A deeply strange Movie Year 2007 comes to a close Sunday night with the announcement of the 80th Academy Awards, a gala that now feels like an anticlimax after months of labor strife, technological shifts in distribution and the widening gap between commercial success and critical laurels.
When the show finally airs, expect host Jon Stewart to crack wise about the writers strike and some less-than-household names rising to make acceptance speeches for movies that not many people saw. You almost couldn't blame the vast TV audience if it were to scratch its collective head and switch channels to watch "Big Brother."
How far has Academy taste strayed from ordinary public taste? Consider that the five best picture nominees ("Atonement," "Juno," "Michael Clayton," "No Country for Old Men," "There Will Be Blood") have a combined gross ($313.2 million at press time) that would rank as only fourth best in the year's box-office sweepstakes. Or consider that the top 10 money-earners of 2007 nabbed a total of eight Oscar nominations, all technical: the same number of nominations that "No Country" and "There Will Be Blood" each earned on its own.
So, one of the highest-rated television shows of the year is all about a bunch of movies that the folks watching it couldn't be bothered to leave the house to see? (And they say electoral politics is tough to understand!)
It all leads to a question: Why do folks bother with Oscar?
Well, tradition is a big part. For 55 years, the Oscar broadcast has been a major annual TV event, and from the red carpet walk-up until the final envelope is opened, it has the air of a party to it: the Super Bowl for movie geeks, pop-culture fiends and gossip mag and blog addicts.
There's the occasional delight of seeing some long-beloved figure touch us with a heartfelt speech or moment of grace or humor (Ruby Dee and Hal Holbrook are the sentimental favorites this year). Conversely, we can hope for an outrageous moment from some hot young talent ("Juno" writer Diablo Cody, c'mon down!). There are the montages of moments from old movies and of movie folks who died the previous year.
And there's the slender thread of hope that the acknowledgement of excellence by a business dedicated most of the year to commerce might encourage more quality from its creators and more discernment among its consumers, that the awarding of prizes to good films (and 2007 was a fine year for smaller films) will result in better movies and wider audiences for them.
It sounds ridiculous, I know. But I've gotta work Sunday night: Let me kindle my dreams, please!
Best picture To date, "No Country for Old Men" has dominated the guild prizes, and because of a strong membership overlap between the producers, writers, directors and actors guilds and the Academy, it must be considered the favorite. One school of thought holds that the hard edge of the film, coupled with the hard-edged "There Will Be Blood," will allow a mellower film through the door: "Juno" or "Michael Clayton" or even "Atonement." But the fact there's no agreement about what might replace "No Country" indicates that it's the strong favorite.
Best director Ethan and Joel Coen ("No Country for Old Men") will join the long ranks of prize-winners who followed up a win at the Directors Guild with an Oscar. Though they comport themselves as outsiders convincingly, they're bona fide Hollywood, having worked with a bunch of studios and big name talents (Paul Newman, Tom Hanks, George Clooney). It's their time.
Best actor It's hard to imagine that votes won't flood toward Daniel Day-Lewis for his titanic work in "There Will Be Blood," which is a shame considering how good George Clooney and Johnny Depp were in "Michael Clayton" and "Sweeney Todd," respectively (not to mention Tommy Lee Jones and Viggo Mortensen, both very fine). But Day-Lewis is clearly the class of his generation, and his infrequent work schedule makes each of his appearances a special event.
Best actress This one's a real race. In the end, I think the Academy's long-standing affection and respect for Julie Christie will put her over the top for "Away From Her," but I wouldn't be terribly surprised if Marion Cotillard repeated her Screen Actors Guild win for "La Vie en Rose." Christie might have suffered in another year for an unwillingness to campaign for the prize, but in this strike-hobbled season, she won't suffer the backlash. Otherwise, Laura Linney ("The Savages") will be back some other day, as might Ellen Page ("Juno"); Cate Blanchett didn't deserve a nomination for the laughable "Elizabeth: the Golden Age," but she may already be sitting pretty (see below) by the time this one is announced.
Best supporting actor Javier Bardem played the character of the year as a psycho killer in "No Country," and that will lift him above a quartet of equally deserving competitors. It's a shame they won't call a tie, because Hal Holbrook ("Into the Wild") and Tom Wilkinson ("Michael Clayton") were truly superb.
Best supporting actress Another squeaker. You could argue for Amy Ryan, who broke out in "Gone Baby Gone," or Tilda Swinton, who's making a name in the business and was terrific in "Michael Clayton." But I think it'll be either a career award for Ruby Dee ("American Gangster") or Cate Blanchett for another shape-shifting role ("I'm Not There"). Given the Academy's apparent infatuation with Blanchett, she takes the statue.
Best screenplays The Coens for "No Country" (adaptation) and Diablo Cody, this year's indie love fetish, for "Juno" (original screenplay). They won the Guild awards, and nothing has changed since then.
Best animated feature There are two strong and deserving candidates, but I think the Academy voters will want at least one person who earned a $200-million-plus gross up there on Oscar night, so Brad Bird's "Ratatouille" edges past "Persepolis." Another category in which a tie would be perfectly just.
Best documentary feature Or, as I like to think of it, the Democratic National Party platform. Kinda tough to sort through, with three films about the Iraq War alongside Michael Moore's "Sicko." I could see the latter squeaking through, but I think the race is between "Taxi to the Dark Side," about acts of torture committed by American forces in Afghanistan, Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo, and "No End in Sight," which details the botched occupation of Iraq. Throwing a dart at the board, I go with "Taxi," which hits on a truly visceral level.
Best music (song and soundtrack) Usually I don't care about these categories except for the snack breaks provided by the song performances. But this year I've got strong personal favorites: "Falling Slowly" from "Once" as best song (it would be a crime if anything else won) and Michael Giacchino's score for "Ratatouille," which will make up for the injustice of his failing even to be nominated for "The Incredibles."
Best makeup Again, who cares, right? But: If "Norbit" wins, there will be a delicious irony. Last year, it was widely surmised that Eddie Murphy's Oscar bid for "Dreamgirls" was scuttled by the premiere of that turkey. If "Norbit" were to win a prize, that would be the ultimate demonstration of the genuine loathing so many in the business have for Murphy. So, the vicious gossip in me says, "Go 'Norbit'!"
