At my own event, sponsored by National Public Radio, eight geeky film critics pontificated upon their picks, careful to note that the Oscar’s was “The Academy’s party, not our own”. Their awards have already been given out. The Oscars is the final stop.

The day’s facilitator, Larry Mantle from “Airtalk” got the critics talking on eight major categories (for those of you hoping to glean some insight into the ever fateful Sound Mixing category, you’ll need to find a different blog). Here’s what they had to say:

Best Animated Feature.

All agree that Up is the surpassing favorite. Larry Mantle called the first ten minutes, the best ten minutes from any film this year. There were some poo-poos about Wes Anderson and his Fantastic Mr. Fox. Despite the A-list vocal cast, this award is about storytelling not vocal talent. In addition, Mr. Andeson’s supposed hands off non-involvement in the process (he oversaw the London production from his apartment in Paris) has many questioning his definition of auterism. The Story of Kells, that fifth entry that no one has seen yet, was praised by all, as little seen foreign films are want to do. When its mid-March release date comes, be sure to check out what is some of the most visually unique animation you’ve seen in a long time.

Best Supporting Actress was overwhelming nodded to Mo’nique. It is a blisteringly evil performance, however, one critic pointed out that performances such as those are actually easier to give than the subtle ones in which the actress “makes it look easy.” Many of the critics pointed out Vera Farmiga from Up in the Air as one such performance that is arguably more deserving of the award.

The Best Original Screenplay was the most divided of any of the awards prognosticating. As mentioned before, the first ten minutes of Up were tremendous and also a narrative risk, starting off with sobs, and saving the humor for the second act. Inglourious Basterds was mentioned as both the work of a genius and the work of an insensitive egomaniac. The Hurt Locker also received attention, however more so for it being the weakest part of the film’s overall package, but potentially benefitting from the wave of acclaim that might sweep it up over the course of the evening.

Best Actor

People all agree that Jeff Bridges is “due”. This is his fourth nomination and he is a beloved figure in Hollywood, always helpful when the acting block of the Academy turns the voting process into popularity driven high school elections. Poor George Clooney. Three months ago he was the front runner and now he barely gets a mention. The dark horse candidate is Jeremy Renner, who, like his screenwriting colleagues, may benefit from a potential wave of momentum for The Hurt Locker.

Best Actress

One of the closer races of this year’s awards. Sandra Bullock continues to be the front runner, however the critics I heard don’t necessarily agree. They’re going with Streep, who hasn’t won in 27 years, but has been nominated 13 times in that span. She’ll be held back by the mediocrity of her movie, which they call “half a movie”. If only they could cut out the “Julie” part of Julie & Julia.

______________________________________________________________

Best Picture: 7 out of 10

A Serious Man, Up, and District 9 all blindsided me. I didn’t give an animated feature enough credit (glad that Academy voters proved me wrong). I thought A Serious Man had been long forgotten. And, I figured the “people’s choice” was already taken care of with The Blind Side, yet District 9 found its way into our hearts and ballots as well. Quite  frankly, I would’ve picked Star Trek over District 9 as the second “people’s choice”, especially given all the hullaballoo over The Dark Knight’s snub from last year, and the parallels that critics were drawing between it and Star Trek for half of last year. In any case, I want to gloat a little over my correct pick on The Blind Side. Not even Dave Karger of Entertainment Weekly saw fit to include this one on his “maybe” list.

_____________________________________________________________

Best Actor: 5 for 5

No surprises here.

_____________________________________________________________

Best Actress: 5 for 5

Again, no surprises.

_____________________________________________________________

Best Supporting Actor : 3.5 out of 5

I picked Tucci, but decided to go with his role as the doting and kind husband in Julie and Julia over his role of the pedophiliac killer in the poorly reviewed Lovely Bones. I guess nice guys really do finish last.  My other miss was not to include Matt Damon. Quite frankly, I’ve seen Damon give far better performances as Jason Bourne than as the rugby player in Invictus. The South African accent is distracting, and it seemed the role was a little too cliche. Ah well.

