There’s nothing like waiting until the last minute for a new blog entry, though with regard to this one I have an excuse. If I am to provide the most dependable Oscar predictions on Earth, I really need to see most of the films nominated, a commitment that generally takes me to the final available weekend. I would advise you to use my expert picks in your office pool, though in reality that’s a crock tagline originated by magazines. Honestly, does anyone work in an office that has an oscar pool? Who’s that close with their co-workers that they organize a company-wide competition for anything other than the NCAA tournament? It just doesn’t happen, because if it did I’d have found that job a long time ago.
The Oscars don’t provoke the same level of debate or interest they once did, particularly since there seems to be a new award show every Sunday from Jan. 1st to the end of March. Additionally, many publicly argue that campaigning now has more to do with the nominees than film quality. How else to explain the best picture inclusion of “The Reader?” Still, the academy awards are a must-see event for serious moviegoers. In a departure from the hit-and-miss comic hosts of years past, this year’s responsibility falls upon the only undeniably gay member of the X-Men, Hugh Jackman. My personal pick would’ve been Charles Barkley, who hilariously announced his picks on “Inside the NBA” this week using his uniquely irreverent assuredness.
The only guarantee this year (other than WALL-E) will be the inevitable, mostly disastrous red carpet filled with women who spent thousands of dollars on dresses and makeup that turn them into creatures unworthy of an endangered species list. I don’t know what it is about this night in particular, but more often than not the parade of fancy outfits and styles make me wonder if the stars stopped for a quick glance in the mirror before leaving the house. At least Kate Winslet always looks good.
Anyway, here are my picks for what will win and should win. I’ll start with the minor categories so you won’t stop reading halfway through.
Categories I Know NOTHING About . . .
Live Action Short Film & Animated Short Film: Since I’ve never heard of any of the nominees, I’ll go with the funniest sounding titles; “The Pig,” in the former and “Oktapodi” in the latter.
Documentary & Documentary Short Subject: The only documentary I’ve heard anything about was “Man on Wire,” so let’s go with that. For short subject, “Smile Pinki” sounds too amusing to ignore.
Foreign Film: Isn’t this category the reason they have awards shows in other countries? In Switzerland they don’t honor the best American film do they? Anyway my money’s on “Waltz With Bashir,” because again it’s the one title I’ve heard of, not to mention it comes from Israel. An Oscar win would give the people something new to talk about on Shabbat, rather than the usual “can you pass the challah?”
Costume Design: Seems simple enough, but the inclusion of “Milk” suggests I don’t understand what they’re looking for. Didn’t everyone in that film wear a faded, tight tee shirt? Anyway, Keira Knightley wears something really tall and wacky-looking on the DVD cover for “The Duchess,” so that’s good enough for me.
Art Direction: Again, I’m not exactly certain of the criteria, though I have a vague understanding. Because it’s unlikely to win anything else, I’ll predict a win for “Changeling,” though in this category I wouldn’t be surprised to see any of the nominees win.
Sound Mixing & Sound Editing: Being that nobody knows the difference between the two, I’ll consider it a win even if I mix them up. Let’s go with “The Dark Knight” for one and “WALL-E” for the other. Academy members will look to reward the year’s best blockbusters with technical awards like these.
Original Song: Having seen the nominees only once, it’s tough to recall a random song from each film. I would’ve predicted Bruce Springsteen had he been nominated for “The Wrestler” but now I’m confused. I’ll go with ‘Jai Ho’ from “Slumdog Millionaire.”
Original Score: Again, tough to remember without multiple viewings. I recall liking the music from “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button” but I suspect a win here for “Slumdog Millionaire,” whose music was a key part of the film’s identity.
Categories I Know SOMETHING About . . .
Visual Effects: This one could go to “The Dark Knight,” but expect a win for “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button,” for the ‘Wow’ factor in several scenes, such as one where Brad Pitt’s character walks across a stage as an infant sized old man. I have no idea how they did that.
Make-Up: I’m pretty confident this will also go to “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button,” for a credible job capturing stars Pitt and Cate Blanchett at every imaginable age. Both were nearly unrecognizable as elderly characters.
