And now for the really tough stuff. Usually I say there are a dreaded 6 categories. This year, it seems there are a dreaded 9 categories. All the people saying this year's Oscars are going to be boring with Oppenheimer dominating are forgetting these categories.
Best Visual Effects - Godzilla Minus OneAdmittedly, I'm partial in choosing this one. Godzilla did get some recognition by the Oscars although it was just for this category. Yet, it may very well win this category and get at least one Oscar. It's biggest competition is The Creator. In a funny twist of fate, Gareth Edwards is the director of The Creator and he's the director of the 2014 Godzilla movie which launched the current USA Monsterverse. But now Godzilla may be coming from Japan to ruin The Creator's chances of winning. Unlike Godzilla, The Creator has a second nomination which is the Sound category. Clearly, there was some technical love for The Creator. I know when I saw the trailer for The Creator, I was impressed with how it looked and it seemed like it could be really neat sci-fi story. The effects seemed pretty impressive. When it released, though, it just seemed to garner a shrug from critics and audiences so I put off seeing. It is on my list of movies to see from 2023 still. On the other hand, Godzilla Minus One got a very positive reaction from critics and audiences and became the highest grossing Japanese film in the USA so people did see it. It also has a bit of narrative with it in that high profile Academy members like Spielberg and Guillermo Del Toro have talked up in the press how impressed they were with the movie and effects and how Toho Studios accomplished that on a small budget of 10 - 15 million. A lot of Academy members listen to their recommendations. Guillermo won Best Animated Feature last year for his Pinocchio movie. I'm hoping Godzilla Minus One can pull off the win here.
Best Sound - The Zone of InterestUgh. This will probably be a mistake I'll regret after. After I watched The Zone of Interest, I pretty much thought to myself that this movie should win for Best Sound because the sound effects play such a heavy part in the movie's atmosphere, mood and putting you in that same... zone as the characters on screen.
It reminds me how I instantly felt Little Women should win Best Costume after I saw it which isn't something I'm normally considering in a movie but I was absolutely right on that one. The big issue is that most people seem to think that Oppenheimer will also claim this award as it sweeps along. Oppenheimer made a billion dollars. A lot of people saw it. Maybe a tenth of those people will have seen The Zone of Interest so I don't know how much voters will actually be aware of what a factor the sound is for that movie. There's also a weird stat that film editing and sound usually get rewarded for the same film. Until 2020, there were two Sound categories so sometimes a film that won Best Editing would win one or both of those sound categories. Going back to 2007, (17 years), there are 4 times that the winner for Best Editing didn't also collect an award for Sound. Three of those occasions happened from 2010-2012. The 4th was just last year. Everything Everywhere All At Once won Editing but Top Gun: Maverick won Best Sound. That makes sense as all the wooshing of jet planes stood out more in that movie. Also, it made a billion dollars so more voters were likely aware of its sound making it easy to award it separately. The rule is to usually go with what you think will win not what you think SHOULD win but, in this case, I just feel too strongly that Zone is the clear choice and I'm going with it.
Best Make-Up and Hairstyling - Poor ThingsThis category can be very easy or very tough. It's easy when a performer has been transformed to look like a real person and will likely win an acting award for their portrayal. Gary Oldman winning for Darkest Hour as Churchill also garnered a win in Best Make-up for Darkest Hour. The Eyes of Tammy Fay won for Jessica Chastain in Best Actress and in Best Make-up for helping her portrayal to look like her. Looking at the acting awards, Oppenheimer would seem like a good pick with two actors likely to win and for portraying real life people. But most people don't really know what those scientists looked like so the transformations may not seem that impressive. (Although I thought Einstein's look was on point!) Then there's Maestro which had a lot of discussion about Bradley Cooper's Make-up / Prosthetic use to look like Leonard Bernstein. The make-up had to help him depict different ages of his life. Yet, he seems unlikely to win in Best Actor plus there was some controversy about the nose being offensive to Jews. And there's Poor Things. Willem Dafoe's mad scientist look is flashy and stands out but is the rest of the cast that impressive? Although, there's a chance that Emma Stone wins Best Actress so perhaps Make-up ties into that possibility. And that's why this category sucks this year. I'm going with Poor Things on the basis that it getting more acclaim during Awards season while Maestro just kind of faded away. If Oppenheimer were to win here then it might be a big, big night for that movie.
