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.
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.
No comments:
Post a Comment