It’s not the writers’ fault, it’s not the weather’s fault, it’s not the fact that the four acting awards went to foreigners (the first time since 1964).

It was the Oscar show itself.

On a scale of one to ten, ten being the highest, I’d give last night’s Oscar snooze fest a four. They lost points for forgetting Brad Renfro in the Memorial segment. More points were lost because Roger Deakins failed to win despite or maybe because of double noms. What can I tell you — I’m a sore loser.

The things about the show that brought it up from a two to a four were:

Tilda Swinton. Not for her performance which I rate as good but not great, but for her fiery hair and individuality. She’s the most unique looking actress since Katharine Hepburn.

Joel and Ethan Coen. As a Coen watcher since Blood Simple, it’s amazing to see how little they’ve changed. They still hang together, still hate Hollywood hoopla, still stay true to themselves and their vision. And they hate to smile. I like that.

Diablo Cody. Any exotic dancer, present or past, who can write a screenplay that’s smart, funny, and real, which actually makes it to the screen, is okay in my book.

Jon Stewart. Not only was he witty as always, but calling back Marketa Irglova, the Best Original Song winner, to give her a chance to speak, was classy.

Harrison Ford. How can we not like a dude who can drink that much and still manage to read his lines without slurring? Almost.

Marion Cotillard. Her performance in the Piaf biopic was stunning. Still, awarding her the Best Actress Oscar over favorite Julie Christie was an upset. Upsets are not boring.

There were a few interesting happenings between Zs, but not many. It won’t kill me to miss future Oscarcasts. But then, I say that every year.

IMDB is running a pretty cool poll this morning and we thought it would be a great topic for discussion. Last night’s Oscar ceremony was certainly one for the books; Jon Stewart was nothing short of awesome in his second go-round as host, the surprises were welcomed ones (i.e. the stunning Marion Cotillard winning Best Actress) and there were plenty of well-deserved wins. One of those extremely deserved Oscar victories went to Glen Hansard and Marketa Irglova, whose song “Falling Slowly” from Once took home the Best Song nod.

Upon receiving his award, Hansard gave the following speech, which was (at that point) the best of the night:

Then as Irglova stepped up to the mic, the music came swooping in, taking us to commercial break. After the break host Jon Stewart showed an unprecedented amount of class, bringing Marketa back on stage so that she could make her own acceptance speech:

It was certainly one of the most memorable moments in recent years. As well, there were plenty of other great moments. Javier Bardem’s sweet tribute to his mother, Tilda Swinton calling out George Clooney’s bat suit and even Diablo Cody’s emotional acceptance speech were among my favorites. And how about the “Binoculars and Periscopes” montage? As my favorite Guinness commercials would say, “Brilliant!”

But those are only a few. The show was something like 12 hours long, so I’m sure you will be able to share more. That brings us to our discussion of the day:

Sound Off: What was your most memorable moment from last night’s Oscar ceremony?

Well, the major theme of the night was how many surprises there were. Even Roger Ebert is probably second guessing the Academy right now. But it was a memorable evening. We got to see some great young talent be honored and recognized, which is a great thing. Here’s a recap of the winners for each category and my thoughts on them.

Best Achievement in Costume Design:
Alexandra Byrne for Elizabeth: The Golden Age

The movie was very mediocre in all terms except this category. It seemed to be the only thing Shekhar Kapur cared about in the film, but I guessed it paid off. My choice would have been Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street.

Best Animated Feature Film of the Year:
Ratatouille (Brad Bird)

This was a lock. Persepolis was a fine and unique film but there would have been some chaos had Ratatouille been overlooked. Way to go Brad Bird.

Best Achievement in Makeup:
Didier Lavergne for La Vie en Rose

You can’t tell me that there were not any other deserving nominees other than Norbit and Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End. Norbit! What were they thinking? At least they chose a decent enough movie for the win.

Best Achievement in Visual Effects:
Michael L. Fink, Bill Westenhofer, Ben Morris, and Trevor Wood for The Golden Compass

I think they made the right choice here and awarded a very underrated film. The effects in Transformers were cool, but The Golden Compass created a really fantastic world to get lost in.

Best Achievement in Art Direction:
Dante Ferretti and Francesca Lo Schiavo for Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street

I wasn’t crazy about the film, but there’s no denying that the art direction and costume design on display here are second to none. Glad it wasn’t shut out.

Best Performance by an Actor in a Supporting Role:
Javier Bardem for No Country For Old Men

I wish there was more love for Casey Affleck and what he accomplished for his role as Robert Ford, but I’m not upset nor surprised that it was Bardem who created the unforgettable Anton Chiurgh.

Best Short Film, Live Action:
Mozart des pickpockets, Les (Philippe Pollet-Villard)

Haven’t seen any of these yet, but I’m planning to shortly at a local film festival and I’m looking forward to it.

Best Short Film, Animated:
Peter & the Wolf (Suzie Templeton, Hugh Welchman)

Best Performance by an Actress in a Supporting Role:
Tilda Swinton for Michael Clayton

Overrated, overrated, overrated. Michael Clayton was a good film but I thought that Tilda Swinton was one of its major flaws. Amy Ryan on the other hand was unforgettable, and devastating in Gone Baby Gone. If Ryan wasn’t going to win, then I think we all expected Cate Blanchett to win it. This was one of the big upsets of the night and I, like many others I’m sure, am not very happy about it.

Best Writing, Screenplay Based on Material Previously Produced or Published:
Joel and Ethan Coen for No Country For Old Men

No surprise here. It’s a fantastic and ridiculously entertaining adaptation of Cormac McCarthy’s novel. However, out of the nominees, nothing hit me as hard as Sarah Polley’s Away From Her and she had to work only from a short story rather than an entire novel, which is even more impressive.

Best Achievement in Sound Editing:
Karen M. Baker, and Per Hallberg for The Bourne Ultimatum

I really expected No Counrty For Old Men to win this. I mean, just think of the impact that Chiurgh’s arsenal of weapons, especially his silenced shotgun, has on the suspense sequences.

Best Achievement in Sound Mixing:
Scott Millan, David Parker, and Kirk Francis for The Bourne Ultimatum

See above…

Best Performance by an Actress in a Leading Role:
Marion Cotillard for La Vie en Rose

Another surprise, but the Academy seems to have a thing for La Vie en Rose. When you watch her performance of Edith Piaf and then see how different she looks in person, that’s the point where you really appreciate her work. But still, no one was as powerful as Julie Christie in Away From Her and if the Academy wanted to recognize a more fresh and uprising actress, then Ellen Page probably would have been a more popular pick.

Best Achievement in Editing:
Christopher Rouse for The Bourne Ultimatum

Again, I expected No Country For Old Men to win this award simply because of the way the Coens weave their story. But not a bad choice here.

Best Foreign Language Film of the Year: The Counterfieters (Austria)
Okay, let me go ahead and say that this is the worst category of nominees ever put together. I’m not judging the films because I haven’t seen them. But that’s the point, almost no one has and none of the nominees saw a U.S. release in 2007! What about The Diving Bell and the Butterfly, 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days, and Lust, Caution? I will never understand the Academy’s reasoning here.

Best Achievement in Music Written For Motion Pictures, Orginial Song:
Glen Hansard and Marketa Irglova for Once

Well deserved. A beautiful song for a beautiful film.

Best Achievement in Cinematography:
Robert Elswit for There Will Be Blood

Again, another upset. Apparently, Roger Deakins got his votes split between his two nominations (outstanding work in both pictures). That was expected, but I think most of us thought that Janusz Kaminiski would take home the gold for The Diving Bell and the Butterfly. But you know something, there really is no wrong choice here. The cinematography in all of these films is top-notch. Personally, I would have chosen Atonement. No shot in 2007 fascinated me more than the one set of James McAvoy walking down Dunkirk Beach.

Best Achievement in Music Written For Motion Pictures, Original Song:
Dario Marianelli for Atonement

The best choice out of the nominees, but I’m not sure why Johnny Greenwood wasn’t nominated for There Will Be Blood

Best Documentary, Short Subjects:
Cynthia Wade for Freeheld

Best Documentary, Features:
Alex Gibney and Eva Orner for Taxi to the Darkside

I only saw two of the nominees (No End in Sight and Sicko) and thoroughly enjoyed them both, so I have no say here about whether Taxi to the Dark Side is better.

Best Writing, Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen:
Diablo Cody for Juno

And this year’s Little Miss Sunshine is….

Best Performance by an Actor in a Leading Role:
Daniel Day-Lewis for There Will Be Blood

Moving on…

Best Achievement in Directing:
Joel and Ethan Coen for No Country For Old Men

See below…

Best Motion Picture of the Year:
No Country For Old Men

And so let the debate commence. It’s not every year we see two films that end up ranked in the top 40 on the IMDb Top 250. 20 years from now there will be dicussion among movie lovers alike if No Country For Old Men truly deserved the Oscar over There Will Be Blood. Did P.T.A. deserve it more than the Coens? Who was the better badass: D-Day as Daniel Plainview or Bardem as Anton Chigurh?

It was an interesting evening but when it was all said and done, There Will Be Blood didn’t get to sip the movie industry’s most delicious milk shake and No Country For Old Men came out on top as the best motion picture of 2007. Until the 81st Annual Academy Awards, so long, friendo.

Sound Off: What are your thoughts on the 80th Annual Academy Awards

Many of our staffers will be chiming in throughout the night, so stay tuned. Just click here, or follow along below!

As you can see, we are all pretty much in alignment (with the exception of John Campea) on Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actor, Best Supporting Actor and Best Actress. It gets fun as you get into some of the ancillary categories such as Art Direction and Costume Design. It is very cool to see all the predictions together. Have a look for yourself by clicking the image below.

