|
A
Shotgun Guide to Oscar Time
2003
By Eric Barker
“I
get a kick out of watching movie stars.”
-- Jack
Nicholson on the Academy Awards
And it’s
a kick watching Jack watch movie stars, a sort of unspoken
Oscar tradition that will be back this year for at least one
more go. Whether he wins his 4th acting Oscar or not, Jack
will be seated on the front row, silently holding court, bestowing
what Time magazine once called “the Killer Smile”
on a parade of presenters and winners throughout the evening,
several of whom will feel mysteriously compelled to say “hi”
to him while they’re on stage. Almost as important as
winning any Oscar is the irresistible, once-in-a-lifetime
chance to say “Wow, Jack is looking at me.” We
can only hope he wears his Foster Grants.
There
should be many such pleasures for movie lovers watching this
year’s 75th Ritual of the Little Gold Man. Though some
categories seem an obvious contest between the two most nominated
films, Chicago (13 nods) and Gangs of New York
(the time-honored 10), it has been years since there were
so many good films nominated. Many top categories have three
front-runners (forgive my horse racing metaphors), and one
or two actually have five nominees that could “win.”
(Not supposed to say win or “winner” any more,
but who does that fool?)
Nevertheless,
call me cynical, I think there will be plenty of business
as usual. As I write this, we teeter endlessly on the brink
of an unnecessary war which may or may not be dominating the
media by Oscar night, but either way expect presenters and
nominees to at least throw in their two cents (like I just
did), giving the show’s director and half of the Academy
ulcers.
Expect
one film to rule the evening; expect winners to be very emotional,
like it really is their dream come true. Don’t expect
the Academy to vote an Oscar to Roman Polanski as long as
he cannot re-enter the U.S., which would be for the rest of
his life. Maybe an Honorary Oscar someday, by satellite to
his home in Paris, if the French are still speaking to us
then.
And who
are these people, anyway, this Academy that snubs Barbra Streisand
whenever she directs a movie? Well, two-time Oscar winner
Barbra Streisand, for one. Add to her, many of this year’s
nominees. Membership is by invitation only, extended primarily
to people who have been nominated for an Oscar. They do make
exceptions, inviting those people whom the Board of Governors
deem are already making a lasting contribution to the art
form (such as Streisand, in 1967, before her first movie).
As a group they are not so much old, in spite of what Roger
Ebert annually insists, as they are esthetically conservative.
They have risen to the fiscal mountaintop of their profession,
and they tend toward honoring what works for a mass audience.
Except,
of course, when they really do give it to the Best Picture,
or Actress, or whatever. It’s rare, but it does happen.
If you’re brave enough to try predicting for the Oscar
pool at work, some things to remember:
a) Forget
documentary and short subject awards: no one ever sees them,
so you’re just firing in the dark (Bowling for Columbine
notwithstanding).
b) Nominations
are made by the various branches of the Academy, but winners
are chosen by the whole membership. This is important because
only writers, for instance, nominate writers for screenplay,
but everyone -- producers, costume designers, sometimes spouses
-- get to vote on which screenplay nominee wins (which is
how a by-the-numbers piece of flummery like Good Will
Hunting gets a writing Oscar). The Big Clue: actors represent
the largest voting block by far, constituting 23% of Academy
members.
c) When
in doubt, stay objective. And remember that objective and
cynical are not the same thing. Snarling over past choices,
such as picking the Disney song because “they always
pick the Disney song,” is mostly a great way to lose
the office pool. They do occasionally give it to “Theme
from Shaft,” too.
d) Always
doubt.
Be advised,
these are predictions, not preferences. If they were preferences,
Dennis Quaid and Richard Gere would be supporting actor nominees,
Far From Heaven and Y Tu Mama Tambien would
be Best Picture nominees, and Martin Scorsese would finally
win.
In ascending
order of importance:
Makeup:
The Time Machine
Without
doubt the year’s worst nomination is the recognition
of The Time Machine for anything. Preposterous! Is
there any hope that Frida’s more refined approach
to the craft of makeup will triumph over Machine’s
adolescent revisionism? Don’t think so. This award is
about drastic changes in appearance, and to hell with careful
nuance. Still, the acting block could come through...
