An embarrassment of riches

So when do Oscar-caliber actors start to cancel themselves out — for awards purposes — with memorable performances across movies and genres? And when do the roles with real gravitas start getting spread a little more evenly around town?

Maybe it’s just the ole maxim: When you’re hot, you’re hot. Or in these days of movie math: When you can open a film with upwards of $20 million and show consistent bankability overseas, then you're hot? Ring, ring!

Cases in point, where Hollywood heavyweights could show up in more than one place on Oscar ballots: Russell Crowe in “3:10 to Yuma” and “American Gangster,” Philip Seymour Hoffman in “Charlie Wilson’s War” and “Before the Devil Knows You’re Dead" or even "The Savages," Christian Bale in "Rescue Dawn" and “3:10 to Yuma” and Denzel Washington in “American Gangster” and “The Great Debaters.”

Past years have seen the same actor nominated, but never winning, in more than one category: Jamie Foxx for both “Collateral” (supporting actor) and “Ray” (actor, which he won) and Al Pacino for “Glengarry Glen Ross” (supporting) and “Scent of a Woman” (he won, back in '92).

And for the historians out there (all three of you), Barry Fitzgerald was nominated in both categories for priest-as-good-guy (pre-Catholic Church scandal) in “Going My Way” and won as supporting actor. Hey, give it up for Bing! After that year, 1944, the rules were changed so an actor couldn’t get nominated twice for the same role.

This year, the aforementioned “Year of the Man,” could even see an actress, Cate Blanchett, get recognized for two jobs, “I’m Not There” and “Elizabeth.” Seven actresses over time have been nominated for two performances in the same year, with no one ever winning both. In recent times, that select list has included Holly Hunter, Julianne Moore and Jessica Lange. (Try to guess the others. Play along, will ya?)

Could Oscar voters be seeing double this year? Or will they share the wealth, giving the viewers a little more zest and a little less sameness?