News Hit

Another year, another opportunity to see Hollywood assure itself that it’s the greatest thing in the world. Oscars, as people well know, aren’t an indicator of quality. They are of interest because they are sometimes influential towards the careers of their recipients. Take, for example, Marion Cotillard. She won the Oscar, and then she was in that great film… uh… well, what about Hilary Swank? She’s got two of them and she’s… oh. Nicolas Cage? No… uh… I know! Cuba Gooding, Jr! Now there’s a career anyone would envy! But wait, what’s this? A major change in proceedings: for the first time since 1943, there are 10 Best Picture nominees – a change made in response to the flagging ratings of the ceremony telecast. Poor ratings which are in turn attributed to the lack of populist fare in the Best Picture lineup – last year, there was great hue and cry when critical and popular favourites such as The Dark Knight and Wall-E failed to make the cut whilst a wonderful and… important film like The Reader held a presence in all of the top categories. Personally, I couldn’t muster up much enthusiasm for the whole affair after the nominations were announced last year. My horse, The Dark Knight, was only making a showing in technical categories (save for the late Heath Ledger’s presence in Best Supporting Actor), and Slumdog Millionaire was pretty much assured to walk away with everything for which it was nominated long before the ceremony. I liked Slumdog, but by God, what a boring race. This year, though, hoping to get bums on seats, AMPAS has been afforded a bit of soap-opera, drama, and most importantly, uncertainty in the top race. Not to mention the fact that Avatar, the highest grossing film of the year… and, incidentally, all-time… worldwide… has a slew of nominations, and having a great big popular film in the ranks is a good way of preventing bad ratings, as the powers that be learned when films such as The Return of the King and Titanic swept through their respective ceremonies. Vomit-inducing results perhaps, but the simple fact of the matter was that the punters were watching the awards. Adding to the fun this year, though, is that the other major contender grossed peanuts in the box office... and was directed by the ex-wife of Avatar’s helmer, James Cameron. It’s a genuine David vs. Goliath battle. Which people seem to like. In the words of Inglourious Basterds’ Colonel Hans Landa: “…how fun!”

Best Picture

The Nominees:

Avatar (James Cameron, Jon Landau)

The Blind Side (Gil Netter, Andrew A. Kosove, Broderick Johnson)

District 9 (Peter Jackson, Carolynne Cunningham)

An Education (Finola Dwyer, Amanda Posey)

The Hurt Locker (Kathryn Bigelow, Mark Boal, Nicolas Chartier, Greg Shapiro)

Inglourious Basterds (Lawrence Bender)

Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire (Lee Daniels, Sarah Siegel-Magness, Gary Magness)

A Serious Man (Joel Coen, Ethan Coen)

Up (Jonas Rivera)

Up in the Air (Daniel Dubiecki, Ivan Reitman, Jason Reitman)

The Field:

Ironically, as the first 10-film Best Picture field in many, many years… this is halfway towards being a solid field. If it were cut down to… let’s say… 5 films, it would be quite a respectable lineup. Funny about that. Of course, there’s more diversity in this field than any other Best Picture group… perhaps ever, but the off-shoot of that is the presence of films that are less than great. The one advantage is the fact that A Serious Man was able to get in. It’s a wonderful niche work that wouldn’t have had a chance under more usual circumstances. The downside of all this is that clumsy dreck like The Blind Side and District 9 can now call themselves Best Picture nominees. That being said, I’d like to see the 10-film field continue for a while, and see what happens… it doesn’t hurt anyone, and it would be good to see perhaps some more foreign films in there, or maybe some documentaries. It’s quite hard to comment on this field as a whole though, since it’s so damn scattershot.