Also, as a bonus, scroll down below to see a video of our own Kevin Carr on Fox 28 in Columbus’ Morning Show, Good Day Columbus.

Below you will find our predictions highlighted in gold. Also, just click the name of any category to read our staff member’s analysis.

PICTURE
Atonement
Juno
Michael Clayton
No Country for Old Men
There Will Be Blood

DIRECTOR
Julian Schnabel - The Diving Bell and the Butterfly
Jason Reitman – Juno
Tony Gilroy – Michael Clayton
Joel Coen and Ethan Coen – No Country for Old Men
Paul Thomas Anderson – There Will Be Blood

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

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

SUPPORTING ACTOR
Casey Affleck – The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford
Javier Bardem – No Country for Old Men
Philip Seymour Hoffman – Charlie Wilson’s War
Hal Holbrook – Into the Wild
Tom Wilkinson – Michael Clayton

SUPPORTING ACTRESS
Cate Blanchet – I’m Not There
Ruby Dee – American Gangster
Saoirse Ronan – Atonement
Amy Ryan – Gone Baby Gone
Tilda Swinton – Michael Clayton

ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY
Juno – Diablo Cody
Lars and the Real Girl – Nancy Oliver
Michael Clayton – Tony Gilroy
Ratatouille – Brad Bird
The Savages – Tamara Jenkins

ADAPTED SCREENPLAY
Atonement – Christopher Hampton
Away from Her – Sarah Polley
The Diving Bell and the Butterfly – Ronald Harwood
No Country for Old Men – Joel Coen & Ethan Coen
There Will Be Blood – Paul Thomas Anderson

ANIMATED FEATURE
Persepolis
Ratatouille
Surf’s Up

ART DIRECTION
American Gangster
Atonement
The Golden Compass
Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street
There Will Be Blood

FOREIGN LANGUAGE FILM
Beaufort – Israel
The Counterfeiters – Austria
Katyn – Poland
Mongol – Kazakhstan
12 – Russia

CINEMATOGRAPHY
The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford – Roger Deakins
Atonement – Seamus McGarvey
The Diving Bell and the Butterfly – Janusz Kaminski
No Country for Old Men – Roger Deakins
There Will Be Blood – Robert Elswit

DOCUMENTARY FEATURE
No End in Sight
Operation Homecoming: Writing the Wartime Experience
Sicko
Taxi to the Dark Side
War/Dance

DOCUMENTARY SHORT
Freeheld – Cynthia Wade and Vanessa Roth
La Corona (The Crown) – Amanda Micheli and Isabel Vega
Salim Baba – Tim Sternberg and Francisco Bello
Sari’s Mother – James Longley

ANIMATED SHORT FILM
I Met the Walrus – Josh Raskin
Madame Tutli-Putli – Chris Lavis and Maciek Szczerbowski
Même Les Pigeons Vont au Paradis (Even Pigeons Go to Heaven) – Samuel Tourneux and Simon Vanesse
My Love (Moya Lyubov) – Alexander Petrov
Peter & the Wolf – Suzie Templeton and Hugh Welchman

LIVE-ACTION SHORT FILM
At Night – Christian E. Christiansen and Louise Vesth
Il Supplente (The Substitute) – Andrea Jublin
Le Mozart des Pickpockets (The Mozart of Pickpockets) – Philippe Pollet-Villard
Tanghi Argentini – Guido Thys and Anja Daelemans
The Tonto Woman - Daniel Barber and Matthew Brown

VISUAL EFFECTS
The Golden Compass
Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End
Transformers

COSTUME DESIGN
Across the Universe – Albert Wolsky
Atonement – Jacqueline Durran
Elizabeth: The Golden Age – Alexandra Byrne
La Vie en Rose – Marit Allen
Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street – Colleen Atwood

FILM EDITING
The Bourne Ultimatum - Christopher Rouse
The Diving Bell and the Butterfly – Juliette Welfling
Into the Wild – Jay Cassidy
No Country for Old Men – Roderick Jaynes
There Will Be Blood – Dylan Tichenor

SOUND MIXING
The Bourne Ultimatum
No Country for Old Men
Ratatouille
3:10 to Yuma
Transformers

SOUND EDITING
The Bourne Ultimatum
No Country for Old Men
Ratatouille
There Will Be Blood
Transformers

ORIGINAL SCORE
Dario Marianelli – Atonement
Alberto Iglesias – The Kite Runner
James Newton Howard – Michael Clayton
Michael Giacchino – Ratatouille
Marco Beltrami – 3:10 to Yuma

ORIGINAL SONG
“Falling Slowly” – Once, Glen Hansard and Marketa Irglova
“Happy Working Song” – Enchanted, Alan Menken and Stephen Schwartz
“Raise It Up” – August Rush
“So Close” – Enchanted, Alan Menken and Stephen Schwartz
“That’s How You Know” – Enchanted, Alan Menken and Stephen Schwartz

MAKEUP
La Vie en Rose – Didier Lavergne and Jan Archibald
Norbit – Rick Baker and Kazuhiro Tsuji
Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End – Ve Neill and Martin Samuel

Mongol (Kazakhstan)
Directed by Sergei Bodrov

Why is it nominated?

Mongol is a large co-production between Germany, Kazakhstan, Russia and Mongolia. Supposedly the first part of a trilogy regarding the life and times of the great mongol conqueror Jenkhis Khan, this 120′ epic, recounts his life from a ten year old boy in search of his future bride to the accepted leader of all mongol tribes. As a historical, war piece set in the exotic and wild parts of Northern Asia it has great potential regarding the global market, along with an acclaimed director and a previously awarded crew of cinematographers and editors. It’s also a good publicity chance for Kazakhstan following the last year’s “Borat effect”.

Why it might win?

Great cinematography, editing and music.

Why it might not win?

The implausible and vague storyline doesn’t match the great technical part. It’s also said to be historically inaccurate in its depiction of Jenkhis Khan’s personality and rise to fame. That’s not really a problem for a film, but its image could be hurt.

The Counterfeiters (Austria)
Directed by Stefan Ruzowitzky

Why is it nominated?

It tells the real story of the biggest counterfeit operation in history, the one the nazis put on so that their enemy’s monetary system would collapse. The money making workshop was set in a concentration camp where a few talented and skilled jewish prisoners did the dirty work in exchange for better conditions. This is an interesting recount of an intriguing holocaust story, one more out of many that have been told.

Why it might win?

Although it’s based on one of the heroes’ memoirs, it avoids excesses, obvious emotional set-ups or manipulative lecturing that could make it look like political fiction. Ruzowitzki has horror film experience so he went with a suspenseful result and got some great acting from everybody to go along.

Why it might not win?

The only reason i can think of besides losing to a better movie, is the lack of a clear moral in the end, plus that blurry area it paints between pragmatism and idealism, which is, to me, what sets it apart in the first place.

Beaufort (Israel)
Directed by Joseph Cedar

Why is it nominated?

This is a recount of the last days of fort Beaufort at the Israeli-Lebanese borders after being occupated for 18 years. Army-life consists a universal code between people who have served around the world. This film is a very real depiction of that, plus it’s sensitive to the soldier as an individual.

Why it might win?

It’s very well acted, takes its time with the characters and avoids speculative politics.

Why it might not win?

It’s a bit long at two full hours since the theme, kind of a countdown to the climax of a forwarned retreat, isn’t so intriguing.

12 (Russia)
Directed by Nikita Mikhalkov

Why is it nominated?

A chechen boy kills his russian stepdad who is also a military man. The 12 jurors have their minds made up, but one of them isn’t ready to vote guilty and convinces them to reconsider. This is a loose remake of Sidney Lumet’s 12 Angry Men, a 150′ minute character study of 12 people with different social backgrounds, all related to the mystery that remains, Russia. It’s the return of an awarded director after a 9 year absence.

Why it might win?

It’s said to be very well written, and directed in a manner that provokes thinking on controversial facts like the chechen warfare.

Why it might not win?

A two and a half hour remake of a jury film isn’t a very attractive prospect, and if Mikhalkov has lost control of the pace, it might cost the award.

Katyn (Poland)
Directed by Andrzej Wajda

Why is it nominated?

Another shocking tale from the 2nd World War period, Katyn deals with the infamous mass execution of over 15000 polish officers and civilians at the region by the same name. Andrzej Wajda’s father was a victim, which makes this effort an extremely interesting one. Since the theme is much controversial (a hot potato that was thrown from the soviets to the nazis and back) it certainly deserved worldwide attention.

Why it might win?

It’s been very well accepted, as one of Wajda’s best films, technically at least.

Why it might not win?

It’s been described as too “polish”, full of uninformative bits that require previous knowledge of the situation, its prelude and its aftermath.

Who will win?

The Counterfeiters

Who should win?

The Counterfeiters

Who got overlooked?

4 months, 3 weeks and 2 days (Romania)
Directed by Christian Mungiu

Mongol is not a good film overall and Beaufort is a bit slow paced. If the favorites, Katyn and 12 (which I haven’t seen) have too many weak spots, then Oscar will land in Austria. The Counterfeiters is a well written, acted and directed, low prophile movie about an intriguing, and not too bleak, holocaust story. It relies on the morally diverse characters and their conflict, in an enclosed privileged environment while facing tough decisions, which works fine. The story is told without obvious political jabbering, a right balance is kept and all that, in a relatively short amount of screen time. Let’s see…

10. The Departed (2006)

I enjoyed this film when I saw it in the theatre, but it completely falls apart on repeat viewings. It has a lot going for it in terms of story and acting, yet those are the same areas where it fails. We are supposed to believe that Costello, “the” major crime figure in Boston, couldn’t figure out the new guy Costigan was the rat. It’s rather obvious, and yet Costello even explained that in the old days he would just wipe everyone out. Awfully convenient that he doesn’t do that now. As is unfortunately typical of many of his recent performances, Nicholson slips out of character and occasionally gives us “Jack,” such as the scene in the bar where he talks about having a rat in the organization and the scene in the porno theatre. They completely disrupt the movie. Don’t get me started on the CGI rat running through the final shot.

