Probable Winner: The Aviator. Big budget. Big director. Big lead actor. Modern-day epic. Period piece. Not overly expensive to hire an engraver, paid by the letter, to etch it on a statuette (now that I think of it, a strong argument for ‘Ray’). Need I say more? Credentials like that can cause Oscar to overdose. The academy would be comfortable and justified with this pick and can still get cute in lesser categories. Additionally, it’s a fine fine film.
Definite Loser: Sideways. This film is certainly enjoyable. The writing is much like a must-see-tv excerpt, albeit Thursday night primetime, and a fine Thursday. However, at its core, Sideways is a comedy, and if we are giving Oscars to comedies, I have a lucrative lawsuit against the academy on behalf of ‘Dumb and Dumber.’ Further, ‘Sideways’ is a sleeper hit, and the academy throws them into categories for novelty purposes only.
Best Actor
Probable Winner: Jamie Foxx. This one is a lead pipe. Foxx portrays a man with many ticks and mannerisms, harkening back to Hoffman as ‘Raymond’, and equating to Oscar paydirt (apologies to R. Crowe). Throw some kerosene on the fire by having the character be a) a universally beloved pop icon and b) recently dead, and we can bet that the academy had checked the Jamie Foxx box, with permanent marker, some time before the film was released. This is not to say that Foxx’s eerie Ray impression doesn’t deserve adequate props. Jamie’s bologna has a first name, it’s . . .
Definite Loser: Don Cheadle. His resume is too thin. Who saw this film? Who will be putting it on at their next dinner party? The academy wouldn’t risk the collective, “Huh?” from the movie-going public. His NFL spokesmanship, contrary to expectations, does not call for acting’s highest prize. And yet, I give him a hearty nod for his work in ‘Boogie Nights.’
Best Supporting Actor
Probable Winner: Morgan Freeman. Whenever Hollywood needs a seasoned, seen-it-all, grandfatherly, cynical, second-banana, they look no further. He plays a different version of the same character almost every time, and yet, we spoon feed it to ourselves. Excellent actor. He should get an Oscar here on general principle, just for his performance in ‘Shawshank Redemption.’ A nice pick here, given the general weakness of the category. Oscar loves lifetime achievement as well.
Definite Loser: Thomas Haden Church. You couldn’t really justify this one. Paul Giamatti gets snubbed for best actor and you shower his surroundings with nominations? I would also point out, in my ultra humble opinion, that Church is not what I would call indispensable in the role. Not once does the viewer conclude, “You know, I couldn’t picture anyone else in this role.” Also, his crying scene, which is always on top of Oscar’s wishlist, was lacking in dramatic force. Besides, if we give him an Oscar, then we have to give one to Tony Shalhoub for ‘Monk’ and I have to renounce my citizenship.
Clive Owen almost took this badge of shame. He was saved, but it wasn’t because he wasn’t brooding enough.
Best Actress
Probable Winner: Hilary Swank. Why? Because I like the word, ‘swank.’
Consider that her performance in ‘Million Dollar Baby’ called on her to believably box, master hillbilly dialect, (spoiler coming) lose control of her limbs, bite off her own tongue, and earn the adoration of the audience. And as much as I criticized the overly simplistic storyline in my ‘Clint Eastwood’ think-piece last week, which is well-written by an aesthetically pleasing author, I recognize her brilliance in this role. What is more, the academy would effectively give a slap on the back to itself for dialing up Swank for ‘Boys Don’t Cry.’
Definite Loser: Kate Winslett. This performance was simply flat. Not once is the audience endeared to Winslett as the female lead. Should the audience not fall in love with the leads in a romance? This shortcoming has much to do with the heady and abstract source material as anything, but her performance simply lacks warmth and charisma. Couple that with how early this film was released in the Oscar calendar cycle and she is only really at the ceremony to potentially high-five Johnny Depp.
Best Supporting Actress
Probable Winner: Cate Blanchett. Blanchett, who rarely disappoints, invokes Hepburn as if she was possessed at a séance. Portraying a real human being is either incredibly easy or incredibly difficult depending on how you look at it. Cate deserves high praise here because she brings real emotional depth to a performance that might otherwise look like Rich Little doing an impression of Hepburn. It doesn’t hurt that she is portraying a Hollywood darling from the golden age of films.
Definite Loser: Every other nominee. Sorry ladies.
Best Director
Probable Winner: Clint Eastwood. The man looks like a hawk. Who wouldn’t want to give a trophy to a man that looks like a predatory bird? Show of hands? Really, here, this reviewer is torn between Clint and Marty and my ultimate conclusion was based simply on gauging the academy’s mood. I sense a vague ‘Gangs of New York’ hangover and this pick is really based on Frito variety pack rationales. Both men are giants in the industry. One of them will definitely lose, but both of them? Unlikely.
Definite Loser: Mike Leigh. Of course, you remember when you were hanging out by the water cooler and somebody said that ‘Vera Drake’ was “Bitchin!” And you said, “That screenplay was top-shelf!” And then somebody else said, “Naw, Naw, Dog! The direction was off-the-chain!” And you said, “Word.” Remember that? Me neither.
They call him “Red” because he’s Irish.
Comment by twiddah — February 27, 2005 @ 7:28 pm