Hi, Mike,
The nominations were a free-for-all, yet this year’s Oscars seem especially predictable. Are we walking into a trap? Will there be surprises to rival Adrien Brody and Roman Polanski from last year? Of course, if you could answer that, then they wouldn’t be called surprises, would they?
Anyway, let’s start by getting the big purple elephant out of the room. “The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King” and its director, Peter Jackson, are going to win best picture and director. Is there even the teeniest bit of doubt?
— Mark
Mark,
You don’t like to save the best for last, do you?
Well, yeah. “Return of the King” and Peter Jackson look like the surest bets in the race — except for the supporting actor contest. And they should be. The entire trilogy is a really massive achievement, great popular entertainment and a triumphant epic literary adaptation as well. One or both of the first two parts already should have won Oscars.
But the voters this year will probably be considering the whole trilogy when they cast their ballots. And they should. It also doesn’t hurt that this is the most exciting and dramatically satisfying of the three movies — though, if ever a trilogy deserved to be ranked and judged as single unit, this is the one.
By the way, of the various Oscar prognosticators, experts and guessers that I called to prepare for this, every single one, without exception, voted for both “Rings” and Jackson — 100 percent. In fact, if “Rings” loses this time, it may prove that a fantasy adventure movie will never get an Oscar.
Think there’s a chance for a major upset?
— Mike
Mike,
No, and I agree with your analysis. The Academy Awards are all about rewarding achievement, and New Line’s and Peter Jackson’s $300 million roll of the dice to film these supposedly unfilmable books represents the outstanding cinematic achievement of the past three years. And the everybody-loves-it competition just isn’t there. True, some fantasy-phobic Academy members probably haven’t bothered to watch “The Return of the King” because they weren’t motivated to see the first two, and “Master and Commander” director Peter Weir’s recent BAFTA win may take Jackson out of the 100-percent lock category. But he’s still a 90-percent lock. So is the movie.
Let’s move on to what you consider the other safe-bet category. I take it that means you think Tim Robbins should be clearing a space on his mantelpiece?
— Mark
Mark,
That’s what everyone seems to think — and they’re probably right. This is a pretty strong category, but Robbins was terrific — playing a shattered human being with great feeling and without any vanity (and just enough ambivalence to keep you guessing about the mystery).
Robbins is also a hugely talented Hollywood figure much admired for his direction as well as his acting — and probably also for his brains, outspoken politics and Susan Sarandon. All that works in his favor, plus the fact that he doesn’t carry the off-screen bad rep baggage of the other big “Mystic River” gun, Sean Penn.
At Cannes, I thought Robbins and Penn — and Kevin Bacon, too — were really robbed by Patrice Chereau’s jury, when they gave the best actor award in tandem to the two Turkish stars of “Distant.” That prize should have gone to Penn, Robbins and Bacon. So the Oscars this year might wind up looking smarter than Cannes, which isn’t often the case.
Did you hear any sentiment for Ken Watanabe or Benicio Del Toro? And what do you think of Tim?
— Mike
Mike,
Although many think he gave the strongest performance in “21 Grams,” Benicio is considered handicapped because he won recently (for “Traffic”), and I don’t sense much sentiment for Ken Watanabe or “The Last Samurai.” Actually, I think the two you didn’t mention have better shots: Alec Baldwin for his fierce, nuanced portrayal of the old-school casino owner of “The Cooler” and Djimon Hounsou for playing the life-force neighbor artist of “In America.” If I sensed Baldwin were a beloved Hollywood figure, I might give him the nod. I do think Hounsou could be the surprise winner because “In America” is a widely loved movie, and voters may be looking for ways to reward it.
But I have to stick with Robbins. I think “Mystic River” will be honored for its acting, and Robbins turns in the kind of transformative performance that often wins.
That said, I wasn’t as big a fan of the movie or performance as you were, but I liked them more than the presumed favorite for best supporting actress. I thought Renee Zellweger was robbed when she wasn’t even nominated for “Nurse Betty,” but I don’t think she should get her golden guy for “Cold Mountain.” Yet most people think she will. Do you?
— Mark
Mark,
Yes — though, like you, I wasn’t really slain by Zellweger’s performance.