Foreign
Language Film: Zus and Zo (The Netherlands)
Ignoring
my own advice, a prediction for a category in which no one
sees the nominees, unless they win. Trying something new,
I’m picking the Netherlands’ entry Zus and
Zo, because I thought it had the most compelling plot
in the descriptions at www.oscar.com, and because the Academy
likes films from the Netherlands.
Visual
Effects: LOTR: The Two Towers
Despite
the complaints of anti-FX critics, Spider-Man’s
CG renderings of Spidey in action were superbly done and plenty
exciting, but the film just can’t match LOTR or Attack
of the Clones for sheer size. Both of the latter films are
jaw-droppers in this department, but LOTR:TTT has Gollum,
the all-time greatest performance by a CG character ever!
(I mean, you know, so far...) The winners will no doubt be
thanking Andy Serkis, the incredible actor underneath the
illusion.
Sound
Editing: LOTR: The Two Towers
Given
to the Sound Designer, the person who maps out every layer
of sound, often hundreds of tracks, deciding how it must all
come together dramatically. This one goes to the MOST sound
editing, and The Two Towers has more sound design logistics
than the other two nominees combined. If there’s a spoiler
in the crowd, it’s Minority Report: nominees Richard
Hymns and Gary Rydstrom are pioneers of sound design as we
have come to know it, with 13 previous nominations and 7 wins
among them.
Sound:
Chicago
Again,
Most Sound is a huge factor, but now the non-effects movies
get their shot, and it’s between an epic and a musical,
just like in the Sixties. This award is all about the work
of actually recording and mixing the tracks, and the efforts
of people who make the sound designers‘ scheme a reality.
Enormous as the task of recording Gangs of New York must have
been, I see Chicago starting its modest sweep right here.
Best
Song: “I Move On” from Chicago
What a
line-up! Paul Simon, U2, the fabulous Kander and Ebb, and
that psycho Eminem. Usually, there’s one legend from
the pop/rock community who is certain to get the award, but
I think the redoubtable Mr. Simon and U2 are going to cancel
each other out, and I don’t think the Academy is ready
to vote their coveted award to Mr. Eminem just yet. He ain’t
no Streisand.
But, tunesmiths
John Kander and Fred Ebb have returned, some twenty-seven
years after the fact, and written a song for the film version
of their musical that fits seamlessly into the old score.
This won’t just be an Oscar for Best Song, but a nod
to the original creators of Chicago for their entire
wacky, wise-ass song score, in the only manner that current
rules of the Music Branch allow. The song is tailor made for
an Oscar show, too: can they let anyone but Zeta-Jones and
Zellweger sing this duet?
Music
Score: The Hours
There’s
a lot of distractions in predicting this category, what with
John Williams racking up his 42nd Oscar nomination for Catch
Me If You Can and Elmer Bernstein, creator of the world
famous “Theme from The Magnificent Seven,” composing
Far From Heaven’s dead-on pastiche of a 1950s
score. But Philip Glass outdid himself with his work on The
Hours, helping immeasurably to create that film’s
sustained sense of loss and longing. There’s even a
melody running through the usual, frantic repetitions.
Best
Costume Design: Chicago
Notice,
every nominee is a period film. Not an accident. Usually goes
to Most Costumes, and that could still happen -- Sandy Powell
not only designed Gangs of New York’s thousands
of historically accurate threads, she also did the fabulous
(not-nominated) costumes for Far From Heaven. But
it seems everybody comments on Colleen Atwood’s gravity
defying creations for Chicago. Roaring Twenties chic
mixed with the peek-a-boo lingerie effect. Never let it be
said Oscar has no sense of fun. (Potential spoiler: consider
Frida, the costumes for which are a work of art).
