Film Studies: No prizes for guessing the big prize

David Thomson
Sunday 11 January 2004 01:00 GMT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

I have a hunch that this year's most important Academy Awards - Best Picture and Best Director - are wrapped up, and have been for two years. I doubt it's possible for many voters to resist the stunning visual achievement or the comprehensive box-office victory of The Lord of the Rings. For the two previous years, voters could argue that Peter Jackson's filmed version of Tolkien was a world unto itself, so wait till it's all over. Well, now the trilogy is done and nothing matches its epic visual imagination or its sway with audiences.

There will be four other contenders and my guess is that the Academy will pick Cold Mountain, Mystic River, Lost in Translation and House of Sand and Fog to make up the numbers. I would add to that In the Cut - terribly abused and misunderstood by critics. But the also-rans are far behind.

For Best Actor, I think the Academy will nominate Sean Penn for Mystic River (with his good work in 21 Grams helping the cause), Ben Kingsley in House of Sand and Fog, Bill Murray in Lost in Translation, Jude Law in Cold Mountain - and probably Tom Cruise in the Last Samurai, if only to honour that rather lost actor's commitment to a strange project. Other worthy contenders would be Philip Seymour Hoffman in the little-seen Owning Mahowny (far too early in the year) and Anthony Hopkins in The Human Stain (another film that fooled the critics). Law, Penn and Kingsley could all win, but I think there's going to be sentiment to give something to Lost in Translation, and Bill Murray has been doing brilliant but self-effacing work long enough.

Best Actress is a crowded category. Nicole Kidman will likely be nominated for Cold Mountain, though her performance there is not in the same class as her acting in The Human Stain. Naomi Watts is very moving in a nearly impossible part in 21 Grams. Evan Rachel Wood is outstanding in Thirteen. Diane Keaton is uncommonly grown-up in Something's Gotta Give. And Jennifer Connelly is good in House of Sand and Fog. By my voting, Meg Ryan would win for In the Cut. But she won't even be nominated. The winner? It's a long shot, but I'll say Charlize Theron in a small (and not very good) film called Monster, in which Theron is unrecognisable as the serial killer Aileen Wuornos.

You don't need my testimony to say that Theron is a beauty - and some have regarded her as a lightweight. But this is an awesome transformation in which the actress is bulkier, with lousy teeth and a raddled complexion. But the real triumph comes in how she moves and the revelation of her character's desperate thought processes. Monster is not pleasant or accomplished, but it has to be seem for this astonishing piece of acting.

In the supporting actor category, with a lot of competition, I can see nods going to Peter Sarsgaard in the fascinating Shattered Glass, Mark Ruffalo in In the Cut, Ken Watanabe in The Last Samurai, Ed Harris in The Human Stain and Tim Robbins in Mystic River. I'd give the award to Robbins, whose role in that dank film is the least flashy and the most difficult, and which is against the grain of the mischief that Robbins usually explores. Plus, I think the Academy wants to honour Mystic River if only because, in their fuddled thinking, Clint Eastwood just sustains the notion that veteran American directors are still capable of good work. In fact, the rest of the year suggests the opposite, but the Academy likes its own success.

Best Supporting Actress is another rich area: Holly Hunter is wonderful as the mother in Thirteen; Patricia Clarkson will get noticed for Pieces of April; Laura Linney is truly frightening in Mystic River; and there's a following for Shohreh Aghdashloo in House of Sand and Fog (even if her name is missing from the poster). But then there's Renée Zellweger in Cold Mountain, earthy, comic and credibly Southern. Her performance helps a lot in the languid passages in that film - and again it's an example of an actress ready to look bad to do good work.

Peter Jackson will win Best Director and he can hardly be opposed for adapted screenplay. As for original screenplay, I'd bet on Sofia Coppola getting the prize for Lost in Translation. In the area of craft, there are three big period pictures - Cold Mountain, The Last Samurai and Master and Commander - and I'd back Cold Mountain to pick up the majority of those Oscars. Unless, the Academy bows to the obvious and gives everything to The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King. For New Zealand has found the passion now so absent from American film-making.

d.thomson@independent.co.uk

The 76th Academy Awards will take place on 29 Feb

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in