The New York Times' Oscar Prediction
For the fourth straight year, the paper has no idea who's going to win anything.
February 10, 2003

On February 9, the Times published A. O. Scott's Oscar predictions. As Slate notes, this was the fourth time the paper washed its hands from the task of predicting a clear contender for the Academy Awards. Problem is, each time they do this they say there's no clear contender like the one from the previous year, when they also said there was no clear contender. The most Mr. Scott was able to mutter was his starry-eyed wish for Oscar night shenanigans.

...I would be glad to see "Adaptation" pick up a few Oscars, though it seems unlikely. At Oscar time, the Academy rarely honors satires of the movie industry, since they might threaten its monopoly on self-parody. It would be particularly apt — and might, indeed, mollify those viewers unsatisfied by the film's ending — if Donald and Charlie Kaufman shared the award for best adapted screenplay, which would mark the first time that the Academy has honored the achievements of a fictional character (Donald). I would love to hear his acceptance speech, but word is he's dead as well as imaginary. Perhaps Nicolas Cage, who plays both Kaufman brothers in the movie, will accept on his behalf. To round out the evening, Mr. Cage might at least be nominated in both the best-actor and best-supporting-actor categories, so that his auto-competition would underscore the movie's theme of sibling rivalry.

Well, that was then. Right now, we already have this year's list of nominees from the Academy. Let's take a look at the categories and see who should walk aways with a little naked guy.

• Film Editing: Chicago was edited to help the non-dancer actors' numbers look better than they would have come out in a single take. The Hours' Peter Boyle had to make 3 parallel storylines come together as a whole. If only a win for Boyle would help Hollywood product move away from excessive cutting...
• Visual Effects: Too bad the Matrix sequels didn't come out last year. It would've been nice to have them kick LucasFilm's behind in this category. Again. That task rests now on either our friendly neighborhood Spider-Man, or a massive army of orcs. I'll put my wager on the orcs.
• Sound Editing: The category's name is misleading; what's being awarded here is not the aural equivalent of film editing (bringing the different pieces together) but of visuall effects (coming up with all those cool noises). Here's the only nomination for last year's Spielberg sci-fi treat. It should win; there are some cool "oomphs!" and "whooshes!" in it.
• Sound: Now this is the category that rewards bringing the whole mix together —dialogue, effects, music, etc.— and giving each its appropriate weight. Among the nominees we have two crime movies (one of them a musical), two war films (the one with the orcs, the other with a species as fearsome: New Yorkers) and two comic book adaptations. Uh... doesn't that make six nominees in a category of five? There must be some overlap here... (The musical for win.)
• Makeup: I usually expect the winner in this category to be the one with the scariest "creature" makeup, but increasingly we see it going to naturalistic work. This year the contenders are Frida and The Time Machine. Jeremy Iron's get-up in Machine was anything but naturalistic. We have a winner!
• Costume Design: Let's hope we don't have Whoopi Goldberg modelling the nominated costumes this year.
• Cinematography: A crime was comitted in this category. Where's the nomination for Rodrigo Prieto? Doesn't it matter he made great work for Frida, 8 Mile and 25th Hour? This is an injustice, I tell you!
• Art Direction: A toss-up. Let's move on to the next one.
• Original Song: As usual, the Academy offered token recognition to songwriters who offer new beats by nominating Eminem's "Lose Yourself." (U2's nominations with "The Hands that Built America" doesn't count; after the Boss won an Oscar, rock became safe for the Academy.) I hope he wins; the acceptance speech will be a riot, specially when they start bleeping it out.
• Original Score: Elliot Goldenthal is here, with his Frida score, which is a good thing. But many othere equally interesting scores were left out. Where's John Powell's nomination for The Bourne Identity's electronic riffs? Cliff Martinez's for the tremulous sounds of Solaris? David Julyan's for Insomnia's reworking of his Memento score? I don't know about you, people, but I can be really snotty when it comes to movie music.
• Animated Feature: When this category was introduced last year, it seemed as if cell-based animation was just waiting for its obit in the Times to realize it was officially dead: computer based work ruled. But this year only one of the nominated movies was made out of whole bits. But did they have to throw in two Disney releases? The nomination for the Powerpuff Girls is missing. At least they included Spirited Away. If the Academy could recognize brilliant animation without it punching their noses, this last one would win.
• Foreign Language Film: Sadly, Y Tu Mamá También didn't qualify for a nomination in this category, it having been released in Mexico all the way back in 2001. Instead, this year's entry from mi patria is El Crimen del Padre Amaro. I predict a loss.
• Adapted Screenplay: It turns out they did nominate Adaptation. The work the Kaufmanses (both the real and the ficticious) did goes well beyond what could be considered an "adaptation" and slips into the land of original screenplay. A nomination for Confessions of a Dangerous Mind, that I could have expected. This? No way! Still, if Adaptation wins, as A. O. Scott commented, it'll be one hell of a show.
• Original Screenplay: When the nominees in this category overlap with those in the Director one, this award serves as a consolation prize for the director who made the boldest movie in the year that proved too bold for the Academy to reward. This year there's no overlap , and instead we get some foreign language nominees whose films didn't make it on the "ghetto." [Correction: Actually, there is one director nominated both here and in the directing category; check note at the end of this post.] So who will win? Todd Haynes' Far from Heaven? Pedro Almodóvar's Talk to Her? The Cuarón Bros. Y Tu Mamá También? No, I think the Academy will display its tackiness in full by rewarding Nia Vardalos and her big fat Greek butt.

As for the main categories (acting, directing and picture), let's call them the people's choice awards: whoever brought the bacon to the box office is most likely to win.

{Update, February 13, 2003}

I must have been sleeping when I attempted to cross-check both the Original Screenplay and Director categories, for Pedro Almodóvar indeed is nominated in both. The question now is, if he doesn't receive the Director Award, will he receive the Original Screenplay one in consolation? We'll find out on Oscar night.