Now that Oscar season is almost over, I feel I should post one last article featuring my personal observations of the race as well as highlight what I think would be the best choices, the worst choices and the choices that should have been. I haven’t seen all of the nominees as yet, so I’m not saying what “should” win, but what I want to win. Also, I’m not sharing opinions in the short film categories, the documentary categories or the foreign film categories since I have not seen enough of these. And I warn you now, this one is long.

Best Picture

What Will Win: Argo. It’s the film with the most going for its win and the least going against it. Every nominee this year has some major stumbling block to a victory. Argo and Zero Dark Thirty don’t have Best Director nominations. Lincoln and Life of Pi have no major precursor support. Beasts of the Southern Wild and Django Unchained are lucky to be nominated. Amour and Les Misérables don’t have editing nominations. Silver Linings Playbook is a comedy. There are cases to be made against all of them, but I think the one with the strongest chance of overcoming its weaknesses is Argo.
What Could Potentially Upset: Life of Pi, Lincoln, Silver Linings Playbook. Apart from being a comedy, Silver Linings Playbook has every major indicator pointing towards a victory except wins at the PGA, DGA, SAG and WGA. Harvey has pulled off upsets before (Shakespeare in Love), so it’s possible and could be the most likely to occur. Life of Pi doesn’t have an acting nomination, but that didn’t hurt Slumdog Millionaire, but it reminds me more of Hugo than any other film for obvious reasons. Lincoln‘s utter lack of support from the precursors is more damning than anything. While such a fate does result in victory on occasion, the film can’t seem to get past the “nice historical record, but otherwise unnecessary” dialog that seems to be plaguing it. The film really should have built up steam by now for a win and if Saving Private Ryan can dominate early and still lose, a film that hasn’t dominated at all doesn’t seem to have much of a chance.
What I Want to Win: Argo. It’s a wonderful film and my number 1 choice of the year. The film’s action, excitement, humor, strong performances and has a great deal to say about situations in the world going on today in spite of taking place more than 30 years ago. It’s just a hands-down more engaging film than the others on the list.
What I Don’t Want to Win: Beasts of the Southern Wild, Django Unchained. I like Quentin Tarantino and have heaped praise on a number of his films in the past, but Django seems like second-tier Tarantino, ranking just above Grindhouse in my personal estimation. It’s a fun movie, but lacking in any really forward-thinking originality. Beasts of the Southern Wild is an absurdly overpraised drama from a filmmaker who seems to think a modestly compelling story can overcome the more questionable elements of the film, the least of which is a borderline abusive father and a mythical approach to storytelling that seems tacked on more than supportive.
What Should Have Been Nominated: The Perks of Being a Wallflower, Moonrise Kingdom. I’m not a huge Wes Anderson fan. I enjoyed The Fantastic Mr. Fox, but Moonrise Kingdom is probably the first time I’ve ever been truly impressed by his work. It’s very quirky, but a great deal of fun and more adequately addresses the ideas of young love than most films that have been made. The Perks of Being a Wallflower has been unfairly ignored this season, too often dismissed as a John Hughes rip-off. Yet, under its surface and in the simple structuring of its plot, the film speaks volumes about the struggles of adolescence in High School. It doesn’t rely on over-emphasized caricatures to sell the story. It’s a film that felt like an honest extension of my high school life and that kind of emotional connection deserves to be rewarded and might have had enough Academy members taken time to see it.

Best Animated Feature Film

What Will Win: Wreck-It Ralph. The Disney effort has run the gamut of the late precursors turning it into a surprising frontrunner. As the critics began doling out accolades, the race seemed to be coming down to a choice between Tim Burton’s Frankenweenie and Laika’s ParaNorman. Somewhere along the line these two films started to falter, largely due to the strong success of Wreck-It Ralph at the box office. Although a couple of late-breaking prizes went to Pixar’s Brave, the studio isn’t infallible and as much derision has been unfairly poured on Brave as it has on any other film leaving Wreck-It Ralph‘s clever originality and heart to win the day.
What Could Potentially Upset: Brave, ParaNorman. With the British Academy and Golden Globes both going for Brave, you can’t rule the film out. However, Cars played well before being slapped down by the more audience-friendly Happy Feet. Voters not wanting to recognize the Disney or Pixar machines might hop on the creativity bandwagon and award ParaNorman, one of the most honored animated films of the year.
What I Want to Win: Wreck-It Ralph. As much as I think Brave is an ideal Pixar version of the classic Disney Princess motif, the more I think about Wreck-It Ralph, the more I appreciate the film itself. From the amazing visuals to the memorable score, I find myself more and more enamored with the film than I was just a few weeks ago.
What I Don’t Want to Win: Frankenweenie. Tim Burton hasn’t made an original film since Big Fish. Everything is always derivative of something that’s come before. Frankenweenie even starts from a short film he made in his early days with Disney. And I do like the film, it was much better than a lot of what Burton has done in recent years, but I don’t think it’s remotely worthy of an Oscar.
What Should Have Been Nominated: Madagascar 3: Europe’s Most Wanted. When a formula works, even if it’s not the most exciting franchise, there’s always a part of you that wants it to be recognized. That’s how I feel about Madgascar 3. It is one of the most consistent properties out there and probably should have gotten a nomination this year.

