Friday, February 22, 2013

2013 Oscar Predictions: Surprise, surprise ...

I apparently spoke too soon when I wrote in reaction to this year's Oscar nominations:
With Affleck and Bigelow denied that shot, the race seems to be all but sewn up for Spielberg and Lincoln—the film with the most nominations—is all but a certainty for Best Picture. At the moment, three of the four acting awards also seem to be foregone conclusions.
So, you know, "Oops."

Since I last wrote about the Academy Awards, Argo has in fact gone on to win pretty much all of the major guild awards. It would be generous to suggest that three acting categories are "foregone conclusions." There may still be a good deal of uncertainty about more than just a couple categories.

As it turns out, we will not be hosting any Oscar party this year, so my picks won't be going toward winning any Oscar pool this year either. And that's probably a good thing, because I can't lose any money either. I certainly wouldn't express the confidence I've had in years past when compared to the overall list of this year's nominees. My prognosticating ability for the Academy Awards has not been particularly sparkling these past few years, but maybe this year can be the turnaround. In the end, I fear, I will be blaming the lone Best Picture nominee we did not see, Life of Pi, for ruining my final score. 


Here are my picks ranked in their usual descending order of confidence (you will probably notice the confidence deteriorating rather quickly):


1. FOREIGN LANGUAGE FILM: Michael Haneke, Amour (Austria)

— Here's your gimme for the evening. I'd say that stranger things have happened if anything other than Amour were to win, but it really would be unprecedented (at least to the best of my knowledge) for a Best Picture nominee not to win a category like this. Every time one of the animated films was nominated for Best Picture, the Animated Feature win was a formality. I see no reason to expect otherwise here.

2. VISUAL EFFECTS: Bill Westenhofer, Guillaume Rocheron, Erik-Jan De Boer and Donald R. Elliott, Life of Pi 
As I said in my intro, this is the one Best Picture nominee we didn't see. It's also basically the one I did not hear anybody else talking about. Still, its support is a lot stronger than its lack of immediate buzz in my vicinity would suggest, and this is the category that essentially earned the film its attention in the first place.

3. ACTOR IN A LEADING ROLE: Daniel Day-Lewis, Lincoln 
As others have noted, Day-Lewis had this won as soon as the first images of him in the Abe makeup were released. Having Meryl Streep present him with his third Oscar is the equivalent of two legends on stage at the same time, and the Academy will always vote for great television.

4. ACTRESS IN A SUPPORTING ROLE: Anne Hathaway, Les Misérables 
— The category's old reputation for being susceptible to surprise probably doesn't apply this year. Sally Field might be a more attractive longshot if she hadn't already won twice, and besides, honoring Hathaway here is a fine way for the Academy to say "Thanks" to the actress for enduring her hosting experience with James Franco a few years back.

5. MUSIC — ORIGINAL SONG: Adele Adkins and Paul Epworth, “Skyfall,” Skyfall 
I initially had this ranked much higher, and still don't really see anything that I think will unseat it. Still, I did read somewhere that "Everybody Needs a Best Friend" should not be underestimated, even though I think seeing Seth MacFarlane step away from his hosting duties to accept an award would just be awkward. Instead, I'm wondering how it will be received if he makes a low dig at Adele after she wins.

6. BEST PICTURE: Grant Heslov, Ben Affleck and George Clooney, Argo 
— So whereas I thought the directorial snubs obviously translated to a Lincoln victory, that was before Argo went on to win, you know ... everything. In the end, it makes sense, because Argo wasn't just an entertaining account of a real-life event, but it also made Hollywood play an important role in the process. During a ceremony all about self-congratulation, how could you bet against a film essentially doing the same?

7. MAKEUP AND HAIRSTYLING: Peter Swords King, Rick Findlater and Tami Lane, The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey 
— The old adage is always "best makeup = most makeup," and that initially made The Hobbit ranked a bit higher in the confidence picks. There does seem to be some speculation about Les Misérables having a shot here, but I still have to suspect that the old adage still rings true and The Hobbit's work is more obvious to more voters.

8. SOUND MIXING: Andy Nelson, Mark Paterson and Simon Hayes, Les Misérables 
This is the sound category that typically favors the musical arrangements, and that makes Les Misérables stand out from the bunch here.

