Oscars Predix 2012

Time for my annual pre-Oscars post.  Which, like last year, is being composed offline at home (sans internet capabilities like checking for past trends, stats, smaller category guild awards) in a rush the day before.  (Will either go to Safeway to use their wifi and post it before midnight (also need OJ) or, more likely, go to work early tomorrow and, tho’ date-stamped day-of, time-stamp will prove ’twas posted hours before the show started.)

I’ll say up front I haven’t been feeling it this year.  Missed seeing a bunch of the year-end contender pictures when I’d meant to see them (tummy troubles sidetracked San Francisco cinema-visiting plans in December, and losing my wallet containing my valued movie gift cards and passes I’d planned to use in January/February sucked — but I’ve already moaned about those downers.)  When the nominations were announced, I hadn’t seen most of the big films, so didn’t really feel excited for any to be in the race (tho’ I s’pose I liked the idea of The Artist being included.)  Managed to do a lot of catching up viewing-wise in recent weeks (without my Cinemark-turned-Cineplex gift card, even made a coupla expeditions to the ‘burbs to see major nominees at non-corporate theatres (only to have those films return to Vancouver-proper cinemas a couple weeks later, of course) plus broke my Empire Granville 7 boycott, but just haven’t been paying attention to buzz or other stuff leading up to the big night.  Wasn’t till I picked up the current issue of Entertainment Weekly yesterday and read thru the “The Winners Will Be…” section that I really realised what’s been going on (and that I really shoulda made more of an effort to see The Help – my library hold for the DVD remains at 177th on 51 copies.)

Anyway, let’s get going by starting with the big stuff…

PICTURE
Rule adjustments resulted in nine nominees this year (to qualify, a film had to receive at least 5% of first-place votes during the initial nominating process, so depending on how evenly the vote got split, there could’ve been anywhere between 5-10 finalists.)  Considering the five directing nods, would guess that markedly lessens the chances for the remaining four.  From the trailer I saw months ago, The Help sounded like a white folks’ self-congratulatory story with a coupla actors I like so maybe I’d’ve seen it at the Hollywood if it was double-billed with something I’d wanted to see, but alas, the Hollywood closed last May and I never saw it.  I’d heard negative stuff about Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close (mostly after the Oscar noms were announced) but a friend whose taste often runs along with mine encouraged me to see it and, though I could understand how some might find it precious, I actually quite liked it — a best pic tho’?  Spielberg’s War Horse may be Academy-type old-fashioned but is hardly refreshingly done (if it was even meant to be.)  Malick’s The Tree of Life being included is cool, but it’s way too experimental to win.  Midnight in Paris might be old-school entertaining Woody Allen, but not an Oscar classic.  Understood The Artist was probably in the lead to win but after I finally saw Hugo this week, I wondered if Scorsese’s more spectacular tribute to cinema’s early days might have the edge in the in-hard-times-nostalgia-reigns argument.  Maybe if he hadn’t just recently won for The Departed (after being owed since Goodfellas or even Raging Bull) and it wasn’t such a CGI’d children’s adventure with no acting noms.  Moneyball and The Descendants are terrific, incisive films showing well-drawn characters facing modern challenges with understated, top-notch central performances.  But I can understand voting for the clever, well-done homage to cinema (which, for something a little deeper, addresses the realities of progress.)  I don’t know that The Artist is a “great” film, but it was certainly one of my faves of last year (fabulous filmfest closer!) and I can see myself enjoying it for years to come (especially doubled with Singin’ in the Rain!)  Yeah, a rarity for a comedy to take top prize (last was Shakespeare in Love.)  Not to mention a silent (last was the first, no? when there actually wasn’t a “Best Picture” category but top prizes for “Production” and “Artistic Quality of Production” (which went to Wings and Sunrise, respectively for 1927-28) – tho’ guess technically, with the sound design (lending particular hilarity in one scene) and, well, don’t wanna give away the “last line”, but it could be argued that, technically, The Artist is not a true silent.)  And was Schindler’s List the last time a B&W won?  I read that tho’ the film had enough US financing to qualify for the restricted-to-American Independent Spirit Awards (French director Michel Hazanavicius is even a permanent resident of the US), because 6 of its 7 production companies are French or Belgian, a win for The Artist would make it the first-ever Best Picture winner from a non-English-speaking country.  Lotsa firsts trivia potential!  With Producers and Directors guilds wins, looks like it’s gonna happen.  And I’d be happy with that.
Best Motion Picture: The Artist

