I Am DB

“New Rule: If they’re going to make a historical epic full of British actors in period costumes about Queen Elizabeth II helping her father get over his speech impediment, why bother having the Oscars at all? You win. Unless someone in America is making a movie where Meryl Streep teaches Anne Frank how to box, we give up.”
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx-Bill Maher, Real Time with Bill Maher, 9/24/10

BEST PICTURE
Bill Maher may have called it earlier than anyone. It would seem that The King’s Speech is poised to be the big winner on Sunday night, with a Best Picture win and several others along the way. Despite The Social Network conquering the first half of the season, its chances are now slim to none. Ditto for everything else, even though True Grit and The Fighter, in particular, are bound to have their supporters. So…not a lot to say here.

Well, one thing. It’s been irritating over the last three or four weeks to see Oscar pundits suddenly jumping on The King’s Speech bandwagon and saying that they really knew all along it would be the favorite and that The Social Network never really had a chance. Because that’s not what they were saying at all before the Producer’s Guild of America, Director’s Guild of America and Screen Actor’s Guild awards all turned the tide away from Social and toward King’s Speech. Although The Social Network did kick ass amongst the critics awards like few films have (in recent memory at least), it was never an obvious Best Picture choice; not to anyone who has actually paid attention to the kind of movies that appeal to the Academy. Everyone was so sure it was gonna be The Social Network, until The King’s Speech started getting love from the guilds. Suddenly these people who had already declared Social‘s victory claimed they really figured that Oscar fortune would favor King’s Speech. Bad form, chaps.

Personal Choice: Inception

BEST DIRECTOR
Now here we actually have some suspense. I don’t think King’s Speech director Tom Hooper has this locked up. The two biggest things in his favor are: a) the movie is the likely Best Picture winner, and Picture and Director usually go hand-in-hand; and b) he won the DGA award, which is a pretty reliable indicator for the Oscar – only six times have the DGA and the Academy diverged since the DGA started its awards in 1948. But of those six times, three have been in the last 15 years. And in the same time period, Best Picture and Best Director have gone to different films on four occasions. (Take that stat with a grain of salt though; Best Picture and Best Director have split 21 times, and many of them happened in consecutive years or just a couple of years apart. So it’s not a trend that has picked up speed in more recent years. In fact, it really has no relevance at all. Why am I pointing it out then? I…I don’t know. I can’t help it. This is like a drug addiction.)

Another thing that could favor Hooper is the exclusion of Christopher Nolan. Sort of. One of the criticisms leveled at Nolan (which is mentioned in this article from The Daily Beast that examines possible reasons for his omission) is that his films, dazzling and engrossing as they may be, are cold. I happen to disagree with this assessment of his work. If you look at Memento, The Dark Knight (and Batman Begins, to a lesser extent), The Prestige and Inception, there are love stories running through all of them, often fueling the protagonist’s actions. I mean, nobody’s going to mistake the guy for Nora Ephron…but I think his work has more heart than say, Stanley Kubrick’s.

I’m getting off-topic. Point is, similar complaints of coldness have been leveled at David Fincher throughout his career (and Hooper’s loss would be Fincher’s win. There’s been no precedent to suggest it would go to Russell, Aronofsky or the Coens). Even when Fincher directed The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, which is a romantic movie both in its style and content, many still deemed it icy. All this to say that Nolan’s snub may suggest that the Director’s branch wasn’t interested in cold this year. They wanted warmth, and The King’s Speech has that.

On the other hand, Hooper is not well known in Hollywood. Such unfamiliarity didn’t stop American Beauty‘s Sam Mendes or The English Patient‘s Anthony Minghella from winning, but a guy like Fincher may appeal more than Hooper to art directors, sound designers, visual effects artists and others whose particular trades are well-represented in his movies. Beyond that, some voters may have the clarity to see that The King’s Speech is just not as powerful a directorial accomplishment as The Social Network. Really, I’m still stunned Hooper won the DGA…and though his Oscar chances are strong, I would like to think voters will realize there’s more impressive directing work to choose from. There is voting crossover between the DGA and the Academy, but the DGA has a much larger voting body and includes the diversity of commercial and television directors, who may have been excited by Hooper’s successful transition to feature films. He comes from TV, where his credits include HBO’s John Adams miniseries. (Interestingly, that series nearly swept the 2008 Emmy Awards – Best Miniseries, Best Actor, Best Actress, Best Supporting Actor…but Hooper lost Best Director. I maintain it was the excessive use of dutch angles, which I must point out whenever possible. So obnoxious. He also directed the network’s Elizabeth I with Helen Mirren, and did win an Emmy for that.)

The last clue that tells me Hooper is vulnerable is that he lost the Best Director at the British Academy of Film & Television Awards. This shocked me, as Hooper was on his home turf and The King’s Speech took seven awards, including Best Picture, Screenplay, Actor, Supporting Actor and Supporting Actress (we’ll talk about the latter two further down). A BAFTA win or loss is by no means a clear bellwether for the Oscar, but there is some crossover in voters, so the fact that they went for Fincher over Hooper is not insignificant…though it should also be pointed out that at the BAFTA’s, only directors vote for the winning director whereas at the Oscars, the entire membership can vote.

So what’s it all mean? The tea leaves could be read both ways, but I’m giving the edge to Fincher. That might be based a little too much on my personal feeling that Hooper doesn’t deserve this award, but there it is.

Personal Choice: In the still baffling-to-me absence of Christopher Nolan (despite what the article above claims), I’d actually give the prize to Darren Aronofsky. I think Black Swan has its problems, but Aronofsky puts on a hell of a show, and it’s because of his vision and talent that the film is so compelling.

BEST ACTOR
Colin Firth pretty much has this in the bag, so there’s no need for a lot of analysis. But since I haven’t been able to comment on it from personal experience as of yet, I should say something about Javier Bardem. I wasn’t crazy about Biutiful, but you can’t say that Bardem didn’t pour himself into the role. He demonstrates a deep commitment to the part and he is compelling, but it’s a hard performance to love. The film is just so steeped in misery, and Bardem wears that well…but as far as actors going deep and exposing themselves, raw nerves and all, I’d rather have seen Ryan Gosling nominated for Blue Valentine.

As for Firth, the praise he’s earned for The King’s Speech is not unfounded, and while there are aspects of the role that definitely offer him the chance to do that showy, externalized Acting! to which Academy members have a Pavlovian response, it should be said that there are plenty of quiet, subtle elements to the performance as well, as Firth’s duke-turned-king struggles internally. So it really is the complete package voters are looking for…even if I think Firth was even more deserving last year for A Single Man. If you really want to see an example of screen acting at its finest, watch the scene from that film in which Firth receives a phone call about his partner’s car accident.

Personal Choice: I like all the performances but can’t say I’m super-excited about any of them. So I guess I’d fall in line and root for Firth. It’s nice to see a guy who’s been in the game so long, standing on the sidelines while others around him got all the accolades, finally having his moment to shine. (Not a reason to vote for him…just an opinion.)

BEST ACTRESS
When Black Swan was released and it became clear that Natalie Portman was going to be a major player this awards season, I wondered if the late January release of a likely-tepid romantic comedy with Ashton Kutcher would be the Kryptonite that sank her chances, just as (it’s widely believed) Norbit destroyed Eddie Murphy’s Oscar bid for Dreamgirls a few years back. I haven’t seen Portman’s No Strings Attached, but I doubt it’s as dismal as Norbit.

Okay, I haven’t seen Norbit either, but I’m a sentient being with a mild awareness of the movie. That’s pretty much all it takes to make a ruling on that one. Anyway, it seems pretty clear by now that Portman isn’t in any danger. 2011 is her year, no doubt. She turned No Strings Attached into a box office hit and has three other movies due in the months ahead, representing her interest in different types of films (one is a stoner comedy, one a comic book adaptation and one a low-budget indie). The pregnancy thing doesn’t hurt either. And then there’s her performance in Black Swan. You know, the thing that she’s actually supposed to be judged on. It’s terrific, and reflects the dedication of rigorous physical training – the kind of extra heft those Academy members eat up like M&M’s.

It is sort of a bummer that Annette Bening will likely lose again to another younger actress, though to be fair – and to take nothing away from Bening’s awesome performance in American Beauty – Hilary Swank totally deserved the win in 1999 for Boys Don’t Cry. Whether she deserved it in 2004 for Million Dollar Baby is more debatable in my mind, though I can’t make a case for Bening either, having still never seen Being Julia. Sympathy for Bening – a sense that her time has come – could prove to be a spoiler, but I don’t see it happening.

As incredible as Michelle Williams is in Blue Valentine, it’s the kind of performance that’s almost too real, too natural, too naked to win an Oscar. Academy members rarely go for subtle and natural. They wanna see you work for it. And besides, I’m sure Blue Valentine hasn’t been seen widely enough. Nicole Kidman and Jennifer Lawrence were both excellent, but they’re along for the ride this year. Portman takes it.

Personal Choice: Natalie Portman

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR
It’s too bad that Mark Ruffalo faces such stiff competition, because he really is excellent in The Kids Are All Right. He does so many interesting things with that character. And as impressive as John Hawkes is in Winter’s Bone, his prize is the recognition. Ditto for Jeremy Renner.

The frontrunner is of course Christian Bale, who has won most of the key Supporting Actor races along the way, but I wouldn’t be shocked (disappointed, but not shocked) if Geoffrey Rush pulled an upset. I’m not expecting that; I think the Academy loves The Fighter, and a vote for Bale is the most obvious way to honor the film, not to mention a great, overdue actor and a tremendous performance. Besides, who could resist the chance, however unlikely, that Bale would pull a repeat of his infamous tirade from the Terminator: Salvation set and start screaming obscenities at the random girl who hands out the trophy, cussing her out for moving around too much while he makes his speech? “WHAT IS YOUR FUCKING PROBLEM? DID YOU JUST WIN AN OSCAR? DID-YOU-JUST-WIN-AN-OSCAR?? NO! NO YOU FUCKING DIDN’T. SO STOP FUCKING WALKING AROUND WHILE I’M TRYING TO GIVE MY SPEECH. IT’S DISTRACTING, IT’S FUCKING DISTRACTING!! HOW HARD IS IT TO STAND IN ONE FUCKING PLACE? FUCK!!!”

Nah, the truth is that Bale has been a teddy bear on the awards circuit this season. Affable, grateful, smiling, enthusiastic and generous with his praise for his co-stars and his real-life counterpart Dickie Eklund and the Ward family, whose lives The Fighter depicts. Still, I have to wonder if a contingent of cinematographers and maybe other below-the-line Academy members will refuse to vote for him, as a belated “fuck you” for his behavior that day. There’s no way to ever know of course, but I’d bet anything Bale will lose at least a few votes for that outburst. Enough to hurt his chances? Probably not. If Bale loses, it will more likely be due to Rush benefitting from all that affection for The King’s Speech. Even with the film’s understandable popularity in England, Rush’s BAFTA win was unexpected. Again, there’s no reason to think it foreshadows an Oscar victory, but there is a nagging voice in my head suggesting Rush has gained ground. Despite the praise I’ve heard from others, I don’t see this as an Oscar-winning performance. I enjoyed it, but it hardly blew me away. I’m sticking with Bale for the win, but I’ll be watching this one nervously.

Personal Pick: Christian fucking Bale.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS
It seems like Best Supporting Actress is often the most wide-open, anything-could-happen of the top categories, or the one where the unexpected is most likely to happen. Marisa Tomei, Marcia Gay Harden, Anna Paquin, Tilda Swinton, Juliette Binoche…all relative-to-huge surprises.

If we go with the flow of the precursors, then not only is Bale a lock to win, but things look good for his co-star Melissa Leo as well. Yet despite wins at the Broadcast Film Critics, the Golden Globes and SAG, I’ve still seen Leo as being vulnerable. And things may have changed even more dramatically in the last few weeks. The first sign of trouble I see – the one that’s been there for a while, and which is utterly arbitrary  – is that you can really tell how much Leo wants it. There’s nothing wrong with hunger, nothing wrong with working the campaign trail if that’s how the game is played (though Mo’Nique proved last year that playing the game isn’t a requirement), but on every awards show I’ve watched this season, as the camera holds on the faces of the five nominees, you can just see Leo on edge, desperately hoping she gets the prize. It’s not that I think this hurts her chances, but rather that her barely contained desire cosmically positions her to lose the big one. Watching her in those moments, it seems like she’ll barely be able to keep it together if they call another name. And in a way, it’s understandable. She’s the kind of actress for whom an Oscar is probably the most meaningful. For a working actress like that – not a big star, not a household name, but a good, strong performer who has done consistently fine work for years in television and film – I have to think the validation of an Oscar would be pretty special. I first saw Leo back in the early 90’s when she was a regular on NBC’s great police drama Homicide: Life on the Street, and it’s been satisfying to see her hitting such a stride in her career of late, getting good material and opportunities. So it makes sense to me that she really wants it. My feeling that she’s fated not to win it for that very reason is nothing more than a bizarre gut feeling.

More concrete, and more recent, is the fact that Leo put out her own For Your Consideration ads right in the middle of the voting period. Actors have successfully self-campaigned before, but usually to win a nomination. As the article points out, however, it hasn’t gone so well for those already nominated now seeking the win. From various pieces I’ve read, reaction to Leo’s move has been mixed. Some have applauded her while others have deemed it crass. Some Academy members have said that the move will cost Leo their vote. Which is total bullshit, because let’s face it, Academy members: the entire system you’ve set up for your award is kind of crass. Any regular Oscar observer knows by now that this is a fantasy, but we still like to proffer it: the award should be about the PERFORMANCE. Yet Winning an Oscar can be as much about the campaigning. Studios and publicists force actors and directors to run a months-long gauntlet of screening Q&As, press interviews and party appearances to schmooze Academy members and woo votes. So here you have someone who, in addition to doing all of that, tried another path as well. And suddenly she’s going to be penalized for it? There are ways one could promote themselves that would be pretty obnoxious; Leo hasn’t crossed that line. Most leading Oscar pundits (oh yes, there is a thriving subculture out there around movie awards) have supported Leo, and here is one piece that makes some good points in her defense.

Despite any unfounded sense I’ve had that she might not win, the fact is that Leo was entering the Oscars as the frontrunner. She didn’t need to do this. She was in really good shape, and this has definitely become an issue. If she doesn’t win, we’ll never know if it was because these ads cost her too many votes (which seems unlikely to me anyway)…but wow, how terrible will she feel, wondering if she torpedoed her own chances?

There is also the theory that Leo won’t win because she’ll split the vote with her co-star Amy Adams, but I don’t think this is an issue. People talk about the roadblock of vote-splitting all the time, and it’s never made sense to me. You’re evaluating two completely different performances. If a voter prefers Leo, they’ll vote for her. If they prefer Adams, they’ll vote for her. What difference does it make if they come from the same movie or not? Catherine Zeta-Jones beat Queen Latifah for Chicago, F. Murray Abraham beat Tom Hulce for Amadeus, Jack Nicholson beat John Lithgow for Terms of Endearment, Robert DeNiro beat Lee Strasberg and Michael V. Gazzo for The Godfather Part II…hell, director Steven Soderbergh beat himself, winning for Traffic when he was also nominated for Erin Brockovich (not an acting example, but the same logic applies). The split vote is a myth.

So who will get it, if not Leo? Adams is excellent in a change-of-pace role, and the Academy is awfully fond of her. This is her third nomination since 2005. I could see her pulling an upset (and it would be hard for Leo to look – and maybe even feel – too upset if her co-star and friend was the one to beat her). Many are looking to Hailee Steinfeld, who gives a stellar debut performance that’s at the heart of the widely-embraced True Grit. Helena Bonham Carter took the BAFTA award, but though I’ve stated that I could see Geoffrey Rush repeating his BAFTA win at the Oscars, I don’t think Bonham Carter has the same chances. For one thing, she didn’t have to compete against Leo (who was overlooked by BAFTA) or Steinfeld (who was nominated – appropriately – in the Lead race, rather than Supporting). Between that and the general fondness for The King’s Speech, she got lucky. And as for Jacki Weaver, well, it’s an honor just to be nominated.

I don’t know what will happen. For now I’m still giving the edge to Leo, but Hailee Steinfeld could totally nab it.

Personal Choice: Melissa Leo (helped by the fact that I was also really struck by her work in Welcome to the Rileys, a film no one else seemed to see or care about, but which I liked. Not only was Leo’s performance really lovely, but it was a 180 degree turn from The Fighter.)

BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY
Earlier in the year, The Kids Are All Right seemed like a potential winner here, but in the wake of The King’s Speech and Inception, it’s now running a distant third. Is there any reason to hope that Christopher Nolan will win? Will his egregious snub in the Best Director race actually help him here, rallying support from those who feel that he needs some kind of reward for his unique vision? He must have friends, allies and admirers throughout the Academy. All those people I talked about as being potential supporters of David Fincher because his films embrace their crafts…if there’s any credence to that theory, it must apply to Nolan as well. Besides, it’s right there in the name of the category: Best Original Screenplay. Yes, I know that means original as in not based on pre-existing material, but maybe it should count for something else too. Nolan should have won this award for Memento ten years ago. Dare I dream that his time has come?

Probably not. Although Nolan did win the award from the Writer’s Guild of America, he didn’t have to face The King’s Speech, which had been ruled ineligible by the WGA. And I’m afraid that too many people were too confused by Inception. We certainly don’t want to challenge people too much or make them think too hard. Much easier to just speak to their emotions, which The King’s Speech does quite well. The fact that its writer, David Seidler, overcame a stutter himself, will likely pluck at voters heartstrings too. I’m predicting The King’s Speech, but I’m hoping to be wrong. C’mon Academy, show some balls! Reach into that part of yourself that gave Eminem an Oscar for Best Song and honored The Departed as Best Picture. I know you can do it; I just don’t think you will.

Personal Choice: Is it not clear?

BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY
This should be an open and shut case. By all logic, the words “Aaron Sorkin” and “The Social Network” are already engraved. Throughout this entire awards season, Sorkin’s screenplay has not lost a single award for which it was eligible. Not one. Every critics group that gave only one Screenplay award gave it to The Social Network. Every critics group that recognized both Original and Adapted scripts gave their Adapted prize to The Social Network. It won the Golden Globe, the WGA and the BAFTA. 32 awards in all, if my notes are correct. I suspect, though I haven’t done the research to confirm this, that such a perfect record may be unprecedented. And if not, surely the list is extremely short. Sorkin is probably the safest bet of the night.

And yet, let me just throw out one thing. Last year, Up in the Air was considered a good bet to win Best Picture during the first half of the awards season, much like The Social Network was this year. And last year, the Adapted Screenplay for Air won suitcases full of awards. Even when its Best Picture hopes had faded, the film still went into Oscar night as the heavy favorite to win Adapted Screenplay. Then in the night’s biggest surprise, it lost to Precious. Now, Up in the Air‘s track record for Best Picture and Best Adapted Screenplay wins wasn’t as strong as The Social Network‘s. But the similar set-up does give me a moment’s pause.

Aaaaand….moment passed. The Oscar goes to Aaron Sorkin for The Social Network.

Personal Choice: The Social Network

BEST ANIMATED FILM
Pixar’s reign continues. Toy Story 3 wins.

