2006 Oscar Predictions
January 29, 2007
The 79th Annual Academy Awards are still a few weeks away, and any reasonable predictions piece should run concurrent with the telecast, but instead of running two separate pieces, one on the nods and one on the predictions, I’ve decided this year to get it all over with in one glorious bundle of criticism and future telling, as to not overload and dedicate two full columns to the past (2006), and the sometimes sickening, yet highly regarded, spectacle of rich and famous people giving each other man-shaped gold statuettes. This year’s batch of nominees had little surprise to them, given that each of the major categories feature the standard films and actors that have been popping up on critics lists and other awards telecasts for near on two months now, but it is a relatively respectable list of nominees, featuring a few notable, yet not entirely disagreeable snubs, and a grouping of Best Picture nominees that, if not arguably the five best films of the year, do represent at least five wildly differing examples of sprawling, plot driven and character orientated storytelling. Of those five, the one with the most nods, “Babel” with seven, is the only one, except maybe “The Queen”, that is hard to define in basic genre terms, for its narrative is pure social and economical criticism wrapped in a jumbled storytelling structure that lends itself less to conventional genre writing than it does to, say, the multi-layered, flashback orientated storytelling of literate pop novels or more sophisticated adult graphic novels, to which the story could easily adapt. “Babel” appears to be the frontrunner for Best Picture, following a win in the same category at the less prestigious Golden Globes last week, adding to the fact that “Dreamgirls”, the film with this year’s highest tally of nods at eight, is curiously absent from the race, but if the past has taught us anything, it’s that an early frontrunner can come up short in the end, and if a late charging Clint Eastwood is in the picture, as he is with “Letters from Iwo Jima”, like in ’05 with eventual winner “Million Dollar Baby”, the end game is anything but certain.
Before I get to the big six categories, all of which seem pretty cut-and-run this year, with one clear favorite and four long shots (at least in the acting categories anyway), I’d like to highlight a few of the nominations I’m personally happy to see, and a few snubs that inevitably made me flush with anger and disillusionment. I was very pleased to see the Academy take notice of Guillermo del Toro’s imaginative magic realism fantasy “Pan’s Labyrinth”, nominating it for six awards, including Cinematography, Original Screenplay, and Foreign Film, which it appears to be a clear favorite, but if it were up to me, this instant masterpiece would have garnered a Best Director and Best Picture nod as well, for no other film last year so beautifully, and emotionally mixed the vivid wonders of fantasy storytelling (and filmmaking) with such harsh realities as childhood during a time of war. Most think the “Dreamgirls” snub was the biggest omission in the Best Picture race, but of the truly great ’06 works not mentioned (and “Borat” and “United 93” rank up there as well), “Pan’s Labyrinth” was for me the best of the rest, and though it’s not up for the Big One, hopefully a win in the Cinematography, Art Direction, or Foreign Film categories will be enough for this one-of-a-kind Mexican gem. Elsewhere on the nominations list, I’m happy to see Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth” get a Documentary nod, though it would be harder to predict it’s eventual win if it were up against tougher competition, like “49 Up”, “Dave Chappelle’s Block Party”, “The Devil and Daniel Johnston”, or “Who Killed the Electric Car?”, but those four memorable docs were overlooked for more broader fare, like the religious skewering “Jesus Camp”, and the political war film “Iraq in Fragments”.
In the writing categories I think “The Queen’s” Peter Morgan is a lock for Best Original Screenplay, unless the poignant “Letters from Iwo Jima” (by Iris Yamashita and Paul Haggis) makes a late charge with its epistolary voice-over and heart-wrenching flashbacks, and “The Departed’s” William Monahan is likely to take Adapted Screenplay over more literate works like “Little Children” and “Notes on a Scandal”. I’d like to see the inventive “Monster House” win for the year’s Best Animated Feature, though Pixar owns this category and is likely to continue the dominance with last summer’s big family hit “Cars”, and likewise, the stunningly colorful costumes of “Curse of the Golden Flower” deserves an Oscar, but voters may be obliged to award “The Devil Wears Prada”, if just to look cool by giving their fashion award to a film set in and around the fashion industry. Faux Pas in the smaller categories never hurt anyone, except those directly involved, so a few technical glitches this year are allowed, but for the big races, I think this year is the easiest to predict in ages, and if the Academy blows this one, well I’m sure we’ll have a few choice words to spew, and a few nasty glances to give, to the offending group responsible for the biggest, and most debatable awards show of the year.
