Fellowship of the Ring, also part 1 of 3, was nominated for 13 Oscars and won 4. I didn't say The Hobbit would win it's awards, but to not mention it in a Contenders discussion thread is silly.

If the Hobbit is even close to the quality of the LOTR trilogy, I find it hard to believe it won't be nominated for best picture, especially with the expanded field.

While I'm sure there is some truth to point b., I think in the end it comes down to the quality of the movie more than "we already gave them awards, so let's give them to someone else this time" kind of thinking.

I don't expect The Hobbit will be as rapturously received as The Fellowship of the Ring. It's entering much more...controversial waters. Critics are tired of Peter Jackson. People hate how the story is being elongated to three films.

Critics are tired of Peter Jackson? He's directed two films since LOTR. One was well-received, the other was not. I don't buy that argument at all.

Some people, I'm sure, are annoyed by the elongating of The Hobbit. I am not one of them, and I'm sure there are many who are fine with it as well. A lot of stuff is not fully explained, just skipped over, or just referenced in the appendices in the book. Jackson is fleshing it out and telling a fuller story. I think this is a good thing.

If anything, I think it limits it's box office potential far more than it's awards potential.

I'm not saying they hate him, but between him trying to turn The Lovely Bones into a CGI epic and his recent "behavior" (the tepidly received 48fps, further dividing The Hobbit), I do believe Jackson has largely exhausted any post-Rings goodwill among non-nerd critics.

I never read, nor watched The Lovely Bones, so I can't really comment on it. But I get the idea that most critics (2/3) thought it was overdone in the effects, and the story suffered. Well, what director of major blockbusters hasn't had that happen?

And why is it bad behavior to shoot the film in 48fps, then screen an extremely early version of a scene so some people can see how it's coming?

I just think that most critics will approach The Hobbit thinking "he did good with LOTR, let's see how he does with The Hobbit", rather than "The Lovely Bones sucked, so this probably will too."

Of course he's exhausted good will from LOTR, those films are 8-10 years old. It doesn't mean a new film can't be liked by them if it's good.

We'll see. You're obviously a fanboy, so I don't blame you for staying optimistic.

What a stupid thing to say.

Sorry my post wasn't any help to you, Chippy. Just know I think the world of you.

Beasts of the Southern Wild has TWENTY 100s on Metacritic, and is on track for at least $10 million at the box office, maybe even $15+ million if it expands well. It probably won't win anything, but it should be good for Picture, Screenplay and Actress nominations. Maybe a tech nomination or Directing if it's REALLY embraced at the end of the year.

Best Supporting Actor might be in play, too.

Hope Springs is at 100% with 17 in, and an 8.1 average.

Is Meryl looking at nomination #18 already?

So Gatsby is out...

I wonder what the chances are for Daniel Day-Lewis to win again. We all know how good he is and this could hardly be a more perfect role in a more perfect movie. But three LEADING wins with five noms...that'd be SOMETHING.

His name is Joaquin Phoenix, Lecter, and he's going to win.

Interestingly enough, no one has ever won an Acting Oscar for a Spielberg film. Dunno if that's helpful at all to predicting his win. Though I feel like Phoenix, Hawkes and Jackman are just as much threats, and none of them have an Oscar yet, let alone two.

Right now I'm suspecting that Lincoln won't live up to the public hype (What was the last serious Spielberg that did? Or any Spielberg?), but it'll still slip in to Picture (If War Horse could...) and Actor (Because it's DANIEL DAY-LEWIS), plus some techs.

Pheonix is the favorite, I am not arguing that. I wouldn't even bring this up, if it wasn't for....DANIEL DAY-LEWIS!

Phoenix should have already won for Gladiator...

I don't see Day-Lewis winning. It's too soon for a third win, and there are other heavyweight contenders.

I don't see how DDL loses.

I think Gatsby's exactly the type of movie that could get in with a 55% RT or something. It can soak up some senior citizen safe Oscar movie votes. I wouldn't bury it yet.

He was referring to it being out of contention this year because it's been delayed to summer 2013.

christian bale will win

For the Terrence Malick movie where he romances starlets on the beach and goes to rock concerts?

I think Moonrise Kingdom and Beasts of the Southern Wild are the only movies released so far this year that will be nominated for Best Picture.

I would take Joaquin Phoenix for Best Actor over DDL at this point. Reading the early word on the Master it really seems like Joaquin's moment career wise + 3rd Oscar for DDL was always going to be an uphill climb. Plus Phoenix's looks like a perfect example of a "half retard" performance and we know how those do.

I'm guessing the Master ends up a "The signature 2nd or 3rd strongest movie, no chance at winning" case

It's no doubt dangerous, of course, to see Best Actor only as Joaquin vs. Daniel. We seriously should not forget: