Oscar Thoughts

What can I say? My movie madness has been lacking in recent months. Funny how things in your life that seem SO real are sometimes the things that are most mutable. Since I went to my first film alone in highschool I have been cultivating my own brand of flick smarts. This "talent" has led me to become a devotee of the annual Oscars telecast and maintained alot of the content on this blog. But this year has been notably different. After two years in HFX I have finally developed a bit of a social network and if there is one thing that gets in the way of rampant film-going it is hanging out with REAL people.

And so, my movie reviews have evaporated and the Writer's Strike has put a definite kink in my awards season trajectory. All of this to say that I am not sure - at all! - what to say about this year's nominees for the Academy Awards. But in one week I will be in my living room, in my PJs, and watching "The One, The Only, The Oscars" so I figured I should say something! As always, I never try to truly predict the winners (If you want to check out the betting odds - I was curious this year considering I had seen so few films - check them out at the aptly-named website: gambling911.) This year, with the void of telecasts, my choices are based on who I want to see on that stage - laughing, crying, looking fabulous. So let's do this.

Best Supporting Actress
Cate Blanchett in "I'm Not There"
Ruby Dee in "American Gangster"
Saoirse Ronan in "Atonement"
Amy Ryan in "Gone Baby Gone"
Tilda Swinton in "Michael Clayton"

This race is an interesting one. I would say that Blanchett is currently the favourite for her gender-bending turn in the Bob Dylan indie fantasy "I'm Not There". She was the only female to make 'Esquire's' Best Performances list and has proven herself an awards darling in previous years (all completely deserved). Also, I figure this is the likely spot for her award considering her double-nomination this year. Having not seen Ganster or Baby I cannot clearly comment on the performances of either Ruby Dee or Amy Ryan. Still I am stoked to see an actress directed into a nominated performance by my boyfriend (that would be Ryan). Tilda Swinton was exceptional in Michael Clayton in what can only be viewed as her most "normal-looking" character ever extending her phenomenal range even further. And while Saoirse Ronan perfectly captured misguided maturity in Atonement the nomination of her performance is likely a sufficient accolade.
Likely Bet: Cate Blanchett
Podium Preference: Tilda Swinton

Best Supporting Actor
Casey Affleck in "The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford"
Javier Bardem in "No Country for Old Men"
Philip Seymour Hoffman in "Charlie Wilson's War"
Hal Holbrook in "Into the Wild"
Tom Wilkinson in "Michael Clayton"

It is always interesting when a supporting actor category contains past nominees of the lead actor category (Bardem, Hoffman, Wilkinson). The talent pool is deep this year and always makes it trickier to call the final count. The nomination of Holbrook is reminiscent of Peter O'Toole's late career nod. The dark horse and intriguing entry is Affleck. What a coup it would be for this young character actor to take the prize. But this particular year is Bardem's without much of a fight. Since Country opened it has been Bardem's sadistic killer with the funny haircut that has received all the attention. Since his skill has been recognized by his peers through the nomination it is almost quaranteed that the Academy at large will not vote him to the gold.
Likely Bet: Javier Bardem
Podium Preference: Casey Affleck

Best Actress
Cate Blanchett in "Elizabeth: The Golden Age"
Julie Christie in "Away from Her"
Marion Cotillard in "La Vie en Rose"
Laura Linney in "The Savages"
Ellen Page in "Juno"

This category is potentially the most difficult for me to call. I have only seen two of the films in question (Eliabeth and Juno)and neither will yield the winner. As mentioned above, Blanchett's dual nominations push her chances into the supporting and her second turn as the virgin queen pales next to the original. And while I would LOVE to see Page on that stage the quirky and nuanced performances selcom take the top prizes. So I am left to ponder three talented ladies in three very different roles. It would take a major upset to put Cotillard's name in the envelope. Linney has been nominated before and in cases when a clear winner is not evident the Academy has been known to reward a body of achievement. But the odds are moving strongly in favour of Christie and I can't complain about that as her role was in the first film by Canadian Sarah Polley.
Likely Bet: Julie Christie
Podium Preference: Ellen Page

Best Actor
George Clooney in "Michael Clayton"
Daniel Day-Lewis in "There Will Be Blood"
Johnny Depp in "Sweeney Todd The Demon Barber of Fleet Street"
Tommy Lee Jones in "In the Valley of Elah"
Viggo Mortensen in "Eastern Promises"

Whew ... what a category. Again, my first-hand knowledge of these achievements is minimal as I have only seen Clooney's Clayton at this point. Still this year the nominees embody the widest breadth of actor attributes I have seen in ages. Clooney is the matinee idol gone golden. Lewis is the consummate actor's actor. Depp is the scene-stealing artiste. Jones is the working man. And Mortensen is the character-maker. The nominated performances reflect these strengths and so it is Day-Lewis in the lead with a hungry and determined pack behind him. Depp is only one nomination behind Lewis in Oscar races and I don't think anyone doubts how amazing it would be to see such an original actor win a major award. Unlike Lewis, Depp has managed to generate outstanding performances and sustain films with broad marketability. This range should be recognized ... at least once!
Likely Bet: Daniel Day Lewis
Podium Preference: Johnny Depp

Best Adapted Screenplay
"Atonement"
"Away from Her"
"The Diving Bell and the Butterfly"
"No Country for Old Men"
"There Will Be Blood"

Best Original Screenplay
"Juno"
"Lars and the Real Girl"
"Michael Clayton"
"Ratatouille"
"The Savages"

The writing categories are interesting because it is where three things happen:
1 - the BEST films are rewarded because a solid script is a necessary foundation (Country, Blood)
2 - films that are considered strong but unlikely "top" prize winners are favoured (Atonement, Clayton, Juno)and
3 - films of originality are honoured with nominations (Lars, Butterfly, Savages)
Calling the winners for this category is linked very much to other categories as I assume that while some voters consistently reward a single film others like to spread the wealth. But you never know because you can have a year like 1997 that was dominated by Titanic but gave screenplay awards to L.A. Confidential and Good Will Hunting. So for this year I don't know if the big films will dominate all, the underdogs will get rewarded or scripts completely off the pace will be gold. I really do love these categories.
Likely Bet Adapted: No Country for Old Men
Likely Bet Original: Michael Clayton
Podium Preference Adapted: Atonement
Podium Preference Original: Juno

Best Film
"Atonement"
"Juno"
"Michael Clayton"
"No Country for Old Men"
"There Will Be Blood"

And so the big prize (well there is directing but I always skip that one!) comes down to a tragic romance, an unconventional love story, a character-driven conspiracy tale, a twisted crime thriller and a turn-of-the century greed story. The romance is subtle and beautifully filmed. But it is not superior film-making in the way that previous winners have set the standard. The quirky tale has the perfect blend of sweet and dark to make it genuine. But it is hardly a triumph of cinema or storytelling. The conspiracy in challenging and complex. But it never finds a solid center and so it spins mildly askew in its execution. The thriller is unique and inspired. But it suffers from an abrupt and confusing exit. The greed is deliberate and fully-developed. But it is heavy and too internal to reach its audience at times. The field is full with adequate contenders this year but a true champion has not made it to the horizon. But if I had to call it - Country by a hair.
Likely Bet: No Country for Old Men
Podium Preference: No Country for Old Men
(yeah, I'm picking a flick I haven't seen - but of the others on the list it HAS to be better considering the buzz it is generated)