Best Directing

Who Will Win: Steven Spielberg – Lincoln. At one time, I was certain this would go to Spielberg, but after so many other factors have entered play, I’m no longer confident and think this is a very wide open field with only Benh Zeitlin unlikely to win. Spielberg may still have the edge considering his film is the most nominated, but Ang Lee’s film has one fewer nomination, but is more likely to pick up the most accolades on Oscar night. That alone suggests it could make Lee a two-time Oscar winner without a Best Picture correspondence. Of course, with Weinstein behind David O. Russell, I wouldn’t be at all surprised if he came from behind to snatch a victory, perhaps as a consolation for the film not winning Best Picture?
Who Could Potentially Upset: Ang Lee – Life of Pi, David O. Russell – Silver Linings Playbook. See previous.
Who I Want to Win: Steven Spielberg. Too often, the narrative of the season puts Spielberg as the least responsible for the success of the film, instead relying on Daniel Day-Lewis’ performance and Tony Kushner’s screenplay. No, the film isn’t outside of Spielberg’s wheelhouse, but it’s a satisfying film that features a good measure of tension in what could have been a very dry and uneventful picture. For that alone, he deserves to win.
Who I Don’t Want to Win: Benh Zeitlin – Beasts of the Southern Wild. Like the film, Zeitlin’s directorial effort is wildly overpraised. There’s nothing new or inventive at play in Beasts and coaxing a passable performance out of a then-6-year-old isn’t enough for me. The film was tedious at times, confused at others. A good, but not great film is what it is and Zeitlin didn’t make it much better.
Who Should Have Been Nominated: Ben Affleck – Argo. Apart form directing the year’s best film, there’s little doubt in my mind that Affleck is one of the greatest working filmmakers in universally-accessible genres. His first two films were solid films that suffered from being thought of as solely genre pieces. Argo built on what he learned from those films and is a tight, structured and exciting ride through Iran. Everything in the film works together smoothly and I have little doubt that he will only continue to grow as a filmmaker.

Best Actor

Who Will Win: Daniel Day-Lewis. This may be his definitive performance. Day-Lewis has delivered some amazing performances, but his portrayal of Lincoln is iconic. Tearing down stereotypes and re-building something we’ve never seen in an interpretation of the 16th president of the United States. Day-Lewis is superb as the Great Emancipator. That he already has two other Oscars seems rather academic at this point as any other result would be one of the great shocks of Oscar history.
Who Could Potentially Upset: Bradley Cooper, Hugh Jackman, Joaquin Phoenix. Everyone on this list with the exception of Denzel Washington has a chance to upset and that wealth-spreading is one of the reasons no one seems like a capable challenger. Hugh Jackman’s supporters feel he may never have another chance (but he’d get the Oscar for an adaptation of Boy from Oz if that ever happened). Bradley Cooper is either on the verge of becoming an Oscar regular or destined to be forgotten, but the Weinstein push could help. Joaquin Phoenix has the advantage of strong critical consensus that his performance is easily one of the year’s best. That he is in a film that doesn’t seem to be very much liked is immaterial.
Who I Want to Win: Hugh Jackman. As much as I respect Day-Lewis’ performance, I would have little problem voting for him had Jackman not delivered a bravura performance as Jean Valjean. Jackman conveys a wide range of emotions throughout the film, none of which ring falsely. He’s a sympathetic paternal character whose conviction is the inspiring driving force of the film. He commands the screen every instant even when forced to sing dialogue outside his comfort zone. I have suspected for some time that Jackman has a gift for acting, but this was the first time I’d been absolutely assured of it.
Who I Don’t Want to Win: No Opinion. I can’t really say that I’d object to any of the nominated performances winning. Other than personal dislike of Joaquin Phoenix (not his performance), there’s little reason for me to wish him failure.
Who Should Have Been Nominated: John Hawkes, Logan Lerman. Two actors were denied Oscar nominations in spite of very strong work this year. While the leading actor slate was filled to the brim with strong performances, Hawkes’ handicapped writer was among the finest of the snubbed. Hawkes departed form his recent spate of villains with a genuinely affecting leading turn. Receiving far less acclaim than he deserved, Lerman has a very bright future as an actor. Although my initial familiarity with him comes from a Young Adult property, his performance in The Perks of Being a Wallflower displays a surprising level of maturity that many of his elder peers could derive lessons from.

Best Actress

Who Will Win: Jennifer Lawrence. On only her second nomination, Lawrence has quickly amassed a rather impressive list of credits. Skillfully shifting gears from genre flicks to serious dramas, Lawrence came into her own as the feisty love interest in Silver Linings Playbook. She received several precursor awards for her performance, frequently sharing similar prizes with Jessica Chastain who dominated the dramatic acting categories. With a healthy number of precursors, a prior Oscar nomination under her belt and a push by Harvey Weinstein, Lawrence has a very good shot of becoming one of the youngest actresses ever to win an Oscar.
Who Could Potentially Upset: Jessica Chastain, Emmanuelle Riva. The problem is that her poorly received appearance on Saturday Night Live and her misunderstood joke at one of the precursor broadcasts have left Lawrence a bit battered. However, many of these foibles have been covered by a manipulative Weinstein who has managed to keep her freshly in the public eye without being distracting or overbearing. Emmanuelle Riva’s win at BAFTA may have given some hope that she can become the oldest Oscar winner in history, but Lawrence still has the lead and while Jessica Chastain could surprise, it’s Riva who seems poised to do so if anyone.
Who I Want to Win: Jennifer Lawrence. Taking what could easily have been a throw-away role with limited nuance and stunt mechanics, Lawrence created a layered performance as a woman struggling with insecurity and infatuation while trying to simultaneously fend off and entice a recovering bipolar ex-teacher. Even without her exciting list of prior performances, Lawrence showed that she can dominate a film without being its central character and then do so without distracting from the chief protagonist.
Who I Don’t Want to Win: Quvenzhané Wallis. How much life experience can a nine-year-old really infuse a performance with? Wallis has been hailed as the year’s breakthrough performance even though what’s on screen in Beasts of the Southern Wild is seldom impressive and mostly feels like carefully constructed segments cobbled together from copious footage. She may have contributed some to her performance, but what little I’ve heard about her submissions have come down mostly on childish things that a nine-year-old would find amusing, but which aren’t particularly compelling within the confines of the plot. Were Wallis to become the youngest Best Actress Oscar winner in history, I’d have to replace Helen Hunt and Gwyneth Paltrow on my list of all-time worst Oscar decisions.
Who Should Have Been Nominated: Emayatzy Corinealdi, Ann Dowd, Rachel Weisz. She may already have an Oscar under her belt, but Weisz’ performance in The Deep Blue Sea is a magnificent presentation of restraint, sorrow and determination. Hers is the kind of performance should be recognizing instead of the inexperienced unimpressiveness of Wallis. Dowd was promoting herself in Supporting Actress, but that placement would have been category fraud. Everything in Compliance relies on Dowd’s ability to create a sympathetic character who lets her desire to cooperate overtake her rational thinking. That you almost feel bad for her even while she’s performing questionable and illegal acts is a testament to her performance. Corniealdi was the true discovery of the year, not Wallis. In Middle of Nowhere, a mostly forgettable film about a woman keeping a candle burning for her incarcerated husband, is commanded by the skillful talent of Corniealdi. Her feelings of loneliness, distrust, betrayal and other complex arrays of emotion dominate and improve a movie that needed to be so much better.

