15. Songs In The Key Of Suck
14. You Wanted Slutty, You Got Slutty
13. The Rise And Fall Of Paris Hilton And The Lindsay Lohans From Mars
12. Putting the “Re” in Rehab
11. Things To Do In L.A. When You’re Stoned
10. Under The Table And Drinking
9. Revolter
8. The White (Trash) Album
7. Hair Existentialism
6. Live At The Betty Ford Rehab Center
5. Goodbye Yellow Brick Road (Because I Lost My License)
4. Oops, I Puked In My Gin
3. Jagged Little Hairstyle
2. Airbag Baby
1. I See Paris, I See France, I’m Not Wearing Underpants

Our contributors aren’t that innocent:

15.  TWuG
14.  Hose311
13.  TWuG
12.  Hose311
11.  MrHub
10. BlueDuck
9.  TWuG
8.  BeavisLasVegas
7.  BeavisLasVegas
6.  TWuG
5.  BlueDuck
4.  TWuG
3.  BlueDuck
2.  Hose311
1.  TWuG

15.  ”Hey, Brit, you know, when they told you bald was beautiful, they were talking about your hoohah.”

14.  “I’ve got you in the Death Pool dying of accidental ingestion of sleeping pills following a three-way with Gary Coleman.  Still a good bet?”

13.  “Who loves ya, baby one more time?”

12.  “Congratulations; you’ve made K-Fed look sane.”

11.  “Not to mention Michael Jackson!”

10.  “Not to mention Mariah Carey!”

9.  “Not to mention Whitney Houston!”

8. “Not to mention the Olsen twins!”

7.  “Hey Britney, now the drapes match the carpet.”

6.  “So, what was it, lice? I bet it was lice.”

5.  “Damn, that bouncer’s hot!”

4.  “Nice; that’s the Natalie Portman look, right? Except she got paid to shave her hair. And she managed to get into college. And her movies do enough box office to make Crossroads look pathetic. But other than that…”

3. “You know, if you can’t hack rehab at Eric Clapton’s house in Antigua, you really can’t hack rehab.”

2.  “I feel bad for your kids.”

1.  “”So, Brit, did you know I contribute to Top X?” (What the hell, she’s got no standards anymore…)”

15.   “At least liars can take their pants off.”

14.  “Flame off! Flame OFF!  FLAME OFFF!” 

13.  “I’d like a convertible please. Yes I’m aware it’s raining.”

12.  “Hello, I’m going door to door selling fire extinguishers…”

11.  “I am not a Bunsen burner.  I am a human being.  A man.”
 
10.  “Don’t look at me for ideas.  It’s a bunch of flames, not a light bulb.”

9.  “I call it the “Don Kingsford” look.”

8.  “Hey, Trump!  You’re my head!”

7.  “Get those goddamn marshmallows out of here!”

6.  “What do you mean I’m not allowed on the rope ladder?”

5.  “Stop smoking?  I wish I could *start*!”

4.  “Sweetie, it’s a great present.  Of course I like it.  And I understand that you spent a lot of time knitting it for me.  But, you know, it’s a hat.  And I have that condition.  You know.  The skull on fire thing?  So….”

3.  “That’s very funny officer.  Where’s the fire.  Never heard that one before.  Just write the ticket, a$$hole.”

2.  “You have fire insurance, right?”

1.  “I’ll tell you one thing, that’s the last transatlantic flight I ever make on a dirigible.”

10. The Adult Swim Exploding Billboard Extravaganza
9. The Pharmaceutical Industry Presents: A Tribute to Jim Morrison and Janis Joplin!
8. The Broadway cast of “Osama, We Love You!” sings their Tony Award winning song “Osama rhymes with Obama!”
7. “The John Mellencamp Jingoistic Appeal to American Patriotism, sponsored by Kia
6. Troy Aikman’s Big Gay Salute to Flamenco!
5. Legends of Rock, featuring Buddy Holly, Ricky Nelson, and Otis Redding in Concert, sponsored by Nev-R-Crash Airplanes
4. The Billy Joel “Kicks Off A World Tour Even Though He Hasn’t Released An Album In 15 Years Spectacular”!
3. The Zinedine Zidane headbutt-a-thon
2. Peyton Manning in Concert, sponsored by Sprint, Mastercard, XBox, Gatorade, DirecTV, and Reebok

