E: That was rather disappointing, wasn’t it?  I wanted to spend more time with neurotic pet owners.

M: I agree, there was very little in the way of dipping into the dog show subculture, not at least to the usual Castle level.

E: On the other hand, it did lead to what might have been the funniest line of the show – papparazzi swarming over Castle, then backing away in disappointment. “Hey, that’s not Jason Bateman!”

M: I can honestly say, I’ve never thought even once that Nathan Fillion and Jason Bateman looked alike.  I thought the poses he was doing that led to them taking his picture were funnier.

C: I’ve always thought that, actually. Or at least that they should play brothers sometime! But speaking of actors, the reality show star, Kay Cappuccio (pooch? get it?) is played by Hilarie Burton of One Tree Hill and, more recently and charmingly, White Collar. Though she’s doing an odd, higher voice here which I couldn’t get used to.

M: I thought she did a really good job with the change of voice, actually.  Because of it and the super-crappy “it girl”fashion, I wasn’t 100% sure it was her in the first couple scenes.

E: Blah blah blah cable shows I don’t watch blah blah.

M: You know that One Tree Hill isn’t a cable show, right?  And you *should* watch White Collar, no matter what network it’s on.

C: Speaking of irritating bickering, the episode makes a point of starting with Lanie snapping at Esposito to show they are still on the outs (boooo) so we can watch Esposito drool all over Kay throughout the rest of the episode.

M: That was kind of embarrassing, and a bit sad after the way they left Wonder Twin #1 and Lanie at Wonder Twin #2′s wedding.

C: Agreed. And I know this isn’t a new complaint on my part, but did we really need lingering close-ups of Cappuccio’s legs, her butt, and her boobs? I don’t know if I should blame the writers or the directors of Castle, but someone working on this show needs to stop projecting his fantasies on the rest of us.

E: Yeah, they really lay it on thicker than any other show I know.

M: I will invoke my role as the lone male here and tell you both to quit your over-sensitive, catty yapping.  ;)  Seriously, though, they were playing her as the sexpot reality star, they did those shots for effect, to make fun of show (and people) like Kim Kardashian and Paris Hilton.  I would think that the two of you would have understood that.

E: Catty?  Excuse me?  You think they needed to show us her butt up close to establish her character?  Riiiiight.

C: This from the guy who gave me faith as an insecure teenage girl that at least some men weren’t shallow and disgusting, because he was always telling his wife she didn’t need to be sexy or “done up” to be beautiful. M, I think my heart just broke a little.

M: Wow, everyone’s inability to take a joke is out of hand today!  I threw in the winkey emoticon and followed it with a “Seriously” and everything!  Yikes.

E: I’m not entirely sure the writers made up for it by eventually showing us that Kay’s actually pretty nice and definitely not as vapid as she appears on TV- a bit noir, really, as the misunderstood bad girl.

C: One of the lighter bits is where Castle and Beckett interview the victim’s psychologist, Dr. Barker (barker? get it?) – who turns out to be Ms. Barker, a dog therapist.

E: More of that, please.

M: Played by Star Trek: DS9‘s Nana Visitor, no less.  Long time no see, Major Kira!

E: No way!  Wow, at least White Collar I don’t watch – I’m appalled at myself for not recognizing her.  That makes me wish even more that she’d had a bigger role.  I’m not at all sure why they had to layer in the reality show stuff, especially with such an obvious mystery.  M and I were chatting and realized that we both pegged Kay’s boyfriend Reggie as the killer from the start.

M: And when you combine the dog show subculture and the drug cartel, they had more than enough without it.  As for Reggie, it fit the Castle formula far too well.  I couldn’t say what his involvement was or why he would turn out to be the killer, but I knew it was going to end up being him almost immediately.  They need to start mixing it up again.

C: Who else found it impossible to believe that they would need to scramble to find a home for the canine companion of the world-famous dog whisperer? Yeah right! Even if he was “better with dogs than people,” I’m sure he would have left instructions on who was to get his pooch. And even if he didn’t, the dog certainly would go begging (get it?) — folks everywhere would have been clamoring for him!

E: Me. Particularly since Royal had mad drug sniffing skillz. You’d think the government would have wanted him; those dogs are super expensive to train.

M: Seriously, E, I can forgive you the use of “mad” as a positive adjective, but you’re a grown woman with four kids, never mind an english major, you should not be pluralizing words with a “z.”  Ever.

E: And as someone who made it through 2nd grade, you should know you need to capitalize English.  (Seriously, dude, it’s a silly phrase, mad skillz. I didn’t invent it.  If you’re going to be so persnickety, you better start backing it up!)

