Heath Ledger winning this award. I just can't help but feel as if there's more room for an upset here than most pundits let on.

Tremendous Upset Potential: Josh Brolin for Milk- If you replaced Heath Ledger with any other actor in this year's list of nominees, then Josh Brolin would have, I believe the strongest case of any actor in this category. He has become a hot property in Hollywood lately, so the cool kids of AMPAS might see him as a rising star they should recruit into their clique. Like Gwyneth Paltrow before him, Brolin may "inherit" a spot among the Hollywood elite as the child of a major Hollywood family. In classic AMPAS fashion, this could be a "'make-up" award where the Academy gives him this year's prize after being snubbed last year. More importantly though Brolin belongs to a well supported film, apparently more liked by the voters than any of his competitor's films. In most years this type of resume would mean Brolin would be favored to win the award. It's just his bad luck that Heath Ledger appears to have become an award winning juggernaut this year.


BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY
Current Favorite: Simon Beaufoy for Slumdog Millionaire- If you try applying my "AMPAS = cool kids at high school" rule to the screenplay awards, you may have a hard time figuring out what to do. After all it's not like anyone wants to hang out with the writers anyways. To guide my judgement in these matters I adopt a principle that holds that the Academy rewards the screenplays that represent their perferred style of picture. Note in the Adapted Screenplay category that rarely means the script with the most original premise or cleverest dialouge. Usually the voters want a story with an epic scope and lots of juicy scenes for actors (remember the actors have the plurality in the membership). Also, you should notice the recent high correlation between Best Adapted Screenplay winners and Best Picture winners. The members have basically adopted the position that the only way to tell a good screenplay is if it leads to a Best Picture caliber film. For these reasons you should assume that Slumdog Millionaire will likely take the trophy. The film has a lot of merits that should appeal to voters. It takes a little known novel and spins it into an engaging story. The tale spans the pretty much all of the characters' young lives. Plus it twists and turns the plot in interesting ways. Simon Beaufoy appears to have a Midas touch in this case. Taking a story few in Hollywood would dare turn into a film, and crafting the basis for a successful and popular movie.

Tremendous Upset Potential: Eric Roth for The Curious Case of Benjamin Button- Of course the voters may feel that Eric Roth's screenplay better fits their preferences. After all it takes an eccentric short story from a bygone era with limited movie potential and expands into into an epic of Forrest Gump level proportions. It provides the kind of gristle actors love to chew up. It inspired a whole slew of technical accomplishments that garnered the film more nominations than any other movie this year. Unlike Slumdog, which has to take place in India, Button is set in principally in New Orleans which gives a boost to American filmmakers. If you don't believe the voters love Slumdog enough to give it all the major awards, than you should keep in mind that the script for Button shares more in common with previous winners than Slumdog. The Academy members have a proven habit of liking what they already know in movies and in stories.

BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY
Current Favorite: Dustin Lance Black for Milk- Once again the best bet for the screenplay award is the script belong to a perceived Best Picture contender. Much like their adapted cousins the scripts that win Best Original Screenplay tend to come with a large vision and a big stage for their actors. Milk offers up the kind of material most leading men dream of playing (unless they've got some deep seated problem with gay people) by showing Harvey Milk as everything from a latter-day hippie, to an effeminate dandy, to a cunning politician. The pciture makes great use of tying the characters' development to historical events we remember. Also, AMPAS has previously rewarded screenplays that bring a new perspective to the lives of well-known historical figures. Even if you worry that the voters may feel too uncomfortable with Milk's homosexual content to give it Best Picture, remember that they have deigned to award screenplay prizes to similarly-themed films before.

Tremendous Upset Potential: Andrew Stanton and Jim Reardon for WALL-E- Though the Academy's choice for Best Adapted Screenplay and Best Picture have recently overlapped, the Original Screenplay award has actually gone to scripts that feature originality. The Oscar's for writing seem to be one of the few places the voters will reward works of inspired cinema. In this case the members may go for an animated feature that elevated the medium to new heights. In fact the critical praise and popular support for WALL-E was so strong, that many expected it to snag a nomination for Best Picture. While it may not win the big prize, it may still strike a blow for animated features by taking a trophy for writing. The voters may feel enough affection for the endearing tale of a robot in love that it could grant it a prize beyond the Best Animated Feature category. The film also breathes new life into the art of wordless-comedy, a big plus for Hollywood elites trying to export more movies around the globe. In the end though the best reason to pick WALL-E for the upset win is because it is the only nominee other than Milk to draw wide spread support from the Academy. When a film has multiple nominations the voters usually like to give it at least one or two.