And, wardrobe malfunctioning its way to  #1:
1. Up with Nipples

10. Clay Aiken’s “Closet Rainbow Sherbet”
9. Paula Abdul’s “Rum Raisin with Methadone Sprinkles”
8. If I’m Being Honest, This Ice Cream Sucks
7. Randy Jackson’s “I’m Feeling You, Dog” (with real dog extract)
6. Cone Deaf
5. Praline Pitchy with Shrillsicles
4. William Hung’s “Unflavored”
3. Cocopaula
2. Delusions N’ Cream

And, filling out his XXXXL jersey at #1:
1. Ruben Studdard’s “Super-Double-Throwdown Extra Chocolate Velvet Teddy Bear #205″

I hate to say it but I quite like the list. It would have been nice to see films like Children Of Men or Pan’s Labyrinth get more notice, of course, but those films simply opened too late to have any impact. The people predicting both films as Best Picture nominees were living in a dream world. And Little Miss Sunshine seemed more like a decent piece of fluff than an Oscar-calibre film to me, but I would rather solid fluff get nominated than total tripe like Chocolat. Clearly the studios pushing Letters From Iwo Jima, Venus and Half Nelson did their homework, while either the Dreamgirls team failed to do their job or the film really just couldn’t find the love.

In the acting categories, only the supporting actors provided any real surprises. Seeing Mark Wahlberg’s picture on the screen instead of Jack Nicholson’s was shocking, in a good way. I think Jack was fine in The Departed, but he didn’t really fit in with what the rest of the cast were doing; he was in his own little Jack world, doing crazy Jack work. Wahlberg was the classic supporting actor, appearing little, but always making an impact when he did. Kudos to him. Also kudos to the Little Children team for getting Jackie Earle Haley’s name up there. The two lead groupings were as predictable as could be, with the Academy stifling any chance of a Borat bid, or of anyone shaking up the Silver Foxes. And for once, the supporting actress category fell exactly as the consensus predicted. It might all seem a bit boring, but only because we listen to all of the talking heads put these names up there so often that we wind up with expectations. Had none of us paid any attention to the Oscar race until the lovely Salma read off the nominees, we would have been pleasantly surprised by a few of them, I’m sure.

In the Best Picture race, I’m stunned at Dreamgirls’ miss, but only because it seemed to be so perfectly placed. It opened at the right time, had solid reviews, a few guaranteed acting nominations, a Golden Globe win. Really, I think people can be forgiven for thinking it would be nominated. I think most people suspected that Letters For Iwo Jima would manage to push one of the front-runners out, but there was no agreement as to which front-runner was vulnerable. I wouldn’t have been shocked to see The Queen miss, or even Little Miss Sunshine. And in the Directors’ category, those sneaky buggers managed a surprise nomination again, how they manage to do it almost every year is beyond me. That their surprise this year is Paul Greengrass is wonderful. So I understand the decision some people have made to not see the film, I did see it, and found it to be emotionally wrenching, bringing up all kinds of feelings about 9/11 that had been dormant. The film’s impact is entirely thanks to the way Greengrass’ usual barf-cam tricks worked in the confined space of an airliner.

Apart from that, the rest of the categories are fairly predictable. I’m surprised Volver missed not only a screenplay nod, but a foreign-language nod as well! Not that Almodovar’s name guarantees a spot there, but the film has been hailed by all quarters. And it is nice see Children of Men and Pan’s Labyrinth get a handful of technical nominations, there truly were a lot of beautiful films this year.

Tim

One actress who I forgot to mention as a dark horse candidate is Maggie Gyllenhaal for Sherrybaby. I don’t think it will happen. Her film made no money (just over 100k back in October) and only critical types are even mentioning her name, yet who knows, with the right push from the studio, Gyllenhaal could surprise everyone. Including me. Now, back to business.

Most years, the Lead Actor category is full to the brim with strong performances from popular actors, while Lead Actress is a wasteland showing a lack of well-written parts for women. But this year is the exact opposite; we’ve got Meryl vs Judi vs Helen, plus possibly Kate, Penelope, Renee or Naomi, while the men’s side is truly weak. It is nice to see, though I’m sure it is an aberration. A weak year means that actors with smaller pedigrees may finally find enough support to break into the Old Boys Club, and at least one or two of the five nominations will go to those newer faces.