DIRECTING, EDITING
I know I’ve gone on before about these categories usually going hand-in-hand, but in recent years, they haven’t necessarily (eg. last year – The Social Network took Editing while The King’s Speech took Director and Picture.)  Editing’s even gone to something without a Best Picture or Director nom (remember The Bourne Ultimatum ruining every Oscarologist’s predix record?)  According to EW, “this award usually matches up with Best Picture” so they say The Artist.  But I’m gonna go with Hugo on editing, reckoning that general voters (ie. not the specific cateogory’s branch that nominates) will think of editing being more flashy and technical, and therefore go for the more obviously edited film (again, see last year.)  I don’t have the nominee names in front of me, but I’d say veteran editor and Scorsese collaborator Thelma Schoonmaker is also a recognisable name voters’d go for.  Tho’ then that makes me think of the veteran director getting awarded for technical expertise and splitting the Directing and Picture awards with the comedy, as happened with Spielberg for Saving Private Ryan while Shakespeare in Love took the big one – could that happen again?  (Would such reasoning (ie. artful-vs.-technical/Artist-vs.Hugo) mean a similar split in other categories like Art Direction and Score?  Argh – getting ahead of myself!)  Ah, but then I think of last year and how the first-timer (The King’s Speech‘s Tom Hooper) beat out the more accomplished Directing nominees.  Last year Hooper took the DGA and the Oscar, and we know those almost always match up, right?  So, yeah, I’m not messing up on big categories by not going with the buzz/momentum and guild awards like I did last year – Hazanavicius over already-has-one Scorsese for Directing.
Achievement in Directing: Michael Hazanavicus, The Artist
Achievement in Film Editing: Thelma Schoonmaker, Hugo

WRITING
I consider Screenplay categories as big as Directing and even watched chick comedy Bridesmaids and Wall Street thriller Margin Call on DVD, despite the fact they don’t have Best Picture nods and therefore little chance.  I could appreciate a lot of the awkward truths in the former, but drawn-out poop joke scenes are not Oscar-worthy.  And tho’ the latter was pretty good, I don’t understand the script nom – each time someone had to explain to a higher-up why they should be alarmed by what was happening (three times?), it fell to a version of “I don’t understand all that stuff, explain it to me like I’m a child” to which the response was a version of “trust me, it’s really bad”.  Sure, you didn’t want to lose viewers with too much derivatives math talk, but for me that just brought attention to the script and took me out of the movie.  I skipped A Separation at the filmfest, knowing it was going to have a general release, and tho’ it’s been playing at Fifth Avenue for weeks, just never got around to seeing it (the only one of the ten writing noms I haven’t seen.)  But a foreign language film isn’t likely to win either, even with a Foreign Language Film nomination.  Tho’ a Best Pic win usually gets the corresponding Screenplay award, don’t think it will this year.  The Artist is a nicely crafted idea, if a familiar story (surely voters are familiar with A Star Is Born and Singin’ in the Rain), so probably seen more original as a whole than as a screenplay.  Midnight in Paris contains a lot of Woody Allen staples (eg. well-off neurotics who know their art and literature and harbour romantic notions, magical elements, both intellectual and silly comedy) but pulls them all together nicely and is really enjoyable, and in this kinda nostalgic-themed year seems poised for some additional recognition (like Meryl Streep, the Woodman’s consistently nominated, but hasn’t won since the ’80s.)  In the Adapted category, I think The Descendants and Moneyball are the strongest contenders, and a chance to award a Best Pic nom that probably won’t get anything else (unless Clooney’s a Best Actor spoiler.)  Payne et al and Zaillian/Sorkin have won before, but think Descendants is seen as having more complexity and therefore the edge.  So, seems I’m going with the WGA winners matching up with Oscar this year.
Best Original Screenplay: Woody Allen, Midnight in Paris
Best Adapted Screenplay: Alexander Payne, Nat Faxon, Jim Rash, The Descendants

ACTING
On the men’s side, I didn’t see A Better Life or Warrior.  On the ladies’, I didn’t see The Help.  With almost similar nomination fields (exactly the same for Supporting Actress), the SAG awards went to Jean Dujardin, Viola Davis, Christopher Plummer and Octavia Spencer.  Like I said before, I’m not messing up on big categories this year by veering from the frontrunners (what the hell was I thinking last year going with a veteran previous nominee in a comedy over the odds-on-favourite starlet playing crazy? and the kid over the won-every-other-award-leading-up-to-Oscar sure thing who threw some folks off with her for-your-consideration ads? – stupid!)  Jean Dujardin plays a silent film actor in both the appropriate style of his character’s time (on and off screen) and in a way that modern audiences can relate and not just see it as a nostalgic caricature.  Like the other Artist noms, I was pleased to see recognition given to his turn, but to find him leading the race? nice!  His closest competition seems to be Clooney, who’s already got a Supporting Actor statue but is a star with humour and intelligence and flair and political involvement who also directs and produces, and there’ll be plenty of folks wanting to vote for Mr. Hollywood over an unknown foreigner.  He also got to go deeper than the usual cool-and-collected Clooney role as a husband and dad dealing with all kinds of tough stuff, so voters may want to reward him for that.  But there’ll be plenty of chances to vote for him in future and this is the chance to make history with the silent French guy!  Christopher Plummer’s a sure bet, right?  He was so good in Beginners as the dying-just-as-he-starts-living newly-out widower dad and it’d be like career recognition.  Tho’ I had second thoughts after seeing Extremely Loud – Max von Sydow also has a previous nom and an admirable career, and, like the likely Best Actor winner, goes thru the movie mute.  Trivia aside: noted from somewhere this list of actors awarded for roles in which they didn’t speak: Jane Wyman in Johnny Belinda in 1948, John Mills in Ryan’s Daughter in 1970, Holly Hunter in The Piano in 1993 (and I’d add Marlee Matlin in Children of a Lesser God in 1986, though maybe her deaf character being forced to try talking means she doesn’t count?)  But they wouldn’t have two non-speaking actor winners in one year, would they?  (Aside only vaguely related to the topic at hand – at mention of Extremely Loud I’m reminded of a couple other double-ups in this year’s nominations: both Extremely and Hugo centre on boys on a search to complete a project started with their now-dead dads (and therefore remain connected to them); and both Extremely and The Artist feature John Goodman in a minor role; oh, and Viola Davis is also in two Best Pic noms, Extremely and The Help.)  Did I mention I didn’t see The Help?  At first it seemed perennial nominee Meryl Streep (this year’s her 17th acting nom!) might finally win for the first time in nearly 30 years.  Then I heard about how Glenn Close had been trying to get Albert Nobbs made for about that long, and since she’s also had many noms (all five previous were in the ’80s) and is maybe more in people’s minds these days cos she’s doing TV, maybe it’d be her turn for a win instead of Streep’s for another.  Then I saw Albert Nobbs.  Yeah, she and Supporting nominee Janet McTeer play women passing as men (Close’s character better as a peculiar little man (or however a hotel guest refers to “him” early on in the film) than McTeer’s obviously-a-big-ol’-lesbian-to-modern-eyes) but everything’s so heavy-handed (everyone’s hiding something! – the butler’s female and stashing money in the floorboards, the hotel proprietor’s fella’s having an affair, the guests are having trysts, the unemployed guy says he can fix boilers so he have a job, the unmarried maid’s pregnant, etc.)  Trivia aside: if Close loses, she ties Deborah Kerr for most female acting noms without a win at 6 (Peter O’Toole and Richard Burton went 7.)  I dunno why the Girl with the Dragon Tattoo‘s in there – cos they realised the role’s originator deserved a nom last year? (guess English with a Swedish accent impresses more than Swedish.)  Michelle Williams will have plenty of future chances to win a golden guy.  (Nice to see Branagh in there, by the way.  And Jonah Hill – anyone see that coming in that guy’s career?  Both very good in their respective roles but nom’s recognition enough.)  Davis is great in everything she does so I imagine the she-didn’t-go-for-sentimental reviews are why she’s in the lead over won-before Streep, and I’d be happy to see her win.  Tho’ I’ve heard everyone else nominated for The Help plays as over-the-top stereotype.  But Spencer’s a “scene stealer”, so that’s why she’s tapped to win.  Apparently tell-it-like-it-is bridesmaid Melissa McCarthy is her biggest competition.  I dunno, I’m guessing she got that nomination more cos her outtakes on the DVD (that’s how they try to get nominated, right? – send DVDs to voters to watch at home?) were so hilarious than cos she so committed to the character and got a key confrontation/pep talk scene.  But good for her.  The Artist gal seems to’ve just caught the wave of her film’s popularity to a nom (her role didn’t offer as much to dig into as her male co-star’s.)  Anyway, I’m going with EW and everyone else’s call for Viola Davis and Octavia Spencer for Best Actress and Best Supporting Actress.
Best Actor in a Leading Role: Jean Dujardin, The Artist
Best Actress in a Leading Role: Viola Davis, The Help
Best Actor in a Supporting Role: Christopher Plummer, Beginners
Best Actress in a Supporting Role: Octavia Spencer, The Help

Sorry, too much rambling – gotta be more to-the-point and get thru all these categories!

