Think last year was a tough race?
Compared to 2002, 2001 was a piece of cake. Sure, there were some differences between the various industry organizations–some liked the indie In the Bedroom, others preferred the musical spectacular Moulin Rouge–but by the time the Golden Globes were handed out, A Beautiful Mind had Oscar written all over it.
The 2002 race for Oscar gold, however, is simply all over the map–and it may be a testament to the astounding level of quality films last year that makes the Best Picture frontrunner so unclear.
Almost every critics’ association has picked a different film. The Los Angeles critics chose the quirky About Schmidt while the New York and Chicago critics tapped the melodrama Far From Heaven. Boston, San Francisco and the National Society of Film Critics picked the Holocaust drama The Pianist. The National Film Board of Review chose the intense The Hours while the musical spectacular Chicago was the Broadcast Film Critics best bet. Those crazy online critics (wait, that’s me) and the Las Vegas critics picked Confessions of a Dangerous Mind. Go figure.
Then came the Golden Globes, what many consider the true barometer of what will go on to win the Academy Award. The Hollywood Foreign Press Association certainly narrowed the field when it anointed The Hours best dramatic motion picture and Chicago best musical or comedy.
Did The Hours and Chicago move ahead by a nose? Or will the Academy of Motion Pictures and Sciences surprise us with an unexpected contender? In this Oscar race, anything is possible.
Let’s weigh the pros and cons of this year’s Best Picture candidates–and rate their chances of winning the Oscar on a scale from one to ten, ten being highest.
For it: It’s a musical, for the love of Pete! This reemerging genre is just too hot for words right now, as people are making the jaw-dropping realization your everyday movie star like Renee Zellweger or Richard Gere can actually sing and dance. Plus, the film’s narrative about two women on Chicago’s Murderess Row in the 1920s vying for the spotlight, interwoven with musical numbers, is just a lot of fun to watch. And, of course, it won the Golden Globe.
Against it: As much as everyone has been wowed by the film’s theatricality, its still a musical and may not have the weight required of a Best Picture Oscar. I mean, where’s the drama?
Rating: 8
For it: Now here’s what the Academy just eats up–sweeping epic period piece, bloody battles, historical backdrops, great acting–all rolled up into one powerful film. Gangs pulls no punches and shoves 1860s New York–warts (so many warts) and all–in your face whether you like it or not. It’s not a comfortable film to watch but an important one–and Academy voters admire that quality. Plus the Academy may feel it’s time to give director Martin Scorsese, who has never won an Oscar, his due.
Against it: The film has many knocks against it. First of all, it took forever to get released, having been pushed back a few times since its original date in December 2001. Many say Scorsese indulges himself too much, that this is not one of his best films, and that the main story is not compelling enough to sustain the weight of the historical context. On top of that, it failed to win the Golden Globe. It’s going to be tough call, but other worthy films may edge it out of a Best Picture win.
Rating: 7
For it: Want to know the honest truth? Even though this film is a heartbreaking, achingly beautiful, time-spanning portrait of three very different women, with unbelievable performances by absolutely everyone (Julianne Moore, Meryl Streep, Nicole Kidman, Ed Harris, Stephen Dillane, Miranda Richardson and so on), and a director (Stephen Daldry) whose meticulous guidance makes the film a seamless moment in time, The Hours ultimately made its mark by winning the Golden Globe–plain and simple. It’s now in each Academy voter’s individual consciousness.
Against it: Not a whole lot. The only thing that could hurt the film is the fact it is a bona fide “chick flick” and may not appeal to everyone. But that’s stretching it.
Rating: 9
The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers
For it: If you follow the guidelines for why Gangs of New York fits into the Academy’s Best Picture frame, then The Two Towers should fall right into that description as well. A period piece of the highest level, it has massive, violent battles and a true adventurous quest at its heart. Plus, there are Hobbits, Orcs, Ents and Wizards thrown in for good measure.
Against it: Fantasy epics are just always going to be a hard sell. Still, it’s the firm belief of many that the Academy will wait until 2003’s third and final installment The Return of the King to finally give this tremendous undertaking by director Peter Jackson its rightful due.
Rating: 6
The Pianist
For it: The Holocaust. Throughout the Academy’s history, it’s been proven time and again that members vote for stories about this horrific but tremendously important moment in history. Powered by the sole performance of Adrien Brody as real-life Polish pianist Wladyslaw Szpilman and from the heart of director Roman Polanski, who lived through the experience, The Pianist takes the story of survival to its fullest.
Against it: Since the Academy gave a Holocaust movie (Schindler’s List) the Best Picture Oscar not so long ago, not as many people have seen it, and because the competition is very stiff this year, Polanski’s film may be passed over.
Rating: 5