Let’s quickly get this out of the way: Forest Whitaker will be nominated. There is no need to say anything more, he’ll be nominated. Winning every single award on the planet for male lead, including now the Golden Globe can do that for a guy (especially after hearing the crowd cheer at the Globe ceremony).

The consensus seems to be that Will Smith will be up for The Pursuit Of Happyness, Peter O’Toole will get his 8^th nomination, for Venus, and Leonardo DiCaprio will get nominated for something, either Blood Diamond or The Departed. The fifth spot is a matter of contention.

I am happy with the consensus, because it isn’t hard to believe that each of those actors will find a solid level of support. They all earned SAG nominations, their films either reviewed well, made a lot of money, or both. Their performances are uniformly strong (I’m going on word of mouth for O’Toole’s work), though in some cases they hold up what is an otherwise mediocre film (see Pursuit Of Happyness, Blood Diamond). But, I can’t be bothered to write an entry if it is just to list the consensus. So for now, let’s assume that Whitaker, Smith and O’Toole will be #1, 2 and 3 on the list and choose a surprise or two for the rest.

Leo needs some thought: for which film will he be nominated? Blood Diamond got mixed reviews but Leo and Djimon Hounsou earned kudos. The Departed got strong reviews all around, but has a large male cast and Leo could have to fight for votes. However, the key is that Leo will be fighting for those votes in the supporting category, as apparently every star of the film has been pushed there by the studio, and that is where the SAG nominated him. So if Leo is to earn a Lead nomination, it will be for Blood Diamond. For now, let’s place him in there as nominee #4.

There are two, and only two, strong possibilities for the fifth spot: Ryan Gosling (Half Nelson) and Sacha Baron Cohen (Borat). Gosling earned rave reviews as the star of Half Nelson, and earned a SAG nomination as thanks for it, but the film came out awhile ago and his momentum is likely no longer growing. Worrisome as well is the lack of a Golden Globe nod, something that points to a weak promotional effort by the studio. However, even if Ryan Gosling’s total vote count winds up lower than early indicators suggested it could be, I think that enough voters will list him high enough on the ballot that he should still be considered a major challenger.

Sacha Baron Cohen is a textbook example of someone earning fewer total votes, but a higher percentage of top votes. His performance as Borat is a one-of-a-kind phenomenon and everyone knows it, and judging from the crowd’s reaction at the Golden Globes, the man has some fans. If a strong enough subset of voters is impressed with Cohen’s work, they would simply have to list his name on the upper lines of the ballot. The big question is, how many voters were as turned off by the film as others were turned on? I think he gets in, because voters know we won’t see performance that audacious for some time.

There are six names but only five spots. It isn’t possible to truly predict which of them will fail to muster the needed first-choice votes to get in. Ryan Gosling could easily fail. Not enough voters may like the perceived anti-Americanism of Borat. Will Smith could lose momentum. Peter O’Toole could simply not get enough voters, who really can say with a small film like that that has barely played outside of the major population centers. I think only Forest Whitaker can be considered a lock. So since I have to trim the list down to five, let’s bump out Ryan Gosling. The possibility of a Cohen nomination is just too juicy to let go of, and I’m going to stick with it. Expect Ryan Gosling to be left on the outside looking in.

Other minor contenders include Aaron Eckhardt for Thank You For Smoking (too early), Clive Owen for Children of Men (too late), Matt Damon for The Good Shepherd (too long) and Ken Watanabe (never took off).

Tim

Penelope Cruz for Volver

Helen Mirren for The Queen

Meryl Streep for The Devil Wears Prada

Kate Winslet for Little Children

Judi Dench for Notes on a Scandal

Now I grant you, this could easily come true. These really are the only actresses who have been mentioned more than once by anyone, they are the five SAG nominees, and I would not bet a single penny that the above list is incorrect. But it sometimes seems that we Oscar lovers come to our conclusions simply because other Oscar lovers have as well, and not based on any actual reasoning. So let’s take a closer look, keeping in mind the Academy’s voting system where an actress would need 16% of first place votes to be nominated (see two posts down for more info on that).

