MJ's OSCAR PICKS 2021: LOCKDOWN EDITION

Where do I begin

To tell the story of how great a love can be

The sweet love story that is older than the sea

The simple truth about the love she brings to me

Where do I start?

Fifty years ago, the baroque-esque sounds of a single piano played the now iconic notes from Francis Lai’s Oscar-winning “Best Original Score” as the camera zoomed in on the opening shot of a young Ryan O'Neal sitting alone on a snowy bench overlooking Central Park’s skating rink, asking what is arguably the ultimate spoiler query, "What can you say about a 25 year old girl who died?"

Whoa! Did he just give away the ending?

Hollywood romances - even tragedies - never gave away the ending at the get-go, at least not this bluntly. Love Story, based on Yale Classics professor Erich Segal's best-selling novel, began to chip away stereotypes of love, romance, even star-crossed endings (we'd need a few more years before Woody Allen's classic, Annie Hall, re-defined the romantic comedy’s notion of a happy ending). Okay, so I’ve already invoked the “W” word and I’m only two paragraphs into my annual predictions. Sue me. Or, better yet, consider all the ways in which movies (many of which were written and directed by Allen) have explored, expressed and re-imagined love. Think about that, and we’ll circle back in a minute.

Love Story generally received positive (if measured) reviews and also a few well-placed barbs. Film critic Judith Crist memorably described it as “Camille with bullshit,” and Gene Siskel, moaning about the movie’s lack of character development among the two leads (Ryan O’Neal and model-turned-actress Ali MacGraw), argued that “love by Fiat doesn’t work well in film.” Yet, despite its contrived plot and tear-jerking induced scenes, Love Story resonated with audiences so much that it still ranks #9 on the American Film Institute’s list of the 100 Greatest Love Stories.

The film literally swept the Golden Globes (when the Globes were more concerned w/honoring quality and less invested in who walked the red carpet?): MacGraw won Best Actress in a Drama, Arthur Hiller won Best Director, Segal won for his Adapted Screenplay, Lai won for Best Original Score and the film won Best Drama. A few weeks later, Oscar responded with seven nominations, ultimately yielding only one win for Lai’s evocative score.

So why am I waxing rhapsodic (I try to work that phrase in every year, if possible) about a schmaltzy love story that earned one measly Oscar a half-century ago?

Well, for one thing, the film oddly holds up. Spending the last year watching movies from home, I’ve tried to revisit favorites to see how well they stand the test of time. Some – like Godfather I and II – are classic in look and feel. Both transcend movie fads and actors’ fleeting popularity. Others, like Peter Bogdonovich’s ground-breaking (for its time) What’s Up, Doc? (and another successful Ryan O’Neal vehicle in terms of his comedic chops) does not fare as well, with its early-1970s trendiness undercutting some of its best comic bits.

I was expecting to make it through maybe a half-hour of Love Story, figuring MacGraw’s “poor but smart” Radcliffe music wonk Jenny Cavilleri and O’Neal’s “stupid but rich” Harvard preppie Oliver Barrett IV would gag me before I finished my popcorn (yes, I do eat popcorn when I watch a movie – what other food choice is there?). In fact, just the opposite happened. I was taken back to the first time I saw Love Story with my mom and aunt Helen (the movie was rated “R” and I was too young to go alone or just with friends) at the Great Northern Theater in North Olmsted, OH. Before being turned into a multi-plex several years later, the Great Northern shopping center housed one of the last big movie theaters and an equally large screen that could show films in cinemascope (Quentin Tarantino would be proud).

I had already read Love Story and memorized key lines from the book. Saving my allowance (as I had for Zefferelli’s Romeo and Juliet a few years earlier), I bought the entire sountrack: four albums with the entire film on vinyl (for younger readers, there was a time before i-Tunes and MPC3’s where we used a now anachronistic device called a record player). I used to listen to it in my room, reliving favorite scenes and musing that this was a love story for the ages.

Several years later, a sequel appeared: Oliver’s Story, a lame attempt to capitalize on the film’s success, this time focusing on Barrett’s discovery of a new love (Candice Bergen) in the years following Jenny’s death. Big mistake. Not only was the movie awful (even O’Neal admitted he never saw it), there was absolutely no chemistry between the lead actors. It was like revisiting Gone With the Wind after Rhett leaves Scarlett on the stairwell, and then replacing Clark Gable and Vivian Leigh with John Belushi and Debra Winter. Come to think of it, there was a sequel attempt to GWTW on TV back in the 1990s (w/Timothy Dalton as Rhett and Joanne Whalley as Scarlett). Ugh. Maybe they should have remembered the post-Love Story’s debacle.

Anyway, Love Story holds up, maybe in the same way Gone With the Wind did for my mom. I remember taking her and my aunt Helen to the 50th anniversary of GWTW back in 1989 (Cedar Lee Theater in Cleveland Heights, OH), and all the women of a certain age in the audience screamed when the camera panned in on Rhett Butler (Clark Gable). Shades of Sinatra, Elvis and the Beatles….and maybe even Rick Springfield, Bon Jovi and Justin Bieber. Every generation has its love story and its pop culture icons.

Now, fifty years later, another pair of star-crossed lovers appear......

Only this time we won’t see any vestige of it at the Oscars. In the growing category of “movies I loved that didn’t get recognized” this year’s award goes to Supernova, a love story for the 21st century, this time with the ill-fated lovers played by Colin Firth and Stanley Tucci. From the beginning, we learn that Tucci’s acclaimed novelist (Tusker) is coping with early-onset dementia. His partner Sam (Firth’s a concert pianist) has given up touring to take his longtime companion on one last trip to England’s Lake Country.

Their relationship as they knew it is slipping away in simple, almost inconsequential ways (Tusker is seen fumbling with how to button his shirt when Sam gently finishes the task in the same way a parent might wipe chocolate milk off a child’s face), and quiet moments. This is an exquisite, poignantly told story, beautiful acted by Firth and Tucci (also longtime friends, but not lovers, in real life), with Tucci’s Tusker providing the meaning for the movie’s title. The film isn’t showy or commercial enough for the Oscars these days: no special effects or in-your-face political message. Just a placid, if unconventional tale of love as old as the stars, one that flickers on the (TV) screen and then slowly finds its way into your heart.

I don’t know if movie critics or film historians will be writing about Supernova in fifty years as a companion piece to Love Story, but for me – Supernova is that one film which comes along each year for me, the one that reminds me why I love the movies, and why I will continue to watch them, even if it means doing so at home for now. And, as I add another year to a life enriched by film, I am grateful that, through all the challenges of living during a pandemic, I have managed some semblance of my pre-teenage self: the part that still looks forward to a new film and measures her favorites by the degree to which the characters and the story touch her heart.

*******

So, what can we expect at this year’s Oscars in light of the ongoing pandemic?

The Oscars will be broadcast from two Los Angeles locations: the Dolby Theater (where it’s been held since 2002), and outdoors at Union Station.

The Oscars will not utilize ZOOM, WebEx, or any other virtual platform. The Golden Globes ZOOM fiasco was enough to redirect that idea.

For the third year, there will be no “host.” – Accelerating the pace of the ceremony without the usual mindless banter is a good thing, so maybe the ceremony will come in at under three hours.

There remain several intriguing, unanswered questions:

Who will present the awards, and how will they maintain a sense of continuity? No star presenters have been identified as yet.

Will there be any singing or dancing numbers? If so, will they be live or pre-recorded?

What kind of tone will the event strike? Maybe a “host” is needed to hold the show together?

And, perhaps the most important question of all: Will anyone watch?

The ZOOM-infused Golden Globes drew its smallest television audience ever. Even Tina Fey and Amy Poehler couldn’t save it. Ditto this year’s Grammy’s, which utilized a more intimate, socially distanced live approach, but still couldn’t build significant audience interest. The Oscars are the main way the Academy makes money, but its global audience has been decreasing fairly steadily over the past decade. Put that together with fewer film releases overall and movie theaters being closed most of the year, and you have the makings of a disaster in terms of audience interest come April 25. My own included.

A recent story online expanded some additional problems that have surfaced around the decision to ban any pre-recorded speeches or Zoom appearances: some of the nominees do not live in the United States and are still under travel bans (Carey Mulligan, Best Actress nominee for Promising Young Woman is one of them). So what are nominees to do? In some ways, it seems like AMPAS finds new ways to exclude nominees: from the ballot, from attending the ceremony, etc. Maybe they need to hire a DEI (diversity, equity, inclusion) coach.

The pandemic has impacted the Oscars in other ways, too. In addition delaying traditional release dates, it forced anxious film distributors to consider other options. Director Christopher Nolan’s rant against HBO Max last December (he called it the “worst streaming service”), came hot on the heels of Warner Brothers’ decision to stream all its movies released in 2021. Warner Brothers produced Nolan’s 2020 film Tenet, and the film company’s decision to release all major films simultaneously in theaters and via streaming is a major shift in how films are distributed and, ultimately, seen. The repercussions of this practice will be fascinating to follow this year, not just because of box office intake, but also because the behavior of movie audiences will be a key factor in how movies are made and watched in the future.

In some ways, streaming really illustrates a convergence of two generations: Baby Boomers are weary of going to the theater because audiences seem less respectful watching films (re: cell phone use and talking during the movie are becoming more and more commonplace). Gen X-ers and Millennials have demonstrated a preference to see movies when and where they want (re: iPhones, iPads, laptops and Smart TV’s), and less drawn by the art of cinema or, as I would argue, a lack of understanding of why the medium of film is different form television, video games, or theater – and should be viewed in its natural environment (re: a movie theater). Either way, aging Boomers and disinterested younger audiences could eventually combine to make cineplexes a thing of the past. Please, no.

*******

As in recent years, I’ll embed most of the “oversights” (snubs?) into their respective categories and try to be judicious in my level of whining about, let’s say, the fact that neither Supernova was not recognized for Best Picture, despite universally glowing reviews, or Stanley Tucci for Best Actor in the same film. On the other end, how could anyone even consider Glenn Close as supporting actress for that awful scene chewing display in Hillbilly Elegy? To wit, Close stands to be the most nominated actor without a win if Oscar passes her over yet again, but is this the role she wants to win that 13.5”/8.5 lb. little man w/no identifiable genetalia?

Perennial snubee Ethan Hawke did not make a theatrical release this year (though he shined in Showtime’s The Good Lord Bird – and for which he has received numerous acting noms), so I can’t whine about that. However, I am forever hopeful that 2022 will see a fourth installment of Richard Linklater’s iconic “Before” series. You know, the ongoing love story (here I go again) of Jesse (Hawke) and Celine (Julie Delpy), that starstruck couple who first met on a Eurorail heading for Vienna in 1995 (Before Sunrise), re-connected nine years later in Paris (Before Sunset, 2004), dealt with the challenges of their long-term relationship (Before Midnight, 2013), and now…..? The latter two films were nominated in the Adapted Screenplay category and Delpy has been a luminous screen presence in all three.

Since last year, word on the street now was that Hawke, director Linklater and co-star Delpy are in discussion to do one final “epilogue” as they’ve called it, in the “Before” series (Before Sunrise, Before Sunset, Before Midnight). Like the first three, an epilogue will no doubt be welcome and wonderful, and Hawke will likely be overlooked in the lead acting category again. If a fourth installment materializes, I’m going out on a limb by predicting another Ethan Hawke acting snub in 2023. Meantime, here’s to a a final installment of this epic romance as Jesse and Celine enter their (pause for a big deep breath) 50s.

In truth, I don’t need to indulge in much whining this year because there weren’t that many films released, so no major controversies (other than increased distribution via streaming), no plethora of great performances to review, no real drama about the dramas. I don’t even have any good Greta Gerwig material this year, so that’s disappointing. In an average recent year (2018) about 875 were released to theaters. In 2020, only 329 movies were released by the film industry. Not much to choose from.

But I will say this: given the dearth of movie releases, let along the paucity of quality films among those that were distributed, I’m surprised the Academy could actually announce eight (!) Best Picture nominees. Think about it: in an average year of almost 900 movie releases, the Academy has never nominated the 10 (I’ll rant about that later) movies that could fill the Best Picture slots. And now, in a year that saw one-third the usual releases, eight were nominated. Notice, too, there is no real diversity among the nominations in terms of genre – it’s a small group of nominees selected from an even smaller pool of candidates. I’m still deciding if that makes the predictions easier or not, but I’ll guarantee it’s a lot less interesting than past years where there was more discussion about snubs, omissions, etc.

So here we are with another twist on the Oscars: a pandemic, no less. The long-term effect of this global crisis will no doubt be examined for years to come, not only in terms of the economics of the industry, but also the art of cinema. What’s a film prognosticator to do? For now, keep on watching and hope for the best.

What follows now is my annual assessment of the Oscar nominees, my picks for the winners (and sometimes, my wish for who should win). Putting my predictive accuracy (96+%) on the line once again, here goes.

And the envelope, please….

BEST PICTURE

The Father Judas and the Black Messiah

Mank Minari

Nomadland Promising Young Woman

Sound of Metal The Trial of the Chicago 7

When I taught film history, I used to tell students that movies weren’t just “reflective,” that they were really “expressions of particular times, places, events.” In some ways, I argued, movies could also be active agents for social change, as they could identify – and offer comment on - various social and political issues before we might be aware of them, rather than simply mirroring something after the fact. There are many documentaries and short films that fall into this realm, but so do feature films. Spike Lee’s Do The Right Thing raised important questions about systemic racism (and racism upon racism) that was considered controversial and groundbreaking at the time. More recently, Spotlight (Best Picture winner in 2016) shed new light on the Boston Globe’s investigation of child molestation within the Catholic church (again, not a new story, but told in a way that brought fresh eyes on a topical, taboo subject).

Films released in 2020 captured, in different ways, the mode and spirit of the country (and the world) in light of the pandemic. Overall, this year’s Best Picture nominees are dark, serious, even provocative films that are sometimes disturbing to watch. The Father offers a terrifying glimpse into an aging engineer’s (Anthony Hopkins) struggle with dementia; Promising Young Woman takes #MeToo to a whole new level, including one victim’s arguable descent into madness. In a year dominated by death, violence, despair and political insurrection, Hollywood released several films that highlighted those very themes. Remember: this year’s nominees were made before the pandemic. And, while a few of the movies honored this year may offer a glimmer of hope for the future (Minari), none of them singularly carry the mantle of a “feel good” movie. This year’s list of honorees is thoroughly bleak.

So which of these depressing films will take home the big prize? Hard to say, as there has been no definitive movie that’s cleaned up at all the Guild Award ceremonies. Usually, a Best Picture nominee that is also nominated by the three big Guilds – Writers, Directors and Producers – takes home the prize, but none of the nominees fits the bill. Another clue typically comes from the SAG awards, where the “best ensemble” in a film mirrors the Oscars best picture. But Nomadland – an early favorite, does not have an SAG nomination for acting ensemble, leaving Aaron Sorkin’s SAG ensemble winner, The Trial of the Chicago 7, as the favorite (but then Sorkin didn’t get an Oscar nom for directing). And on it goes.

I’ll offer my thoughts on which film will win in a minute, but let me just say this up front: Of all the Best Picture nominees, the film that is clearly, undeniably a cinematic masterwork (re: smart dialogue, great acting, beautiful cinematography, Hollywood politics, personal demons, and an exceptional homage to movies past) is Mank. It is also the movie with the most Oscar nominations this year @ 10. But don’t expect it to win. Mank might have made more of an impact had it been made 25 years ago, when the debate over who actually wrote the screenplay for Citizen Kane (you know, the “greatest movie ever made”) was a hot topic among movie critics and film historians.

Today, with waning interest in the life and career of Citizen Kane’s wunderkid, Orson Welles, Mank might seem more like a quaint throwback to a bygone era. It is anything but. Though I admit it does help if you know something about Herman Mankiewitz, the Hollywood screen writer affectionately nicknamed in the film’s title, his long-standing battle with alcoholism (from which he died in 1953), and his even longer standing conflict with Orson Welles over who got screen credit for Citizen Kane, are not necessarily the stuff dreams are made of, or the kind of film that draws in big box office. Too bad. The film’s keen analysis of the movie industry, where “the buyer gets nothing for his money but a memory” is spot-on and fascinating.

Even more important to appreciating Mank fully is having seen Citizen Kane. Director David Fincher uses many of the same cinematic techniques: long and overhead shots, skewed camera angles that make rooms seem larger or smaller, emphasizing or diminishing the subject – just as Welles did in his 1941 masterpiece. And Fincher finally convinced financial backers to shoot the film in glorious black and white (apparently the reason why it took so long for the project to materialize).

The result is a stunningly beautiful piece of celluloid, a story both personal and epic: Fincher’s late father Jack wrote the screenplay over 20 years ago at the height of renewed discussion about who actually wrote most or all of Citizen Kane, as a kind of delayed response to New Yorker critic Pauline Kael’s book length essay, “Raising Kane” (1971) in which she argued that Mankiewicz was the primary author of the script and almost completely omitted from getting screen credit by Welles who became increasingly irritated with his partner’s alcoholic binges that threatened to delay production. Mankiewicz was ultimately credited as co-author, along w/Welles (though many still argue about how much of the actual script was penned by Orson), but their industry-known feud over who received final screen acknowledgement led to a crack in their relationship that remained until Mank’s death.

For Jack Fincher, the script was a culmination of his own interest in the film industry and designed as a gift for his son David, then a budding 1990’s Hollywood filmmaker. Like Citizen Kane, Mank became a problematic film project: first, for the controversial subject matter (an anti-Orson Welles film was a hard sell in the film industry at the time), and then because Fincher insisted on filming in the aforementioned black and white (still considered box office kryptonite). Fincher persisted, even after his father’s death in 2003 and finally, in 2019, it was announced that Mank would begin production w/Oscar winning Gary Oldman in the titular role and Amanda Seyfried in the pivotal part of American actress Marion Davis.

With all the drama surrounding a film about another industry drama, Mank does not disappoint. Neither time nor production challenges have diminished the power of the story, or Fincher’s astute artistry. Even the movie poster is reminiscent of Citizen Kane, and the subtle references that punctuate the non-linear telling of this story only serve to enhance the drama, the history, and underlying theme: Mank is the tale of a Hollywood outsider (Welles) who threatens to destroy the career of an even greater outsider (Mankiewicz) written by rebel American journalist/screenwriter (Jack Fincher) by his edgy outsider director son (David Fincher). How’s that for layering the symbolism?

In sum, though Mank is unlikely to win Best Picture (though I will call it as a longshot upset), mostly because it is not a trendy film. It’s not politically aware, shows no connection at all to Hollywood’s current (ongoing) issue w/diversity and inclusion. In fact, it would be completely inaccurate, ahistorical and asinine to expect an insider movie about the film industry that takes place in the early 1940s to have any real sense of the kinds of DEI issues that permeate moviemaking today.

In that way, I doubt Fincher’s brilliance will be recognized this year (he didn’t win for The Social Network in 2011 either, so Fincher’s status as a bonafide Hollywood outsider is clearly established now).

I’ve had this argument before: Back in 1985, I was chastised for saying Amadeus was a better film than The Killing Fields (it was and still is), because the latter was considered more politically important. Ditto in 1993, when I suggested that Jane Campion’s The Piano was a more artistic cinematic effort than Schindler’s List. I didn’t say that The Piano was a “better” film, nor did I even hint that Schindler’s List was not important. I merely offered the observation that, looking at the art of filmmaking, The Piano had more successful elements of storytelling, cinematography and performances. But, you know….

While we’re on the subject of movies that demonstrate diversity and inclusion: for all of AMPAS’s concern about erasing “Oscars so White” from any hashtag tweets, it did not nominate Spike Lee for Da 5 Bloods, in what I would argue is the most ergregious omission of all this year. Perhaps, we should start creating an awards show for all the renegade directors, writers, actors, who are otherwise ignored by the industry, something in between the real outliers. Wait! We have the Independent Spirit Awards for that…so what do we do for the “tweeners” – the films that don’t qualify as “little” (re: independent) but are small enough not to generate Oscar interest. Maybe someday…..over the rainbow.

One additional comment about diversity, specifically, as it relates to two films not nominated for Best Picture: Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom and One Night in Miami. Both films are based on plays, the former one of August Wilson’s ten plays collectively called “The Pittsburgh Cycle,” which chronicles the experiences of African-Americans in the 20th century; the latter, the dramatization of an alleged real event that took place on 25 February 1964, the night that Mohammed Ali (then still Cassius Clay) defeated Sonny Liston for the heavyweight championship, in which Ali met with activist Malcolm X, football star Jim Brown and singer Sam Cooke.

More than a few critics (and critic wannabes) have complained about the omission of one or both of these from the best picture category. So let me say a few things about the complaints. First, plays are not movies and translating theatre-dialogue to film is a tricky skill that does not always yield effective results. Second, plays that are also successful films typically need to undergo substantive changes that retain the focus of the original while maximizing a different medium. Take Les Miserables, for example. The theatrical production relied on clever staging that moved the long, sometimes complicated story along while maintaining audience interest. The film version, directed by Oscar-winner Tom Hooper, completely transformed the staging and production design, instead maximizing actor vocals by having them sing the music live, subsequently focusing on the lyrics and dialogue that moved the story along, rather than the set design. And it worked, as Les Miserables was a strong contender for Best Picture in 2012.

Ditto Amadeus, a much-praised stage play that came to even more vibrant life under Milos Forman’s Rockstar production that emphasized Mozart’s music using astute editing and memorable performances to great effect (re: Amadeus won Best Picture in 1985). In effect, both Les Miserables and Amadeus stood on their own as distinct interpretations of the original work.

Neither distinction is true for either Ma Rainey or Miami, although Miami fares slightly better in the Adapted Screenplay and Original Song categories. Both films boast stellar performances, (Chadwick Boseman and Viola Davis in Lead Actors categories; Leslie Odom Jr as Supporting Actor), but fall short in the respective director’s visions of the translation from stage to screen. Miami premiered with great fanfare about being Oscar-winner Regina King’s directoral debut – and it’s a fine first film.

However, in many ways, Miami falls victim to the Hollywood conventionalism, failing to address head-on some of the racial issues that underscored the lives of the four historic leads. In a similar way, Ma Rainey relies on the strength of its two lead performances rather than the underlying racial themes, notably, the tragic (but too easily telegraphed) black-on-black violence that is the story’s climax. Excellent film choices for both in terms of adaptation material, though not so great in execution. That’s why I would not call these omissions “snubs.” Neither film should be included as a Best Picture choice.

I’ve digressed a bit, but in a good way – addressing the “snub or not snub” factor. Back to the nominees.

Let me update some commentary from last year’s predictions:

The trend in Oscars past has been that the film with the most nominations translates to a Best Picture winner (it happened nine straight years from 1992-2000), but recently that distinction has only predicted the winner four times in the last 11 years, or since AMPAS expanded the category to up to 10 nominees. Per my remarks about Mank, some of the greatest films ever made did not win Best Picture: Citizen Kane, High Noon, Singin’ in the Rain (no nomination!), Dr. Strangelove, Bonnie & Clyde, The Graduate, Cabaret, Nashville, Pulp Fiction, Fargo, Brokeback Mountain, Do the Right Thing (no nomination!), and BlacKkKlansman. Certainly puts the Academy’s selection process into perspective, and raises the question about how to define what art is – and whether great art equals “best” with the Oscars. Spike Lee was right when he quipped after Green Book’s 2019 win for Best Picture, “Sometimes the ref gets it wrong.” Indeed.

For that reason (in part) and for the past decade, I have bemoaned AMPAS’s decision to expand the number of Best Picture nominees from five to ten so as to be more “inclusive” of the variety of films made (re: a way to insure that really mediocre, big budget films that made lots of money are included, potentially ensuring that Oscar’s TV audience is interested enough to watch). This explains, in part, why a film like 2010’s Toy Story 3 and 2015’s The Martian were included. Yet, in the eleven years since this expansion has been applied to the voting process, none of the biggest grossing movies ever has won Best Picture. So the intention of the expansion has not yet yielded the anticipated result.

In fact, despite AMPAS’s desire to include more popular films in the Best Picture category, most top-grossing films have not even been nominated. Given that 2020’s top grossing American film was Bad Boys for Life ($230M, but not ever a likely Best Picture contender), followed by Christopher Nolan’s much anticipated Tenet (way behind @ $53M, which would normally be considered a bomb for a film of that magnitude), this year’s list of eight Best Picture nominees looks like a compilation of movies that received mostly positive reviews, with seven of the eight representing themes of diversity or social justice.

So what happens when the (arguably) best film of the year does not embody the Academy’s desire to right past wrongs of racism/sexism or demonstrate an inclusivity that does not exist in the film industry outside of a handful of the various guilds? Well, here’s what: the Best Picture winner will come down to which DEI issue seems most appropriate to honor, and which issue has the most widespread support throughout the Academy. Don’t misunderstand: I’m not suggesting that DEI issues should not be recognized or celebrated on Oscar night. I am, though, calling out an AMPAS practice that has, in the past fifty-plus years, failed to recognize one of the giants of film – writer/director Spike Lee, or consider women directors other than those who delivered box office gold (except, of course, if you are Barbra Streisand or Penny Marshall – then, your directorial skills and the box office don’t count).

The only woman to have won the Best Director Oscar is Kathryn Bigelow for 2009’s The Hurt Locker, a film that confirmed a woman could direct a violent film about war. There wasn’t anything remotely related to a woman’s experience. Even Bigelow’s 2012’s follow-up, Zero Dark Thirty, did not advance any notion about women in war, even with Jessica Chastain in the lead (character could have been a man). And the bigger question: what has Bigelow done since then? Try nothing of importance. Other female directors, from Ida Lupino to Lina Wertmuller, have scarcely been recognized and have explored themes much more germaine to women. Bigelow was a convenient winner because she made a film that could have been made by a man.

Two of this year’s Best Picture nominees were directed by woman, Chloe Zhao’s Nomadland and Emerald Fennell’s Promising Young Woman. Both directors have also been nominated in their respective screenplay categories, so there is always the consolation prize if neither take the Best Director or Best Picture award (Note: Both Quentin Tarantino and Spike Lee have yet to win the Best Director nod, but both have won the screenplay award, QT twice). Zhao and Fennell’s nominations almost double the total number of women directors ever nominated for an Oscar. Yes, there is work to be done, and it will be interesting to see how woman will fare at the Oscars, given the increased and necessary attention on inclusivity.

Of this year’s nominees, I would eliminate Sound of Metal, The Father and Minari as unlikely winners. Sound of Metal is an interesting exercise in understanding the world of a rock musician (Riz Ahmed as drummer Ruben Stone) who [SPOILER ALERT!] suddenly – and permanently – loses his hearing, but its attempt to straddle the world of sound and the world of silence is inconsistent and, ultimately, unsatisfying. I must admit that I pressed fast forward after about 75 minutes because I figured out the storyline path and did not want to sit through it (something I would never do in a theater, nor would I walk out).

Sound of Metal suffers from too much: not only is Riz Ahmed’s afflicted drummer stunned by a sudden and profound loss of hearing, he’s a recovering addict and in a troubled relationship. The film tries to address all these issues and, along with a making a statement about sound/noise(?) in the modern world and, in doing so, convolutes the plot and, at least for me, distracts the viewer in ways that cause disinterest.

The Father might be considered a horror film for anyone terrified of Alzheimer’s, and the movie builds tension as it see-saws between reality and delusion with the main character’s dementia. Based on the play of the same name, The Father boasts fine performances by leads Anthony Hopkins and Olivia Colman (though she is nominated in a supporting role), but doesn’t really have the breadth or “gravitas” for a Best Picture win. Minari, a heart-warming and heart-breaking film about a Korean family’s migration to Arkansas in search of the American dream reminded me a lot of 1984’s Places in the Heart, a kind of rags-to-no riches tale of determination and grit, despite disappointment, family tragedies and dwinding financial resources. I liked a lot about this movie, especially the fine ensemble performance by the cast, led by nominees Steve Yuen and Youn Yuh-jung. But in spite of that, the story is somewhat clichéd (younger son has a heart problem and grandma suffers a stroke that ultimately helps him overcome his affliction), and the film a little too conventional to rise to a best picture win.

Of the remaining nominees, Promising Young Woman has its best shot winning Carey Mulligan for best actress or Emerald Fennell’s original screenplay. The film itself, a searing treatise on the #MeToo movement with touches of dark comedy and wit, is uneven and undecided in whether its main character – a medical school drop-out named Cassie – is a genius seeking righteous vengeance, or a deranged psycho who never got over her best friends alleged gang rape and subsequent suicide.

Fennell’s choice of her title character’s name, a not-so-subtle riff on Cassandra, the mythic priestess of Apollo who spoke truths no one believed, underscores the current #MeToo assertion that no woman who accuses men of sexual harassment is lying. That assumption may be popular right now, but it is one that is likely to be challenging as #MeToo segues from movement to investigation. While it clearly takes courage for women to come forward about sexual abuse, it is also naïve to think that every woman who makes a claim is telling the truth. But I’ve gotten ahead of myself.

As a woman who has lived in the world of academic administration for almost two decades (and that includes being both a witnesses to and victim of sexual harassment), there is a scene in PYW that rang false and made me go back and review other inaccuracies in the storyline. The scene involves Cassie paying a visit to the medical school dean who “looked the other way” and did not pursue charges against the male students who reportedly raped her friend Nina. The dean is depicted as a generic administrator spewing platitudes about why she couldn’t press charges against the male students in question and one in particular, something about not wanting to “ruin the life” of a promising male student based on a claim of sexual assault.

