"We'll Get Through This:" Chunk White's Annual Oscar Picks!

One way of approaching the history of film is to examine the struggles of the great directors against the limits of time and space. In fact, one can almost identify a director as an auteur based on the ways in which he or she has wrestled with this idea. One wonders then what someone like Andre Bazin would have made of Avatar. It's quite possible that James Cameron's film will signal the final triumph of the director over such limitations; with the technology at our disposal, it seems that now the only limits a director faces are those of his or her own imagination. Yet Avatar surely doesn't feel like a liberating yawp of freedom for film; many casual and serious filmgoers alike walked away from the film with quite the opposite feeling. We may look back on this year's Oscars as nothing less than a referendum on the direction that film will take in the future, and it seems like a good ol' Matrix/Terminator man vs. machine struggle between Avatar and more traditional works like Hurt Locker. It will be clear below where my sympathies lie, but we cannot avoid the question: is the "breakthrough" represented by Avatar the next step in film's evolution, or is it a passing fad that will play itself out in the wake of the countless imitations and sequels it will inevitably spawn? Are the next auteurs out there with cameras in their hands, or locked away in a cubicle somewhere writing software code?

Best Picture
Hollywood gave in to Dark Knight syndrome this year, and for the first time since Orson Welles was a pup and Hitchcock a recent emigre, we have ten films nominated for this award rather than the accustomed five. Based on the fact that some truly interesting genre pieces and smaller, thoughtful films made the cut, I must shout hooray! I love the idea that the DVD of A Serious Man can trumpet "Best Picture Nominee!" when it clearly would never have made the top five. And how about the same for the sneaky genre pyrotechnics of District 9? And Up joining Beauty and the Beast as the only animated films ever nominated for BP? That these three wildly different, brilliant and unforgettable films made the list validates the Academy's change, to my mind. They have no chance, but who cares? An Education was too small, Blind Side too hackneyed (even for the superannuated voters) and Push too bleak to make much of a stir. That leaves two outside shots and two obvious choices. After almost 20 years in the business, Tarantino is still too extreme for much of mainstream Hollywood, and for all of its moments of brilliance, Basterds was too inconsistent and talky. If Pulp Fiction couldn't win against the flatulent Forrest Gump, I don't think QT has much of a shot here. Up in the Air has a slightly better shot, but I defy those of you who saw it when it opened to recall more than a scene or two. Like Michael Clayton, it is quality product that was worth the price of admission, caused a bit of a stir, and will thence vanish into the ether like expired frequent flier miles. Which leaves the heavy hitters and, without being too dramatic, the clash of Dances with Smurfs (kudos to Trey and Matt from South Park for nailing that one right away) and Hurt Locker might be nothing less than a battle for the soul of American film. I have faith enough that Oscar voters will keep their rare hot streak alive and vote for Bigelow's work, which encompasses nearly all that a great film should be. Hopefully, the BP Oscar will be made of unobtainium this time around.

Best Actor
This one is clearly a two-horse race, and an interesting race at that. Out of the running are Morgan Freeman (weakish film, won too recently), Jeremy Renner (brilliant as the latest of Katheryn Bigelow's adrenaline junkies, but seemed more part of the ensemble than the star) and Colin Firth in a movie that was named A Single Man because that's who went to see it. This leaves us Clooney vs. Bridges. These two represent very different approaches to acting in Hollywood. Clooney is Cary Grant, a star; charming, intelligent, often rising above mediocre material and frequently making good material great. Up in the Air was a solid, entertaining film that got more attention than it deserved due to its fortuitously-timed take on the new-Depression era economic and social malaise. The film was a huge hit, and that may outweigh the fact that Clooney won Supporting fairly recently for the egregious Syriana (OK--how many of you have already forgotten that that one was ever made?). And then there's the Dude, who's more like Claude Rains, bringing subtlety and grace to every role, large or small, into which he inevitably disappears. From Last Picture Show and Fat City, through minor classics like Cutter's Way and Fisher King, to showier pieces like Lebowski, Bridges has been, beyond any doubt, our most underappreciated actor for going on four decades. I'm not certain enough people saw Crazy Heart to make this happen, but this may be the time for his Pacino/Scent of a Woman or Newman/Color of Money moment, i.e. a Lifetime Achievement Award. An interesting contest of generations and of styles, but I'm going with Bridges; first round of white russians are on me.

