Off the Carpet: Academy members have numerous tight races to mull over this season
The major categories have rarely been this competitive
Helen Mirren in "Hitchcock"
Are you a fan of In Contention?
Sign up to get the latest updates instantly.
As members of the Academy hurry through the last screeners they need to see before committing an opinion on the year's best (for those who bother trying to get as deep into the stack as possible, that is), a number of races hang in the balance as extremely tight categories are sure to leave a number of contenders feeling the sting of "also-ran" on Thursday, January 10.
The lead actor competition tends to lead the way on "tight races" each year, and this year there are definitely more than five hopefuls angling for position. But it seems to me the leading ladies are making for a more spirited showdown than the gents as we close in on the end of phase one this time around. What started out looking like a typically thin season for Best Actress has become tensely competed with, by my count, 10 actresses that could realistically make a go of it.
Let's start with the givens, though they themselves didn't even begin with the current frontrunner, Jessica Chastain in "Zero Dark Thirty," until recently. She wasn't considered a strong possibility until the film finally started shaping up in November and made its presence felt in a category sorely in need of a frontrunner.
Until then, Jennifer Lawrence was out front for work in "Silver Linings Playbook," which put her on the awards map during the Toronto Film Festival. Emmanuelle Riva had already been lurking as a possibility after big buzz in Cannes, but needed a second wind. She started picking up a little pace, inevitably, as critics began dishing out awards in December. Marion Cotillard also maintained steady visibility for her work in "Rust and Bone," another Cannes player, particularly with a number of tributes throughout the season.
Going way back to January and the Sundance Film Festival, young Quvenzhané Wallis has been a talking point from "Beasts of the Southern Wild" all year, while Helen Mirren -- SAG- and Globe-nominated for her performance in "Hitchcock" -- could ride the British vote to a nomination many aren't expecting for her due to the film's critical reception. (It has, however, been more positively received overseas, particularly in the BAFTA set.)
Amid all of this, after a slow start out of Toronto, Naomi Watts has been getting plenty of attention as "The Impossible" makes its way into theaters and well-publicized endorsements (which all contenders receive, whether publicized or not) keep her above water -- so to speak. And joining the conversation after the New York Film Critics Circle sprung for her work in "The Deep Blue Sea" was Rachel Weisz, suddenly in play with a Globe nod and a campaign.
Related
-
Richard Gere on crafting a New York state of mind with Nicholas Jarecki's 'Arbitrage'
And how he was sold on the first-time director's 'movie guy' cred
-
Emmanuelle Riva on playing part of a Michael Haneke symphony in 'Amour'
We talk to the Boston and Los Angeles critics' choice for Best Actress
And just because you never can account for a sudden Tommy Lee Jones-like nomination from the blue, I add to that Globe-nominee Judi Dench from "The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel" (a SAG ensemble nominee, too) and Keira Knightley in "Anna Karenina" (who may be nowhere to be found on the circuit but, well, you never can tell).
Who gets in? Does Mirren ride the Brit vote? Does Cotillard love translate throughout the actors branch (which has very little crossover with SAG's nominating committee)? Has Wallis run out of steam as the room has gotten crowded? And could Watts prove to fall out of the final tally like any number of fellow actors who have received notices from SAG, the HFPA and the BFCA (Paul Giamatti, Cameron Diaz, Russell Crowe, Tilda Swinton, etc.)? The only two I feel confident will land nominations are the two most expect to duke it out for the win: Jessica Chastain and Jennifer Lawrence. It's a race!
Then we get to the leading men, which feels more like a six-player thing. Daniel Day-Lewis ("Lincoln"), John Hawkes ("The Sessions") and Bradley Cooper ("Silver Linings Playbook") all seem secure. Hugh Jackman's status feels maybe a little more concrete for his work in "Les Misérables" than Denzel Washington's for "Flight," but ask me again tomorrow and I might feel different. The only real intrigue has been the SAG "snub" of Joaquin Phoenix in "The Master." Did that reflect an overall feeling? Or did it actually galvanize support?
Add to that the lurking potential of surprise bids for Jean-Louis Trintignant, drawing respect for his work in the two-hander "Amour," or Golden Globe nominee Richard Gere, working really hard and wanting it for his "Arbitrage" performance, and you have something a little more interesting.
Best Supporting Actor seems to have a revolving door on the fifth spot, with nods for Alan Arkin ("Argo"), Robert De Niro ("Silver Linings Playbook"), Philip Seymour Hoffman ("The Master") and Tommy Lee Jones ("Lincoln") all expected. The spot seems to want to go to a performer from "Django Unchained," but the potential is there for Leonardo DiCaprio, Samuel L. Jackson and Christoph Waltz to cancel each other out, with Javier Bardem (SAG-nominated for "Skyfall"), Matthew McConaughey (a critics' favorite for "Magic Mike" who faded on the surface but still has champions beneath it) and Dwight Henry (sticking around for underrated work in "Beasts of the Southern Wild") lying in wait to capitalize.
Best Supporting Actress also got spiced up when Nicole Kidman asserted herself with SAG and Globe nods for her incendiary performance in "The Paperboy." Is she really in the fold as Anne Hathaway ("Les Misérables"), Sally Field ("Lincoln") and Helen Hunt ("The Sessions") all seem poised? And if so, who grabs the last spot? Is it the SAG-"snubbed" Amy Adams in "The Master" or the SAG-nominated Maggie Smith in "The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel?" Is it lovable Jacki Weaver to fill out a quartet of acting nods from "Silver Linings Playbook" or it Judi Dench for a substantial turn in "Skyfall?" Does Samantha Barks ("Les Misérables") have an angle on the race? Does Ann Dowd ("Compliance") get to a nod on her own dime? Lots of possibilities.
Which brings me to the Best Director category. It hasn't been this competitive in a long while. It's certainly tighter than any such race in recent memory. Steven Spielberg seems like the alpha for "Lincoln." One would more easily say Tom Hooper is right in there for "Les Misérables," but some are taking his Golden Globe snub a bit too seriously. Kathryn Bigelow, meanwhile, helmed the year's critical darling in "Zero Dark Thirty" and seems good to go (even if she has to fend off hatchet jobs like the one in last week's issue of The Hollywood Reporter on the way there).
Most would say Ben Affleck is as assured as anyone else, but it's interesting to note that the at times selective directors branch can sometimes put its foot down on actors-turned-directors, even on occasions such as this. Ron Howard was somehow snubbed for "Apollo 13" after winning the DGA, remember. (I'm not saying I expect Affleck to be snubbed, or that he's necessarily even in danger of it. I'm just saying there's a precedent for a well-liked movie to get the cold shoulder here, and it's a tight year.)
The directors being a high-minded, smaller group than, say, the guild, you can always expect some rarefied picks. So Michael Haneke is by no means out of it for "Amour." Meanwhile, Quentin Tarantino may have gotten to the party later than most, but it was just in time for "Django Unchained" to be seen, and liked, by an Academy with ballots in hand.
Let's not forget David O. Russell, who directed one of the films ("Silver Linings Playbook") we would expect to see make the Best Picture cut in a year of five, nor the BFCA- and Globe-nominated Ang Lee, whose vision for "Life of Pi" is a driving identity for the film. And in the realm of fingerprint vision, let's also not forget Paul Thomas Anderson, whose "The Master" feels so curiously nebulous in the fray of the season. I would even include the directors of indie faves "Moonrise Kingdom" (Wes Anderson) and "Beasts of the Southern Wild" (Benh Zeitlin), because, again, it's tight all over and you never can tell.
And I haven't even gotten to the screenplay races, which have their own share of intrigue. I'll save it for another time.
All of this tight competition simply stems from one of the more neck-and-neck Best Picture races we've ever seen. So much room to maneuver and I'm betting even the nominations leave unanswered questions. We'll see if I'm right in 10 days' time.
Until then, have a Happy Holiday and we'll reassess the standings again in 2013.
Check out my updated predictions HERE and, as always, see how Guy Lodge, Greg Ellwood and I collectively think the season will turn out at THE CONTENDERS.
2012-2013 OSCAR PREDICTIONS
Best Picture
Best Director
Best Actor
Best Actress
Best Supporting Actor
Best Supporting Actress
Best Adapted Screenplay
Best Original Screenplay
Best Cinematography
Best Costume Design
Best Film Editing
Best Makeup And Hairstyling
Best Original Score
Best Original Song
Best Production Design
Best Sound Editing
Best Sound Mixing
Best Visual Effects
Best Animated Feature Film
Best Documentary Feature
Best Foreign Language Film
Latest Posts
-
Oscar Isaac is a revelation in melancholy study of arrested artistrySunday, May 19, 2013
-
Putting a bow on last year's awards season with a few laughsSunday, May 19, 2013
-
How has the franchise fared at the Academy Awards over the decades?Saturday, May 18, 2013
-
Competition's first outright dud is a major letdown from Arnaud DesplechinSaturday, May 18, 2013








Comments
Option 1
Comment instantly as a guest GuestOption 2
Option 3
Login or create a HitFix account Login SignupJonnybon
December 24, 2012 at 1:43PM EST Reply to CommentI know it's a strong year for English-language actors, but Omar Sy is more deserving than most of them.
cineJAB
December 24, 2012 at 1:47PM EST Reply to CommentI really don't see Amour getting any nods other than Foreign language, but I'm loving how possible an Adapted Screenplay nod seems for Perks nowadays.
JJ1
December 24, 2012 at 2:23PM EST Reply to CommentHow I see it rig now:
Actor - I feel like Jackman is in. I feel like the actors branch will actually put Phoenix in.so who's out, Cooper or Denzel? I still don't see Cooper as concrete, but that may just be me.
Actress - fascinating. Only Chastain and Lawrence seem assured. I'd like to think that Riva will pull through. Watts is building steam. But she's not lovvvved by the academy. Cotillard feels vulnerable, too. Weisz is a charmer and is campaigning. And then there's Mirren, obviously well-loved. And I keep forgetting about Wallis, which may mean something. I feel like since she missed SAG and GG that only Bafta support could help, but I feel like they'll be spreading their wealth Between Mirren, Weisz, Watts, Dench, Knightley, and the 2 French women (Bafta loves their French actresses). So where the Wallis loophole?
Supp actor - TLJ, PSH, Arkin (ugh) plus 2 of Bardem, Deniro, Dicaprio, and Waltz. No clue.
Supp. Actress - the solid 3 plus 2 of Kidman, Smith, Dench. I see Dowd and Barks as outside looking in.
Director - I see Spielberg, Bigelow, Affleck, Lee, Hooper. But I wonder how much Django or Amour is loved. I don't see Anderson happening. And if Hooper is in, it's because they really like him and respect the audacity of what he did with Les Miserables.
That's where I'm at.
Jan I also don't think that Cooper is a sure thing. If Giamatti didn't get nominated for Sideways despite all the attention from precursors, being in a film that had less detractors than SLP and being a respected actor's actor unlike Cooper...
December 24, 2012 at 3:14PM ESTI'm hoping/predicting that Les Mis will be more like the Dreamgirls than the Chicago of this season and that Hooper will miss out.
Martin Weisz is not eligible for BAFTA as it was released last year in the UK. Dench and Smith are already locks in supporting for BAFTA, they probably won't get another nod in leading. Also, Knightley's film wasn't well received in the UK, so I doubt she's much of a threat for BAFTA. As for Wallis, she wasn't eligible for SAG, so her omission there does not hurt her at all.
December 24, 2012 at 3:47PM ESTJJ1 Sorry, I realize Weisz isn't eligible for bafta. I meant to say that the British bloc in the academy may be voting for her. It's a strange thing to talk about, but there apparently is one, huh?
December 24, 2012 at 6:49PM ESTI still think Mirren, Smith (quartet), Dench (best exotic), Weisz, and the 2 French actresses will take a brunt of support. But Wallis could definitely slip in. I just don't see it right now.
CaptainCanada
December 24, 2012 at 3:09PM EST Reply to CommentI don't really see Cooper as a clear "in", particularly since the movie has kind of lost steam from the heady period when it looked like it was going to be a big commercial play as well as a critical hit.
RichardZ
December 24, 2012 at 3:10PM EST Reply to CommentI don't think SLP will get much nods--. It's a rom-com that didn't even make enough money. It's a flop considering the casting--also, a wildly inept release strategy for the season. It's a very slight achievement in cinema, even in its genre. I rather see Perks of Being a Wallflower get noticed.
I do love SLP but I am surprised that it is such a player in the Oscar season. I do like Bradley Cooper. I feel that Jennifer Lawrence is a supporting role, which she might win hands down in a way that Marisa Tomei won for My Cousin Vinny. SLP might actually have been a better shot as a original screenplay, but as a sourced material, it is pretty lightweight considering the competition.
In all, if there is a movie that will be edged out by a crowded field, I think SLP will suffer.
Paul Outlaw From your keyboard to...
December 24, 2012 at 3:33PM ESTMatt What the hell are you talking about? Silver Linings hasn't even gone into a wide release yet. It's expanding to 750 theatres tomorrow. I'll agree the release strategy has been odd, but there's still potential for this to be a 60-70 Million type film at least. It's made 20 Million in 370 theatres over a month, that's not bad at all.
December 24, 2012 at 3:41PM ESTJLPatt And yet it's a better film than almost all of the leading contenders for Best Picture, "Lincoln" excluded.
December 24, 2012 at 6:36PM EST"Lightweight" is such a frivolous and reductive adjective. There's nothing wrong with a comedy competing against bigger and heavier pictures. In fact, it's rather refreshing.
Matt
December 24, 2012 at 3:43PM EST Reply to CommentI'm not getting how SLP can't still be a commercial play. Odd release strategy or not 20 Million in 370 theatres over a month is not bad business at all. They're using a platform strategy that will benefit if the film does well with the Academy.
m1
December 24, 2012 at 3:55PM EST Reply to CommentIn what universe is Silver Linings Playbook a flop? It's making the same amount of money that The King's Speech made in the same time frame! I think Cooper is in and Phoenix will miss out on a nomination. Someone mentioned Giamatti as indication but Giamatti didn't have Weinstein on his side. Cooper does.
Ty Phoenix has Weinstein as well
December 24, 2012 at 4:40PM ESTm1 @Ty: That's true. But Cooper's movie has better reviews and has won more awards the Phoenix's.
December 24, 2012 at 5:07PM ESTm1 *than Phoenix's.
December 24, 2012 at 5:08PM ESTLaura Stewart No, The Master is sitting very pretty at 86 on Metacritic compared to the 81 for SLP. It hasn't won more awards yet either... it's been nominated for more, sure.
December 25, 2012 at 11:29PM ESTm1
December 24, 2012 at 3:56PM EST Reply to CommentOne more thing: Phillip Seymour Hoffman will win Supporting Actor easily.
Chris138 One can only hope.
December 24, 2012 at 4:18PM ESTJLPatt And it will be the biggest category fraud win in Academy history. So I hope it doesn't happen, even though his nomination will be fraudulent as well.
December 24, 2012 at 6:37PM ESTCremildo Silly thing to say when Hoffman is facing Lincoln's Tommy Lee Jones.
December 25, 2012 at 2:22AM ESTJohn Gilpatrick Easily? Hardly. Jones is looking very solid.
December 26, 2012 at 12:05PM ESTred_wine
December 24, 2012 at 4:13PM EST Reply to CommentIf Affleck is not nominated, my joy would be boundless. Its dispiriting to know that he has more of a chance than the great Michael Haneke. I really hope that the director's branch watch Amour. I think if they do, they WILL vote for Haneke. Same goes for PTA. Make no mistake, PTA is probably the most critically acclaimed director working today in America, more than the Coens and Scorsese. PTA is the Kubrick of our times, and is sure to be achieve a legendary status for posterity.
Fliegender Just because someone pretends to be Kubrick doesn't make them Kubrick. SK never mimicked Eisenstein or Lean in order to be great. He just had to be himself.
December 24, 2012 at 4:38PM EST/3rt Kubrick had influences; including other filmmakers from and before his era.
