Oddly enough, the Polish National Film School has stopped sending me tapes ever since I gave "Moulin Rouge" only two stars out of five. Apparently their administrator has a thing for Nicole Kidman. So truth be told, I haven't actually seen all of the films in this category, and when I say "all" I actually mean "any."
So let's hie to the Internet for descriptions and then do our best.
None of my research here has turned up anything more compelling than "'Amélie' got lots of nominations outside the foreign film category, and that has to mean something" so let's engage the keystrokes and mouseclicks that put that title in bold maroon letters and continue to the next category.
There are no Holocaust documentaries this year so there's no immediately obvious front-runner here. Nope, I'm not trying to be funny. In the documentary categories you start with the Holocaust doc and then look for any reason not to select it.
Given that I've nothing to go on but one-paragraph descriptions, I guess I'll have to endorse "Promises" on the basis that as it showcases the plight of children caught in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, it might plug into the same sort of vibe.
Innerestingly controversial, methinks. "Artists And Orphans" has
been liberally painted as the front-runner here. And then on Wednesday Rosie
O'Donnell spent a big chunk of her show denouncing it and her involvement as
voice-over narrator. Seems that there's a massive anti-gay, anti-minority cult
involved in the film's production, somehow. But here's the thing: the deadline
for Oscar ballots was Tuesday. So maybe voters had no idea about the
connection (if any) between this nice little documentary about orphans in the
former Soviet Union and jumpsuited zombies in shaved heads waiting in a Tulsa
parking lot for some sort of spaceship to come.
Again, all I know about any of these is that "Artists
And Orphans" is seen as some sort of favorite. So why waste
time going "eenie, meenie, minie" to select an alternative?
This is the first year that Animated Features have been given their own category and they've already blown their credibility. A Pixar animated feature. Good. A DreamWorks feature. Good, good. And third: um, "Jimmy Neutron."
And not, er, "Final Fantasy," which took photorealism in rendering and motion capture to jaw-dropping new heights?
Or…or "Atlantis," this year's big Disney summer release?
Or even "Waking Life," the defies-easy-description film that began as live-action digital video but was painstakingly transformed and replaced frame-by-frame with hand-painted digital artwork?
I mean, Jimmy Neutron?!?
There has been talk that a Third Nominee was hard to find. There was also talk that there was an active desire to ensure that this Third Party Candidate would have little hope of stealing votes from either of the Big Two. Just talk?
Well, anyway. Obviously it won't be Ralph Nader.
Okay! Cool! I've actually seen a couple of these!
When you see "Best Animated Short Film" on the list you look for the words "Pixar" or "Aardman" or "National Film Board Of Canada." Those mark the instant front-runners. We don't have a Wallace And Gromit short but thanks to the NFBoC we have a Cordell Barker short. He made the high-larious short "The Cat Came Back," which was Oscar-nominated. "Strange Invaders" is animated in much the same style and has won a sackful of international awards already.
But the Pixar short is a Pixar short. And it was attached to "Monsters, Inc." so it's pretty famous.
I like 'em both. I'm going to predict "For The Birds" because while "Invaders" is funny, "Birds" is funny and an impressive technical accomplishment.