Now I’ve known plenty of generic administrators in my life, some of whom might sound close to the medical school dean in PYW, but – in this case – the dean’s gender (a woman) and total lack of understanding about the complexities of this case sounded a hollow note. I get what Fennell is trying to do, but her focus on Cassie’s character at the expense of other stereotyping and grandiose clichés ultimately lessened my opinion of the movie as a whole. Granted, there are some fine moments here and some clever twists and situations. Overall, it’s a great, if flawed film in concept and execution.

The last four nominees – Mank, Judas and the Black Messiah, Nomadland and The Trial of the Chicago 7 are all worthy winners in terms of the scope, message and artistry found in each. Judas and the Black Messiah is the least likely to win of these, though Shaka King’s impressive biopic about civil rights activist Fred Hampton (the film’s Black Messiah) and FBI informant William O’Neal who delivers him (Judas), is compelling drama and a fine counterpiece to Sorkin’s The Trial of the Chicago 7. Set in Chicago in the late 1960s, both films address issues of social justice, racism and challenges to the “Establishment” that were prominent during this era.

Judas is smaller in scope than Trial but powerful in its intimate, biblical metaphor about the price of being a true rebel, a renegade in and out of sync with contemporary social dissonance, and those who would sell a comrade out for personal salvation. Those unfamiliar w/Fred Hampton’s story or misinformed about the Black Panthers may not find this movie a vehicle for the topics it raises. But it is a movie that should be seen and (I would argue) integrated into any American History curriculum.

That means that this year’s best picture is likely to come down to Mank, Nomadland and The Trial of the Chicago 7. Right now, my money is on Nomadland for several reasons: 1) the scope of the film and its focus on another segment of America’s underclass – the transitory poor who travel from place to place in search of temporary jobs, 2) the grandeur of America’s southwest depicted through the eyes of these transients, and 3) the poignant connection to all those who have suffered great loss and still manage to carry on.

The first time I watched Nomadland I couldn’t stop crying.

And not just a droplet of tears. I wept. Over and over again, to the point that my husband (whom some of you know as Professor Paul, emeritus associate professor of English at Ohio University) asked me if I was okay. The answer: yes and no. No, because I was troubled by the ongoing struggle of America’s underclass (also prevalent depicting immigrants Minari). No, because sometimes it seems that there will never be real equality in this country. And no, because we seem powerless to overcome this inequity.

But yes, too. I was okay because I was touched by director Chloe Zhao’s ability to transform a work of non-fiction about a small segment of America’s intermittent jobless, into a panorama about the resiliency of the human spirit. Underscoring the film’s visual cinematic landscape are tiny, but candid performances by the always fierce Frances McDormand, the all-too-infrequently utilized David Straithairn and a cast of largely non-actor/unknowns. Together, with Zhao’s brilliant direction, they tell a tale too often unnoticed and one that is timely for those transient and un. As one tells McDormand’s Fern: “One of the things I love most about this life is that there are no final good-byes… just I’ll see you down the road.” Not since Midnight Cowboy have I experienced such stark poignancy and measured hope amid human despair.

That leaves the unlikely, but deserving Mank and The Trial of the Chicago 7. The latter has all the right components for a best picture win: great ensemble cast, intelligent, sassy script and timely subject (yes, fifty years have not lessened the importance of the trial, the Chicago 7 and their enduring reminder to speak out against political and social injustice – not to be confused w/the January 6, 2020 Capitol riots). Aaron Sorkin has more than established himself on television and in film as one of the best screenwriters of his – or any – generation. In his directing debut, he does not disappoint with astute editing, active camera work, and the ability to capture the best nuances of all actors (including Eddie Redmayne, supporting actor nominee Sasha Baron Cohen, Mark Rylance, Yahya Abdul-Mateen and Frank Langella) in this stellar ensemble. Most of all, Sorkin manages to explicate the complicated issues and personalities while still maintaining an eye to the movie’s broader theme about the First Amendment.

But Sorkin’s omission from the Best Director category is an unfortunate shadow that may affect the film’s ability to win the big prize. Nomadland has already won the Producers Guild Award and and the BAFTA. Chicago 7 won the SAG award for Best Ensemble Performance (the equivalent of Best Picture). Hard to say if the SAG nod will yield Oscar gold, but as of this writing, Nomadland appears to be on more of a surge with its director Chloe Zhao winning the Directors Guild and BAFTA’s in that category.

MAJ’s pick: Nomadland (but calling a potential upset for The Trial of The Chicago 7)

LONGSHOT: Mank

BEST DIRECTOR

Lee Isaac Chung, Minari

Emerald Fennell, Promising Young Woman David Fincher, Mank

Thomas Vinterberg, Another Round Chloe Zhao, Nomadland

Five nominees. None have won before, and four are first-time nominees in this category. One could argue that David Fincher coulda/shoulda/woulda won for The Social Network, a film for which Aaron Sorkin won Best Original Screenplay. And one could also argue that Sorkin was clearly snubbed. He should have been nominated in this category. Why, despite creating a fine film, is Thomas Vinterberg taking up Sorkin’s spot, even if his film is up for Best International Film (but not Best Picture, like Bong Joon-ho’s Parasite last year)? Methinks Sorkin is not widely liked in some of Hollywood’s guilds. Oh, well.

You can thus eliminate Vinterberg and also Lee Isaac Chung, as neither probably has the notoriety, connections, or momentum across this awards season to win. David Fincher is the old-timer here: previously nominated for The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (2008) and The Social Network (2010). Amid the growing call for more diversity in Hollywood (subjects of films as well as production cast and crew), Fincher would appear to be an unlikely choice this year, especially with two women nominated in this category.

Of Zhao and Fennell, Zhao has the edge, given her previous wins at the Golden Globes, Critics Choice, Directors Guild and BAFTA awards. Fennell’s Promising Young Woman has more bite in both subject matter and attitude, but Zhao manages to express bigger broader views of hope and despair, weaving a complex fabric of the nameless, faceless people who are forced to migrate from place to place in order to sustain a living. There’s a great opportunity here to honor a woman director for only the second time – Zhao is most deserving, but Fincher’s body of work looms large with a film (Mank) that is a different kind of masterpiece.

Remember, too: Stanley Kubrick and Jean Renoir never got a directing Oscar. Ditto Orson Welles. And no directing nods yet for Spike Lee or Quentin Tarantino. If you’re David Fincher, the best prize may be a non-win.

MAJ’s pick: Chloe Zhao for Nomadland (a deserving one)

UPSET: Emerald Fennel for Promising Young Woman

Who Should Win: David Fincher for Mank (equally deserving as Zhao)

BEST ACTOR

Riz Ahmed, Sound of Metal

Chadwick Boseman, Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom Anthony Hopkins, The Father

Gary Oldman, Mank Steven Yeun, Minari

If you’re betting on a sure thing and don’t need a big return, Chadwick Boseman may be the only lock this year. His performance in Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom capped an all-too-short career ended by cancer last August. Boseman was only 43. But Ma Rainey wasn’t Boseman’s only stellar performance last year. He could have also been nominated in supporting role for Da 5 Bloods. His raw, powerful performance as Ma Rainey’s overconfident trumpeter, Levee Green, is one for the ages, even if August Wilson’s play seems a bit dated and underwhelming as a movie.

Of the four other nominees, Steve Yuen’s determined father in Minari is understated and memorable. Gary Oldman and Anthony Hopkins, both previous winners in this category, belong here this year, especially Oldman’s nuanced performance as screenwriter Mank. Over thirty years ago – after seeing Sid and Nancy – I predicted Oldman would be one of the finest actors of his generation. There were a few years in the 1990s when I thought I might have overstated his credibility (mostly based on a few over-the-top roles), but in recent years, he has secured his spot among acting’s finest.

Ditto Hopkins, a generation older than his fellow nominees and whose screen roles have ranged from serial killers to American presidents. Hopkins won the BAFTA in a surprise nod over favorite Chadwick Boseman, but the Brits love Anthony, so the upset shouldn’t have come as a shock, or indicative of Oscar outcome. I’m doubtful his BAFTA win can translate to Oscar gold this late in the race, given the admiration Boseman has received for this role and his career.

The remaining newcomer, Riz Ahmed, the first Muslim actor to be nominated in this category, gave a solid, if disjointed performance in Sound of Metal. I am hopeful we will see more of Ahmed in the future. The more his name gets out and people outside the industry (re: audiences) recognize him, the better.

A final word about the nominees in this category. There are two omissions that I suspect were determined by the studios: Daniel Kaluuya and LaKeith Stanfield, the black messiah and Judas, respectively, in Judas in the Black Messiah. Both are nominated as supporting actor this year, but both share screen time and role sizes that would suggest they should be in the lead actor category. Since AMPAS rules don’t allow an actor to be nominated in two categories for the same role, I am fairly certain that both actors were put forth as supporting actor nominees so as not to compete (and possibly split the votes) w/Boseman. My two cents on this one, as there is no good reason why Kaluuya and Stanfield are in the supporting category, except their nominations show a dispersion of diversity across more categories, and the likelihood of multiple wins.

Now about Chadwick Boseman: like Heath Ledger and Phillip Seymour Hoffman, Boseman was a fine actor gone too soon, and not because of an unfortunate drug addiction, but because of the horror of cancer, often diagnosed too late in African American men. Boseman brought many historic figures to life – from James Brown to Jackie Robinson, giving larger-than-life dignity to those whose personalities and accomplishments had already transcended race and culture. One of his final, iconic performances, as T’Challa in Black Panther and two of the Marvel Comics franchise films, secured his place as a legendary black screen presence. We will not see his like again, and we are better for having witnessed his special cinematic contributions.