Best Supporting Actor

Who Will Win: Christoph Waltz. I’ve changed my mind several times in the last few days and finally settled on the BAFTA winner for this category. This is a close call and any one of the actors could eke out a victory, but all of the support Waltz has received has given him more strength going into the Oscars than I had expected. He isn’t the actor you would expect to win a second Oscar, but I hear his name mentioned as often as I do the others, which leads me to believe that Waltz will pull this one out in the end.
Who Could Potentially Upset: Robert De Niro, Tommy Lee Jones, Philip Seymour Hoffman. Harvey Weinstein has two horses in this race and either could easily triumph. Jones has been largely seen as a negative figure this year, scowling through much of the season leading many to believe that he doesn’t care if he wins and that they don’t expect much from him in terms of speech. Normally, that wouldn’t hurt a contender, but in such a tight race, it does hurt. De Niro has as much a chance of winning as the others simply because it’s been so long since he was last given an Oscar and because Harvey Weinstein has been flogging him incessantly. It’s hard to tell whether Harvey favors De Niro over Waltz, but selling an acting legend being given a third Oscar is easier than getting a second Oscar for someone who’s a relative neophyte. Of course, all of this could permit indie darling Hoffman to edge past the others and score a victory that early precursors predicted. He hasn’t been much in the competition in the last two months, but a lack of formidable frontrunner may enable fans of The Master to give him the edge.
Who I Want to Win: Tommy Lee Jones. Yes, this is a performance Jones could give in his sleep, but so are the performances of all five Best Supporting Actor nominees. Of all of these performances, many of which I respect, only Jones’ seems like it’s deserving of being called an Oscar winner. Jones does what this category demands and stays on scree long enough to have vital impact without drawing away from other events. Playing a crucial role in the passage of the 13th Amendment, Jones plays fast and loose balancing effectively between the comic and the dramatic while delivering sharp criticism and forward-thinking ideas.
Who I Don’t Want to Win: Alan Arkin. I try not to criticize those who stick to their wheelhouses and deliver consistently exceptional performances; however, Arkin is one of those actors whose acerbic, cantankerous caricature is more grating than entertaining. Sure, he works his standard magic on Argo, but every other actor in the film delivers a more intriguing and involving performance, especially his co-star John Goodman.
Who Should Have Been Nominated: Ezra Miller, Eddie Redmayne. Two young actors acted circles around this year’s nominees, both of which seemed to be short-changed by various forces going into the Oscars. Miller’s chilling performance in We Need to Talk About Kevin showcased an emerging talent, but his performance in The Perks of Being a Wallflower demands attention. He skillfully shifted from menacing dramatics in Kevin to lovable vulnerability in Perks. Redmayne is a little less broadly divergent in comparison to his prior performance. He was merely adequate in My Week with Marilyn, but his vocal strengths and especially his amazing rendition of “Empty Chairs at Empty Tables” mark him as an actor to watch. Whether he can find as meaty a role as Les Misérables remains to be seen, but an Oscar nomination might have helped that goal.

Best Supporting Actress

Who Will Win: Anne Hathaway. Other than Daniel Day-Lewis, there are only a handful of unquestionable frontrunners in this year’s competition. With her emotional rendition of “I Dreamed a Dream” dominating the early advertising for Les Misérables has earned countless accolades for her performance and has seldom been beaten in all the precursors that matter. Even several stuffy critics groups gave her the nod and if she can maintain the level of support she’s had for more than the last four months, last-minute grumbling isn’t likely to thwart her ascension.
Who Could Potentially Upset: Sally Field. They like her. They really like her. It’s been over 30 years since Sally Field last had Oscar set in her sights, having won two trophies on her only two nominations. Since then, she’s acted inconsistently on the big screen and spent several years on television. Had she been a consistent presence at the movies, we might be looking a third Oscar. However, the odds seem to be stacked against her and the rest of her fellow nominees and were she to win, matching the early acclaim she received from critics, it would be one of the bigger surprises of the night.
Who I Want to Win: Anne Hathaway. Hathaway is given short shrift for this performance, most of her detractors harping on the fact that she is being rewarded for the performance of one song. While to some this may be true, those of us who have an appreciation for the film, see something stronger. From her battering in Valjean’s textile factory to her bruising spiral out of control in the city’s docks, Hathaway has far more screen time than her one absolutely stirring vocal performance. She even sings in two other significant songs, including the finale. And with her passing, the dominance of her character carries through the rest of the film and were she not a gifted actress, that significance might have been lost.
Who I Don’t Want to Win: Jacki Weaver. Other than the Weinstein machine, there’s absolutely no reason why Weaver was or should have been nominated. An insignificant role in a film that seems to forget she even exists, at least in terms of character development, leads to one of the more puzzling inclusions in recent memory. Were she to win, there would be little doubt that Harvey Weinstein should be banned from Oscar campaigning, and a campaign to change those rules might be waged.
Who Should Have Been Nominated: Samantha Barks, Emma Watson. Naomi Watts should have been in support instead of lead and Ann Dowd deserved to be considered for lead and not support. The Best Supporting Actress slate seems to be largely shallow in terms of quality potential inclusions. Of all of the performances that should have been considered here, Samantha Barks easily stands out as the spurned love interest in Les Misérables. With her brief appearance, she embraces the audiences with her dulcet tones and infectious enthusiasm. She may have the glossy, Hollywood looks that seem like stunt casting, but in The Perks of Being a Wallflower, Watson delivers on her years of tutelage under the masters of British theater. As the quirky girl whose love the film’s lead wants to attract, she embodies the determined facade of an internally terrified teenager.

