Oscar 2023-24 – Predicting the Winners

Those of you who’ve been following this blog for several years know that I consider myself something of a movie buff. Furthermore – and at the risk of sounding like a braggart – I historically have a knack for predicting Oscar winners each February or March. It has been a few years since I posted anything on the subject, but since I found myself with a bit of extra time this year while another writing project languished, I thought I’d wax prophetic on this year’s Oscar nominees.

Best Picture

American Fiction
Anatomy of a Fall
Barbie
The Holdovers
Killers of the Flower Moon
Maestro
Oppenheimer
Past Lives
Poor Things
The Zone of Interest

Will win: Oppenheimer
Should win: Oppenheimer
Watch out for: The Holdovers
Should have been nominated: Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse

The decision in 2022 by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences to open the Best Picture category to an even ten films instead of a varying five to ten was, I think, a smart one, and with so many independent films in particular being released, I can’t help but wonder if the Academy will ever expand the nominee slots for the other categories as well. At any rate, I saw every film nominated for Best Picture, and unlike years past, when there were always two or three “What the heck” nominees, I agree with all ten films that were nominated this year. Frankly, there isn’t a bad apple in the bunch.

I predict higher-than-usual viewership for this year’s Oscars, in part because two of the year’s highest-grossing films, “Barbie” and “Oppenheimer” – collectively marketed as “Barbenheimer” last July – are duking it out in several categories. Of course, the frontrunner for this prize – pretty much since it opened – is “Oppenheimer,” part biopic and part four-alarm emergency about the tortured physicist who invented the atomic bomb, only to wage a war with his conscience about the weapon of mass destruction he brought into the world. At 180 minutes, it’s a beast of a film, one of those great, historical message movies, like 1991’s “JFK” and 2004’s “Munich,” that simply leaves viewers feeling wrung out by its conclusion. Subtle it ain’t…but then, the subject of nuclear proliferation is not something to be taken lightly.

Believe it or not, “Oppenheimer” is not the category’s longest film. That honor goes to “Killers of the Flower Moon,” Martin Scorsese’s 206-minute, late-career triumph and another true tale, this one about the rash of 1920s killings of Osage men and women in a sinister – and overt – plot by white settlers in the region to take control of newfound Osage oil riches. “Killers of the Flower Moon” is, cumulatively, the most well-reviewed film of the year, and as an important a tale to tell as that of J. Robert Oppenheimer, but alas, it only seemed prone to give “Oppenheimer” a run for Oscar gold for the first two weeks of its release, after which time Universal rereleased Oppenheimer for a second theatrical run. If there is an underdog, it’s “The Holdovers.” Alexander Payne’s dramedy about a crusty prep school English teacher tasked with watching a group of students left behind over winter break is sure to endure as a holiday classic, and tugs perfectly at your heartstrings and your funny bone.

If you’re curious to learn more about the other Best Picture nominees, know that “American Fiction” explores what happens when a struggling, intellectual Black writer pens a profane, guttural parody of gang life as a lark, only for the book to become a runaway smash and for him to feel like a fraud. Know that “Anatomy Fall” is a French film about an unsmiling wife and mother whose visually-impaired son returns from a walk to find his father and her husband dead below the steps of their Alpine chateau…but from an accidental fall or from a deliberate push? Know that “Maestro,” the second film written by, produced by, directed by, and starring Bradley Cooper, explores the life of the legendary Leonard Bernstein, particularly his complicated marriage. Know that “Past Lives” follows the reunion of childhood sweethearts from Seoul, 20 years later in New York, after they’ve each moved on with their lives…or have they? Know that “Poor Things” is a feminist tale disguised as a horror comedy in which a slow-witted, ungainly, amnesiac woman discovers first her memory, then her sexuality, and finally her voice. Finally, know that “The Zone of Interest” is an experimental, German-language Holocaust drama in which we hear, but never see, a single atrocity committed by its main male character, Auschwitz Commandant Rudolf Höss.