While there are many other Best Pictures winners that are admittedly worse movies, The Departed secured a spot in this top 10 because the film did not win on its merits (The Queen was a much better film), but was instead given as a Lifetime Achievement Award to Scorsese. Through envy or ignorance the Academy members have missed honoring a number of great filmmakers (Hawks, Hitchcock, Kubrick) through the years. Scorsese used to be on that proud list as his seminal works (Taxi Driver, Raging Bull, Goodfellas) were bypassed. The Academy even had a chance to honor him for The Aviator, which was technically fantastic, but that year they decided to stick it to conservatives, since Bush was re-elected, by selecting Million Dollar Baby, a good film but there was no comparison. If the Best Picture of the Year is going to be determined, it should be based on the film in question not be used by the Academy to save face with history. It won four awards.

9. Cimarron (1931)

The film tells the story about the expansion of America in the late 19th Century, particularly around the Oklahoma Land Rush. What certainly is a period full of great potential in American history is completely sabotaged by lead actor Richard Dix’s overacting, no doubt left over from silent films, the racist attitudes towards non-whites, and a terrible script. Some of the action scenes are impressive in their execution, but those aren’t enough to make up for this odd, rambling film. It won three awards.

8. Around the World in 80 Days (1956)

Producer Michael Todd took Jules Verne’s compelling adventure story and turned it into a boring travelogue. Having to compete with television many movies during the 1950s used the medium to its full advantage by telling massive stories that could only be fully appreciated in a movie theater. Shot in 70mm Todd-AO, the film has a lot of location footage from different parts of the world that at the time must surely have been impressive, but viewers today have seen all these locations through the myriad of cable channels, so there’s no longer any novelty. It is also filled with over 40 cameos, so it’s likely that everyone who voted for this had a friend in it. It won five awards.

7. Cavalcade (1933)

While the British have made some fantastic films over the years, it must be some secret cruel joke that their Best Picture winners rarely hold up over time. Mrs. Miniver may have been inspiring upon its release, but it comes off as a hokey WWII propaganda piece. Tom Jones is basically an extended Benny Hill episode and says more about what a terrible year 1963 must have been. Other than Vangelis’ score, was there anything memorable from Chariots of Fire, other than the SCTV sketch with Hall & Oates?

However, the worst of the British imports is Calvalcade. Based on a Noel Coward play, it is a boring melodrama about two families as they experience major events through the turn of the 20th Century: the Second Boer War, the death of Queen Victoria, the Titanic, and the WWI. A documentary on the History Channel would be more entertaining. Yet, it won three awards.

6. A Beautiful Mind (2001)

A terrible film written by Akiva Goldsman, a man who has written many terrible scripts. How a writer could get so many facts wrong about John Nash’s life when he has access to them in the book he’s adapting speaks to his abilities.

Nash didn’t have visual hallucinations, but the medium is visual and the filmmakers were limited in their imagination. What we do get for hallucinations is surprisingly rational and coherent, which is another crutch filmmakers use since there shouldn’t be a logic that the entire audience can understand.

Many other notable facts were omitted or altered from Nash’s life, but the worst has to be the casting of Jennifer Connelly, who won an Oscar for her performance, as Nash’s wife who is from El Salvador. Are we supposed to believe that in 2000 there were no Latina actresses available? The film only won Best Picture because Ron Howard and Brian Grazer are such nice guys in the industry. It won four awards.

4. & 5. An American in Paris (1951) & Gigi (1958)

What the heck was there about Leslie Caron in Paris, France that made Academy voters swoon during the 1950’s because both these movies are stinkers? These MGM musicals are hard to take as we are forced to believe that someone could fall in love with the annoying Caron. Her suitors are Gene Kelly, a struggling American painter, and Louis Jordan, a rich Parisian, both completely uninteresting characters, so there’s no interest in seeing anyone get together.

An American in Paris has many great Gershwin tunes in it, but it goes completely off the rails with the 18-minute ballet that concludes the film. Gigi is by Lerner and Lowe, who have two very good songs in the film, “Thank Heaven for Little Girls” and “I Remember It Well,” but they were unfortunately prophetic with “It’s a Bore.” An American in Paris won six awards and Gigi won nine out of nine awards.

3. Broadway Melody (1929)

Unfortunately the years have not treated this backstage Broadway drama well as two sisters try to make it on the Great White Way. This film suffers like many of the time do from an overabundance of melodramatic storytelling and acting. It has some historical significance being the second Best Picture winner and the first to have sound, as well as its early use of Technicolor in a sequence, but leave this to the hardcore film historians. The film won one award.

2. Driving Miss Daisy (1989)

The fact that this snoozefest beat out Born on the Fourth of July, Dead Poet’s Society, and Field of Dreams in the category is astounding. This film thinks its insightful by letting us know racism was bad and blacks weren’t treated well in the South, as if no one had been aware of that before 1989.

We are supposed to feel empathy towards Miss Daisy, an old southern Jewish widow, becomes enlightened over the years to the plight of African Americans, but considering the story opens in 1948 when she is 72 and six million fellow Jews have recently been slaughtered in WWII because they were different, it is nearly impossible to care about this ignorant woman.

Rather than voters feeling good about themselves because they selected a film that shows the ills of racism, why couldn’t they have gone a step further and nominated the much more worthy Spike Lee’s Do the Right Thing?

1. Ordinary People (1980)

The movie is tolerable with its navel-gazing story about an upper middle class family falling apart due to the death of a son. What earns the film its ignominy as the worst choice by the Academy is that it and its director Robert Redford beat out Martin Scorsese and his masterpiece Raging Bull, which has since gone on to not only be dubbed the best film of the 1980s by many critical groups, but in the 2002 Sight and Sound Director’s Poll was voted the sixth greatest film of all time because of the excellence it achieved in all categories of filmmaking.

The Academy made a similar error awarding Kevin Costner’s Dances with Wolves over Scorsese’s Goodfellas, but Dances is a more impressive achievement compared to Ordinary People, which barely raises above the level of Lifetime movie.

Regardless of the number of Best Picture wins, deservedly or not, Scorsese earns moving forward (See #10), it will never erase the epic mistake Academy members made overlooking Raging Bull.

Plot
Based on the novel “Oil!” by Upton Sinclair, it is the tale of Daniel Plainview (Daniel Day-Lewis) – the embodiment of greed – in a brutal land grab that promises to make him wealthier than any man needs and to destroy him and his relationships in the process. The story ravages the screen, aided by Day-Lewis’s grueling and immaculate performance. Gritty drama, character study, humane tragedy – it defies easily being shoved into any particular genre.

Acclaim
There Will Be Blood has been marked for the Oscar since it was first screened by critics. That whisper became a roar when it hit theaters nationwide. It has been placed on hundreds of Top Ten Lists, receiving top honors from Premiere, The New York Times, and Entertainment Weekly. It’s tied with No Country for Old Men for Oscar nominations this year (with eight apiece) and has grossed $31 million domestically.

- The film garnered a 91% Fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes and a 92/100 from Meta Critic.

- Nominated for nine BAFTA awards, winning one for Best Leading Actor for Daniel Day-Lewis.

- Won Best Actor, Best Director and Best Picture from the Los Angeles Film Critics and National Society of Film Critics.

- Daniel Day-Lewis has won eighteen (18) Best Actor Awards – every one he’s been nominated for.

- Paul Thomas Anderson has won three (3) Best Director Awards.

“There Will Be Blood is as close to perfection as you will find in a movie.” – Beth Accomando, PBS

“There Will Be Blood… arrives belching fire and brimstone and damnation to Hell.” - Manohla Dargis, The New York Times

“As astounding in its emotional force and as haunting and mysterious as anything seen in American movies in years.” - David Denby, The New Yorker

“A force beyond categories.” - Roger Ebert, Chicago Sun-Times

Why It Might Win
This is one hell of a movie. It’s gripping and detailed in a way that has hypnotized audiences that are lucky enough to feel the glow of its screen. If it wins the big prize it will do so solely on its own merit. So far, it has stayed in the conversation as a top contender, vying directly against No Country For Old Men. In almost any other year, this film would be uncontested, and even against stiff competition, it may end up being the star of the evening.

Why It Might Not Win
The competition is stiff, and talk about There Will Be Blood being the best picture of the year has gone on more in the media than at the podium so far. Daniel Day-Lewis is going to need to add another trophy room to his home, but the film itself has failed to win Best Picture almost across the board. Plus, it’s contending with powerhouse No Country for Old Men and the possibility of indie flick Juno stealing it out from under both heavyweights.

Final Summary
There Will Be Blood has a shot at top honors, but it will come as a surprise to most. Despite being an incredible achievement in film, it had the unfortunate luck of being released in the same year as some other incredible achievements. Daniel Day-Lewis should already leave a space open for his second Oscar, and the film might be rewarded for its cinematography and writing, but Best Picture might prove too elusive for this masterpiece.

And while the Best Director Oscar is not the end-all, be-all of directing merits (as evidenced by plenty of awesome directors over the years who did not receive the award), it is definitely one of the main reasons people watch the ceremony. Along with Best Picture, Best Actor and Actress, and Best Supporting Actor and Actress, it is among the Big Six.