9. ACTRESS IN A LEADING ROLE: Jennifer Lawrence, Silver Linings Playbook 
Whereas I once suspected that it would be Jessica Chastain giving Lawrence the stiffest competition, the buzz has been that an Oscar here for Emmanuelle Riva could be a way for the Academy to honor an actress they might not get the chance to again. I was tempted to buy into that logic (of the eight films I've seen so far, Amour was the most powerful), but Lawrence has the marketing wizardry of the Weinstein Company behind her—not to mention the reputation as a versatile actress who is also a box office draw.

10. DOCUMENTARY FEATURE: Malik Bendjelloul and Simon Chinn, Searching for Sugar Man
— While Sugar Man seems to be an overwhelming favorite, I'm extremely hesitant here because this is a category that I seem to recall as loving to surprise. However, I didn't see any documentaries about the Holocaust, so an alternative wasn't attractive enough to dissuade me from going with the frontrunner. How to Survive a Plague has received some guesses and seems to have support, and I initially thought that maybe the subject matter of The Invisible War (rapes in the military) would grab some of the more political voters, but this is one category that I'll stick with the safer choice.

11. COSTUME DESIGN: Jacqueline Durran, Anna Karenina 
Durran has been nominated before, but more importantly, Karenina better embodies the period piece feel that is typically associated with winner in this category.

12. SOUND EDITING: Paul N.J. Ottosson, Zero Dark Thirty (NOTE: Ottosson tied with Per Hallberg and Karen Baker Landers, Skyfall)
— Whereas the other sound category is more about the music, this is the one that favors the war movies. Thus, Zero Dark Thirty strikes me as the obvious choice, although a victory as part of an Argo train is not out of the question here.

13. FILM EDITING: William Goldenberg, Argo 
— Funny because last year, I remarked how this award usually goes hand-in-hand with Best Picture—even though that has not been the case for the past two years. That in mind, I am skeptical about Argo here, but can't go with any other nominee as being strong enough to replace it.

14. PRODUCTION DESIGN: Eve Stewart, Les Misérables
— Ugh. My fear here is that I'm flip-flopping the honors with Costume Design and I should play it safe by picking the same movie to win both awards. Instead, I'm inclined to believe that recreating 18th Century Paris is a feat that is going to gather more votes than any other nominee in this category.

15. ANIMATED FEATURE FILM: Rich Moore, Wreck-It Ralph 
In what used to be the easiest pick of the night, this one is completely up in the air. It is essentially a race between Ralph and Brave, but I was truly tempted to believe that enough voters will choose to honor Tim Burton by voting for Frankenweenie. I can't go too over-the-top with letting sentiment guide my picks, as you will see coming up.

16. DIRECTOR: Steven Spielberg, Lincoln 
— Ang Lee came on late, but Spielberg's two previous wins in this category have both come from historical movies. A victory here could help take some of the sting off losing the big prize. As strong as the push has been for Pi, Lincoln is still the one with the acting nominations that gave it the most overall and probably help it secure more votes from that group, the largest branch of the Academy.

17. ACTOR IN A SUPPORTING ROLE: Robert De Niro, Silver Linings Playbook 
— The toughest acting category to call, but De Niro has the longest drought of the five nominees. Jones was my initial pick, but he didn't show up at the SAGs to accept there and hasn't campaigned anywhere near as much as De Niro—who, like Lawrence, also has the strong push from the Weinstein machine. And again, a speech from De Niro ould make for great television.

18. WRITING — ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY: Quentin Tarantino, Django Unchained 
— Of the three most likely contenders, I find more reasons to doubt each one than I do in believing them. Mark Boal did win the WGA here, but Zero Dark Thirty has also seen its share of criticism about some of the facts in the movie. Amour  has some support, although foreign films are at a disadvantage here. And then there's QT, who I picked to win here three years ago before he went on to lose to Boal for his work on The Hurt Locker. This time, I think Quentin's got a more quotable movie and Boal's film isn't as strong of a Best Picture contender, so I'm guessing that Tarantino pulls it out.