M: Really, you think I didn’t know that you did not invent the phrase “mad skillz”?  You not being the originator of it still doesn’t mean you should EVER use it.  Not only are you too old, intelligent and responsible, you are not nearly ghetto enough.

E: Wow, somebody needs to take it down a notch.

C: Um, yes. The quibbling is out of hand today. So! All that said, it was pretty adorable to see Beckett and Castle sparring for custody of the gorgeous golden retriever. Especially when Beckett (inevitably) let the dog up on the couch.

E: Very.  Very cute.

M: Speaking of very cute, when Castle held and rubbed Beckett’s hand to display how Royal liked to be scratched?  Very nice.

E: Definitely something we can agree on, M.

M: Back to “impossible to believe,” did anyone else have a problem with the premise that a South American drug cartel would have a dog trainer killed because he was doing such a good job training drug-sniffing dogs?  I mean, won’t Customs just get another trainer?  Aren’t there plenty of people who can train dogs effectively enough that risking themselves to kill some Caesar Milan-inspired trainer was an unnecessary risk?

E: I’m not an expert, but I don’t know if drug cartels really have a measured attitude towards taking life.

M: My incredulity didn’t have anything to do with their taking a life, I agree that they don’t have any particular qualms about that.  It’s about minimizing risk and maximizing gain.  There’s very little benefit for them to kill the guy that trains the drug sniffing dogs (setting aside how they would find out who it was), while there’s a high potential risk of law enforcement tying it to them causing them more problems than if they let him live.

E: Well, I still don’t know that I give them that much credit.  Of course, I’m ghetto enough to know that for sure. In totally unrelated news, don’t you think Alexis is looking particularly sophisticated these days?  It makes me slightly sad. I did like hearing about her new friend Buttons – though I think it’s peculiar she hadn’t noticed the hilarity of the name Buttons Dutton.  I hope she’s not losing her sense of humor!

M: I think she’s been looking very sophisticated since the beginning of the show, personally.  She just looks more grown up now, so instead of looking like a sophisticated teen she looks like a sophisticated young woman.  And yes, as a dad with a daughter getting close to her teenage years that transition scares the hell out of me.

C: Rallying after Sybil’s disappointing lack of response to Branson’s first declaration, this week saw a satisfying amount of action on the lady-chauffeur romance front. She asks him why he promised Mr. Carson that he would not try any more statements of protest, in order to keep his job. Branson says he’s not leaving until she’s willing to run away with him. She’s in love with him, he says – she just won’t admit it. Adorable.

E: Did you think so?  I was actually annoyed by that.  I’m not feeling him this time, somehow.  It should have been romantic the way his original proposal was, but it just wasn’t.  Maybe I’m still bothered by his weirdness from last week.

C: I did think that part was cute, yeah, but it’s amazing how just a couple words can put a damper on romance. Sybil goes to see Branson again, this time at night in the garage, to tell him Lady Mary knows about what’s been going on (technically, not much) between them. He repeats his offer to run away, and she finally voices her concerns. What about my family, she asks? What about my work? “What work?” he scoffs. And suddenly I am 500 times less charmed by the idea of them together.

E: Well, yeah.  That’s unfortunately dismissive.  Generally, I found his whole “if you love me, you should be willing to throw over the rest of your life” attitude really irritating.

C: Sybil’s just finding a sense of purpose. And she actually likes her family, somehow even her sisters. I don’t think his “all or nothing” ultimatums are going to win her over. But if the bloom is a little bit off that rose, Mr. Fellowes certainly ramped up the adorable factor in another department. Could the concert scene have been any more wonderful? I’ll admit it: the three adult women watching at my house emitted a simultaneous squeal of joy.

E: The concert was definitely wonderful.  Mary has just learned that Matthew went out on patrol and never came back. She doesn’t want to do the concert, but Lord Grantham tells her the men need it – the show must go on. So there she is singing with Edith, struggling along, trying to care when she doesn’t, and then Matthew and William walk in and she just stops. And then he joins her!  Of course.

C: Of course? I was blown away! That was the perfect touch, the moment our smiles turned to squeals. “If you were the only girl in the world, and I were the only boy…” A fantasy from a time of horror. Spot on.

E: I mean “of course” because it was the perfect, perfect thing.  It was the best possible thing to happen at that moment.  Just as wonderful as Mrs. Patmore and Mrs. Bird feeding the jobless soldiers, and Cora joining them.  And, even better, forcing O’Brien to serve as well!  Those are some seriously lovely moments.

