Reading the Oscar Vibes

As a record 140 nominees posed for the traditional group portrait at the Beverly Hilton's annual Academy nominees luncheon, an ebullient Will Smith, standing near Djimon Hounsou, led the cheering squad, as he had when he attended as a nominee for Ali. The raucous Mexican contingent applauded their own. Leonardo DiCaprio hung close to his Departed cronies Martin Scorsese, Mark Wahlberg, Thelma Schoonmaker, and Graham King. As he went to pick up his plaque, DiCaprio high-fived Abigail Breslin, who was sitting in the front row kicking her short black boots, which didn't reach the floor.

If I know one thing about the Oscar race, it's this: momentum is a key factor. Here's what I have gleaned lately, especially from reading the room at the nominees luncheon:

1. Peter O'Toole works a room like a pro. He flirted with Sherry Lansing (who's getting an honorary Oscar) and hung with the equally tall Clint Eastwood. The Academy holds considerable affection for these older survivors, who also include The Departed director Martin Scorsese and Little Miss Sunshine supporting actor Alan Arkin. O'Toole is giving front-runner Forest Whitaker—who is not a glib speechmaker—a run for his money. Neither Whitaker nor O'Toole stars in a best picture contender. O'Toole is getting the late spate of media attention, now that he's in L.A. for the final round. The gang at the Hilton Monday gave the 74-year-old master thespian a standing ovation. They love him, they recognize his desire to win a real Oscar (he got an honorary one in 2003) before he leaves this mortal coil. That's a big deal.

2. Dame Helen can't lose. She's invulnerable. She has worked graciously, tirelessly, and given a new and different acceptance speech every time. Mirren's an insider, she lives in L.A. with director Taylor Hackford. She's an actors' actor, British, respected, and she's never won an Oscar. Meryl Streep and Judi Dench have won. Kate Winslet and Penelope Cruz have not, but now is not their time.

3. Both Eddie Murphy (who has never acted in a drama before, and kicks ass) and rookie actor-belter Jennifer Hudson are front-runners in the supporting actor and actress categories, respectively. But Dreamgirls is losing steam, because it didn't win a best picture slot. But who can beat them? Maybe senior citizen Arkin, because the little movie that could, Little Miss Sunshine, has to win a few things. But Arkin is the shy and retiring type. Babel's Adriana Barraza (a moving performance) and Rinko Kikuchi (a discovery) would have better chances of beating Hudson if they weren't competing against each other. Abigail Breslin has a shot. And Cate Blanchett won recently for her role as Katharine Hepburn in The Aviator.

4. Marty can't lose for best director. It is his turn; it is not Clint's year.

5. The Queen's Peter Morgan could unseat Little Miss Sunshine frontrunner Michael Arndt. That's because Morgan is relatively fresh on the L.A. PR circuit; he wrote two big screenplays (Last King of Scotland is the other); and he's got Ron Howard's Frost/Nixon still to come. He's an articulate Brit on a hot streak. Arndt has written a very funny and beloved script his first time out of the box, and now works with the ace comedy writing team at Pixar.

6. Best Picture is anyone's guess. Little Miss Sunshine has momentum, but it's a small-scale comedy whose rookie directing team did not get nominated. But people love it. The Queen will land an Oscar for Mirren for sure and possibly a few others, but no matter how clever and adept it is, it too is small. For many, Letters from Iwo Jima's Best Picture slot was a nomination for Clint Eastwood's extraordinary achievement in 2006; it includes Flags of Our Fathers. Some folks haven't seen Letters and may never do so. It feels like The Departed and Babel still have momentum. They are the two most complex movies; they have the most scale and scope. Clearly the actors love The Departed; but it is a genre remake for which Scorsese will be rewarded for pulling it off so well—and for all the other times he didn't win over the years. Babel has art and gravitas and emotion. And a sprawling ensemble like Crash.

Comments

[rgm]

Mirren just lost the London Evening Standard awad to Dench. Unbelievable But many Brits are anti QUEEN--and this was all critics voting.

[Chicago48]

I think Thompson is right on. O'toole just may beat Whittaker because of Whittaker's acceptance speeches previously. If an acceptance speech can kill your chances, he just killed his. The man needs to take a Toastmasters class immediately!

But the Oscar shouldn't go to someone just because they've got one foot in the grave either.

[Lee Hobbs]

I felt "The Departed" had gravitas, certainly got emotional responses out of the audiences I viewed it with, and had an ensemble cast firing on all cylinders !