______________________________________________________________

Best Supporting Actress: N/A

Like I said before, this is Mo’nique’s to lose. Nonetheless, I was surprised to not see any of the lovely ladies from Inglourious Basterds included here. Instead we’re stuck with more sex kitten theatrics from pouty Penelope Cruz in that awful Nine movie.

Best Animated: 4 out of 5

What the heck is this The Secret of Kells movie? Where are my meatballs! Surprised to see Up still doing time in this category as well. Some worry it may lose votes here as those who vote it for Best Picture won’t vote for it here. I say, Pixar will remain undefeated.

____________________________________________________________

Best Adapted Screenplay: 4 for 5

I’m remiss that Where the Wild Things are has been shut out in every category. The snub of the year if you ask me. Often times the Screenplay category will recognize those riskier films that may not have had the pedigree to earn a Best Picture nod. Wild Things just lost that ever powerful momentum after its initial release date. There did not appear to be any significant push by its studio, Warner Bros., either to put it in contention. Shame.

_____________________________________________________________

Best Original Screenplay: 4 out of  5

(500) Days of Summer was my error here, and I echo my points from above. This quirkier, not-quite-Best-Picture-material film got snubbed all around, DESPTE a heavy push from its studio for some serious Oscar consideration. Nonetheless, I’m happy to see the Coen Brothers take its place with their script for the very potent A Serious Man. Where’s Michael Stuhlbarg’s acting nom though?!?!?!?!

Final Tally (minus Best Supporting Actress noms): 32.5/40 or 81%. Not bad. I will consult on your Oscar pool if you’d like. For a small fee, of course.

What it looks like when they announce the nominees at 5:30am

The groundhog won’t be the only creature forecasting the future tomorrow. February 2 is also the day the Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences announces their nominees for the Oscars. I’ll give my own predictions for nominees below. My predictions are based on the following:

1. Performance at the other awards shows (Golden Globes, Screen Actors Guild, Producers Guild, National Film Critics, and various festivals)

2. Box office take

3. Metacritic Score

4. Momentum

The fourth category can be the most dominant force of the four, but is rooted in all three. In addition, momentum is dependent upon the concerted effort of the studios to position their film, their actors, etc. into the spotlight. This is similar to the politicking that goes on during election years. The month of January is critical for stars and their directors to do press interviews, be seen at screenings, and offer up plenty of juicy sound bites so that we don’t forget about them when it’s time to jot down their name on our ballots (I speak of the 5500 or so Academy voters).

Here’s what I think:

Best Picture

Avatar (will be in a showdown with Hurt Locker)

Up in the Air (losing steam, but is still a shoe-in)

The Hurt Locker (possible frontrunner)

Precious (Oprah still loves it)

An Education (There’s always got to be a British film in there)

Inglourious Basterds (will never win)

Invictus (Clint Eastwood’s films are virtual shoe-ins. He’s had a film nominated in this category for four of the last five years)

(500) Days of Summer (this year’s Juno entry)

The Blind Side (Sandra Bullock is the woman of the moment. Her film will benefit from this umbrella effect)

Crazy Heart (tons of momentum after Jeff Bridges’ SAG and Globes wins)

___________________________________________________________

Actor

Jeff Bridges, Crazy Heart

Colin Firth, A Single Man

George Clooney, Up in the Air

Jeremy Renner, The Hurt Locker

Morgan Freeman, Invictus

__________________________________________________________

Best Actress

Sandra Bullock, The Blind Side

Carey Mulligan, An Education

Gabourey Sidibe, Precious

Meryl Streep, Julie and Julia

Helen Mirren, The Last Station

___________________________________________________________

Best Supporting Actress

Mo’nique, Precious

Doesn’t really matter who the rest are. This award is Mo’nique’s. Needless to say, you’re sure to see some of the ladies from Up in the Air and Inglourious Basterds represented here.