CINEMATOGRAPHY, ART DIRECTION
I’m thinking The Artist‘s artistry is going to be overshadowed in these arty categories and other Best Pic noms are gonna get some of the Oscar pie.  Here’s a chance to give something to the incredibly beautiful but otherwise too-weird-to-really-be-considered-for-anything-else Malick film.  (That scene where I swore I saw the trees through the dinosaurs like it was an unfinished special effect is due to off CGI, not cinematography, surely.)  And, as I mentioned in regards to Editing, the spectacle of Hugo will impress voters as award-winning Art Direction (as fantastic worlds of Alice in Wonderland and Avatar did previously.)
Best Cinematography: The Tree of Life
Best Art Direction: Hugo

COSTUMES, MAKEUP
Okay, there’s no way the dental protheses used for the actresses playing young and old Margaret Thatcher don’t win the makeup award for The Iron Lady.  There just can’t be.  All Costume noms this year are period pieces so likely a Best Pic nom?  Toss-up cos both also involved scenes of “old movies” being made in glamorous and fantastical costumes – um, The Artist?
Best Costumes: The Artist
Best Makeup: The Iron Lady

MUSIC
Didn’t see the Tintin movie or either of the ones with a Best Song nomination (can’t believe I still haven’t seen The Muppets.)  I haven’t even bothered listening to the two songs online (there must be promo/music videos on YouTube, eh?)  What’s up with the Academy’s music branch not being able to come up with more than two nominatable songs from a year of movies?  What the hell’s going on in that branch’s nominating rules?  They can’t say there isn’t time in a 4-hour show to perform all two of the Best Song nominees, can they? (I wanna see muppets at the Oscars!)  Well, considering the history of memorable songs in past muppet movies (ah, Paul Williams – y’know Gonzo’s his favourite? he told us so at a Muppet Movie screening at the Cinémathèque a few years ago – just another little aside, heheh), I’d say the “Man or Muppet” one has more than the obvious 50/50 chance.  Score’s more likely to go to a Best Pic nom – adventure tale thrills of Hugo, old-fashioned orchestral with local-sounding riffs (eg. English countryside fiddle and whistle) of War Horse… or, c’mon, the music that plays even more of a key role than the others cos the film it’s accompanying doesn’t have any talking! – and, like everything else in the styling of that movie, was so perfectly of the era being paid tribute to.
Best Original Song: “Man or Muppet”, The Muppets
Best Original Score: The Artist

SOUND, VISUAL EFFECTS
And sound categories to Hugo – cos it’s the secondary Best Pic that’s gonna get the technical kinda awards it’s nominated for that The Artist isn’t up, right?  Wait, ‘c’ept for Visual Effects – cos apparently the motion capture stuff was amazing in the Planet of the Apes movie I didn’t see.  Hugo‘s the only one in that category I saw so gotta go with EW and the buzz on that one (tho’ in typical attempt-to-cover-butts-by-mentioning-another-possibility-in-all-the-smaller-categories EW fashion, it’s suggested “if there’s a mini-Hugo sweep, it could take this prize.)
Best Sound Editing: Hugo
Best Sound Mixing: Hugo
Best Visual Effects: Rise of the Planet of the Apes

FOREIGN
Have only seen the Canadian entry in this category and can attest to Monsieur Lazhar‘s excellence.  I think all the nominees have North American distributors and are either out now or soon to be – or maybe I’ve just heard of them all cos they’ve played festivals.  Poland’s In Darkness is by a known-in-North-America, previously-Oscar-nominated director (Agnieszka Holland – Adapted Screenplay nom’d in ’91 for Europa Europa) and has a Holocaust theme (supposedly always an Academy shoo-in, but has it really been in recent years? – as writing this, no ‘net connection to check.)  But A Separation also has a Screenplay nomination.  Then again, Pan’s Labyrinth had multiple nominations and even won in other categories but didn’t win this one.  Have to wonder if typically-thought-to-be-lefty Hollywood would consider the fact things are heating up around Iran right now to be a reason to bring American attention to a film that’s already won various festival accolades or if typically-older-white-male (ie. conservative?) Academy voters would consider the fact things are heating up around Iran right now to be a reason not to bring American attention to it?  Tho’ it’s about people deciding whether it’s better for them to stay in Iran or leave, so maybe that’d be seen it as a poke at Ahmadinejad.  If Hollywood were to honour such a film, would that make Iran’s leaders all the more angry with America, or would it give people hope that art can bring about discussion and bring people of different countries closer, like realising we’re all just people hoping to make the best of if for ourselves and our families (so can’t we all just get along?)  Gonna go with the fact it has a “regular category” nom to mean that makes it a winner here.
Best Foreign Language Film: A Separation (Iran)

