Anyone think that Laura Dern might start to gather steam in this race in the next few days? We haven't seen any awards for her at this point, but it could be coming. She's gotten great reviews, her parents are Bruce Dern and Diane Ladd (Hollywood insider points), and she's a previous nominee that everyone has expected more from. It could be a comeback for her. Has anyone actually seen her performance? If so, what do you think?

Thanks for the insight on Spanglish, loyal. What are Cloris Leachman's chances for a supporting nod?

No problem. :wink:

Like I wrote in my review, all Leachman needed was that one scene to lock in a nomination. I don't think she had that one scene but her role is important enough and fits perfectly into the mold for supporting actress so it's possible she'll get nominated. She really was great in the film.

I know regardless of the answer, Leachman has a better cahnce...but is Paz Vega better than Leachman. Which is what I had been hearing from early reviews (that she was the highlight of the movie).

Vega steals every single scene she's in, especially those scenes with her daughter. I'm not too sold on the relationship with Sandler though.

After seeing Closer, I think Julia definently deserves a nomination, but I dunno if she'll actually get one. A Globe nod is almost certain, I think.

Blah. Thinking about it now, I really wish Rachel McAdams had a shot at a nomination for her performance in The Notebook. The movie is probably considered too "generic", though.

True dat. The movie itself deserves more recognition from the critics than it got.

Great article by Ebert on Hilary Swank in Million Dollar Baby and the film's odd rise from obscurity to Oscar contender in such a short period of time:

Hilary Swank will quite possibly win the Oscar as best actress this year, for a role in a movie nobody had heard of two weeks ago. The movie is Clint Eastwood's "Million Dollar Baby," which wasn't in any of those stories we were all reading about Oscar "front-runners," because crafty old Clint doesn't believe in a lot of foolish publicity before he has a movie to show you. Oh, and the movie will be a contender for best picture, actor, supporting actor and director, too, and cinematography, editing, all those categories.

What happened was, Eastwood showed it to Warner Brothers, which had no plans for an Oscar campaign until studio executives realized they had an amazing movie on their hands.The first press screenings were held only two weeks ago, and word began to spread: Tear up your Oscar predictions and start over again...

Read the rest here: http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbc ... /412150301

It would be sort of sad if Hilary Swank yet again defeated Annette Bening. I'm just saying.

Well, if Hilary Swank won, it will likely be because people are simply overwhelmed by her performance. It's like when Tom Hanks won for Forrest Gump, people were saying "we can't award him two years in a row," but they can't find any excuse to not award him because the performance is so great, at least in their minds. Does Hilary deserve to win 2 oscars in 5 years, when Kate Winslet still hasn't won one? Probably not. She isn't in the league of Jodie Foster as an actress when she won 2 at a relatively young age, but it just happens that she got two great Oscar-baity roles.

It would be, because Annette is such a wondeful actress. But, you can't discredit Hilary. She was outstanding in Boys Don't Cry, and it looks like she's great in this movie also. I haven't seen it, or Being Julia for that matter, so I can't say who deserves it. It would be nice for Annette to win, though.

I have yet to see Boys don't cry, but I'd still find it sad if Annette Benning would lose this year against Hilary once again. However, I somehow get a feeling that Imelda Staunton might very well win this one.

I hate to see Spanglish implode the way it did. The women all did such a great job in the film.

The only one I possibly still see getting a nod is Chloris Leachman in the Best Sup. Actress category.

I think it's Chloris Leachman (has the name behind her, good reviews) vs. Paz Vega (almost universal acclaim, might actually deserve it, but not very well known).

I think both are long shots though.

Well, I would like to drop in a few words on the Swank v Benning race having seen both performances....

First off, let me tell you right off the bat... if Aviator is as good as the hype, it has Best Picture in the bag. I don't think Million dollar Baby can challenge it that far. Baby was great overall, I gave it an A-, one of the 10 best of the year according to me, but I don't think it's something Academy would choose over flashy-hollywood biopic Aviator. It might defintely be the ONLY challenger, but I don't think it will win.