19. WRITING ADAPTED SCREENPLAY: David O. Russell, Silver Linings Playbook 
— OK, upset pick. The frontrunner for the longest time was Tony Kushner's Lincoln script, but the tide as of late has switched over to Chris Terrio's Argo work. While Terrio won the WGA, the actors voting here that did not vote there are some of the biggest supporters of Silver Linings, and this Oscar gets to give Russell a consolation prize for the Director trophy he likely has no shot at.

20. MUSIC — ORIGINAL SCORE: John Williams, Lincoln 
I am going entirely with name recognition here, although this very well seems like another category that I will be seeing Pi being honored instead.

21. CINEMATOGRAPHY: Roger Deakins, Skyfall 
— I remember how much I have struggled with this category in recent years, and I also recall how I've picked Deakins before many times as "this has to be the year he finally breaks through." In other words: probably another award that goes to Life of Pi instead.

22. SHORT FILM — ANIMATED: John Kahrs, Paperman 
One of annual guesses from the trio always ranked at the bottom, but this is the one I clearly feel the strongest about.

23. DOCUMENTARY SHORT: Kief Davidson and Cori Shepherd Stern, Open Heart 
— Another annual guess, but this category gets to be the one where I feel stronger than one but not as confident as the other.

24. SHORT FILM — LIVE ACTION: Bryan Buckley and Mino Jarjoura, Asad 
— And the final annual guess is the one that I admit is going against what appears to be the most common pick, but I see no harm at the moment in picking an upset. Perhaps I will rue the moment, but I might as well gamble a bit on this year's minimum bet.



UPDATE: My most accurate prediction may have been my guess that Life of Pi would ruin my night. Indeed, the Ang Lee film ended up winning the most Oscars in an evening that saw the Academy spread the honors around. I recall how I told my co-worker back when there was still the possibility that the wife and I might host an Oscar party that I couldn't remember that last time I lost an Oscar pool.

I may have even said, "I've never lost an Oscar pool."

I was not involved in any pool this year, but I would have to guess that my final score was most certainly a beatable one if the pool used the confidence format I prefer. If it was just a straight-up total of rights and wrongs, I almost certainly would be a loser. From a historical perspective on previous BMC performances in Oscar prognositcation:

2009 293 268 points (18/24)
2010 277 252 points (18/24)
2006 248 points (17/24)
2011 — 237 points (15/24)
2012 229 points (17/24)
2013   226 points (15 14/24)

So I don't know what the lesson is this year. Keep ranking cinematography low? Play it safer? I suppose my one saving grace would be that I can feel pretty good about my confidence rankings, having correctly called 12 of the 13 categories I ranked highest. Too bad I only got two of the remaining 13. It would be appropriate if this year can mark the absolute lowest point in my Academy Award predicting career, what with a ceremony hosted by Seth MacFarlane.

There's about five paragraphs in a New York Times story about reaction to the show that I think make some important points (any emphasis in quoted passages has been added):
Cathy Schulman, a producer who won a best picture Oscar in the past for “Crash” and is the president of the industry group Women in Film, took aim at a song-and-dance routine about female nudity in film. “Among the women I’ve talked to today I would say I haven’t heard from any who thought it was in good taste,” said Ms. Schulman. She expressed particular chagrin that the dance number poked fun at nudity, which is generally a difficult issue for actresses, in connection with performances that were often “wrenching and moving in many ways.” 
The "many ways" including at least four actresses who bared their breasts because their character was being raped. We'll get back to the song.
But the ratings were good, and almost nothing counts for more where the Oscar enterprise is concerned. The show drew an average audience of 40.3 million viewers, up about 3 percent from 39.3 million viewers last year, according to the Nielsen ratings service. The audience among those between the ages of 18 and 34 grew 20 percent, to post an 11.3 rating, compared to 9.4 last year, when Billy Crystal was the host.
Yes, but is that increase really about MacFarlane?
Oscar shows tends to rise and fall in the ratings based on the proven box-office appeal of several best picture nominees; this was a good year, with six of the nine films taking in more than $100 million. Mr. MacFarlane, who is known mostly as a TV producer but passed for a musical variety star as host of Sunday’s ceremony, will also be credited as a drawing power.