But the question will always remain, as it did w/Heath Ledger and Peter Finch, who died two months before the 1977 ceremony. If they hadn’t died, would the race look different? In Finch’s case, I would argue “yes” because his fellow nominees included Robert DeNiro for Taxi Driver and Giancarlo Giannani for Seven Beauties (a longshot, but a fine actor). Ledger’s competition was a less stellar, though impressive group (Josh Brolin for Milk, Philip Seymour Hoffman for Doubt), but there was clearly no one who could touch the subversive complexity of Ledger’s Joker (sorry, Joaquin, but Heath set the template for this character and it still resonates). So, Finch might not have won, but Ledger’s performance was an undeniable classic.

Assuming the nominees would be the same, I’d still put my money on Boseman, but there would be a greater chance for an upset, especially from Oldman or Hopkins. And – I’d be curious if Boseman hadn’t died, might Daniel Kaluuya have been touted in this category instead of the supporting actor? That, I think, would be the biggest difference, as I’m willing to bet that film companies backed off pushing Kaluuya in the lead actor category after Boseman’s death. Just sayin’.

MAJ’s pick: Chadwick Boseman in Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom

NOTE: If there is an upset (highly unlikely), it will be Anthony Hopkins.

BEST ACTRESS

Viola Davis, Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom

Andra Day, The United States v. Billie Holiday Vanessa Kirby, Pieces of a Woman

Frances MacDormand, Nomadland Carey Mulligan, Promising Young Woman

The pickings show more diversity this year, but are still somewhat slim (again) in the Best Actress category. Viola Davis is rapidly becoming the Denzel Washington of black women nominees – not because she’s not a formidable screen presence and a wonderful actor, but she seems to get nominated for mediocre performances in so-so films (a la Washington), kind of like the go-to diversity pick. Andra Day offers some optimism that options for African-American woman may be widening, but she’s (again and like Davis) left to play the role of a troubled, drug-addicted black artist/icon. The other three nominees represent two up-and-comers and one perennial war horse among women in leading roles.

A few months ago, I would have predicted Mulligan as the frontrunner to win Best Actress for her intelligent, sardonic, so-close-to-the-edge performance as Cassie in Promising Young Woman. But then she lost the Golden Globe to Andra Day in The United States v. Billie Holiday (though, arguably, members of the Hollywood Foreign Press are notorious for their love of actors portraying troubled artists), and failed to secure a nomination with BAFTA (and she’s a Brit! – blame it on the new BAFTA rules). Newcomer Vanessa Kirby gave a strong performance in Pieces of a Woman as a woman coping with the still birth of her first child, so it’s tough to say if a relative unknown will grab the top acting prize. It depends if AMPAS voters are trending toward recognizing younger talent instead of relying on proven veterans.

That leaves previous winners McDormand (twice, lead actress) and Davis (once, supporting role) to potentially duke out the results. I’d put my money and my vote on McDormand, only because her performance as a widowed transient forced to pack up her belongings in her van and travel from place to place to secure work – and life – is far more layered and nuanced than Davis’s turned as famed blues singer Ma Rainey. Someone should slap the make-up artist who created Davis’s almost grostesque appearance and costuming which does little to enhance her screen presence or performance. And I love Viola Davis – I’ve probably seen all her films. But here, she is out of her element a bit. Unlike many of her peers in similar roles about famous singers, Davis does not do any of her own vocals. What’s left is a kind of caricature of Rainey, a sidelined diva to Chadwick Boseman’s showier, troubled trumpeter.

But Davis won the SAG award and seems to be gaining momentum, McDormand has been noticeably absent from any awards hoopla this year (she has been very vocal about her disdain for the whole awards season circus), although she did grab the BAFTA. Mulligan’s failure to score a victory since the Critics Choice Awards, along with her new-rules omission from the BAFTA’s, puts her potential Oscar win in jeopardy. The one X-factor might be that the Brits have a huge AMPAS contingency, and Mulligan is a favorite there.

What continues to be frustrating is there weren’t that many stellar performances by women this year that deserved a look, and what seems to be emerging in terms of roles for women seems angry and vindictive. Mind you, I don’t disagree that women have been marginalized, minimized, abused and disregarded in places beyond the film industry, in really every aspect of life and culture. Maybe I’m just eager to see a wider range of stories than those presented here, especially a broader representation of women’s experiences that don’t just express (de)/(re)pressed hostility.

It would also be refreshing to see more diversity of roles among women of color. The two African-American actresses nominated this year – Andra Day and Viola Davis – both played troubled, hard living music legends. Is that the only way African-American women can and should be represented? What happened to the Hidden Figures stories? Surely there is more to the African-American woman’s experience that playing down and out jazz/blues singers. Maybe that’s another Hollywood stereotype that needs to be changed.

MAJ’s pick: Probably now too close to call, as it’s clearly between Viola Davis for Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom AND Carey Mulligan for Promising Young Woman (I’m giving Mulligan a slight edge).

NOW LONGSHOT: Frances McDormand for Nomadland

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR

Sasha Baron Cohen, The Trial of the Chicago 7

Daniel Kaluuya, Judas and the Black Messiah Leslie Odom, Jr., One Night in Miami

Paul Raci, Sound of Metal Lakeith Stanfield, Judas and the Black Messiah

Back in January, Leslie Odom Jr. was considered the front-runner in this category for his evocative performance as legendary singer Sam Cooke in Oscar-winner Regina King’s directorial debut, One Night in Miami. And Odom’s performance remains the best supporting performance of the year. A close runner-up is (brace yourself) Borat himself, Sasha Baron Cohen as activist icon Abbie Hoffman in The Trial of the Chicago 7.

What about Daniel Kaluuya, who has been burning up the awards circuit this year for his powerful turn as another 1960s activist, controversial socialist (and Black Panther) Fred Hampton in Judas and the Black Messiah? Well, Kaluuya is the now-favorite pick for supporting actor, though I would argue his role is more lead than support. Blame the Hollywood marketing system that prefers a sure win over a chancey competition to promote Kaluuya (previously nominated as lead actor for 2018’s Get Out). As stated previously, I suspect no one wanted to pit Kaluuya against Chadwick Boseman.

That said, Kaluuya is as powerful as Hampton as he is charming off-screen. His unabashed silliness when technical problems muted his Zoom acceptance speech at the Golden Globes was as unaffectedly endearing as his TV success hosting SNL a few weeks ago. Heck, I’d give him the Oscar just based on his infectious smile and mischievous eyes.

Kaluuya’s co-star (the Judas of the film’s title) Lakeith Stanfield is a fine thespian match but kind of inconsequential here. Not sure how dual nominations in the same category will do anything but take votes away from Kaluuya. If the two actors do generate a split among AMPAS voters, Odom might benefit from the residuals. The fifth nominee, Paul Raci, as the deaf druggie-turned ADS advocate is effective, if somewhat of a throwaway in Sound of Metal. I’ve not seen evidence that he has a viable chance of winning (but then upsets in the supporting categories are common).

I would like to comment briefly on Odom’s nominations this year, here and for Best Original Song. Following recent trends with Lady Gaga and Cynthia Ervio, both of whom received acting and original songwriting nominations in the same year, Odom might still bring home Oscar gold for ”Speak Now,” One Night in Miami’s lyrical call to action. It would make a nice bookend to Odom’s Tony for Hamilton.

Overall, Best Supporting Actor boasts another strong group of nominees, with Kaluuya’s Hampton, Odom’s Cooke and Sasha Baron Cohen’s transformative Abbie Hoffman as the standouts.

MAJ’s pick: Brad Pitt in Once Upon a Time in…Hollywood. Period. No upsets. Just Brad.

Oops! I must have had a momentary daydream into last year.

MAJ’s REAL pic: Daniel Kaluuya in Judas and the Black Messiah

UPSET: Leslie Odom Jr in One Night in Miami

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS

Maria Bakalova, Borat Subsequent Moviefilm

Glenn Close, Hillbilly Elegy Olivia Colman, The Father

Amanda Seyfried, Mank Yuh-Jung Youn, Minari

Of all the acting categories, this one was probably the hardest/closest to call until two weeks ago. No one had been sweeping the awards circuit this year, so it was really anybody’s guess who would win as there wasn’t one nominee you could totally count out. There have been more twists and turns trying to predict a supporting actress winner this year than trying to solve a Days of Our Lives murder mystery. (I may have just revealed a guilty pleasure.) And then….Yuh-Jung Youn emerged from the ashes.

But first, more on the drama. Almost perennial nominee Glenn Close was touted early on (laslt summer) was the odd-on winner for her almost unrecognizable performance as Mamaw (yes, you read that correctly) in Ron Howard’s (re: grown up Opie from The Andy Griffith Show) thoroughly wretched Hillbilly Elegy. If Close loses this year (likely), she will tie Peter O’Toole for the most Oscar nominations w/no win. Even with that track record, O’Toole received an Honorary Oscar for “career achievements” when he was 72 (two years younger than Close is today – not that there’s any systemic sexism in Hollywood).

For my money, Close should have won back in 1983 in this category for The World According to Garp (her first nomination). Subsequent supporting roles in The Big Chill and The Natural brought two more deserving noms and then her (unfortunate) box office-breaking (at the time) psycho-stalker in Fatal Attraction brought notoriety, if not greater acting credibility. Arguably, her finest role may have been the coldly calculating, thoroughly heartless Marquise Isabelle de Merteuil in 1988’s Dangerous Liasions. It is a cinematic shame that Close has never won an award for the breadth and depth of roles she has brought to life. But – back to a question I asked earlier – does she really want to be recognized for a role like Mamaw?

After Hillbilly Elegy completely tanked at the box office/streaming service and with critics, Amanda Seyfried became the next “It” girl in a supporting role. Co-starring with Oscar winner Gary Oldman in the universally praised Mank, Seyfried exemplifies 1930s Hollywood through savvy ingenue Marion Davies.

Like Davies, Seyfried’s wholesome looks belie a worldly (and sometimes world-weary) perspective that demonstrates resilience and resistance in the face of film industry inequity. Her performance is a stunner.