Personal Choice: Toy Story 3

BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY
The presence here of The King’s Speech is just one of many cases where people’s love for the film allowed it to earn nominations it didn’t really deserve. In some of those cases, it might even win, but probably not in this one. Likewise, The Social Network will have to be content with a nomination. This should come down to a three-way race between Black Swan, Inception and True Grit, and I really don’t know which way it will go. Roger Deakins, the man behind the camera for every Coen Brothers movie since 1991’s Barton Fink and one of the greatest cinematographers ever to commit an image to celluloid, has still never won an Oscar. True Grit could finally change that. Like everything Deakins touches, especially for the Coens, it’s a beautifully shot film, embracing both tight confines and the open plains. I think Inception poses more of a threat than Black Swan, given its varied set-pieces and the fact that it won the prize from the American Society of Cinematographers. But that group has honored Deakins before. The Academy has yet to show him the money, and considering True Grit‘s popularity, this may be the easiest place to honor it.

Personal Choice: As much as I love Deakins and want to see him win an Oscar, on the whole I don’t think True Grit ranks among his best work. I’d be happy to see it win just because I want the man to win a damn Oscar already, but I’m more torn between Inception and Black Swan as the deserving winners.

BEST FILM EDITING
I must state again for the record that the absence of Inception in this category is incomprehensible. It should be the winner, hands down. But we must work with what we have, and it is a pretty strong category this year. The least deserving nominee is of course one that has a good chance of winning. Yes King’s Speech, I’m looking at you. This is yet another instance where it’s easy to imagine that voters will just pick the movie they like without really thinking about what they’re voting for. I’m betting they’ll know better in this case, but who knows. The Fighter, Black Swan and 127 Hours are all worthy contenders. But my money’s on The Social Network, with its complex timeline that juggles two legal depositions and the events that led to the lawsuits. Impressive work.

Not quite as impressive as Inception, but still.

Personal Choice: The Social Network or Black Swan

BEST ART DIRECTION
Tim Burton films fare well in this category. In fact, of the three Burton films that have been nominated for Art Direction over the years, all have won. So history favors Alice in Wonderland. But I suspect the streak may end this year. Sure, Alice in Wonderland is pretty, but it’s also overstuffed. If the award were for Most Art Direction, it would be a slam dunk. This criticism may not matter to voters who just like the purdy colors, but I feel like they might go a different way. The category also tends to honor period pieces, and The King’s Speech is more likely to benefit from that tendency than True Grit. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part I is also in the mix, but probably doesn’t stand out enough for a win. And then there’s Inception, which combines elements of modern, fantasy and period design. That should make it the winner, but I have a feeling voters will go with the straightforward work of The King’s Speech.

Personal Choice: Inception

BEST COSTUME DESIGN
I haven’t seen The Tempest, but based on the images I’ve caught, it does look like it features some impressive costuming. However, I doubt most Academy members have seen it either. Same goes for I Am Love, which benefits from a striking dress or two, but not much more. As this is another category that most often goes for period pieces, we once again have True Grit and The King’s Speech in contention. Grit‘s costumes are good, but there’s not much variety and the colors don’t exactly pop. This is definitely a category where King’s Speech could benefit from Autopilot Syndrome, but this time I think Alice in Wonderland will stand out.

Personal Choice: Alice in Wonderland

BEST ORIGINAL SCORE
I’m getting tired of saying this, but it just keeps being applicable: The King’s Speech barely deserves to be here, yet it stands a good chance of winning. The Social Network score by Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross is original and effective, but may be a little too unconventional for more conservative tastes. And Inception may just be too loud and dissonant for older voters. I’m not usually a huge proponent of scores lacking a strong, memorable theme or those that relentlessly pound – characteristics that apply to Inception. But Nolan uses Hans Zimmer’s score as such a key tool in his arsenal, employing propulsive music to constantly keep the tension cranked. If we’re going by the most effective use of a score in a film, this is the one. But in this race, I think voters will prefer the lighter, more classical-stylings of The King’s Speech. Snore.

Personal Choice: Inception

BEST ORIGINAL SONG
This category is tough to call this year. None of these songs have much staying power. The question is whether or not voters take the time to go back and listen to the songs before marking their ballots, or just make a selection based on which film or artist they like or which song they just assume is probably best. (To hear the songs for yourself, mostly courtesy of InContention.com, click on the links below.)

While I have to admit that Gwyneth Paltrow’s got some impressive pipes, I’m ruling out her tune “Coming Home” from Country Strong, if for no other reason than I doubt enough people have seen the film. The Dido/A.R. Rahman collaboration “If I Rise,” from 127 Hours, is the most interesting and original entry, but there’s no guarantee that’s a good thing in a category that generally (though not always) likes to play it safe. That leaves the animated films. Pixar once again turned to Randy Newman to come up with a song for Toy Story 3. The result, “We Belong Together,” is a snazzy, upbeat number, but not all that strong, and not as good as some of his earlier Pixar tunes like “You’ve Got a Friend in Me” from the original Toy Story or “If I Didn’t Have You” from Monsters, Inc. (the song that finally won Newman an Oscar after 15 nominations). Finally, there’s “I See the Light,” the love song from Disney’s Tangled. Written by Disney’s longtime go-to composer Alan Menken (working with lyricist Glenn Slater), it’s a nice enough tune with a pretty melody courtesy of Menken. But just as Randy Newman’s song doesn’t measure up to his past work, “I See the Light” is a shadow of the truly great songs Menken created with his late collaborator Howard Ashman for The Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast and Aladdin. I suppose the comparison is unfair and irrelevant, but I can’t help thinking it.

“If I Rise” has spoiler potential, but my shot in the dark is that the award will go to “I See the Light.” The song is sweet, and the scene in which it occurs is more memorable than the song itself. Plus, when you look back at those Menken-Ashman years and beyond to The Lion King, when multiple songs from each film were nominated, the romantic ballad almost always won out over the rousing showstopper. In this case the songs are from two different movies, but I think the same logic will apply, allowing “I See the Light” to trump “We Belong Together.”

Personal Choice: “If I Rise”

BEST MAKEUP
The Wolfman is probably the safe bet here, for a few reasons. One, it’s the showiest of the contenders. There’s not a lot of subtlety about a guy turning into a werewolf. The reason this might matter is that none of the nominees, at least based on their box office numbers, were widely seen. Not that this reflects the number of Academy members who’ve seen them, since they get to see all their movies for free. But I’d be surprised if enough voters have seen The Way Back or Barney’s Version to make an informed judgment. So if they’re just looking at the three choices and basing their selection on instinct, they’d probably go with the werewolf. Which they might do even if they have seen all the nominees. Barney’s Version features some really well done aging makeup, while The Way Back‘s work mainly consists of facial wounds that reflect the harsh battle against nature that the characters are up against (cuts, bruises, blistering, etc.). Effective, but not flashy. I figure The Wolfman will nail it.