Best Director

Jonathan Glazer, The Zone of Interest
Yorgos Lanthimos, Poor Things
Christopher Nolan, Oppenheimer
Martin Scorsese, Killers of the Flower Moon
Justine Triet, Anatomy of a Fall

Will win: Christopher Nolan
Should win: Christopher Nolan
Watch out for: Justine Triet
Should have been nominated: Greta Gerwig, Barbie

First things first: There was much furor on nomination morning after the names were announced for Best Director and “Barbie” director Greta Gerwig’s was not one of them. I am a huge fan of her imaginative film and agree that she earned a place alongside everyone else.

That being said, there are only five slots in this category, and I shouldn’t imply that one of the actual nominees was less deserving than Gerwig. This year’s slate of nominees includes one previous winner (Scorsese), two previous nominees (Lanthimos and Nolan), and two first-timer nominees (Glazer and Triet). As with Best Picture, Martin Scorsese’s name came up as a possible spoiler immediately upon the release of “Killers of the Flower Moon.” He is 81, he has never made a bad film, and – as hard as this is to believe – he has only won Best Director once (for 2006’s “The Departed”). But alas, once Christopher Nolan’s Oppenheimer was rereleased in theaters in late December, its distributors hoping to break the $1 billion global box office mark, all focus on the Oscar race returned to Nolan.

He deserves to win. Aside from James Cameron, Nolan is the only director working today who can open movies based on his name alone. His films are intense, visceral, and loud. If there are any marks against him, it would be that he could be accused of over-directing. Then again, he packs enough ideals and visuals for three movies into one of his, and his command of the craft is impeccable.

Is there anyone who can stop the Nolan train? It is no longer Scorsese, as his film failed to garner expected Lead Actor and Adapted Screenplay nods. It could be Justine Triet, who crafted France’s multi-lingual murder mystery/ courtroom drama “Anatomy of a Fall” with aplomb. But probably not.

Best Actor

Bradley Cooper, Maestro
Colman Domingo, Rustin
Paul Giamatti, The Holdovers
Cillian Murphy, Oppenheimer
Jeffrey Wright, American Fiction

Will win: Cillian Murphy
Should win: Cillian Murphy
Watch out for: Paul Giamatti
Should have been nominated: Leonardo DiCaprio, Killers of the Flower Moon

The Best Actor race often finds actors who played real human beings duking it out for the statuette. Four cases in point: Daniel Day-Lewis’s Christy Brown beating Tom Cruise’s Ron Kovic in 1990 (“My Left Foot” vs. “Born on the Fourth of July”); Philip Seymour Hoffman’s Truman Capote besting Joaquin Phoenix’s Johnny Cash in 2005 (“Capote” vs. “Walk the Line”); Eddie Redmayne’s Stephen Hawking trumping Benedict Cumberbatch’s Alan Turing in 2015 (“The Theory of Everything” vs. “The Imitation Game”); Rami Malek’s Freddy Mercury trouncing Christian Bale’s Dick Cheney in 2019 (“Bohemian Rhapsody” vs. “Vice”).

So I fully expected Bradley Cooper’s Leonard Bernstein to duke it out with Cillian Murphy’s J. Robert Oppenheimer this year, or face Leonardo DiCaprio’s Ernest Burkhart in the second round. I’m talking, of course, about the films “Maestro,” “Oppenheimer,” and “Killers of the Flower Moon.” So color me surprised when mixed reviews for “Maestro” somehow reduced 12-time nominee (!) Cooper’s chances here, despite raves for his performance as the legendary composer/conductor. What’s more, DiCaprio wasn’t even nominated! His turn as the spineless co-conspirator of crimes against Osage Native Americans is one of his two or three greatest performances, and while he’s won in this category before (playing another real-life figure, maimed fur trader Hugh Glass in 2015’s “The Revenant”), I still expected to see him nominated this year. It seems silly to suggest that his spot was “taken” by one of the other nominees, but were the Academy to reveal the actual votes, I suspect he didn’t miss out on a nod by much.

