Alright, so don't drink and drive, don't pee in the street, celebrate the New Year happily and be safe, all of that.

I'm reminded every year around this time of the 1999/2000 New Years I enjoyed directly beneath the ball in Times Square. I spent 14 hours in that unruly, unforgiving environment. It took me, at one point, an hour and a half to wade through a sea of humanity just to go to a porta john and back. The porta john was maybe twenty feet away from where my friends and I had staked our spot. I recall the systematic counting down of the new year for each time zone, and when it came time for the Brits, John Lennon's "All You Need Is Love" played majestically throughout the streets over the speaker system. I looked around me, and everyone, all races, all creeds, all nationalities, were singing along: "All you need is love." It was beautiful.

Anyway, I always remember that and consider that this is the moment when we all get to reboot and start all over again. Here's hoping your reboot is exactly what you need.

We'll be back here at In contention tomorrow with the top ten most anticipated films of 2007. Until then...Happy New Year.

Sound mixing and music composition may seem to be unrelated tasks when it comes to the creation of a film. But both tasks go to toward the betterment of a given film’s overall soundtrack, the audible experience that can add to the enjoyment of a film as much as the most beautiful of landscapes or the most dazzling of visual effects sequences. I recently had the opportunity to speak to a composer and sound mixer who are in the thick of this year’s award races in their respective categories.

This is why I like to get that yearly wrap up handled the week before the holidays. It gives me the opportunity to just waste away for the next week and a half doing nothing, if I so choose. Of course, with the easy access the internet affords, we all know I'll pop up from time to time before the end of the year (likely over at The Blog for some glorious randomness), but preferably, In Contention will be a vague aspect of my life until the guild nominations unload starting on January 4. Ugh!

But in any case, for now, allow me to wish you and yours a happy holiday season. It's been a crazy year, full of intrigue in all corners; politics, entertainment, sports, etc. The Apocalypse seems to be closer at hand each and every year. I don't know about you, but I plan to be wearing sunglasses and hawaii shorts when the world explodes, so bring it on!

Here's hoping 2007 is kind to us all. See you on the other side. (And be sure to check back for Gerard's final 2006 "Tech Support" column next week.)

So here we are. The end of the line. All the critics’ groups have dished out their awards (did that make you dizzy enough last week?) and the guilds are soon to announce their nominees. Before we duck out for the holiday season here at In Contention, however, let’s toss up the obligatory rundown of kudos, as far as my wacky mind and opinion sees things. Again, that #1 tie Monday makes it clear that it’s very difficult to qualify “The Fountain” and “Inland Empire,” so I’ve opted ouot of letting those films top the Best Picture and Best Director categories here. It really is tough to describe, I guess, but oh well. I’m not curing cancer here…

Best Picture
“Children of Men”

Best Director
Alfonso Cuarón, “Children of Men”

Best Actor
Gael García Bernal, “The Science of Sleep”

Best Actress
Laura Dern, “Inland Empire”

Best Supporting Actor
Jack Nicholson, “The Departed”

Best Supporting Actress
Rinko Kikuchi, “Babel”

Best Adapted Screenplay
“The Departed”
Written by William Monahan
Based on an original screenplay by Feliz Chong, Siu Fai Mak

Best Original Screenplay
“Babel”
Written by Guillermo Ariaga

Best Art Direction
“Children of Men”
Jim Clay, Geoffrey Kirkland,

Best Cinematography
“Children of Men”
Emmanuel Lubezki

Best Costume Design
“Dreamgirls”
Sharen Davis

Best Film Editing
“United 93”
Clare Douglas, Richard Pearson, Christopher Rouse

Best Makeup
“Pan’s Labyrinth”

Best Music – Original Score
“The Fountain”
Clint Mansell

Best Music – Original Song
“Listen” from “Dreamgirls”

Best Sound Mixing
“Happy Feet”

Best Sound Editing
“Happy Feet”

Best Visual Effects
“Superman Returns”

Best Animated Feature
“Over the Hedge”

Best Ensemble Performance
“Shortbus”

Now beyond that, I like to offer up varying degrees of commendations. This or that, just to get some other titles out there and give an overall view of how I saw the 2006 cinematic landscape:

Most Underrated Film of the Year
“Running with Scissors”

Most Overrated Film of the Year
“Volver”

Best Directorial Debut
Rian Johnson, “Brick”

Breakthrough Performance (Male)
Kazunari Ninomiya, “Letters from Iwo Jima”

Breakthrough Performance (Female)
Rinko Kikuchi, “Babel”

Best Cameo Performance (Male)
Dustin Hoffman, “The Lost City”

Best Cameo Performance (Female)
Julia Ormond, “Inland Empire”

Best Performance in a Bad Film
Cate Blanchett, “The Good German”

Worst Performance in a Good Film
Rachel Weisz, “The Fountain”

Best FYC Campaign
Paramount Pictures for “Dreamgirls”

This film has been on the awards circuit for ten months, and it shows no signs of stopping. But Paramount/Dreamworks has put together a fetching ad campaign full of bright colors and christening itself as THE contender to beat this awards season.

Studio of the Year
Fox Searchlight Pictures

Call it the “best schmoozer” award if you must, but I think this kind of thing can creatively reach a bit deeper. Sometimes it goes beyond the dollars earned and the quality of product on the whole. After all, the worst film can be a top grosser and the best film can lack the pizzazz of a supportive studio. It seemed every time I came home this fall, there was something else in the mail pitching consideration for a Fox Searchlight offering. Whether it be a little yellow bus for “Little Miss Sunshine,” separate category cards for “Notes on a Scandal” or a “Thank You for Smoking” Christmas card, this was a studio visibly encouraged by and supportive of its slate of 2006 cinematic product. Also going to great lengths to throw hip events for films like “Sunshine” and “Fast Food Nation,” this is a company, and a PR team, that understands how to reach out to the industry, and they did so vibrantly, excitedly, all throughout the year. It certainly helps that their slate was a valuable, diverse and exceptional one, to say the least. Bravo.

Best Poster
“The Last King of Scotland”

Best Trailer
“The Prestige”

Most Surprising Film of the Year
“The Painted Veil”

Most Disappointing Film of the Year
“Miami Vice”

Best Action Sequence
“Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest”

The Kraken sinks the Black Pearl and the end(?) of Jack Sparrow.

Best Opening Titles Sequence
“Casino Royale”

Entertainer of the Year
Clint Eastwood

Whatever your opinions of “Flags of Our Fathers” and “Letters from Iwo Jima,” these efforts combine for one hell of an ambitious endeavor. I applaud such bravura, as anyone who knows the effort that goes into making just ONE movie would.

As I mentioned when I introduced the category in September, there is a two-stage process in determining the nominees for Best Visual Effects. And guess what? Stage One has now passed!

Last Friday, the following titles were announced as finalists in the category:

“Casino Royale”
“Eragon”
“Night at the Museum”
“Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest”
“Poseidon”
“Superman Returns”
“X-Men: The Last Stand”

The committee will now screen pre-selected scenes from these titles and choose three nominees from among them.

More bubble gum fun today.

No one here at In Contention is under the assumption that our coverage actually INFLUENCES the Oscar race. You’ll get that feeling at other outlets, and even if our work here does make such an impact, it certainly isn’t our intention. THAT SAID, we all have our little fantasies, those “if I were an Academy member” times when you wish this film or that had made it into contention. So I ward off those demons every year with a personal ballot listing the nominees I think deserve a mention in each category. Sometimes my views line up with AMPAS, sometimes they don’t. But hey, it’s all subjective in the end.

I tack on a final category, by the way, that I guess COULD be seen as an attempt to influence voters. There REALLY needs to be a Best Ensemble award at the Oscars. I don’t know, maybe I’m alone. But I always include it, nonetheless.

One final note, re: “The Fountain” and “Inland Empire.” I mentioned in Monday’s Top Ten column that those films, though they combine to form my #1 film of the year, are impossible to qualify. As such, you won’t see them listed in the Best Picture or Best Director categories because it’s, again, just too difficult to think of the films in those terms. There are various category mentions throughout for each, as varying elements of those films stick out as worthy of commendation. But otherwise, in the top two tiers, I’ve opted out of considering them. Hey, it leaves room for more!

We’ll wrap the year in review up on Friday with a final array of personal kudos. And then it’s Happy Holidays and hello 2007!

The ballot:

Best Picture
“Babel”
“Children of Men”
“The Departed”
“The Last King of Scotland”
“Shortbus”

Best Director
Alejandro González Iñárritu, “Babel”
Alfonso Cuarón, “Children of Men”
Martin Scorsese, “The Departed”
Kevin Macdonald, “The Last King of Scotland”
John Cameron Mitchell, “Shortbus”

Best Actor
Gael García Bernal, “The Science of Sleep”
Jude Law, “Breaking and Entering”
Leonardo DiCaprio, “The Departed”
Joseph Gordon-Levitt, “Brick”
Forest Whitaker, “The Last King of Scotland”

Best Actress
Annette Bening, “Running With Scissors”
Judi Dench, “Notes on a Scandal”
Laura Dern, “Inland Empire”
Helen Mirren, “The Queen”
Kate Winslet, “Little Children”

Best Supporting Actor
Kevin Kline, “A Prairie Home Companion”
Sergi López, “Pan’s Labyrinth”
Jack Nicholson, “The Departed”
Kazunari Ninomiya, “Letters from Iwo Jima”
Jaden Smith, “The Pursuit of Happyness”

Best Supporting Actress
Adriana Barazza, “Babel”
Juliette Binoche, “Breaking and Entering”
Rinko Kikuchi, “Babel”
Brittany Murphy, “The Dead Girl”
Emma Thompson, “Stranger than Fiction”

Best Adapted Screenplay
“Children of Men”
“The Departed”
“The Last King of Scotland”
“The Painted Veil”
“Thank You for Smoking”

Best Original Screenplay
“Babel”
“Breaking and Entering”
“Brick”
“Shortbus”
“Stranger Than Fiction”

Best Art Direction
“Children of Men”
“Inland Empire”
“Perfume: The Story of a Murderer”
“The Prestige”
“Running With Scissors”

Best Cinematography
“Breaking and Entering”
“Children of Men”
“The Fountain”
“The Last King of Scotland”
“The Prestige”

Best Costume Design
“Curse of the Golden Flower”
“Dreamgirls”
“Marie Antoinette”
“Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest”
“The Prestige”

Best Film Editing
“The Departed”
“Inland Empire”
“The Last King of Scotland”
“Shortbus”
“United 93”

Best Makeup
“Pan’s Labyrinth”
“Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest”
“X-Men: The Last Stand”

Best Music – Original Score
“The Fountain”
“The Good German”
“Inside Man”
“Letters from Iwo Jima”
“Notes on a Scandal”

Best Sound Mixing
“Children of Men”
“The Departed”
“Dreamgirls”
“Happy Feet”
“Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest”

Best Sound Editing
“Flags of Our Fathers”
“Happy Feet”
“Miami Vice”
“Superman Returns”
“World Trade Center”

Best Visual Effects
“The Fountain”
“Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest”
“Superman Returns”

Best Ensemble Performance
“The Departed”
“Shortbus”
“Letters from Iwo Jima”
“Little Miss Sunshine”
“A Prairie Home Companion”

In Contention’s Year in Review
Monday: “A Good Year” Indeed: The Best Films of 2006

A fine year at the cinemas is an incredibly subjective thing. After all, the worst year in a long time in my view (2005) could be seen as one of the best years in your view or the next guy’s. I fought hard to enjoy myself last year, but something about those 365 days made them a chore to weather. As I mentioned in an item posted earlier this year, that disregard for, and ultimate displeasure with what Hollywood had to offer manifested itself in a top ten list full of morose and down-tuned artistic endeavors, from Gus Van Sant’s “Last Days” to Gore Verbinski’s “The Weather Man.”

2006 started off quietly. Typical dumping ground efforts came and went (“Firewall,” “Freedomland”), while a number of disappointments lurked around the corner of spring (“Inside Man,” “V for Vendetta”). A cynical movie-goer in my position might begin to dread a woeful continuation of the prior year’s offerings. But there were shafts of light penetrating a darkened sky in those early months, hinting at a potential oasis beyond.

Sidney Lumet’s “Find Me Guilty” and Jason Reitman’s “Thank You for Smoking” really kicked things off in this regard. Critical acclaim soon came the way of Paul Greengrass’s “United 93,” an effort truly exemplary of a rising director carving out a niche undoubtedly his own. Independent efforts like Doug Atchison’s “Akeelah and the Bee” and Rian Johnson’s “Brick” were also opening and impressing on the spot. Things were looking up.

The summer landed and all you could make out in the blockbuster garble was this or that about Tom Cruise and the box office “failure” of J.J. Abrams’s “Mission: Impossible III.” But I still thought it was a hell of a ride worthy of the series – no worries. I even found some room to have a good time in an IMAX screening of Wolfgang Peterson’s “Poseidon,” while the rest of the world was hanging it from the rafters or otherwise strapping it to a stake, critically igniting it like a witch.

Sure, Ron Howard’s “The Da Vinci Code” opened and seriously stunk up the joint, serving as one of the worst films of the year throughout. But how can you complain when Al Gore is preaching “An Inconvenient Truth” to America, while at the same time Dreamworks is releasing a quality animated experience in “Over the Hedge?” And thank goodness for that, by the way, given that Pixar was missing the mark considerably with “Cars” (even if they were cleaning up at the box office).

Heck, I didn’t even mind that the screenwriting team behind “X-Men: The Last Stand” royally screwed the franchise over, going out of my way to commend Brett Ratner for shooting his film with such expediency at the mandate of a foolish studio decision. That alone shocked my socks off. (Note: The movie is still a train-wreck.)

Various summer flops ebbed and flowed amongst it all, and finally the first serious awards film of the season landed in June – what would come to be the swansong of one of the most championed American directors of all time. Robert Altman’s “A Prairie Home Companion” survived the next six months as one of the finest offerings of 2006 – a perfect, paradoxically golden-hued exit for the rebellious craftsman.

Bryan Singer’s “Superman Returns” was acceptable and a delight for the July 4th corridor, Gore Verbinski’s “Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest” destroyed box office records and exhausted this viewer with the wildest of rides, M. Night Shyamalan’s “Lady in the Water” received the thrashing the director deserved, if not the film, and Michael Mann’s “Miami Vice” punctuated the fact that there is a necessity for him to stay out of frivolous, commercial fare and get back to business.

The touchdown of Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris’s “Little Miss Sunshine” and Oliver Stone’s “World Trade Center” announced a great start for the 2006 film awards season. By the middle of August, it seemed we were neck deep in it, and THAT’S when my eyes began to open.

It seemed to me that every other day I was sitting in a screening room, witnessing wonderful, diverse and surprisingly capable filmmaking. Seasoned vets and youthful upstarts alike were cranking out cinematic gold. Four star reviews (whatever those mean) seemed to pour out of me, and it became clearer and clearer that, to my mind, 2006 was the best year for movies since the rush of excitement we felt in 1999.

By the time the fall months hit us, the entire ride was dizzying. Film festivals blurred together, drama came and went and the business of Oscar prognostication was a surprisingly tame experience (most of the time).

And then, in the final month of 2006, I saw the two best films of the year – or what I would come to consider the year’s best – and a whole new perspective would set in. I began to recognize potential change lying on the horizon in a medium long-settled upon in its current state, and vibrantly, beautifully, 2006 made sense.

Interestingly enough, there wasn’t a “decade’s greatest” sort of film in the mix for me. There isn’t that film on the level of Terrence Malick’s “The Thin Red Line” or Lars von Trier’s “Dogville” that left me shouting to the heavens “This is the best film I’ve seen in ‘x’ number of years!” But the overall quality across the board is what will make 2006 stick out in my mind – that notion that every time I turned around, every time I glanced over my shoulder, there was something to like, something to champion, something to appreciate. That and, of course, the punctuation of those two pioneering efforts of innovation at the end of the line.

And that was my 2006 experience. I blinked, it was over…and here we are.

Crafting an ordered list of the best films of the year was a difficult chore this time around. Like no other year, I really wish I could just cough up a blob of films and call the list the year’s finest. But people like their qualifiers, so rank them I shall. But first, the films that just missed placement in the top tier.

Unfairly maligned by a critical community forever emotionally on guard, Emilio Estevez’s “Bobby” is everything his prior work was not. It is both insightful and meaningful. It exudes passion and commands relevance. It represents a cross-section of a country battered and bruised, and emphasizes the beacon of light that hoped to usher it to greener pastures. Crafted with graceful devotion and blistering sincerity, “Bobby” is not merely one of the most personal films of the year. In a season curiously dedicated to themes of compassion and understanding, it is one of the most resonant film-going experiences politically inclined cinema can aspire to be. Heaven help the cynical.

Rian Johnson’s “Brick” was the single greatest feature debut of the year. Chocked full of unique panache, an ironic sense of the medium and boasting a charismatic lead performance from actor Joseph Gordon-Levitt, the film is a thrill from start to finish. It is one of those efforts that slips through the cracks and misses deserving notice once the film awards season finally rolls around. And that really is a shame, because “Brick” represents the sort of filmmaking that rejuvenates and refocuses the perspective of individual creation. This is the kind of film that creates new filmmakers. This is the kind of artistry that eventually gets lost in the shuffle of success and financial necessity. This is what independent filmmaking is all about.

It took two viewings of Phillip Noyce’s “Catch a Fire” to really get my head around the accomplishment. Inspired by the true story of Apartheid-era freedom fighter Patrick Chamusso, the film is a tight and specific dissection of one of the humanity’s most deplorable times. Typically an uneven filmmaker, Noyce is the sort to find both artistic and commercial room for his politicized brand of output. “Catch a Fire” is a mixture of the two, serving as an exhilarating pot-boiler and a deeply analytical work all the same. Derek Luke proves, yet again, that he is one of the most promising actors of his generation, while Tim Robbins crafted a steely-eyed villain to make the skin crawl (another aspect of the film that took subsequent viewings to fully appreciate).

What director Clint Eastwood and his seasoned crew expedited in the wake of missing the mark with “Flags of Our Fathers” earlier in the fall is a film unlike any other entry in the war genre to date. “Letters from Iwo Jima” is ultimately an anti-war statement as lacerating and unique as the anti-violence mandate of Eastwood’s masterpiece, “Unforgiven.” But regardless of perceived success or failure, there is something exceptional about an American filmmaker taking this approach, sympathetically revealing the story of a former enemy of his homeland. One of the year’s most organic ensembles finds high marks in the performances of Ken Watanabe and Kazunari Ninomiya.

Richard Eyre’s “Notes on a Scandal” is a particular sort of film, one that builds suspense and tension with every moving part of its machinery. On the surface, the film plays like a thriller, dragging the viewer through its wicked tale toward a sinking, almost matter of fact conclusion. But on deeper levels, “Notes on a Scandal” is a true character study – an analysis of dependence, delusion and, ultimately, hopelessness. It would be much too simple to claim Dame Judi Dench’s performance as her bravest portrayal to date. Philip Glass’s score, perhaps his best work yet, tells the story as well as the visual elements, functioning more appropriately as a work of musical composition than any other such effort this year.

Probably director Guillermo del Toro’s career-finest work, “Pan’s Labyrinth” is an unabashedly creative piece of filmmaking. Perhaps not quite the masterpiece some critical communities might deem it to be, the film is nonetheless an example of an artist stretching the limits of his medium, as well as his audience’s consciousness. A visual feat to say the least, high marks go to the already award-winning cinematography and production design, and especially Sergi López’s vile, serpentine performance as the deplorable Capitán Vidal. There might be a masterpiece lurking in the imagination of del Toro yet, and though “Pan’s Labyrinth” isn’t quite there, something, someday, most certainly will be.

Robert Altman’s lingering vision of a radio show’s dying hours is one of the director’s greatest creations in a career that has spanned decades. Crafted from the imagination of “Prairie Home” maestro Garrison Keillor, the screenplay hides a certain shade of faith and destiny beneath the surface of an otherwise hilarious ensemble piece. The effect is an elaborate richness, proving a number of levels being worked upon. The cast shines throughout, but standouts would have to include Kevin Kline’s gumshoe wannabe Guy Noir, Woody Harrelson and John C. Reilly as a pair of misfit country-western singers, Dusty and Lefty, and Meryl Streep’s sensitive and world-weathered portrayal opposite on-screen sister Lily Tomlin.

Carefully calibrated and wound to a specific 103 minutes, Stephen Frear’s “The Queen” is a modest and fine hour for a director who has been cranking out work of the highest quality for over two decades. Though it revolves around an event that occurred nine years ago, and prior to the post-9/11 environment we endure today, the film is very much a current piece of filmmaking. It is about the necessity for a leader to be in touch with his or her people. It is about finding a balance and, if not maintaining that balance, at the very least striving for it at all costs. “The Queen” could be seen as quite applicable to our current domestic political environment, or it could simply be enjoyed as an airy, pleasant endeavor with no frills. But isn’t it the best of cinema that finds that balance?

In his feature directorial debut, writer/director Jason Reitman (son of filmmaker Ivan Reitman) saw what would become one of the year’s best comedies lie in gestation for a number of years. Based on the Christopher Buckley novel of the same name, “Thank You for Smoking” is the libertarian flag-waver of the cinematic universe. First hitting the page when he was younger than the editor of this website, Reitman stuck with this story of freedom of choice as seen through the veil of a tobacco lobbyist and spinmeister, ultimately knocking his first lengthy endeavor out of the park. Aaron Eckhart is devilish and playful as Nick Naylor – and he’s seemingly the only guy on the planet born for such a role.

The pair of 9/11 endeavors this year couldn’t have been more opposing, both in style and in tone. But both films are a testament to professionalism, each existing as exemplary pieces of filmmaking rather than stunts set in motion to capitalize on the emotion found bottled in the memories of that fateful day. Paul Greengrass’s “United 93” is a swift trip into the hyper-real, a film as dizzying in its sense of authenticity as it is harrowing in its depiction of heroism. But the real story seemed to be Greengrass himself, most certainly one of, if not the most promising director of his generation. If Michael Mann is a director that glamorizes ultra-reality, Greengrass is a director who utilizes it like a tool in his arsenal. It's a commanding sort of helming that seems to almost recall the notion of autuerism.

Oliver Stone’s close-to-the-cuff depiction of something so personal, yet so universal, leaves the instigating events of September 11, 2001 almost as an afterthought – lipstick on the rim of a wineglass long emptied. The triumph of commanding such humanity belongs in large part to screenwriter Andrea Berloff, who pitched a striking and rich tale to producers Michael Shamberg and Stacy Sher before burying herself into the lives of her story’s subjects. A huge chunk of that glory, however, deserves to be placed into the hands of Stone, a filmmaker who shows in this latest effort (amidst a career speckled with films that are his own, if nothing else) that he retains the professionalism to tell a story free of artistic whimsy or personal commentary.

And now, the top ten films of 2006:

A good comedy is a difficult thing to come by. Usually comedies aim for the easy marks, and typically, that’s the best course of action. In the immortal words of Cosmo Brown, “Make ‘em laugh!” But when a comedy reaches past the funny bone and wiggles its way into the heart, that’s the mark of a true gem. If a filmmaker (or filmmakers) can manage such a task beyond the never-ending check book of a major studio, the accomplishment is even more considerable. That’s precisely what Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris managed with “Little Miss Sunshine.”

Michael Arndt’s screenplay has quickly become one of the most championed original works of the year. As well it should be. He capably molded a troupe of characters that colorfully carried across a tale of love, family, understanding and camaraderie. Any thespian would have killed for a place in the mix, and Dayton and Faris peppered the narrative with some of the finest actors for this kind of work. Greg Kinnear, Toni Collette, Paul Dano, Alan Arkin, Abigail Breslin and Steve Carrell each hit the mark and then some, both separately and collectively.

Not since the heyday of Merchant/Ivory has a film in the vein of John Curran’s “The Painted Veil” come along and found the right emotional and artistic marks. Based on the M. Somerset Maugham novel of the same name, the film is a different kind of love story, one crafted in the world of independent filmmaking rather than the glut of studio tent poles. And the intimacy shows, as Curran leaps from the strictures of efforts like “We Don’t Live Here Anymore” and into a different place of epic command at a story’s roots.

Edward Norton had a field day in the world of independent cinema this year. Performances in Neil Burger’s “The Illusionist” and especially David Jacobson’s “Down in the Valley” proved his migration out of the studio system and into a world of more creative control. In “The Painted Veil,” he disappeared into the role of Walter Fane like no other performance since 1998’s “American History X.” Naomi Watts also puts forth an exemplary leading performance, charting the arc of a woman who matures through love and understanding.

Anthony Minghella has spent most of his career tackling large, sometimes grandiloquent epics with central themes of obsession and passion, love and longing lurking within the frames. “Breaking and Entering” marked the first departure from such sweeping settings since his directorial debut, “Truly Madly Deeply.” What feels like the director’s most personal work to date, the film is possibly his most achieved work as well, something that represents a reawakening to the passion of filmmaking and sporting a lived-in quality that warms the soul.

Sharing themes of an individual’s place in his or her life with Todd Field’s “Little Children,” for instance, “Breaking and Entering” is one of a select few films from the 2006 film season that seems to ponder what it is putting forth through every nuance and scene. Jude Law offers his greatest performance to date opposite actresses Juliette Binoche and Robin Wright Penn. Binoche, in particular, carries across a mixture of beauty and exhaustion like no actress since Meryl Streep in “The Bridges of Madison County.”

Zach Helm’s screenplay “Stranger than Fiction” received mixed reaction from critics and audiences alike toward the end of 2006. Some circles found it a creatively muted experience, while others offered praise for its ingenuity, fit with comparisons to the work of Charlie Kaufman. Others still saw parallels to the films of Frank Capra. Regardless, the film quickly became one of the most meaningful cinematic exercises of the year for this viewer – an achievement as profound in its broad gestures as it is in its more intimate commentaries.

Directed with a thoughtful hand by filmmaker Marc Forster, “Stranger than Fiction” can be about a number of things to a number of people. Some might see modest Christian symbolism. Others might sense the story of a man’s refusal to live his life by the numbers any longer. But whatever it might be to you or me or the next guy, that a film this commercial leaves interpretation up in the air in this manner is an achievement unto itself. A great comedic ensemble finds high marks in performances by Emma Thompson and Ferrell, in a career-topping portrayal.

Filmmaking duo Alejandro González Iñárritu and Guillermo Ariaga sadly parted ways in 2006, but not before unloading the crowning achievement of their young careers, “Babel.” Much more ambitious than their prior collaborations “Amores Perros” and “21 Grams,” though paradoxically more accessible on the whole, the film is a particular specimen in the recent lineage of socially and politically conscious filmmaking.

Amidst a year noted as having an intriguing devotion to compassion and harmony through a variety of filmmaking efforts, “Babel” sat right at the top of the heap. “Listen” was the tagline peppering movie posters and print advertisements, and it resonated deeply, yet simplistically, within the parameters of Ariaga’s screenplay. Sporting an international ensemble that has deservedly corralled praise from all corners of the film-going community, the film’s true find is actress Rinko Kikuchi, a fresh face with searing talent we’d be so lucky to witness on screen again in the future.

Celebrated filmmaker Martin Scorsese tapped into youthful aggression once again this year in a remake of the Hong Kong thriller “Infernal Affairs”: “The Departed.” Working from a textured script by the clearly gifted William Monahan, Scorsese sculpted his most visceral artistic endeavor since 1990’s “Goodfellas,” and perhaps his darkest effort since 1976’s “Taxi Driver.” A cinematic experience dripping with gore, violence, sin and cynicism, the ride that is “The Departed” won’t soon be forgotten by the film-going community.

In the film, a cast of A-list thespians combines to showcase one of the most unique ensemble performances of the year, with every contributor seemingly at the top of his or her game. Standouts include Leonardo DiCaprio in perhaps his best performance to date, Jack Nicholson wallowing in the villainous glory of a detestable character and Vera Farminga in one of two accomplished supporting efforts this year. But the real ignition comes behind the camera, where one of the art form’s greatest living directors shows no signs of slowing down.

John Cameron Mitchell is one of the few creatively challenging filmmakers in the independent scene, crafting works of art more so than movies easily marketed to the masses. Ever since launching onto the filmmaking scene in 2001, transitioning from stage to screen with “Hedwig and the Angry Inch,” he has shown the promise of a fast and furious talent. Underneath a delightful exterior of sex, sex and more sex, his latest film is a meditation on fear – fear of love, fear of loneliness, fear of self and fear of connectivity.

Working from material improvised by a cast of unknowns, Mitchell molded a kaleidoscope of his personality in “Shortbus,” finding a piece of himself in each of the characters he presented. One would be hard-pressed not to find a piece of oneself in each of these creations as well, making the director’s effort all the more poignant and crucial to the filmmaking community. Metaphor and insight abound, while one of the most organic ensembles of the year works as a giant, living creature of definitive purpose.

It only occurs to me now that two of the best films of 2006 exist as the most living, vibrant technical celebrations of the medium we’ve seen in a long time. Kevin Macdonald’s “The Last King of Scotland” is a narrative document of such electric and seductive force that it is unimaginable this is the director’s first foray into the world of fiction, following a healthy career as a documentary filmmaker. Those sensibilities and instincts force themselves quite comfortably into a twisted, ruthless adaptation of the Giles Foden novel of the same name.

Screenwriter Jeremy Brock brought his touch of the macabre to a structurally resonant Peter Morgan draft, paving the way for a pair of outstanding performances from James McAvoy and especially Forest Whitaker as Ugandan dictator Idi Amin. The most organic pairing of two actors found on screens this year, McAvoy and Whitaker play cat and mouse above and below the surface of a narrative that threatens to boil over at every waking moment.

What has quickly become one of the most critically acclaimed films of the year, Alfonso Cuarón’s “Children of Men” has also been viewed as the most technically dazzling cinematic achievement to come along in quite some time. Something seemed to become lost, however, even amongst this wave of deserved praise of craftsmanship: the notion that Cuarón’s film captures a uniting aspect of humanity like no other filmmaking endeavor of the year.

“Children of Men” is about hope. It is a genre film successfully boiled down to a single idea, and it is an examination of what happens in a world where that idea has become lost. Held on high as a vehicle for dystopian visual panache and wonder, the effort is so much more. It is at once immediate and timeless, and while it certainly exists as Mexican auteur Alfonso Cuarón’s most accomplished film to date, it is also one of the crowning achievements of 2006, bleak, bold and brilliant in one commanding, luscious stroke.

The art of filmmaking has stagnated. There are no two ways about it. Something good enough or even inspiring enough screens every year for audiences and critics, but nothing moves beyond that expected level of entertainment and/or narrative pleasantry. Nothing has attempted to push the medium toward another level of artistry in quite some time indeed, and filmmakers have settled into a steady, albeit accepted vein of typicality that seems almost as it should be. But it isn’t…and it shouldn’t.

2006 afforded two separate, diametrically opposed works of cinema that can finally be considered a part of another movement altogether. They are Darren Aronofsky’s “The Fountain” and David Lynch’s “Inland Empire,” and though qualification is a fool’s errand when it comes to each, both films combine to form the number one film-going experience of the year in this viewer’s opinion.

Since the release of “Pi” in 1998, it has been clear that director Darren Aronofsky is interested in something more visceral in his filmmaking. He continued the trend in 2000 with “Requiem for a Dream,” for better or for worst. But in “The Fountain,” Aronofsky has dared to envision a truly unique perspective on the science fiction genre, reaching to form something so fresh as to manifest an entirely singular experience.

Years of failed preparation left the director slashing and burning ideas and intentions all along the way to a 90 minute condensation of his original vision. But he made it to the other side, a difficult task for even the most accessible of filmed entertainment. The result might be considered a failure in some viewers’ eyes, a success in others. But what it undeniably exists as is the trail left behind by a creator determined to stretch his artistic vernacular. A commanding, multi-tiered performance from Hugh Jackman and one of the most penetrating scores of modern times from Clint Mansell are immediately commendable aspects of the piece.

Similarly, David Lynch has been twisting the cinematic medium to fit his whims of fancy for the better part of three decades. From the initial explosion of “Eraserhead” through equally ambitious creations in “Blue Velvet,” “Wild at Heart,” “Lost Highway” and “Mulholland Dr.,” Lynch’s has been an imagination that knew no boundaries. But with “Inland Empire,” he seems almost bored with the medium, perhaps even contemptuous of his audience.

Anchoring the incomparable effort with an intrepid central performance from Laura Dern, Lynch dares the viewer to stick with 180 minutes of sheer audacity, a certifiable tapestry of narrative innovation. What can only be considered his least accessible effort to date, and at times even the most terrofying cinematic experience of 2006, “Inland Empire” is the moment one of the most creatively cavalier filmmakers of all time left this plane for alternate possibilities, finished with the tedious strictures his medium has to offer. He just doesn’t seem to see things the way we do anymore, and “Inland Empire” is evidence of his longing for something else, something different, something unequivocally diverse.

The “#1 film of the year” is a subjective notion to say the least, meaning something different to each and every person. It in fact means something different to me each and every year I sit down and attempt to determine “the best of the year.”

2006 was a good year for films in my opinion, but when it all trickled down to “the best,” the clearest indication was two films that couldn’t be bothered with being “good” or “bad,” and certainly not “the best.” It came down to two films that are playing by a whole other set of rules – a set the medium will not likely be playing by for years to come, when narrative and thematic typicality have given way to further potential and intentions. They are truly ahead of their time.

Stay tuned throughout the week for more on the 2006 retrospective.

INCONTENTION.com’s TOP TEN FILMS OF 2006

01. (tie) “The Fountain” / “Inland Empire”
02. “Children of Men”
03. “The Last King of Scotland”
04. “Shortbus”
05. “The Departed”
06. “Babel”
07. “Stranger than Fiction”
08. “Breaking and Entering”
09. “The Painted Veil”
10. “Little Miss Sunshine”

Two weeks of critics’ awards and various precursors are now past us as we wind down 2006, the year that was. As the kudos fly, some circles bark about the whole affair being “irrelevant,” others sit up and take notice. But when you really buckle down and pay attention, the masses are speaking. Consensus is forming. The only thing left to figure out is the blue from which random nominees will come.

Who will be this year’s Fernando Meirelles and leap into the fray? Who will be this year’s Peter Sarsgaard and fall to the wayside after a strong showing throughout the precursor season? These are the lingering questions, and year in and year out, they remain unanswered until nomination morning.

This week the charts have been whittled down to pretty much the best interpretation possible given the material in front of us. Anything added or subtracted is really conjecture at this point, and of course I’ve taken my stabs in that regard here and there. But by and large, the map is being drawn up.

A few notes:

The directors’ category looks to be shaping up accordingly. As “Little Miss Sunshine” looks solid for a Best Picture berth, “Babel” and “United 93” are in direct competition to take that “critics’ darling” spot away from Fox Searchlight. As such, Paul Greengrass and Alejandro González Iñárritu seem to be head to head for the directing slot likely vacated by the Dayton/Faris duo behind “Sunshine.”

The lead actor category seems to be a mess yet again. Beyond a locked nomination for Forest Whitaker and a likely nomination for Will Smith, it really is a free-for-all. Ken Watanabe is hoping to leap into the fight at the last minute. If he manages placement, he can be a threat to win the award. But for now, missing out on BFCA and Golden Globe mentions, it’s a tough road to hoe. Peter O’Toole, meanwhile, isn’t nearly the sure thing he seemed to be out of Toronto, and Ryan Gosling is hoping that thick core of passionate support survives the next 30 days.

Meanwhile, Warner Bros. has FINALLY amped up a campaign of note for Leonardo DiCaprio in “The Departed.” For weeks, trade FYC ads have included all peripheral actors under the label “Best Supporting Actor,” with DiCaprio’s name just floating there, category-less, for…SOME reason.

Maybe it had something to do with the “Blood Diamond” campaign, maybe not, but immediately following BFCA and Golden Globe nominations for this, his best performance to date, the studio finally bought a giant, full page ad proclaiming the actor’s category placement: Best Actor. Perhaps it was wise to hold off for so long, but the fact remains, both performances have established equal support and he is in danger of splitting his vote, allowing room for Ryan Gosling or, perhaps, Sacha Baron Cohen. Things are tight.

The supporting actor category has also been shaken up somewhat. The push for Ben Affleck in “Hollywoodland” has been substantial. He was first mentioned as an awards contender right here back in August and after some questions arose as the awards season pushed forward, the actor is getting another wave of support from awards-giving organizations.

Mark Wahlberg, meanwhile, has stepped up as a definite possibility to join “The Departed” co-star Jack Nicholson, pushing fellow pretty boy Brad Pitt down ever so slightly. There is plenty of studio support behind the performance and Wahlberg remains one of the more memorable aspects of the film for voters.

But in yet another questionable decision by Warner Bros. campaign strategists, no support of note has been shown for Kazunari Ninomiya in “Letters from Iwo Jima,” one of the best supporting performances of the year. It was really disheartening to come across ad after ad supporting Watanabe’s lead actor push with nothing, not even two lines of print calling for the consideration of Ninomiya.

Maybe this is because no organization has taken the time to recognize the performance so far and they aren’t willing to go out on a limb for the guy yet. This is only an assumption, given what happened with DiCaprio’s “Departed” push. But Ninomiya deserves better.

The supporting ladies have filtered down somewhat. Catherine O’Hara has inexplicably crow barred herself into this race for her performance in “For Your Consideration,” while Shareeka Epps and Emma Thompson threaten to steal her thunder in “Half Nelson” and “Stranger than Fiction” respectively. “Little Miss Sunshine”’s Abigail Breslin has sadly been left out of the precursor season so far, but she’s not dead yet. I’m sure an Academy willing to vote her film into Best Picture contention would love to see her name in the mix as well.