Now, I don’t really sympathize with the Hollywood nasties who are calling R.Z.’s “Cold Mountain” role “Granny Clampett.” But she certainly dominated every scene she was in. And there may be a Bette Davis-“Dangerous” factor here: Zellweger wins this year because she lost for “Chicago” last year, just as Bette won for the deservedly forgotten “Dangerous” in 1935, after missing out with her classic Mildred in ’34’s “Of Human Bondage.” (Not that “Cold Mountain” is another “Dangerous.”)
Renee’s very tough competition comes from two performances more intense and memorable than hers in two films much less seen or talked about than “Mountain”: Shohreh Aghdashloo as the besieged Iranian wife of “House of Sand and Fog” and Patricia Clarkson as the dying Thanksgiving feast-bound mother in “Pieces of April.”
Now, there are a couple of classic Oscar performances — and Aghdashloo is rightly seen as the logical spoiler by a lot of people.
Any thoughts on those? And what’s your line on best actress?
— Mike
Mike,
You know what? Last year everyone said Catherine Zeta-Jones was going to win best supporting actress for Miramax’s “Chicago,” and I said, “Nah” and predicted Meryl Streep for “Adaptation.” (Insert loud buzzing sound here.) So I’m going to learn from experience and … Nah, I’ll throw in with Aghdashloo instead. She was awfully impressive, and Iranian actresses don’t tend to get a lot of plum roles in Hollywood. Everyone knows Renee will have other chances.
The strikes against Aghdashloo are that her movie is such a downer that Academy members may have popped out their cassettes before they reached her strongest scenes, and Hollywood tends to celebrate its own, i.e. Zellweger.By the way, one knock against Zellweger is that people may be tiring of the effusive faux-humble act she puts on when she wins an award, such as at the Golden Globes last month. (Last Sunday’s New York Times mock Oscars acceptance speech on her behalf was brutally funny.) Best actress favorite Charlize Theron could be hurting her chances as well in that her Globes acceptance speech and media-saturation interviews have made her seem more like a typically self-involved movie star than a serious actress.
So the door may be open for Diane Keaton to win her second Oscar (after “Annie Hall”) for “Something’s Gotta Give,” which was popular with the older-type viewers that dominate the Academy, or the race’s increasingly buzzed-about sleeper: Naomi Watts for her bone-rattling portrayal of a grief-stricken, revenge-filled mother in “21 Grams.” And the winner is …
Oh, I can’t deny Theron for her unexpectedly primal, furious portrayal of serial killer Aileen Wuornos in “Monster,” and I don’t think the Academy will either. Make that three straight best actress wins for gorgeous women who obscure their beauty to snag the Oscar.
Right?
— Mark
Mark,
Right. But, you know, for weeks, I’ve been hearing that Sean Penn may have blown the Oscar by snubbing the Golden Globes, or that Zellweger and Theron have been making corny acceptance speeches, or that this actor or that actor has been playing the game or not playing the game. My reaction is getting to be: Are Academy voters really affected by this stuff? Can’t we give them some credit for decent professional cynicism?
How low can the Oscars have sunk if they’re awarded even partly on the basis of snubs to the Golden Globes?
Be that as it may, Charlize Theron looks like a shoo-in: a glamor-girl going mean and ugly, a superblond sneering, snarling, serial-killing, breaking down and tearing her guts out on screen, a mix of Hilary Swank’s “Boys Don’t Cry” and Robert De Niro’s “Raging Bull.” Now, she’s always been a very likable star — unpretentious despite her glamor — and here she comes up, blasting everyone’s expectations with this ferocious role: scary and sentimental. How can she lose?
Only one way: If the older Academy voters feel such a powerful empathy for Diane Keaton and that particular role — the smart, 50ish playwright in love (and what it says about aging in life and movies) — that they give it to DK as a salute and a statement. It’s possible.
Now the toughie: the odds-cruncher we’ve saved until last. Best actor. Penn or Murray (or Johnny or Ben). You first.