Best Original Screenplay

What Will Win: Django Unchained. It was nearly twenty years ago when Quentin Tarantino took home his only Oscar. Since then, he’s been a reliable presence at the box office and with Inglourious Baseterds, he matured enough to regain the appreciation of the Academy. Although Django is a lot more jovial and quite a bit more violent than Basterds, the film’s script has been earning more late-breaking Oscars than had been previously expected.
What Could Potentially Upset: Amour, Moonrise Kingdom, Zero Dark Thirty. This category could go any number of ways with no clear frontrunner. The WGA typically clarifies matters, but two of the category’s nominees weren’t eligible there, including my predicted victor. Amour could be the Academy’s only chance to recognize Michael Haneke, but will they really feel the need to recognize him in a category where his is considered the least expansive nominee? Zero Dark Thirty won the WGA prize and Mark Boal’s script has been one of the more praised aspects of the film, but the torture brouhaha may have tarnished the film’s name unnecessarily. Wes Anderson has been nominated here before, but his oddball films have seemed quite antithetical to the Academy’s typical fondness. Moonrise Kingdon is a bit more accessible and could benefit from voters being torn which other film to throw their support behind.
What I Want to Win: Moonrise Kingdom. It is easily the most inventive and involving script in the list. The others are largely traditional narratives that don’t seem to explore life more than superficially (not including Amour, which I haven’t yet seen). Although Anderson’s script is something akin to what he’s written in the past, this one seems more broadly appealing than his prior efforts and even though I don’t care much for him as a filmmaker, his work on this film impressed me and part of that success was from his literate script filled with nifty witicisms.
What I Don’t Want to Win: Flight. I’ve never quite understood what part of Flight merited a nomination. The film is a fairly typical story of a drunk struggling through life after a plane crash, needing redemption, but unable to obtain it until he accepts he has a problem. Well acted, the film’s success is not derived from its screenplay.
What Should Have Been Nominated: Compliance, Wreck-It Ralph. A compelling narrative questioning our desire to comply with authority figures even when doing so goes against our core beliefs, Compliance is a frightening film. With little more than dialogue and described actions to drive the narrative, Craig Zobel’s screenplay is fascinating in its horrific realism. Among animated films, Wreck-It Ralph is probably one of the most creative and inventive films in a number of years. Some might dismiss the film as Toy Story for video games, and there’s a bit of that in the film, but the result is a charming, sweet film that excels in its blending of homage and originality.

Best Adapted Screenplay

What Will Win: Argo. Until the USC Scripter went to Argo, I hadn’t really considered the film much of a threat. Both Lincoln and Silver Linings Playbook had been playing stronger with critics and Lincoln was considered to be the frontrunner for the longest time. But as the shift towards Argo for Best Pictrue began, it became obvious that voters needed to find other places to recognize it. One of those places was Best Editing, but as USC Scripter and later the WGA proved, Adapted Screenplay may mark its third total Oscar for the night.
What Could Potentially Upset: Lincoln, Silver Linings Playbook. Both films still have a chance to upset with Harvey pushing one and Lincoln supporters the other. While clearly the negative press surrounding Lincoln‘s historical revisions may have harmed its chances with a scant number of voters, it still seems like the kind of film the Academy should be honoring even if doesn’t usually. It’s also possible that Harvey’s constant barrage of press for Silver Linings Playbook could push David O. Russell towards his first Oscar. Can it overcome the current Best Picture frontrunner? And if it does, should we be in for a bumpy night with Argo sweating it out until the final envelope? Possibly. Keep an eye on this category. It will speak volumes for the evening.
What I Want to Win: Argo. It isn’t a literary behemoth. It isn’t filled with witticisms. It is a tight, well-researched dramatic thriller that plays like a compelling historical drama with an action edge. While much of the credit for the film’s success can be laid at Ben Affleck’s feet, Chris Terrio’s script is well crafted, interesting and blends a lot of what makes so many diverse scripts work. Bringing all of that together is why I support the film to win this award.
What I Don’t Want to Win: Beasts of the Southern Wild. What is there about Beasts of the Southern Wild that makes it Oscar worthy? This is a script that relies more on action than dialogue, happenstance over deliberation and looks like large parts of it may have been crafted on the fly. While that may be supported by a strong script, the moral of the story is too easily lost in the filmmaker’s desire to make an “important” movie that suffers the same guilt-ridden blandness that characterized the script for Crash.
What Should Have Been Nominated: The Perks of Being a Wallflower. The honesty with which Stephen Chbosky translated his novel comes through with each cleverly observed bit of dialogue. It takes its time defining a set of characters whose unity defies expectations. Even when the protatgonist’s literary heroes have something important to say, those ideas are expressed but don’t overwhelm the audience. Familiarity with its literary roots is not needed to appreciate the film and that level of screenwriting is challenging.

Best Original Song

What Will Win: “Skyfall”. From the instant I heard Adele’s rendition of the Skyfall theme, I knew it was a winner. Adele is a red hot star at the moment and her lush vocals brought new life to an increasingly tired franchise theme environment. It’s Bond’s 50th Anniversary and the series has never won an Oscar in spite of being one of the most consistent original song-generating engines. The last time a Bond song was nomianted was thirty years ago. Almost everyone believes that it’s time and considering the success of this latest Bond film, I really think this is the franchise’s best opportunity pick up a prize.
What Could Potentially Upset: “Pi’s Lullaby,” “Everybody Needs a Best Friend”. I don’t really think there’s much competition. Any song that beats “Skyfall” will be instantly lambasted as one of the most egregious victories in history. “Pi’s Lullaby” is a catchy song that once you remember it, it carries with you. THe problem is that it’s an easy to miss song since it opens the film. “Everybody Needs a Best Friend” would be Oscar record-seekers’ chance to give an Oscar to the show’s host while he’s hosting it. The song is fairly bland pastiche that fits into the style of song that was once recognized here, so it could appeal to the Diane Warren crowd.
What I Want to Win: “Skyfall”. Not since Shirley Bassey sang her three legendary tracks for the Bond films has a sultry songstress brought so much depth and creativity to a theme song. Sure, there have been plenty of other smashing tracks over the years, but Adele’s is easily one of the best.
What I Don’t Want to Win: “Everybody Needs a Best Friend,” “Before My Time”. I listened to all of the tracks shortly after they were nominated and other than “Pi’s Lullaby,” the other songs are largely forgettable including Scarlett Johnasson’s performance of “Before My Time” and Norah Jones’ of “Everybody Needs a Best Friend.” While I have nothing particularly against either song, neither would be high on my list of potential Oscar winners.
What Should Have Been Nominated: “Misty Mountains,” “Abraham’s Daughter”. The music branch has a bizarre ear for music and have struggled to prevent voters from selecting tracks that are tacked onto the ends of films. While this year’s crop seems to avoid that tendency, the past paints another picture. This year, one end-track song deserved a nomination, while one of the best in-film songs wasn’t even eligible. “Abraham’s Daughter” is an eclectic single that starts off the final moments of the film but fits well within the themes of The Hunger Games. Perhaps it was a bit too unusual for Academy consideration. “Misty Mountains,” the dirge highlighted in the trailer for The Hobbit is one of the most stirring, low-register songs ever collected on a film score. Avoiding the typical poppy ballads that typically dominate film scores, “Misty Mountains” carefully adapted its lyrics directly from the written word of the novel and the sound is skillfully blended by the actors in the film. If ever there was a case for a song being an integral part of a film, this is it. Unfortunately, Peter Jackson and company went with the more syrupy rendition of the song tacked onto the end credits.

