Bardem will only be nominated if Moreno (Maria Full of Grace) isn't nominated. There's bound to be one foreign film performance nominated, but, between the two categories and considering oscar politics (Depp, Eastwood, and Neeson having been snubbed in the past), I think Bardem will be teh omitted one.

Kinsey, however, is officially dead. FOX Searchlight will focus on campaigning "Sideways" now, and it's also very possible that they will chose to campaign for Best Actor for Sideways. Neeson might be the snubbed one...

The Phantom of the Opera has no chance, too. It's just ridiculous. That'll give WB TWO films to campaign (other being Million Dollar Baby). Though it might score at the Globes, WB would be wisest to focus on the domestic run and technical categories than a BP nominee when it really has no chance at the win anyways.

Other Films that Could Suprise and take the fifth spot: The Life Aquatic (depends on Murray, really), In Good Company (Unlikely with Universal investing mostly in Ray, but the few reviews thus far have been at a similar level of Weitz' "About a Boy"), Spanglish (early reviews = shite), Hotel Rwanda (best chance outside of Ray or Collateral):

Right Now:
The Aviator (Miramax/WB)
Collateral (DreamWorks)
Finding Neverland (Miramax)
Million Dollar Baby (WB)
Sideways (Fox Searchlight)

Collateral over Ray?!?!?!?!

I don't think so.

Unless NY critics show Kinsey some love, it probably has no chance of a best picture nomination. The actors are another story, however. Laura Linney will be nominated and LA has given Liam Neeson a strong chance. Remeber when LAFC awarded Denzel Washington best actor for Training Day? It changed the Oscar race that year.

It looks as if Virginia Madsen is going to be nominated but I think Cate Blanchett will actually take home the Oscar.

I'd agree that Collateral is more likely than Ray...

There is a pre-September nominee almost every year and Collateral seems the logical choice at the moment. Also Ray is a biopic and there are enough other biopics to be nominated this year.

collateral will not be nominated...

that is all

I see an "American Splendor" happening to Paul Giamatti again... ==> he'll be snubbed.

"Ray" is like "Monster". Like Theron in "Monster", Jamie Foxx carries "Ray", but without his performance, the film is mediocre.

Collateral, meanwhile, isn't only carried by the lead actor, but also Michael Mann's directing (which he won the NBR for!) and the artistic categories (cinematography especially).

Plus, DreamWorks is every bit as effective at marketing as Universal

You took the words out of my mouth.

Monster is a horrible comparison.

Ray has been a relative hit at the box office and is an indie with a major studio push.

Collateral suffers because Cruise isn't a lock (or in the top 10 of potential canidates?) and Foxx is stronger for his performance in Ray.

With Sidways, Million Dollar Baby, Closer, etc. becoming big contendors and Alexander and others failing, the biopic issue isn't a big deal anymore.

I notice that when most people, predict a pre-fall film to be nominated , it's not (Road to Perdition). Yet almost every year when they count out those early films (Moulin Rouge, Seabisquit, Gladiator) it ends up actually being nominated.

Which lead me to believe this year there will be one film that kinda surprises people and ends up with a nomination. My first choice is Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, but since that might not happen the next logical choice is Collateral. Unless they go crazy and nominate something like The Manchurian Candidate (or Fahrenheit 9/11 which I still haven't counted out).

Just some thoughts :wink:

But it's not always about the acting! 3 of the 5 films last year didn't have any major acting nominations (Seabiscuit, Lord of the Rings, and Master and Commander). I think the Academy has gotten a bit more selective and now they won't just nominate a film for Best Picture because of a great acting performance.

Also, Collateral was a big hit (bigger than Ray) at the box office and the Academy LOVES Michael Mann.

I actually keep thinking about Master & Commander over and over again when I think about Collateral.

AS for Ray, I think something like Ali is probably a more accurate comparison.

Yeah. I kinda thing there needs to be a spot for an action film in the Top 5.

Ali isn't an accurate comparison; Ali was an awful film that dragged on endlessly even with Smith's performance. Ray is a good film when all things are considered, but as I've said, if you took Foxx out, you'd get a mediocre movie. Giving Ray a Best Picture nominee is like rewarding Foxx twice.

andaroo, Rod, loyal, Raffiki, Dkmuto, etc: Who votes on the Oscar noms?