That’s pretty much all the news that’s out there for consumption until the New Year rears its ugly head. I’m hoping Clint Mansell can sustain current momentum and secure a nomination for his beautiful “The Fountain” score. I’m also holding out hope that “Children of Men” can find support as the precursors march on. Surprisingly, the critics have been kind of chilly toward it in their awards, opting mostly for recognition for Emmanuel Lubezki’s phenomenal cinematography. The guilds will unleash soon enough, the real precursors of note. Perhaps the film can sustain more support in their ranks, but time will tell.

So, that looks to be all she wrote for this year of Oscar columns. We’ll pick it up on the other side in 2007 when the guilds and other various precursors join the party. Enjoy the charts. Please note predictions for Best Documentary – Feature have been added to the sidebar. And stay tuned later this afternoon as we begin the year in review with “’A Good Year’ Indeed: The Best Films of 2006.”

Main Category Charts
Technical Category Charts
Oscar Predictions Archive

Previous Oscar Columns:
11/27/06 - "Switching Gears"
10/23/06 - "Lighten Up"
10/16/06 - "Starting To Get Serious"
10/09/06 - "'Flags' Lands and the Supporting Actresses Need Sustenance"
10/02/06 - "What's in a lead anyway?"
09/18/06 - "Aftermath"
09/11/06 - "It's All Happening."
09/04/06 - "Aw, Canucks."
08/28/06 - "On Your Marks..."
08/14/06 - "Enough Foreplay!"
08/07/06 - "Don't Knock Masturbation; it's Sex with Someone I Love"
07/31/06 - "Old and New, the Oscar Season Approaches"

Next week we'll be wrapping 2006 up in a nice, neat package and placing a glorious bow on the whole mix. Starting Monday, the Best of the Year column will hit, with Top Ten list in tow. Wednesday we'll toss up the obligatory "if I were an Oscar voter" ballot, and Friday we'll wind it down with various awards and kudos. The In Contention Awards, or whatever self-important label you want to place on the thing. So stay tuned, and enjoy the weekend (if you can do both at once, that is).

The press release:

Seven Vie for Visual Effects Oscar®

Beverly Hills, CA — The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences today announced that seven films are in consideration for achievement in Visual Effects for the 79th Academy Awards®.

The films are listed below in alphabetical order:

“Casino Royale”
“Eragon”
“Night at the Museum”
“Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest”
“Poseidon”
“Superman Returns”
“X-Men The Last Stand”

On Wednesday, January 17, the Academy’s Visual Effects Award nominating committee will view 15-minute film excerpts from each of the seven shortlisted films. Following the screenings, members will vote to nominate three films for Oscar consideration.

Nominations for the 79th Academy Awards will be announced on Tuesday, January 23, 2007, at 5:30 a.m. PST in the Academy’s Samuel Goldwyn Theater.

Academy Awards for outstanding film achievements of 2006 will be presented on Sunday, February 25, 2007, at the Kodak Theatre at Hollywood & Highland Center®, and televised live by the ABC Television Network at 5 p.m. PST, beginning with a half-hour arrivals segment.

The striking omissions here are "Charlotte's Web" and, especially, "Flags of Our Fathers," which itself received a Satellite nomination in the category a few weeks back (which admittedly doesn't mean much - but it goes to show people were considering the film's visual effects sequences).

Overall, the list is a rather poor sampling of product. I'd expect "Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest" and "Superman Returns" are still secure, with the last nomination likely going to "Night at the Museum," which has popped up recently as a real contender in any case.

I just picked this up at The Envelope. "Dreamgirls" director Bill Condon, snubbed twice today by the starf*cking Hollywood Foreign Press Association (for writing and directing his film), released a classy statement appreciating the recognition of the film's talent:

"It's a real kick to get this kind of recognition on the day before we open, and I'm especially excited for Beyonce Knowles, Eddie Murphy, and Jennifer Hudson," he says. "'Dreamgirls' is a movie about performers, so to have three of our cast members honored feels very nice. I'm also delighted that Henry Krieger, who wrote the original show, has been nominated for his new song, 'Listen.'"

Four months ago, I began this column by taking a look at those craftspeople who have not been nominated to date and were hoping for their first citations from AMPAS this year; I was speculating on how their 2006 efforts would affect this race.

Today, I want to look at the opposite end of the spectrum – the veterans. The men and women who have toiled in their movie-making professions for years (usually at least a couple of decades for most of the people I’m going to mention) and who have been rewarded for their past efforts by the Academy. Veterans bring a unique presence to the race, often representing the old guard in their fields and always representing those who have gone through this process before.

Well, following what was perhaps the clumsiest awards announcement in the history of awards announcements, the nominees for the Hollywood Foreign Press’s Golden Globe Awards are finally in. Variety was the first to publish the complete rundown.

Alejandro González Iñárritu’s “Babel” led the pack this morning with seven nominations. This is a very interesting development, but it is worth keeping in mind that just three years ago “Cold Mountain” landed the most Golden Globe nominations and still failed to score a Best Picture nod with the Academy. “Babel” has long been known as a film that went over swimmingly with the HFPA, as proven in the announcement this morning. It is, after all, an international tale. But will the AMPAS be as welcoming? More to ponder as that seven film crunch for five spots stays in a clear gridlock.

The real surprise, well, to most anyway, is “Bobby” landing that nomination in the Best Picture – Drama category. This shouldn’t come as much of a shock given that the film is full of stars and the HFPA would certainly love to have each and every one of them at their awards ceremony (as noted in my conversation with Gerard, they’re “starfuckers” after all).

Clint Eastwood scored two nominations in the Best Director category for his “Flags of Our Fathers”/”Letters from Iwo Jima” one-two punch. The former received no other nominations, while the latter was nominated in the Best Foreign Language film category.

And with “Little Children” securing a surprising Best Picture nomination (that you’ll recall Gerard pondered as a definite possibility), expect a few people to attempt to leverage it as a threat with the Academy. But I wouldn’t bet on it.

Finally, Leonardo DiCaprio grabbed two Best Actor nominations for “Blood Diamond” and “The Departed,” scooting Ryan Gosling out of the mix. This isn’t good for his Oscar chances, frankly. The threat of a split is far too imminent.

I correctly predicted 32 of the 45 nominees for which I ventured guesses. I landed Best Supporting Actor 100%, sadly being proven correct in my inclination that Alan Arkin would miss for his wonderful turn in “Little Miss Sunshine.”

I’d like to close with a big congratulations to Clint Mansell for managing a nomination for his brilliant, BRILLIANT score for “The Fountain.” Not to be an advocate, but here’s hoping he can get a fair shake from the Academy.

The nominees for the 64th Annual Golden Globe Awards are:

Best Picture – Drama
“Babel”
“Bobby”
“The Departed”
“Little Children”
“The Queen”

Best Picture – Comedy or Musical
“Borat!: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan”
“The Devil Wears Prada”
“Dreamgirls”
“Little Miss Sunshine”
“Thank You for Smoking”

Best Actor – Drama
Leonardo DiCaprio, “Blood Diamond”
Leonardo DiCaprio, “The Departed”
Peter O’Toole, “Venus”
Will Smith, “The Pursuit of Happyness”
Forest Whitaker, “The Last King of Scotland”

Best Actress – Drama
Penélope Cruz, “Volver”
Judi Dench, “Notes on a Scandal”
Maggie Gyllenhaal, “Sherrybaby”
Helen Mirren, “The Queen”
Kate Winslet, “Little Children”

Best Actor – Comedy or Musical
Sacha Baron Cohen, “Borat!: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan”
Johnny Deep, “Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest”
Chiwetel Ejiofor, “Kinky Boots”
Aaron Eckhart, “Thank You for Smoking”
Will Ferrell, “Stranger than Fiction”

Best Actress – Comedy or Musical
Annette Bening, “Running with Scissors”
Toni Collette, “Little Miss Sunshine”
Beyoncé Knowles, “Dreamgirls”
Meryl Streep, “The Devil Wears Prada”
Renée Zellweger, “Miss Potter”

Best Supporting Actor
Ben Affleck, “Hollywoodland”
Eddie Murphy, “Dreamgirls”
Jack Nicholson, “The Departed”
Brad Pitt, “Babel”
Mark Wahlberg, “The Departed”

Best Supporting Actress
Emily Blunt, “The Devil Wears Prada”
Cate Blanchett, “Notes on a Scandal”
Jennifer Hudson, “Dreamgirls”
Adriana Barraza, “Babel”
Rinko Kikuchi, “Babel”

Best Director
Clint Eastwood, “Flags of Our Fathers”
Clint Eastwood, “Letters from Iwo Jima”
Stephen Frears, “The Queen”
Alejandro González Iñárritu, “Babel”
Martin Scorsese, “The Departed”

Best Screenplay
“Babel”
“Little Children”
“Notes on a Scandal”
“The Departed”
“The Queen”

Best Original Score
“Babel”
“The Da Vinci Code”
“The Fountain”
“Nomad”
“The Painted Veil”

Best Original Song
“Never Gonna Break My Faith” from “Bobby”
“Listen” from “Dreamgirls”
“The Song of the Heart” from “Happy Feet”
“Try Not to Remember” from “Home of the Brave”
“A Father’s Way” from “The Pursuit of Happyness”

Best Foreign Language Film
“Apocalypto”
“Letters from Iwo Jima”
“The Lives of Others”
“Pan’s Labyrinth”
“Volver”

Best Animated Film
“Cars”
“Happy Feet”
“Monster House”

We always talk about this actor or that, this filmmaker or that who deserves to win an Oscar but hasn't. Some consider this lineage the "Hall of Shame" for the Academy, if you will. The one person I've always felt has been left off such consideration lists is musical composer Ennio Morricone, who added the heart and soul to the Spaghetti Western movement through his briilliant work with director Sergio Leone. Not to mention the other memorable works of film music he's ushered into creation. He was nominated for the Oscar five times, most recently in 2000 for his work on "Malèna." Well The Hollywood Reporter is reporting that Morricone is set to receive this year's Honorary Oscar at the Academy Awards next February.

Some consider Morricone's work with Leone his most memorable, others his efforts on Brian De Palma's "The Untouchables" and Roland Joffé's "The Mission." But I've always felt "The Man with the Harmonica" from Leone's "Once Upon a Time in the West" to be the single greatest piece of film music composition (not to mention that film being, to my mind, one of the greatest films of all time). In any case, Morricone never won an Oscar, until now. The annual "Sorry we never gave you a proper award" Oscar. But we'll take it. Talk about a truly deserving recipient.

Congratullations, Mr. Morricone.

Here is the Rueters report [src]:

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Italian movie composer Ennio Morricone, famed for his work on such "spaghetti westerns" as "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly" and "A Fistful of Dollars," will receive an honorary Oscar during the Academy Awards ceremony next February, organisers said on Wednesday.

Morricone, 78, has composed more than 300 motion picture scores during his 45-year career, but had never won an Oscar. He was nominated five times, for "Days of Heaven" (1978), "The Mission" (1986), "The Untouchables" (1987), "Bugsy" (1991) and "Malena" (2000).

The honorary Oscar, determined by the board of governors of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, went this year to director Robert Altman, who died last month.

"The board was responding not just to the remarkable number of scores that Mr. Morricone has produced," said Academy president Sid Ganis, "but to the fact that so many of them are beloved and popular masterpieces."

Morricone's other credits include the scores for "Once upon a Time in America," "Cinema Paradiso," "Bulworth," "In the Line of Fire," "La Cage aux Folles" and the 2008 release "Leningrad."

The 79th annual Academy Awards will be held in Hollywood on February 25.

(Thanks to Gerard for the tip, here.)

Just a quick note, if you’ll indulge me for a moment.

How did a film as vapid and misguided as “The Devil Wears Prada” – certifiably the worst film of 2006 – find itself in the midst of an awards season? Something that plays like stale cotton candy you’d catch on a WGN matinee some lazy Saturday afternoon, this is a film packed with reprehensible characters, half-baked performances, built on a clumsy screenplay that shockingly enough begins to take itself seriously when the third act rolls around in all its languid horror.

I didn’t catch “The Devil Wears Prada” in its theatrical run, and have only had the chance to catch up with it on DVD recently. I went with the grain on Meryl Streep’s leading performance, sure like the rest that she would land an Oscar nomination for what seemed like a – well – devilish turn. But this is a retched, ill-conceived performance if there ever was one. I feel as though I could have stepped in front of the cameras with that mane of silver hair and put forth, if not a better performance, at least the same rote and unspecific effort. Streep’s awards buzz is a sham with no foundation to steady itself, as far as I’m concerned. But the chatter-train will keep it going strong toward the most undeserved Oscar nomination of the season.