Who Will Win:

Avatar. If… no, when it wins, it will have overcome a few Oscar milestones – the first Best Picture that could be classified as Sci-Fi, the first Best Picture winner to not have received any writing or acting nominations since 1932’s Grand Hotel (which in itself has the dubious honor of being the only Best Picture winner to have received no other nominations). And I don’t care what people call it, but in my eyes, when it wins, Avatar will have become the first Best Picture winner that is predominantly an animated film. Why will it win, I hear you ask? Because AMPAS itself has made it very clear that they want to bring the Oscars back to the people. What better way than to crown the new highest grossing film of all time as the best picture of the year? People seem to love Avatar for some reason… I guess the power of purdy colours cannot be underestimated, and I’m pretty sure a major portion of those tuning in would be absolutely chuffed with a win. The greatest competition it faces is from The Hurt Locker, which has racked up all the precursors and seems like more of an Oscar-type film. However, I can’t shake the feeling that AMPAS is itching to reward a big, popular epic… they haven’t done so for 7 years, since Return of the King won. And apart from whatever people may think of the film itself… it’s brought people back to the theatres. Which is what I assume movie people want to see.

Who Should Win:

Inglourious Basterds. Or The Hurt Locker. It’s quite hard to decide between the two. For what it’s worth, The Hurt Locker was a film I found to be instantly impressive, while Inglourious Basterds took more time to grow on me. However, I think it’s the best film in the lineup – it’s an experience unto itself, it’s impeccably made on a technical level, there isn’t really a genuine weak link in the cast, even with the bevy of amateur performers, it’s beautifully written… it satisfies all the criteria, and what I think is really wonderful about it is that it generates dramatic tension and suspense based on character, rather than gimmicks. Which is a bit of a lost art, I think, but Tarantino hit it out of the park this time. It’s rousing entertainment, it’s not too high-faultin', and like most of Tarantino’s works, it’s a love-letter to film itself.

Should Have Been Here:

Invictus, a film that I would argue wasn’t built for Oscars, but still ended up being one of the best films of the last year. It had clarity, accessibility, and like most of Eastwood’s work, it had grace. But the American public preferred The Blind Side. Pray for them. Fantastic Mr. Fox, I would argue, was the best animated film of last year – it oozed charm and innovation, while managing to put across very genuinely human emotions and feelings through stop-motion foxes and badgers. No small feat. I would have given that Up’s slot. Up is a good film, but falls shy of being a great one, I feel. Star Trek was much better than District 9, although such a statement might cause great umbrage amongst the online community. “But District 9 was so anti-Hollywood.” Yeah, apart from the cacophonic and idiotic last act, which consisted of the most banal action sequences committed to screen in recent memory. Not to mention the fact that the film abandons its one innovative conceit barely half an hour in. Star Trek was great entertainment, in the Lucas/Spielberg mould of yesteryear – unpretentious, balls-to-the-wall, good fun for everyone. And whilst I liked An Education, I would like to have seen (500) Days of Summer take its spot. While it’s not leaps and bounds ahead of An Education, it does feel more original and complete. Not to mention more popular, which is in keeping with AMPAS’ intentions. My personal favourite of the year, In the Loop, leaves all of the nominees in the dust, but that was never going to be a competitor, so it was naught but a pipe-dream.

Best Director

The Nominees:

Kathryn Bigelow for The Hurt Locker

James Cameron for Avatar

Lee Daniels for Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire

Jason Reitman for Up in the Air

Quentin Tarantino for Inglourious Basterds

The Field:

An interesting line-up. Only the second nomination in the category for Cameron, Reitman, and Tarantino – Cameron being the only previous winner. Bigelow and Daniels are newcomers – Bigelow is only the fourth woman to have been nominated, after Lina Wertmüller, Jane Campion, and Sofia Coppola. None of them won. Daniels is only the second African-American ever nominated, after John Singleton. Not to mention the fact that Precious is only his second film (and Up in the Air is Reitman’s third). To my mind, Bigelow is the analogue of David Fincher and Danny Boyle from last year’s field – seasoned and respected filmmakers who were yet to receive any Academy recognition. I’m not overly familiar with the rest of Bigelow’s filmography, though, and Point Break, the only other film of hers that I’ve seen inspires little faith, but there’s no doubting that she deserves to be here for her work on The Hurt Locker.

Who Will Win:

Kathryn Bigelow. This is the first time that a woman has been at the helm of an awards juggernaut. The other times in which women have been nominated, there was always something else scooping up all the awards, be it Rocky, Schindler’s List, or The Return of the King. But now, with The Hurt Locker at the forefront of this awards season, AMPAS is going to find that glass ceiling far too tempting to shatter. All signs point towards Bigelow, and the only one spoiling for an upset here is her ex-husband, James Cameron. The fact that he’s already got one works against him, though, and I think AMPAS are going to want to spread the love.

Who Should Win:

Kathryn Bigelow, funnily enough. The most robust and harrowing directorial work of the year, Bigelow knew exactly where to place both the players, and the viewers at any given time, and in my opinion, that’s what it’s all about. A stylistic flourish here and there doesn’t impinge upon proceedings either. What Bigelow does, working with cinematographer Barry Ackroyd (of United 93 fame) is provide an unnerving level of immersion for the viewer, without the use of glasses or some other bloody gimmick. And she allows us to experience this wonderful portrait of Sergeant James, the main character, while surreptitiously bringing us closer to Sergeant Sanborn – the character who undergoes the actual progression over the course of the film. Riveting stuff.

Should Have Been Here:

Clint Eastwood, although he’s got all of his other Oscars to console him. Still, he did perhaps the most unobtrusive (while still being highly effective) work of the year on Invictus. Armando Iannucci (In the Loop) provided some of the best comedic direction outside of the Coen brothers since Charles Chrichton’s work on A Fish Called Wanda (which was nominated). Of course, the Coen brothers themselves would have deserved a look-in here. I’d also say that Wes Anderson should have been here, but no one has ever been nominated in the category for a fully animated film. And I’m sure people would have wailed from on high if a predominantly live-action director had been the first to do so. Reflecting what I would like to have seen in Best Picture, J.J. Abrams’ work on Star Trek showed a complete understanding of what it is to deliver a rousing adventure film that doesn’t take itself too seriously.

Best Actor

The Nominees:

Jeff Bridges for Crazy Heart

George Clooney for Up in the Air

Colin Firth for A Single Man

Morgan Freeman for Invictus

Jeremy Renner for The Hurt Locker

The Nominees:

I think this is a very, very solid line-up. The weakest of the bunch still delivers a tremendous performance, which is something that can’t be said for every year. A little bit of history for each of the nominees: It’s the first nomination for Firth and Renner. Freeman and Clooney have both won in Best Supporting Actor, and have previously been nominated in this category (Freeman twice, Clooney once). Bridges has never won, despite netting his first nomination in 1971 (supporting, for The Last Picture Show), and another three nominations over the years. The only other time he was in the leading category, however, was for 1984’s Starman. Somewhat surprisingly, Freeman is the only one here playing a historical figure. Usually, the Academy goes all gooey for such things.

Who Will Win:

Jeff Bridges. To my memory, the guy hasn’t really delivered a bad performance. Sometimes, he single-handedly raises the quality of an overall film (I’m looking at you, Tron). He’s very well-liked, he’s never won before, he’s got his own fanbase due to his hilarious turn as “The Dude” in The Big Lebowski… I just don’t think there’s any chance of anyone stopping him. He’s racked up all of the required precursors, so I think it’s safe to say he has it in the bag.

Who Should Win:

Jeremy Renner. For an extraordinary, star-making turn in The Hurt Locker. The writing plays a big role, obviously, but Renner’s portrayal of Sergeant James stays with you long after you’ve walked out of the theatre. Its character-building at its finest, and he is infinitely watchable. As I said, though… it’s a very solid field. A win for Firth would be totally justified as well – his is a performance built within the very precise, highly technical but wholly entertaining mould of the British greats of yesteryear. Don’t get me wrong, Bridges is very good, but I think that his turn in Crazy Heart isn’t really one of his all-time greats, and I’d prefer to see him win for perhaps a more iconic turn.

Should Have Been Here:

Michael Stuhlbarg, for his unparalleled portrayal of a total breakdown in A Serious Man. Extraordinary work, neglected, I think, only because no one knows who the guy is. Jeremy Renner has already filled the requisite “Who?” slot that we seem to have each year. Michael Sheen once again tackled a historical figure with great success in The Damned United… and once again was neglected by the Academy. One of these days… oh, and there’s Joseph Gordon-Levitt’s tremendous work in (500) Days of Summer, which was underrated from the get-go anyway, so he didn’t have a chance. My personal “Nobody was ever going to think that” pick would be Chris Pine, for standing out in the terrific ensemble cast of Star Trek – like Depp in Pirates of the Caribbean, or Robert Downey, Jr in Iron Man, he was both humorous and heroic. A welcome break from the pallid cookie-cutter leads that Hollywood foists on us. I’m pretty sure he’ll be going places, though, and that he’ll find his way into the Academy’s good books at some point or another.

Best Actress

The Nominees:

Sandra Bullock for The Blind Side

Helen Mirren for The Last Station

Carey Mulligan for An Education

Gabourey Sidibe for Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire

Meryl Streep for Julie & Julia

The Field:

Yuck. There are only two nominees here that I think are genuinely justified, but unfortunately, I’m struggling to think as to who could possibly have replaced the others. There genuinely aren’t enough great roles for women in mainstream film these days. Bullock, Mulligan, and Sidibe are here for the first time ever. Mirren, of course, won in 2006 for The Queen, and Streep won in 1982 for Sophie’s Choice, after a supporting win in 1979 for Kramer vs. Kramer. Streep of course, currently holds the record for the most nominated performer in Academy history… a staggering 16 nominations.

Who Will Win:

Sandra Bullock. Because, you see, she plays a sassy and feisty character. This is likely going to be Bullock’s only shot at Oscar gold, and she’s one of the biggest box office stars of the year… people seem to like her. The only potential spoiler is Meryl Streep, but Bullock has too much precursor momentum behind her, I feel. Although I’m almost pulling for a Streep win, just so I can say “Finally! Now can we stop nominating her for pedestrian work?”

Who Should Win:

Gabourey Sidibe... or Carey Mulligan. So hard to decide. Both are fully rounded performances, mature beyond their age, simultaneously entertaining and deep, and the anchors of their respective films. Since it’s impossible for me to decide which is better (and a reminder of how silly the whole concept of ranking performances against one another is) I’ll go with Sidibe, simply because I’m not sure she would have another chance at it… Mulligan’s going to be a regular, provided she doesn’t do something excessively stupid with her career, but I’m not quite sure how many opportunities for starring roles will present themselves to Sidibe. I don’t mean to be mean-spirited by saying that, but I’m just not quite sure how she would find herself on the A-list.

Should Have Been Here:

Uhh… no idea. Zooey Deschanel for (500) Days of Summer, maybe? Maybe not. Paula Abdul for Brüno, perhaps? I hear that Tilda Swinton was great in Julia, and that Abbie Cornish was kick-ass in Bright Star, but I haven’t seen those films, so I can’t testify for their kick-ass-ery. Short of performing some excessive category fraud here, I can’t think of any legitimate contenders. Oh, I know! Sasha Grey for The Girlfriend Experience. That’ll do.

Best Supporting Actor

The Nominees:

Matt Damon for Invictus

Woody Harrelson for The Messenger

Christopher Plummer for The Last Station

Stanley Tucci for The Lovely Bones

Christoph Waltz for Inglourious Basterds

The Field:

Good God, I had no idea there was anyone else nominated apart from Christoph Waltz. Well, there might as well not be. Damon and Harrelson are the only prior nominees – both were in the lead category, for Good Will Hunting and The People vs. Larry Flynt respectively. The other three are newcomers. Yes, even Christopher Plummer, which is a shocking fact in and of itself. Tucci has also been overdue for a quite a while. Waltz is the, or rather was the requisite “Who?” contender.

Who Will Win:

Christoph Waltz. I’m not going to even explain this one.

