Fox News:

• At last, it’s Oscar week.
  
  On Sunday, we’ll finally get to see who was right: the critics, the audience, the bloggers, the Hollywood Foreign Press or the Screen Actors Guild.
  
  Right now, the odds-on favorite for Best Picture has to be the Coen brothers’ “No Country for Old Men.” The Coens have won everything so far. Javier Bardem is a shoo-in for Best Supporting Actor unless the Academy feels sentimental for Hal Holbrook.
  
  What could screw up the Coens’ chances? If the Academy splits their vote between “No Country” and the similar in tone “There Will Be Blood.” Then things could get interesting. “Michael Clayton,” a big studio movie, might be the beneficiary. “Juno” could be, too. The outside shot goes to “Atonement.”
  
  One thing certain: Daniel Day-Lewis will get the Best Actor nod for “Blood.” He’s overdue from “Gangs of New York,” for one thing. For another, he’s just great as the increasingly obsessed, crazy oil man Daniel Plainview. It’s his night.
  
  Best Actress isn’t so simple. The Academy’s sympathies probably lie with Julie Christie in “Away from Her.” She’s just a terrific Hollywood story, with friends and former lovers in the higher echelons. Marion Cotillard was wonderful as Edith Piaf in “La Vie En Rose,” but the movie’s in French and Cotillard is lovely but still very much an unknown quantity.
  
  Then there’s the question of Ruby Dee. The beloved actress won the SAG Award for her work in “American Gangster,” but she’s up against formidable competition. Amy Ryan is a “discovery” in “Gone Baby Gone” and has picked up a lot of critics’ awards. But Cate Blanchett as Bob Dylan in “I’m Not There” is simply amazing. I vote for Blanchett. Whoever wins will get it by just a few votes.
  
  That leaves Best Director. Or directors. The Coens won the Directors Guild Award, so we can pretty much assume they have the Oscar sewn up.
  
  Paul Thomas Anderson did his best work ever in “Blood.” Tony Gilroy made “Michael Clayton” rise above the average studio fare. Julian Schnabel made an almost perfect film in “The Diving Bell and the Butterfly” and has won a bunch of awards and great notices, but very few people have still seen this film.
  
  The only real shock might come from Jason Reitman. “Juno” is his second solid film in a row (after “Thank You for Smoking”). And here’s something key about “Juno”: it’s the rare $100 million indie hit. Hollywood respects that. Reitman could give the Coens a run for their money.
  
  A couple of other Oscars: Best Song should go to the “Once” team of Glen Hansard and Markéta Irglová for “Falling Slowly.” I ran into the pair last week in Amoeba Records, trailed by the New York Times’ intrepid Jamie Diamond for a Style section piece. I keep hearing bad things about Hansard’s manager and that maybe their PR hasn’t been handled so well. But they should win unless Disney’s “Enchanted” floods the ballot box.
  
  Finally, Best Documentary should go to Michael Moore’s “Sicko.” Moore has been unusually low-key this year, and “Sicko” should clean up because of it. But don’t count out “No End in Sight,” Charles Ferguson and Audrey Marss' exceptional account of the Iraq war.

Bardem was great in No Country for Old Men, but you can make anyone methodical and meticulous enough to be a likeable character who's crazed and vicious. Oft times, it's more up to the director showing the actor doing something really cool and shocking than it is the actor just making the character.

Now Daniel Day Lewis on the other hand is one of those guys you can barely recognize from part to part because his method skills are so damn amazing. When I first saw a preview for There Will Be Blood, I thought he was just gonna be a Bill The Butcher knock-off. But Daniel Plainview turned out to be an image and personality in and of himself.

Personally, if I looked like Daniel Day Lewis, I'd turn myself into Plainview all the time. I liked the character for all the reasons everyone hated him. I'm a little confused as to why he did all the things he did at the end of the movie; considering his self-control beforehand, it was a little non-sequitur for him to do that to his son. I know they were running over two hours at that point, but they really needed to explain exactly what made him so deranged. I think they were trying to say it was because he stopped working and just handled the books from then on, but I can't say for sure because they just refused to elaborate.

Anyway, I could care less about Oscars and Emmys and the Academy but if anyone deserves an award, it's Lewis.

an argument could be made that Lewis is the best actor ever.