I do want to give shout outs to first-time nominees Colman Domingo and Jeffrey Wright, and to this year’s category underdog, Paul Giamatti, each phenomenal. Domingo plays another real person, Civil Rights activist Bayard Rustin, whose unabashed homosexuality was as much a part of his identity as his tireless struggle for equality. Between his work in “Rustin” and as Mister in the vibrant “The Color Purple” remake, he’s had a terrific year. I fully expect him to someday win an Oscar…just not this year. Wright, usually more of a character actor than a lead (the exception being the biopic “Basquiat”), sunk his teeth into the fully-fleshed out role of Thelonius “Monk” Ellison in “American Fiction.” He plays a struggling Black novelist whose extended family drama couldn’t have come at a worse time.

And then there’s Paul Giamatti. No one, and I mean no one, plays miserly curmudgeon better than Giamatti. He should’ve gotten nominations for playing one in 2003’s “American Splendor” and in 2004’s “Sideways,” so it’s high time he earned his first Lead Actor nomination. In “The Holdovers,” he reteams with “Sideways” director Alexander Payne for a 1970s-set dramedy that sees him as a prep school English teacher who is tasked with minding the Christmas break holdovers – that is, students who won’t be spending the holiday with their families. His embittered, aging, glass-eyed sad sack is the perfect, contemporary Scrooge, and the beloved Giamatti is the only nominee that may block a haunting Cillian Murphy from Oscar gold.   

Best Actress

Annette Bening, Nyad
Lily Gladstone, Killers of the Flower Moon
Sandra Hüller, Anatomy of a Fall
Carey Mulligan, Maestro
Emma Stone, Poor Things

Will win: Lily Gladstone
Should win: Lily Gladstone
Watch out for: Emma Stone
Should have been nominated: Fantasia Barrino, The Color Purple

The 2020s have been kinder than any previous decade in offering meaty roles for film actresses to sink their teeth into. From Frances McDormand’s heartbreaking minimalist in 2020’s “Nomadland;” to Olivia Colman’s decidedly non-matriarchal vacationer in 2021’s “The Lost Daughter;” to Cate Blanchett’s terrifying orchestra conductor in 2022’s “Tár;” to Michelle Yeoh’s multi-universe laundress in the same year’s “Everything Everywhere All at Once,” there has been a veritable master class of female performances and roles to choose from lately. (And of the four I listed, two of them won and two of them didn’t.)

This year’s race is no exception. Four-time previous nominee Annette Bening gives an intense, deglamorized performance as distance swimmer Diana Nyad in “Nyad,” and elevates a standard sports underdog story into something with real stakes. First-time nominee Lily Gladstone displays a memorable balance of quiet intelligence and heartbreaking weakness as Mollie, the Osage wife of a white opportunist, in “Killers of the Flower Moon.” German Actress Sandra Hüller has had a very good year, starring in two Best Picture nominees. In “Anatomy of a Murder,” for which she is nominated, she plays Sandra, an icy novelist whose husband died under mysterious circumstances. The trial to determine her involvement features fireworks better than any courtroom thriller since, I’d say, 1992’s “A Few Good Men.” Carey Mulligan garners her third nomination for “Maestro,” playing Felicia Montealegre, the long-suffering wife of closeted composer/conductor Leonard Bernstein. Finally, previous Best Actress winner Emma Stone (for 2016’s “La La Land”) plays Bella Baxter, a feminist Frankenstein’s monster of sorts, in the delightfully wonky “Poor Things.”

Where is Margot Robbie, so good in last summer’s “Barbie?” Not here. Nor is Greta Lee, heartbreaking as a wistful Korean-American in “Past Lives.” Nor is Helen Mirren, whose tireless, chain-smoking Golda Meir is unrecognizable behind convincing, Oscar-nominated makeup in “Golda.” Nor, for that matter, is Fantasia Barrino, sensational as Celie in the musical remake of “The Color Purple.” Each of these actresses held their own against the five eventual nominees, but as with the previous few years, the category is simply too crowded. For a cinephile like myself, this is not a bad problem to have.