It’s been around since the Academy Awards themselves, going all the way back to 1929, which honored films from 1927 as well as 1928. It is the award with some of the richest history and most notable names. Indeed, some of the best directors ever have received far more nominations than they have won, and some have received plenty of noms but no awards at all (like Robert Altman, Alfred Hitchcock and Stanley Kubrick).

This year, as with many others, the big question isn’t as much who will win but will the vote split between No Country for Old Men and There Will Be Blood. It’s happened before, even in recent years (e.g., Steven Spielberg for Saving Private Ryan in 1998, Steven Soderbergh in 2000 for Traffic, Roman Polanski for The Pianist in 2002 and Ang Lee for Brokeback Mountain in 2005).

And the nominees are…

Paul Thomas Anderson for There Will Be Blood

Why He Was Nominated: Even before it was released, There Will Be Blood had Oscar buzz written all over it. With as much cred as P.T.A. got from Best Picture nods over the entire award season, it was impossible to leave him out of the Oscar running.

Why He Might Win: Anderson has flirted with Oscar before, most notably with the screenplays for Boogie Nights and Magnolia. He’s never won a statue, and hasn’t even been nominated for director. This could be his year to break in.

Why He Might Not Win: This year’s field is fierce, and There Will Be Blood shares such a similar tone with No County for Old Men. And, when it comes down to love from the award voters, No Country tends to edge out Blood by a slight sip of a milkshake.

Joel and Ethan Coen for No Country for Old Men

Why They Were Nominated: No Country for Old Men has been gobbling up awards left and right throughout the season. It’s also a Best Picture nominee, and the Coen Brothers flat-out deserve the recognition.

Why They Might Win: This is the first time the Coen Brothers have shared screen credit as directors and been nominated. This film has been called their best since Fargo, which was the last time the bros made such a splash at the Oscars.

Why They Might Not Win: Because it is so similar in tone and style to There Will Be Blood, No Country is in real danger of splitting the vote with it for this and other awards, making the way for dark horses to seize the day.

Tony Gilroy for Michael Clayton

Why He Was Nominated: I’m going to go out on a limb here and say that at least part of Gilroy’s nomination is due to George Clooney. The Academy loves Clooney, and they just seem to want to shower at least one of his movies each year with accolades.

Why He Might Win: If There Will Be Blood and No Country for Old Men split their vote and suppress the Juno vote at the same time, Gilroy might just pull this one out. But I wouldn’t run the Vegas odds just yet.

Why He Might Not Win: Let’s face it, when people think of Michael Clayton, they think of George Clooney. And this makes sense as this film is Gilroy’s directorial debut. The Academy may love to give nominations to newcomers, but they generally don’t hand out statues to them.

Jason Reitman for Juno

Why He Was Nominated: This year, Juno is the little movie that could. It was a quirky indie hit that took the nation by storm. Reitman had a strong command over Diablo Cody’s script, and he directed his leading lady to an Oscar nomination.

Why He Might Win: With Juno running as the dark horse in oh-so-many categories, it would be no surprise if this little flick could pull it off. Plus, with all the other nominees having such a heavy undertone, the Academy voters might just mark the box for the feel-good movie this year.

Why He Might Not Win: With as much positive buzz as Juno has garnered, people seem to forget it is a long shot dark horse. Like last year’s Little Miss Sunshine, it’s grabbed a lot of nominations, but the little movie that could might walk away with only the screenplay Oscar this year.

Julian Schnabel for The Diving Bell and the Butterfly

Why He Was Nominated: This year’s Oscar slate is filled with understated, more somber movies. And what can be more understated than a POV movie about a paralyzed guy? Better yet, Schnabel made the whole thing pretty darn interesting, and that’s worth some honors at the end of the year.

Why He Might Win: This could be an upset yet. Plus, Schnabel pulled out a Best Director win at the Golden Globes earlier this year, taking the award from a field of excellent films.

Why He Might Not Win: The biggest problem Schnabel’s going to have is that fewer people have seen his movie than the other nominees. Plus, The Diving Bell and the Butterfly is in subtitled French, and no amount of innovative camerawork and intimate finesse is going to break that language barrier.

Who Will Win?

Joel and Ethan Coen for No Country for Old Men

These guys have never won an Oscar for directing, and they really deserve one. Plus, if you look at the field, No Country for Old Men has secured more top honors than its closest competitor, There Will Be Blood. While the Best Director/Best Picture category has split four times in the past ten years, the better director usually wins out… and the Coen Brothers have done a superior job over P.T. Anderson this year.

And the nominees are…

Persepolis
Marjane Satrapi and Vincent Paronnaud

Why it is nominated: Persepolis could be the only politically relevant film to sneak past the Academy this year, in any category. It is the story of a young girl and her family who are forced to live under a conservative Islamic regime in Iran shortly after the overthrowing of the Shah. Drawing from her own life, director Marjane Satrapi has made Persepolis her labor of love, and it is being recognized for its immensely creative delivery and its non-preachy, relatable political backdrop.

Why it might win: The close-to-home nature of Strapani’s tale and the backstory behind how the film got made has captured the attention of so many, especially those within the Academy. If the Academy members are fit to deny Pixar another win, Persepolis could be their next choice.

Why it might not win: Under-exposure, plain and simple. Persepolis has received great critical acclaim, but never really made the splash that another, more widely appreciated nominee has.

Ratatouille
Brad Bird

Why it is nominated: From the moment Remy the rat enters your life as a viewer to the moment we see the Paris skyline for the first time to the film’s heartfelt finish, Ratatouille is as arresting a cinematic experience as any this year. Academy Award Winner Brad Bird (The Incredibles) has inarguably delivered the best work of his career in the form of a film that centers around a rat, voiced by comedian Patton Oswalt, who wants to cook fine French cuisine. Go figure.

Why it might win: Ratatouille is the odds-on favorite to win this award. It was single best reviewed film of the year by critics and has collected a room full of hardware during awards season so far (36 wins). It has also broken barriers by being nominated for an unprecedented 5 Oscars this year (Best Original Screenplay, Best Original Score, Best Sound, Best Sound Editing). If it doesn’t take home this one, it will surely pick another up along the way.

Why it might win: Lets face it, the Academy has been known to do some strange things. They could favor the more obscure Persepolis over the popular Ratatouille. Stranger things have happened.

Surf’s Up
Ash Brannon and Chris Buck

Why is it nominated: Explaining why Surf’s Up is nominated and a film like The Simpsons Movie is not is just too hard. This was a very cute, very fluffy film that was extremely unremarkable, yet still found commercial success. Thats not saying it is bad by any means, its just that it doesn’t hold a candle to the other nominees.

Why it might win: If the voting for the Academy Awards was held in Ohio or Florida by the general election committees of those two states, Surf’s Up would have a chance. C’mon hanging chads!

Why it might not win: For directors Ash Brannon and Chris Buck, the phrase “it was really nice to be nominated” will become their best friend — they will be using it often. They really should be happy though, as their film really beat out some other very deserving films just to get nominated.

Who Will Win?

Ratatouille

Who Should Win?

Ratatouille

Who Was Overlooked?

The Simpsons Movie

Films Reviewed this Week: Vantage Point, Charlie Bartlett, Witless Protection and Be Kind Rewind.

[audio:http://www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3?http://media.filmschoolrejects.com/audio/episode53.mp3]

Download this Episode

Visit the Home of the Fat Guys at the Movies!

Give the Fat Guys some love:

Subscribe in iTunes

Email the Fat Guys

Digg the Fat Guys

This year the nominees for Best Performance by an Actor in a Leading Role, as the award formally is called, are…

George Clooney, Michael Clayton

Why is he nominated? Although an incredibly popular actor, George Clooney has only been nominated for three other Oscars, and only one for performance (the other two were for writing and directing Good Night and Good Luck). Although he won the 2006 Oscar for Best Supporting Actor for his role in Syriana, this is the first time that Clooney has been nominated for a major Academy Award based on his acting. Traditionally, Clooney’s performances suffered for two main reasons: he either appeared in incredibly cheesy films (such as the 1997 disaster Batman & Robin), or, when he did manage to latch onto a good script, his performances were cookie-cutter copies of one another, mechanical and predictable (The Perfect Storm, Ocean’s Eleven… Ocean’s 12… Ocean’s 13… need we continue?). In Clooney’s case, with age and experience comes either some sort of epiphany or some great luck, because his performances since 2005 have been increasingly impressive, and Michael Clayton is no exception.

Why he might win: As mentioned above, the quality of Clooney’s performances has been steadily increasing over the past several years, culminating at this point with Michael Clayton, in which Clooney’s portrayal of a “fixer” at a powerful law firm who ultimately finds himself in danger when he investigates his colleague’s actions in a controversial lawsuit was hailed by critics as “Tense, tough and terrific,” and “Engrossing every step of the way.”

Why he might not win: To be perfectly honest, Clooney and his newfound acting prowess are up against Daniel Day-Lewis, arguably one of the best actors of all time. Clooney’s ability to portray smarmy businessmen and do-gooder lawyers is no match for Daniel Day Lewis’ ability to transform himself into some of the most disturbing characters we’re never able to forget (Bill ‘The Butcher’ Cutting in Gangs of New York, for example). As much as we might hate to admit it, this year’s Oscar for Best Leading Actor has Daniel Day-Lewis written all over it.

Daniel Day-Lewis, There Will Be Blood

Why is he nominated? As previously mentioned, Daniel Day-Lewis arguably is one of the best actors ever to grace the silver screen with his presence (something he doesn’t often do, either). The characters he portrays are memorable almost to a fault, and prior to his role as Daniel Plainview in There Will Be Blood, Day-Lewis’ only longstanding criticism was that he was simply too good at what he did. That’s right, many critics complained about Day-Lewis’ performances simply because they found that they were not watching a movie, but instead were watching Daniel Day-Lewis be amazing as [insert character name here].