C: It might have been smarter to send O’Brien home – dang, that woman has resentment down to an art! – but I loved Cora’s immediate decision to join in. I can’t help feeling the cooks were a bit silly not to just ask permission in the first place. Lord and Lady Grantham aren’t exactly misers.

E: Mom disagrees with me, but for once, I actually thought it was reasonable of O’Brien to be suspicious. Of course, she thinks badly of people who don’t deserve it, and one feels she should have known Mrs. Patmore wasn’t selling the food, but I can see why it looked strange.

C: You know, that’s a fair point. They were obviously sneaking food. You don’t usually go that for an honest, above-board reason. (And as I noted, there really was no reason not to try doing it honestly.)

E: And ultimately, O’Brien’s snooping did good.  ‘From now on you must take the food from the household budget,’ Cora says.  Awesome.

C: If I have one big complaint about Julian Fellowes’s writing this season, it’s his dependence on dramatic irony, which has been used so liberally it’s become absurd. “I think they might ask me to stay!” says Molesley. “Get used to being happy!” Anna tells Bates. It doesn’t make me sympathetic with these people when they’re inevitably disappointed; it makes me want to smack them out of the habit of uttering famous last words.

E: So so true.

C: And Bates coming back before he’s got his business settled? Idiocy. If you don’t want to ask for help, then take care of your issues where they won’t rain down on the people you care about – that’s why you left to begin with.

E: The man really needs a good smack upside the head, doesn’t he?

C: Much as I have always rooted for him… yes he does.

E: I have to say, on a totally different subject, that I am utterly convinced of Mary’s love for Matthew.  In some ways I feel like we’re seeing a battle for her soul when she talks of joining forces with Richard, because her love for Matthew ennobles her. But I cannot see a way through for her to be with Matthew!  For that matter, I can’t tell that he still loves her, can you?  Are we meant to think that receipt of her letter announcing her sort of engagement makes him reckless?  Because he just seems blind to her – perfectly friendly and pleasant, but not pining at all.

C: Oh, I don’t see that at all. I think he definitely still loves her – but in a “put on hold” kind of way. What he’s blind to is the fact that she loves him, so he’s moved on to a new relationship. That’s his priority now, and Lavinia (as far as we know) loves him in return, so he’s just not going to dwell on the Mary issue. But he’s so not over her.

E: Don’t you think Lavinia loves him?  I do.  As for the least successful relationship of the night (even given the heavy competition for that status)… oh, Ethel.

C: Yeah, we all knew exactly what would happen there.

E: Am I crazy for thinking that they should have had someone reprimand Major Mustache?  Plus, how the hell long are these guys going to convalesce?  There doesn’t seem to be anything wrong with the Major, does there?  So why is he still taking up space?

C: Well, just because we haven’t seen what’s wrong with him doesn’t mean he’s okay. But yeah, if he’s up to sneaking around the house and vigorously seducing the housemaids, it’s probably time to send him home.

E: Um, quite.  At first he was in a wheelchair, so that made sense – but he’s not anymore.

C: This really shows how having Thomas in charge poses a very serious problem. Mrs. Hughes approached this as a staff issue – as she would have if Ethel had slept with a regular guest of the Crawleys. But if they had a responsible person in charge of day-to-day administration on the military end, she could report the incident and that person would decide how to deal with Major ‘Stache. Unfortunately, Thomas is an uncooperative git.

E: Well, I can’t deny that, but I kept wondering why they didn’t report it to someone with military authority, like Dr. Clarkson.  Or even to Lord Grantham – don’t you imagine he’d have been furious that someone was repaying his hospitality in that way?

C: I imagine he would, though they are playing him more passively this season. I guess they can’t play the “Lord G. steps in” card for every problem, or where would the drama be? Which brings us to the ending: O’Brien trying to motivate Thomas to scheme some more against Bates. Seriously – have you ever met an average human who put that much energy into being evil?

E:  Hee.  George Eliot writes about that in Mill on the Floss in a way I just adore:

“Plotting covetousness and deliberate contrivance in order to compass a selfish end are nowhere abundant but in the world of the dramatist; they demand too intense a mental action for many of our fellow parishioners to be guilty of them.  It is easy enough to spoil the lives of our neighbors without taking so much trouble; we can do it by lazy acquiescence and lazy omission, by trivial falsities for which we hardly know a reason, by small frauds neutralized by small extravagancies, by maladroit flatteries and clumsily improvised insinuations. We live from hand to mouth, most of us, with a small family of immediate desires; we do little else than snatch a morsel to satisfy the hungry brood, rarely thinking of seed corn or the next year’s crop.”

C: But the planting of wicked seeds, it seems, is this dramatist’s bread and butter!

How’s that for a mixed metaphor to end on?

This morning’s nominations bring a happy number of surprises and more than a few nominations that weren’t so shocking.  And nine Best Picture nominees! Wow!

Let’s get to it.

Best Supporting Actor:

I said:  Kenneth Branagh, Albert Brooks, Jonah Hill, Nick Nolte, Christopher Plummer

They nominated: Kenneth Branagh, Jonah Hill, Nick Nolte, Christopher Plummer, Max Von Sydow

Okay, here it is.  I did just as well as Dave Karger (who picked Brooks instead of Nolte), but I will be damned if I can figure out how he knew it would be Von Sydow when he hadn’t be nominated for a single precursor award.  But there it is. He was right, and everyone else was wrong.  You saw my reasoning, and the long list of fellows who’d been nominated for other awards.  I”m not at all surprised to get one wrong; in fact, I’m rather pleased to have gotten 4 out of 5.  Brooks not getting the BAFTA nom, when they clearly loved his movie, turns out to have been a good sign of things to come. But.  I guess it’s the year for silence – Von Sydow plays a character who hasn’t spoken since the second World War.

Best Supporting Actress

I said: Berenice Bejo, Jessica Chastain, Janet McTeer, Octavia Spencer, Shailene Woodley

They Nominated: Berenice Bejo, Jessica Chastain, Melissa McCarthy, Janet McTeer, Octavia Spencer

4 out of 5 again.  As you recall, I said it would be some combination of McCarthy, McTeer and Woodley.  I picked the wrong one.  I knew picking Woodley was a bit of a risk, but her performance was so lovely, I decided to take a chance.  I’m really happy for the super likable McCarthy that she and close friend Spencer will get to go through the nomination whirlwind together.  Fun fact; 4 out of 5 women are first time nominees, with McTeer being the only repeat.

Best Actor:

I said: George Clooney, Leonardo DiCaprio, Jean Dujardin, Michael Fassbender, Brad Pitt

They nominated: Demian Bichir, George Clooney, Jean Dujardin, Gary Oldman, Brad Pitt

This turned out to be my worst category – 3 for 5.  Bichir and Oldman had made my alternate list, and I had identified DiCaprio and Fassbender as the weakest links on the presumed list, but wow.  Two non-native speakers on the list?  I don’t think that’s ever happened before (and like I said is definitely a sign that this was not a big year for lead male performances).  Oldman picks up his first nomination for playing John LeCarre’s famous spy; this movie was expected to get more buzz than it did.  Now it’s making up for that.  Looks like the SAG nomination for Mexican star Bichir and the BAFTA nod for Oldman really did indicate momentum.  I downplayed that since he and Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy are both British and they often prefer their own, but apparently I shouldn’t have.  As far as I can tell, Bichir will be only the second Mexican born actor to be nominated, after four time nominee Anthony Quinn.

All of this, in case you were wondering, adds up to George Clooney being in an even better position to win that he was before.

Best Actress:

I said: Glenn Close, Viola Davis, Meryl Streep, Tilda Swinton, Michelle Williams

They nominated: Glenn Close, Viola Davis, Rooney Mara, Meryl Streep, Michelle Williams

4 out of 5.  Swinton was clearly the vulnerable one, and Mara was clearly the best alternative, but it’s still a little bit of a surprise.  I’m really pleased for Mara – and I’m more pleased for myself, because now I don’t have to see We Need to Talk About Kevin, which, frankly, I was not looking forward to.  So, yay?   The fight is still between Davis and Streep.  I am actually hearing a bit more chatter along the lines of “when the heck are they going to let Meryl win?” which is encouraging – but I’m going to try not to let myself get too invested there, because we know Meryl always loses these head to head battles.

Best Director

I said: Woody Allen, David Fincher, Michel Hazanavicius, Alexander Payne, Martin Scorsese

They nominated: Woody Allen, Michel Hazanavicius, Terence Malick, Alexander Payne, Martin Scorsese

4 out of 5 again. Well, I said the last slot was between Fincher, Malick, and Spielberg; I just picked the wrong horse.  I don’t feel badly about it; it really could have been any of them.  I should have said in the prediction post, but the exclusion of Tate Taylor, director of The Help, signals that The Help isn’t a top contender.   It’s virtually impossible for a film to win when it’s director hasn’t been nominated; it’s a clear sign that the film doesn’t have enough across the board support.  You have to go back to Driving Miss Daisy for an example of that even being possible.  Given that, you have to consider that the only films with even a scrap of a chance to beat frontrunner The Artist are The Descendants (perhaps weakened by Woodley’s snubbing) and nomination count winner Hugo.