Confession: I love Mulligan in “Maestro.” Costar (and director) Cooper is good, but Mulligan is better. She earned kudos for the cancer arc that occupies the last third of the film, but there is so much more to her performance here. In early scenes, when Felicia and Leonardo first flirt with one another, her line delivery is so bouncy that she reminded me of 1940s-era Katharine Hepburn. I likewise love Stone in “Poor Things.” Her sexually-charged performance is certainly the bravest among the nominees, and it’s left many prognosticators predicting she will win. And she may. Ultimately, though, I think Gladstone, the category’s first Native American nominee, will take home the statuette. Her nomination is an important one, and I suspect acknowledgment of that fact by a diverse Academy will propel her to Oscar gold. That is not to say she doesn’t otherwise deserve to win, however. Gladstone’s Mollie is the emotional core of “Killers of the Flower Moon,” and the film’s climax pivots on her character’s brave journey, halfway through the film, to Washington, DC. If Gladstone walks home empty handed on Sunday, the actress who bests her will also have “Stone” in her last name. Either way, this is the evening’s tightest race.

Best Supporting Actor

Sterling K. Brown, American Fiction
Robert De Niro, Killers of the Flower Moon
Robert Downey Jr., Oppenheimer
Ryan Gosling, Barbie
Mark Ruffalo, Poor Things

Will win: Robert Downey, Jr.
Should win: Robert Downey, Jr.
Watch out for: Ryan Gosling       
Should have been nominated: Charles Melton, May December

The Best Supporting Actor race has more or less been decided since “Barbenheimer” was released. Wait, you mean “Oppenheimer,” right, gringo? Or did you mean to write “Barbie?” No, you read correctly. Robert Downey Jr. and Ryan Gosling have been the frontrunners to beat since their respective films opened on the same day last July. The legendary Robert De Niro, a two-time Oscar winner (but not since 1981, when he won Best Actor for “Raging Bull”), spent a few weeks atop the “predicted winners” chart when “Killers of the Flower Moon” opened last fall, and Charles Melton was seen as the presumptive nominee to beat when “May December” opened…for all of five minutes. Fast forward a few months, and while De Niro made the cut for his villainous turn as “King” Hale in Scorsese’s dark drama, Melton, so good as the much-manipulated younger husband of an unstable older woman, was not among the nominees.

I’m happy for the praise Downey Jr. and Gosling are receiving. As Lewis Strauss, the Washington, DC insider who yearns to have the ear of genius scientists J. Robert Oppenheimer and Albert Einstein, Downey Jr. is the only on-screen villain in Christopher Nolan’s three-hour behemoth. His jealousy-fueled, black-and-white rants in “Oppenheimer’s” final hour are the scenery-chewing moments that any dramatic actor craves, and Downey, Jr. delivers the best performance of his career. And as Ken, the mimbo, bleach-blond surfer of plastic waves in Barbieland who discovers how to shift the balance of gender power dynamics in his factor after visiting the real world, Gosling sends up his own macho image rather brilliantly. The fact that he can sing Matchbox 20 covers and dance-fight like nobody’s business is the icing on the cake. This is a brilliant comedic performance.

Downey Jr. has the edge on Gosling, having won nearly every precursor award since the Golden Globes. His losing on Sunday would be one of the greatest upsets in Oscar history, so you can safely bet on Downey Jr. triumphing. In addition to the three actors whose names start with “R,” I’d be remiss without mentioning the other nominees, first-timer Sterling K. Brown and fourth-timer Mark Ruffalo. Brown, a long-time character actor of both film and television, impresses as Cliff Ellison, the gay, drug-addicted, estranged brother to Jeffrey Wright’s Monk, while Ruffalo almost steals the film from costars Emma Stone and Willem Dafoe with his hilarious turn as the memorably named Duncan Wedderburn, scoundrel and cuckhold extraordinaire. Everyone’s favorite Hulk will someday win an Oscar…but not this year.

Best Supporting Actress

Emily Blunt, Oppenheimer
Danielle Brooks, The Color Purple
America Ferrera, Barbie
Jodie Foster, Nyad
Da’Vine Joy Randolph, The Holdovers

Will win: Da’Vine Joy Randolph
Should win: Da’Vine Joy Randolph
Watch out for: Emily Blunt
Should have been nominated: Julianne Moore, May December

