2004 Oscars

<body topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 marginheight=0 marginwidth=0> <table cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0 border=0><tr> <td valign="top" colspan=2 height=90 BGCOLOR="#006699" TEXT="#080000" bgproperties="fixed" background="002285a1erlcgo.gif"> <div> <FONT SIZE="5" COLOR="#FFCC66" FACE="Arial" ><B>www.chapmansfriend.com</B></FONT><B>     |     </B><A HREF="default.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="www.chapmansfriend.com"><U><B>home</B></U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="id5.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Movies"><U>Movies</U></A></div> <div> </div> </td> </tr><tr> <td valign="top" width=210 BGCOLOR="#FFCC66" TEXT="#080000" background="001d2c00dkelyh.gif"> <bR> </td> <td valign="top" height=390 BGCOLOR="#FFFFFF" TEXT="#080000"> <div> <I>2004 Oscars</I></div> <div> <B>February 29:</B></div> <div> <B>THE OSCARS ARE TOO DAMNED EARLY THIS YEAR</B></div> <div> I just thought I'd get that off my chest. Thirty years of associating the Oscars with the beginning of spring, or the NCAA basketball tournament, and then... One of my all-time favorite memories of an Oscar telecast was from the mid-70's, when the show was on the same night as the NCAA championship game. Elliot Gould's co-presenter said, "And the winner is..." </div> <div> "Indiana, 86-68", Elliot said quickly.</div> <div> I know the two events haven't coincided for a while, and, gee, I know that it's vitally important to get ABC another big event before sweeps month ends, but this is throwing my timing off. I think it's also going to have an effect on who ends up winning, based upon who the early favorites are. Like the "front-loaded" presidential nominating system, there might not be enough time for underdogs to build up support. (Yes, there are problems with this theory given that Howard Dean was the front-runner, but after the actual voting started and he lost Iowa... he didn't have much opportunity to get the Big Mo back.)</div> <div> So, I will bet that most of the "favorites" will win, and everyone will complain that the show wasn't that exciting this year, and this will all be due to moving the schedule up to accommodate ABC. Now watch that girl from <I>Whale Rider </I>win and make me look foolish. Again.</div> <div> How does this year look like it's shaping up? </div> <div> <B>BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR:</B></div> <div> Alec Baldwin, <I>The Cooler</I>;<I> </I>Benecio Del Toro, <I>21 Grams</I>; Djimon Hounsou, <I>In America</I>; Tim Robbins, <I>Mystic River</I>; Ken Watanabe, <I>The Last Samurai</I></div> <div> Benecio Del Toro won a few years ago in this category, so I'd be surprised to see a double win for him. Ken Watanabe could spring a surprise, and I know that a lot of people like Djimon Hounsou in this movie, but I think it comes down to Alec Baldwin and Tim Robbins. I was surprised to learn that this is Baldwin's first nomination... Somehow I remember that blistering 10 minutes he was on-screen in <I>Glengarry Glen Ross</I> and assumed he'd been recognized. It's fitting that he is nominated for a supporting, character-actor role, because he's really a character actor trapped in a leading-man's body. I <I>think </I>that's a complement, isn't it? Has Tim Robbins been nominated either? Maybe for writing or directing, but I don't know about acting. This could be a very close race, though we'll never know until they release the vote totals. Tim Robbins is popular, the fact that he was outspoken on the war won't hurt him (but then, so was Alec Baldwin, I think-- I know he's a Bush-hater), and the temptation to give him an Oscar to match Susan Sarandon's will make the difference. (Sorry, I've not seen the performances, so I guess the fact that he was apparently very good in the movie might have some impact too!) My pick, <B>Tim Robbins</B>.</div> <div> <B>BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS:</B></div> <div> Shohreh Aghdashloo, <I>House of Sand and Fog</I>; Patricia Clarkson, <I>Pieces of April</I>; Marcia Gay Harden, <I>Mystic River</I>; Holly Hunter, <I>Thirteen</I>; Renee Zellweger, <I>Cold Mountain</I></div> <div> I don't want this to sound mean or xenophobic-- I don't mean it that way at all-- but instead of her nomination being its own reward, Shohreh Aghdashloo's true reward will be hearing her name pronounced correctly! Reasoning that past winners are at a disadvantage, that would knock out Holly Hunter and Marcia Gay Harden... except remember that Harden won in an upset a few years ago and voting could be following the same pattern. I fondly remember Patricia Clarkson for her work on <I>Murder One </I>many years ago. Renee Zellweger is the big favorite, I think-- voters may regret not giving her an award in the <I>Chicago </I>sweep last year, she's worked hard to make herself a standout and often subtle actress after her big break in <I>Jerry Maguire</I> (which seems to be on TBS or TNT like, every other night. I like the movie, don't get me wrong, but... I'm just saying.), and she's a cutie-pie. The only thing that might be a problem is that people say her performance in <I>Cold Mountain </I>was a little over-the-top... almost alarmingly so. And this from the voters who gave an acting award to Roberto Begnini. Barring misgivings over that, I'll go along with the herd and say <B>Renee Zellweger</B>, but Clarkson and Harden could be dark-horses. Not trying to mix metaphors with "herds" and "dark-horses".</div> <div> <B>BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY:</B></div> <div> <I>The Barbarian Invasions</I>; <I>Dirty Pretty Things</I>; <I>Finding Nemo</I>; <I>In America</I>; <I>Lost in Translation</I></div> <div> They say that if <I>Lord of the Rings</I> wins Best Picture, it will in reality be a collective award for the entire trilogy. It seems odd, though, that the <I>third</I> part of a trilogy would win when the first two didn't. <I>Godfather III</I> didn't win, at least partly because of the inept performance turned in by Sofia Coppola. Astonishingly enough, the same Sofia Coppola who has turned into such a damned good writer and director... if <I>Lost in Translation</I> is any indication. Could anybody have imagined this in their wildest dreams way back then, or when she was making embarrassing appearances in Madonna videos? There's a clear history of Best Picture-nominated movies winning screenplay categories, a clear history of personally-crafted, "small" pictures winning in this category, and the opportunity to make the Coppolas the second three-generation Oscar family is too tempting for Academy voters. <I>Finding Nemo </I>or <I>In America </I>could pull upsets, but of all the major categories, I'd feel most confident about Sofia Coppola winning for <I><B>Lost in Translation</B></I>.</div> <div> <B>BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY:</B></div> <div> <I>American Splendor</I>; <I>City of God</I>; <I>The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King</I>; <I>Mystic River</I>; <I>Seabiscuit</I></div> <div> Using the "only Best Picture nominees need apply" standard, this boils down to <I>Lord of the Rings </I>(I'm not gonna keep using the second half of the title every time!), <I>Mystic River</I>, and <I>Seabiscuit</I>. I've only seen <I>Seabiscuit</I>, and wasn't impressed. In particular, the writing seemed determined to deaden what in real life was a fascinating story. <I>Lord of the Rings </I>looks ready to sweep everything, but I have a feeling that Brian Helgeland will win for <I><B>Mystic River</B></I>. Unlike in acting categories, winning in the past seems to help in everything else-- remember how many times Edith Head won-- and Helgeland won for adapting <I>L.A. Confidential</I>. Voters might also want to give a significant award to a film grounded more in real life than <I>Lord of the Rings</I>. But I also wouldn't be shocked to see <I>Seabiscuit</I> win, either, even though I didn't like it that much. I mean, I <B>hated </B><I>Driving Miss Daisy</I>, and look at all the hardware they dropped on that film.</div> <div> <B>BEST ACTOR:</B></div> <div> Johnny Depp, <I>Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl</I>; Ben Kingsley, <I>House of Sand and Fog</I>; Jude Law, <I>Cold Mountain</I>; Bill Murray, <I>Lost in Translation</I>; Sean Penn, <I>Mystic River</I></div> <div> Bill Murray, finally getting the nomination he was robbed of for <I>Where The Buffalo Roam</I>. Seriously, for years I've thought Murray was a far more subtle and accomplished actor than you'd imagine remembering his lounge-singer character on <I>SNL</I>. (Hey, if he were still doing the bit about Oscar predictions on <I>Weekend Update</I>, how would he handle <I>his </I>nomination?) <I>Groundhog Day</I>, <I>Rushmore</I>, even his role in <I>Wild Things</I>-- but who remembers him instead of the infamous Neve Campbell-Denise Richards- Matt Dillon scene? I saw <I>Lost in Translation </I>would love to see him win, and besides, it might get <I>Quick Change </I>released on DVD. I didn't see any of the other performances, but the clips of Johnny Depp look like a hoot, and I think he's also been underappreciated as an actor. Ben Kingsley is a national treasure, or he would be if I were a Briton, and might just be getting to the point where he deserves a second Oscar to go along with the one he won prematurely for <I>Gandhi</I>. Jude Law? Brits have a fine track record of winning awards by adopting a Southern accent. Sean Penn has been called America's Finest Actor for years now, and surely he will get lots of support.