Best Picture

I said: The Artist, The Descendants, The Help, Hugo, Midnight in Paris, Moneyball, War Horse

They nominated: The Artist,The Descendants, Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close, The Help, Hugo, Midnight in Paris, Moneyball, Tree of Life, War Horse

I got 7 out of 9, which is – I don’t know.  I didn’t get any wrong, but I didn’t pick enough, and I certainly wouldn’t have picked Extremely Loud – it barely made my long shot list.   Clearly the Academy liked the 9/11 family drama.  Tree of Life is less surprising.  And it’s already out on dvd for those who haven’t seen it (as are The Help, Midnight in Paris and Moneyball), so hurrah!  Everything else you can see in theaters.  Man, it really is an interesting list.

Other categories:

Not only did Steven Spielberg miss out on a director’s nom, he was denied the expected Animated Feature nod for The Adventures of Tintin.  Now that’s a big, big shock.  And the movies that took it’s place?  A Cat in Paris and Chico and Rita.  Huh?  (Actually, even though I’ve never heard of it, A Cat in Paris is such a wonderfully evocative title; I totally want to see it now, though heaven knows where its available!) Just not a great year for animated film, so the voters went pretty far afield to get nominees they were passionate about, it seems.

I was happy to see an Adapted Screenplay nomination for the married writing team behind Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, chiefly because the wife unexpectedly passed away; it’s a lovely tribute for her and consolation for her grieving husband.   Kristin Wiig did get her writing nod.  It’s nice to see a few women writers make the list. George Clooney had a pretty good morning (he just added a screenplay nod to his resume for Ides of March);Pitt and Davis both star in multiple Best Picture nominees.  The Iron Lady and Harry Potter both got make up nods; I’d never thought I’d be so excited about make up.

Now I know MMGF and I complained that there weren’t a lot of good songs this year, but seriously, only two nominees?  That’s pathetic.  Absolutely pathetic. Glenn Close will have to be content with her lead actress nomination; the song she co-wrote did not make that tiny list.  Good for Bret McKenzie, however; his “Man or Muppet” did make it.  The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo was snubbed for its much lauded score.  Tintin did manage to sneak in a nomination here (if it can be considered sneaking when your composer is John Williams).

And that’s about it for now!  What are your thoughts?  Are there movies you’re excited about?  Snubs you can’t believe?  What’re you going to run out and see?  For a full list of nominations, go here.

The nominations always bring greater surprises than the actual awards; that makes nomination day my favorite of the awards season.  Let’s start with one of the worst categories – but I’m going to leave the very most important and very worst of all, Best Picture with its uncertain number of honorees, for last.  And as always, I will be hoping to be wrong.

Best Supporting Actor

They’ve Appeared Everywhere:

Kenneth Branagh, My Week With Marilyn
Jonah Hill, Moneyball
Christopher Plummer, Beginners

They’ve Appeared Some Places:

Jim Broadbent, The Iron Lady
Albert Brooks, Drive
Armie Hammer, J. Edgar
Phillip Seymour Hoffman, The Ides of March
Viggo Mortensen, A Dangerous Method
Nick Nolte, Warrior
Patton Oswalt, Young Adult
Andy Serkis, Rise of the Planet of the Apes

Still Hanging on to Some Buzz:

George Clooney, The Ides of March
Max Von Sydow, Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close

I suspect you see why this category is posing a problem for me.  There’s just no consensus.  And honestly, I think it’s possible that the Academy could choke on Jonah Hill as they did with Mila Kunis last year.  Not that comedians can’t get Oscar nominations; they’re just not usually young, hip comedians.  And if that turns out to be the case, we would only have two clear choices.

But let’s not go there.  This category’s confusing enough without second guessing the lead contenders. Let’s assume that my incredulity is unwarranted, and that Jonah Hill does get in, as most people assume.  And we can bet on Kenneth Branagh, as British icon and his precursor as that country’s favorite film interpreter of Shakespeare, Lawrence Olivier.  Also assured of a nomination for playing against expectation, manly Christopher Plummer plays an elderly man who, upon the death of his wife, decides to no longer be gay only in theory.  Based on a true story (its director/writer’s own, in fact), Beginners is destined to win Plummer a nomination and most likely a win.  Who does that leave us?  Every major precursor awards different guys for the remaining slots.

