BEST PICTURE
Who will win: ""Avatar""
Who should win: ""The Hurt Locker""
Who was snubbed: ""Fantastic Mr. Fox""/""Two Lovers""
Because ""Avatar"" made so much goddamn money and because, for reasons beyond me, James Cameron's name automatically connotes prestige. The Academy bowed at the Altar of Cameron 11 times in 1997 for ""Titanic,"" which is, as anybody who has watched it recently can attest, offensively expensive garbage. 3D looks to be the new profitable thing in big-budget filmmaking; I expect voters to side with the film that will be remembered for having gotten the ol' money-ball a-rollin'.
Kathryn Bigelow's possible masterpiece is as unapologetically frank and spectacularly visceral as any movie released in 2009. Whereas ""Avatar"" only implies anti-imperialist and pacifist attitudes, ""The Hurt Locker"" keeps its eyes and ears to the ground, illuminating both the harsh existences known by troops serving abroad and the psychic consequences of fighting in an unjust war. It's a small miracle that this film's relentless physicality agreed with the Academy's sensibilities in the first place.
""Fantastic Mr. Fox"" has the combination of a star-studded cast, clip-friendly banter and a happy ending that usually revs up Oscar voters' engines. Alas, it was an animated film (an incredibly impressive one at that), so it was disqualified from any serious consideration. James Gray's ""Two Lovers"" is the most stylistically exquisite classical drama released in 2009, yet its February theatrical release ensured that it'd be all but forgotten come nomination time.
—Dan Sullivan
BEST DIRECTOR
Who will win: James Cameron, ""Avatar""
Who should win: Kathryn Bigelow, ""The Hurt Locker""
Who doesn't deserve it: James Cameron, ""Avatar""
My pick for director this year was changed by a profile of James Cameron that Rolling Stone ran back in January—working with effects artists for ""Avatar,"" he described in detail how the blades of grass were moving in a way that didn't seem believable as the wind from helicopter turbines above disturbed them— clearly, the look of ""Avatar"" was held to a higher standard largely to keep in line with Cameron's vision for his film.
His passion and technical achievement will likely net him an Oscar win. The fact that he made over a billion dollars on the deal probably doesn't hurt either. However, the reality is that truthfully, his achievement was to make one of the prettiest, most visually stunning versions of ""Fern Gully"" the world has ever seen.
By comparison, Kathryn Bigelow (who divorced from Cameron in 1991) achieved much more with her gritty war picture ""The Hurt Locker."" Bigelow made a taught, visually-inspired war film with five percent of the budget that her ex was working with for his blue kitty masterpiece. In short, she did everything a great director can do to elevate her film above the sum of its parts. Cameron's only true achievement was converting unlimited money and time into massive box office. His inevitable victory will be hard to swallow.
—Mark Riechers
BEST ACTOR
Who will win: Jeff Bridges, ""Crazy Heart""
Who should win: Jeff Bridges, ""Crazy Heart""
Who was snubbed: Nicolas Cage, ""Bad Lieutenant""
The only thing that beguiles Academy members voting on Best Actor more than Daniel Day-Lewis are biopic performances, which have received four of the last five awards. With Day-Lewis out the field this year, the next logical bet would seem to be Morgan Freeman's portrayal of Nelson Mandela, who oversaw South Africa's transition from apartheid to democracy, presumably with some help from rugby, in ""Invictus."" Not so fast.
Freeman certainly seems to have been born for this role, and his transformation makes us realize there's more to him than that tranquilizing voice. For a film that's less concerned with national unity than watching Matt Damon tackle people, it's hard to justify the award.
Instead, it looks like it will finally be the year of the Dude. Jeff Bridges' performance as a worn-out county singer in search of redemption in ""Crazy Heart"" evokes Mickey Rourke's gritty work in ""The Wrestler"" last year, and his natural style and surprising singing ability keep the film fresh and watchable.
As for the rest, George Clooney plays a troubled traveler in ""Up in the Air,"" and Colin Firth plays a gay college professor who loses his partner in ""A Single Man,"" and Jeremy Renner plays a detached James Dean type in ""The Hurt Locker.""
Overall, it's a solid bunch, though I would've replaced either of those latter three with Nicolas Cage, who finally got a chance to apply his awkward voice fluctuations, mannerisms and iguana-like disposition to a decent script in ""Bad Lieutenant.""