Best Actress
Five great performances, but as with Actor, it should boil down to a competition between two polar opposites in terms of backstories and styles. Meryl Streep probably should win for inhabiting Julia Child so well, but she's become such a national treasure that her performances are almost taken for granted. Carey Mulligan is this year's Ellen Page, a fresh, bracing performance out of nowhere; I'm not sure enough people saw An Education to put the newcomer over the top. Dame Helen, as a recent winner, is the least likely choice here. This leaves the diametrically opposed neophyte, Gabourey Sidibe from Precious and Hollywood stalwart Sandra Bullock for The Blind Side. Unlike the Actor race, however, I don't think this will be all that close. Sidibe's performance was powerful, but it's pretty clear that Mo'Nique will win Supporting and that voters will not be inclined to reward both performances. Sandra Bullock is a veteran whom everybody loves, and to pinch a Python line, her career has had more ups and downs than the Assyrian Empire. Blind Side is classic Hollywood hokum, and was hugely popular. All the stars are aligning, and I think the prize will be hers.

Best Supporting Actor
The easiest pick of the bunch, as much of a no-brainer as Javier Bardem was for No Country two years ago. The only mysteries are as follows: why does Stanley Tucci get nominated for the repellent Lovely Bones and not for nearly stealing Julia and Julia from La Streep? And how did Fred Melamed, as the titular Sy Abelman of A Serious Man, not get nominated? It's all academic, anyway, since it's Christoph in a Waltz, as the most charmingly evil "gnatzi" since Ralph Fiennes in Schindler's List. And she'll have the milk...

Best Supporting Actress
Again, an easy choice. The two babes from Up in the Air will cancel each other out; Penelope just won, and Maggie G's time will definitely come. But this year it's all about Mo'Nique, and her shocking, devastating, powerhouse, out-of-left field turn as the world's worst mom since Grendel's in Precious.

Best Director
What exactly does one do for an encore after crowning oneself King of the World? Pope? Emperor? Dark Lord of the Sith? Fans of what used to be called "movies" are hoping against hope that the voters will look past the box office, hand James Cameron a whole slew of technical awards (which he clearly deserves), and give this award to someone who made a movie rather than designing a clever theme-park ride. An obvious choice would be JC's ex, Katheryn Bigelow, who finally managed to do what has eluded many brilliant and mediocre filmmakers alike: make a definitive film about our misadventure in Iraq. Since Jason Reitman and Lee Daniels made films that succeeded based on performances and script, rather than interesting filmmaking, I think we can safely eliminate them. Which leaves the wildest of wild cards, a certain Mr. Tarantino. As much as I enjoyed Basterds, I still think it pales in comparison with QT's best work; then again, so did Departed when compared to the half-dozen or so other films for which Scorsese should have won the prize. Basterds is certainly the choice for the auteurists among the voters, being a film that no one but its director could possibly have made. Unfortunately, the voters have not taken too kindly to auteur directors over the years; I'm inclined to think that QT's Oscar career will mirror Scorsese's, and that he'll win somewhere far down the road for work that is more safe and conventional than what he's doing now. In the end, there is no doubt that Hurt Locker was the best-directed film of the year, in the sense that Bigelow used the "non-verbal" elements of film to help tell her story, establish the mood, and involve us with the characters. For that, she should win, unless the dollar signs of Avatar blind voters to the fact that beyond the sugar rush of the immersive technology, it is a very conventional and cliched piece.

And So On...
Toughest pick of the year: Best Animated Film, where Up and Fantastic Mr. Fox were equally deserving, Princess was a wonderfully old-school piece for Disney (though someone needs to tell Randy Newman that he's been writing the same three songs for the last forty years) and Coraline was creepy and wonderful (I'm going with Pixar). Haneke's White Ribbon for Foreign, with Un Prophete as an outside shot. Wallace and Gromit ride again for Animated Short! Adapted Screenplay for Precious; and while I'd give anything for the Coens to win Original Screenplay, I won't be disappointed if it goes to Tarantino for a screenplay that is, one must admit, highly Original. Which leaves Cameron with an armful of tech awards, much money and, if there's any justice, little else. Anyway, we've just had a Polanski and a Scorsese open in the same week, so there is light ahead...