But Mank does not seem to have caught on with audiences, and the rise of recent Oscar winner Olivia Colman and newcomers Maria Bakalova and Yuh-Jung Youn started gaining momentum. Colman’s comedic turn in 2018’s The Favourite is a diametric counterpoint to her performance as a daughter grappling with her father’s declining health demonstrates tremendous acting range, if not greater celebrity. She’s been nominated repeatedly for this film, but so far, no wins.

With her win at the SAG and BAFTA awards, Yuh-Jung Youn as the distant, but caring grandmother in Minari seems poised to take the gold home this year, another potential step forward for AMPAS recognizing women of color. Of course, that doesn’t mean that an upset won’t happen. And Maria Bakalova’s wickedly funny tour de force in Borat: Subsequent Moviefilm is the kind of performance you don’t easily forget.

The question is:

Will Hollywood really be brave enough to reward an actor who brazenly duped Rudy Giuliani? 😊

MAJ’s pick: Yuh-Jung Youn for Minari (but secretly hoping for a Bakalova or Seyfried win)

UPSET: Olivia Colman for The Father

BUT…… Don’t count Glenn Close out (a unlikely, but possible outcome)

ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY

Judas and the Black Messiah

Screenplay: Will Berson & Shaka King; Story: Will Berson & Shaka King and Kenny Lucas & Keith Lucas

Minari

Lee Isaac Chung

Promising Young Woman

Emerald Fennell

Sound of Metal

Screenplay: Darius Marder & Abraham Marder; Story: Darius Marder & Derek Cianfrance

The Trial of the Chicago 7

Aaron Sorkin

Continuing great news: For the tenth consecutive year, both original and adapted screenplay categories are very solid, demonstrating yet again, that good writing matters. This year, the winner may amount to directors (Zhao or Fennell) whose script is deemed most worthy of a “consolation” prize, though one wonders how many consolation prizes Quentin Tarantino and Spike Lee need before taking home the Best Director trophy.

The 2021 Writers Guild Award in this category went to Emerald Fennell for the clever, often subversive and overall provocative Promising Young Woman. PYW is clearly in line with the #MeToo movement, though its bizarre plot line, over-the-top premise and stranger than fiction black humor may not sit well with some AMPAS voters.

It is, nonetheless, a bold and original effort from British actor/writer/director (can she multi-task, or what?) Emerald Fennell, who most recently portrayed Camilla Parker-Bowles in Seasons 3 and 4 of The Crown. Though I can’t say I loved PYW, I can say that it definitely had its moments, including a wickedly ascerbic final scene, set to Juice Newton’s 1981 cover of “Angel of the Morning,” that serves as a satisfying, if sardonic conclusion and more so, an homage to Martin Scorsese’s ironic use of upbeat pop music to underscore deeper, more violent personal and societal issues.

Sound of Metal carries writer-director Derek Cianfrance’s penchant for offbeat storylines, and Lee Isacc Chung’s heartwarming Minari may have a broder appeal with voters. Aaron Sorkin has won an Oscar before for The Social Network and has two additional writing noms, all in Adapted Screenplay. This is his first Original Screenplay nom.

That leaves Shaka King & Co. for Judas and the Black Messiah, which I would place over PYW, mostly because the dialogue is able to both elevate the rhetoric AND maintain a certain streek-smart credibility. Industry-wide, though, this is one award that may produce a surprise winner. PYW’s inability to snag a SAG award for Carey Mulligan or a nom for ensemble acting may impact the AMPAS vote… or not.

MAJ’s pick: Emerald Fennell for Promising Young Woman

UPSET: Aaron Sorkin for Trial of the Chicago 7

ADAPTED SCREENPLAY

Borat Subsequent Moviefilm

Screenplay: Sacha Baron Cohen, Anthony Hines, Dan Swimer, Peter Baynham, Erica Rivinoja, Dan Mazer, Jena Friedman, Lee Kern; Story: Sacha Baron Cohen, Anthony Hines, Dan Swimer, Nina Pedrad

The Father Nomadland

Christopher Hampton and Florian Zeller Chloe Zhao

One Night in Miami... The White Tiger

Kemp Powers Ramin Bahrani

Like last year, the Adapted Screenplay is a veritable pantheon of mostly newcomers, this year’s adapted screenplay category should come down to two: Chloe Zhao and Sasha Baron Cohen & Co. (this year’s Writers Guild Award winner).

After his WGA win, Baron Cohen quipped that the only reason they won was because there were so many members of the Writers Guild credited on the script. That may be true, but the audacity of Cohen’s script (“adapted” because it is based on pre-existing characters from the first Borat film) is brilliant, thought the acknowledged focus on improvisation may hurt it here.

Chloe Zhao’s creative adaptation of Jessica Bruder’s non-fictional work Nomadland may wind up the winner w/Oscar, especially if Zhao does not nab the Best Director nod. Either way, though, this is a fine a compelling adaptation, notable for Zhao’s ability to create characters and retain non-actor spaces for the story. For me, that would spell “winner,” but that doesn’t mean Baron Cohen’s crew won’t make mischief with voters.

MAJ’s pick: Chloe Zhao for Nomadland

UPSET: Sasha Baron Cohen et al for Borat

LONGSHOT: Christopher Hampton and Florian Zeller forThe Father

ORIGINAL SONG

“Fight for You,”Judas and the Black Messiah

Music by H.E.R. and Dernst Emile II; Lyric by H.E.R. and Tiara Thomas

“Hear My Voice,” The Trial of the Chicago 7

Music by Daniel Pemberton; Lyric by Daniel Pemberton and Celeste Waite

“Husavik,” Eurovision Song Contest: The Story of Fire Saga

Music and Lyric by Savan Kotecha, Fat Max Gsus and Rickard Göransson

“IO SÌ” (SEEN), The Life Ahead (La Vita Davanti a Se)

Music by Diane Warren; Lyric by Diane Warren and Laura Pausini

“Speak Now,” One Night in Miami...

Music and Lyric by Leslie Odom, Jr. and Sam Ashworth

To reiterate my annual rant (and not to put too fine a point on it again): This category’s been fucked up for years! Period. On to this year’s mess (well, sort of)….

What should be an award for a song that best fits the mood and theme of a movie, Best Original Song has become, in recent years, synonymous with which nominated song ha been the biggest Top 40 hit. Screw its relationship to the film, and bring on the recording industry for another pat on the back. This year, none of the nominees were Top 40 hits (can you sing one?), so the opportunity for Oscar to award what the category intended lives. Maybe we'll see an appropriate winner.

Perennial nominee (this is her twelfth) Diane Warren might be a victorious candidate this year. So here’s my updated Diane Warren assessment:

Arguably, her first two noms were strongest – the joyous “Nothing’s Gonna Stop Us Now” from the undistinguished rom-com Mannequin or “Because You Loved Me” from an even sappier rom-dram Up Close and Personal (cloyinging sung by Celine Dion), but I’d hoped a few years ago that her collaboration w/Lady Gaga “’Til It Happens to You” from the 2015 documentary The Hungting Ground would yield a win. It did not. Four noms later, Diane seemed destined to try again. She’s already in the Songwriters Hall of Fame, so how about an Oscar already?

Warren’s unexpected Golden Globes win may help here, except that it was for a foreign film starring the legendary Sophia Loren, and the Hollywood Foreign Press loves Sophia, so the Globe nod may be a fluke. In addition, she does have some serious competition, notably “Fight For You,” “Hear My Voice,” and (my favorite) “Speak Now.” The latter of these three, co-written by supporting actor nominee Leslie Odom Jr. for One Night in Miami captures the burgeoning Civil Rights Movement in a manner that befits singer Sam Cooke’s own understated ability to express complex social themes through pop music. “Speak Now” is reminiscent of Marvin Gaye’s iconic “What’s Going On?” and it would definitely get my vote.

In a nutshell, this years nominees are four first-timers and Diane Warren, so it’s an interesting race. Not a bad song among them, though “Husavik” is probably the least recognizable (if not the most innovative).

MAJ’s pick: Leslie Odom Jr and Sam Ashworth, “Speak Now” from One Night in Miami

PERSISTENCE AWARD: Diane Warren and Laura Pausini, “IO SI” from The Life Ahead

LAST-MINUTE UPSET: H.E.R, "Fight for You," from Judas & the BM

ORIGINAL SCORE

Da 5 Bloods, Terence Blanchard

Mank, Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross Minari, Emile Mosseri

News of the World, James Newton Howard Soul, Trent Reznor, Atticus Ross and Jon Batiste

In a somewhat underwhelming group of nominees, Trent Reznor seems poised to win for one of the two films for which he is nominated, though I would suggest one of them may have a bit more of an edge.

For the other nominees, veteran James Newton Howard is celebrating his seventh nomination for original score (no wins and he’s been nominated twice for original song). Jazz trumpeter Terence Blanchard is seeing his second nomination (and collaboration w/Spike Lee – he was previously nominated for the BlacKkKlansman score). And newcomer Emile Mosseri could be a dark horse winner.

Previous winners Reznor and Ross (for The Social Network) were busy this year creating memorable scores (this may be one of the most overlooked categories in Oscar history) for both the classic period piece Mank and the colorful, animated Soul. Given their Golden Globe win for Soul, I’m betting that Nine Inch Nails comrades Reznor and Ross – along w/jazz musician Jon Batiste – will win for this exquisite animated film. That’s not to say that Rez ‘n’ Ross’ work in Mank doesn’t measure up. It does and, in a different year with other nominees, I’d give the nod to Mank.

MAJ’s pick: Trent Reznor, Atticus Ross and Jon Batiste for Soul

OR Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross for Mank

And now for the less sexy Oscars: no one will care who wins or whether they bring a famous date. Hell, no one will probably care since the ceremony has been designed for limited attendance. Too bad. It might have been fun to see who’s sitting at home on the couch in sweats having a brew while giving an acceptance speech. But we won’t see that, either.

Instead, here are the “other” Oscar predictions….