</div> <div> Honestly, this could be the toughest and deepest field in a long time. The smart money has a close race between Murray and Penn, but with Johnny Depp's SAG award, he might be in contention too. Bill Murray could benefit from a "What the hell... I'd love to hear his name announced!" vote-- the same attitude that won an Oscar for Roman Polanski last year. (The quality of work might have had <I>something </I>to do with it, too.) But in the end, I think voters will take the opportunity to give the Oscar to <B>Sean Penn</B>, and he will get the biggest standing ovation of the night. Only given his past history, he might not even be there...</div> <div> <B>BEST ACTRESS:</B></div> <div> Keisha Castle-Hughes, <I>Whale Rider</I>; Diane Keaton, <I>Something's Gotta Give</I>; Samantha Morton, <I>In America</I>; Charlize Theron, <I>Monster</I>; Naomi Watts, <I>21 Grams</I></div> <div> I'll say this: If she was nominated in the supporting category (as the studio apparently wanted), I'd be picking Keisha Castle-Hughes to win there. She's almost a prototype for a Best Supporting Actress winner (Tatum O'Neal, Anna Paquin). Charlize Theron is the favorite, based on the time-tested formula: Make a major hottie look unattractive and then rave about her acting ability. I'm not saying she wasn't as good as they say in <I>Monster </I>(didn't see it), only that it's so predictable. Samantha Morton and Naomi Watts probably don't have much of a shot, but if there is a challenge, it might be from Diane Keaton-- a great story, winning again so many years after <I>Annie Hall</I>. I'll stick with the front-runner and say <B>Charlize Theron</B>. </div> <div> <B>BEST PICTURE/ BEST DIRECTOR</B></div> <div> <I>The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King</I>; <I>Lost in Translation</I>; <I>Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World</I>; <I>Mystic River</I>; <I>Seabiscuit</I></div> <div> Sofia Coppola, <I>Lost in Translation</I>; Clint Eastwood, <I>Mystic River</I>; Peter Jackson, <I>The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King</I>; Fernando Meirelles, <I>City of God</I>; Peter Weir, <I>Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World</I></div> <div> A reasonably good formula for predicting Best Picture winners focuses on which categories past winners have been nominated. The best matches are editing, adapted screenplay, director, and strange as it sounds, supporting actor. Throughout the past 25 years, a stunning percentage of Best Picture winners have had a nominee (though not necessarily a winner) in the supporting actor category. Last year? John C. Reilly, <I>Chicago</I>.</div> <div> Of those 4 "predictor" categories, <I>Lord of the Rings </I>is nominated in 3 (editing, director, and adapted screenplay), and <I>Mystic River </I>is also nominated in 3 (editing, director, and supporting actor). An even race, with well-liked Clint Eastwood maybe pushing <I>Mystic River </I>over the top? Maybe, except that as much as a supporting actor nomination helps, the formula suggests that a supporting actress nomination hurts. That puts <I>Mystic River </I>back behind <I>Lord of the Rings</I>.</div> <div> <I>Seabiscuit </I>won't win without a nomination for Best Director. <I>Master and Commander </I>has no screenplay or acting nominations, and really, if Russell Crowe is in a movie and happens to not get a nomination, how much of a chance can it have? I love <I>Lost in Translation</I>, but it's obviously not a Best Picture prototype. It would be most excellent if I were proven wrong. </div> <div> <I>Lord of the Rings </I>is the favorite. I have a feeling that if it were to be beaten, it would be by <I>Mystic River</I>. Personally, <I>Lord of the Rings </I>sounds like a movie I'd have to be dragged to kicking and screaming (though they say you don't have to appreciate fantasy or sci-fi to like it). But it's a movie on a Big Scale, and Oscar loves movies on a Big Scale. So, <I><B>Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King </B></I>for Best Picture.</div> <div> And it will follow that virtual Rupert-from-<I>Survivor </I>look-alike <B>Peter Jackson </B>will win Best Director. Not much to say about the other nominees except that I've heard a prediction that someday, Sofia Coppola will be the first female Best Director, and there's always a chance that Clint Eastwood could upset Jackson... but it seems unlikely.</div> <div> <I>Let's Get Ready To Rumble!!!</I></div> <bR> </td> </tr></table></body>