Helen Mirren’s spot has to be assured. She has won virtually every Lead Actress award out there, and there are a lot of them, believe me. The Queen is a favourite of every guild, earning nominations from all of them, and the film revolves around Mirren’s portrayal of Queen Elizabeth II. So let’s assume that we are all correct, and that Helen Mirren will get more first-place votes than anyone else. I have yet to see any compelling reason not to do so.

Meryl Streep has to be next, because, she’s Meryl Streep. She’s been nominated for truly garbage roles (Music of the Heart, anyone?) and this is one of her best performances in a long while, which means she should be assured a spot. However, there may be a small group of voters who list her as a supporting actress instead, which is probably the more correct spot for her. It isn’t likely, since the studios are often insistent on reminding voters of which category is “appropriate”, but it needs mentioning anyway.

Judi Dench is another actress with a history of nominations, often more for bland work (Chocolat) but her work in Notes on a Scandal is juicy and dark, enough to go with the flow and keep her on the list of “probables”.

Penelope Cruz has never been what one would call an Academy favourite, but Volver is unlike any of her Hollywood work. For whatever reason, Cruz is a solid actress is her native Spanish, but in English sometimes just goes off the rails. So with Volver, a big, lush Almodovar picture, Cruz may not get as many total votes as some of the competition, but she will definitely earn enough upper votes to keep her in the game; it is her breakthrough role, something that none of the “Silver Foxes” can claim.

Kate Winslet worries me greatly. Now this is partly because she is my favourite actress in the whole wide world and any perceived snub of Kate is an affront to me. But my worry mostly comes from the fact that at the age of 31, Kate already has four Oscar nominations under her belt. Streep, Dench and Mirren have been lauded before as well, but they’ve all put in some of their best work ever this year, and many voters likely just like to see them still giving their all when so many others from their era have fallen off of the map. I worry that voters will see Kate’s performance (not her best, truly) as something worth listing as a fourth or fifth choice, nowhere near enough to the top to get her in. This leaves her vulnerable to a dark horse candidate with a small number of highly-placed votes, and I’m actually predicting that Kate will be the big snub of the category. Oh, well. I’m sure that they will invite her to be a presenter, at least.

If Kate truly does fall, that means someone will take her spot, and predicting who it will be means thinking about which films are riding momentum right now. Annette Bening’s name had oft been listed in the early days of this Oscar campaign for Running With Scissors, but the film came and went without a peep and the SAG voters would have all seen it in time to judge it. Also, the film has a huge cast, and any support that is out there is likely diffused through them all.

What about Beyonce Knowles? Ah haha, I know. But, remember Chicago? Remember how every single cast member earned a nomination? Oh, wait, Richard Gere didn’t. Ah hahahahaha!!! Sorry, I hate Richard Gere. But, Dreamgirls is in a similar position, and though it is Eddie Murphy and Jennifer Hudson getting all of the kudos, it isn’t impossible for voters to love the film enough to write Beyonce’s name down. Not impossible, but improbable, because if voters feel the need to nominate another female member of the cast, it seems more likely that Anika Noni Rose would be their choice, as unlike Beyonce, she has actually earned positive reviews.

Toni Collette could surprise us all and earn a nomination for her work as the harried mother in Little Miss Sunshine. It is a solid performance, one that anchors the film against the many crazy characters around her, and Lord knows, the film is getting a ton of buzz. I don’t see it happening however, because those anchoring performances tend to be ignored in favour of loonier, flashier fare. If any other cast member will surprise us with a nomination, it would be Steve Carrell.

The Zellwegger is lurking out there with a little film called Miss Potter, in which she plays the title character. Never count the squinty-eyed wonder out, as the Academy voters seem to have a soft spot for her. But did the film get seen? It opened late in theatres, so it will come down to whether the studio got it out there in time. And in the new, shortened period for voters to make up their minds, you would really need a Weinstein to guarantee success in promotion. Oh wait, Miss Potters is being promoted by… The Weinstein Company. Let’s consider Renee a strong, strong dark horse contender.