CINEMATOGRAPHY

Judas and the Black Messiah, Sean Bobbitt

Mank, Erik Messerschmidt News of the World, Dariusz Wolski

Nomadland, Joshua James Richards The Trial of the Chicago 7, Phedon Papamichael

Cinematography is often tied to Best Picture. If that holds true this year, then….

MAJ’s pick: Joshua James Reynolds, Nomadland (PS Richards is the favorite)

If not, then… Erik Messerschmidt for Mank

FILM EDITING

The Father, Yorgos Lamprinos

Nomadland, Chloé Zhao Promising Young Woman, Frédéric Thoraval

Sound of Metal, Mikkel E. G. Nielsen The Trial of the Chicago 7, Alan Baumgarten

Even more than cinematography, film editing most closely mirrors the Best Picture award, but again this year tradition may not prevail since Sound of Metal has been widely recognized for excellence in this category, as have The Father and Promising Young Woman. In a year where many Oscar traditions have already been broken (unprecedented number of first-time nominees AND greater diversity), I’m going to go out on bit of a limb here, and say….

MAJ’s pick: Mikkel E.G. Nielsen for Sound of Metal

CONTENDER: Alan Baumgarten for Trial of the Chicago 7

UPSET: Yorgos Lamprinos for The Father

PRODUCTION DESIGN

The Father, Design: Peter Francis; Decoration: Cathy Featherstone

Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom, Design: Mark Ricker; Decoration: Karen O'Hara & Diana Stoughton

Mank, Design: Donald Graham Burt; Decoration: Jan Pascale

News of the World, Design: David Crank; Decoration: Elizabeth Keenan

Tenet, Design: Nathan Crowley; Decoration: Kathy Lucas

The Academy loves seeing a good European (re: British) period piece or an epic futuristic world, in which case The Father’s claustrophobic interior scenes or Tenet’s sci-fi thriller would be duking it out. But I’m going with a different type of “period” piece: Mank. Burt and Pascale’s meticulously recreated set shows Hollywood in the tweener years as the United States was emerging from the Depression and entering World War II. They also created an environment evocative of Citizen Kane, whose backstory is the centerpiece of the movie.

MAJ’s pick: Donald Graham Burt and Jan Pascale for Mank

UPSET: Nathan Crowley and Kathy Lucas for Tenet

COSTUME

Emma, Alexandra Byrne

Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom, Ann Roth Mank, Trish Summerville

Mulan, Bina Daigeler Pinocchio, Massimo Cantini Parrini

This award usually goes to a period (historical) piece, so depending on your definition of “period” – either all or almost none of the films fill that bill this year. If the Academy takes this category quite literally and traditionally, then Emma will take home the gold. But Byrne will have serious competition from both Bina Daigeler’s spectacular costuming the in live-action Mulan, and Trish Summerville’s exquisite attire (including a costume party) in Mank.

Previous winners Roth (The English Patient) and Byrne (Elizabeth: The Golden Age) may repeat, with Byrne early favorite, and Roth poised to make Oscar history: if she wins, she’ll be the oldest recipient in this category @ 89. This is one award that has no viable connection to Best Picture (ditto Make-up), as the achievements do not necessarily connect with other, bigger elements of film making like cinematography or editing.

Roth has and Daigeler have already been recognized by their respective designers guild for period and sci-fi costuming, respectively. And Viola Davis’ SAG win may give Roth additional momentum.

MAJ’s pick: Ann Roth for Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom

UPSET: Alexandra Byrne for Emma

LONGSHOT: Trish Summerville for Mank

MAKEUP AND HAIRSTYLING

Emma, Marese Langan, Laura Allen and Claudia Stolze

Hillbilly Elegy, Eryn Krueger Mekash, Matthew Mungle and Patricia Dehaney

Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom, Sergio Lopez-Rivera, Mia Neal and Jamika Wilson

Mank, Gigi Williams, Kimberley Spiteri and Colleen LaBaff

Pinocchio, Mark Coulier, Dalia Colli and Francesco Pegoretti

Holy cow! For the past several years, this category could not even come up with five nominees, and then – for the third year running – it’s filled. This year, the big question is which feat was more noteworthy: turning Glenn Close into the mawkish Mamaw in Hillbilly Elegy (a thoroughly awful movie), or the near-grotesque transformation of Viola Davis into Ma Rainey. Emma and Mank show far more restraint in the use of makeup to create a mood, a place, a sense of time.

But Makeup and Hairstyling is often not given for subtlty or understatement.

MAJ’s pick: Sergio Lopez-Rivera & Team for Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom

UPSET: Marese Langan & Team for Emma

LONGSHOT: Gigi Williams & Team for Mank

SOUND

Greyhound

Warren Shaw, Michael Minkler, Beau Borders and David Wyman

Mank

Ren Klyce, Jeremy Molod, David Parker, Nathan Nance and Drew Kunin

News of the World

Oliver Tarney, Mike Prestwood Smith, William Miller and John Pritchett

Soul

Ren Klyce, Coya Elliott and David Parker

Sound of Metal

Nicolas Becker, Jaime Baksht, Michellee Couttolenc, Carlos Cortés and Phillip Bladh

Guess my annual explanations about the difference between sound “editing” and sound “mixing” are no longer needed. As I’ve ranted and repeated myself for what seems like forever – Yes! There is – now was- a difference between sound editing and sound mixing. The nuanced difference between overall sound and aural effects is sometimes lost on the average moviegoer, mostly because these awards often go to the same film and the films are usually BIG (not to be confused w/LOUD). In short, you can really tell when sound is making a difference. This year’s nominees again all had the kind of sound quality that is distinctive and powerful – such that, even if you’re not paying attention to the sound, you really do notice it because it impacts the overall experience of watching the film.

But the Academy has decided that this nuance is no longer applicable (?) so the two awards have been collapsed into one. Sigh. Guess we will see what the trends will begin to look like.

Sound typically favors two film genres: musicals and action adventure, so with no musicals or action adventures in the mix this year, it looks like something new will prevail. Because of its creative use of sound in a film about one man’s entry into silence, Sound of Metal seems like the appropriate choice here.

MAJ’s pick: Sound of Metal

CONTENDER: Any of the other nominees could upset, but I’m going to stick w/Becker and Company for this one.

VISUAL EFFECTS

Love and Monsters, Matt Sloan, Genevieve Camilleri, Matt Everitt and Brian Cox

The Midnight Sky, Matthew Kasmir, Christopher Lawrence, Max Solomon and David Watkins

Mulan, Sean Faden, Anders Langlands, Seth Maury and Steve Ingram

The One and Only Ivan, Nick Davis, Greg Fisher, Ben Jones and Santiago Colomo Martinez

Tenet, Andrew Jackson, David Lee, Andrew Lockley and Scott Fisher

Many people equate this award with a summer blockbuster, but last year there wasn’t one (and no, Bad Boys doesn’t count). Most recent winners have been fall or holiday releases, with several also receiving Best Picture nods (think Life of Pi, Hugo,or Gravity). But again this year none of the nominees is up for best picture, so the winner is likely (again) to be a virtual visual crapshoot.

The frontrunners are The Midnight Sky (featuring a scruffy George Clooney) and Tenet (which may suffer because of director Christopher Nolan’s vicious attack against the studio’s decision to send his film directly to streaming). Love and Monsters has emerged as a dark horse. Technology will probably play a role in the winner, as many of the voters will make their decision around the use of high-level CG facial replacements and VFX shots (how many, how effectively used, etc.). Too techy for me, but I would suggest that Clooney’s Sky creates some intense imagery, despite its slow pace and understated (maybe “lack of” would be more accurate) drama. Of course, Tenet did win the BAFTA.

MAJ’s pick: Tenet

UPSET: The Midnight Sky

LONGSHOT: Love and Monsters

INTERNATIONAL FEATURE FILM

Another Round (Denmark) Better Dyas (Hong Kong)

Collective (Romania) The Man Who Solid His Skin (Tunisia)

Quo Vadis, Aida? (Bosnia & Herzegovinia)

I have seen one of the nominated films via streaming – and all or parts of the others online, so I’m speculating again a bit based on reviews…. Per my limited viewing – Another Round – and critics’ assessments, I’m going with what I saw. The film’s director, Thomas Vinterberg, was also nominated in the Best Director category though, unlike last year’s IFF and Best Picture winner, Parasite, another round did not garner the same kind of universal audience interest. So, based on Vinterberg’s directorial nom and the film’s recent BAFTA win, I’m going with Denmark’s entry.

MAJ’s pick: Another Round

PS A recommendation based on several critics’ observations: Romania’s Collective is nominated here and in as Best Documentary Feature. It comes praised as a “must-see” film, and an excellent contender (though unlikely winner) in both categories.

DOCUMENTARY FEATURE

Collective, Alexander Nanau and Bianca Oana

Crip Camp, Nicole Newnham, Jim LeBrecht and Sara Bolder

The Mole Agent, Maite Alberdi and Marcela Santibáñez

My Octopus Teacher, Pippa Ehrlich, James Reed and Craig Foster

Time, Garrett Bradley, Lauren Domino and Kellen Quinn

With its typical collection of important social and political subjects – war, finance, world hunger – Best Documentary feature has some interesting nominees and also some glaring snubs this year. Expected to be in this group, but omitted were some dazzling docs, among them Boys State, Dick Johnson is Dead and Welcome to Chechnya. Of those that did make the final cut, it’s a toss up between Time and My Octopus Teacher. Some critics thought Time – a sprawling documentary that sets love against the industrial prison complex – was not on the best doc, but the best film of the year. Late release My Octopus Teacher won the Producers Guild Award and the BAFTA in this category and is considered a “crowd pleaser” for its director’s playful interaction with the title creature.

MAJ’s pick: My Octopus Teacher

Don’t be surprised if…. Time wins (probably more of a longshot now)

ANIMATED FEATURE

ONWARD

OVER THE MOON A SHAUN THE SHEEP MOVIE: FARMAGEDDON

SOUL WOLFWALKERS

This may be the only category other than Best Actor that appears to be a lock: Soul has won every major award in this category, including the Golden Globe and the BAFTA. But Wolfwalkers provides some very strong competition, even though it’s not likely to win.