This category is rife for surprises (and none would be more shocking than Broadcast critics nominee Andy Serkis for his motion capture work).  Broadbent shines playing the supportive husband of The Iron Lady’s prime minister.  Oswalt captured hearts as the former high school loser who bonds with Young Adult’s fading prom queen.  Viggo Mortensen is Freud; enough said.  Hoffman rather surprised with a BAFTA nomination, for his role as a campaign operative.  Nolte’s shown up on several shortlists as the father of two fighters in the (somewhat surprisingly well reviewed) mixed martial arts drama Warrior.  Albert Brooks played against type as a villain in Drive; Armie Hammer (last seen playing both Winkelvi from The Social Network) plays J. Edgar Hoover’s best friend and probable lover in the gloomy biopic.

Especially this year, everybody loves George Clooney.  But will he really sneak in here, when he didn’t at the celebrity-lovin’ Golden Globes? Is Von Sydow a good choice because the Academy favors age?  I can’t see it being enough.  The movie, let’s face it, has been a bust.  With a director like Steven Daldry (who was nominated for each of his first three movies) and megastars like Sandra Bullock and Tom Hanks, it seemed bound for great things.  But alas, pedigree is no prediction of success at the box office or with the Academy.  Honestly, I’m only including him on the list because Dave Karger – prediction guru extraordinaire – is absolutely convinced Von Sydow’s the guy.  Maybe I’ll be eating crow over this, and since Karger knows actual Oscar voters,  I guess I can’t just laugh him off.  I’m going to be quite annoyed – and grudgingly impressed – if he turns out to be right.

So honestly, I think it’s a crap shoot.  It genuinely could be any of these guys (or heck, someone else we haven’t even thought of, like 2011 nominee John Hawkes for Martha Marcy May Marlene).  But because they’ve gotten the most other nominations, I’m going to close my eyes and point my finger at Albert Brooks and Nick Nolte.  And it’s genuinely not because I’m sold on them; I just think they’re the safest bets in a race that’s not all that safe.

Best Supporting Actress

Locks:

Berenice Bejo, The Artist
Octavia Spencer, The Help

Solid:
Jessica Chastain, The Help

Fighting it out for the Last Spots:

Melissa McCarthy, Bridesmaids
Janet McTeer, Albert Nobbs
Shailene Woodley, The Descendants

Long Shots:

Jessica Chastain, Tree of Life
Judi Dench, My Week With Marilyn
Carey Mulligan,  Shame/Drive
Vanessa Redgrave, Coriolanus

Now, I gave you the long shots, but chances are exceptionally good that you won’t need them; chances are that the five nominees will come from the list of six above.  Octavio Spencer is your frontrunner as sassy and defiant maid Minnie; Frenchwoman Bejo bounds across the screen as the charming and lovable Peppy Miller, unknown turned starlet in The Artist.  Minnie’s unlikely boss and eventual friend Celia, played by the year’s most omnipresent ingenue, Jessica Chastain (of, in case you missed any, The Help, The Debt, Tree of Life and Coriolanus).   Unless there’s a major surprise and Bejo gets a lead nomination (as she did at BAFTA) those three are pretty settled.  It’s what comes after that’s a trick.

Janet McTeer has stunned audiences as a woman passing as a man in Victorian England; her courage and comfort with her choices provide the example that lead Glenn Close longs to follow. Shailene Woodley, a teen who regularly carries an entire television series on her capable shoulders, proves an able partner to George Clooney as his thoughtfully rebellious daughter in The Descendants.  And Melissa McCarthy has had quite the break out year with perhaps the most  memorable and beloved new character of 2011 – her butch, confident, wise bridesmaid Megan in the smash hit Bridesmaids.
The Academy rarely recognizes comedy quite as broad as what McCarthy does in Bridesmaids; I mean, have you seen that bathroom scene?  I can’t think of another instance something anywhere near that broad has been nominated; Robet Downey Jr. in Tropic Thunder is probably the closest.   But on the other hand, she’s managed to get nominated almost everywhere. Karger notes that while she did miss out on a Golden Globe nomination, it may simply be because of she failed to curry sufficient favor with the Hollywood Foreign Press Association.  But on the other hand, BAFTA didn’t go go for her either, which means the Globes snub wasn’t an isolated incident.  A nomination for Woodley may be a test of how much the Academy loves The Descendants; it’s impossible to see that movie and not be impressed by the depth of what she achieves, by how real her pain and anger and love feel.

Now, sure, there could be a shock like Chastain getting the nod for Tree of Life, BAFTA nominees Dench and Mulligan sneaking in, or the beloved Vanessa Redgrave sneaking in for her role in the Ralph Fiennes’ directed Shakespearean tragedy Coriolanus.  But.  There’s enough drama here to be getting on with.

If the Academy goes artsy, they’ll go McTeer and Woodley.  If they go with movies they’ve seen, it’ll be McCarthy and Woodley.  If they go with names they know, it’s McCarthy and McTeer.  So in a squeaker, I’m going go with Art and to guess Woodley and McTeer.  I am not tremendously confident that this is the right call, but as beloved as McCarthy’s character is, she did still poop in a sink.