Why he might win: With his performance as Daniel Plainview, a ruthless California oilman who will stop at nothing to achieve wealth and power, Daniel Day-Lewis has finally overcome whatever shortcomings critics previously pointed to when awarding the Oscar for Best Leading Actor not to Day-Lewis for his performances in Gangs of New York (2002) and In the Name of the Father (1993), but to other actors in other films nominated those years. As we said before, this year’s Oscar for Best Leading Actor has Daniel Day-Lewis written all over it.

Why he might not win: We’re not sure on what technical grounds Day-Lewis might again be robbed of a well-deserved Oscar, but as we said previously, it has happened before… we won’t be surprised if it happens again… just sorely disappointed.

Johnny Depp, Sweeney Todd the Demon Barber of Fleet Street

Why is he nominated? In the past, Johnny Depp was renowned for choosing to be in films and to portray characters that weren’t exactly considered mainstream entertainment. Although there is no doubt that Depp’s acting abilities are far-reaching and that he is at the top of his game in this regard, his choices to “showcase” his talent in films like Cry-Baby (1990), Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (1998), and The Astronaut’s Wife (1999), films that eventually develop a strong cult following but nevertheless don’t hit mainstream culture as popular movies, left a great actor without much public praise. Since his turn to blockbuster hits like Pirates of the Caribbean in 2003, Depp’s strong talent and excellent performances have indeed hit the mainstream, and his role as Sweeney Todd is no exception.

Why he might win: Losing the Oscar for Best Leading Actor this year would not be a detriment to Depp’s performance, but due entirely to the very nature of Hollywood award ceremonies, which are designed to bring together the best of the best in an effort to cull out, well, the best. Out of the four actors pitted against Daniel Day-Lewis’ crazed performance in There Will Be Blood, it is Depp who has the sheer talent necessary to stand a chance of taking home the Oscar in this category.

Why he might not win: As previously said, Depp is the frontrunner for Best Leading Actor after Day-Lewis, who, as we have seen before, has a history of being robbed of what is rightly due him. At this point, it’s anyone’s game, really, although the fact that Depp’s portrayal of the homicidal barber Sweeney Todd doesn’t necessarily surpass his performance in several of the roles he was never nominated for doesn’t help his chances, either.

Tommy Lee Jones, In the Valley of Elah

Why is he nominated? Tommy Lee Jones, an aging Hollywood favorite, hasn’t been nominated for a single Academy Award since his win in 1993 for Best Supporting Actor in the film The Fugitive. As we said, Tommy Lee Jones is a Hollywood favorite, although an aging one, and the fact that he hasn’t been nominated for an Oscar in over a decade probably has more to do with the types of films he appeared in during that time than the quality of his performance. That said, In the Valley of Elah brings together a number of elements that make it ripe for an Oscar win: an excellent performance by a seasoned Hollywood favorite, a politically and socially relevant storyline, and perfect timing (when would be a better time to release a film about a Vietnam veteran searching for his son, a recently-returned Iraq war veteran, than just prior to the U.S. primaries, when our nation’s citizens are primed for discussing Iraq, war, and anything having to do with either of the two?).

Why he might win: As previously noted, In the Valley of Elah perfectly combines a number of elements at just the right time. In addition, Tommy Lee Jones hasn’t been nominated for an Oscar in over a decade, making him sorely overdue for some serious recognition. If that’s not enough, then there’s always the fact that In the Valley of Elah hasn’t been nominated for any other Academy Awards this year, making Tommy Lee Jones’ win for Best Actor in a Leading Role the only chance the film has for taking home an award this year, giving its chances of doing so in this category a little boost.

Why he might not win: Although the sheer fact that Tommy Lee Jones was nominated for Best Leading Actor proves that he gave a good performance, based solely on quality Jones’ portrayal of Hank Deerfield, a Vietnam veteran searching for his missing son in the wake of his return from a tour of duty in Iraq, unfortunately can’t hold a candle to Depp’s Sweeney Todd or Daniel Day-Lewis’ Daniel Plainview.

Viggo Mortensen, Eastern Promises

Why is he nominated? Despite the fact that Viggo Mortensen has appeared in a number of noteworthy and impressive roles, including his three-film stint as Aragorn in the Lord of the Rings trilogy and his chilling portrayal of Tom Stall in A History of Violence, this is in fact the first Academy Award nomination that Mortensen has ever received. From all accounts, Mortensen’s portrayal of Nikolai, the ambitious driver and henchman of a Russian mobster who favors him over his own son, is outstanding—a chilling rendition in which Mortensen has so completely transformed himself according to his role as to leave him barely recognizable as the same actor who appeared in Hidalgo (2004).

Why he might win: As several critics have pointed out, Eastern Promises marks Viggo Mortensen’s coming of age as a Hollywood actor and movie star. Unlike some actors — *cough* Alec Baldwin *cough* — who are somehow unable, despite their chosen profession, to adopt even the simplest accent—coughBostoncough—Mortensen has proven his ability to mold himself to any role, whether it requires a thick, authentic sounding Russian accent or a casual Western drawl. And his ability to adopt a convincing Russian accent is only the least of Mortensen’s abilities, as we now beginning to see.

Why he might not win: Unfortunately for Mortensen, the numbers are against him this year. In addition to the fact that he is up against several other actors in his category that already have an Oscar on their mantle, there is an unofficial trend in the awarding of Academy Awards that doesn’t often see an actor take home an Oscar in a major category like Best Actor in a Leading Role the first time he is ever nominated. But who knows, anything can happen and maybe Viggo will take home the Oscar in a surprise upset!

Who will win?

Daniel Day-Lewis, There Will Be Blood

At this point, the Oscar for Best Leading Actor is a toss-up between Daniel Day-Lewis, Johnny Depp and possibly Academy Awards newcomer Viggo Mortensen. It seems unlikely that Viggo Mortensen will take home the Oscar for his first ever nomination, but his performance in Eastern Promises was indeed a strong one, and as we’ve noted several times already, Daniel Day-Lewis has a history of being cheated out of Oscars that he fully deserves. It’s any man’s game; fortunately for us, each of the nominees has earned his place among the best of the best, ensuring that no matter who takes home the gold (statue), it will be well deserved.

Who should win?

Daniel Day-Lewis, There Will Be Blood

Daniel Day-Lewis should be the actor to take home the Oscar for Best Performance by an Actor in a Leading Role this year. As we said before, Day-Lewis’ perfected his portrayal of crazed oil tycoon Daniel Plainview, bringing an amazing and complicated character to life and ultimately contributing to, rather than taking away from, the overall film, There Will Be Blood. There is little to criticize about his performance, which simply served to steel his characterization as possibly the best actor ever to grace the silver screen.

Who was overlooked?

Josh Brolin, No Country for Old Men

After seeing No Country for Old Men, nominated for eight Oscars, including Best Picture, this year, it seems unfair that neither Javier Bardem (for his role as Anton Chigurh) or Josh Brolin (for his role as Llewelyn Moss) were included in this year’s Best Leading Actor category. Unfortunately for each of these actors, their exclusion from the category is probably due to the fact that it is entirely unclear who the true Leading Actor is in No Country for Old Men. Is it the Anton Chigurh, the sociopathic hit man with the pageboy haircut and propensity for shooting people who irritate him, or is it Llewelyn Moss, the man with a sawed off shotgun and two million dollars?

Plot Summary
It’s the summer of 1935 on a peaceful English estate. But things are anything but peaceful in the fertile imagination of 13 year old Briony Tallis, Saiorse Ronan, a budding writer. She’s trying to stage her latest play using lazy cousins and her efforts aren’t going well. Briony has a crush on the son of one of the household maids. Robbie Turner, James MacAvoy, is educated at Cambridge and is ready to go onto medical school. Briony’s sees her older sister Cecila, Keira Knightly, strip down to her underwear to go into a fountain, seemingly, in Briony’s eyes, forced in some way to do this by Robbie. We find out in anther scene she went into the fountain to retrieve a piece of a broken vase. This begins the series of events that trigger Briony to misinterpret everything she sees in relation to Robbie. This is compounded by a mistakenly sent obscene letter written by Robbie and given to Briony to hand deliver to Cecilia.

When Briony sees the pair in the library consummating the love they’ve just come to realize they feel for each other, Briony is sent into an emotional tailspin. She’s now convinced more than ever that Robbie is a sexual predator. When she sees her cousin Lola being sexually assaulted she convinces herself and Lola that Robbie is the rapist. Robbie is convicted because of Briony’s lie.

Fast forward to the early says of WWII and we now are focused on Robbie who has enlisted to get an early release from prison. He reconnects with Cecilia in London where she’s become a nurse, tending to the wounded. They are determined to rebuild their love and their lives that were torn apart by Briony’s lie.

Robbie ends up in Dunkirk where the British army is cornered, waiting for evacuation. An exhausted and ill Robbie clings to his memories and his hopes for the future as he awaits the evacuation.

We now are focused on Briony, grown up and also a nurse, she is beginning to grasp the terrible damage her lie has inflicted upon Cecilia and Robbie. It’s here, tending to the wounded and the dying that she begins her quest for atonement. Her quest for atonement will continue throughout her life.