MAJ’s pick: Soul

UPSET: Wolfwalkers

DOCUMENTARY / ANIMATED / LIVE ACTION SHORTS

Not having kept up w/the Documentary, Animated or Live-Action (short) categories for the umpteenth time, I’m mostly taking a pass, but I’m always certain one of the nominees will win. It seems pretty clear from various prognosticators that there are frontrunners in each of the categories, with a favorite in the Animated Short category.

We shall see..or not. One of these years, I’ll make it to the marathon pre-Oscar showings of all these nominees.

BTW, no one has yet (still not?) responded to my annual question: How many of you go to see the “short subjects” when they play as a single bill in theatres?

DOCUMENTARY SHORT

Collette, Anthony Giacchino and Alice Doyard

A Concerto Is a Conversation, Ben Proudfoot and Kris Bowers

Do Not Split, Anders Hammer and Charlotte Cook

Hunger Ward, Skye Fitzgerald and Michael Scheuerman

A Love Song for Latasha, Sophia Nahli Allison and Janice Duncan

MAJ’s Pick: A Concerto Is a Conversation

The title alone should merit a win because it is true.

ANIMATED SHORT

Burrow, Madeline Sharafian and Michael Capbarat

Genius Loci, Adrien Mérigeau and Amaury Ovise

If Anything Happens I Love You, Will McCormack and Michael Govier

Opera, Erick Oh

Yes-People, Gísli Darri Halldórsson and Arnar Gunnarsson

Coming in at a mere six minutes (the title takes almost as long to read), If Anything Happens I Love You maximizes its message about love and grief and is especially timely this year, given that it was made before the pandemic erupted. See? I told you. Hollywood being “proactive” foreshadowing what is to come. If you have a moment, check out the animation on this one – so start, simple and compelling, a truly remarkable feat, given the film’s topic and length.

Reminds me of something Queen Elizabeth II once said, “Grief is the price we pay for love.”

MAJ’s Pick: If Anything Happens I Love You

LIVE ACTION SHORT

Feeling Through, Doug Roland and Susan Ruzenski

The Letter Room, Elvira Lind and Sofia Sondervan

The Present, Farah Nabulsi and Ossama Bawardi

Two Distant Strangers, Travon Free and Martin Desmond Roe

White Eye, Tomer Shushan and Shira Hochman

Live Action Short is always tough to pick because it’s usually filled with compelling commentaries about social justice. This year is no exception, with topics ranging from the George Floyd Protest (Two Distant Strangers) to a homeless youth helping the deaf and blind (Feeling Through). The Present was produced by Netflix, and White Tiger boasts its 20-minute, single shot cinematography. But The Letter Room may upset all, as it stars actor Oscar Isaac (Inside Llewyn Davis, Poe Dameron in the last two Star Wars installments), who also served as executive producer. AMPAS voters may be drawn to Isaac’s star power here.

MAJ’s Pick: The Letter Room OR Feeling Through

And the Oscar goes to….

EPILOGUE

Like last year, there are many issues that warrant discussion this year, though AMPAS’s ongoing controversy concerning Oscar’s lack of diversity seems to have been jolted (finally!) into the 21st century with record nominations of first-timers, including people of color in almost all areas of filmmaking, and notably in the directing and four acting categories. Boseman and Kaluuya are likely acting winners, but if Davis overtakes Mulligan for Best Actress and Yuh-Jung Yuon prevails as Supporting Actress, we would witness Hollywood history, with all four acting awards going to people of color. And Chloe Zhao could set all kinds of records for her work on Nomadland.

#MeToo as it relates to filmmaking and filmmakers was addressed memorably and head-on in Emerald Fennell’s provocative Promising Young Woman. Unlike other groundbreaking films about sexual abuse /gang-rape (1988’s The Accused w/Jodie Foster’s Best Actress win comes to mind), PYW takes no prisoners and refuses to show woman as victims. Though some of scenes may be shocking in their bold, near-delusional approach, the film clearly marks a departure in the way women’s stories are told. Ditto for Pieces of a Woman. Here’s hoping that the glass ceiling so long hovering over cinematic storytelling will be broken and allow for more stories like 2016’s Moonlight, last year’s Parasite, and this year’s Minari (among others).

As many of you know, I am a great believer in the strength of diversity, and cinema can be – and has been - a powerful force recognizing and addressing important social issues, so the time to broaden our perspectives and our knowledge of different cultures, lifestyles and perspectives is now.

Last year, I shared the following observation about the future of cinema:

The future of American and International Cinema is at a crossroads, and one of the most frightening issues is that franchises like Marvel and DC comics are gradually narrowing the choices of what films will be made, meaning that, over time, films will exist more and more to pander to whatever demographic is buying the most tickets.

That more and more movies will now face streaming options is another concern: will cinema as we know it – a larger than life art form – now be reduced to the restrictions associated with TV viewing? Not an appealing thought. Scorsese admitted his own concern that, in order to make The Irishman, he needed financing from Netflix, which only offered limited theatrical release before going straight to streaming.

This year, for the first time since I was four (my aunt Helen took me to see Pinocchio in the theatre and I was hooked – Jiminy Cricket’s “When You Wish Upon a Star” remains a favorite to this day), I did not go to a movie theatre to watch a film. My last cinema experience was Emma which I saw in Albany, NY the week before the pandemic hit. And, even though I’m now considered “fully vaccinated,” I don’t know when I’ll feel comfortable returning to a movie theatre (hopefully, sometime later this year).

So I couldn’t help but wonder how the at-home streaming experience may have affected my assessment of movies this year. Though many – Nomadland, Supernova, Judas and the Black Messiah – moved me to tears, and some (Trial of the Chicago 7) kept me riveted on the couch , others left me strangely detached (Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom, Pieces of a Woman) and almost disinterested.

Had I not been able to use fast-forward, as I did w/Pieces and Sound of Metal, would I have gained greater appreciation for these critically praised films? Or would they have still left me scratching my head as I did when I sat through Terrence Malick’s Tree of Life, a NY Times favorite that I found one of the most self-indulgent, pretentious pieces of filmmaking ever made?

Writing this Epilogue has sparked other observations and memories. Earlier today as I made my way through the last of my Oscar predictions, the funeral of Prince Philip was on TV. With one eye on my text and the other on the events of the day, I found myself pause, as something on the screen made me look up and stay. It was Elizabeth II, head bowed, masked and dressed in appropriate black, sitting alone. How small and fragile she looked, I thought. And how alone.

Granted, she is nearing her 95th birthday, but suddenly the grandeur of St. George Chapel overwhelmed her, and the reality – the sadness - of her solitary presence became clear. There she was in this historic place of worship, surrounded (sort of) by family, but undoubtedly alone. Her consort of almost three-quarters of a century has passed. It is the end of an era.

In a very different, but equally telling way (at least, for me), the image of Elizabeth sitting alone reminded me of being in a movie theatre. There you are – surrounded (sort of) by audience members, maybe even with a friend or loved one – but nonetheless alone. Movie-going in the theatre may be the one place you can be with others and remain alone. Alone in your grief, perhaps, or your joy, or maybe just lost in the splendor of the cinematic moment.

Unlike watching television, going to the cinema has always a larger-than-life experience, one that entices the audience to step out of reality and be swept away. Whether it takes you far from your own experience or touches something deeply intimate within your heart, a movie can leave an impression that encourages you to think, to imagine, to step outside your comfort zone in ways that television (yes, even streaming on television) cannot.

As a geeky kid (at least, I felt like one), a shy “smart girl” with glasses and braces who hadn’t yet found her confidence or her sense of self, I found going to the movies to be not just an escape, but a kind of refuge and salvation. Movies allowed me to dream beyond my own reality, to visit other places and share different stories about the human experience. Movies - and my Oberlin education - got into my head and nudged me outside of what could have been a very limited life in a declining industrial rust-belt city.

Not that there is anything wrong with growing up in Lorain, OH – my parents gave me two of the greatest gifts when they encouraged my interest in music and my desire to go to college. But movies and school presented a set of alternate options and motivated me to think outside the box in terms of what I wanted in life, making me more of a risk-taker (personally and professionally) than I might have otherwise been.

To this day, movie memories are some of those I hold most dear, and I would hate to see the ritual of sitting in a darkened theatre as the lights go down come to an end. If there is a spiritual experience for me beyond the church, it is cinema (and maybe a few select concerts 😊).

Someday, I hope to see Nomadland, Judas and the Black Messiah and Trial of the Chicago 7 in a theatre. They are all films with themes that transcend time, place, and culture, and the power of their respective stories needs a bigger space than a smart TV screen. In that way, I hope the era of movie going has not yet ended, just merely been enhanced by the option of streaming.

For me the jury remains out on the generational and technological changes now going on politically, socially and in movies. The impact of the pandemic will surely reach wider than working from home, ordering online and utilizing various types of curbside pick-up in lieu of shopping. I’m not sure if it’s good or bad, comedy or tragedy. But I do hope that, in the end… there are still movies and theatres in which to see them. This is one era that needs to continue on.

I return now to Mank, which holds one of my two favorite movie lines of 2020. Louis B. Mayer (Arliss Howard) beautifully sums up my love of movies (and probably why I still think Mank is 2020’s best film):

"This is the business where the buyer gets nothing for his money but a memory. What he bought still belongs to the man who sold it. That's the real magic of the movies and don't let anybody tell you different."

So let’s keep that magic and maybe I’ll see you all at the movies sometime soon. If not there, then maybe “I’ll see you [somewhere] down the road.” (Nomadland, my other favorite line.)

Stay safe and well, my friends.

*******

PS Don’t forget the always-fabulous, consistently-irreverent Independent Spirit Awards: Thursday, April 22 @ 9:00 PM CDT on IFC, streaming simultaneously on AMC+.