____________________________________________________________

Best Supporting Actor

Christopher Plummer, The Last Station

Peter Saarsgard, An Education

Woody Harrelson, The Messenger

Cristoph Waltz, Inglourious Basterds

Stanley Tucci, Julie and Julia

____________________________________________________________

Best Director

James Cameron, Avatar

Kathryn Bigelow, The Hurt Locker

Jason Reitman, Up in the Air

Lee Daniels, Precious

Quentin Tarantino, Inglourious Basterds

____________________________________________________________

Best Animated Film

Up

Fantastic Mr. Fox

Alvin and the Chipmunks: the Squeakwell (just kidding. Making sure you’re paying attention)

The Princess and the Frog

Coraline

Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs (just beating out Ice Age and Monsters v. Aliens)

_____________________________________________________________

Best Adapted Screenplay

Up in the Air

Precious

An Education

Where the Wild Things Are

District 9

___________________________________________________________

Best Original Screenplay

Inglourious Basterds

The Hurt Locker

(500) Days of Summer

The Messenger

Up

________________________________________________________

A few things to note;

-The animated films still get no love from the big boys in the Best Picture race……

-…but the Blind Side does. Looks like ten nominees gave the fans what they wanted. Popular movies being selected over more high brow arthouse fare that no one sees (cough, cough, The Reader, cough, cough).

-These predictions were actually pretty easy to make. The Best Actors feel all but certain, as do the first four of my Best Picture pics, and all of my directors. If anything, the Best Animated Race looks to be the most interesting (especially if frontrunner, Up, is put in the Best Picture Race, thus leaving the door open to any of the other four to win)

-To the few of you that actually liked the movie Nine, rest assured it will have plenty of songs nominated.

-Let the Oscar office pools begin!

You already know my initial thoughts about Avatar from a prior post. I saw it again last night with my girlfriend who hates Sci-Fi/Fantasy. She was blown away. And even though she contends that Blind Side was her favorite film of the year, she believes, “without a doubt, Avatar should win Best Picture”. Yes, we both loved Up in the Air, but really, Academy, can it really hold a flame next to Avatar? You may say it’s not a fair comparison, but what are we trying to reward with the Best Picture Oscar? Solid and original filmmaking? Or filmmaking, that while arguably flawed in places, causes a global sensation? Water cooler conversation is not about George Clooney’s dashing performance in Up in the Air. It’s about the world of Pandora, the bravura of James Cameron, and whether or not we found those blue aliens sexy.

As of now, Avatar is on pace to break Titanic’s worldwide box office record. Sure, the numbers are inflated because of the hefty 3-D ticket prices we’re all paying to see it, but the fact remains I can name only a few people I know who haven’t seen it. Avatar is bringing the movie-going public together in a way that Harry Potter did with books in the last decade. It’s a failsafe talking point, and whether we loved it or not, we all have an opinion. And we all agree it looks georgeous? But will we agree that it was the Best Picture of the Year?

As for the Best Supporting Actress, this will go to that actress who was well known around the biz, but delivered one of those “transformative” acting jobbies in a highly touted film. Kind of like Eddie Murphy did in Dreamgirls. This year it will be another funny person: Mo’nique, best known as a stand up comic, will walk away easily with the award for her role as the abusive mother in Precious. Many also lauded Anna Kendrick’s role as a perky young upstart in Up in the Air as Oscar-worthy, but I don’t see it happening. If costar Vera Farmiga’s role is seen as “supporting” she will earn this nomination over Kendrick. In addition, Kendrick’s involvement with the very un-Oscar worthy Twilight franchise, will undermine her credibility. Nonetheless, I applaud Kendrick on a GREAT year, and even though she hasn’t snagged the teeny mag cover photos like her hot Twilight costarts Taylor Lautner, Kristin Stewart, and the pale guy, she has something they don’t. Talent.

Best Picture of the Year

1. The Hurt Locker

Kathryn Bigelow’s Iraq War set drama/action film is being hailed as the first successful movie made about this current conflict. It made only $13 million at the box office, and if it wins, would be the lowest grossing Best Picture ever (inflation adjusted). However, it also the best reviewed American film of the year, topping the annual Metacrtic chart at a whopping 94.