And then there’s the notion that the performance is experiencing category fraud. Well, yeah. I wouldn’t even call this an accomplished supporting turn, let alone an award-worthy leading turn. Seriously, what is so viable about this performance that it has the audacity to garner traction smack dab in the middle of a hardly passable date movie? How is this, the most overrated work of the year, the performance to land Streep’s 14th Oscar nomination rather than her lived-in, wonderfully achieved work in “A Prairie Home Companion?” Robert Altman, the actors’ director, should be paid that tribute if nothing else. But apparently David Frankel is the seasoned director to usher Streep to those golden pastures.

“That’s all.”

In Contention columnist Gerard Kennedy and I gabbed all things Oscar last night online, and while we don't do the podcast thing around these parts, the transcript is below for your perusal regardless. We talked reactions to the various precursor awards so far, projected some thoughts on tomorrow's Golden Globes announcement as well as the usual Oscar pondering. Interspersed throughout are both Gerard's and my predictions for the Hollywood Foreign Press nominations. We'll try this again next week with Oscarwatch editor Sasha Stone, once we've all had a chance to digest the HFPA announcement and what it means in the grand scheme of things. It's lengthy, but I think it turned out well. Enjoy!

KRISTOPHER TAPLEY: So I’m sorry we didn’t get to this earlier this morning, but I needed to catch up on some sleep…badly. And then I woke up to a boring BFCA announcement.

GERARD KENNEDY: Yeah, the BFCA was so...BFCA-ish.

KT: So what’ve we got? We have a boat load of critics announcements in the span of, like, four days. The Boston, New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Washington, D.C. and Broadcast Film Critics have all weighed in, following the National Board of Review’s announcement last week.

GK: It certainly has been a total immersion, though it’s starting out more varied than last year or the year before that.

KT: I think it is varied, yeah, but at the same time there’s a little consensus across the board. For starters, “Babel,” “Letters from Iwo Jima” and “Little Miss Sunshine” are the only films on all three top ten lists released so far (NBR, BFCA and AFI). That is interesting, given that none of them are considered locked in for a Best Picture Oscar nomination, by and large. “Letters” still has its holdouts, but I think those prognosticative detractors will come around soon enough.

GK: That’s particularly true for “Babel” and “Little Miss Sunshine”; both of those will struggle for nominations.

KT: I think we’ll see both pop up on the Golden Globes announcement Thursday, too, which will continue to prove a case for each film.

GK: Absolutely. They also seem likely candidates for the double bill of SAG Ensemble and WGA nods (especially “Sunshine”). “Letters” is in a better position, but I still wouldn’t call it a “lock.” I find that to be a very overused term.

KT: I think we’ve whittled the real contenders down quicker than last year. It seems like a pretty solid list of seven right now.

GK: Agreed.

KT: Last year, the HFPA were out on their own limb, lending credence to a lot of different contenders, “A History of Violence” for one.

GK: Last year the HFPA really did shake things up. Then the guilds brought us back down to earth. I must say I’m very curious to see what the Best Picture – Drama nominees are. “United 93” doesn't seem like their film; if it manages to score in spite of this, I suspect it will be difficult to stop.

KT: True, though I feel that is a film bound for critical notice. And critics love what they love. That doesn't always transfer to Oscar. I’m reminded of Peter Sarsgaard in “Shattered Glass”: notices across the board and then seemingly locked in after the HFPA nominated him. But the HFPA are press, even if they're oddly Oscar-predictive press.

GK: If Paul Greengrass manages a DGA nod, the film will be impossible to rule out. But Globe attention would keep it on people’s lips.

KT: Absolutely. And I guess it’s tied with “Letters from Iwo Jima” for most Best Picture wins so far. Michael Moses, Tony Angellotti and the Universal crew have their picture painted for them now.

GK: Indeed.

KT: They had high hopes for “The Good Shepherd,” which has admittedly Academy-like sensibilities throughout, but it just wasn’t to be. “Children of Men” isn’t as challenging as most might think, but it’s being singled out for techs – your department, Gerard – more than anything else. So I think very soon, we’ll begin to see an onslaught of “United 93” marketing.

GK: Yes.

KT: But they need a more interesting visual strategy. The whole FYC campaign has been kind of a snooze so far, with the "Children of Men” ads being much more fetching

GK: The “Children of Men” ads have certainly been the strong point of Universal’s campaign thus far. “United 93” has been dull and very heavy-handed (even by campaign standards). They need to highlight Greengrass himself and the film’s visual juxtaposition as far as I’m concerned, not its “importance.”

KT: I’ve had my theories on what to do with that ad campaign myself, but I suppose there are a million different ways to get there. But I do think they need to concentrate it as a film of importance. However, running long lists of adjectives used to describe the film in reviews with no catching imagery just isn’t getting that job done. That said, this is how a typical Universal campaign swings: lots of vague, sweeping stuff initially, and then more and more to the point as the season progresses.

GK: I could see that making for an effective campaign when all is said and done. Regardless, it's certainly an interesting film to watch throughout the season.

KT: Agreed. I think a real selling point could come for it if SAG nominates the ensemble.

GK: Absolutely.

KT: Which would be trippy for me, as I used to know one of the peripheral cast members. Trieste Dunn, the girl with the headphones.

GK: Haha, really?

KT: She dated a friend of mine in college, and was actually in a short film another friend of mine directed, which I edited my sophomore year.

GK: I see.

KT: And I’ve officially taken us WAY off track. Let’s talk about the Globes. What do you expect in the way of surprise?

GK: Hans Zimmer immediately pops to mind. Though given their love for him, that shouldn’t really be considered a surprise.

KT: Sure.

GK: One of Leonardo DiCaprio, Ken Watanabe, Ryan Gosling, Peter O’Toole, Will Smith and Forest Whitaker will be left out of Best Actor in a Drama. With the possible exception of Watanabe, that person will have a difficult time recovering.

KT: It could be Watanabe that misses, but I think it might be Gosling, if only because of the fact that, out of that list of folks, he’s not a star. And, as we all know, the HFPA are “Starfuckers,” if you will.

GK: Indeed.

KT: DiCaprio is a conundrum.

GK: Even if he misses out with AMPAS, the HFPA will go for him.

KT: I agree. I get the feeling this wishy-washy campaign for his performance in “The Departed” is going to leave him out to dry for Oscar. And oddly enough, I would expect to seem him nominated for “Blood Diamond” at the Globes before “The Departed” (and understand, I think his work in Scorsese’s film is his best to date).

GK: I could see that.

KT: Maybe he could split there and Gosling will get in after all, which is what I think could affect the Academy's decision.

GK: I could definitely see that.

BEST ACTOR - DRAMA PREDICTIONS

KENNEDY: Leonardo DiCaprio - “The Departed,” Ryan Gosling, Peter O’Toole, Will Smith, Forest Whitaker (alternates: Michael Sheen, Ken Watanabe)

TAPLEY: Leonardo DiCaprio - “Blood Diamond,” Peter O’Toole, Will Smith, Ken Watanabe, Forest Whitaker (alternates: Ryan Gosling, Edward Norton - “The Painted Veil”)

GK: I also feel that “Little Children” could be a somewhat surprising Best Picture nominee come Thursday morning.

KT: That’s a very American movie, though. I guess it could certainly happen.

GK: It seems like the sort of thing they might go for when the AMPAS doesn’t.

KT: Sure. As does “Blood Diamond.”

GK: Which would be an embarrassment for all time. But with “Letters,” “Little Miss Sunshine” and “Dreamgirls” out of the race, the drama category becomes more open.

KT: Absolutely.

GK: I see “The Queen,” “Babel” and “The Departed” as good bets there, but after that, it becomes more difficult.

KT: I’m thinking “Babel,” “The Queen,” “The Departed,” “Flags of Our Fathers” and one of the 9/11 films. “The Painted Veil” could slip in. In fact, I think Edward Norton could slip into the Best Actor – Drama race, given his trio of exceptional performances this year.

GK: I expect Naomi Watts and Alexandre Desplat to show up Thursday, so more wouldn’t surprise me.

BEST PICTURE - DRAMA PREDICTIONS

KENNEDY: “Babel,” “The Departed,” “Flags of Our Fathers,” “The Queen,” “United 93” (alternates: “Little Children,” “World Trade Center”)

TAPLEY: “Babel,” “Bobby” “The Departed,” “Flags of Our Fathers,” “The Queen” (alternates: “Blood Diamond,” “World Trade Center”)

GK: The category I am most curious to see what the Globes do with is Best Supporting Actress.

KT: Oh, sure. That’s all over the place.

GK: It is incredibly open, and with Abigail Breslin and Catherine O’Hara (whose presence in the precursors has really surprised me) off in lead, it becomes even more interesting.

KT: Is Jennifer Hudson off in lead as well?

GK: Not according to Tom O’Neil, though he’s been wrong before.

KT: Well, you know who COULD turn up and surprise is Brittany Murphy.

GK: That wouldn’t surprise me at all. It seems like the sort of thing the HFPA would like to do.

KT: And if “World Trade Center” is a Best Picture nominee, Maggie Gyllenhaal could get in. Vera Farmiga as well. Lots of possibilities.

GK: The reason we have all these possibilities, however, is because the category is so open; normally, that’s not the case.

KT: I feel like Jennifer Hudson could surprisingly fall into the lead category. It seems awfully Zeta-Jones-ish.

GK: I’m kind of doubtful about both “Babel” ladies; it doesn’t feel right.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS PREDICTIONS

KENNEDY: Adriana Barraza, Cate Blanchett - “Notes on a Scandal,” Maggie Gyllenhaal - “World Trade Center,” Jennifer Hudson, Rinko Kikuchi (alternates: Emma Thompson, Vera Farmiga)

TAPLEY: Adriana Barraza, Cate Blanchett - “Notes on a Scandal,” Maggie Gyllenhaal- “World Trade Center,” Jennifer Hudson, Emma Thompson (alternates: Vera Farmiga, Rinko Kikuchi)

GK: Best Supporting Actor, on the other hand, seemingly has a great deal of strong contenders.

KT: Well, given the group, we know Brad Pitt will show up. I’m surprised, still, that he missed with the BFCA. But I suppose they knew they’d have him at a table with “The Departed”’s inclusion.

GK: Definitely. I was surprised, too. Especially for Adam Beach being “Flags of Our Fathers”’s only nomination. But I’ve always had this suspicion (before the BFCA nod) that the HFPA would look to Ben Affleck.

KT: That’s definitely possible. Focus has done a nice job of keeping that film on the radar, sending out single, solid, letter-sized cards of each actor and a big "For Your Consideration" across the top. They’ve come separately, too, so another one shows up in the mail every other day. Very smart.

GK: Focus knows how to run a campaign; they just don’t have the films this year.

KT: They’ve got a new Oscar strategist this year, too. But regardless, I think this category might be all over the map. I actually expect Mark Wahlberg to show up here. I’d personally love to see Kazunari Ninomiya show up, but it won’t happen.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR PREDICTIONS

KENNEDY: Ben Affleck, Alan Arkin, Eddie Murphy, Jack Nicholson, Brad Pitt (alternates: Steve Carell, Djimon Hounsou)

TAPLEY: Ben Affleck, Eddie Murphy, Jack Nicholson, Brad Pitt, Mark Wahlberg (alternates: Alan Arkin, Djimon Hounsou)

GK: You know, the fact that the BFCA only nominated five women for Best Actress is...telling...as far as I’m concerned.

KT: Telling indeed. They’re stretching hard to be THE Oscar prognosticators of the world. Maybe they should work for the Oscar sites!

GK: Haha.

KT: I think Helen Mirren, Judi Dench, Penélope Cruz and Kate Winslet are pretty solid in the drama category at the Globes. With Naomi Watts or late-starter Sienna Miller taking the last spot.

GK: Agreed.

KT: Word has it the group hated “Factory Girl” but loved Miller.

GK: They clearly loved The Weinstein Company last year, and used to love Miramax back in the day, as well.

KT: Yeah. And who didn’t?

GK: HFPA even more so: more nods for “Gangs of New York,” “Kill Bill,” “Cold Mountain,” etc.

KT: True.

BEST ACTRESS - DRAMA PREDICTIONS

KENNEDY: Penélope Cruz, Judi Dench, Helen Mirren, Naomi Watts, Kate Winslet (alternates: Sienna Miller, Cate Blanchett – “The Good German”)

TAPLEY: Penélope Cruz, Judi Dench, Helen Mirren, Naomi Watts, Kate Winslet (alternates: Sienna Miller, Cate Blanchett – “The Good German”)

KT: Well the comedy category for the ladies is tricky. Meryl Streep is in there. Annette Bening is likely. I guess Beyoncé Knowles looks good, but…whatever. Actually, that’s exactly what she does in “Dreamgirls”: “looks good.”

GK: Haha.

GK: Bening, Abigail Breslin, Knowles, Streep and Renée Zellweger, I reckon. With Catherine O’Hara and Toni Collette as alternates.