I've begun to find the Oscars interesting again in sort of a predictably ridiculous, maybe even tragically funny kind of way. Lewis and Christie are virtual locks. Bardem and Blanchette aren't far behind as supporters. No Country will most likely win Best Picture; maybe it's not a slam dunk, but it's a safe bet. I personally don't think it's better than Blood or the undernominated Assassination of Jesse James, but it's a fine selection and as technically outstanding a movie as the Oscars have given the award to since...I dunno, Schindler's List? With a few exceptions(The Departed, American Beauty, I guess begrudgingly I'll include Titanic), the Academy has a long streak of recognizing either bombastic(and typically sappy) glorified mediocrity or mindless big budget sword epics.

The one big award I could see as up in the air is Best Director. The Coens I guess are the favorite. Paul Thomas Anderson is tops in my book. Julian Schnabel's film is far from perfect, but he seems to be the critic darling of this year.

Of course, the Academy is so in love with George Clooney that maybe Michael Clayton will win everything. Wilkinson and Clooney aside, I was kind of underwhelmed by it...perhaps simply because of the massive critical hype.

However the awards go is however they'll go, but I do have two "complaints". The first is that Casey Affleck is nominated as a supporting actor for Assassination, when he's a lead. I've had this argument so many times. Brad Pitt is not the lead. Affleck is. Affleck, incidentally, can actually act, which I admit surprised me. The second is that the Academy disqualifed Jonny Greenwood(of Radiohead fame) from Best Score for There Will be Blood due to what sounds like a vague, inconsistently-enforced trivial rule.

I think "NCFOM" will beat "TWBB" if, for no other reason, the Coens are seen as "due."

Are Oscars Worth All This Fuss?

• I’m only slightly ashamed to admit that I found myself hoping that the strike would shut the Academy Awards down; that for once, in a year of such cinematic bounty and variety, appreciation for the best movies could be liberated from the pomp and tedium of Hollywood spectacle.
  
  The Oscars themselves may be harmless fun, but the idea that they matter is as dangerous as it is ridiculous.
  
  The top nominees often come into the ceremony with middling box office numbers. (This year “Juno,” the only PG-13 best picture nominee and the only one in which nobody dies a violent death, is also the only one to have topped $100 million in gross receipts.) A big victory on Oscar night is supposed to help make up the difference. And this, of course, explains the frenzied, overcrowded fall release calendar. The commercial fate of serious movies is now, to a disturbing extent, dependent on the Academy Awards.
  
  In the old days it was more often the opposite: the academy would belatedly gild the lily of commercial success with a shiny finish of ersatz class. This vulgarity was the saving grace of the Oscars. It was not necessary for film lovers to take them seriously or for media outlets to cover them like presidential campaigns, with horse-race reporting, sober analysis and war room spin doctoring. A bit of perspective is needed. The wonderful thing about the Academy Awards is that they are fundamentally trivial. To pretend otherwise is to trivialize movies.

I only caught the last hour or so but, man, what the hell happens to Stewart when he does this show? Some of the jokes are kind of witty, but he's palpably nervous to the point of looking amateurish.

If he acted like that on the "Daily Show" he would have been replaced with some guy from "Talk Soup" by now.

Lowest Rated Oscars Ever.

• The 1st Academy Awards were presented on May 16, 1929 at a private dinner held at the Hollywood Roosevelt Hotel. Tickets cost $5 and fewer than 250 people attended. The whole ceremony lasted only 15 minutes. Unlike later events, the winners had been announced months prior to the ceremony. This was also the only Academy Award ceremony not to be broadcast in some way.

I like Tilda Swinton...

She's a good actress, but Cate Blanchett was robbed this year.

Cate Blanchett's got enough...

Another reason why Jon Stewart kicks ass

Yeah, that was a classy move on his part.

But overall, he's not good at this gig. He comes off as a pretty self assured guy on the "Daily Show," but when he does the Oscars he acts all nervous and stiff.

I think this movie was robbed!

Fuck yes. She was brilliant as the GA* Elizabeth and deserved the naked gold guy.


GA = Golden Age

Man, Coppola is really milkin' that franchise...

Actually, I was referring to her best supporting actress nomination for playing Bob Dylan.

Meh...

You didn't think she was great in that role?

I guess. The only thing that makes it a big deal is the fact that she's a woman playing a man...

Well, yeah, that counted for a lot. But also the fact that she played Dylan so damn well. It was every bit as good as, say, Jamie Foxx in 'Ray' or Reese Witherspoon in 'Walk the Line.' And those cases they were playing singers of the same sex.