Best Actor

Locks:

George Clooney, The Descendants
Jean Dujardin, The Artist
Brad Pitt, Moneyball

A Risque, but not Terribly Risky, Choice

Michael Fassbender, Shame

Not Fading Fast Enough

Leonardo DiCaprio, J. Edgar

Other Options:

Demian Bichir, A Better Life
Ryan Gosling, Drive
Ryan Gosling, The Ides of March
Gary Oldman, Tinker, Tailor, Solider Spy
Michael Shannon, Take Shelter

Most years, Best Actor boasts the biggest stars from the biggest films.  Sure, some of them come from small movies, but there tends to be a lot of wattage in this category. This year, not so very much.  This category just doesn’t have the juice.  Granted, Hollywood doesn’t build them any bigger than Brad Pitt and George Clooney, but neither star has a showy role, or a particularly huge hit to back them up.

Of course, there are buzzed about guys out there.  So when is the Academy going to give up and acknowledge Ryan Gosling’s a consistently terrific actor?  Not until he’s about ten years older, apparently.  Oh, I know, I know.  He’s been nominated for playing Half Nelson‘s addicted teacher, kind of the equivalent of an actress glamming down.  But where were his nominations for Lars and the Real Girl, or Blue Valentine?  Why doesn’t he have a solid shot for Drive or The Ides of March?  Apparently because he’s too young, too popular and too good looking (characteristics rewarded in actress, or by fan groups like the Hollywood Foreign Press, but not the Academy).  Maybe when the “hey girl” meme subsides, he’ll better figure into the awards mix.

The other actor who vaulted into prominence and cultural saturation does have a very solid shot at a nomination this year: Michael Fassbender.   Despite the somewhat squirm inducing nature of his role as a sex addict (what with the incestuous sexual tension and full frontal nudity thrown in), Fassbender should receive his first nomination tomorrow.

In baseball manager Billy Beane, Brad Pitt found a role which allows him to transcend his epic looks and persona.  You don’t spend your time thinking that he’s beautiful, or perfect; he’s just a man, a real, regular man.  All things considered, it’s an impressive achievement, and will be rewarded.  Though unknown in America, Jean Dujardin is a popular comedian in France, and seems poised to pick up an Oscar nomination for his fading silent film star.  It’s not unheard of for a foreign performer to snag a lead performing slot, but it’s not common, either, and again, I can’t help thinking it’s a sign of a weak year for the men.

Poor sap Woody Harrelson – who actually read the Golden Globe nominations from which he was excluded – earned rave reviews as a dirty cop in Rampart, but the film has never seemed to gain real traction.  Take Shelter is even smaller, and his terrific reviews hasn’t managed to propel previous nominee Shannon into the race for real.  Bichir beat Fassbender to a SAG nod, and Oldman nudged DiCaprio out of the BAFTA slate.  Fassbender still holds an impressive number of precursor nods, however.  And while BAFTA could be indicating a move away from DiCaprio, I’m guessing it’s come too late. Lots of Oscar voters turn in their ballots early, so that might help a well known, well respected guy with a floundering film.

So I say the obvious – Clooney, DiCaprio, Dujardin, Fassbender and Pitt.

Best Actress

Ladies Who are Locks:

Glenn Close, Albert Nobbs
Viola Davis, The Help
Meryl Streep, The Iron Lady
Michelle Williams, My Week With Marilyn

Might She Be the Tiniest Bit Vulnerable?

Tilda Swinton, We Need To Talk About Kevin

And If She Is:

Rooney Mara, The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo
Charlize Theron, Young Adult

The It Girls:

Kirsten Dunst, Melancholia
Felicity Jones, Like Crazy
Kiera Knightley, A Dangerous Method
Elizabeth Olsen, Martha Marcy May Marlene

Best actress is always the most stable field in Oscar; it’s the steady lesbian girlfriend of award categories.  The list has been pretty clear since early December; Streep (duh), Davis, Close, Williams and Swinton.  Ever since it was announced that Meryl Streep was going to play Margaret Thatcher, Oscar watchers have been anticipating her appearance on this list.  Could it be the role which would win her the long anticipated record tying 3rd Oscar?  The somewhat controversial best seller The Help provided a great and subtle role for great and subtle previous nominee Viola Davis, and since the movie premiered this summer we’ve all expected her to make the list.  Former costars Davis and Streep (both nominated for Doubt) contend for the win.  Which means it will probably go to Davis, because you can count on Streep to lose just as surely as you can count on her to be nominated.  But.  That’s a story for another day.   It is not a story for tomorrow morning.  Tomorrow morning celebrates both women.