—Ryan Hebel
BEST ACTRESS
Who will win: Sandra Bullock, ""The Blind Side""
Who should win: Carey Mulligan, ""An Education""
Who shouldn't be here: Sandra Bullock, ""The Blind Side""
Sandra Bullock's performance in ""The Blind Side"" is surprisingly decent. The role is more or less a Southern Erin Brockovich—tactless, fearless and flirting with the dangerously fine difference between Southern charm and bitchiness. Though Bullock's part is miles above her ever-so-brilliant roles in ""Miss Congeniality"" and ""All About Steve,"" one must not forget the horrors of ""The Lake House."" Just because she's learning how to get past terrible romantic comedies should not get her an automatic bump to Academy Award winning status. But unfortunately, that seems that it'll be the case.
Meryl Streep naturally gave a fantastic performance as Julia Child in ""Julie & Julia."" She mastered Child's charm and warmth, even her bumbling antics. But this is just kid's stuff for the likes of her; wait till her next, probably more impressing feat for her next Oscar. Same goes for Helen Mirren in ""The Last Station,"" giving a powerful performance as Leo Tolstoy's
wife, but her ice-cold ""Queen"" will resound with the Academy for these awards.
Carey Mulligan has an Audrey Hepburn-esque elegance and sophistication in ""An Education,"" resounding with her wit and charm. And Gabourey Sidibe's heartwarming resilience against abuse in ""Precious: Based on the Novel ‘Push' by Sapphire"" is inspirational. Both are new faces on the Hollywood scene, and it seems they have proven their worth to be given more opportunities to shine with age and experience.
—Katie Foran-McHale
BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR
Who will win: Christopher Waltz, ""Inglourious Basterds""
Who should win: Christopher Waltz, ""Inglourious Basterds""
Who shouldn't be here: Matt Damon, ""Invictus""
Sometimes the Oscars are so unpredictable that going into awards night, no one has a clue as to who will be taking home the golden statuettes. This is certainly not the case in the category of Best Supporting Actor. Christopher Waltz's turn as the charming, irrepressible Colonel Hans Landa in Quentin Tarantino's ""Inglourious Basterds"" is absolutely, 100 percent, without a doubt going to win the award. You'd be hard-pressed to find a single publication that says otherwise. Even though Waltz acted alongside such incredible characters as Melanie Laurent's Shoshanna Dreyfus and Brad Pitt's Aldo Raine, he outclasses them all with his alternations between festive giddiness and cold, vindictive cruelty as ""The Jew Hunter."" Tarantino's World War II revisionist history flick may not take home many other awards, but this one is a shoo-in.
Couple Waltz's visionary performance with a few weaker nominees—including Matt Damon, who should have been nominated for Best Actor in ""The Informant"" and not for his brief turn in ""Invictus""--and you've got the easiest Oscar to predict since last year's Best Supporting Actor award, given posthumously to Heath Ledger for ""The Dark Knight"". Couple that with 2007's Best Supporting Actor winner Javier Bardem (""No Country for Old Men""), and you've got three of the easiest awards to predict in recent memory. As Hans Landa would say, ""Ooooooh, that's a Bingo!""
—Kevin Slane
BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS
Who will win: Mo'nique, ""Precious""
Who should win: Anna Kendrick, ""Up in the Air""
Who was snubbed: Melanie Laurent, ""Inglourious Basterds""
Let's not be under any illusions here, Mo'nique pretty much has this one in the bag. She has been the frontrunner ever since rave reviews started pouring in for her performance at the 2009 Sundance Film Festival, and if she loses it will be an upset of epic proportions. It is hard to say Mo'nique doesn't deserve the award. Her role as the mother of the titular character in ""Precious"" is the very definition of a powerhouse performance in a film hampered by sloppy direction.
However, in an ideal world the golden statuette would go to ""Up in the Air's"" Anna Kendrick. Mo'nique may have been great in ""Precious,"" but there are several other actresses that likely could have knocked that role out of the park just as well (Viola Davis and Alfre Woodard come to mind). It is hard to imagine anybody imbuing ""Up in the Air's"" Natalie Keener with the same corporate-yet-caring mentality of Kendrick, who constantly walks the trickiest of balancing lines. But we don't live in an ideal world, because if we did Melanie Laurent would have been nominated for her career-making turn in ""Inglourious Basterds,"" even though she was improperly campaigned as a lead. She certainly would have made a better choice than the histrionic Maggie Gyllenhaal of ""Crazy Heart,"" who, while decent enough, could not hold a candle to the subtle determination of Laurent's performance.
—Todd Stevens