Editing: More often than not this category matches with best picture, but all five nominees are really strong. Expect another win for “Slumdog Millionaire” for effectively merging Jamal’s past stories with the present.
Cinematography: A very tough call, this one could go to either the aforementioned “Slumdog Millionaire” or “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button” (writing that full title is starting to piss me off), but I predict a win for “The Dark Knight” for its dark atmospheric Gotham City. Still, this category is very much up for grabs.
Animated Feature: The biggest lock of the night; pick “WALL-E.” You can bet your children on this one.
Original Screenplay: Among the toughest categories to predict, because there is no standout. My pick would be “In Bruges,” a dialogue-driven violent comedy that was among the most surprising films of 2008. But I suspect the academy will reward “Milk,” in one of the few categories it has a real shot. It’s not a groundbreaking script, but it’s very efficient and takes no wrong turns. “WALL-E” is a possible spoiler, but I just don’t see the academy handing a writing award to an animated film.
Adapted Screenplay: My personal pick is “Frost/Nixon,” which unjustly doesn’t seem to have the widespread support of other top contenders. I found it completely engrossing, but won’t be disappointed when “Slumdog Millionaire” takes the prize. I can’t imagine ever writing such a detailed, complex story that despite the massive scope of events, somehow never seems contrived. It’s continually clever and never loses site of its characters.
Supporting Actress: This is the one primary category I wasn’t able to give it’s proper due having missed “Doubt,” which was awarded four acting nominations, two in this category (for Amy Adams and reported scene stealer Viola Davis). Taraji P. Henson gave a sweet performance in “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button,” but I’m not even certain she was that film’s top supporting actress. Marisa Tomei would be my pick for “The Wrestler” had she not won an Oscar years ago for “My Cousin Vinny.” Unfortunately, that kind of thing factors into the academy’s decision process. I suspect the “Doubt” actresses will split their votes, leading to a win for Penelope Cruz for her work in Woody Allen’s “Vicky Cristina Barcelona.” Regrettably, I missed this one as well.
Supporting Actor: I don’t see any way Heath Ledger loses this for his work as the Joker in “The Dark Knight.” Sometimes people are ambivalent about voting for deceased actors, but in this case no other nominee has the steam to overcome him. If forced to pick an upset it’d be Josh Brolin for “Milk,” mainly because some consider the actor overdue for some kind of recognition, but like Henson (above), I don’t know if he’s even the best supporting performance in that film. Robert Downey Jr. was nominated for a fun, but silly performance in “Tropic Thunder,” and Michael Shannon’s nomination for “Revolutionary Road” was his award. The always excellent Phillip Seymour Hoffman won an Oscar three years ago and won’t win here. Bet the house on Ledger.
The Heavyweight Categories . . .
Actress: Let’s go by process of elimination here. Angelina Jolie was terrific in “Changeling,” but she’s got no chance. The lukewarm reception to the film and disappointing box-office did her in. Neither does critical favorite Melissa Leo for “Frozen River.” Anne Hathaway gave a breakthrough prestige performance in “Rachel Getting Married,” but some will view this as the first of several nominations down the road. That leaves Oscar favorite Meryl Streep for “Doubt,” and the actress many consider her heir apparent, Kate Winslet, nominated for her work in “The Reader.” The most nominated actor of all-time, Streep has two previous wins and some critics felt this was not among her finest work. Winslet contrastingly was by far the best part of her film, giving a multi-faceted performance that elevated the material. In addition to being long overdue, many felt she should’ve been nominated for “Revolutionary Road,” and will reward her for a strong year. It’s close, but Winslet’s the pick.