KT: Zellweger. I don’t know. “Miss Potter” sure is a brick.

BEST ACTRESS - COMEDY or MUSICAL PREDICTIONS

KENNEDY: Annette Bening, Abigail Breslin, Beyoncé Knowles, Meryl Streep, Renée Zellweger (alternates: Catherine O’Hara, Toni Collette)

TAPLEY: Annette Bening, Abigail Breslin, Beyoncé Knowles, Catherine O’Hara, Meryl Streep (alternates: Jennifer Aniston - “The Break-Up,” Renée Zellweger)

KT: Comedy gents? Mr. Borat himself, Sacha Baron Cohen, seems secure (which I finally saw the film yesterday). Aaron Eckhart is on the map. Jamie Foxx (starfuckers).

GK: This year will be a test for how much they love Johnny Depp.

KT: I don’t know, I think Depp is out of the mix.

GK: Major star, major hit.

KT: True, but been there, done that.

GK: That didn’t stop them with Bridget Jones.

KT: Touché. Well, hopefully Greg Kinnear can slip in. And Will Ferrell from “Stranger than Fiction,” though he also has “Talladega Nights” out there. A very fun film.

BEST ACTOR - COMEDY or MUSICAL PREDICTIONS

KENNEDY: Sacha Baron Cohen, Johnny Depp, Aaron Eckhart, Will Ferrell – “Stranger than Fiction,” Jamie Foxx (alternates: Greg Kinnear, Will Ferrell – “Talladega Nights”)

TAPLEY: Sacha Baron Cohen, Aaron Eckhart, Will Ferrell - “Stranger than Fiction,” Jamie Foxx, Greg Kinnear (alternates: Will Ferrell - “Talladega Nights,” Vince Vaughn)

KT: You know, this is the group that gave Robert Altman the award the year he was SUPPOSED to win the Oscar, in 2001, for “Gosford Park.” I keep wondering what kind of tribute we’ll see get paid “A Prairie Home Comapnion”’s way. Maybe a surprise Best Picture – Comedy/Musical nomination?

GK: I could see that; it showed up in the Best Ensemble category in the BFCA nominations, which could also happen with the SAG.

KT: “Dreamgirls,” “Little Miss Sunshine” and “Borat” are solid gold.

GK: Indeed. “The Devil Wears Prada” is a probably a pretty good bet.

KT: Yes, and “Stranger than Fiction” could certainly get it.

GK: I’d say “Stranger than Fiction” vs. “Thank You for Smoking” is the likely battle for the last slot. Though “Prairie Home” wouldn’t shock me.

KT: I don’t think “Thank You for Smoking” has shown up enough to be a threat for Best Picture here. The film has had just one mention thus far, from the National Board of Review. I’m going with “Dreamgirls,” “Sunshine,” “Borat,” “Prada” and “Prairie Home,” putting Streep in a pickle as to which table she’ll sit at.

BEST PICTURE - COMEDY OR MUSICAL PREDICTIONS

KENNEDY: “Borat,” “The Devil Wears Prada,” “Dreamgirls,” “Little Miss Sunshine,” “Thank You for Smoking” (alternates: “Stranger than Fiction,” “A Prairie Home Companion”)

TAPLEY: “Borat,” “The Devil Wears Prada,” “Dreamgirls,” “Little Miss Sunshine,” “A Prairie Home Companion” (alternates: “For Your Consideration,” “Thank You for Smoking”)

KT: Finally, let’s talk about Best Director.

GK: I could see Stephen Frears missing out here, despite being on his way to DGA/Oscar nods and the BAFTA win.

KT: He is an international fave, though.

GK: Fair enough, though he isn’t a “celebrity director” like Scorsese or Eastwood.

KT: True.

GK: And Alejandro González Iñárritu could show up here as well.

KT: Yes, Iñárritu is possible. You know, Eastwood could show up twice and blow everyone’s minds.

GK: I was JUST in the process of typing “Eastwood getting two nods also would be a ‘surprise’ that wouldn’t really surprise me.”

KT: It surely could happen. And you know, their lone director nod is always odd. Last year it was Steven Spielberg.

GK: Alongside Peter Jackson.

KT: Yes (starfuckers).

GK: As I said, “celebrity director” ought not to be ruled out. Mel Gibson? (Just kidding).

KT: Who knows? Perhaps Robert Altman?

GK: That is possible. But they didn't have a lone director in '02, '03 or '04 so I wouldn't get too preoccupied over that.

KT: True enough. I guess they do have ten shots at getting their Best Director bill to lineup 100%. Well perhaps Altman gets in alongside his film. Now THAT would be interesting, and it would put “A Prairie Home Companion,” still one of the year’s best films, right back on the map.

GK: Yes it would. I hadn’t thought of that, actually.

BEST DIRECTOR PREDICTIONS

KENNEDY: Bill Condon, Clint Eastwood - “Letters from Iwo Jima”, Paul Greengrass, Alejandro González Iñárritu, Martin Scorsese (alternates: Stephen Frears, Clint Eastwood - “Flags of Our Fathers”)

TAPLEY: Robert Altman, Bill Condon, Clint Eastwood -“Letters from Iwo Jima”, Alejandro González Iñárritu, Martin Scorsese (alternates: Stephen Frears, Paul Greengrass)

KT: Well, regardless of how these things pan out Thursday, the season is off – and in a hurry!

GK: I know. Thursday will put people in a tizzy. It will calm down slightly over Christmas and New Year’s, but from the first week in January on, it will be not stop action for eight weeks.

KT: I’m on a jet plane to Hawaii March 1, so this season can’t wrap itself up soon enough!

GK: I can only imagine!

KT: But in any case, it’s been fun and spontaneous this last week.

GK: Indeed.

KT: I’m happy to see Clint Eastwood jump into the fray with a film that is as valuable as “Letters from Iwo Jima,” because frankly, “Million Dollar Baby” quickly became the most overrated film of 2004 for me.

GK: “Million Dollar Baby” was certainly effective as far as I was concerned, but too clichéd for me to consider it “great.”

KT: True enough. Thankfully “Letters” lacks all semblance of the cliché and is a truly original piece of filmmaking. And I guess we’ll see if it can ride this wave to overtake the long-considered “frontrunner” of the Oscar season for the Best Picture trophy. That certainly seems to be the fight at the moment, “Dreamgirls” vs. “Letters.”

GK: I wonder if “Letters” could win without Clint winning as well? It would seem beyond cruel for Eastwood to beat Scorsese AGAIN. But hey…that’s AMPAS sometimes.

KT: Indeed it is. Well let’s pick it up between you and I after the New Year and see where we stand.

GK: Absolutely.

Be sure to check out Gerard’s “Tech Support” column every Thursday, right here at In Contention.

I've confirmed with the Oscar campaign behind "Letters from Iwo Jima" that Iris Yamashita's screenplay is an original entry, even though the trailer for the film notes that it was "Based on the book 'Picture Letters from Commander in Chief' by Tadamichi Kuribayashi." I suppose Yamashita and Paul Haggis merely took inspiration from the book for their story. If I get anything further, I'll be sure to follow up.

Lots going on today, so I doubt I'll get into a full-fledged column. We'll pick up the pieces post-BFCA and HFPA, but for now, here are the Oscar charts:

Main Category Charts
Technical Category Charts
Oscar Predictions Archive
"The Contenders"

Previous Oscar Columns:
11/27/06 - "Switching Gears"
10/23/06 - "Lighten Up"
10/16/06 - "Starting To Get Serious"
10/09/06 - "'Flags' Lands and the Supporting Actresses Need Sustenance"
10/02/06 - "What's in a lead anyway?"
09/18/06 - "Aftermath"
09/11/06 - "It's All Happening."
09/04/06 - "Aw, Canucks."
08/28/06 - "On Your Marks..."
08/14/06 - "Enough Foreplay!"
08/07/06 - "Don't Knock Masturbation; it's Sex with Someone I Love"
07/31/06 - "Old and New, the Oscar Season Approaches"

So the east coast crowd weighed in this afternoon, giving their top honor to Paul Greengrass's "United 93." It apparently took five ballots to get it down to this decision, and frankly, I think it's obvious that this was an easily agreed upon back-up to a likely gridlocked race between "The Queen" and "The Departed," which have awards and runner-up notices scattered throughout. "United 93" is nowhere else to be seen, not even in the runners-up for Best Director.

In any case, the big winners today are "The Queen" and "Little Miss Sunshine." The latter had enough runner-up notices to prove definitive critical support here, and so it's still pretty secure in that fifth Best Picture slot. "United 93" could feasibly come and knock it off its perch, but for now, the light and fluffy likely beats out the cold and unsentimental.

I correctly predicted eight of the group's twelve awards. Three of my remaining foour predictions showed up in the runners-up.

From here we go to the BFCA and HFPA nominations, he truest predictors of the Academy's tastes outside of the guilds.

The Oscar column will be up later this afternoon. Full list of NYFCC winners with commentary for each after the jump.

(Wonderful work getting these winners out extra quick from the folks at TheScreenGrab.com.)

Best Picture
"United 93"
(Runners-Up: "The Queen," "The Departed")

Well, this is further help that "United 93" needs to really push into the Best Picture race after being in a lull. We all knew critical love was coming its way. Mentions from BFCA and HFPA will really sell the point, however. And hey, at least "The Departed" made the runners-up list here. It seemed that, ultimately, the NY Best Picture win was going to be one of these three films.

Best Director
Martin Scorsese, "The Departed"
(Runners-Up: Stephen Frears, "The Queen," Clint Eastwood, "Letters from Iwo Jima")

Martin Scorsese makes another valiant push toward that poptential Oscar win with kudos here today. It's interesting that Paul Greengrass didn't even make the runners-up list, however, and we can tell the group favorite must have been "The Queen," which was probably in some sort of deadlock for Best Picture with "The Departed," leaving the group settling on a favorable, easily agreed upon "United 93" for the top prize. This is the only mention of the morning for Clint Eastwood's "Letters from Iwo Jima."

Best Actor
Forest Whitaker, "The Last King of Scotland"
(Runners-Up: Ryan Gosling, "Half Nelson," Sacha Baron Cohen, "Borat")

It's beginning to look like a steam-roller for Forest Whitaker. As will be noted in the updated Oscar charts later this afternoon, he's pretty much the frontrunner at this point. Talk about coming back strong after the buzz seemed to peak so early. Ryan Gosling showing up in the runners-up isn't a surprise as it is their kind of performance, and another mention for Sacha Baron Cohen will likely get everyone up in a tizzy. But I still can't see this performance getting an Oscar nomination.

Best Actress
Helen Mirren, "The Queen"
(Runners-Up: Judi Dench, "Notes on a Scandal," Meryl Streep, "The Devil Wears Prada")

A long, slow, inevitable march to an Academy Award looks to be in store for Helen Mirren, who has been way out in front of the pack since "The Queen" began screening back in August. It's strange, regardless, to see the lead acting awards being so concentrated so far. It isn't rare for one of these categories to be centralized during the awards season, but for both, it's kind of unsettling. It's odd that Penelope Cruz mised out in the runners-up here, but some love finally comes Judi Dench's way, to my mind the best leading lady performance of the year. This trio is pretty locked a loaded now, I think it's safe to say.

Best Supporting Actor
Jackie Earle Haley, "Little Children"
(Runners-Up: Eddie Murphy, "Dreamgirls," Steve Carrell, "Little Miss Sunshine")

This is predictably the award Haley had coming, but will it translate to an Oscar mention? Probably not, as "Little Children" is falling into the highest of the highbrow categories lately, missing the gallant critics awards showing thus far that many thought it would achieve. First signs of love for Eddie Murphy emerge here, and ditto Steve Carrell. Fingers crossed the latter can pick up momentum for some really wonderful work. Oh, and interestingly enough, I can't find a single picture of Jackie Earle Haley on the net. There's not one image of him in the trailer. And the only thing I found is a shot that barely has the back of his head visible. New Line sure made some weird decisions handling this film.

Best Supporting Actress
Jennifer Hudson, "Dreamgirls"
(Runners-Up: Shareeka Epps, "Half Nelson," Catherine O'Hara, "For Your Consideration")

After winning with the D.C. critics and taking down runner-up spots and breakthrough performer mentions, it looks like Hudson is well on her way to that Oscar nomination and potential win. But it's strange this is the only place the critics, who gushed over this film both verbally and, some, in print, have decided to recognize the film thus far. Shareeka Epps showing up here isn't a surprise, and I guess Catherine O'Hara shouldn't be either, given the Eugene Levy win for "A Mighty Wind."