From Oscar Watch:
1,298 Actors
465 Producers
433 Executives
403 Writers
416 Sound
365 Public relations
366 Art directors
372 Directors
366 Members-at-large
307 Shorts
241 Music composers, lyricists
239 Visual effects
222 Film editors
182 Cinematographers
128 Documentarians


During the nomination process, actor vote in the acting categories, writers in the writing categories, musicians in the score/song categories, etc. The exception is best picture, for which every one votes.

During the voting for the winners, anybody can vote for anything.

That is very true, but that was just one year, in MOST years that is not the case and until there's some more Academy history it will be hard to gauge. I don't think Collateral is a contendor. I don't think Cruise is a contendor. I don't think Mann is a contendor. It could definately (and should definately) be considered for cinematography, but cinematography isn't always the easiest category to predict and many fantastic films have been overlooked by that guild.


But you are dismissing the fact that Ray *did* get really great reviews. It got better reviews than almost every major movie we have been talking about on this website, and not all because of Foxx.

The Ray comparison was to Monster, not to Collateral.


How do you know this? He's been nominated for ONE MOVIE! 3 times, because he was producer, writer, director. He lost all 3 times.

And IMO Collateral is a success because of the performances of the two leads, not because of the story (which many have critisized) so it is in the same boat as Ray.

I love Collateral! But NBR is NOT A GOOD PREDICTOR. Collateral strikes me as very "Road to Perdition"

In throwing all these comparisons around we must acknowledge that no two films are alike and no two films have the same path to Oscar, that's why this is so interesting

Wow, I just saw thw inners. Thank God something finally makes the race clearer.

Yes, it seems Sideways is as close to a lock as anything now, besides Aviator, which is a lock 100%.

Because Sideways is in, that automatically kills Eternal sunshine and Spanglish from Best Picture, and quite possibly Fahrenheit 9/11 too, cuz that's also sort of quirky comedy.... those 3 are basically dead.

JULIE DELPY!!!!!!!!!!!! YAYYYYYY!!!!!!

Much deserved! Imelda Staunton's back in the race as I predicted.
I just saw Being Julia this weekend and while Annette Benning gave a great performance, I don't think she was near topping the 3 equally best performances of the year, Uma thurman, Julie Delpy, and Imelda Staunton.

Shocking that The Sea Inside did not get a best foreign picture nod.

I still don't see Bardem getting a nomination. He almost has no buzz and no major or even minor awards in America.

The love for Delpy in Before Sunset surprises me, but so has the fawning over this film. I don't find any of the performances in the "Before series" to be particularly impressive, it all sounds forced. The screenplay maybe, but eh...

The more time goes on the less I like Before Sunset.

I'm still not buying Sideways' chances.

Let's take a look at Far From Heaven. It received nothing but raves from critics. Decent box office for the type of film it is. Won the New York's Critics Award for Best Picture. Swept at the IFP's.

About Schmidt won the Los Angeles Film Critics' Award. Plenty of others


Neither of them got a nominations.

Of course about this time last year when everyone was honoring Lost in Translation and people were calling it a lock I was saying the same thing (and then when it missed out on PGA and everyone was people started thinking maybe it wouldn't i figured, sure it will ) but Lost in Translation was not something the academy usually goes for. Will they do it two years in a row?


At the very least I'd say its far from a lock right now.

Another factor is that this year is weak. We need 5 films, and Sideways is looking as good as anybody right now. It was much more competitive for the years of Far From Heaven and About Schmidt. Not getting in with About Schmidt will also help Payne this time.

I don't think About Schmidt was universally raved. Alot fo people liked it (I didn't) but it did not get raves as other movies di that year. Plus, it was kind of a slow and melodramatic film.

Far From Heaven is just an exception, because that is one of the biggest snubs in history of Oscars. Point blank. That's that.

But Sideways is not like any of them. It has the best reviews of the year and it gets raves from almost every reviews. It's starting to win rounds with awards (like Far From Heaven) but it has an edge because it's a different genre. Far From Heaven was drama, as were most of the films nominated that year (except Chicago). Sideways is not another biopic or dark movie... it's GREAT and heavy light-weight fell-good movie (that may be an oxy-moron). It's strong performances (I still don't undertsand why everyone raves for Virginia Madsen, she was good and I loved her character, but not anything too special, defintely not winning material, but it's alright, it just makes the film stronger). With strong raves for its actors also solidifies its overall chances....