Prior to the January 23^rd announcement of this year’s Best Supporting Actress Oscar nominees, there were three surefire nominees: Emily Blunt, who plays the underestimated Kitty Oppenheimer, in “Oppenheimer;” Jodie Foster, delivering her best turn in years as Bonnie Stoll, Diana Nyad’s lover-turned-coach, a woman as hard-willed as Diana herself, in “Nyad;” and Da’Vine Joy Randolph, a grieving mother and prep school cafeteria worker, in “The Holdovers.” The eventual inclusion of Danielle Brooks, as the strong-willed Sofia in “The Color Purple” (a role originated by Oprah Winfrey in the 1985 original), and of America Ferrera as Mattel executive secretary Gloria in “Barbie, aren’t surprising, persay, but they were less certain. For Brooks, the questions was a simple one of which supporting actress from “The Color Purple” – Brooks, Taraji P. Henson (as Shug Avery), or newcomer Phylicia Pearl Mpasi (as young Celie) – would make the cut in such a crowded category. For Ferrera, the question was whether voters would give credit for the memorable Act III speech she gave to the actress herself…or to the writers.

But man, oh man. Would that this category could accommodate more than just five nominees. In addition to the not-nominated Henson and Mpasi, I would have loved to see Sandra Hüller make the cut for her chilling turn as Auschwitz camp commandant’s Rudolf Höss’s wife Hedwig in “The Zone of Interest;” she’s as good here as she is in “Anatomy of a Fall.” I would have also liked to see Vanessa Kirby nominated for her role as Empress Joséphine in “Napoleon,” and, even moreso, Julianne Moore as the toxic Gracie, a disgraced former high school teacher who has wrapped her much-younger husband, Charles Melton’s submissive Joe, around her fingers in “May December.” If you’ve read this far, I hope you’ll seek out these films on the streaming/VOD market.

Earlier, I wrote that Randolph was one of the three presumed nominees. More than that, she has been the presumed winner since this race kicked off last fall. If I’m not mistaken, she’s won every precursor award since the Oscar race began, and she is seemingly unstoppable. Her Mary, grateful that her job offered her son a free education, even though he is no longer alive and even thought the work keeps her from visiting her sister as often as she’d like, is the emotional center of “The Holdovers,” and her character helps bring Paul Giamatti’s misanthropic Paul out of his own doldrums. Emily Blunt, who has never been nominated prior to “Oppenheimer,” has been delivering strong performances for years. Her nomination as the hard-drinking Kitty is much overdue and richly deserved, especially considering how easily she could have been eclipsed by her male costars Cillian Murphy and Robert Downey Jr., both of whom have meatier roles. That being said, I don’t expect her to beat Randolph, who is simply sublime.

Best Adapted Screenplay

American Fiction
Barbie
Oppenheimer
Poor Things
The Zone of Interest

Will win: American Fiction
Should win: Oppenheimer
Watch out for: Oppenheimer
Should have been nominated: Killers of the Flower Moon

The biggest surprise in this category is the presence of “Barbie,” which was not based on any particular story, ending up in the adapted rather than original category. Apparently, the Academy decided that because the characters are already the intellectual property of Mattel, the film’s whip-smart script, cowritten by director Greta Gerwig and partner-turned-husband Noah Baumbach, must be considered an adapted one. Alas, this decision appears to have been at the expense of Martin Scorsese and Eric Roth’s dense “Killers of the Flower Moon” screenplay. The lack of a nomination here also bodes poorly for that film’s Best Picture chances. Scorsese and Roth changed the focus of their film – based on the David Grann book “Killers of the Flower Moon: The Osage Murders and the Birth of the FBI” – from the FBI to the Osage themselves. I agree with their decision from an emotional standpoint, but it appears to have worked against them from an awards perspective.

Interestingly enough, “Barbie” has a medium chance at winning here, should Academy voters wish to compensate for Gerwig’s lack of a nomination for Best Director. That being said, I think this category is a two-horse race between the talky, cerebral “Oppenheimer” – based on the 2005 biography “American Prometheus: The Triumph and Tragedy of J. Robert Oppenheimer” by Kai Bird and Martin J. Sherwin – and the funny, clever “American Fiction” – based the 2001 novel “Erasure” by Percival Everett. While I think Christopher Nolan’s literate “Oppenheimer” screenplay deserves to win, I expect “American Fiction” to take home the prize; its small scale, audience-pleasing story is the kind of screenplay the Academy often awards when it decides to spread the wealth instead of giving the top prize to the same film.

