Critic Doctor (Herb Kane) - Peter Sobczynski's 2004 Oscar Picks

"Where Movie Critics Get A Taste Of Their Own Medicine"
Subscribe To Weekly Newsletter!

FEATURES

FEARLESS OSCAR PICKS
by Peter Sobczynski

February 13, 2004

When the nominations for the 76th Academy Awards were announced a couple of weeks ago, there seemed to be almost a sigh of relief from commentators. Although many of the top nominees were predictable ("Return of the King" leading the pack with 11 nods came as a surprise to no one), many others that were simply assumed to be assured of their slots, regardless of quality, were left out in the cold while people who were actually deserving took their places. Who could have predicted, for example, that people like Tom Cruise, Nicole Kidman and Russell Crowe would have been passed over while a long-shot like Keisha Castle-Hughes became the youngest Best Actress nominee ever for "Whale Rider"? (This was a feat even more astonishing considering that Newmarket, the studio behind the film, had actually pushed her in the supporting category, assuming that she would have a better chance there.) Sure, there were still a couple of botches (such as the Best Picture nod for "Seabiscuit", a testament not to the quality of the film but to the quality of the massive publicity push that Universal gave it) but any year in which the annual Miramax behemoth gets all but frozen out (they may be hyping seven nods for "Cold Mountain", but they aren’t mentioning that two of them are for Best Song) can’t be all bad.

After the shock, however, it has become pretty clear that most of the categories are pretty much all but locked up with "Return of the King" set to dominate, mostly in tribute to the entire trilogy. However, the few categories in which that film doesn’t’t have a slot-such as all of the acting slots-still have the potential to be interesting. Sure, Best Actress is apparently a mortal lock but the others could actually yield surprises this year. Besides, just because a film is meant to sweep doesn’t necessarily mean that it will happen-witness the unexpected wins last year for Roman Polanski’s "The Pianist". Below, please find my fearless predictions, along with notations of who deserves to win (not always the same) and, most importantly, who got screwed out of a deserved nomination.

BEST PICTURE

The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King
Lost in Translation
Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World
Mystic River
Seabiscuit

Scratch "Seabiscuit" immediately-sure, it got seven nominations but the fact that this and Adapted Screenplay were the only major ones suggests a lack of support. "Mystic River" was popular but there is the sense that Clint Eastwood has already been more than adequately honored in the past for "Unforgiven". "Lost in Translation" is my favorite of the films but it tends to split audiences between those who fall under its spell and those who argue that the acclaim is much ado about (literally) nothing. In another year, the scope and technical achievement of "Master and Commander" might have made it the front-runner but it is clear that this year, voters will be leaning towards another epic adventure. After being passed over for the last two years for the previous installments of the trilogy, Peter Jackson will finally take home the prize for completing the "Lord of the Rings" films in grand style and, unlike most trilogies, without any ebb in quality.

SHOULD WIN: Return of the King

DESERVES TO WIN: Lost in Translation

WHAT HAPPENED TO...?: Quentin Tarantino’s Kill Bill may have been nothing but a gory exercise in stylistic excess, but it is hard to argue against such a thing when it is done as energetically and stylishly as he did with his homage to grindhouse cinema. Tarantino is a director who is giddily in love with the possibilities of cinema and that love is evident in every frame of his film.

BEST DIRECTOR

Fernando Merielles: City of God
Peter Jackson: Return of the King
Sofia Coppola: Lost in Translation
Peter Weir: Master and Commander
Clint Eastwood: Mystic River

One of the biggest surprises when the nominations were announced was the strong showing of the Brazilian crime drama "City of God"-which received nods for Adapted Screenplay, Cinematography, Editing and Direction despite being released more than a year ago. However, I am guessing that the nominations will be the reward for this film, at least in this category and the controversy that has sprung over Merielles getting the nod while co-director Katia Lund was left off the list won’t help matters either. Weir and Eastwood have been nominated in this category several times before but will also go home empty-handed as the race comes down to Jackson and Coppola. Although there may be a sentimental push for Coppola (being both Hollywood royalty and only the third woman nominated in this category-and the first American one to boot), I am guessing that she will be honored elsewhere for her work and Jackson will get the prize-and deservedly so for corralling the awesome technical undertaking that was "Return of the King".