Now... Swank was great, yes... but I wasn't stunned by her performance. She and Clint were both amazing, a little harder to observe the better performance but that might be because Clint's performance as in holding back alot of feelings and then slowly unraveling. I wouldn't say it's impossible for Swank to win again, because there are alot of other factors in play. I haven't seen Boys Don't Cry, but I doubt this was signiifcantly, if at all, better than her performance in that....

I already voiced my opinion on Benning's performance.... it was very good. VERY SHOWY!!!! Very much in your face and I think maybe too over-the-top in some scenes in the beginning of the film, but she was good and the best part of the movie....

The funny thing is I really can't tell which of the two women gave the better performance in their respective films. And it becomes much more of a mess when you know neither gave the best performance of the year; that honor belongs to Imelda Staunton and Julie Delpy and of course I would give it to Uma for her astonishing turn as The Bride in both Bill films combined.

So, it's tough... but here is the bottom line...

Because Hillary Swank wasn't the best of the year and quite possibly because there were other amazing performances in her movie, coupled by the fact that she hasn't really topped her 'Boys' performance, defintely give Benning the edge, especially since Benning was the best thing in her movie. Is it possible that Imelda might win? I thinkher chances of a nod are locked up and were months ago, but I don't think anyone has ever seriously talked of a win for her. I think she's too unknown to win an Oscar.

I'm really thnking they will just give the damn thing to Benning or it will be a complete surprise!

Here's a nice little Newsweek article on...

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6725951/site/newsweek/

- Why Sideways won't win best picture
- Why Scorsese will finally win
- Why Hilary Swank will not win
- And why, once again, two African Americans will be nominated in the best actor category

I think he's pretty much dead-on, and he makes a great point by saying that the Academy won't be letting Swank join the 2-win group of Ingrid Bergman, Katharine Hepburn, Bette Davis, etc., but I'm still not entirely convinced by that.

I agree on all points.

I just read the article and it's not as strong as I thought... they are barely arguments.

Point 1: Sideways won't win Best Picture

I think everyone knows Sideways won't win, but I disagree that it's out fo the Academy's voting process to award a movie about regular people and their regular lives as the article states. That's not the case. The case is not why Sideways will not get it but how strongly the Aviator will get it.

Point 2: Why Scorceses will finally win

Again, everybody already thinks Scorseses is gonna win. Even if Aviator doesn't win Best Picture (Baby would instead) they'll still give Director to Scorceses. They wouldn't award Clint twice for the same Oscar in such a short period, especially when it seems he is at the top of his career and could give us some more great films.

Point 3: why Hillary Swank won't win

I don't want to gloat, but I think my argument as to why she won't win is stronger than this article's/ Their only argument is the double actress win. to be honest, I even disagree with that... I really don't think the Academy minds handing Swank 2 best actress statues. You can argue they may want to wait on it since she still has alot in front of her. I think the time period will factor in more than the double award thing: they won't want to give her the same award twice in 5 years. But those are all secondary compared to Benning and other politics I discussed in one of the above posts.

Point 4: Why Don Cheadle and Jamie Foxx will get nominated for Best Actor...

This one I am not too positive on and they neglect to mention some other points attributing to this race.

Leonardo and Foxx are definitely in. Depp is still questionable but he's in for now.
Carrey, Kline, and Spacey are not even in the race....

Here are the ones in contention for the next two spots...

Clint Eastwood- A legend now and most crotocs claim at the top of his form.... he delivers his best acting performance yet, which is saying ALOT. Don't tell me you're ruling out the possibility for a nod at the least. SHOCKED that the article didn't even mention him!

Liam Nesson- in a way, this might be the film's award, like awarding an Uma nod for KB. Liam Nesson is Kinsey and he is the main focus and they might give the nod to him because the film has no real chance in anything else big.