2. Avatar

It may not win, but it can’t be ignored either. It has made some Best Of lists, but for those it hasn’t it has at least garnered mention by the critic as to the reasons for its absence. Most everyone agrees upon the groundbreaking merits of its FX, but the cliched story line is the unanimous reason that holds it back from greatness.

3. Up in the Air

Everyone knew this movie was going to be good. It received advanced acclaim at the Toronto Film Festival back in September. However, at best it looked to be shaping up to be the “little indie that could” along the lines of past Best Picture nominees of the same vein: Lost in Translation, Sideways, Little Miss Sunshine, and Juno. However, I think we all expected star-studded holiday releases like Nine, Brothers, and Invictus to be better than they are. The lukewarm reception to films like those has allowed Up in the Air to rise to to the level of Best Picture front runner. Unfortunately, what comes with this prominence is a sense of recently developed backlash. Everyone wants to bring down a winner. Don’t let it affect your opinion of this excellent film.

4. Inglourious Basterds

This wouldn’t be the first Tarantino picture to earn a spot in this category. Pulp Fiction was nominated in 1994, and many call Basterds a superior film. The skill of the filmmaking is undeniable, and Brad Pitt’s supporting role adds mainstream credibility. However, Basterds place in this category is cemented by the new ten film limit, allowing voters to think a little more outside the box, where the Tarantinos of Hollywood reside.

5. Precious

Oprah loves it, and so does everyone else. Precious will earn numerous awards, maybe more than any other film save for Avatar and Up in the Air. Expect to see it represented in acting categories, directing, and screenwriting.

Beyond those five, nothing else is certain. Remember, this is the first year that the Best Picture category will have TEN nominees. I can’t think of ten truly great films of 2009, so I expect some surprises and undue generosity to bubble films like Nine. For the record, I disagree with TEN nominees. I think it undermines the credibility of the award, and will perversely skew standards of quality in the industry. Yet, I also believe The Dark Knight was a far superior film to Best Picture nominee The Reader in 2008. Anyways, I predict the following “mediocre” films as possibilities to round out the Top Ten:

1. Nine

2. The Blind Side

3. Invictus (but only if it can pull off at least $40 million at the box office)

4. The Hangover (rewarding such popular fare is largely the reason for expanding the award to Ten)

5. Star Trek (ditto to above)

And five Good films that are longer shots, but more deserving:

1. An Education (by the strength of Carey Mulligan’s certain acting nomination, this film may just make it)

2. Up (has the best chance of transcending the JV Best Animated category and making it into the Big Leagues, the first animated film to do so since Beauty and the Beast in 1992).

3. Disctrict 9 (way more inventive and gripping than the more popular Star Trek, and made for a fraction of the cost).

4. A Serious Man (will be held back by its pedigree: Coen. Voters may feel they’ve been honored too recently for 2007 winner, No Country for Old Men).

5. Where the Wild Things Are (for whatever reason, this film has really lost steam since its October release. Nonetheless, I feel it works on both an emotional and visual level and moved me more than any other film this year).

I quite enjoyed Sherlock Holmes. Film historians have classified the 19th Century British sleuth as the most filmed character of all-time, having appeared in over 100 film and television adaptations. I have seen only a few of these previous works, but can’t imagine a better Holmes than Robert Downey Jr. Just as he was in Iron Man, he embodies the superhero archetype with a loquacious but fragile arrogance that masks an underlying loneliness bordering on sociopathy. He is a magnetic actor to watch, in large part due to a full-head of hair that should be getting product endorsement offers from every mousse and gel on the market.

Metacritic is charting Guy Ritchie’s Holmes adaptation as only a 57. The crticism seems to mostly stem from the action movie theatrics that this version takes on. In the same style of previous works, Snatch, and Lock, Stock, and Two Smokin’ Barrels, Guy Ritchie enjoys the slo-mo dirty bare-knuckle boxing sequences that showcase flesh rippling across bones as if they were ocean waves. It should be noted that A.C. Doyle intended his detective creation to also be a master of certain martial arts. I don’t believe critics have overlooked this fact, its merely that they see it as catering to a generational audience that is too often diagnosed with having a collective case of ADD (for which MTV, rap music, and video games are mostly to blame).

I disagree. This Sherlock Holmes is the movie of our time. It seems that 50% of critical success comes from making a movie that is “timeless”. Yet, timelessness is a distinction given by the subjective individual, just as time itself is a relative concept. Sherlock Holmes under Basil Rathbone’s quipped Queen’s English is considered the benchmark, but his films will not hold up to the majority of the theater-going public nowadays, myself proudly included. Will this Holmes be still enjoyed fifty years in the future? Who knows; but such concerns are frivolous. For now, I gladly pay my ten dollars to see Downey Jr. and Jude Law light up the screen a series of quick-take gun fights tempoed by the music of the Dropkick Murphys.  Rock on!

It just occurred to me that for the first time in its eight year history, the Oscar award for Best Animated Feature is a real toss-up. In the past, this award has typically been a no-brainer, featuring just three nominess, one of which is usally the token Pixar release from that year and the subsequent lock to win. Often times it seems that there just weren’t enough quality animated films released, and we therefore see mediocre mainstream fare like Jimmy Neutron: Boy Genius, Bolt, and Brother Bear get to claim the distinction of “Academy Award nominated film…”

2009 has been a golden year for animation of all kinds. In the spring, we were treated to Henry Selick’s stop-motion dark fable, Coraline, an experience heightened more so by seeing it in 3-D. This summer Pixar continued its fantastic run with yet another critical and commercial success, Up. Flying under the radar was the new Hiyao Miyasaki film, Ponyo, which garnered near universal acclaim for its hand-drawn beauty and environmentally conscious subtext. Finally, the holiday season brought us another stop-motion masterpiece in the form of Wes Anderson’s Fantastic Mr. Fox.  With Princess and the Frog, Disney went back to its roots with a 2-D, hand-drawn princess story that proved to still capture our fancy in a world where CGI reigns supreme.

As a dark horse candidate, Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs was recently named to Time Out London’s list of 50 Greatest Animated Films of All-Time (#49) and despite its seemingly “cheesy” content, was well-received by critics and audiences alike. If Cloudy is a dark horse, then Monster’s Vs. Aliens (notable in that it was one of the highest grossing films of the year and featured a bevy of A-list celebrity voices) is one heck of a Black Stallion. Ice Age 3: Dawn of the Dinosaurs, was also a T-Rex sized hit and given a different year would probably be a shoe-in for that third nominee spot.

According to the official rules of the Academy Awards, a maximum of three nominees is permitted if the number of animated films released in LA (the official viewing location for any and all Oscar bait) is between 8-15. However, if it is over fifteen releases, the number of nominees can be bumped up to five. Only one year previously has this category had this many. It appears, however, that 2009 will qualify for the full amount. My early forecast:

1. Up (as definitive a choice as there ever was. Will probably also win)

2. Coraline (also a pretty sure-fire pick. Will probably preclude Fantastic Mr. Fox from a nomnination as there will only be one spot voters will alow for a stop-motion film, and Mr. Anderson annoys most people)

3. The Princess and the Frog (Disney would expect nothing less from its features, and by finally featuring an African American princess, voters will honor such tardy political correctness)

4. Ponyo (with voicework from the likes of Tina Fey and Liam Neeson, enough Hollywood types were able to at least hear about this film and will choose to nominate it as the token “Arthouse” entry)

5. Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs (money speaks, and let’s not forget that every category always features at least one “Huh?” nominee)

Honorable mentions to Mr. Fox, and the ambitious (if hackneyed) 9.

It did not bode well for Avatar as recently as a few months ago, when the trailer was released, and regular Americans were treated to the first glimpse of what had been touted as “the future of movies”. The bloggers hated the look of the movie, calling it a gratuitously expensive remake of the classic animated eighties film, Fern Gully. I too could not help but think, “Really? This is it?” The main actors were ten feet tall, waifish aliens with sparkly freckles and urine colored eyes. Could I get behind that? That was the concern.

The story of the making of Avatar is as compelling, if not more so, than the story that plays out across the screen in its 2.5 hour run time. Cameron always wanted to make THE sci-fi movie of our time. He claims that as young as 14 he was already sketching out the alien world of Pandora. When George Lucas, his contemporary, made the first Star Wars movie in 1977, Cameron was only angry that he didn’t make it first. Lucas had beat him to it, capturing America’s imagination and pocketbooks, and raising movie-making to the next level of success and spectacle.

Cameron kept at it though. He continued to build the world of Pandora, and its inhabitants, the Na’vi, carefully crafting even the most minute details, such as the Latin names of all the fauna that exists on the ground. The accompanying almanac to the movie will be available for sale shortly and is over 300 pages long, complete with glossary on key terms in the Na’vi native tongue.

It is said that it took James Cameron so long to finally make Avatar because he needed to first invent the technology by which to make it. This is true. Among his many innovations used in the filming is a 3-D camera that allows him to see what the movie will look like (with all the CGI images and backdrops) while he is filming it. This allows for a more authentic interaction between the characters wearing motion capture “wetsuits” and the green screen behind them. Through these new technologies, James Cameron has solved what is dubbed “the Uncanny Valley” problem. This refers to the inability of CGI to effectively capture the subtleties of the human form and emotion. In CGI movies that portray actual humans, such as the Polar Express and Beowulf previously, there had always been something missing, something that was difficult to pinpoint, but nonetheless precluded the audience from ever developing empathy for these “almost”human-like characters. If you watch Polar Express, you’ll understand. Stare into the CGI Tom Hanks’ face and you’ll see that what is missing is a soul.

In Avatar, characters look real. In fact, they look so real that it becomes hard to imagine that what you’re seeing on screen was actually all digitally manipulated by computers. Pandora becomes a real place. The Na’vi become real beings, and you wonder, where the heck did they film this? New Zealand? Cameron claims that had he decided to not make the Na’vi ten foot tall blue aliens, and instead human figures made of flesh and hair and about four feet shorter on average, you would be not be able to tell that they were actually CGI images. In other words, you would believe that you were actually seeing the actors playing themselves. The implications of such advances in technology are numerous, and perhaps dangerous. In a way, James Cameron has allowed the Foutain of Youth to become a reality. We could make another James Bond film with Sean Connery as the lead. Indiana Jones sequels would no longer be so painful to watch as a 6o year old Harrison Ford aches his way through action sequences. We could bring our film heroes back to life, as we most want to remember them.

That future is yet to be written, but for now, Avatar is killing at the box office, well on its way to earn back its $300 million price tag, and I’ve got a new favorite for Best Picture of the year.

Nonetheless, they are a fairly significant indicator of which films and actors we might expect to be honored come Oscar time. The vague Foreign Press Association has the tendency to be a little bit more audience friendly in their selections, eschewing the inaccessible art-house fare in favor of recognition for popular movies that were actually seen by more than the hipsters in Chelsea. In addition, the Globes have always featured two separate Best Picture categories: Best Drama and Best Comedy/Musical. Of these, the Comedy/Musical category is a distant second fiddle in prestige to the dramas. At most, one film from this category actually stands a chance for any sort of Oscar buzz, and usually it is the token Musical entry from each year (Chicago, Sweeney Todd, and Dreamgirls have all been recent winners here). Just compare the average Metacritic ratings between the five dramas (81.4 average, with a high of 94 for The Hurt Locker) to that of the comedies (63.0 average, with a low of 48 for It’s Complicated). This is after all, the awards that once nominated Arnold Schwarzenegger in his role as a pregnant man in the film Junior for an acting globe. The Oscars these are not.

The films nominated for the Comedy/Musical this year are: (500) Days of Summer, The Hangover, Julie & Julia, It’s Complicated, and Nine (the token musical entry). The Hangover, Julie & Julia, and It’s Complicated stand out as relatively mediocre mainstream fare that is being recognized for a) making a lot of money and/or b) starring awards darling Meryl Streep. Her name lends credibility to any project. (500) Days of Summer stands apart as the quirky, indie entry in the tradition of Juno, Little Miss Sunshine, and Sideways before it. Films like these are always demeaned with the genre label of comedy as they compete in this category against films like the Hangover. It’s like Sir Alec Guiness starring alongside Jimmy Fallon. However, Oscar tends to pluck from the mire of “comedy” one film each year that stands apart, usually due to its lack of A-List stars and inspired song-driven soundtrack. (500) Days of Summer is shaping up to be that film this year.

That brings us to the Musical portion of this category. There is no good reason to lump musicals and comedies together, other than to imply that these genres are lesser in some way, yet deserve at least some recognition (kind of like those technical Oscar awards they hand out at an untelevised event the night before and how the recaps of shortly before the 43rd commercial break of the actual Oscar telecast). There is rarely more than one musical featured in this category each year, but for that matter, there is rarely more than one musical made each year that is worth noting by the mainstream public. Nine boasts no less than six Oscar winners, and is directed by Oscar-winner Rob Marshal (Chicago). It seems fairly obvious that this film (complete with its late December release date) had its sights set no less than on winning the Academy Award, yet the reviews have been unkind and the box office tepid. It is dead on arrival and not even the combined star power of Daniel Day Lewis, Judy Dench, et al can elevate it past its shoddy execution. Not every star is meant to be a singer.

The dramas pose a far more interesting preview of what we might expect come Oscar time. Perhaps the most surprising entry is James Cameron’s Avatar. I predicted a few months ago that this film could not live up to the hype, however thus far over 90 percent of major film critics have given it positive reviews, although the box office office might fall short. Nonetheless, FX-driven extravaganzas are typically the one area that the major awards shun, lest we bring up the Dark Knight debacle from last year’s Oscars. However, a sea change has hit Hollywood’s major prizes, due in large part to the snub the Dark Knight (the second highest grossing film of all-time, next to James Cameron’s Titanic, ironically) received last year. Given the steadily declining ratings in the Oscars telecasts over the last decade, should they recognize the films that people actually saw (The Dark Knight) and might then inspire them to tune in for four hours on March 7, or do they recognize the “pedigree” films that no one saw because they only opened in New York and LA (The Reader)? The move to ten Best Picture nominees this year is meant largely to draw in more viewers to the Oscar telecast by allowing more popular films to be nominated. If Avatar can put up decent box office numbers, expect it to be a shoe-in for one of these nominations. Cameron himself is on record saying that his film would not have stood at a chance at the Oscars if they were still just limited to five Best Picture nominees.

From the most surprising to the least surprising, The Hurt Locker, has been the highest rated film of the year, topping out at a 94 Metacritic rating. I have not seen this film, but have a hunch that a lot of the positive buzz around it is due to its director, Kathryn Bigelow. Is it surprising that a woman could so effectively capture on film the horrors of the Iraq war while also providing some heart-stopping action sequences. Well, this is the same woman who directed Point Break, the coolest surfing movie of all-time. She is also the only director of any gender to finally make a movie about the Iraq war that is actually good (there have been many attempts in the last four years, from Rendition to Lions for Lambs, do we remember any of these?). The point is, despite his gold veneer and lack of discernible genitalia, Oscar is a white and very much a proud member of the good ole boy’s club. Nearly 60 years after Jackie Robinson broke the color barrier in baseball, Denzel and Halle were able to do it at the Oscars in 2002. Yet women are still striving to break the ceiling in the directing category. Many people may not know that out of the 440 or so Best Director nominees in Oscar history, only two have been women: 0.4%. This may speak to a larger problem about Hollywood in general and the lack of female directors. Only 7% of the Directors Guild of America are women. How many female directors can you name?

More to come…..