SHOULD WIN: Peter Jackson

DESERVES TO WIN: Peter Jackson

WHAT HAPPENED TO...?: In the past, Tim Burton has been written off by many as a director more interested in special effects than in people. With "Big Fish", he proved that he could make a film that could satisfy the heart as well as the eyes.

BEST ACTOR:

Johnny Depp: Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl
Ben Kingsley: House of Sand and Fog
Jude Law: Cold Mountain
Bill Murray: Lost in Translation
Sean Penn: Mystic River

You can quickly scratch Law from the list and, barring an upset, Kingsley as well as they would seem to be the darkest of horses. (Of course, 21 years ago, it was assumed that Paul Newman would win for "The Verdict" and he wound up losing to...Ben Kingsley for "Gandhi".) After that, though, it gets interesting. The putative front-runners are Murray and Penn, neither of whom has ever won before (Murray hasn’t even been nominated-the "Rushmore" snub is still one of the great Oscar injustices) and a vote for either could be seen as a career nod. However, neither is the most popular guy in Hollywood and you won’t be seeing either of them tub-thumping to attract votes. Therefore, if they wind up splitting the votes, there is a possibility that the widely admired Depp could score an upset for his hugely popular turn in "Pirates of the Caribbean" I am guessing that Murray pulls ahead in a close race-partially because "Mystic River" was more of an ensemble piece and partially because voters are hoping for a repeat of his killer Golden Globes acceptance speech.

SHOULD WIN: Bill Murray

DESERVES TO WIN: Bill Murray

WHAT HAPPENED TO...?: Although Depp’s nomination for a flat-out comic role was welcome, I wish that voters could have also made room for Jack Black for his work in "School of Rock". A scene-stealing supporting performer for years (check out "High Fidelity"), he broke through to the ranks of leads with a performance that managed to evoke wild abandon without ever tripping over into outright silliness.

BEST ACTRESS

Keisha Castle-Hughes: Whale Rider
Diane Keaton: Something’s Gotta Give
Samantha Morton: In America
Charlize Theron: Monster
Naomi Watts: 21 Grams

The easiest call this year-Theron will win for strapping on the make-up and packing on the pounds for the serial killer hagiography "Monster". While I admired her performance (far more than I did the movie it was featured in) but I have to admit that, with the exception of Keaton (who was fine and funny but hardly revelatory), the other three nominees were just as good, if not better, and they managed to do it without make-up tricks. Barring an upset from Watts, the best of the bunch, for her wrenching performance as a former addict lurching towards her bad old habits in the face of tragedy, this one is a lock.

SHOULD WIN: Charlize Theron

DESERVES TO WIN: Naomi Watts

WHAT HAPPENED TO...?: The single greatest acting performance I saw last year appeared in one of the least-seen movies. In the marvelous horror-tragedy "May", Angela Bettis was astonishing in the role of a lonely young woman who desperately tries to make a friend-by any means necessary. A victim of both a disinterested distributor (shame on you, Lions Gate) and the fact that it was a difficult sell (too genre-oriented for arthouses and too arty for the malls), the film is worth seeking out for her wonderful work-she is so touching and sympathetic in the first half that you find yourself rooting for her even as she begins to inexorably slip into madness.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR

Alec Baldwin: The Cooler
Benicio Del Toro: 21 Grams
Djimon Hounsou: In America
Tim Robbins: Mystic River
Ken Watanabe: The Last Samurai

The best performance of this group was by Del Toro, but having won just a couple of years ago for "Traffic", he is unlikely to repeat. Baldwin and Watanabe were the highlights of their respective films but there doesn’t seem to be enough support for either to pose much of a threat. Therefore, it comes down to a race between Hounsou, playing the noble black man who sacrifices himself so that the white people can be better off in "In America", and Robbins for his hammy turn as a molestation victim who is all but begging to be put out of his misery 30 years later. I’m guessing that the Academy will go for the showier turn and give the award to Robbins, perhaps closing their eyes and thinking of his standout work in "The Player" and "Bob Roberts" while casting their ballots.