Don Cheadle- He is one of the most underrated actors today and he delivers great performances. This is a goldmine of a role to play. Too bad he picked the toughest year to play it. He still has a great shot. the only big obstacle is having people see the film and not have Foxx overshadow the entire race and leave him out. Plus he needs some critics support, which is hard to get this year.

Javier Bardem- I always refrained from giving Bardem a slot in my top 5 predix, but he is a mian player and has always surfaced around #6 on my lists.
The MAIN thing going for him: I hear is actually THAT good and the fact that it's something different than mainstream America.
The MAIN thing going against him: there's actually two... 1) the tightness of the race 2) the fact that since there are so many foreign films that have made headlines for the Academy having stupid rules disqualifying them, the Academy might try to find way to award the foreign films in other cateoires.
Since Bardem's The Sea Inside is elligible for Foreign movie and is most probably the winner, they might refrain from giving him a nod and quite possible either give it to Bernal, who has had a strong year and a strong career start in America or he might split the vote with Bernal.

Surprises:

Gael Garcia Bernal: See Javier Bardem Argument

Paul Giamatti: evidentally snubbed last year and still awesome in Seideways, he might sneak in a nod in a category that doesn't seem to have any light-weights or feel-good movie actors, comedic turns.

Jude Law: He got a nod for Cold Mountain and he is much better in Closer, and in my opinion the Best actor in the movie. The tightness of the race and his nod last year really put him out of the race. That and the fact that he has zero buzz. there are however two pretty strong things going FOR him that make him a surprise rather than a long-shot:
1) He was in like a gazillion movies this year and they might want to award him for that (though this is a rather weak point to base much on)
2) The CLOSER band-wagon. They might actually decide to nominate all 4 in the CLOSER cast because they all worked so well together and basically made the movie work!

@Raffi

One I can say almost certain...Clint won't get a nom for Best Actor. He failed to get one at BFCA and at the Golden Globes. I mean if he missed out one of them, I'd still give him a chance, but both?! No, I don't think so...

You're right about Spacey, Kline and Carrey not even being contenders, though.

Mind naming something to support your arguement then? :wink:

After finally seeing Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind (which I thought was great) I'm really wondering about Kate Winslet's Oscar chances. I think she deserves a nomination, but it's very hard to separate her performance from Jim Carrey's, who is equally deserving. He has no chance because of the competition and the lack of respect he gets.

Also, it's just not an Oscar-bait type of role. No breakdowns, not a period piece, no dead or dying children. Hmm, maybe she will get nominated for Finding Neverland in supporting instead. I think she deserves the nod and might get in, but I could certainly seeing her missing out. What do you all think about her chances?

Tjats exactly what I think!!
I think she's one of the best of the year, but just not good enough for that creamy crop! she will get a Neverland nod though, no doubt!

I also just watched Before Sunset last night. It was good, not great, and while I enjoyed both Ethan Hawke and Julie Delpy's performances, I think they both have zero chances of nominations. Just as I said about Kate Winslet in ESOTSM, it's just not a role Oscar will go for. It just doesn't seem to be acting, which sounds like a compliment, but I don't think the Academy will see it that way. I would say don't consider Delpy seriously (sorry Raffiki!).

You know, I never had Delpy on any of my prediction lists until other people started predicting her AND when she starting picking up some mentions or runner-up accolades.
Before, I knew she had no chance, but I think she's one of the surprise actresses that could get in....
I have three categories for the Best Actress line-up.... locks, borderline, and surprises. I don't think she's a long-shot or dead shot anymore, she moved up to the surprise category!
I still don't think she'll get in, but glad to see her getting mentioned nontheless.

Very glad you saw Before Sunset and glad you liked it. I'm still the only person I know who loved it as much as some of the critics did and saw the brilliance in it.... I dunno what it is, but in my opinion, it is a masterpiece, and I got more than two dozen four star reviews to back me up! lol