[David]

I find Whittaker charming in those halting acceptance speeches: awkward, bashful, and authentic. Is polish everything?

[Pierre de Plume]

I’m beginning to sense that Academy voters subconsciously and collectively allowed “Letters From Iwo Jima” to slip in through the side door — right past “Dreamgirls” into the best picture category — so that Mr. Eastwood’s film might amble away at the last minute with the top Oscar. Granted, Mr. Scorsese may at long last take best director; it’s hard to imagine Clint winning a third one at Marty’s expense. What’s more, “Letters” may win best picture without even winning original screenplay or best director. But hey, strange things have happened at the Oscars recently. For that matter, if “Letters” were to win just one Oscar — for best picture — it wouldn’t be the first time such a result has occurred.

I acknowledge that “Babel,” like “Letters,” serves up meaningful messages that resonate deeply in our contemporary cultural climate. What seems most relevant here, though, is that the Oscar balloting period specifically coincides with what might be called a time of emerging national consciousness regarding the direction of U.S. involvement in Middle East affairs. I’d wager that, to an Academy voter at least, “Letters From Iowa Jima” addresses that sociopolitical reality more directly, more concisely, and in a context that’s somehow less emotionally threatening than what “Babel” offers. An American-made, Japanese-language World War II movie with a contemporary message seems familiar enough -- yet remote enough -- to safely insulate us a bit from today’s cold realities of northern Africa, uber-urban Tokyo, or the gritty U.S./Mexico border zone.

The seeming drawback of “Letters From Iwo Jima” — 98 percent of its dialogue in Japanese with English subtitles — could actually become a winning factor in seducing noble-minded Academy members to pause and reflect on the implications of a nation’s actions as viewed from a broader, universal perspective. And let’s not forget: “Letters” did win one of the awards for a Golden Globe best picture. Because Hollywood Foreign Press Association rules of eligibility for foreign films differ from those of the Oscars, we weren't afforded the opportunity to see how "Letters" might stack up against the crop of Golden Globe nominees for best drama. Further, it probably doesn’t matter that “Letters” wasn’t nominated by the predominantly English-speaking Screen Actors Guild for a best ensemble award; doing so would have seemed unlikely given the film’s prevalence of actors performing in a non-English language. Let’s not forget that “Letters” has already picked up enough top awards to demonstrate it’s a heavy hitter. Finally, one cannot disregard the proven power of the admiration and prestige that Clint Eastwood has come to represent to Academy voters.

Of the remaining nominees, “The Queen” probably will be viewed by the Academy as an excellent but nonetheless more of an "arthouse flick" worthy of a berth near — but not at — the top. (Remember “The Madness of King George” and all those Merchant/Ivory films that never won?) Next, too many voters will be reminded of previous Scorsese films that were as good as or better than “The Departed” and still didn’t win top prize; the mere 5 nominations for Scorsese’s current nominee further suggests that Academy support for this excellent but stylistically violent remake doesn’t run very deep (Scorsese flicks usually get more nods in technical categories).

Finally, although “Little Miss Sunshine” ultimately is seen as an upbeat crowd pleaser, its profundity is deceptively simple and perhaps too light on the surface. The film probably is not regarded as “big” enough to command Oscar victory: “Sideways” couldn’t win 2 years ago even with the aid of its romantic plot line — something “Sunshine” doesn’t even have. And the “Little Engine That Could” theme of “Sunshine” may not stack up against the expansive racial theme of last year’s winner, “Crash.” No, the Producers Guild victory for “Little Miss Sunshine,” though deserved, may be more a tip of the hat to the Little Film That Could than a harbinger of its chances for Oscar Gold.

Ultimately, whether or not “Letters” is a better or grander film than “Babel” or "The Departed," the Eastwood entry may be viewed by the Academy as simpler, more emotionally accessible but deeply engaging fare — as in more traditional Oscar bait. Just as “Unforgiven” was Eastwood’s revisionist Western, “Letters From Iwo Jima” could be his revisionist war movie.

For now at least, I’m guessing the Academy will go for “Letters From Iwo Jima.” As Academy members quietly view the film in their homes via the complimentary DVD provided as part of the film's dignified Oscar campaign, "Letters" may be subtly and assuredly garnering sufficient momentum to take top prize while the other, higher-profile contenders cancel each other out when Oscar's ballot count becomes final.