Who Should Win:

Christoph Waltz. He’s already a part of pop-culture with his catch-phrases. Of course, the character is Tarantino’s creation, but Waltz embodies the written character so perfectly that it all blends together. Perhaps the most successful rendering of any of Tarantino’s characters. Which is saying a lot. The rest of the nominees are good (I apologise for not having seen Harrelson’s work yet, though), but Waltz is untouchable this year.

Should Have Been Here:

Peter Capaldi for bringing his evil monster, Malcolm Tucker, to the big screen with vim and vicious vigor. A truly terrifying but totally hilarious performance that really should have been recognized by the Academy. Although my personal favourite performance from the film was that of David Rasche, with a frightening evocation of Donald Rumsfeld, wandering about spurting delightful little non-sequiturs. Every year I can usually name about a dozen performances that could justifiably made their way into this category, so I’m not going to bore you with all that, but a few other standouts would have to be Anthony Mackie in The Hurt Locker (who, really, really should have been here) and Karl Urban for his uncanny mimicry of DeForrest Kelly in Star Trek.

Best Supporting Actress

The Nominees:

Penélope Cruz for Nine

Vera Farmiga for Up in the Air

Maggie Gyllenhaal for Crazy Heart

Anna Kendrick for Up in the Air

Mo'Nique for Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire

The Field:

Well, it’s better than the lead actress field. The only sore thumb here is Cruz. Seriously, what is she doing here? If we absolutely needed to have a nominee from Nine, why in God’s name wasn’t it Marion Cotillard? Who was actually, you know, good? I digress... Cruz is actually the only Oscar vet here, and she won last year for Vicky Cristina Barcelona. The rest are all newcomers, with Farmiga and Gyllenhaal, in my opinion, being the two that are overdue. Kendrick must be just beside herself that she’s going to walk out of The Twilight Saga with a legitimate career, though.

Who Will Win:

Mo’Nique. Oscar engravers must be kicking themselves. “Oh, look! A single name! This is Cher all over again, only this time we get to see if we can do apostrophes!” And then they see the length of the title. Like Waltz, Mo’Nique has swept the precursors, and has been talked about all year as a frontrunner. The fact that she still has momentum, even this far from Sundance, where the film emerged, is quite telling, I feel.

Who Should Win:

Vera Farmiga. I thought Mo’Nique was terrific, but Farmiga’s job was far more difficult, I think. She gets no big speech or show-stopping moment, but instead exists to… support! Clooney and company. In the spirit of the award actually being for the best supporting turn, rather than the best supporting turn that stole the show, I think Farmiga did the best work here.

Should Have Been Here:

Diane Kruger and Melanie Laurent, the Inglourious Basterds girls. Kruger in particular – her scenes with Waltz are extraordinary. A restrained but genuine portrayal of sheer and utter fear. Rosamund Pike gave a surprisingly accomplished and amusing, but- at the same time- slightly tragic performance in An Education. And from Precious, I was most impressed by Paula Patton’s highly sympathetic and subtle work.

Best Original Screenplay

The Nominees:

Mark Boal for The Hurt Locker

Quentin Tarantino for Inglourious Basterds

Alessandro Camon, Oren Moverman for The Messenger  

Joel Coen, Ethan Coen for A Serious Man  

Bob Peterson, Pete Docter, Thomas McCarthy for Up

 

The Field:

Without having seen The Messenger, I like it. I’m not the biggest fan of Up, but the other three films are superbly written. The Coens and Tarantino are the only vets here, with the Coens having won in the category for Fargo, coupled with a win in the adapted category for their Best Picture winner, No Country For Old Men. Tarantino, of course, won in 1994 for Pulp Fiction.

Who Will Win:

Mark Boal. He’s been bagging awards left and right, and The Hurt Locker is the closest thing this race has to a juggernaut. This is the most open category of the lot however, and a win for Quentin Tarantino wouldn’t be surprising in the slightest. I just get a feeling that there’s a lot of goodwill for The Hurt Locker, and people will be looking to reward it in any way possible… while still reserving the top prize for Avatar. Inglourious Basterds has its fanbase, but I think the fact that Tarantino already has an Oscar might work against him. I don’t know why I’m working with that mentality when several people have bagged their second Oscars in recent years, but I’m sticking to my guns.