My last stab at finding a surprise nominee is Naomi Watts, currently starring in The painted Veil with Ed Norton and Live Schreiber. It only just opened and I haven’t seen it, but a glance at the reviews on Rotten Tomatoes shows it to be an old-school period piece, something that Sydney Pollack might have made back in the day. The reviews for Watts are solidly positive and I would have to put her on par with Renee Zellwegger in terms of apparent chances, except that there is no Weinstein attached to her film.

So let us proclaim Renee Zellwegger as our dark horse candidate for the 5^th Oscar nomination, and damn all of the experts who have anointed Kate Winslet has sure to hit the five-timer club. Helen, Meryl, Judi, Penelope and Renee. We’ll know soon enough!

Tim

Guessing the dark horse is hard because there are no trends or indicators to use as guides. For instance, it was easy to guess that Marc Forster was vulnerable for his work on Finding Neverland, but how could one safely assume that it would be Mike Leigh who would take his place for his work on Vera Drake? Similarly, Gary Ross was nowhere near being a lock with Seabiscuit, but only a handful of Oscar prognosticators guessed that it would be Fernando Meirelles earning a surprise nomination for his work on City Of God.

Sometimes the dark horse is an eccentric filmmaker (David Lynch, Mulholland Drive) though others of that ilk have failed (David Cronenberg, A History Of Violence). Sometimes the surprise is a big-name foreign filmmaker (Pedro Almodovar, Talk To Her), sometimes simply the director of an uplifting film (Stephen Daldry, Billy Elliott) or even of a weepie melodrama (Lasse Hallstrom, The Cider House Rules). If there is any constant between these lucky few, it must be that their promoters get a great job of making sure that the Academy voters saw their films.

We previously identified Stephen Frears and the duo of Jonathan Dayton & Valerie Faris as those most at risk of being bumped from the Oscar shortlist. Historically, only one DGA nominee gets bumped, and having just seen Little Miss Sunshine last night, I’m sticking with the idea that Dayton/Faris will be out of luck. We’ll give Stephen Frears a pass.

So who will bump the intrepid directing duo? There is a long list, all of whom are likely to have a small pocket of support amongst Academy directors, but one of whom is likely to reach that crucial 16% level (see previous post for details on that). First up are Alfonso Cuaron (Children of Men) and Guillermo Del Toro (Pan’s Labyrinth), who along with Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu (Babel) make up the Mexican Trio that has Hollywood buzzing this year. All three are apparently worthy of recognition (I’m stilling waiting for Pan’s Labyrinth to play here, so can’t directly comment), but it seems as if they are going to attract the same voters. So let’s say that a significant handful of voters list all three on their ballot; could enough of them list Cuaron as #1 and Del Toro #2, or vice versa, to push one of them past Gonzalez Inarritu? It seems likely that since he has already earned a DGA nom and there is so little time between ballots being due for the DGA and the Academy that Gonzalez Inarritu will remain the one member of the Mexican Trio to get through to the Oscar level, while the other two will come up short.

Next we have to consider Paul Greengrass, who made United 93. Lots of people were stunned to not see his name listed as a DGA nominee, judging from various Oscar websites with message boards. But Greengrass’ film came out ages ago, had a small but significant number of detractors, and also has to contend with the presence of another 9/11 film, from a better-known director, Oliver Stone’s World Trade Center. If a voter wanted to list a 9/11 picture, and liked both films, which would they choose? The one they saw ages ago about the plane (to put it in blunt terms) or the more recent one about the Twin Towers? Just like with the news coverage back in those fateful days, the Towers falling get more attention, and so I think Paul Greengrass’ chances were doomed from the start.

So far we have yet to find a convincing argument for anyone to bump out even a weak nominee like Dayton/Faris, but there is obvious one left to talk about: The Clint.

Clint Eastwood has been talked about for months now, with his pair of Iwo Jima films garnering much discussion. Some people loved Flags of our Fathers, many did not. Some people are raving about Letters From Iwo Jima, many have not even seen it. Eastwood has had such a strong string of recent films that many thought he could even be nominated for both films, pulling a Steven Soderbergh, but apparently the DGA isn’t as apt to nominate you based on your name as some feared. We’re left to wonder if Clint vote-splitted (vote-splat?) or if neither of his films is being well-received? I think it is a case of the older directors choosing to vote for Fathers, you know, the one about the American soldiers taking over Iwo Jima and kicking Japan’s butt, and the younger, more left-leaning voters picking Letters because it is (apparently) the better film and also because picking the one told from the Japanese side just feels like a left-wing thing to do. Where I’m going with this is that I don’t think we will see a rallying behind one film or the other; I think Clint is out of luck this year, though perhaps not for Best Picture (we’ll cover that down the road).