Personal Choice: The Way Back

BEST VISUAL EFFECTS
It’s nice to finally see five films nominated in this category, which has previously allowed only three. I’ll be surprised and disappointed if Alice in Wonderland wins the prize, as its effects were inconsistent. Hereafter features one dynamite effects sequence – a tsunami ripping through a coastal community – but with no other major effects to speak of, there’s not enough to earn the win. Harry Potter and Iron Man 2 both feature high quality, impressive work that would not be undeserving, but you gotta figure that Inception – with its folding cityscapes, crumbling buildings, zero-gravity fights in spinning rooms and so much more – will emerge victorious.

Personal Choice: Inception

BEST SOUND EDITING and BEST SOUND MIXING
Understanding as little as I do about sound work in film, these two categories are always a crapshoot for me. Luckily, I always figure that most Academy members know as little about the category as I do, so we’re in the same boat. I’m going with Inception in both cases. My paper thin justification? For Sound Editing, I expect Inception‘s broad support gives it the edge over the other action movies in the race – Unstoppable and Tron: Legacy. Toy Story 3 and True Grit are here too, but my sense is that when there’s a quality, respected action (or sci-fi or fantasy) film in the running, voters will gravitate toward that.

In the Sound Mixing race, Inception faces more familiar competition – namely The King’s Speech and The Social Network. (True Grit and Salt round out the category). In their ignorance, voters could just go for King’s Speech, as I fear they’ll do in other places…but I actually think this is a category where they’ll display some semblance of logic. Again, the option of an action movie that is widely admired may make them feel like they’re applying their vote in a meaningful way.

Are you with me?

Personal Choice: Given that I love the film and don’t know any better, Inception for both.

BEST DOCUMENTARY
I can offer no help here, as I haven’t seen most of the nominees and am not aware of what has struck the right chord. While I don’t think it’s favored to win, I do especially want to catch up with Exit From the Git Shop, which sounds pretty trippy. I had no idea who Banksy was until a few months ago when his super-ballsy Simpsons opening aired. I thought this article, about how the Academy wouldn’t let the never-seen artist accept a potential Oscar in any way other than the traditional climb up the stage – was interesting. And I love the Charlie Brown picture. (I think there are other photos of his recent L.A. art floating around online.)

Anyway, for what it’s worth, I hear that Inside Job may be the winner, or possibly Restrepo. But like I said, I can offer no help here. In fact, I can’t help with any of the remaining categories…and since I’m on vacation right now, racing to finish this up in time for you to digest it all before the awards (or choke trying), I’m not even gonna bother making the attempt. I’m afraid you’re on your own for Best Documentary Short, Best Animated Short, Best Live Action Short and Best Foreign Language Film. (Actually, In A Better World may have the edge in the latter category, if the buzz I’m hearing is accurate.)

And there we have it. Some tough calls in the below-the line categories, and some potential surprises in some of the top categories. As always, I can’t wait to see how it all unfolds. Along with my wishes for a good Oscar night that favors your favorites (unless they conflict with mine, that is), I’ll leave you with this video of James Franco seeking hosting advice from Judd Apatow. Very awesome, and a little NSFW.

Vodpod videos no longer available.

Complete List of Nominees

Some years, you can go into the Oscar race feeling pretty confident that your predictions are largely safe bets, save for a few toss-of-the-coin categories like last year’s Penn vs. Rourke Best Actor race.

This is not one of those years. And don’t listen to anyone who claims otherwise (sorry Ebert).

Instead, we’re facing a year with a small batch of heavy favorites and a whole lot of races, down through the below-the-line categories, that could go a few different ways. So I’m not feeling as confident in my predictions this year as I often have in the past, but I am really looking forward to Sunday night and seeing how this topsy-turvy Oscar season comes to an end. I’m happy to sacrifice bragging rights for some genuine suspense…and I’m not really a bragger anyway. So here’s where my head is at as the big day rapidly approaches.

WARNING: My fondness for talking (and writing) about movies can lead to a lot of rambling, sometimes more than the category in question really justifies. My Best Picture commentary really goes off on some tangents, but I couldn’t keep it all in! Anyway, I tried to keep it shorter as I worked my way down the list, but proceed at your own risk.

ANOTHER WARNING: This is just some advice. If you’re planning to Tivo the show, be sure to set whatever is on after the Oscars to record as well, because you can bet that the show will run over the three-hour time that your DVR has allotted for it.

Now then….

BEST PICTURE/DIRECTOR
To those who’ve been paying attention since last November-ish (i.e. mega movie awards nerds like me), this year’s Best Picture race has been the most schizophrenic in recent history. Heading into December, I would have said that Up in the Air was going to be the movie to beat. A serious film that still has lots of laughs, plus effervescent performances and a sharp script that nailed the zeitgeist. But as the critics awards actually started to roll out, The Hurt Locker turned out to be the dominant film. Then came mid-December and the release of Avatar, which left everyone slack-jawed, Academy members far and wide included (or so it was reported). When the Golden Globes anointed Avatar, it officially became the frontrunner. Until the guilds came around, that is, and suddenly The Hurt Locker was back on top with wins from the producers, directors, writers, and editors.

And still there are many who think that with the new voting system, this isn’t just an Avatar–Hurt Locker race. To go along with the switch from five to ten Best Picture nominees, the Academy is also switching to the preferential ballot system for its top category. This is the system by which they’ve always determined the nominees, but the actual winners were voted by straight up popularity: the movie with the most votes wins.

Not anymore.

If you want to understand this game-changing element, read this article wherein the preferential system is clearly and thoroughly explained through a fantasy scenario that has Inglourious Basterds winning Best Picture.

Let’s start with Director though, because that race seems to have become more certain. At this point, I’d be surprised if Kathryn Bigelow doesn’t take it. Even her fellow nominees James Cameron and Quentin Tarantino have said they’re voting for her. She would be the first woman to ever win Best Director. She’s only the fourth to be nominated, and the only one who has come this close, thanks to wins from nearly every major critics group, plus the Director’s Guild and the British Academy.  And The Hurt Locker is a superbly directed movie.

But will it win Best Picture? This could definitely be one of those years when the two top prizes are split. The irony there, if we stick with the Hurt Locker vs. Avatar scenario, is that it would probably make more sense for the split to go the other way. I think more people look at The Hurt Locker as a better film overall than Avatar, but even those who take shots at Avatar‘s story have to admit that Cameron is a true visionary and a brilliant craftsman. Whether you’re bothered by his dialogue or not, there’s no arguing that the man can direct the shit out of a movie. Nonetheless, the opportunity to help Bigelow make history seems to be the overriding feeling, and it’s not like The Hurt Locker is undeserving of a directing Oscar.

So what about Avatar? Despite the staggering box office, I know many people were underwhelmed and disappointed in the story and can’t believe that the Academy would give the film its top honor. But think about this: most movie fans of my age group, if not beyond it as well, look at 1977 and still can’t believe that Annie Hall beat Star Wars for Best Picture. Star Wars, after all, defined a generation. Its box office success was unprecedented, its affect on culture was unparalleled, and its impact on visual effects was revolutionary. Star Wars changed movies forever. Yet it was a simple story, one whose detractors – and yes, it had plenty of them – dismissed as childish as they sneered at the dialogue and wrote it off as silly, faux-spiritual hokum. Those “serious” filmgoers and Academy Award watchers probably didn’t think Star Wars deserved it either. But I’ll bet that a lot of the people who decry Avatar as a Best Picture winner do think that Star Wars should have won. I’m not saying that Avatar is as good as Star Wars or that it will spawn the same degree of undying fervor, but its impact is similar…maybe not as much on the culture, but for better or worse it is seen as changing movies forever. Like it or not, Avatar is the movie of the year. Not necessarily the best movie of the year, but the one that more than any other defines 2009. Is it crazy to argue that the Best Picture Oscar should recognize exactly that?

Still, I really don’t know which way this is gonna go. For every article I find that says the preferential ballot system will favor Avatar, there’s another claiming it will help The Hurt Locker while yet another claims that Inglourious Bastards will actually be the beneficiary. And the stream of idiotic arguments for or against a given movie’s chances are laughable, as everyone spins whatever numbers or stats they want in order to bolster their film’s chances. Some say The Hurt Locker won’t win because it grossed so little money theatrically. Seriously? It’s not going to win because it only made $12 million? Who the fuck cares? Okay, fine – maybe producers and studio executives think that way. But does anybody really think that a composer, makeup artist or cinematographer is going to not vote for a movie because of how little money it made? That’s what they’ll ask themselves when they fill out their ballot? It’s absurd. The Hurt Locker will apparently be the lowest grossing Best Picture winner if it wins. So? No fantasy film had ever won Best Picture until The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King. And come to think of it, I don’t think any science-fiction film has ever won it either, so there’s Avatar‘s chance to make history. There’s a first time for everything. (Hear that, gay cowboys? Your day will come!)

Or then there’s Harvey Weinstein, who is convinced that Inglourious Basterds has Best Picture in the bag, citing the film’s win of Best Ensemble at the Screen Actors Guild awards as one of his chief reasons (actors being the largest branch of the Academy). Harvey, there are 1,205 actors in the Academy. There are nearly 120,000 in SAG, and they all get to vote. Do the math. Not to mention that every year, people try to draw a connection between the SAG Ensemble prize and Best Picture despite the fact that they’ve only matched up six times out of 14.

There are also the run of recent stories about various acts of dirty campaigning (The Hurt Locker incident being the most prominent), or accusations against the nominees ranging from anti-Semitism (shots ludicrously thrown at Basterds, An Education and A Serious Man) to story inaccuracies (real soldiers suddenly attacking The Hurt Locker months after its release). I hear that helium balloon vendors are incensed over Up‘s reckless suggestion that their product could allow a house to be safely navigated through the air. Unfortunately, this kind of behavior mars every Oscar season, even if the sordid depth of the shenanigans are not highly publicized. Really, when you hear how much manipulation and politicking goes on behind the scenes by studios and producers to win Oscars, it paints the whole thing in such a tawdry, disheartening light. There are so many reasons that the Oscars often have little to do with recognizing and celebrating the best in film, and yet despite being fully aware of that, I eat it up like candy. I can’t help it. Years later, fans like me – and some of you – are still muttering about the snubbed performer or the movie that should have won this or that award. But I suppose it’s all part of the fun.

God, have I stalled long enough? Okay, here goes. I’m practically throwing a dart here,  but I’m going with The Hurt Locker. It seems like a less polarizing film than Avatar, and so I’m thinking that with the preferential ballot system, people who choose another film as their favorite still might have Hurt Locker high on their list, which could help it in subsequent rounds of voting. But I can honestly say that I’ve never had such a hard time trying to predict a winner in any category about which I’m reasonably well informed, ever. I have absolutely no idea what’s going to happen.

Personal Choices: Picture – Precious;  Director – James Cameron (but I’ll be really happy for Bigelow)

BEST ACTOR
Morgan Freeman should have been a force to be reckoned with as Nelson Mandela, but unfortunately the film didn’t meet expectations and the role gave him little to work with. George Clooney, though he dominated the field of critics awards, doesn’t really have a chance either. Colin Firth picked up the BAFTA award, but he had a home field advantage. While he and his work in A Single Man are widely admired, this just isn’t his year. I’d say Jeremy Renner has a shot for an Adrien Brody-style upset, but Brody wasn’t going up against a heavy favorite who had never won before. Renner is.

This is a category where sentiment will rule the day. The industry hath deemed it time for Jeff Bridges to win an Oscar, and win an Oscar he shall. Does he deserve it? Sure. Bridges has long topped my list of actors overdue for an Oscar (a spot he shares with Ed Harris and Sigourney Weaver, so get crackin’ Academy…), and he does great work in Crazy Heart. Is it the best of his career? I wouldn’t say so. Is it even the best of the year? Debatable. But it’s good, and he’s universally respected and appreciated in the business. His time has come.

The possible irony here is that Bridges is about to re-team with the Coen Brothers, who directed him in The Big Lebowski (a film that, in hindsight, should totally have earned him a nod), for a remake of True Grit. John Wayne won a Best Actor Oscar for the original in 1969, and with the Coens at the helm, Bridges may well be back in the race next year.

As for my own pick, if I strip away all the external factors and just judge the performance alone (which is always how it should be and always how we want it to be but rarely how it is…even for purists like me), the nominee whose work left the strongest impression is Firth. But I’ll be thrilled to see Bridges finally win.

Personal Choice: Colin Firth

BEST ACTRESS
Way back in the fall, long before the race had fully taken shape, it already seemed like we were headed for a two-woman showdown: Meryl Streep and Carey Mulligan. At the time my feeling was that a Streep-Mulligan race was no race at all; the Academy was not going to overlook Meryl Streep again in favor of some fresh-faced ingénue with her whole career ahead of her. I actually thought that if anyone could beat Streep, it was Gabourey Sidibe. True, like Mulligan, she’s a new face at the start of her career, but she had a role and a movie that stirred people deep inside – much more so, I guessed, then Mulligan, whose performance was admired and engaging but not nearly as moving.