Who Should Win:

Quentin Tarantino. He’s a screenwriting force unto himself, with an inimitable ear for dialogue, and this is the first time since Pulp Fiction that he’s offered it in a film that actually rises above the pack. Boal’s work is splendid, but from a sheer screenwriting perspective, in terms of character, dialogue, and structure, Tarantino’s work is unmatched.

Should Have Been Here:

(500) Days of Summer, written by Scott Neustadter and Michael H. Weber. An insightful, incisive, and innovative approach to the romantic comedy, while still managing to be funny. I would have preferred this as a nominee over Up, which I think falls to deeply into formula in its later movements without doing anything interesting with it. For a more controversial choice, perhaps Judd Apatow’s work on Funny People. If that suggestion is wrong, I don’t want to be right. Apatow’s interpretation of The Great Gatsby was impeccable, and- if there were problems with the film- they certainly didn’t lie in the screenplay. Oh… and I suppose James Cameron is kicking himself that there’s no “Best Plagiarised Screenplay” category.

Best Adapted Screenplay

The Nominees:

Neill Blomkamp, Terri Tatchell for District 9

Nick Hornby for An Education:

Jesse Armstrong, Simon Blackwell, Armando Iannucci, Tony Roche for In the Loop

Geoffrey Fletcher for Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire

Jason Reitman, Sheldon Turner for Up in the Air

The Field:

Good. Apart from District 9. But I’m not going to grind that axe here. The In the Loop nomination brings makes me a happy camper… that film was underground for so long, and the Oscar nomination is such a surprise. Everyone here is a newcomer to the screenwriting races at the Oscars. In fact, Armstrong, Hornby, Reitman, and Turner are the only ones who have had screenwriting experience on a feature film before their nominated work here. Pretty cool stuff.

Who Will Win:

Jason Reitman and Sheldon Turner. Up in the Air was an Oscar frontrunner for a short while a few months ago. People like it a lot. It’s well written. They’ve already won some awards. There’s a lot of goodwill for Jason Reitman as a filmmaker, after Thank You for Smoking and Juno. The only potential spoiler here is Geoffrey Fletcher, since Precious has a lot of weight in other categories, denoting a lot of love for the film. But I’m pretty confident that it belongs to Reitman and Turner.

Who Should Win:

Armstrong, Blackwell, Iannucci and Roche. Funniest writing of the past decade, says I. The writing moves along at a breakneck speed, while providing a hugely complex plot, a bevy of distinctive characters, and some of the most quotable exchanges of dialogue in recent years. In a just world, they would have this award in the bag, but for the time being, they’re going to have to be content with the nomination. I think Iannucci might be able to make waves in Hollywood in years to come, though, and that can only be a good thing.

Should Have Been Here:

Wes Anderson and Noah Baumbach for their work on Fantastic Mr. Fox. Witty, with a superb juggling of themes and character. The writing of the “Ash” character alone should have merited an Oscar nomination. I suppose they didn’t have enough clumsy allegory for racism and stuff, though. I would have given Anthony Peckham Nick Hornby’s nomination as well, for his highly accessible work on Invictus, but people complained that the script was too direct and coherent to be “truly great.”

Anyway, that’s my rundown of the major Oscar categories. Check back on Monday afternoon to see if I was wrong, or maybe if I was even wronger. To briefly mention a few other categories… I’d love to see Bruno Delbonnel pull off a massive upset for his cinematography on Harry Potter and the… Harlem Globetrotters or whatever it was called. And Alexandre Desplat deserves to win in Best Score, but I think those two are pipe-dreams. As for the rest… who really cares? It’s hard enough mustering up the strength for the major categories, much less “Best Product Placement in a Supporting Role” or whatever.