Best Original Score

What Will Win: Life of Pi. Mychael Danna, having never been nominated before, isn’t the type of composer you can see winning an Oscar, especially after so many years of churning out solid compositions but being ignored. However, lightning seems to have struck at the perfect time for him as the dominant score of Life of Pi fills immense tonal voids in the film. Much like last year’s winner The Artist, it’s hard to imagine how successful the film could have been without Danna’s music.
What Could Potentially Upset: Argo, Skyfall. This is one of those categories that seems fairly straightforward, but could yield a surprise. Namely Thomas Newman’s umpteenth nomination for Skyfall could sneak from behind as a companion to its certain Original Song victory. On the other hand, Oscar voters like to throw prizes at potential Best Picture winners and by recognizing Argo, they would not only be praising a strong, unobtrusive composition, they would also be recognizing one of the most important composers working today: Alexandre Desplat. Perhaps if he’d been nominated for one of his more eclectic pieces, he could mount a more vigorous campaign, but right now his only chance is winning on the coattails of Argo‘s Best Picture potential.
What I Want to Win: Argo. Forget the simple fact that Alexandre Desplat is utterly overdue. Forget the fact that Argo is my favorite film of the year. Now, go and listen to the composition. It’s a satisfying, traditional composition that highlights the film without becoming overbearing. Too often, bombastic compositions are rewarded for being noticeable, but for years Desplat has created quietly effective work in a number of films. Desplat is long overdue and based on his total output this year, he definitely deserves to win.
What I Don’t Want to Win: Skyfall. I can’t recall a single musical refrain from the film apart from the title tune. Thomas Newman’s work may be competent, but it’s instantly forgettable and far from his best work to date.
What Should Have Been Nominated: The Hobbit, Moonrise Kingdom, Wreck-It Ralph. I can’t count how many times I’ve read that the score for The Hobbit was too similar to the scores of The Lord of the Rings films. There are certainly refrains that remind me of the original trilogy’s music, but if you get in and listen to the entire soundtrack and focus on what’s different, you’ll find worlds of difference between Howard Shore’s previous work and his new compositions. Perhaps people hear the familiar cues and instantly tune out the music, but doing so is a disservice to the stirring work also included in the film and a film that needs to tie itself to prior endeavors needs some measure of connection. Shore achieved a fantastic balance here. Desplat wasn’t nominated for his best work this year. Moonrise Kingdom is easily his superior composition, but it was deemed ineligible because it supposedly drew to heavily on existing work. I challenge that notion because it’s the same reason the magnificent score of The Truman Show was overruled over a decade ago. One of the things that works incredibly well in Wreck-It Ralph is the video game soundtrack-inspired score. When Wreck-It Ralph was winning multiple awards at the Annie’s, I had a chance to revisit the music and realize just how special and creative it was without feeling derivative.

Best Film Editing

What Will Win: Argo. A lot of Oscar watchers marveled at the possibility that Argo could become the first film since Grand Hotel to take home the Best Picture Oscar and no other awards (Hotel is an anomaly. It wasn’t nominated anywhere else, so it couldn’t have won more). Of course, those of us in the know figured it had to win somewhere else and probably in multiple places, thus a Best Editing award seemed like it’s best shot considering the competition. Indeed, all of the precursors for editing began breaking for Affleck’s film late in the season supporting that idea and giving rise to the concept that Argo could build on that momentum and take a number of other categories as well.
What Could Potentially Upset: Life of Pi, Zero Dark Thirty. If Argo loses this award, it can kiss Best Picture goodbye. It seems like there are no real competitors in this category outside of Argo, but both Life of Pi and Zero Dark Thirty could benefit from an Argo backlash. The former has momentum in several creative categories while the latter has that closing segment to bolster its chances. In the end, I don’t think we’ll see a result other than Argo.
What I Want to Win: Argo. There was no more superbly edited film this year. From the opening moments until the tense finale, the film moves quickly and efficiently, keeping the audience engaged while creating a sense of dramatic purpose. And although it seems flashy looking back, sitting through the film, it seemed like each action sequence was a slow, methodical journey to the edge of your seat. It showed audiences that they don’t have to be bombarded by wasteful, excessive editing in action films to get the full impact.
What I Don’t Want to Win: Silver Linings Playbook. They say comedy is hard. I agree with that completely, but there’s enough drama in Silver Linings Playbook to tilt it away from a pure comedy designation. And with that comes a responsibility to the audience to keep them engaged even when the film seems to wander. I very much enjoyed Silver Linings Playbook, but it doesn’t deserve any awards for editing.
What Should Have Been Nominated: The Impossible. Here’s a film that was unfairly dismissed in a number of circles, but one thing you cannot deny about the film is the skillful way it is edited together. In the first thirty minutes alone, the film creates a level of chaos that is difficult sometimes to contain and can create more confusion than it needs to. To bundle that together in a carefully manipulated series of scenes that titillates the audience while keeping them from becoming disoriented (at least unintentionally), the editing work in The Impossible easily outshines much of what was nominated this year.