Which leaves me with only one last, crazy choice as a dark horse contender, and that is Robert Altman for A Prairie Home Companion. Everyone knows that he never won an Oscar for direction. Everyone knows that he died this past year. Could enough voters look at this year’s crop of frontrunners, like Dayton/Faris, Frears and maybe even Bill Condon, and think “Screw it, I’m putting Robert Altman’s name down”? I think this is a possibility, because I doubt anyone will list Altman’s name on the fifth spot on their ballot. Or fourth. Or third. If a voter writes the name Robert Altman, it will be on the very top line of the ballot, because they will making a statement with their choice. Unlike Clint Eastwood, who will likely be listed in a lot of #2 spots behind Martin Scorsese, or Bill Condon, who will have a lot #2 and #3 votes, Altman’s are #1 all the way. The only question is, am I right that a significant number of directors will want to honour him in this way? We’ll see, but I’m going out on a limb to say that Robert Altman will be 2006’s surprise nominee for Best Director at the Academy Awards.

Thoughts?

Tim

I know…

I know.

There’s always a chance.

But no.

It’s over.

And I’ll tell you why: because the Directors Guild nominees were announced yesterday. And your guy wasn’t there.

The DGA nominations always come out right around when the Academy Award nominations are due, and thanks to their timing, they provide a certain snapshot of the future. On average, four out of the five DGA nominees move on to Academy Award nominations, and their films, often all five, move on to Best Picture. What can be said about the directors who fail to earn Oscar nods after some DGA love? Well lots, actually, but none of it can be consistently applied to each occurrence. The main thing to consider is the different voting systems of the Guild and Academy. The Guild’s nominees are chosen based on who was listed the most on members’ ballots. The Academy however uses a preferential system where each member can list up to five choices – once a film garners about 16% of the first choice votes, it becomes a nominee (I’d explain the 16% number but it’s not that interesting, trust me). So the accountants drop the films with the lowest #1 votes, and move those ballots to their second choice, etc. until five nominees are determined. This mean that though a film or person can be mentioned often (like Gary Ross, director of Seabiscuit, for instance), if they are seldom listed near the top of the ballot (like Gary Ross, director of Seabiscuit, for instance), they may not become an Oscar nominee.

It’s all about the love, is what I’m saying. Look at the directors who failed to get Oscar nods. Marc Forster for Finding Neverland. Gary Ross for Seabiscuit. Cameron Crowe for Almost Famous. They all kinda feel like fourth choices, don’t they? Compare that to Ang Lee for Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon or Peter Jackson for Return Of The King or Steven Spielberg for Schindler’s List. They all feel like first choices.

This year’s DGA nominees are:

Bill Condon – Dreamgirls

Jonathan Dayton & Valerie Faris – Little Miss Sunshine

Stephen Frears – The Queen

Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu – Babel

Martin Scorsese – The Departed

Do any of those feel like fourth or fifth choices? Try to think of whether a film is heralded because of, or in spite of its director. Babel may have strong performances, but it is Gonzalez Inarritu getting most of the buzz. The Departed is overflowing with strong male performances, but it is Marty getting all of the love. And Dreamgirls? Well okay, Jennifer Hudson is getting most of the love there, but Bill Condon is getting his fair share as well. None of them feel like fifth choices to me.

Stephen Frears may be a third of fourth choice nominee. His name has only occasionally been attached to a heralded film (The Grifters would probably be the last big one), and though The Queen is on everyone’s faves list from 2006, it is because of Helen Mirren, not him. So let’s consider him vulnerable.

Jonathan Dayton & Valerie Faris are definitely vulnerable. Everyone loved Little Miss Sunshine, but you know why? Because of little Abigail Breslin and the way she closed out the film. They love it because it is a little cinematic treat. Not, at least I think not, because of Dayton & Faris’ direction. So if anyone is getting booted this year, it simply has to be them. But the big question is, will they? We’ll figure that out next…

Tim Chandler