So his reviews were positive?
But the post-mortems here included unease over gay jokes that began with an appearance by the Gay Men’s Chorus of Los Angeles, and frank dismay at some of the riskier humor, particularly bits that turned on gags about women and Jews.

“It is offensive, even though comedians have great latitude,” said Rabbi Marvin Hier, speaking of a skit in which Mr. MacFarlane, in character as the trash-talking teddy bear from his movie “Ted,” counseled Mark Wahlberg that it’s best to become Jewish and donate to Israel if you want to work in Hollywood. Rabbi Hier, an Academy member and dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center here, was seconding an opinion offered earlier in a statement by Abraham H. Foxman, the national director of the Anti-Defamation League. Speaking by telephone Mr. Foxman said he was particularly troubled by the “duration and intensity” of a skit that was likely, in his opinion, to be seen as reinforcing anti-Jewish stereotypes among Oscar viewers around the world.

“It wasn’t funny,” Mr. Foxman said. “It was ugly.”

Yes, the old "stretching out something so long that it's funny" bit. It's classic MacFarlane, and it's also one of the three basic gags that Family Guy has, or number nine on this terrific list of 10 reasons why that show always has been and always will be fucking terrible.

Spencer Kornhaber over at The Atlantic seemed to hit most every point that sums up my own reaction to the evening:


The best moment of Seth MacFarlane's Oscars hosting gig may have come late in the night when, in announcing Meryl Streep, he said "our next presenter needs no introduction" ... and then just walked away. 

If only he'd kept his mouth shut more frequently.

That's not to say the Family Guy and Ted creator made for an out-and-out terrible host. His lack of nervousness, his throwbacky radio-broadcaster voice, and his clean looks added up to a charisma score greater than zero, which is more than could have been said for James Franco. And at the very beginning of the evening, it seemed as though we were in for a tolerable if insider-y night: joshing about Ben Affleck's directing-award Oscar snub, referencing the unimpressed Tommy Lee Jones meme spawned at the Golden Globes, drawing knowing chuckles by observing that the film industry's big box-office haul this year meant Hollywood accountants had to "work harder to prove that nothing made a profit."
But then William Shatner was beamed in for a Family Guy-esque experiment in the meta. Captain Kirk had come from the future to reveal that the headlines the next day would proclaim MacFarlane the worst Oscar host ever, unless he changed his routine. Cut to a clip—from the future, see—of MacFarlane performing "We Saw Your Boobs," during which he essentially read off a Mr. Skin database of shirtless-actress appearances over time. The bit could have been a hilarious acknowledgement of MacFarlane's past idiocies—if it had been, like, five seconds long. But no: We got a full minute-plus of breast chronicling, followed by MacFarlane's definition-of-homophobic insistence to Shatner that he wasn't a member of the gay men's chorus he'd just sang with.

From there, the jokes just got more and more... well, what's the word? Calling them offensive gives them too much power, which isn't to say that black people shouldn't have felt uncomfortable about MacFarlane pretending to mix up Denzel Washington and Eddie Murphy, or that half the population needn't have squirmed when MacFarlane called Zero Dark Thirty's plotline an example of "a woman's innate ability to never ever let anything go." What the jokes were, really, was stupid, boring, and empty: humor that relied less on its own patently sexist, racist, homophobic, etc. content than on admiration for or disgust with the host's willingness to deliver it. So much of comedy is about the shock of recognition, of seeing some previously unacknowledged truth suddenly acknowledged, but the only recognition MacFarlane offered was that some people say dumb things about other peoples' gender/racial/sexual identities. Which, of course, should not be shocking at all.
MacFarlane's fake edginess didn't totally derail the night, but it did irritate, given that the ceremony was already too long.

All of that said, producers producers Neil Meron and Craig Zadan certainly aren't off the hook either. The nostaliga for Dreamgirls, only about seven years old, was awkward. The manner in which Meron and Zadan essentially paid tribute to their own work for Chicago basically made me want to dislike a film that I seem to recall enjoying.

Jennifer Lawrence's moment on the stairs aside, consider this a year that I'm going to try to forget. 

NOTE: Oscars poster taken from HERE

No comments: