Will Smith's nomination sort of demonstrates why so many films are released so close to December 31. You want your man's performance to be fresh in Academy members' minds when they submit nominations, yes, but you also want it as close to the filing deadline as possible so if his film sinks into the abyssnal trench and reaches crush depth before it's even made enough to cover its catering budget, the (unfair) characterisation as a box-office bomb won't affect his chances at a nomination. Thus every year there are those nominations from films that spent a whole year building buzz as Becoming A Major Oscar Mill but were bumped out of the cineplexes without much ado. It's not that Will's performance was inconsequential, but this is an honor for Sony's publicity machine. So scratch Will off the list of potential winners.
Sean Penn: with every film he further solidifies his position as his generation's Robert Mitchum. And, now that Mitchum has passed on, he's inherited the entire Bob Mitchum franchise. And rightly so. As such, we can all look forward to a lifetime of superlative performances and it won't be until he hits his Seventies (or until someone creates absolutely the most stunning Robert Mitchum/Sean Penn vehicle imaginable) that the Academy will reward his work. It's not out of their cynicism. When the good-lookin young dame with bubble-headed tendencies somehow gets a nomination, you'd better slap an Oscar in her hand fast before her fifteen minutes are up. With actors like Penn (and there are dashed few of 'em) I'm convinced that there's a sense of "What's the hurry?"
Tom Wilkinson. Poor guy. Any other year, and I'd at least humor your nomination. Good job, but man, you're standing between Godzilla and Megalon here so if you're smart you'll step back out of the way and just enjoy your gift basket.
So we've got Russell Crowe and Denzel Washington. Russell Crowe's got that unmistakeable Buzz about him, plus he's attached to one of this year's scarce – maybe its only – real Oscar Locomotive. Crowe will undoubtedly benefit from people who vote a straight "Beautiful Mind" ticket. But man alive, some strange things are happening with Denzel's nomination. First, he's got a bit of the Bob Mitchum scent on him. Everybody likes him. Everybody knows he always does great work. But in Denzel's case, the Academy knows that good, Oscar-ey roles are a rare thing for African-American actors; if they don't heave a bit of gold-electroplate in his direction this year, when will they get another chance?
Crowe did himself no favors by acting like a (highly public) hothead at the BAFTA awards. But how much damage could he have done? He's already got a reputation as a troublemaker, and they gave him a Best Actor for "Gladiator," of all things. I mean, God, "Gladiator!" "Gladiator"!!!
I'm sorry. I'm still not over it.
As for Denzel: he's both benefitted and jeopardized by all the press that's resulted from the triple nominations for African-Americans in Oscar's top acting categories. He benefits because as previously stated, the Academy wants to vote for him. He's jeopardized because the Academy is old and conservative and maybe they don't like being told that they're a bunch of racists who couldn't even see fit to give Spike Lee a Best Director award.
I don't doubt that he'll get a bump from Halle Berry's nomination; many people who are naturally inclined to vote for her will also vote for Denzel, and vice-versa.
But man alive, did he have to get nominated for a role as a street-wise tough-talkin' cop?
Can I say how wonderful it is to be typing "Wow, who can choose?" so often? Oh, God Bless You, Reneé. Loved you in "Bridget Jones." Please sign this waiver before you leave, you'll find the exits back there to the left and right of the espresso stand, thanks. Judi! Babycakes! Can you every be anything short of utterly fabulous? My opinion? No, no you can't. Here's your clipboard. Just follow Reneé.
Dang. It's not their fault that no one saw their films. Poor dears. Judi's also hampered by the fact that she had to split her role with Kate Winslet (playing the Young Her). Never works out well for a nominee, does it?
Truth be told, this category has four actresses who I strongly feel should get an Oscar. A few minutes ago I joked about cute girls getting Oscars because gawd, who knows when they'll find another role they can handle well. And then I remembered Halle Berry, who is damned cute but damn, did she ever prove that she could act. I felt bad, but correcting the line would have involved backing up and deleting it and then thinking of something else, both of which are eerily reminiscent of something that might smack of effort, so I just moved along. Sissy Spacek has quite unfairly fallen off the big-time-movie-actress radar. It's OK; white vans keep patrolling the roads around Hollywood and whenever they spot an actress who looks as though they might have turned 37, they pick 'em up and put them someplace where they can get a bed and a hot meal and occasional work in basic cable. What else is a famous and talented actress going to do at that stage of life? These are the ineffable and unanswerable questions of people who greenlight and cast films for the major studios.
If I'm not mentioning Nicole Kidman it's because I really disliked her in "Moulin Rouge," but I don't want to single her out because it didn't have anything to do with her performance. It was the damned movie. My brain was forming antibodies against it after the first ten minutes, purely as a defensive measure.
Well, cuts must be made. I'm going to keep Nicole Kidman on the shortlist. There's a serious buzz around her nomination, plus she's the only nominee who sits at that top level of stardom. The Academy likes big-time movie stars. And I hate to sound cynical, but her divorce from Tom Cruise can only help her. She need never know how many sympathy votes she gets, so long as she gets them.
I'm also keeping Halle Berry. Again I cite that mystical, ineffable Buzz. I think she'll be the greatest recipient of all that press regarding Denzel's, Will's, and her nominations. It was also a hell of a performance and she's been avidly making the rounds of the talk and news shows to support her nomination.
I don't have to cut Sissy Spacek, come to think of it. But I'm sitting here and trying to come up with a compelling reason for her to beat Halle Berry and I'm coming up blank. She's got two obstacles. First, she's already won an Oscar, so the Academy can't be thinking "Hey, it's time to reward her for a lifetime of solid work." But more potently she's been off the radar for some time. By which I mean that she's been working steadily and well but not in pictures that voters are particularly aware of. Some might remember her in 1999's "The Straight Story" and if prodded they'll recognize that she was in "JFK" way back in 1991, but her recent years have been filled with smaller, boutique-ey sort of projects. So dang, I need to move forward here so I'll have to send you packing, Siss.
"Training Day" is really just Denzel's nomination, to out goes Hawke. Jon Voight was buried under makeup and was stuck playing the part of a man whose voice has been endlessly mimicked, mocked and parodied for the past thirty years. Out he goes. Bang goes Ben, too. It's not an easy thing for a Best Actor winner to win a Best Supporting Actor. It ain't impossible, but it's a strike against. The real trouble is the familiar problem of unfamiliar movies. Most people weren't even familiar with "Sexy Beast" until Kingsley was nominated for it.
Jim Broadbent is clearly the most interesting nominee of the bunch. If I took the effort to actually look at fifty years' worth of past nominees, I'd probably name him as one of the most interesting Supporting Actor nominees in history. He's nominated for supporting Dame Judi, who was nominated for Best Actress in "Iris." He also supported Nicole Kidman, who's nominated for "Moulin Rouge." And! He supported Renée Zellweger in "Bridget Jones," and you know how that turned out. He was fortunate to be nominated for the right role. He has as much right to a Best Actor nomination as Dame Judi, but he'll do better in a supporting category, and will do better with "Iris" than he would have had he been nominated for either of his other films.
Will all of this highly visible and highly successful Supporting nudge up his chances? Is it enough to best Sir Ian? I doubt it. He's everything you want to see in a Best Supporting Acting nominee. (a) He's old and (b) British and (c) he hasn't won one yet; (d) He was in a monster-hit movie that (e) won't win any other major acting awards, and (f) his role was huge, important, and exceedingly well-played. (g) Within recent memory, He Shoulda Won (for "Gods And Monsters"), oh, yeah, and (h) he was in another monster hit last year ("X-Men").
Plus, he's got a British accent.
Working from the bottom of the list, up: Had to split her role with another nominee, has already won for Best Actress, is having a great many of her votes diverted to another actress nominated for the same film, is having a great many of her votes diverted to another actress nominated for the same film.
And then we have the one who everyone is saying is gonna win. The one nominated for the film which is probably gonna win Best Picture and Best Director and will likely win Best Actor.
More to the point, she's the one who did that in-cred-ible nude scene in "The Hot Spot" and an in-cred-ible nude scene in "Mulholland Falls" and while she wasn't technically nude in "Career Opportunities" that white tank top she was in was just as good.
I'm not a pig.
I'm merely noting that there's probably a fair share of pigs among the voting members of the Academy and after seeing "The Hot Spot" they wanted to give Jennifer Connelly a three-bedroom condo commanding stunning harbor views. So giving her something that they don't actually have to pay for themselves is even likelier.
Helen Mirren is in there with a chance; she did win the SAG award, after all. But she didn't beat Connelly, who wasn't nominated.