Best Cinematography

What Will Win: Life of Pi. Ever since Avatar, digital cinematography has emerged as the go-to recognition in this category. With little input from cinematographers beyond the initial nominations, Oscar voters tend to go for the film that looked the most creative visually even if they have a higher propensity towards being fixed in post-production. Life of Pi had amazing visuals and a large number of inventive uses of lightning and that alone will net it the prize.
What Could Potentially Upset: Skyfall. Roger Deakins has been ignored by the Academy for so long that each time he’s nominated, you have to look for other film’s that will top his work for the year. Skyfall is a tried-and-true visual spectacular wherein evocative lighting decisions and compelling shot selections dominate a film that largely eclipses past entries in the franchise. That’s the problem. It’s part of a franchise and the Academy tends to shy away from these kinds of efforts in general, which may have more to do with the film’s inability to engage voters outside of cinematographers who recognize the masterful style of Deakins.
What I Want to Win: Skyfall. As much as I dislike certain elements of the film, in this list, Skyfall is undoubtedly the best shot film. I’ve not always admired Deakins’ work and what he has done with the Coens never really caught my eye, but looking back at Skyfall, I can’t help but see one of the great cinematographers at work. And I would love for the Academy to reject work that can be fixed with visual effects and reward someone who takes the time, skill and effort to use natural and artificial lighting without post-production manipulation to tell his stories.
What I Don’t Want to Win: Life of Pi. The digital revolution has begun and it isn’t always for the best. While I admire and appreciate the visual style of Ang Lee’s sea-bound adventure, I have a hard time supporting a film that makes traditional cinematographers nearly obsolete. Yes, it’s important for a director of photography to correctly light the actual objects in a frame, but when the green screen can thereby be manipulated to color-match and mimic the lightning employed in the scene, a lot of the necessary skill to shoot regular features is lost. I don’t dislike the cinematography work on Pi, but I dislike what rewarding it will mean for future craftsmen.
What Should Have Been Nominated: Moonrise Kingdom. Why I’ve finally begun to appreciate Wes Anderson, I don’t quite understand, but watching a movie like Moonrise Kingdom, you are immediately struck at how mesmerizing the images are. Here’s a director who knows how to enable his cinematographer with compelling shots and beautiful locales. They may an overemphasized version of reality at times, but the photography of Moonrise Kingdom is a blend of the fantasy standard of Anderson and the naturalistic lighting of the world around it.

Best Production Design

What Will Win: Life of Pi. Another byproduct of the Avatar Oscar victories is that it is almost mandatory for films that are largely crafted with a green screen background to win this award. Certainly artists must create an overall feel for a film and that is reflected in lush visuals that may only be generated through visual effects, but after all of the years of Pixar’s gorgeous films being ignored in this category because they are entirely animated, it seems alien to me that the Academy would so frequently embrace this style of creativity. That being said, the colorful film is very likely to win out in the end, even though there are better films waiting in the wings.
What Could Potentially Upset: Anna Karenina, Les Misérables. One of those better films is Anna Karenina and if the Academy decides to continue its frequent tradition of awarding both Production Design and Costume Design to the same film, then Anna could win. The problem is that the theatrical motif employed in the film has turned off as many voters as it has impressed and while I fall into the impressed category, my opinion won’t matter in the end. Les Misérables has that rich period detail that the Academy typically loves to reward, but it’s so often hidden by excessive close-ups that it’s hard to imagine Oscar voters remembering it long enough to toss it a vote, but it could still upset.
What I Want to Win: The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey. I have long been impressed with the world of Middle-Earth created by Peter Jackson and company. For me, getting back into the world of hobbits and elves is embodied in the lovingly crafted detail of the world. Many would cite the film as a retread of all that has gone before it and while I would agree to an extent, there are plenty of new locales and environments that help enhance all that has come before. It would be a delightful result for this to win even though I don’t think it will.
What I Don’t Want to Win: Les Misérables. I can’t really complain about too many of this year’s nominees. The one I was least impressed with is Les Misérables, not because it wasn’t well designed, but because I didn’t get to see enough of it. Apart from the somewhat laughable barricade constructed late in the film, there are plenty of rich, period details to keep the eyes engaged. The problem was that Tom Hooper spent so much time in close-up with his actors that what passes for setting is barely noticeable.
What Should Have Been Nominated: Moonrise Kingdom. I could extol the virtues of any number of films, including those nominated, but while I think the visual style of animated features Wreck-It Ralph and Rise of the Guardians would have been terrific nominees, the live-action film that I think was most short-changed this year was Anderson’s Kingdom. Here’s a film that’s crisply colored with copious details transporting you to Anderson’s idyllic world of quirky romantic entanglements and we’re all richer and more satisfied for the effort.

Best Costume Design

What Will Win: Anna Karenina. The most frocks aren’t always the best frocks, but for Academy members, any number of period frocks is more impressive than authentic, detailed ones. For that reason, the lush wardrobes of Anna Karenina should have little trouble claiming the victory here.
What Could Potentially Upset: Mirror Mirror, Snow White and the Huntsman. The year’s two, competing Snow White stories seem to have the most vocal support. The former is Eiko Ishioka’s acclaimed final film. The costumer who gave us the brilliant, Oscar-winning gowns of Bram Stoker’s Dracula has been delighting and confounding audiences for decades. The originality of the designs in Mirror Mirror might just be the kind that generates an upset. A little less creative than Mirror Mirror, Snow White and the Huntsman has a lot of fantastical designs and while I think it’s running third in this race, I wouldn’t be shocked if it managed to eke out a victory.
What I Want to Win: Mirror Mirror. Ishioka should have been nominated countless times by now. Her work on Dracula ranks as one of my all-time favorite set of costume designs. Here’s a film that highlights her exuberant style and delivers costume after costume that draws your attention, frequently distracting from the film around it (some might think this is a blessing). While her work has been better before, of all of the work in this year’s category, none is more impressive to me than hers.
What I Don’t Want to Win: Snow White and the Huntsman. Other than name recognition, there is absolutely nothing award-worthy in the designs of Snow White. Many of the dresses are somewhat garish and few of them are distinctive enough to be memorable. This is a clear case of voters seeing the legendary name Colleen Atwood and marking it down regardless of the overall quality of the work.
What Should Have Been Nominated: The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey. Just looking at the first images of the dwarves from Peter Jackson’s prequel and you’ll understand why I was most disappointed the film wasn’t nominated. Dwarven wardrobes aren’t necessarily impressive, they are largely utilitarian, but in that limited color palette, Richard Taylor’s individually tailored designs gives each dwarf a distinctive look that ties them uniformly together as kinsmen. And while these aren’t the only costumes in the film, the rich details of these alone should have been enough to earn it a place in any costume design race.