Critical Acclaim
The film garnered numerous award nominations and several wins in a variety of categories:

San Diego Film Critics Society Awards: Best editing: Paul Tothill

American Society of Cinematographers, USA: Outstanding Achievement in Cinematography in Theatrical Releases: Seamus McGarvey

Art Directors Guild: Feature Film – Period Film: Sarah Greenwood

BAFTA: Best Film of 2007

Golden Globe: Best Dramatic Film 2007

Satellite Awards: Best Screenplay: Christopher Hampton

Venice Film Festival: Prize of the Forum for Cinema and Literature: Joe Wright

Why It Was Nominated
It’s lush and beautiful, but the beauty is artfully used as an idyllic backdrop to the coming storm of disasters that await the characters in their last peaceful summer of 1935. The adaptation by Hampton is a true accomplishment for a screenwriter. The book isn’t easy to work with, but he adapts it perfectly. Joe Wright’s direction brings out the best in his actors, particularly James McAvoy as Robbie and Saiorse Ronan as the young Briony. His most stunning set piece is Dunkirk in which he captures the heartbreak of that moment in history, making it all the more immediate because of the audience connection with Robbie. It’s a breathtaking and emotionally moving film that never succumbs to manipulation to pull the audience in or to move the audience to tears.

The musical score by Dario Marianelli, who scored Wright’s Pride and Prejudice, is excellent with the tap tap tap of a typewriter underscoring the film’s message of the power of words to damage and to heal.

Why It Might Win
It’s a gripping and well made film that respects its literary origins. The film has the epic sweep the Academy loves, the star crossed lovers, the horrors of war and the tragic ending. But it never becomes stale, stiff or trite. The film also boasts great cinematography, direction, screenplay and performances. The notable exclusion in its seven Oscar nominations is Joe Wright who wasn’t nominated for direction but should have been. A film and a director really are one.

Final summary
The film without a doubt deserves the Best Picture Oscar it’s nominated for. It could pull off a win based on the quality of the film and splits in the voting between No Country for Old Men and There Will Be Blood which appear to be the front runners. I can see the Coen brothers pull a best director Oscar and Atonement actually take the Best Picture prize. It’s the kind of straight forward film epic film making that Oscar loves to reward.

Javier Bardem, No Country for Old Men

Given that Bardem has already won 17 awards for this performance, including the Golden Globe and Screen Actors Guild Award, he seems a favorite, if not a shoo-in, for the award. Despite some stiff competition, he could certainly be said to have earned it. (I might vote for someone else, but that doesn’t mean his performance isn’t masterful.) Bardem plays Chigurgh, an out-an-out psychopathic assassin, but he plays it all with his eyes, which reveal a wealth of great emotion. (Not to mention his gravelly, trembling voice.) It elevates his unredeemed killer beyond the mere cardboard Frankenstein a lesser actor might have made him.

Casey Affleck, The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford

The Academy’s distinction between lead and supporting actors seems arbitrary, considering that Anthony Hopkins got a best lead actor nomination—and win—for 16 minutes of screen time in Silence of the Lambs. Why Casey Affleck got nominated for best supporting actor and not best lead performance is anyone’s guess, especially as his character, Robert Ford, is a major character in the film, enough so that he merits mention in the film’s exhausting title.

I suppose co-star Brad Pitt, as the title’s Jesse James, overshadowed him. Pitt, despite his lack of a reinforcing nomination, gives his most tender performance to date in the film, but it’s Affleck’s turn that makes the film the treasure that it is. (Certainly one of the year’s best.) The gorgeous cinematography, brilliant script and patient, poetic direction are all essential, but without a performance as strong and cryptically complex as Affleck’s, the film wouldn’t be able to stand so firmly. Combined with his fine work in Gone Baby Gone, he beats even Daniel Day-Lewis for the title of 2007’s best actor, if only for the sheer volume of solid performances.

Tom Wilkinson, Michael Clayton

They say that the roles only get better with age, for men anyway. If that’s not entirely true, surely the actors get better as they get older—there was a treasure trove of great performances this year from actors over 60 (Wilkinson, Holbrook, Tommy Lee Jones in No Country, Albert Finney in Before the Devil Knows You’re Dead.) It may not be a country for old men, but it’s certainly an industry for one.

Wilkinson has been making a name for himself only in the last few years with solid roles in indie flicks (mostly supporting, as in Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind but also lead, like In the Bedroom.) He’s a powerful and convincingly credible actor, so it’s encouraging to see him recognized by the Academy, even if he lacks the necessary buzz to take the award.

Hal Holbrook, Into the Wild

Into the Wild was an awful film, but it wasn’t the fault of its cast, particularly Hal Holbrook. He plays a father figure to the adventurer Chris McCandless, who abandons him like everyone else in the young man’s life. It might be kind of sad when McCandless leaves Catherine Keener behind, but it’s downright devastating and heartbreaking when he does it to Holbrook, who single-handedly drives home the emotional cost of McCandless’ solipsistic existence.

Philip Seymour Hoffman, Charlie Wilson’s War

Hoffman gave two highly respected performances last year…and he was also in Charlie Wilson’s War. As fine as he is in Charlie Wilson, he gave the performance of his career, hitherto, in Before the Devil Knows You’re Dead, and yet it went un-nominated. Given how crowded the lead actor category is, and what a favorite Hoffman is of the Academy (best actor, Capote, 2005), this looks more like a pity nomination, one to round out the category.

Who’s going to win?
Javier Bardem

Who should win?
Casey Affleck or Hal Holbrook
(No Country‘s not going to win enough awards in other categories?)

Who got overlooked?
Albert Finney, Before the Devil Knows You’re Dead

Cate Blanchett, Elizabeth: The Golden Age

Why she’s nominated: Blanchett is arguably the best actress working today and seems to be nominated every time she makes a film. This year she has the distinguished honor of being nominated for both Best Actress and Best Supporting (for I’m Not There). She’s also the first actress to be nominated twice for the same character (joining Paul Newman’s Fast Eddie Felson and Al Pacino’s Michael Corleone). In Elizabeth, Blanchett shows a lot of what made the first performance so stellar by displaying a great amount of strength as well as intense vulnerability. Blanchett’s scenes with Clive Owen at first sizzle and then she does a great job of appearing desperate and jealous later on. Blanchett is dynamic and Elizabeth displays it all.

Why she might win: The Academy loves Cate Blanchett. She plays the queen with great vigor and tenacity and even manages to be playful at times. The Academy likes period performances (like Nicole Kidman in The Hours and Gwenyth Paltrow in Shakespeare in Love) and Blanchett’s is the only one this year (unless you consider Marion Cotillard’s which takes place between the the early 1920s to the ’60s).

Why she might not win: She has a better chance of picking up her second Best Supporting Actress award. My instincts tell me that any Academy members that loved Elizabeth will most likely vote for her performance as Bob Dylan instead. Elizabeth was also panned by critics and I don’t think the studio has done a great job of marketing either the film or Blanchett’s performance.

Julie Christie, Away From Her

Why she’s nominated: Christie, a past winner in 1965 for Darling, plays Fiona Anderson, a woman struggling with Alzheimer’s who’s admitted to a nursing home and over time forgets her loving husband (Gordon Pinsent). Christie’s performance is heartbreaking. She’s a free-spirit who slowly begins to unravel and her scenes in the nursing home, especially when she becomes confused or frightened, will absolutely tug at your heartstrings.

Why she might win: Christie’s strength comes across very well. She’s a matter-of-fact kind of lady and manages to keep a movie about Alzheimer’s from slipping in to melodrama. You can absolutely see the terror and anguish in Gordon Pinsent’s eyes as she slips away from him and Christie shows us glimpses of the woman that captured his heart.

Why she might not win: I often wonder how powerful Christie’s performance would’ve been if it hadn’t been for Pinsent. It’s because of his character that we care about Fiona and it’s his story this film is telling. Not only is Pinsent’s snub at the Oscars a grievous mistake, but you take him out of the movie and I think we’d all of a sudden care less about Fiona. Her performance relies too heavily on his and for that the Academy may not award her.

Marion Cotillard, La Vie En Rose

Why she’s nominated: Cotillard plays French singer Edith Piaf as the film follows her rise to French icon and tumultuous collapse into drug addiction and alcoholism. Cotillard seamlessly portrays the troubled singer and embodies her for a few decades, and for such a young actor that is a noble feat. Unlike some biopics which come off as mere impersonations, Cotillard plays with the role and creates a version of Edith which many did not know: her private life.

Why she might win: The Academy has a recent obsession with biopics, especially when discussing real women (Helen Mirren as Queen Elizabeth II, Reese Witherspoon as June Carter Cash, Charlize Theron as Aileen Wuornos, and Nicole Kidman as Virginia Woolf). Cotillard actually gets to break away from some of that because she brings to light a personality that most Americans aren’t even familiar with and gets to play around with some of the specifics about the character while maintaining true to the film’s intent. Cotillard’s dedication to the performance is exemplary and undeniable as we see her body and personality go through a range of emotions and changes.

Why she might now win: Cotillard does not have a very strong body of work. Foreign films also very rarely win in the acting categories (I can only think of Roberto Benigni’s Life is Beautiful off the top of my head). She’s up against much more seasoned nominees in Christie, Blanchett, and Laura Linney and the beloved underdog Ellen Page.

Laura Linney, The Savages

Why she’s nominated: Perhaps the most surprising nominee, Linney deserves to be recognized because Wendy Savage is an emotional wreck and Linney makes it look effortless. Vulnerable and stubborn, empathetic and approval-seeking, whatever the emotion, Linney nails it. Her time with Phillip Seymour Hoffman (a nominee for Charlie Wilson’s War) on-screen is terrific and she brings out a different kind of femininity that is very rarely shown in movies.

Why she might win: She held her own with Philip Seymour Hoffman. She deals with death in a matter-of-fact way and the movie, and Linney’s performance, never skirts around how uncomfortable death makes us all. Linney is also deserving because she’s given several good performances in her career and has been nominated twice before (once for Best Actress).