Best Supporting Actress: I like the two nominations in this category for “Babel’s” Rinko Kikuchi and Adriana Barraza for their moving performances in two distinctly differing yet similarly depressing storylines, two examples of how diverse this year’s group of acting nominations is, but the frontrunner is Jennifer Hudson of “Dreamgirls”, for a scene-stealing performance as the cast out diva Effie White in Bill Condon’s song happy musical. Cate Blanchett of “Notes on a Scandal” just won this award two years ago for “The Aviator”, and young Abigail Breslin of “Little Miss Sunshine” is more of a cute pick than a serious contender, so with the “Babel” actresses splitting their votes, it’s Hudson in a landslide, winning what most would consider something slightly more prestigious than the “American Idol” crown she was denied three years back.
Should and Will Win: Jennifer Hudson, “Dreamgirls”
Best Supporting Actor: Like the Supporting Actress category, this one is a virtual lock for a “Dreamgirls” actor, in this case the revelatory Eddie Murphy, who took a role designed to emulate the soulful styling of a James Brown and Jackie Wilson and created something all his own; the sympathetic, washed up and burnt out martyr of the music industry’s shady, and unforgiving past. There is fine work elsewhere in this category, from Djimon Hounsou’s passionate peasant fighting diamond lords for his family in “Blood Diamond”, to former child star Jackie Earle Haley’s turn as a creepy pedophile having trouble adjusting to suburban life after jail in “Little Children”, but the Academy loves it when a leading man, especially a comedian, takes a supporting role against type, which is exactly what Murphy did with “Dreamgirls”, a decision that, barring something strange, will win him his first Oscar in a long and bumpy career.
Should and Will Win: Eddie Murphy, “Dreamgirls”
Best Actress: This is the least interesting category of the year, simply because everybody and their brother knows that Helen Mirren is going to win for playing Elizabeth II in “The Queen”, while the other four actresses feign half-hearted applause when the inevitable is read. Of course Mirren is terrific in the film, playing the tough old bird as a strong willed matriarch who reluctantly, after much scrutiny from the public and her new Prime Minister, has to acknowledge the death of her former daughter-in-law with a royal funeral, presenting the Queen as both a stubborn monarch and a relatable woman of principals. Of the four highly talented actresses left in Mirren’s dust, I personally love Kate Winslet for her performance as a lonely mother caught up in a summer affair in “Little Children”, a performance of nuances both heartbreaking and sexy, and there’s certainly nothing wrong with the likes of Judi Dench, Meryl Streep, and first time nominee Penelope Cruz, but yeah, in any other year it would be a tight one, but give it to Queen Helen, along with every other award on the planet.
Should and Will Win: Helen Mirren, “The Queen”
Best Actor: If Best Actress is going to a Queen, than it’s only fitting that Best Actor go to a King, or rather a brutal dictator with the word in his film’s title, for as Idi Amin in the drama “The Last King of Scotland”, Forest Whitaker commands the screen unlike anyone else in this category in a performance of tremendous charm, savagery, wit, power, and paranoia. From the moment he charges onto the screen, his back to the camera leading a raucous rally after his successful coup, to the pathetic, frenzied final moments of his bloody regime, Whitaker transforms the often charismatic Amin into a man who can talk his way out of anything, but comes to use his savagery more than his wits to win his battles, and for that brilliant and seamless shift between likable leader and ruthless murderer, the actor becomes his subject with terrifying accuracy. There may be a few sympathy votes for the legendary Peter O’Toole, up for this eighth Oscar in the little seen “Venus” (he’s never won, but has an honorary award which must count for something), and though Will Smith is a commanding and sympathetic presence in “The Pursuit of Happyness”, the film’s unending dourness may be a turnoff to voters who grow impatient waiting for the inevitable payoff. Leonardo DiCaprio is up again in this category, following his bid in ‘05’s “The Aviator”, but it’s for “Blood Diamond” and not “The Departed”, which was by far the better of the two performances, and though “Half Nelson’s” Ryan Gosling was widely hailed by critics, it isn’t too likely he stands a chance of stealing this baby from Forest Whitaker and his dominating Idi Amin Dada.