— Mike
Mike,
How would Bill Murray have handicapped this race on the old “Saturday Night Live”? “Jude Law? Get outta here!” (crumples up piece of paper, flings it over his shoulder). “Johnny Depp, you were funny, funny, funny in `Pirates of the Caribbean’ — but funny doesn’t count at the Oscars. See ya! Ben Kingsley, you scared me, man, in `House of Sand and Fog.’ You scared me more in `Sexy Beast,’ and you didn’t win for that. You probably won’t win for this either; your movie was soooo depressing, and we all remember you won for `Gandhi,’ what, 20 years ago, because we’re all that old.
“Bill Murray? What’s he doing here? Handsome dog, though, and you know, this kind of acting is tricky stuff. It’s what they call `internal’ — you feel for this guy, he’s got pathos or bathos (which is the good one?), and he’s funny, too. And I loved that Globes speech, especially the part about everyone trying to take credit for `Lost in Translation.’
“Sean Penn — he didn’t even show up at the Globes, yet he found time to go to Iraq. Snob. Then again, the Oscars folks hate the Globes, so bully for him! Here’s the thing: Sean Penn, you are a god, and not just because of that Spicoli dude. Actors all look up to you, you’ve got two heavy movies out, and, hey, it’s your turn. So although that Murray fellow has a lot of hot hot heat on his side, Sean, you da man.”
OK, that’s probably not how Bill Murray would have done it.
— Mark
Mark,
Actually, that’s pretty good. But you missed the opportunity to have Bill Murray unctuously lecturing Bill Murray on how to be cool. Like: “Bill. Bill! Love ya, man. But hey, I’m serious. Forget that `Lost in Translation’ stuff. Lose your barber! Lose your tailor! Find a skin doctor. And instead of Scarlett Johansson, why can’t you get cast with someone like . . . Charlize Theron? Hey, imagine her winning an Oscar if she ate and dressed and cut her hair like you!”
Well, enough of that. Sean Penn is da man, and this is his best shot ever. Jimmy Markum in “Mystic River” is a classic American tough guy performance, level with the best of Bogart, Cagney, Pacino, Nicholson, De Niro. Penn has been admired so long and lost so regularly that he really is due. Here’s a scenario, though. The Academy loves “Lost in Translation,” but the only real Oscar lock it has is Sofia Coppola for best original screenplay. They figure “Mystic River” already has one Oscar for Robbins, and maybe also adapted screenplay for Brian Helgeland, so they split the ballot and give Murray best actor. They like “Translation” and they want to honor a little film after that MPAA screener mess. They also figure this is the performance of Murray’s life, and Penn will be back at least a half dozen more times. They’ll catch him later.
Plausible? That’s why everyone says this is the closest race on the card — one that even Kingsley and Depp might pull out. Other than a Shohreh Aghdashloo win, it’s the one chance for real suspense in the top six categories.
Even so, I’ve got to stick with Penn. Sue me.
Any last thoughts?
— Mike
Mike,
Well, MW, let me tell ya. I think “Finding Nemo” will win the animated feature Oscar, Billy Crystal will dress up as either Aileen Wuornos or Gimli the dwarf, there will be lame jokes about “wardrobe malfunctions,” Jack Nicholson will get the most reaction shots of any non-nominee, and you won’t be able to remember how the best song winner goes the next morning. Oh, yeah, and best actress presenter Adrien Brody will be rooting for Charlize Theron to win and to reprise the greeting he gave to presenter Halle Berry last year.
— Mark
Mark,
But this time, they’ll be ready for him.
— Mike
– – –
PICTURE
Wilmington: “The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King”
Caro: “The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King”
DIRECTOR
Wilmington: Peter Jackson “THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE RETURN OF THE KING”
Caro: Peter Jackson “THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE RETURN OF THE KING”
ACTOR
Wilmington: Sean Penn “MYSTIC RIVER”
Caro: Sean Penn “MYSTIC RIVER”
ACTRESS
Wilmington: Charlize Theron “MONSTER”
Caro: Charlize Theron “MONSTER”
SUPPORTING ACTOR
Wilmington: Tim Robbins “MYSTIC RIVER”
Caro: Tim Robbins “MYSTIC RIVER”
SUPPORTING ACTRESS
Wilmington: Renee Zellweger “COLD MOUNTAIN”
Caro: Shohreh Aghdashloo “HOUSE OF SAND AND FOG”