Best
Art Direction: Gangs of New York
Yep, period
films again. Even LOTR is really, at bottom, a medieval
epic with orcs. The production design for Road to Perdition
was magnificent, but too dark, forget it. Chicago
and Frida? Good work, but both too small and artsy
for this category. That leaves LOTR: The Two Towers,
which was brilliant, breathtaking, and three-quarters fabricated
in a computer. Only Gangs of New York fulfills every
possible requirement of this ancient movie craft. Think acres
of plywood, hundreds of artisans, volumes of research, and
a total recreation of 19th century New York covering many
city blocks at Rome’s Cinecittà studios (where,
not incidentally, Ben-Hur was filmed).
Best
Film Editing: Chicago (Martin Walsh)
Traditionally
goes to a really, really big job, often an exciting film with
negligible Best Picture chances, like ‘99 winner The
Matrix. But even the film editors gave their “Eddie”
Award (no joke) to Chicago, to my mind a minor piece
of flash-and-dash that any film student could have pulled
off, at least in the too-kinetic dance sequences. It has some
good editing, but don’t count out Thelma Schoonmaker
(pronounced Skoon-mocker), Martin Scorsese’s secret
weapon since Raging Bull (1980). The Academy is very
aware that she spent some fifteen months ushering Gangs
of New York through countless revisions while her boss
and Harvey Weinstein haggled over every minute of screen time.
Best
Cinematography: Gangs of New York (Michael Ballhaus)
Even though
the Academy is made up of 5,000-plus people who should know
better, this category usually goes to Best Outdoor Color Cinematography.
Forget drama, forget texture and shadow. The most stunning
example of cinematography nominated this year would be Road
to Perdition, shot by the late Conrad Hall, who died
in January. Hall is a Hollywood legend, and this film shows
why: he was truly a painter with light.
But Road
to Perdition is too damned dark, plain and simple. So
is Chicago, though it is certainly colorful. Gangs
of New York, on the other hand, has every kind of shot
set-up imaginable, light/dark, indoors/outdoors, and it was
done by the great German cameraman Michael Ballhaus. Oscar
loves those European cinematographers.
Best
Animated Feature: Spirited Away (Hayao Miyazaki)
A long
shot, but I‘m a romantic. This Disney-financed anime
feature is the most highly praised film of its kind in the
mainstream media since director Miyazaki’s last masterwork,
Princess Mononoke (1997), and I’m betting on
it because: a) Miyazaki’s maturity and depth outstrips
all the other nominees, and b) if ever there was a moment
to set a precedent in this still-new category, it is now,
before Hollywood bookkeeping interferes.
Okay,
the dreaded writing awards.
You’d
think a screenwriter like myself would be able to predict
the writing awards with some accuracy, but the only thing
accurate about my predictions in the two writing categories
over the years has been an uncanny ability to get at least
one wrong with annual consistency. I’m too close, too
likely to choose what I would vote for. And yet I keep trying.
Hm. Isn’t that the definition of madness? Speaking of
which...
Best
Adapted Screenplay: The Hours (David Hare)
Last year
was proof enough that it’s perilous to ignore the Writers
Guild Awards when predicting Oscars. My intuition says Chicago
for this one, because it entered my head some time ago that
Best Screenplay and Best Picture are historically connected,
and I can‘t let go. But the WGA gave their Adapted Screenplay
award to The Hours on March 8th, and I have to say
it makes sense. Penned by playwright David Hare, The Hours
script translates Michael Cunningham’s daunting literary
exercise into a coherent film. But then, there’s...
Best
Original Screenplay: Far From Heaven (Todd Haynes)
Then the
WGA shocked everyone by giving this award to Michael Moore
for his docu-essay, Bowling for Columbine, a Hollywood
first. Only problem: the Academy didn’t nominate Mr.
Moore in this category. What to do?
Both Talk
to Her and Y Tu Mama Tambien are in Spanish.
Brilliant as they are, half the voters won’t have bothered
seeing the films. I could be even more cynical and guess that
a majority in the Academy will vote for My Big Fat Greek
Wedding, because it is the least deserving nominee present.
It’s happened before. And Gangs of New York
fails to come together in the end. Nah, I’m going out
on a limb and predicting this Oscar will go to Far From
Heaven, because it’s a freakin’ great screenplay
and the best one nominated. That’s happened before,
too. There I go, losing objectivity and voting again.