That completes my coverage of the major awards. If you want to know who to pick in your Oscar pool, I would advise you to take all the favorites (and consult the various experts I linked to ofcourse). Only select an upset if you really agree with an argument I made or if you hear about an something brewing from one of the many Oscar pundits you'll see on TV between now and the ceremony. If you're very lucky I may also share my predictions for the other categories, but I make no promises. I may decide to save those tips for my own elite cricle.

If I ran Vegas-Proposition bets for Super Bowl XLIII

My bizarre fascination with gambling seems to exhibit a certain infectious quality. For starters my posts on the topic have come to comprise a substantial chunk of this blog's content. I would contend that these posts tend to reflect my humorous outlook on sports betting more than they display the kind of half-baked, over-thought advice typical of degenerate gamblers. However it still may look a little suspicious that I type up so many words dissecting Vegas lines, even if just in jest.

Naturally my obsession with wagering and all the pseudo-science it entails has found other vectors along which to spread, victimizing not just unsuspecting Technorati users, but now my family as well. Over the past several years, my bad influence has started to steer conversations to the theory and practice of gambling, especially during the NFL play-offs. This slow moral decline of my family has prominently featured an annual ritual of exchanging possible proposition bets before each Super Bowl. As with my blog posts on the topic, these are principally tongue-in-cheek items meant to highlight some of the funnier storylines and odd quircks of the particular game. To help demonstrate what I mean, I'll share some examples from my own proposals of previous years.

From Super Bowl XLI:
-The number of Super Bowl commercials for beer that feature animals will be over the total number of Super Bowl commercials featuring Peyton Manning.
-Odds that a black coach will win the Super Bowl: Even
-Odds that no one outside of the sports punditry will care about this: Even

From Super Bowl XLII:
- Mentions of the Patriots possibly going undefeated: over/under 41.5
- Mentions of the Patriots using cameras to spy on opponents earlier in the season: over/under 98.5
- Uses of the word "history" and all variations during the broadcast (including "historic", "historical", and "histriatoric" by Terry Bradshaw): over/under 26

In order to share the fun and innanity of this tradition with those few random folks who will read this post, I decided to make my personal selections of proposition bets for Super Bowl XLIII publically available on this blog. If anyone had any ideas of their own they would like to share, I invite you to write them up in the comments section below.

Now, for your enjoyment, I present the proposition bets I would post if I ran my own Las Vegas casino.

-Total in game promotions of shows premeiring on NBC's primetime lineup mid-season: Over/Under 6.5

-Number of time a prickly Al Michaels will make a point of mentioning which college a player attended after they refuse to mention it in the starting lineup introduction: Over/Under 3.5

-Times John Madden mentions Brett Favre favored -3 over Times John Madden mentions Neil Rackers

-Odds of someone making a comment about Troy Polamalu's hair during the broadcast: 3-1

-Total fumbles committed by Kurt Warner favored -2 over Total fumbles by entire Steelers team

-Comments made by announcers concerning Hines Ward having to play through an injury favored -5 over Actual minutes played by Hines Ward in this game

-Number of commercials for NBC's Heroes favored -3 over Total non-offensive touchdowns scored by the Steelers

-Number of interceptions thrown by Kurt Warner favored -2.5 over Number of commercials for NBC's underappreciated and underpromoted Life

-Odds that Steeler fans will comprise a majority of the stadium audience: 1-2

- Total catches by Larry Fitzgerald: Over/Under 6.5

-Total catches by Larry Fitzgerald that go for more than 20 yards or a touchdown: Over/Under 6.5

-Total compliments payed to Mike Tomlin by the announcing crew: Over/Under 5.5

-Total times the announcing crew mentions how much Tomlin resembles actor Omar Epps: Over/Under 0.5

-Total compliments payed to the city of Tampa Bay by the announcing crew: Over/Under 0.5

-Number of highlight reels about the Steeler's history of greatness shown during the game favored -1 over the number of highlight reels about the Cardinal's history of ineptitude

-Odds that the Cardinals will beat the spread and impress the announcing crew: 5-1

-Odds the Cardinals will actually win: 10,000-1

-Odds that you will see someone wearing a piece of apparel related to the winning team tomorrow: Even

I hope you enjoy those propositions bets. Remember always gamble responsibly, and never trust me to get any of these close to right. Enjoy the game!