Best Original Screenplay

Anatomy of a Fall
The Holdovers
Maestro
May December
Past Lives

Will win: Anatomy of a Fall
Should win: Anatomy of a Fall
Watch out for: The Holdovers
Should have been nominated: Air

When “Past Lives” was released last spring, I thought it was the best film of the year. Many critics agreed with me, and even the later releases of much-anticipated dramas like “Oppenheimer” and “Killers of the Flower Moon” did little to move the film’s ranking further down year-end top ten lists. Its presence here is of no surprise, and it’s in good company, alongside another bilingual drama (“Anatomy of a Fall”), a prep school dramedy (“The Holdovers”), and two Netflix productions: a one-part biopic, one-part love story (“Maestro”), and a fictionalization of the Mary Kay Letourneau scandal (“May December”). The breezy Ben Affleck film “Air,” about Nike’s courting of Michael Jordan, would have fit nicely into this category as well.

As much as I love “Past Lives,” however, I find the tense, twisting narrative of the dialogue-heavy French film “Anatomy of a Fall” to be the best-written original screenplay. I think Academy voters agree with me, as it’s won multiple writing awards this season – more, I think, than any other film. There’s a chance that “The Holdovers” could win here instead; think “Dead Poets Society” with a holiday setting and remember that that 1989 dramedy also won Best Original Screenplay. But I think “Anatomy,” with its explosive husband-and-wife flashback scene being the perhaps the best scene in all of 2023 cinema, will prevail.

Other categories:

Best Animated Feature: In a surprisingly tight race, Sony’s exhilarating “Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse” will narrowly edge out Studio Ghibli’s imaginative “The Boy and the Heron.”

Best International Feature: Since France failed to submit “Anatomy of a Fall” for consideration, the German-language, UK/Poland co-production “The Zone of Interest” will win.

Best Documentary Feature: “20 Days in Mariupol” will win. But why wasn’t the moving “STILL: A Michael J. Fox Movie” nominated?!

Best Documentary Short: “The Last Repair Shop” will edge out “The ABCs of Book Banning.”

Best Live Action Short: “The Wonderful Story of Henry Sugar,” one of four short Roald Dahl adaptations made for Netflix by “The Grand Budapest Hotel” wunderkind Wes Anderson, will win.

Best Animated Short: “War is Over! Inspired by the Music of John and Yoko”

Best Costume Design: A tight race, with “Barbie” triumphing over “Poor Things” and the more-deserving “Killers of the Flower Moon.”

Best Production Design: Another tight race, with “Poor Things” besting “Barbie” this time. But why isn’t “Asteroid City” a nominee?!

Best Makeup and Hairstyling: “Maestro” beats “Poor Things” and “Golda,” despite early controversy over whether Bradley Cooper’s prosthetic nose was in good taste.

Best Visual Effects: Everyone expected “Oppenheimer” to win this for its centerpiece Trinity test sequence, but the film was surprisingly snubbed here. As such, I think the creature design in Japan’s “Godzilla Minus One” will triumph over the stunning Battle of Austerlitz sequence from Ridley Scott’s “Napoleon.”

Best Sound: Christopher Nolan’s films have triumphed in this category before, and I expected they will again when “Oppenheimer” wins…but don’t underestimate the brilliant mixing of the tricky, much more subtle “The Zone of Interest.”

Best Film Editing: “Oppenheimer”

Best Cinematography: IMAX + color + black-and-white = Oscar gold for “Oppenheimer.”

Best Original Song: The tender, Billie Eilish and FINNEAS-penned ballad “What Was I Made For?” will win over the jaunty, Ryan Gosling-sung “I’m Just Ken” from the same film, “Barbie.”

Best Original Score: Ludwig Göransson’s wall-to-wall “Oppenheimer” score is widely expected to win, but there is some sentiment for “Killers of the Flower Moon’s” Robbie Robertson, who passed away while the film was in post-production.

____________________________

Who do you think will win? Drop a comment below…and be sure to watch the 96^th Academy Awards, hosted by Jimmy Kimmel, this Sunday on ABC-TV at 7pm EST/4pm PST.