Best Screenplay
"The Queen"
(Runners-up: "The Departed," "Little Miss Sunshine")

This is an added boost for Stephen Frears's film, which was bound to get a leg up from the critics following an odd snubbing on the NBR's top ten list. Peter Morgan's screenplay is a tight and precisely tuned effort that deserves this recognition, and is an example of quality craftsmanship on a modest level. The accomplishment is even more impressive when weighed against Morgan's completely different work with Jeremy Brock on "The Last King of Scotland." The runner-ups seem perfectly expected, but I still recall my giant WTF at seeing "The Lives of Dentists" pop up here in 2004.

Best Cinematography
"Pan's Labyrinth"
(Runners-Up: "Curse of the Golden Flower," "Children of Men")

This is an interesting get for Guillermo del Toro's beautiful work, and it keeps the film on the radar. It is encouraging to see "Pan's Labyrinth" continue to show up in various categories (the production design and the brilliant portrayal of supporting actor Sergi Lopez received shout outs from the LAFCA yesterday). At this point it has to be seen as the most apparent foreign film in the precursor awards. It's too bad "Children of Men" missed the win here, and I actually had "Curse" pegged for the win. The former is likely heading for an Oscar nomination, while the latter might make a play in the coming days.

Best Foreign Language Film
"Army of Shadows"
(Runners-Up: "Volver," "The Death of Mr. Lazarescu")

With word coming down the pike in the last few days that the NYFCC had gone ga-ga over the previously unreleased "Army of Shadows," it's no shock they decided to throw some love that film's way in the Best Foreign Film category. "Volver," meanwhile, stays on the scene.

Best Animated Film
"Happy Feet"
(Runners-Up: "A Scanner Darkly," "Cars")

I bet the NY critics went this way begrudgingly. After all, nothing terribly eclectic or obscure was in the mix. Then again, George Miller's derivative film has been seen as quite unique in a number of circles. I'm surprised they didn't go with "A Scanner Darkly" for the win just to go against the grain.

Best Non-Fiction Film
"The Deliver Us from Evil"
(Runners-Up: "49 Up," "Borat," "An Inconvenient Truth")

This was totally expected, and frankly I'm surprised it's taken so long for the film to pop up on the critics' awards radar, what with "An Inconvenient Truth" winning most awards and merely a tie (with the Bean Town crew) to show for itself. But what the heck is up with sticking "Borat" in here?

Best First Film
"Half Nelson"
(Runners-Up: "Little Miss Sunshine," "A Guide to Recognizing Your Saints")

Nothing approaching surprise on this one, and a nice feather in the cap of Ryan Fleck. It makes sense that the New York-centric "A Guide to Recognizing Your Saints" would pop up here. "Half Nelson" as well for that matter. And I'd say "Little Miss Sunshine" has maintained enough love through the early precursor season to remain in a safe spot for the fifth Best Picture nominee at the Oscars.

Alrighty, so the LAFCA went with "Letters from Iwo Jima" as I had anticipated, though they left absolutely nothing for Marty and "The Departed." Very strange, but alas, the NYFCC announce their awards tomorrow, and you can bet Scorsese's latest will be all over the place there.

The Gotham folks tend to be a bit more high brow, if you will, in a seemingly willful fashion. I wouldn't expect a whole lot of love for Eastwood there, either. They went with the Clint in 2004 for Best Director, but they weren't overly accepting of "Mystic River" and might want to look elsewhere. "The Departed" could really clean up as a result, especially now that the LA guys and gals have stiffed the film altogether.

Gerard was good enough to post the full rundown of LA winners in The Blog as I was out and about today. My commentary on today's winners can be found there now as well.

(NYFCC predictions after the jump.)

Best Picture
"The Departed"

Best Director
Martin Scorsese, "The Departed"

Best Actor
Forest Whitaker, "The Last King of Scotland"
(This doesn't feel right. I want to go with Ryan Gosling, but they tend to go for older, more established actors putting out career-topping work. Maybe O'Toole?)

Best Actress
Helen Mirren, "The Queen"

Best Supporting Actor
Jackie Earle Haley, "Little Children"

Best Supporting Actress
Phyllis Somerville, "Little Children"

Best Screenplay
"The Departed"

Best Cinematography
"Curse of the Golden Flower"

Best Foreign Language Film
"Army of Shadows"

Best Animated Film
"Happy Feet" (Is there anything obscure and Japanese in the mix?)

Best Non-Fiction Film
"Deliver Us from Evil"

Best First Film
"Half Nelson"

It is extremely difficult to go about writing a review of Clint Eastwood’s “Letters from Iwo Jima” without comparing it to, or at least considering, the film’s October cousin “Flags of Our Fathers.” After all, the film was born out of a nagging sensation Eastwood felt while shooting “Flags,” a sense that the full story wasn’t being told. What he and his seasoned crew expedited as a result is a film more penetrating than “Flags of Our Fathers” could have ever been, a film unlike any other entry in the war genre and, ultimately, an anti-war statement as lacerating and unique as the anti-violence mandate of his masterpiece, “Unforgiven.”

Told from the perspective of the Japanese soldiers tasked with defending the island of Iwo Jima as American forces pushed toward the mainland, “Letters” is a long, deep breath of a film. Eastwood is not the sort of person to work under the 120 minute barrier, and at 140 minutes, his latest takes its time getting there. But what has been considered behind the scenes a “small” film, or an “art” film, I actually find to be the most emotionally epic outing of the year.

The film is book ended, much like Steven Spielberg’s “Saving Private Ryan,” by a modern setting. Japanese archaeologists are excavating the tunnels on Iwo Jima, the refuge of the Japanese soldiers who defended that God forsaken rock with all the futility in the world. Cut to the pre-battle Iwo Jima, as the Imperial Army is readying the island for battle, awaiting the arrival of Lt. General Tadamichi Kuribayashi (Ken Watanabe) to lead the effort.

Kuribayashi is a forward-thinking leader whose views fly in the face of traditionalist Imperial Army officers. He also holds a unique perspective of the enemy as he formerly spent time in America as a student and officer. A man’s man who capably wins the hearts of his soldiers, Kuribayashi seems like a role tailor-made for Watanabe.

We meet Saigo (Kazunari Ninomiya), a baker who was shuffled off to the war and hopes to make it back to the simple life with his wife and child. Saigo irreverently curses the island, the war and his place in it. We are also introduced to Baron Nishi (Tsuyoshi Ihara), a former Olympic equestrian who, much like Kuribayashi, paradoxically shares fond memories of life in America.

Soon enough, the battle begins, and the viewer gets an eyeful to say the least. The Japanese are knowingly left to their own defenses, as the majority of the Japanese fleet has recently been destroyed off the Marianas. These men know they are going to die, whether it is at the hands of the Americans or by their own honorable methods. Yes, the suicides-by-grenade heard from afar in “Flags of Our Fathers” are depicted with ruthless candor in “Letters,” and it is the most harrowing sequence committed to film this year.

The three aforementioned performances head up what has to be seen as one of the year’s most organic and accomplished ensemble performances. The cast seems to live and breathe as something singular in that light, each character a part of a greater being. This makes the concentration on individuality in the film’s flashback sequences all the more poignant, sometimes more so than the greatest of American war cinema. Watanabe seems all but assured an Oscar nomination for Best Actor, and should the buzz really amp up, he’s got the stuff to steal the statue. Ninomiya also has enough heart-twisting moments to declare a place amongst the supporting actor regiment, should the snowball continue to build.

The craftsmanship is on par with “Flags of Our Fathers,” though the sound elements seem somehow more terrifying. Tom Stern’s cinematography really gets to show its stuff in the final act as the Japanese soldiers push through smoldering fields of dead trees and smoky post-battle remains. It might prove to be Academy award-winning work.

Joel Cox’s editing, meanwhile, is sufficient, though anything that runs nearly two and a half hours has fat to trim. Much of the central portion of “Letters” feels bloated and could have been consolidated, but within each sequence, his hand is masterful as always. Finally, Kyle Eastwood and Michael Stevens's score is mesmerizing. Truly, the simplicity of his approach reaches somewhat profound levels in the delicate, lingering theme he created for this film. It isn’t the orchestral accompaniment you typically see recognized by awards groups, but it is a deserving piece of work nonetheless.

Broad in its intentions and majestic in its revelations, I would go so far as to call “Letters from Iwo Jima” one of the most important cinematic creations of modern times. Regardless of perceived success or failure, there is something exceptional about an American filmmaker taking this approach, sympathetically revealing the story of a former enemy of his homeland. There is also something unsettling and altogether revealing about watching American soldiers depicted as faceless, nameless antagonists in this manner. As such, there is no film as self-inspecting as “Letters from Iwo Jima” this year or, seemingly, any other. Not in this manner.

“Letters” has already secured its place in the awards race of 2006, and from here, who knows what the unsuspecting late entry has in store? But ultimately, it can’t be stated enough that Clint Eastwood deserves ample appreciation and respect for creating these two films. Any director who would take on such a task would be deemed ambitious beyond his years, but for this filmmaker to do so at his age, it is staggering. Bravo.

Over the past couple of months, we’ve overviewed each of the individual races here at “Tech Support.” Over the next few weeks, most places will be previewing – and posting their reactions towards – the many precursor awards coming up. Obviously, I’ll be doing that for the guilds. But the fact of the matter is the influence on the tech races of these earlier awards bodies is not all that consequential.

So over the next couple of weeks, I personally plan to do a few different things, and today I’m going to do something a little personal – and make pleas for some favorites who need all the help they can get.

Well, the LAFCA announce their winners this weekend, and you know what? I'm betting they go with Clint Eastwood's follow-up effort just like the National Board of Review did this afternoon. This is a town that bows at the Eastwood's feet, and knocking these two films out of the park (in their view, anyway) would be seen as just another high mark.

"The Good Shepherd" was the last film to screen for the LAFCA, I believe, but "Letters from Iwo Jima" screened right before that, last Friday night, for the BFCA. I assume there were plenty of the LA folks straggling around as well. And guess who was in attendance? The man himself. The Clint. Talk about leaving a good taste in the group's collective mouth on the cusp of their voting process.

So, it is just as possible the group could split and give Eastwood the directing award for his one-two punch, thereby clearing the Best Picture slot up for "The Departed" or "The Queen," still two of, if not the most critically acclaimed films of the year. But I sense something very -- "Million Dollar baby" about all of this.

(LAFCA Predictions follow after the jump.)

Best Picture
"Letters from Iwo Jima"

Best Director
Martin Scorsese, "The Departed"

Best Actor
Ken Watanabe, "Letters from Iwo Jima"
(This could be where they stick a flag in the ground for Leonardo DiCaprio in "The Departed," however.)

Best Actress
Helen Mirren, "The Queen"

Best Supporting Actor
Jack Nicholson, "The Departed"

Best Supporting Actress
Jennifer Hudson, "Dreamgirls"

Best Screenplay
"Little Miss Sunshine," "Little Children"

Best Cinematography
"Children of Men"

Best Music Score
"Notes on a Scandal"

Best Documentary/Non-Fiction Film
"Deliver Us from Evil"

Best Foreign Language Film
"The Lives of Others"

Best Animation
"Happy Feet"

Best Production Design
"Curse of the Golden Flower"

New Generation Award
Ryan Gosling

From the National Board of Review's press release today:

“2006 was one of the most challenging for the NBR in terms of choosing winners in the various categories,” said NBR President Annie Schulhof. “There were many outstanding films and performances this year, and our 2006 Ten Best Films list reflects a wide range of narratives. LETTERS FROM IWO JIMA is probably Mr. Eastwood's masterpiece and perhaps one of the greatest films of our time. His achievement is all the more extraordinary when one views the film as a companion piece to FLAGS OF OUR FATHERS.”

I think one thing that is important to note about these films is that, had they remained in separate years, the accomplishment would not have been perceived in as grand a light as it is. The box office failure of "Flags of Our Fathers" would have left "Letters from Iwo Jima" as a February 2007 afterthought. The decision to pull "Letters" into the 2006 film season is in many ways a brilliant move, not only for awards attention, but for the very fact that coupling these films in the same season assures more viewers for the second film, thereby assuring more dollars at the box office.

And so it begins...

National Board of Review names 'Iwo Jima' best film
First award in kudos race goes to Eastwood epic

By VARIETY STAFF

Clint Eastwood's "Letters From Iwo Jima" has won the National Board of Review's top prize, taking home the first award in the kudos race for 2006.