Best
Supporting Actress: Catherine Zeta-Jones in Chicago
Marvelous
Meryl, patron goddess of American acting, could be a spoiler
here: her turn as a reporter who goes hilariously native in
Adaptation is just far enough out of character to
warrant her third Oscar. But my guess is the Academy will
wait until they can give her the more prestigious Best Actress
award again. Another year. Meanwhile, bratty diva Zeta-Jones
gives Chicago its acidic burn, the pivotal performance
in the Academy’s favorite movie of 2002. It’s
a showy, career-making stunt that, like Velma Kelly herself,
will not be denied.
Best
Supporting Actor: Chris Cooper in Adaptation
An extraordinarily
tough category that anyone could win, so I’m just going
to close my eyes and pick the wonderful Chris Cooper for his
orchid-stealing, movie-stealing performance in Adaptation,
a role that highlights everything there is to like about this
versatile character actor. Any of the other nominees could
snatch the prize away, and for any number of reasons, but
the most likely would be 1978 Best Supporting Actor winner
Christopher Walken, coming back strong in a Spielberg extravaganza.
Best
Actress: Julianne Moore in Far From Heaven
A few
weeks ago it seemed so simple to me: Nicole Kidman had finally
given her real breakthrough performance as Virginia Woolf
in The Hours, and everyone else could stay home.
But I’m hoping Oscar is a more elusive fellow than that.
There is a reason why Julianne Moore is nominated in two categories.
Two nominations for different movies is always a sign that
they like you, they really, really like you.
Best Actor
is the category with the tradition of honoring over-the-top
scenery-gnoshing; Best Actress is the acting award most likely
to be given for pure performance chops, for portraying the
human condition with subtlety and blinding intelligence, AND
for having a long track record of doing so. If that’s
what it takes to get this Oscar, this time, then Nicole will
just have to wait behind the incomparable Julianne (and if
it’s showiness that wins the evening, she’ll be
getting tough competition from the Screen Actors Guild winner
Renée Zellweger, coming up from behind at the last
minute).
Best
Actor: Daniel Day-Lewis in Gangs of New York
Some might
say Jack, and I love Jack, I always have, his performance
in About Schmidt is surely one of his five most memorable,
a characterization full of subtlety and blinding intelligence.
But this award isn’t usually given for those things,
unless the performance is also in the service of creating
a villain. Daniel Day-Lewis is simply one of the greatest
actors on the planet right now, an Einstein of performance
pyrotechnics, and his Bill the Butcher in Gangs of New
York is one of the unforgettable monsters of screen history,
a brilliant Shadow figure reflecting our darkest impulses
back at us with a creepy, knowing smile and an outrageous
hybrid accent that never falters. Never.
If Academy
voters, who do have a sense of their own history, wish to
elevate the one-and-only Jack Nicholson to the rarified plane
of Katharine Hepburn, to date Oscar’s most honored performer,
this is certainly their chance, and it would not be a bad
choice. He’s a great and deserving legend. But it won’t
be their last chance. In Jack’s favor, the Academy gave
this award to a pretty well-imagined monster last year (Denzel
Washington in Training Day). Two monsters in a row
is unlikely, to say the least.
Best
Director: Rob Marshall for Chicago
Is this
a lock? Harvey Weinstein has certainly been campaigning hard
for Martin Scorsese, over whom the Academy must have tons
of guilt by now. One of the all-time great directors and not
a single Oscar on his shelf. If ever there was a sentimental
favorite for Best Director, Marty is it: he risked millions
on a gargantuan production, he labored for years with the
project, he fought the almighty Weinstein tooth-and-claw to
preserve a vision.
But I’m
hanging with the historical numbers, with the shadow of the
Directors Guild Award hanging over the proceedings. That means
relative newcomer Rob Marshall, a former Broadway choreographer
and director getting his first shot at big screen moviemaking.
And not just because 9 out of 10 DGA winners also take the
Oscar for Best Director, but because Oscar loves Broadway
and the evening WILL end with...