Why she might now win: I would say Linney has the least chance of any actress to win. She doesn’t have the benefit of having been seriously considered for any other acting awards at various other ceremonies and some are saying that Linney being included is what knocked Angelina Jolie out of contention for A Mighty Heart. Though her performance here is very good, we’ve seen this territory from Linney done before and this wouldn’t even rank in her Top 3 performances of all-time (behind The Squid and the Whale, Kinsey, and Mystic River in that order).

Ellen Page, Juno – “FSR’s Little Darling”

Why she’s nominated: Ellen Page took what several actresses did this year–namely, act pregnant–and nailed a role that no one else could’ve done better. We see rough-around-the-edges Juno and her smartass ways and learn that underneath that gruff, pregnant exterior is a fragile girl who is inches away from breaking down. Page’s performance, though saddled with some “cool” dialogue, takes off as we get to know her and how she fits in to the world around her. Page, who turned 21 yesterday (the 21st), shows a great maturity as an actress even at her young age.

Why she might win: Page has been right there the entire way. Blanchett and Linney have not been included in some of the awards races from the Globes to the BAFTAs, but Page was nominated along with Cotillard and Christie for all the major awards. She’s been the little engine that could this entire time, and with Christie and Cotillard perhaps cancelling each other’s votes, Page could pull an Adrien Brody this year (Brody won in 2002 for The Pianist, upsetting heavily-favored Jack Nicholson for About Schmidt and Daniel Day Lewis for Gangs of New York). It’s also refreshing to see an actress give a wholly, genuinely original performance–a performance not bound by history or actual events. Juno is both the comedic and dramatic center of the film and Page pulls both off flawlessly.

Why she might now win: She would tie with Marlee Matlin (Children of a Lesser God) for being the youngest actress by winning at age 21 (however she would be the youngest if you counted years and days). I suspect we’ve only begun to see what Page can do and she could have a long line of Oscar nominations ahead of her, but this may not be the year. The Best Actress award is tight this year, tighter than any other year I can remember, and Page may be the sacrifice to such a close race.

Who will win?

Julie Christie, Away From Her

Who should win?

Ellen Page, Juno

Who got overlooked?

Say what you will about her personally but Angelina Jolie’s performance in A Might Heart was easily one of the best. It’s a shame that the Academy let her personal life get in the way of how they judged her professional one.

Amy Ryan, Gone Baby Gone

Amy Ryan has strong credentials having earned two Tony nominations and Outer Critics Circle awards for her work on the New York stage. She’s also spent years doing role on television. Ryan is relatively new to film but with her role in Gone Baby Gone she’s on her way to establishing herself as a fine film actress. Up until now she hasn’t had a big role, though she gave a memorable turn in Capote as a small town star struck housewife. Ryan plays Helene McCready, the drug addicted mother of a missing four year old girl in Ben Affleck’s Gone Baby Gone. Ryan shows us one woman in front of the television cameras when Helene plays the role of grieving mother and quite another when those cameras are turned off. This is a remarkably layered performance. Ryan slowly lets us see the complexity of who Helene really is and she does it so artfully that we never see the wheels turning or the actor’s art at work.

Why is Ryan nominated? Simple. Ryan keeps us interested in Helene who is impossible to like, but fascinating to watch. It’s a great performance.

Why might Ryan win? It’s impossible to imagine the film without her powerful performance.

Cate Blanchett, I’m Not There

Blanchett goes into the Oscar ceremonies nominated for two Oscars. Best Actress for her reprisal of her role as Elizabeth I and Best Supporting Actress for playing Bob Dylan, the iconic singer songwriter.

The second is a better piece of work than the first and the nomination that was truly deserved. In Todd Haynes I’m Not There Blanchett takes on the role of the young Bob Dylan and it’s interesting to watch her work the role. She never tries to become Dylan, that’s never really the point of the film. It’s not about impersonations or “becoming” Dylan as much as showing another facet of the legendary singer/songwriter’s life in an unconventional way.

Why is Blanchett nominated? She’s fascinating to watch in scenes where Dylan converses with Alan Ginsberg, makes a move on a socialite and tries to escape an intrusive journalist.

Why might she win? The performance is risky and the actress walks a tightrope without a net.

Ruby Dee, American Gangster

A long distinguished career behind her, the actress provided some strong emotional moments in Ridley Scott’s American Gangster. Portraying Mama Lucas, the stalwart and steady mother of Frank Lucas, Dee nails the character and is memorable even though her screen time is fairly limited. Ruby Dee is a classic, a heavyweight who has had one of those careers that while not flashy has always been grounded in her formidable presence and talent. She’s the kind of actress that can make five minutes on film memorable.

Why is Dee nominated? She has great moments that stay with you. One when her son has bought her the house that represents the American Dream and the other when that same Dream purchased with misbegotten gains is ready to fall down around her as the law catches up with her son.

Why might Dee win? Dee has already won the SAG award for the role and it remains to be seen is she will be given an Oscar, perhaps not just for this film but as a nod to her entire career.

Tilda Swinton, Michael Clayton

Tilda Swinton is one of the great unknown actresses working in film. Its unlikely most film goers know who she is. Much of her work has been in independent films, though she is probably most recognized for her role as the White Witch in the Chronicles of Narnia. In Tony Gilroy’s Michael Clayton Swinton takes on the role of villain and goes after it without flinching. She plays Karen Crowder. She keeps her face blank, impassive, but we can see the inner workings of a corporate counsel whose only loyalty is to her bosses, no matter what evil they might perpetrate, no matter what damage they inflict on the innocent. It is as usual, an adept performance, the kind Swinton has always given during her twenty plus years as a film actress.

Why was Swinton nominated? This is a tough character to play, one with no redeeming qualities. She has to make us want to watch her even as much as we hate her Karen Crowder.

Why might Swinton win? Swinton never steps back or tries to distance herself. She successfully brings this frightening vision of a woman wearing blinders to everything but the job to chilly life.

Saoirse Ronan, Atonement

The youngest nominee of the group, Ronan takes on the difficult role of Briony Tallis in director Joe Wright’s adaptation of Ian McEwan’s novel, Atonement. Ronan not only holds her own but surpasses the work of some of her more experienced elders in her role as the catalyst to romantic disaster and heartbreak. Briony sets the events in motion that cause the destruction that she will spend the rest of her life trying to atone for.

Why was Ronan nominated? Ronan has to carry the first crucial part of the film and the young actress creates the role with confidence and conviction. Her Briony is an intelligent young girl, a budding writer who we think is old beyond her years. But her sheltered life mixed with her imagination produces the lie that sends the lives of those around her into a tailspin.

Why might Ronan win? Her performance is the performance of a seasoned actor, not a child. This isn’t a child being natural and cute, but a talented professional giving a mature performance that enhances the film. She makes Briony complex both hateful and sympathetic at the same time.

Now to the really big question that’s eating away at everyone who watches the Oscars. Who will win? Who should win? Any one of these actresses is deserving of being handed the gold statuette and it’s hard to predict their choice. I think its wide open, but for the sake of making a prediction here go.

Who will win?

Cate Blanchett, I’m Not There

Who should win?

Amy Ryan, Gone Baby Gone

Who was overlooked?

Emmanuelle Seigner, The Diving Bell and the Butterfly

As Céline Desmoulins, the loyal ex-girlfriend, the mother of Jean-Dominque Bauby’s children she brought to life a woman who stands by the man who left her. It’s a beautiful realization of a woman who overcomes her anger with grace. But she’s not a cardboard cutout of loyalty. Her scene sitting at Bauby’s bedside when the woman he left her for calls him to explain her absence is powerful.

As we discussed previously, parties are all about planning and thematics. We’ve still got a few days left before the Academy Awards happen, so get those invitations out soon! Pick a theme! What kind of theme? Well, my friends, Beer Pong isn’t going to cut it this year.

The Oscar Party

Perhaps the simplest of all the Oscar parties, this one you treat as though your house were hosting a red carpet event. Everyone is expected to show up in a stunning gown for the men or a smart tuxedo for the ladies. Er. Reverse that. Or don’t, what you do behind closed doors is your deal. I won’t tell.

This party should be accompanied by champagne, or at least white wine. Cheese and cracker platers, no doubt, to keep things classy. The background music? While, musical scores, of course. If you happen to have a soundtrack to some of the nominees, even better. If not, anything by John Williams will be just great. Also, don’t be afraid to Million Dollar Baby-it and wear your fancy clothes to McDonald’s after the shows over.

A Best Picture Party

Choose one film and celebrate it! Which is your choice to win? Your favorite? Pick it and make it a theme. No Country For Old Men tickle your fancy? Sport a mustache or a bowl cut, crack open some cold beers and put your boots on the table. There Will Be Blood? More like there will be cowboy hats and milkshakes for you to drink up! From across the room! Drink it up! I don’t recommend a Juno party, simply because the mixture of alcohol and a lack of condoms can have disastrous, though sometimes hilarious and charming, results. But usually just disastrous.

Just make sure to coordinate all aspects of your theme to run together. You can’t mix domestic beer and fancy English dress for Atonement. That would just be weird. Try on these pre-made combos for a select few films.

Ratatouille – Pot luck, everyone brings a dish. Beverage of choice shall be a selection of red and white wines.

American Gangster – Beer and whiskey. Everyone should show up dressed like its 1970.

Michael Clayton – Martinis all around, with stiff necked business suits and a tense atmosphere.

3:10 to Yuma – Whiskey and the score from 3:10 blazing in the background. Beer for those that can’t handle their rye.