SHOULD WIN: Tim Robbins

DESERVES TO WIN: Benicio Del Toro

WHAT HAPPENED TO...?: There were a couple of great overlooked performances in the category (Peter Sarsgaard in "Shattered Glass", Judah Friedlander in "American Splendor" and Sonny Chiba in "Kill Bill"), my favorite was Eugene Levy’s performance in "A Mighty Wind" as a burned-out folk singer trying to pull himself together for a reunion performance with his former partner. Sure, he was hysterical (his line "I would love to see this town in autumn may have been the single funniest moment of last year) but what really made his performance memorable was the fact that there was a real emotional core to it-by the end, you genuinely cared about what would happen.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS

Shohreh Aghdashloo: House of Sand and Fog
Patricia Clarkson: Pieces of April
Marcia Gay Harden: Mystic River
Holly Hunter: Thirteen
Renee Zellweger: Cold Mountain

Traditionally, the Supporting Actress category has been the one most likely to ruin betting pools by coming up with a wholly unexpected winner-remember Marisa Tomei? Therefore, while Renee Zellweger has generally been considered the front-runner for the embarrassingly over-the-top faux- "Annie Got Your Gun" audition piece that was her work in "Cold Mountain" (and Miramax will go all out to get her the award in order to save face), any one of the nominees is liable to pull off an upset. While I wouldn’t necessarily bet against Zellweger, my best guess for an surprise would be Shohreh Aghdashloo for her work in "House of Sand and Fog"-her work was the best of the bunch and her backstory (fleeing her home country of Iran during the 1979 revolution) is the kind of thing voters eat up. The only question-will her subdued work be overlooked among the more high-strung turns from her competitors?

SHOULD WIN: Shohreh Aghdashloo

DESERVES TO WIN: Shohreh Aghdashloo

WHAT HAPPENED TO...?: When an actor plays multiple roles in a film, it is generally little more than a stunt that distracts more than it contributes. The rare exception was Miranda Richardson’s triple role in David Cronenberg’s little-seen "Spider"-this was a film that hinged entirely on her performances if the various shifts in reality were to work at all. She lived up to the challenge and her work is another one of those hidden gems that you owe it to yourself to check out as soon as possible.

BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY

The Barbarian Invasions: Denys Arcand
Dirty Pretty Things: Steven Knight
Finding Nemo: Andrew Stanton, Bob Peterson and David Reynolds
In America: Jim Sheridan, Naomi Sheridan and Kirsten Sheridan
Lost in Translation: Sofia Coppola

Generally, if there is a year in which one film is dominating, the screenplay awards are used to spread the wealth around and give a prize to the quirky underdog-especially if the script was written by the director (this was the category that was won by "The Crying Game", "The Piano", "Pulp Fiction", "Fargo" and "Almost Famous") and this year’s choices pretty much fall along those lines (the only non-director script was surprise nominee "Dirty Pretty Things"). I am guessing that the voters will use this category to honor Sofia Coppola for her tremendous "Lost in Translation"-a film that understood that what isn’t said in a situation is sometimes just as important as what is. However, if the anti-Coppola sentiment that I outlined in the directing category continues to hold up, there is a slight chance that "In America" could squeak by. However, I would bet on Coppola-one of the brightest new American filmmakers working today.

SHOULD WIN: Lost in Translation

DESERVES TO WIN: Lost in Translation

WHAT HAPPENED TO...?: Francois Ozon’s Swimming Pool was that rarest of birds-a screenplay that provided dozens of diabolically clever twists while always playing fair with the audience.

BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY

American Splendor: Robert Pulcini and Shari Springer Berman
City of God: Braulio Mantovani
The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King: Fran Walsh, Philippa Boyens and Peter Jackson
Mystic River: Brian Helgeland
Seabiscuit: Gary Ross

If the expected "Lord of the Rings" sweep goes as expected, then the "Return of the King" gang will win for coming up with a screenplay that managed to both wrap up a trilogy and essentially work as a stand-alone film. However, if the sweep isn’t total (or if voters aren’t able to get around the seemingly endless number of climactic scenes), there is a chance that Pulcini and Berman could score the cult upset for their work on "American Splendor", the best script of the bunch because of the way that they managed to smartly adapt both the work and the life of artist Harvey Pekar to tell one of the most unique stories of the year. (Also, it would go a way towards making up for the inexplicably overlooked performances by Paul Giamatti and Hope Davis)

SHOULD WIN: Return of the King

DESERVES TO WIN: American Splendor

WHAT HAPPENED TO...?: Speaking of Hope Davis, she was in another film with a wonderful screenplay that was ignored. In The Secret Lives of Dentists, playwright Craig Lucas took a Jane Smiley short story and spun it out into a funny, scary meditation of love, marriage, faithfulness and the compromises people make in order to keep life going.

BEST ANIMATED FILM

Brother Bear
Finding Nemo
The Triplets of Belleville

What was previously assumed to be to biggest given of the year- "Finding Nemo" was one of the biggest hits of the year and one of the most widely admired-is now a more intriguing race thanks to the fallout from the recent Disney-Pixar split and the decision to shut down the Disney animation studio in Florida in order to concentrate of 3-D CGI instead of the traditional 2-D style. Although "Nemo" is still the odds-on favorite, a bunch of interesting scenarios could well take place. Will voters pick "Brother Bear" in order to support the deposed Disney animators or to go against Pixar? Will others pick "Finding Nemo" in order to support Pixar and stick it to Disney? Then again, will voters decide to go for "The Triplets of Belleville"-thereby avoiding the fray and voting for the best of the bunch in one fell swoop? Against all common sense, I am going out on a limb and predict that "The Triplets of Belleville" will make a surprise triumph in much the way that "Spirited Away" did last year.

SHOULD WIN: The Triplets of Belleville

DESERVES TO WIN: The Triplets of Belleville

WHAT HAPPENED TO...?: Joe Dante’s Looney Tunes: Back in Action was not only one of the most sheerly entertaining films of last year, it also paid tribute to the greatest stable of cartoon characters ever created by placing them in a contemporary context while never losing sight of the characteristics that made them so memorable in the first place. (And yes, despite the live-action scenes, it did contain enough animation to qualify for this award.)

As for the rest of the awards, I am guessing that Return of the King will pick up additional nods for Editing, Original Score, Costume Design, Makeup, Art Direction, Visual Effects and Sound. (Perversely, it didn’t get nominated for Sound Editing-that will probably go to Finding Nemo as a result.) Eduardo Serra will take the Cinematography award for his gorgeous work for Girl With a Pearl Earring. Although "The Fog of War" is the superior film, the more talked-about Capturing the Friedmans should snag the Best Documentary prize and Canada’s The Barbarian Invasions will take the Foreign Language Film award. As usual, I am ignoring the short film categories since they are generally unavailable for viewing. (However, the one I have seen, the animated short Destino should win for both its mind-blowing visuals and its pedigree-it is the final result of a 60-year-old collaboration between Walt Disney and Salvador Dali.)

As for the Best Original Song category (which shocked people last year by unexpectedly giving the prize to Eminem’s "Lose Yourself"), it is a wide-open race. Two songs from "Cold Mountain" are nominated ("The Scarlet Tide" by T-Bone Burnett and Elvis Costello and "You Will Be My Ain True Love" by Sting) but while I would love to see Costello’s acceptance speech, the two will probably split the vote. Annie Lennox’s "Into the West" from "Return of the King" could be swept in on that film’s momentum (which would mean that co-writer Fran Walsh could potentially win awards for Picture, Screenplay and Original Song). The title song from "The Triplets of Belleville" was a wonderful bit of nonsense and I cannot wait to see how they manage to perform it on-stage. However, I think that the winner will be "A Kiss at the End of the Rainbow" from A Mighty Wind-a faux-folk song that managed to work both as a sly parody of the genre as well as a perfectly good stand-alone song in its own right. (Here’s hoping the producers of the show have the sense to allow Eugene Levy and Catherine O’Hara to perform it themselves, preferably in character as Mitch & Mickey.)

-- PETER SOBCZYNSKI

CLICK ON THE SPONSOR BELOW!

| HOME |