DOCUMENTARY, ANIMATED FEATURES
I know Michael Moore’s been out there fighting for more fairness and better handling of this category’s nominations, but other than the Wenders 3D arthouse doc on famed late choreographer Pina Bausch, none of the docs I thought were probable noms made the list.  Have only seen the aforementioned Pina.  In another year, I think it might be the frontrunner, but I’ve heard about the third Paradise Lost film all over the place, even on non-film/arts-related news.  I don’t think Errol Morris’ The Thin Blue Line was even nominated for a Documentary Oscar (an example, along with Hoop Dreams, often cited over the years by folks like Siskel & Ebert and Moore in railing against the Academy’s WTF doc qualifying rules) so I think this is an opportunity to award a non-fiction film that actually made a difference in the lives of the people it profiled (as with Randall Adams from Thin Blue Line, the “West Memphis Three”, posited by the Paradise Lost films to have been wrongly convicted, have been able to leave prison, due in part to the filmmakers bringing attention to their story.  If a sequel can win Best Picture (Godfather 2, Lord of the Rings 3), surely a Documentary can.  That said, dunno about an Animated Feature franchise – two in this year’s (Kung Fu Panda 2 and Shrek spin-off Puss in Boots.)  Trivia note: apparently Cars 2 was the first Pixar feature to not be nominated for an Oscar.  Have only seen two of the Animated nominees – wacky big-studio big-budget western-with-environmental-issues-overtones Rango (on DVD at Christmas) and nostalgic Spanish-language music-filled romance-with-civil-rights-issues-overtones Chico & Rita (on Blu-ray on the big screen.)  I gather Johnny-Depp-voiced Rango‘s the front-runner over Antonio Banderas-voiced Puss in Boots.  Whatever.
Best Documentary Feature: Paradise Lost 3: Purgatory
Best Animated Feature: Rango

SHORTS
Packaged programs of the shorts nominees have been touring the past few years, which is a great opportunity for cinemagoers and film fans to see them in public exhibition (which is apparently such an important part of Academy rules – along with requirements to’ve had ads and reviews in major Los Angeles and New York papers – have they considered revisiting how realistic that is in this age of filmfests and the internet and specialised movie cable channels?)  I got to see the Live Action and Animated categories but due to “licensing issues” the Doc Shorts didn’t play in Vancouver, tho’ I gather four of the five noms were screened in Seattle — it was only God is the Bigger Elvis that had a problem (guessing from the Presley estate, tho’ it’s an HBO film set to air in April so maybe it’s rights to show the film, not the clips within it that’s the issue.)  Apparently Academy voters can only participate in the short cats if they’ve screened all five noms (sounds fair to me), which would’ve shown in LA and NYC (that doesn’t sound so accessible to all) and not on this touring program, so it could be deduced that it’s quite a small pool of likely older industry-type members.  And so, considering that God doc is about a former actress who was in a coupla movies with Elvis before becoming a nun and claims to’ve been his first on-screen kiss and a 1961 Oscar presenter, I’m going with the idea that the otherwise largely unseen (before voting closed, anyway) one that involves an old Hollywood story will be swept up in the theme of nostalgia-for-old-movies surrounding The Artist (over the Tsunami doc or other “issue” films.) Same goes for the Animated Short The Fantastic Flying Books of Mr. Morris Lessmore – cos it’s got references to The Wizard of Oz and the main character looks like Buster Keaton.  (Another gaffes aside: did anyone else notice Mr. Lessmore’s spelling error? – it’s “weasel” not “weasle”.)  EW‘s Live Action prediction mentions Raju, the “issue” film about a German couple inadvertently making a discovery about the Indian boy they just adopted, before saying The Shore has the edge.  The Shore is by Hotel Rwanda director Terry George and stars Cieran Hinds (recognisable names), but it’s got uneven pacing and a long, lacking exposition-via-semi-monologue scene in with misunderstanding silliness and is the least impressive of the five.  I’m going out on a limb and going with the American comedy about a neurotic time traveler and his caring buddy.  Cos last year the goofy B&W romantic comedy won over the stories with kids and the serious-issue drama.
Best Documentary Short Subject: God Is The Bigger Elvis
Best Animated Short: The Fantastic Flying Books of Mr. Morris Lessmore
Best Live Action Short: Time Freak

Ack!  After midnight and have to work in the morning.  And go in early so as to use work’s internet to post this with a timestamp well before the ceremony begins.  Looking forward to Billy Crystal’s return.
[update: finally got it posted from work]