Actor: I missed seeing “The Visitor,” but in truth first time nominee Richard Jenkins has little chance in an unusually competitive field. Similarly, Pitt’s thoughtful work in “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button” is probably the least likely win from that film’s leading thirteen nominations. Frank Langella gave a powerhouse performance as former President Richard Nixon in “Frost/Nixon,” but he’s generally seen as the 3rd place finisher here. Still, the leading contenders have detractors. Sean Penn was magnificent as the title character in “Milk and is a deserved favorite to win. But the gay theme may turn off older voters (see “Brokeback Mountain”) and Penn won this award just five years ago for “Mystic River.” Mickey Rourke’s personal story is the best of the bunch and his work in “The Wrestler” was as poignant and memorable as any 2008 performance. But he’s not exactly an eloquent speaker and the academy may not want to reward the reputable bad boy who turned his back on serious acting for years. Langella is a respected veteran with no flaws here, but his fellow actors picked Penn at the SAG awards, while Rourke took this prize at the Golden Globes. Make your own guess here, but I’ll go with Penn for “Milk.”
(Note: Clint Eastwood’s “Gran Torino” snub was a shock to me. This performance, combined with his work in “Million Dollar Baby” represents his finest dramatic work ever. It’s also emblematic of the unique, hard-edged tough guy persona he created decades ago. He’s also funny as hell and probably should be there ahead of Pitt).
Director: For anyone still reading, I’ve finally come to the top awards. “The Reader” director Stephen Daldry seems to have benefited most by Harvey Weinstein’s over-the-top campaign promotion for the film. Daldry is respected, now having been nominated in this category for his first three films (an amazing feat) along with “Billy Elliot” and “The Hours,” though ironically I’m not sure he’s truly warranted any of them. But he won’t win this, nor will Ron Howard, with his second directing nomination for “Frost/Nixon.” His was a professional job, as he creatively merged fact with fiction in a riveting account of an old event that felt new. But the film never really caught on with the public and he seems destined to be an also-ran. Similarly, “Milk’s” Gus Van Sant has a previous directing nomination and a sensational film that didn’t turn into the hit some thought it might. Both Howard and Van Sant were more solid than fancy, a good strategy for strong, sustained filmmaking, but not necessarily for winning awards. David Fincher is the wild card. He’s long been a critical favorite and it’s his first time here. But for every smashing review for “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button,” there was another who called it an overlong “Forrest Gump” clone (I was not among those.) It was an ambitious project, very well made and featuring a lot of technical wizardry, but it’s not Fincher’s year. The award will likely go to Danny Boyle. Another first time nominee, his “Slumdog Millionaire” has been a word of mouth hit, a feel good story, and an epic tale of courage and tragedy. It’s also set in a country the film community hardly ever sees and certainly never like this, so expect Hollywood to reward themselves for venturing out and acknowledging Mr. Boyle, a worthy winner.
(M.I.A. Christopher Nolan, another long overdue filmmaker who I thought might sneak into the group even if “The Dark Knight” was ignored for best picture. He deserves recognition for crafting the smartest blockbuster in years and for getting his all-star cast to treat every scene as drama. I suspect some couldn’t bring themselves beyond seeing it as comic book material, but if “Gladiator” and “Lord of the Rings” can win best picture, I don’t see why “The Dark Knight” couldn’t have been nominated here. The amazing thing is Nolan’s film was better received critically and commercially than Fincher’s, making him seem a logical choice for director).
Picture: I probably could’ve combined this and the director’s category, because the nominees match up perfectly and I don’t see much changing here. For the most part they did a good job in this category, minus “The Reader” which is decent, but simply doesn’t measure up to the rest. Better nominees would’ve included the aforementioned “The Dark Knight,” “The Wrestler,” “Gran Torino,” or “WALL-E,” not to mention “Body of Lies,” “Changeling,” and “In Bruges.” “The Reader” won’t win; neither will “Frost/Nixon” (too small and political) and “The Curious Case of Benjamin Button” (too big with a mixed reception). The one legitimate spoiler could be “Milk,” which was exceedingly well shot, written, and acted. It’s about an important subject and felt very relevant despite taking place nearly thirty years ago. But have all the voters even seen it? If “Brokeback Mountain” couldn’t defeat “Crash,” as the presumed favorite, I don’t see “Milk” gaining enough steam here as an underdog. Thus, your 2008 best picture goes to . (Envelope please) . . . . . Slumdog Millionaire,” an admirable choice who’s reputation will undoubtedly suffer over time as a result of this win. But that’s for bitter internet dwellers to decide.
Enjoy and Good Luck
No comments:
Post a Comment