Best Makeup & Hairstyling

What Will Win: Les Misérables. The aging making. The boils. The dirt. The grime. Every character is beautified or dehumanized in creative and compelling ways. It’s no wonder that the film has become the frontrunner for this award. With its Best Picture nomination bolstering its chances, Les Misérables seems like it’s cruising to a safe victory.
What Could Potentially Upset: The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey. That is unless the fantastic creativity of The Hobbit doesn’t steal its thunder. Foundering under withering critical dismemberment, Peter Jackson’s film could still pull out a victory in spite of its negative reviews. A number of victors in this category have been from execrable films. The thing that typically seals the deal with voters in this category is prosthetic makeup. They love it. The Hobbit has it in spades, but what they seem to love more is aging makeup. Enter Les Misérables and you have one of the factors contributing to that film’s rise in the competition.
What I Want to Win: The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey. I hate to go back to something I said in Costume Design as it seems almost dismissive of the other work in the film, but one of the key reasons why I feel The Hobbit is heads-and-shoulders above the competition is the inventive, original and wildly differing makeup and hairstyling designs of the dwarves in the film. Two individually coif and layer makeup on 13 different characters and make each one easily distinguishable from the next is no easy task. That the film has been derided as derivative in respect id disrespectful.
What I Don’t Want to Win: Hitchcock. With all of the marvels of prosthetic makeup, how could you possibly turn Anthony Hopkins into Alfred Hitchcock and make it look inauthentic and sloppy. That’s what has happend here. Alfred Hitchcock is the only one who has any measure of makeup applied, the other actors have less noticeable work on their faces. Hopkins doesn’t look much like Hitch in the first place, the makeup job makes him like a fatter version of himself, not a replica of the original. Perhaps it was partly intended. Regardless, it seems a bit sloppy to me.
What Should Have Been Nominated: Lincoln. As much as I love the inventive hairstyling and facial hair of The Hobbit, there are so many different styles employed in Lincoln that it’s not only dizzying, but seems to be a gallery of every style of facial hair that adorned the faces of men during the Civil War. This attention to detail helps create the time and place for the film and although I would still have voted for The Hobbit, Lincoln is a very close second.

Best Sound Mixing

What Will Win: Les Misérables. Musicals have an unfair advantage in this category. Not only do they have to blend sound effects, dialogue and music together, but they have to add in singing that not only must be heard, but must be understood. With as many different sounds competing for attention in Les Mis, it’s no wonder the film is poised to become the category’s fourth musical victor in the last two decades.
What Could Potentially Upset: Argo, Life of Pi, Skyfall. Any number of these films could easily step in to win. Argo could have its chances bolstered by fans of the film desirous of netting the film as many Oscars as possible. Life of Pi has very little dialogue to propel its story, thus relies more heavily on sound effects and music to convey its themes. While Skyfall could become yet another spy thriller taking this prize after The Bourne Ultimatum proved that even a franchise can do it.
What I Want to Win: Les Misérables. My reasons above are the exact reasons I think the film should win. While the concept has been beaten like a dead horse, recording the actors singing live on set is a difficult task and isolating enough background noise to create a pleasing and aurally diverse soundtrack isn’t an easy undertaking.
What I Don’t Want to Win: Lincoln. There isn’t a lot going on in Lincoln that would merit an Oscar. This is your typical coattails nomination where no one really thinks it was one of the year’s best sound mixes, but which nevertheless earns the praise of film partisans and nabs a nomination even when it wouldn’t have otherwise.
What Should Have Been Nominated: The Impossible. Sometimes the absence of sound is more evocative than a bombastic aural landscape. Such is the case with Juan Antonio Bayona’s The Impossible, a film that eschews copious sound effects in its depiction of the tsunami in the film. Instead, we’re treated to a naturalistic soundscape that pulls us into the visceral, life-altering turmoil of that deadly tsunami and creates a level of claustrophobia that is almost unnerving. The rest of the film likewise sticks to unassuming sound work, which makes it one of the year’s most impressive designs.

Best Sound Editing

What Will Win: Skyfall. Although it isn’t your traditional Sound Editing winner, Skyfall has won all the right prizes to become a likely victor in this category. This is sometimes a catch-all place for tech-friendly films that Oscar doesn’t want to award with bigger prizes and instead gives them a consolation prize.
What Could Potentially Upset: Argo, Life of Pi, Zero Dark Thirty. The problem is that this race is so close, I could easily imagine Skyfall going down in defeat. As in other categories, Argo could be bolstered by its Best Picture frontrunner status. Life of Pi could win for creating so many distinct and original sounds. Zero Dark Thirty could benefit from being the lone “war” film in the bunch. Even the unlisted Django Unchained could eke out a victory in a crowded and frontrunner-lacking race. In the end, I think the film most likely to upset Skyfall would be Life of Pi. It just seems like the right kind of film to win the category.
What I Want to Win: Life of Pi. As much as I would like for Argo to win this category, Life of Pi is easily the most creative and inventive of the nominees in the race. Here’s a film that has to tell its story out on the ocean with very little outside aural influence. Creating distinct sounds that fill the void of emptiness the ocean tends to elicit, is exactly the kind of work this category should be recognizing.
What I Don’t Want to Win: None. I can’t really disagree with any of this year’s nominees and I don’t even feel comfortable choosing the least impressive as none of them really merit exclusion.
What Should Have Been Nominated: Wreck-It Ralph. There is no other film this year that had to derive its inventiveness by manipulating existing sound effects and tweaking them to create distinct and original ones. Video games are filled with all sorts of sound effects to create environment and propel action. Wreck-It Ralph duplicates the aural experience of the various video game settings it employs and the result is completely satisfying.