But then something happened. The film community collectively put their heads up their asses and somehow moved Sandra Bullock to the front of the queue for her entertaining-but-hardly-award-caliber work in The Blind Side. I talked about this when I commented on the nominees, so I won’t dwell again on how she even wound up in the race. But I will dwell on how she has turned into the frontrunner, because it continues to baffle me.

Bullock is extremely likable, and word on the street is that everyone who has worked with her, cast and crew, adores her. I like her too, but she has hardly given us a career full of great films and performances, so any argument that it’s “her time” is complete bullshit. It’s Jeff Bridges’ time. He’s someone who has been around for years, done consistently excellent work, been nominated multiple times but never won and this year found himself a role that perfectly suited his stage in life and his career. If this were the aforementioned Sigourney Weaver, or Julianne Moore or Laura Linney, then there might be some credence to the argument that “she’s due.” But we’re talking about Sandra Bullock, whose filmography has a smattering of good movies and a lot that are mediocre to bad. I could see likability factoring into things if the performance really dazzled, but I just can’t see how enough people could be more impressed by her performance than those of her fellow nominees.

I readily admit that numerous factors other than quality of performance enter into Oscar voting and that all kinds of political factors are taken into account, from how much a nominee works the campaign circuit to how good their speeches are throughout the season. Bullock has worked the circuit, and her speeches have been funny, humble and all around terrific. But despite all signs pointing her way for the win (including The Blind Side‘s shocking Best Picture nomination, which suggests reasonably broad support), I just can’t go there. My mind can’t wrap around it and my fingers can’t type it. While it may cost me in the pool, I’m holding onto the idea that enough Academy members pulled their heads out of their asses in time to actually watch these performances side by side and recognize that while Bullock does a good job, she doesn’t hold a candle to her competition.

Meryl Streep, on the other hand, is still defying expectations and proving why she is widely regarded as the greatest actress alive. There’s nothing this woman can’t do. She is a force of nature. Julia Child is such a recognizable and distinct personality that any actress would be daunted trying to portray her. Streep not only does it, but deepens our understanding and appreciation of someone we knew only as a TV personality. It may not be the biggest stretch of her career, but this was hardly an easy or throwaway performance. The film marks her 16th nomination, and her 12th since the last time she won. She’s due…and there’s nobody else but Meryl Streep who could already have two Oscars and still be called overdue.

I also want to throw this out there: Streep and Bullock tied at the Critics Choice Awards; they both won Golden Globes (Bullock for Drama, Streep for Musical/Comedy); and although Bullock took the SAG, that group tends to spread the wealth around rather than awarding people multiple times, and Streep won last year for Doubt. I’m just saying. So despite the prevalent opinion – and probably the accurate one – I’m predicting Meryl for the win.

That said, if Gabourey Sidibe pulls an upset, I’ll be on my feet cheering.

Personal Choice: Streep or Sidibe

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR
Sorry guys. You did good work, but this category is owned by Inglourious Basterds‘ Christoph Waltz, who will become the third performer in a row – after Heath Ledger and Javier Bardem – to win Supporting Actor by giving us an antagonist for the ages.

Personal Choice: Christoph Waltz

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS
Anybody who thought that Mo’Nique’s behavior during the awards season was controversial – oh my God, she didn’t run around kissing Academy members’ asses! – has been silenced by her moving, grateful acceptance speeches at the Critics Choice Awards, Golden Globes and Screen Actors Guild awards (where her graciousness extended to acknowledging some of the actors from Precious who were not included in the film’s nominated ensemble cast). With all respect to her fellow nominees, especially the ladies of Up in the Air, Mo’Nique can not be stopped. Nor should she be.

Personal Choice: Mo’Nique

BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY
While Oscar voters sometimes want to keep the Best Picture space relatively serious, the writing awards are where they’re more likely to vote for something fun. Movies like Little Miss Sunshine, Juno, Fargo and Ghost have all triumphed here rather than in Best Picture, so I think Inglourious Basterds stands its best chance at a major non-acting award here. Some will point to The Hurt Locker‘s Writer’s Guild Award win as a sign in its favor, but keep in mind that Basterds was ineligible for a WGA nomination, clearing the way for The Hurt Locker. Not that Locker isn’t a good script and couldn’t pull through, but I think all the support for Inglourious Basterds – Christoph Waltz aside –  will be channeled here to Quentin Tarantino, giving him his second screenwriting Oscar.

Personal Choice: Inglourious Basterds

BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY
Up in the Air has earned gushing love for its writing and Jason Reitman has cemented his status as one of our finest young filmmakers. This category is full of great work, but Up in the Air is too smart, too “of the moment” and too appreciated to go home empty handed. I would be shocked if anything else wins. It’s kinda lame though that this dude Sheldon Turner gets to pretty much ride Reitman’s coattails to an Academy Award win, but what can you do?

Personal Choice: Up in the Air (with In the Loop nipping at its tail). Seriously, have you not seen In the Loop yet? WTF are you waiting for?

BEST ANIMATED FILM
It was such a good year for animated features that even this category could have had close to 10 worthy nominees. Fantastic Mr. Fox could pull an upset, but it’s hard to imagine that Up isn’t going to bring another Oscar to the halls of Pixar.

Personal Choice: Up…but I’d have no complaints about Mr. Fox

BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY
The black and white imagery of The White Ribbon took the prize from the American Society of Cinematographers and won some notable critics awards as well, but I don’t think enough Academy members have seen it. And nice as it is to see Harry Potter here, Colin Creevey stands a better chance of killing Voldemort than this movie does of winning. Basterds will have a lot of support, but I think it will fall by the wayside. It could go either way with Hurt Locker and Avatar, and while I don’t necessarily think most voters understand the technical challenges involved in shooting Avatar, I think they understand enough – and admire the film’s prettiness enough – that I’m giving it the edge.

Personal Choice: Avatar

BEST FILM EDITING
I think Academy members tend to vote for editing they can notice or at least intuit, so I’m ruling out Precious and Basterds, finely edited though they may be. Even more so than its cinematography, The Hurt Locker‘s editing creates its powerful tension and helps the movie hold the viewer in a vice-grip. In Avatar‘s favor, it is the rare action movie that is edited so cleanly that even during the rapid cuts of big battle sequences you never lose your bearing or feel like you’re watching a blur. And District 9 actually bridges that gap as an action movie that is also dramatically intense.