Best
Picture: Chicago
Don’t
ask me how, I just know it, I knew it before the nominations
were announced, it’s the only prediction in this whole
mess I’m sure of. Finally, someone made a good musical,
I mean, how hard is it? Like any other kind of movie, you
find a good story, actors who can do the work, writers and
a director who know the genre, and you make a movie.
Actually
it takes huge balls, bigger than anyone else’s.
The Academy
loves a Cinderella story, and I don’t mean Chicago’s
gentle faith in human nature. I mean producer Martin Richards
trying to get this film made for 28 years, I mean Renée
and Richard and Catherine getting to sing and dance, and in
the process expanding our idea of them, I mean a relatively
small movie that hangs in the top ten box-office for two-and-a-half
months against all received Hollywood wisdom. Many Academy
voters grew up with The Wizard of Oz, West Side Story,
Funny Girl and The Sound of Music, and for them
Chicago revives the magic, like the experience of
suddenly hearing a song you hadn’t known you had missed.
Is it
really the best movie of 2002? No one will know for years.
Finally,
the lone Honorary Award: to Peter O’Toole
At first
the Great One balked, rightly fearing the honor meant the
Academy considered his career, and perhaps his life, finished.
The award is a concession, to be sure -- sorry we never gave
it to you competitively, old chap -- but a concession that
went to the likes of Cary Grant, Orson Wells, Charlie Chaplin
(twice) and Alfred Hitchcock. Not bad company. To see for
yourself what the Academy’s Board of Governors means,
rent Lawrence of Arabia, or The Lion in Winter,
or The Ruling Class, or The Stunt Man.
Barker’s
Oscar Index;
or,
the Little Gold Man by the numbers:
Current
number of voters in the Academy: 5,739
Notable
seat holders among this year’s 42 member Academy Board
of Governors:
Tom Hanks,
nominee Kathy Bates, director Michael Mann
Number
of voters in the Actors’ branch: 1,315
Number
of voters in the Screen Actors Guild: 98,000
Last day
for Academy members to turn in ballots: March 18
Year Daniel
Day-Lewis was born: 1957
Year Jack
Nicholson made his film debut: 1958 (as the lead in Roger
Corman’s The Cry Baby
Killer)
Best Actor
awards given since 1928 for playing a genuine monster (here
defined as a murderous sociopath with whom we can nevertheless
sympathize): 5
Frederic
March in Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1931); Broderick
Crawford in All the King’s Men (1949); Marlon
Brando in The Godfather (1972); Anthony Hopkins in
The Silence of the Lambs (1991); Denzel Washington
in Training Day (2001)
Number
of musicals nominated for Best Picture since 1928: 34
Number
that won: 8
Number
that won between 1961 and 1968: 4
Number
of times since 1949 the Directors Guild and Oscar have differed
over Best Director:
5, out
of 54 (9%)
Number
of times since 1928 that Best Picture and Director have gone
to different films:
19, out
of 74 (26%)
Number
of times since 1997: 2 (40%)
Number
of times SAG and Oscar have differed over Best Actress: 5,
out of 9
Most nominated
actresses (including this year):
Meryl
Streep, 13
Katharine
Hepburn, 12
Bette
Davis, 10
Geraldine
Page, 8
Most nominated
actors (including this year):
Jack Nicholson,
12
Laurence
Olivier, 10
Paul Newman,
10
Spencer
Tracy, 9
Marlon
Brando, 8
Jack Lemmon,
8
Al Pacino,
8
Most Honored
Performers:
Katharine
Hepburn, 4 (all for Best Actress)
Walter
Brennan, 3 (all for Supporting Actor)
Ingrid
Bergman, 3 (1 for supporting)
Jack Nicholson,
3 (1 for supporting)
Most Nominated,
non-winning performers:
Richard
Burton, 7
Peter
O’Toole, 7
Number
of Oscars that I accurately predicted last year: 13 out of
20
Sources
of interest:
All
About Oscar: The History and Politics of the Academy Awards
by Emanuel Levy, Continuum Books.
The
Academy Awards Handbook by John Harkness, Pinnacle Books,
updated annually (contains a smart guide to predicting).
www.oscars.com
www.oscars.org
www.calendarlive.com
(the LA Times entertainment section)
|