Should and Will Win: Forest Whitaker, “The Last King of Scotland”
Best Director: I said this two years ago when Martin Scorsese was nominated for “The Aviator”, and it didn’t come true then, but I believe this is the year he’ll finally win his Best Director Oscar, for directing the entertaining Boston mob drama “The Departed”. He has some stiff competition this year, including Clint Eastwood, the man who came from behind to beat him last time, and if the voters go for “Letters from Iwo Jima” as much as they did “Million Dollar Baby” in ’05, Clint might find himself with a third, and much deserved directing Oscar. Rounding out this list of very talented auteurs is England’s Paul Greengrass (“United 93”) and Stephen Frears (“The Queen”), and Mexico’s Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu, whose “Babel” was a stunningly directed work, no matter how you feel about its depressing content and sometimes confusing structure. Personally, I think Eastwood deserves the award for his bravura examination of Japanese soldiers patiently awaiting an American barrage they know is going to lead to their deaths; it’s a bold and compelling companion piece to his equally-as-pacifist “Flags of Our Fathers”, and if the voters take both films into account, they’ll realize that even Scorsese and his gangsters have nothing on Eastwood and his humanist, Renoirian mastery.
Should Win: Clint Eastwood, “Letters from Iwo Jima”
Will Win: Martin Scorsese, “The Departed”
Best Picture: It’s been a long time since we’ve been able to say that the most interesting and wide-open category of the night was the Grand Salami, but handicapping the Best Picture race this year is a mighty task, where a strong case can be made for any of the five nominated films. With such splendid pictures as “Pan’s Labyrinth”, “Borat”, “United 93”, and “Dreamgirls” sitting this one out, the lone dark horse that snuck in instead of those more deserving choices is the road comedy “Little Miss Sunshine”, a film that ironically condemns big ticket competition but now finds itself competing at the highest level. “Little Miss Sunshine” is a nice film, both funny and touching, with a handful of remarkable performances, but compared to the four dramas it’s up against, the producers may have to be satisfied with the surprise nomination and move on from there. “The Queen” as well will have to settle for the writing and acting award, it doesn’t stand much of a chance despite picking up a few critics awards as the best film of the year. That leaves us with the top three, “The Departed”, which has earned Scorsese his best reviews since “Goodfellas”; “Babel”, the kind of sprawling, multi-character drama the Academy loves to shower with gold; and “Letters from Iwo Jima”, a flat-out masterpiece that may be hampered only by the fact that it’s completely spoken in Japanese, and no non-English film has ever won the Best Picture prize. I think “The Departed” will win the Best Director award and finally fall short of the Best Picture, because if “Goodfellas” and “Raging Bull” didn’t win, I can’t see this lesser Scorsese drama taking it, but I could be wrong, it has tremendous critical support behind it, and a full Warner Brothers campaign won’t hurt either. Ultimately, I believe, it’ll come down to the two most sweeping films with mostly international stars, “Babel”, which won the Golden Globe, and ‘Letters’, which took a majority of the critics prizes and has an iconic figure in Clint Eastwood, totally reinventing his directing image, yet again. I give the edge to “Babel” for its hefty storytelling and impressive, seamless weaving of four dark inter-continental storylines, but the best of the five is “Letters from Iwo Jima”, and if the voters truly take the time to study it, they’ll see a film that celebrates the importance of life, and ridicules the pettiness of pride in the face of unnecessary war, an issue that, I’m sure, applying it to modern times, most liberal members of the Academy can take to heart. It’ll be close, and I for one can’t wait to see how it turns out.
Should Win: “Letters from Iwo Jima”
Will Win: “Babel”
The 79th Annual Academy Awards will be broadcast in three weeks, Sunday February 25th on ABC
by Adam Suraf