December 24, 2012 at 6:17PM ESTFliegender Of course. Everybody has influences, but there's a difference between having influences and aping great filmmakers, no matter how skillfully you do it. And I LIKED The Master and There Will Be Blood, but I didn't see a vision. I saw a technically talented writer-director following all the steps in the Stanley Kubrick Playbook as opposed to realizing something from his own mind. I know the man has his fans, but it's been kind of frustrating for me to see some people call him the greatest filmmaker of his generation and a genius for doing something that is, in my mind, not very original and not very personal. I don't doubt that the fans of The Master are genuine in their love for it, but it seemed to me like a case of something that looked like a great movie at first glance, but only because it checked off so many of the boxes that "great movies" are supposed to check off. Don't get me wrong, I'm glad it exists, I'm glad I saw it, but the outpouring of love for it feels overdone. Just one man's opinion.
December 24, 2012 at 9:40PM ESTbrad despite my opinions on the Master I really don't get the argument of Anderson does nothing personal and he only follows his influences. He takes years to do his films that he writes himself mainly becuase of hard to find financing. The main character for The Master has apparently been with him longer. How is that not personal. I dont get that at all.
December 24, 2012 at 10:34PM ESTFliegender I'd say it's personal to PT Anderson in the sense that he does care deeply about these films he's imitating. I just don't feel that he reveals any kind of unique worldview that couldn't come from another filmmaker. Nor does he use his cinephilia to make a comment on the way that movies affect or reflect the audience, in the way that Tarantino has done in his last few films, to mention one of the most famous examples.
December 25, 2012 at 1:52AM ESTshark
December 24, 2012 at 4:48PM EST Reply to CommentWhat the hell? There's no way Amour is getting Picture and Director nominations. No way at all. This is crazy.
tonytr
December 24, 2012 at 5:04PM EST Reply to CommentAm I the only the one saddened by the fact that 40+ actors and old-timers who have been shown plenty of love in the past(wins, noms, etc) keep on coasting to nominations with very good but not-stretching-in-the-least performances (Arkin in Argo, Jones in Lincoln, Bardem in Biutiful, Dench in Marigold, Mirren in Hitchcock) while younger, intense actors get snubbed over and over again for the best work of their career (Fassbender in Shame, Dicaprio in Django, Gosling in Blue Valentine). I'd even add Phoenix to the mix even though he's not that young. I fully expect both him and Dicaprio to be snubbed this year because they're not "part of the club" i.e. actors who are either too pretty to win or simply aren't respected by their peers.
While I certainly believe him to be worthy this year, Phillip Hoffman is another example of an actor who seems to coast to nominations no matter what.
/3rt Dicaprio and Phoenix are the exact same age.
December 24, 2012 at 6:21PM ESTJLPatt Really? You include Tommy Lee Jones in your argument? How is that performance NOT worthy? It's one of his best performances and quite different, really, than anything he's done before.
December 24, 2012 at 6:39PM ESTAntonio A The Bardem mention doesn't make sense either, he was outstanding and his nomination was a well received surprise.
December 24, 2012 at 7:28PM ESTMarianne
December 24, 2012 at 5:06PM EST Reply to Commentcloud atlas should get a best score nod.
Also I just dont think the academy will nominate 2 french actresses, so I think Riva is out.
The Dude
December 24, 2012 at 11:15PM EST Reply to CommentI don't see why De Niro is considered a surefire nomination.
The same holds true for Bradley Cooper, who's still seen as a pretty boy only, and the buzz for their film is beginning to die down. I honestly don't understand why you consider him (or De Niro) such a certain nomination.
And if Dennis Lavant isn't among the nominees (he won't) it will be a travesty.
The Dude
December 24, 2012 at 11:22PM EST Reply to CommentMy predictions for the actors:
Sure noms:
DDL
Hawkes
Denzel
The other two:
Jackman
Phoenix
Actress:
Sure noms:
Chastain
Lawrence
The other ones:
Watts
Cotillard
Riva
Mirren and Kidman seem like Di Caprio last year: looks good on paper, and yet I just don't see it happening.
Sup. Actor:
Certain noms:
PSH
TLJ
Arkin
Others:
Bardem
Waltz (easily the one with more buzz so far)
Supp. Actress:
Hattaway
Hunt
Field
Others:
Adams
Smith