Best Visual Effects

What Will Win: Life of Pi. It’s already been crowd and any other result would be an absolute shock. The character of Richard Parker will likely drive the film’s victory in the way that Gollum did for The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers. It’s won every precursor that gives out this prize and that only cements its frontrunner status.
What Could Potentially Upset: The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey. If there’s one film that could beat Ang Lee’s film, it’s the movie whose predecessors each claimed the Best Visual Effects prize. While Gollum may seem like old hat to voters by now, one encounter with the Goblin King should be enough to secure it higher consideration than its detractors would prefer.
What I Want to Win: The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey. I have little problem supporting The Hobbit as the year’s best visual effects. This is a movie that has a fantasy setting, but which uses its Visual Effects to create a world that’s realistic and inhabitable. When you watch the film, you are visiting Middle-Earth, not a hyper-stylized vision of what Middle-Earth should be. I believe Life of Pi‘s graphics are top notch, but The Hobbit, for me, is better.
What I Don’t Want to Win: Snow White and the Huntsman. How exactly did the sometimes laughable visual effects work of Snow White get nominated here. I may not have adored some of the more glaring moments of The Avengers, but there’s absolutely nothing award worthy about Snow White and the Huntsman. It’s nomination is a mystery.
What Should Have Been Nominated: The Impossible. The opening sequence of Flight is fantastic. Much of the effects in Cloud Atlas is impressive, but nothing surmounts the astounding tsunami sequence in The Impossible. The effects are crisp, detailed and realistic. It’s a stunning achievement that deserved more attention than it received.

Best Foreign Language Film

What Will Win: Amour. Having seen none of these nominees, I have to believe that the only film nominated in any other category at this year’s Oscars will triumph. Amour has far more acclaim than any other nominee here and also has four other Oscar nominations including one for Best Picture. That alone should give it a comfortable lead.
What Could Potentially Upset: Anything. The problem is that some feel Amour is too nihilistic and older voters might be turned off by its frank depiction of what their lives could be like in a few years. This enables more crowd-pleasing efforts like Kon-Tiki (pushed by Harvey Weinstein) to gain a foothold in the race. A Royal Affair is a sumptuous period drama and could benefit from older voters’ affinity for such films and War Witch has a stirring socio-political message. Even No has a political advantage over the apolitical Amour, but in the end this isn’t Best Documentary Feature and any film that earns Oscar nominations outside of Best Picture has a tendency to win the Best Foreign Language Film award, but beware the Amélie precedent.

Best Documentary Faeture

What Will Win: Searching for Sugar Man. It’s won nearly every prize that matters and an uplifting story frequently dominates those which are downers.
What Could Potentially Upset: How to Survive a Plague, The Invisible War. When feel-good documentaries compete against political documentaries, surprises are always possible. That’s what Searching for Sugar Man faces with its other four competitors, any of which could steal its thunder. How to Survive a Plague talks about the early days of the AIDS crisis and the blind eye too frequently turned to the suffering of gay men and women; The Invisible War takes the army to task for its discriminatory practices and secrecy surrounding rape within its ranks; 5 Broken Cameras examines the political turmoil between Isreal and Palestine; and The Gatekeepers examines the history of the Isreali secret security agency. Typically when political documentaries overtake emotionally-fulfilling features, there is a clear favorite along with some non-political documentaries to avoid siphoning votes. Here, we have four strong political competitors that will siphon each others’ votes leaving Sugar Man to its victory.

Best Documentary Short Subject

What Will Win: Open Heart. Children in peril. It’s almost as inevitable as period frocks winning Costume Design. Here you have poor children getting heart surgery in a neighboring country, traveling through war-torn regions of Africa. If this isn’t the postcard definition of Oscar bait, I don’t know what is.
What Could Potentially Upset: Inocente, Mondays at Racine. Of course, the rest of the slate is filled with baity features. As with the other categories in which I haven’t seen any of the nominees, any of these films winning is possible. I give the edge to two films. Mondays at Racine is a documentary about a hair salon that opens its doors to women with cancer diagnoses and share the joy and pain of the struggle as they shear off their locks. It’s the kind of film I would expect Academy voters to line up behind simply because of its poignancy, but when every nominee has a similar feel, it’s hard to get behind just one of them. Incoente is another possibility, a movie with a child living in a dangerous area who won’t let that keep her from examining the beauty of life through art.

Best Animated Short-Film

What Will Win: Head Over Heels. Unti recently, I though Paperman would be the hands-down winner of this category. However, every time I’ve picked a Pixar short to take the prize, I’ve been disappointed by a surprise from elsewhere. As much as I like Paperman, one of only two shorts nominated that I’ve seen, part of me suspects Head Over Heels with its inventive take on an aging marriage and the trouble with living apart yet so close, feels like the kind of movie that earns a surprise win, so unlike the other twenty-two categories this year, I’m largely playing a hunch with this prediction.
What Could Potentially Upset: Paperman. Then again, the glory days of Pixar’s animated shorts may be upon us again. It’s been over a decade since Pixar won in this category and it could be time for them to win again. Their decision to continue to create short films that rely on expression and action to tell a story without dialogue is an interesting one, and in the end, the young love affair on display in this short could win out, but I wouldn’t be surprised if another film that might appeal to older voters might slip in, thus my prediction.

Best Live-Action Short Film

What Will Win: Death of a Shadow. As often as Best Animated Short Films is adventurous, Live-Action Short Film seems to be largely familiar and predictable. While it would be easy to pick one of the children-in-peril stories being told, the most distinctive and original concept in the bunch is the one I’m predicting for an upset win. Read anything about Death of a Shadow and you may understand why I’m predicting it’s win. The concept is so inventive and original that it would be a most interesting choice this year.
What Could Potentially Upset: Anything. In the end, though, the Academy will likely stick close to its chosen path of awarding sentimental films that don’t really break new ground. All four of the other nominees seem like familiar stories told in time-tested ways and any one of them could win, though Asad seems to be picking up the most buzz regarding its potential victory. So, while I’m predicting Death of a Shadow to win, I’m expecting something else to take home the Oscar.