There Will Be Blood – Milkshakes. Nuff said.

Juno – Beer. White wine. Unprotected sex.

Sweeney Todd – Ale or wine, wrist cutting. (Just kidding!)

Moving on….

Fun and Games

What fun is watching a results show without placing a few bets? If money is too steep, just play for pride. If you lose, just maintain you weren’t playing for anything and then claim you voted with your heart, which is deeper and more meaningful than the Academy. So grab a pen and pad and keep track of who can accurately predict the winners in each category. Check out our full Oscar Week coverage to tip the odds in your favor!

Normally, you’ll never hear the Movie Style Guy recommend charades, but on Oscar night I’ll make an exception. Take a list of all the nominated pictures, mix them up, and have everyone act out the particular film. Lots of embarrassing entertainment on tap for this one.

The I Don’t Care

Let’s face it, a lot of people don’t care this year. A lot of the nominees were fairly quiet while in theaters and don’t have a big following like Titanic or Lord of the Rings. So order up a pizza, have some friends over (they’ll bring the beer) and flip back and forth between the Academy Awards and whatever else is on. I can almost guarantee there’s a Law & Order marathon on somewhere.

Plot
Juno tells the story of Juno MacGuff, a 16-year old girl (Page) who gets bored one day and has some sex with her lanky, awkward boyfriend Paulie Bleeker (Cera). Their union, their first foray into the world of sexual activity, leads to a very “unholy” pink plus sign, the precursor to a pregnancy. Juno is then forced to deal with her little mess, testing the waters of adoption in a somewhat humorous an very non-preachy way, but ultimately deciding to have the kid and give ‘em up to a young child-less couple who may not be exactly what they seem. It’s a coming of age story that packs a punch, a tale of a strong, whip-smart girl who isn’t as strong as she thinks, and its ultimately a smart story that grew into a fantastic cinematic experience that doesn’t disappoint.

Acclaim
Aside from its 4 Oscar Nominations: Best Picture, Best Director (Jason Reitman), Best Actress (Ellen Page) and Best Original Screenplay (Diablo Cody); Juno has racked up 33 award wins and 21 other nominations since it dropped at Toronto in August. It is currently ranked #138 on the Top 250 movies of all-time according to IMDB with an 8.3/10 rating (53,753 votes). Among the wins, Diablo Cody seems to be cleaning house just about everywhere she has been nominated; BAFTA, COFCA, Critic’s Choice, National Board of Review, Online Film Critics Society and the Writers Guild of America — She won them all. The film has also garnered a great amount of recognition for Ellen Page, who is easily the breakout sensation of the year. In a world where studios are reluctant to make films where the lead character is a strong female, Page has broken through with her own brand of strength — a strength that comes with being intelligent, unwavering and at times even vulnerable.

But heck, those are just awards. What did the critics have to say about Juno?

“”THE BEST PICTURE OF THE YEAR. How can I choose this warm-hearted comedy about a pregnant teenager, when the year was rich with serious drama? I tried out other titles in the No. 1 position, but my heart told me I had to be honest: This was my true love, and I could not be unfaithful. It is so hard to make a great comedy at all, and harder still to make one that is intelligent, quick, charming, moving and yes, very, very funny. It begins with the pacing of a screwball comedy and it ends as a portrait of characters we have come to love. It is so very rare to sit with an audience that leans forward with delight and is in step with every turn and surprise of an uncommonly intelligent screenplay. It is so rare to hear laughter that is surprised, unexpected and delighted. So rare to hear it coming during moments of recognition, when characters reflect exactly what we’d be thinking, just a moment before we get around to thinking it. So rare to feel the audience joined into one warm, shared enjoyment. So rare to hear a movie applauded.” - Roger Ebert, CHICAGO SUN TIMES

Do you really need more than that? I think Rog pretty much sums it up. Ok, one more.

“JUNO is the best film of the year by a mile.” - Neil Miller, Film School Rejects

Not as cool as Ebert, but you get the point…

Why It Might Win
This is where being the most notable film of the Best Picture nominees could come in handy. Yes, No Country for Old Men and There Will Be Blood are the traditional, odds-on favorites to win the award, but will Academy voters really be able to pick a clear winner? If they are unable to decide as a whole, then Juno could sneak in and take this one. It is the film that seems to be getting all the attention leading up to the final push for Oscar, both positive and negative. And as they say, all publicity is good publicity. For Juno, there is certainly hope.

Why It Might Not Win
As we pointed out earlier, Juno is not the Academy’s traditional cup of tea. Rarely have they rewarded a comedy, especially one with so much pop appeal. No Country and Blood would both be easy choices, choices that no one would really have a problem with. It could be the hype, it could be the type of film and it could be the fact that it has run into a few films that are simply more fit for the award, but it certainly wouldn’t be a surprise if the Academy made a pass on Juno, despite the fact that it is the most unique of all the nominees.

Final Summary
Juno may end up as Oscar’s little darling, the fun, light-hearted comedy that made it all the way to the final round of the biggest show, but it has only a little chance of taking home the gold. No one will be surprised if Juno doesn’t win Best Picture, as there are other great nominees. But if by some strange twist of fate she does walk away with all the marbles, expect the press core equivalent of a riot — and we all know how much those Hollywood-types like their drama.

Diablo Cody, Juno

Why It’s Nominated: If you haven’t heard of Juno, welcome to Earth. Ever year Oscar a “little film that could” must be captured and celebrated and lavished with awards and this year, it’s Juno. The sassy acting of star Ellen Page brings this quirky story to life and helped earn it this nod.

Why It Might Win: Juno received a lot of big nominations and a lot of big hype. The Academy also loves to give underdog movies big awards. Juno, with its sharp, off-kilter story and the favor of the crowd behind it may look to follow in the footsteps of Little Miss Sunshine with a big win here. On a truly script level, this film may have some weaknesses compared to other entrants, but the pure level of hype behind this film will blind most critical interpretations of the plot.

Why It Might Not Win: If Juno has a weakness, it’s the critical reception against being so high. The Academy members may end up going in a more unexpected way, but it’s hard to see this media darling going home with this award. On it’s own merit, the film may not stand up as well to some of the more dramatic winners of past that keep a hard edge to them and are often more strongly written, but this film has a lot of people behind it.

Nancy Oliver, Lars and the Real Girl

Why It’s Nominated: Another quirky comedy-drama works its way on to the list. Soon I’ll start wondering if people are writing these movies just for the attention come Oscar season. This script offers up a unique story and has the talent of Academy up-and-coming wonderboy Ryan Gosling attached. Writer Nancy Oliver previously worked on the acclaimed HBO drama Six Feet Under.

Why It Might Win: Lars would win based on the true quirkiness of it all. It is an odd and inventive idea that is played for drama and laughs and has a small, but passionate, legion of supporters behind it. First timer Oliver faces an uphill battle to capture this award.

Why It Might Not Win: Aside from an unusual premise, Lars doesn’t seem to be able to compete on the same level as some of the other scripts in this arena. Much of the acclaim for the film goes to Ryan Gosling and his performance which doesn’t, and shouldn’t, mean accolades for the script. Further, the Academy rarely awards films a bit on the stranger side the grand prizes.

Tony Gilroy, Michael Clayton

Why It’s Nominated: Gilroy is a talented writer with such titles as Proof of Life and the Bourne films under his belt, but none of his films have been as highly praised as Michael Clayton. This taught melodrama slowly ratchets up the tension throughout the film and stays smart and relevant throughout. Gilroy also looks to take home the goldenboy for his directorial efforts.

Why It Might Win: This films subject matter, namely evil big business, is timely and gained a strong foothold in the era of government distrust and anti-big business feelings. The timeliness of it gives it a strong boost as does its strong roots in the dramatic arena. Of all the films, only Clayton can claim to a thrilling drama, or one with any real sense of danger throughout it.

Why It Might Not Win: Michael Clayton has been oft defeated already this award season by the likes of No Country for Old Men and There Will Be Blood, and the only real challenge it should face in Best Original is Juno. The love and hype behind Juno may prove fatal to Clayton.

Nominee #4: Brad Bird, Ratatouille

Why It’s Nominated: Anything Pixar touches turns to gold and Ratatouille pulled in a strong box office and good critical reception with its cute story about a mouse cook.

Why It Might Win: Ratatouille faces a big uphill battle to capture this award. The cute factor of the story and its message of acceptance are the only thing putting it into contention.

Why It Might Not Win: It won’t win. I honestly don’t know why this film is nominated in this category. I felt it to be, by far, the worst of the Pixar films with a weak resolution and a mostly cookie cutter plot. Ratatouille will not take home the Oscar.

Tamara Jenkins, The Savages

Why It’s Nominated: The Savages may be one of the best reviewed films of the year, but its also one of the least viewed. The film can be, at times, both loving and hateful, dark and light, sad and funny. Typical of an Oscar favored movie for this category, it’s nomination was little surprise to those few who knew about it.

Why It Might Win: This complex film offers up everything at once that the Academy likes to reward, from its unknown indie stature to its subject matter of family reuniting. However, the battle will be a hard for the Savages.

Why It Might Not Win: The Savages has only an outside chance at victory. The real stars of the movie are the actors who pumped life into the script. Movies like this generally would fail without a stellar cast behind them, and this is no exception. Audiences who aren’t a member of the reviewing press often look on the film less favorably than their cynical peers.

Who Will Win?

Diablo Cody, Juno

The love boat behind this ship can’t be beat.

Who Should Win:

Tony Gilroy, Michael Clayton

A really smart and coherent story that doesn’t rely on its actors or its gimmicks to glue people to the screen.

Who Was Overlooked:

Kelly Masterson, Before the Devil Knows You’re Dead