Best Actress - Lily GladstoneThis is another one I've been ping-ponging back and forth on my opinion. It reminds me a bit of last year's Best Actress race. A possible historical first winner for the Academy in a highly praised role versus a previous winner putting in what's considered career best work. One difference, though, is that Cate Blanchett actually encouraged voters to vote for Michelle Yeoh and gave a less concerned attitude about winning a second Best Actress Award. I've seen nothing from Emma Stone along those lines so I think she's in it and hoping to win. Poor Things struck a note with the Academy to be the second most nominated film although Killers of the Flower Moon is right behind with one less nomination. Personally, I don't get the high praise for Gladstone. I didn't think there was anything that special or memorable about the role. On the other hand, Emma Stone's character is hard to forget. Likewise, Emma Stone was also highly praised for her work on a recent show called The Curse. It's not quite a one-two punch like Matthew McConaughey when he had Dallas Buyers Club and True Detective happening at the same time which created a lot of buzz on his acting ability. There's been a viewpoint that Gladstone is belongs more in the Supporting Actress category while Emma is clearly full main character in her film. Gladstone is a first time nominee. Sometimes the Academy is ok with that and sometimes they don't want to award someone on a first nominee. They may if the person has had a good body of work or well regarded resume but, looking at Gladstone's past work, I'm not sure that argument would work here. Gladstone did win the SAG award which indicates there could be a lot of support in the Academy for her to win but its no guarentee. Glenn Close won SAG and lost to Olivia Coleman who starred in The Favorite, Yorgos Lanthimos last film before Poor Things. Might he have directed another Best Actress win? Yet, the Academy may want to make history by giving Gladstone the win and sort of putting to bed it's 50 year old embarrassment with Sacheen Littlefeather although even that is debated on how much of a controversary it was not to mention it's fifty years old and many Academy members have probably forgotten it, know about it or care that much about it now.
By all accounts, it sounds like I should be picking Emma Stone based on the reasoning so far but I can't think of a time the Academy awarded someone an acting award for a role as sexual as Stone's. I've certainly seen a lot of comments from people thinking it was too much or made them uncomfortable. There's still a lot of older and traditional members in the Academy. Look at Green Book winning a bunch of Awards just six years ago. Gladstone's role is a bit safer in that regard. It's the possible divisive reception to Stone's role that I think may give Gladstone the edge which is why I'm choosing her to win. Obviously, I expect someone with the word stone in their to win tonight although that doesn't even touch on Sandra Huller who starred in two of the movies nominated for Best Picture this year and is a nominee in this category. Eye-yi-yi!
Costume Design - BarbieThe next two categories are considered coin flips between Barbie and Poor Things. No one seems confident in their choice for this category. I'm going along with the Critics Choice Award for Costume Design. In the past 15 years they've begun awarding this category, they've only missed twice with the Academy. It's a pretty good record and the designer of Barbie has won a couple times already so she may have some connections in the industry to drum up votes. The main argument seems to be whether the Academy will award the recreations of a lot of iconic outfits from Barbie's past or the uniqueness and originality of Poor Things costumes. Personally, I feel the outfits in Barbie registered with movie goers more with a lot of people wanting to recreate some of the looks in real life. To me, that strong reaction may also have occurred in the Academy so that might give Barbie the edge in voting.
Production Design - Poor ThingsI've read some people say that this is the most wide open category where anyone could win but I still think it will come down between Barbie and Poor Things but maybe Oppenheimer plays spoiler. In a way, I'm hedging my bets by splitting Costume and Production between Barbie and Poor Things. Perhaps one will win both or perhaps I picked the wrong split. Barbie Land was a memorable world and set. A point in Barbie's favor is that it caused an international paint shortage for the color pink because so much was used on the set. That anecdote could seal the deal here. My problem is that Barbie Land was more an enlargement of various Barbie toys so it lacks a bit in originality although recreations can win in this category. The other negative is that aside from Barbie Land, the rest of film and it feels like half of it is spent away from Barbie Land in the real world where nothing seems that impressive about the set design. Poor Things on the other hand has a unique look and twisted fantasy setting that is prevalent throughout the whole movie. I think creating a complete fantasy like world from beginning to end might help Poor Things push it over the edge in voting for a win here.
I read someone arguing a stat that the winning film of Best Production usually gets a nom for Sound. I checked to see if that was true. Going back the past 14 years, there are three times in which a Best Production winner didn't have a sound nomination and a couple in which they only had one sound nomination between the two categories when there were two sound categories just narrowly keeping that stat a bit more relevant. It's definitely a stronger stat for the past 10 years. If it were to stay true now then Oppenheimer is the only Production nominee that also has a Sound nominee. Again, that could be a sign Oppenheimer will have an even bigger night than people are currently predicting but I'm going assume it doesn't quite put a complete chokehold on the proceedings. In one last tidbit, the Art Director's Guild does three Production Design awards so it makes it hard to assess who the Guild may favor. Yet for the category of Production Design for a Fantasy Film, it actually had Barbie face off against Poor Things in that same category and Poor Things came out on top as the winner. BAFTA also give it Best Production and though there record is spotty between their winners and Oscar winners, it could be a sign that international members of the Academy will favor Poor Things over Barbie in voting.
Show Posts
when we can all see there was only one. Welcome to the club of trying to screw over the best player, nickmitch! 
I think he needs to change his name from Order.RSS to Law.RSS because he doesn't play by the rules and just sets whatever standard he wants. 