The top 10 from the National Board of Review:

"Letters From Iwo Jima"

"Babel"

"Blood Diamond"

"The Departed"

"The Devil Wears Prada"

"Flags Of Our Fathers"

"The History Boys"

"Little Miss Sunshine"

"Notes on a Scandal"

"The Painted Veil"

The rest of the awards:

Best Film: LETTERS FROM IWO JIMA
Best Director: MARTIN SCORSESE, The Departed
Best Actor: FOREST WHITAKER, The Last King of Scotland
Best Actress: HELEN MIRREN, The Queen
Best Supporting Actor: DJIMON HOUNSOU, Blood Diamond
Best Supporting Actress: CATHERINE O'HARA, For Your Consideration
Best Foreign Film: VOLVER
Best Documentary: AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH
Best Animated Feature: CARS
Best Ensemble Cast: THE DEPARTED
Breakthrough Performance by an Actor: RYAN GOSLING, Half Nelson
Breakthrough Performance by an Actress: (2)
JENNIFER HUDSON, Dreamgirls and RINKO KIKUCHI, Babel

Best Directorial Debut: JASON REITMAN, Thank You for Smoking
Best Original Screenplay: ZACH HELM, Stranger Than Fiction
Best Adapted Screenplay: RON NYSWANER, The Painted Veil

Top Five Foreign Films:
VOLVER

(and, in alphabetical order)

CURSE OF THE GOLDEN FLOWER
DAYS OF GLORY
PAN'S LABYRINTH
WATER

Top Five Documentary Films
AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH

(and, in alphabetical order)

51 BIRCH STREET
IRAQ IN FRAGMENTS
SHUT UP & SING
WORDPLAY

Top Independent Films
(in alphabetical order)

AKEELAH AND THE BEE
BOBBY
CATCH A FIRE
COPYING BEETHOVEN
A GUIDE TO RECOGNIZING YOUR SAINTS
HALF NELSON
THE ILLUSIONIST
LONESOME JIM
SHERRYBABY
10 ITEMS OR LESS
THANK YOU FOR SMOKING

Career Achievement - ELI WALLACH
Billy Wilder Award for Excellence in Directing - JONATHAN DEMME
Career Achievement in Producing - IRWIN WINKLER
William K. Everson Film History Award - DONALD KRIM
The BVLGARI Award for NBR Freedom of Expression - WATER and WORLD TRADE CENTER

Now the question is this. Can "Flags of Our Fathers" and "Letters from Iwo Jima" both be nominated for Best Picture.

ITEMS OF NOTE REGARDING NBR 2006

I don't know if the readers keep up with these at The Blog, but every month I toss up a fresh set of predictions for Oscar wins in every category, and, well, I'm leaping off the deep with this month's set.

The Oscar column from last Monday pretty much put me in print as claiming that, in my view, "Letters from Iwo Jima" could pull down the win in the Best Picture category. Most have long chalked that statue up for "Dreamgirls," and following screening that film myself some weeks back, I began to tilt toward the "Departed" side of things in the equation. But the hollow nature of the "Departed" narrative, the random, explosive violence (that has no emotional context and can therefore not be seen in the same arena as the violence of "Braveheart" or "The Silence of the Lambs" when it comes to Oscar hopes) kept digging at me as a hinderence for the film.

Well, this hour, today, this week, this month - for better or for worse - I'm in print on the issue with as much clairty as I can offer. I'm predicting "Letters from Iwo Jima" to take the win for Best Picture of the year, what I think will be seen as a salute to Clint Eastwood's one-two punch. It's possible that AMPAS giving him the Best Director award for "Letters" could be seen as getting that job done, leaving Best Picture to "Dreamgirls" or "The Departed." I don't disagree that such a scenario could be in the cards, but I feel like the Academy knows how foolish it would look by not handing Marty that statue this year.

If I'm wrong I'm wrong and everything will go back to "normal" next month and following the first wave of precursors. Maybe something thin, fun and lacking a certain emotional connectivity is exactly what the doctor ordered following one of the most "serious" years in the Academy's history. Maybe "Dreamgirls" will take the cake after all. But I have to jump off that train for now. I'm feeling a little...wacky.

One final note, on the Best Actor race. Peter O'Toole won't be out here to campaign, it seems. I sense genuine love for "The Pursuit of Happyness," but I somehow feel Will Smith's performance, however harrowing it is (and indeed, it's a fine piece of acting), isn't enough to win. I can't put my finger on why. With Ryan Gosling seemingly too young to seriously compete with the top dogs for the win, however critically acclaimed, and with Forest Whitaker's performance peaking too early, I have to say I think Ken Watanabe could be the guy to take O'Toole down for the Best Actor win in "Letters from Iwo Jima." Crazy? Maybe I'm longing for "change for the sake of change," but oh well, you snooze you lose. Regardless, I'll stick with O'Toole for one more month and see how things shake out.

The National Board of Review announces their annual list of winners tomorrow, kicking off the awards season kudos-coaster in earnest. Year after year this group prides itself on being the first out of the gate, lending serious Oscar consideration to this contender or that by being the first to dish honors. Think "Moulin Rouge!" taking down their Best Picture win in 2001, or Halle Berry winning the Best Actress award the very same year for "Monster's Ball."

This year has boasted a unique mixture of filmmaking efforts, and I for one am excited to see where the kudos will fall. So with that, I'll just toss up some NBR predictions and see how it pans out tomorrow morning.

Best Picture
"The Queen"

Top Ten Films of the Year
"Babel"
"The Departed"
"Dreamgirls"
"Flags of Our Fathers"
"Letters from Iwo Jima"
"Little Miss Sunshine"
"Half Nelson"
"Inside Man"
"The Queen"
"United 93"

(More predictions after the jump.)

Best Actor
Ryan Gosling, "Half Nelson"

Best Actress
Helen Mirren, "The Queen"

Best Supporting Actor
Jack Nicholson, "The Departed"

Best Supporting Actress
Cate Blanchett, "Babel," "The Good German," "Notes on a Scandal"

Best Director
Clint Eastwood, "Flags of Our Fathers" and "Letters from Iwo Jima"

Best Breakthrough Actor
Sacha Baron Cohen, "Borat: Cultural Learnings for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan"

Best Breakthrough Actress
Shareeka Epps, "Half Nelson"

Best Adapted Screenplay
"Little Children," Todd Field, Tom Perotta

Best Original Screenplay
"Babel," Guillermo Arriaga

Best Debut Director
Jason Reitman, "Thank You for Smoking"

Best Documentary
"Deliver Us from Evil"

Best Foreign Language Film
"Volver"

Best Acting by an Ensemble
"United 93"

Best Animated Feature
"Happy Feet"

I'm under embargo on "The Good Shepherd" and won't see "Letters from Iwo Jima" until later in the week, so really, a column is a pointless exercise this week. There is also little movement in the charts in any case, but I can take a moment to mention this year's 2006 wrap-up pieces, which will begin the week of December 18th (we're there already!?). The top ten list will hit Monday, 12/18, my personal ballot on Wednesday, 12/19 and we'll wrap it all up with the obligatory "In Contention Awards" column that Friday. Then it's egg nog, champagne and before you freakin' know it, it'll be 2007. Wow.

Enjoy the charts:

Main Category Charts
Technical Category Charts
Oscar Predictions Archive
"The Contenders"

Previous Oscar Columns:
11/27/06 - "Switching Gears"
10/23/06 - "Lighten Up"
10/16/06 - "Starting To Get Serious"
10/09/06 - "'Flags' Lands and the Supporting Actresses Need Sustenance"
10/02/06 - "What's in a lead anyway?"
09/18/06 - "Aftermath"
09/11/06 - "It's All Happening."
09/04/06 - "Aw, Canucks."
08/28/06 - "On Your Marks..."
08/14/06 - "Enough Foreplay!"
08/07/06 - "Don't Knock Masturbation; it's Sex with Someone I Love"
07/31/06 - "Old and New, the Oscar Season Approaches"

It seems like it. Further thoughts over at The Blog.

I thought I’d take the time to clear the plate of three brief reviews this weekend that I need to get out there before the final push. Looking back at them now, it’s clear this trio of endeavors all had a strange supply of potential in store, but failed to capitalize on that potential in varying degrees. Only one of them is tolerable, mind you, and it isn’t fair to even consider it on such a perceivably low level as “tolerable,” but it deserved inclusion for muddled tendencies along with the others.

Next week, screenings of “The Good Shepherd” and “Letters from Iwo Jima” will finally begin in earnest, and the week after, the National Board of Review sends us spinning out of control into the 2006-2007 Oscar season. Hold tight!

“Apocalypto” (***)

Mel Gibson is a twisted individual. There’s no question about it. There are dark places deep down inside this cat that bubble to the surface via his directorial efforts, and I for one am a fan of witnessing such emotional turbulence play itself out in an artistic endeavor.

“Apocalypto” might be the lesser effort of Gibson’s directorial quartet thus far, but it isn’t a poor film by any stretch. Taken merely as a cat-and-mouse action flick, the film is aces. For better or worse (usually better), I found myself comparing the final 40 minute chase sequence (it felt like 40 minutes) to the final act of John McTiernan’s “Predator.” Edge-of-your-seat anxiety drips off this thing from the first shot, and there’s something to be said for instilling that kind of intrigue in the viewer.

The film’s downfall, however, is its murky and muddled message. There’s certainly something being said about the end of civilization (I’m convinced Gibson thinks the world will end soon). Plenty of parallels are drawn in a horrifying Mayan, human sacrifice sequence to governments manipulating their people, or even religions manipulating their followers. Additionally, there’s an interesting pro-nature, pro-simplicity thing floating around that goes a little further than you’d expect it to, and I can’t quite put my finger on it. None of these ideas seem to be up front and center, however, making for a peculiar viewing experience for any who would look for something deeper than the surface-level excitement.

Ultimately, “Apocalypto” is a very valuable film. Threading the end of one civilization into the end of another in the manner Gibson achieves in the film’s denouement has a touch of fatalism that is almost beautiful. His view of these themes and historical events is both unique and welcome, and regardless of his personal downfalls, he remains something of a visionary in the filmmaking community.

“Blood Diamond” (**)

Edward Zwick is not a good director. He can put scenes together in a coherent exercise that reveals a film with a beginning, middle and end, but more often than not, his efforts seem to fall apart solely because there are Edward Zwick films. “Blood Diamond” is certainly no exception.

At two and a half hours, “Blood Diamond” can easily be considered too long. But while most films that are considered to boast inflated running times can bring meandering and aimless third acts up to blame, “Blood Diamond” is too long in every waking moment of the piece. At least five minutes needed to be trimmed from just about every scene. When you find yourself rolling your eyes this often in a film, it’s time to rein it in a bit. Zwick seems to have either too much patience for his characters, or expect too much patience out of his audience, because the effect seems almost willful.

Leonardo DiCaprio’s performance is a saving grace of sorts. Hitting a hell of a stride in his career right now, the star pulls double duty this year in “The Departed,” where he gives his career best portrayal. In “Blood Diamond,” he reveals the embers of a deep-burning fire in the character of diamond smuggler Danny Archer. He also seems to know what’s up, as his performance never seems to be stretch too thin due to Zwick’s snoozing on the job. Djimon Hounsou, on the other hand, plays every breath for much more than its worth. A lot of his scenes either needed more takes or maybe they needed more coverage to cut around or…SOMETHING…because it’s a trying portrayal indeed.

The sad thing about “Blood Diamond” is that it could have been something truly brilliant. It could have been this generation’s “The Treasure of the Sierra Madre” or better, because there is a real discussion happening here. And the story is a very good one, if the script is ultimately an overloaded thing resembling a first draft.

“The Good German” (**)

Sigh…I think I’ve had my fill with director Steven Soderbergh. His mandate of experimentation has reached an audacious level, and he’s now losing studio dollars and respect by offering up clunkers like “The Good German.”

I don’t worship at the altar of Soderbergh like much of the film going and filmmaking communities. I think he’s had some interesting ideas in his career, but never has he fired on all cylinders with any consistency. 1998’s “Out of Sight” is his single greatest effort to date, and I’m slowly discovering it will never be topped. In “The Good German,” the director set about making a film according to the strictures apparent in the 1940s. Fixed lenses, single boom mics and specific blocking were the order of the day. While it seems like a neat idea on one hand, seeing stars like George Clooney and Cate Blanchett in this environment, an environment generally reserved for Humphrey Bogart, reeks of spoof far and above homage.

The script comes from one of the greats, Paul Attanasio. It is an appropriately murky affair, certainly piquing interest as it drags the viewer from one cliché to the next, but it climaxes at a point that makes for an incredible “so what” exhalation. There are plenty of opportunities to spout off one-liners, but really, the whole thing just feels like a piece of elastic.

The single worst aspect of “The Good German”: Tobey Maguire’s “look at me” performance that is so difficult to buy it seemed like the Maguire of “Pleasantville” rather than “Seabiscuit” talking dirty and giving it to Blanchett from behind. There’s not much to be said of any performance, really, as even Blanchett’s very poised portrayal gets drowned out by the surrounding horror.

Monday's Oscar column will come later in the evening next week, as I'd prefer to take my reaction to "The Good Shepherd" into account. Expect the charts and column to hit around eight o'clock PST. Stay tuned later today for a trio of brief reviews, and otherwise, enjoy the weekend.