I have a number of friends who are editors, and I have to think they’re laughing their asses off at my ignorant commentary. Hey, I admit I don’t really understand what makes editing great and that I too tend to be wowed by editing that I notice…even though any editor will tell you that the best editing is invisible. So knowing full well that I really know nothing, my gut tells me this one goes to The Hurt Locker.

Personal Choice: The Hurt Locker

BEST ART DIRECTION
This category often favors period pieces and historical recreations, which bodes decently for Sherlock Holmes and even better for The Young Victoria. But if there’s anything that can trump something from a history book, it’s something imagined and fantastical. So while Victoria could be crowned, I think the floating mountains, celestial skyscape and lush, eye-popping botany of Avatar‘s Pandora will take the gold.

Personal Choice: Avatar

BEST COSTUME DESIGN
Period frocks do even better with Oscar than period sets. Both Coco Before Chanel and Bright Star fit that bill (and I wouldn’t count out the latter), but The Young Victoria is the higher profile of the period films, and also required a greater number of costumes to dress all those royals at court. I expect it will rule the day.

Personal Choice: Bright Star

BEST ORIGINAL SONG
It’s not the strongest category this year, but then again, how often is this really a strong category? You usually find one or two good songs each year, and a few others – often cheesy ballads – that fill space. Perhaps that’s why this year, Oscar producers decided not to include performances of the nominated songs during the show.

The Princess and the Frog has two nominees and there was a time when a song from a Disney animated musical would have this sewn up, but while the movie is a welcome return to form for Disney animation, the songs by Randy Newman don’t live up to the Alan Menken/Howard Ashman tunes that scored wins for The Little Mermaid and Beauty and the Beast.

No one has heard of the movie Paris 36, let alone it’s nominated song, so we can safely discount that one. And the number from Nine? Ehh.

This year, justice will be served as the one great song in the category takes the prize:  “The Weary Kind,” from Crazy Heart, by T-Bone Burnett and Ryan Bingham. Since you won’t hear the song on the show, check out the video or just let the mp3 play in the background. I love the underlying percussion that enters in the second verse. It’s unobtrusive, yet gives the song an added depth. Whatever that means.

If you’re interested in hearing the competition, here are links to Quicktime mp3’s via In Contention:

“Almost There” (Princess and the Frog)
“Down in New Orleans” (Princess and the Frog)
“Loin de Paname” (Paris 36)
“Take It All” (Nine)

Personal Choice: The Weary Kind

BEST ORIGINAL SCORE
I suppose it’s possible that James Horner could get caught up in an Avatar sweep, but I think Michael Giacchino’s whimsical score for Up will float to the top.

Personal Choice: Up

BEST MAKEUP
There are three nominees. One is Il Divo. Ever heard of it? Neither has anyone in the Academy. One is The Young Victoria. I still can’t figure out how this got nominated. Even the artist admits there isn’t much in the way of makeup. Seriously. In a Variety article about the set design, costumes and makeup for the film, this is all hair and makeup artist Jenny Shircore could say:

But it’s especially in her dewy, makeup-free skin that Victoria’s youth shines through — although this is as much of an illusion as anything, Shircore reveals. “Emily did wear quite a lot of makeup, but that’s the skill of doing it, really, to make her look lovely.” The trick, she says, is “not to powder it into oblivion so that you get a dry, matte look. You’ve got to allow a little bit of sheen to come through.”

That leaves Star Trek, which features some fine makeup work, sure. Oscar worthy? In this weak field, I guess so.

Personal Choice: Can I still say The Road? Okay, then Star Trek.

BEST VISUAL EFFECTS
Star Trek and District 9 both feature excellent work, but when James Cameron movies are nominated for Best Visual Effects, they win Best Visual Effects. And how can this one not? It changed the rules. One of the night’s surest bets.

Personal Choice: Avatar

BEST SOUND MIXING/SOUND EDITING
As usual, I have no idea how to make a well-thought out prediction in these categories because not only do I not understand either of them, but that obviously means I don’t understand how they differ from each other. So as always, my guess is pretty blind. I’m picking Avatar for both, but who knows? The Hurt Locker could easily get one of them.

Personal Choice: None. As in, I don’t have a personal choice. Not “none” as in none of them deserve win. That would just make me a dick.

BEST FOREIGN LANGUAGE FILM
Now we’re getting into the categories where I haven’t seen any or all of the nominees and can only go by what I hear, so I’m looking to professional journalists who’ve all been covering the Oscars for years to guide my choices.

The two highest profile films are A Prophet and The White Ribbon. From what I’ve heard, the former is the preferred choice, but few think it will win and neither do I. It’s a violent movie, and the thing to remember about this category is that only Academy members who have attended screenings of all five nominees can vote. That means the deciding members are likely older and retired, and they don’t like violence. My concern around The White Ribbon is that it almost seems too obvious. Being one of the most recognized and critically acclaimed of the bunch would appear to give it an edge, but this category seldom follows traditional logic. So while Ribbon may well be the victor, I’m going with what many in the field are predicting: El Secreto de Sos Ojos, or The Secret in Their Eyes.

BEST DOCUMENTARY FEATURE
The most well-known of the nominees are Food, Inc. and The Cove. The latter has collected the majority of pre-Oscar prizes and seems to be the favorite, so I’ll follow the pack.

BEST DOCUMENTARY SHORT
These documentary categories are often so hard to pick because each one tells a story more devastating and heartbreaking than the last. It almost comes down to which one moves people the most. It looks like the majority of pundits are predicting The Last Truck: Closing of a GM Plant. I’ll probably make up my mind at the last minute, but both Music By Prudence and China’s Unnatural Disaster: The Tears of Sichuan Province also sound like they could be winners.

BEST ANIMATED SHORT
Oscar history favors the Wallace and Gromit short A Matter of Loaf and Death. Wallace and Gromit have earned their creator Nick Park four Academy Awards (three for short animation, one for feature length). The only time he lost was in 1990 for A Grand Day Out. That year’s winner? Nick Park for Creature Comforts.

BEST LIVE ACTION SHORT
My friend Brantley recently saw these five films and posted a brief write-up on his blog, if you’re interested in seeing what they’re all about. The Door is the most widely expected to win. But every now and then this race favors something quirky and funny over something doomy and gloomy, so Instead of Abracadabra might pull it out of the hat.

And there it is. It will be fun to see how Steve Martin and Alec Baldwin handle co-hosting chores, and after last year’s really well-produced show, I’m curious to see how this year will go. Adam Shankman’s involvement has worried me from the beginning, but I read some interviews with him that led me to give him the benefit of the doubt. We’ll see. Enjoy the show, and we’ll meet back here one last time for a post-mortem…as soon as I can write it.

Is anyone still reading this, or have I pulled a Ted Striker?