Former Dawson’s Creek star Michelle Williams looks to pick up her second consecutive nomination for best actress (and third overall) for her astounding, Golden Globe winning transformation into American film icon Marilyn Monroe.  Less buzzy, but just as showy is the five time nominee Glenn Close for her role as a Victorian woman impersonating a man so she can work as a waiter.  Close has recently been tearing up the small screen, but she’s making a glorious return to both the large screen and big time acclaim this year.  Finally, we have former winner Tilda Swinton as a mother whose icy chill drives her son to becoming a school shooter.  Youch.  Now Swinton is probably the iffiest lady in Oscarland;  people seem to respect her work here, but they don’t necessarily enjoy it.  More than likely, however, she’s still in; she’s on the important shortlists, and it shows that she’s consistently impressed.

But if she isn’t, then who?  Golden Globe nominee Rooney Mara, as new pop culture icon Lisbeth Salander, the infamous, titular girl with the dragon tattoo?  Or could it be Charlize Theron’s narcissist, blindly pursuing her (married) high school sweetheart as a balm to an ego bruised by failed adulthood?   Or Kirsten Dunst’s award winning bride, struggling with depression as the world ends?  Elizabeth Olsen’s lost soul joining, and then escaping, a cult?  Felicity Jones’ girl enchanted by love and then broken when she can’t sustain it over distance?  Keira Knightley’s fierce, intelligent patient grappling with Freud and Jung?   If The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo had performed better, Mara could have slammed Swinton to the ground, but now I wouldn’t bet on it.  Of the others, I’m most surprised that Dunst and Olsen didn’t get more traction; the press on Olsen has been relentless since Martha Marcy May Marlene hit the festival circuit last year.

But no.  Close, Davis, Streep, Swinton, Williams.  That’s how it should go.

Best Director

Locks:

Michel Hazanavicius, The Artist
Alexander Payne, The Descendants
Martin Scorsese, Hugo

Solid but not Sold:

Woody Allen, Midnight in Paris

Place Your Bets:

David Fincher, The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo
Terence Malick, Tree of Life
Steven Spielberg, War Horse

Shocking Long Shots:

George Clooney, The Ides of March
Clint Eastwood, J. Edgar
Bennett Miller, Moneyball
Nicolas Winding Refn, Drive

Discount the fact that you’ve never heard of Hazanavicius, and the difficulty of pronouncing his name.  You’ll hear them say it on Oscar night for sure.  No, I’m not saying he’s a lock to win, though he’s certainly got a great shot at it.  But he’s absolutely on the list of nominees for his ballsy tribute to old Hollywood.  Ditto for previous nominee Alexander Payne; The Descendants is a beautifully observed film, wry and bittersweet and loving, and he will most justly take his place amongst the nominees.  And Martin Scorsese made a classy 3D kids movie; his skill in taking a style and a genre not usually considered awards bait, and then turning the film into a classic, will get him to the party for sure.  Plus, how great is the story that he wanted to make a movie that his twelve year old daughter could see?  Pretty great, right?

We really have four directors fighting for the last two slots.  Woody Allen had the box office hit of his career with the charming fantasy Midnight in Paris; he seems a slightly stronger bet for the fourth slot.  But the fifth?  We’ve got Terence Malick, with the controversial but also beloved oddity Tree of Life; you can’t rule him out easily, but he’s not an easy sell, either. (Can we just get over the dinosaur thing, please?)  Then there’s Steven Spielberg and David Fincher, who both created projects which were the talk of November – until they premiered.  Both the war epic and the bloody mystery story – the children’s novel made Broadway smash and the Swedish best seller – were well enough reviewed, certainly, but somehow didn’t capture the public imagination as we thought they would.  I can’t even explain how that could happen with Fincher’s movie.  Fincher clinched the Director’s Guild nomination, which is a really strong predictor of Oscar.  It’s very very tough to bet against Spielberg, but in a squeaker, I’m going to follow the DGA toward Fincher.

Granted, it’s the directors, and they could pick someone totally out of the box like Pedro Almodovar (The Skin I Live In) or Asghar Farhadi (A Separation). Sometimes, they do that.  But probably not.  Allen, Hazanavicius, Payne, Scorsese and Fincher.  Probably Fincher.  Unless it’s Spielberg.  I guess we’ll see!

Best Picture

Locks:

The Artist
The Descendants
The Help

Good Bet:

Hugo
Midnight in Paris

Fighting for the Last Slots:

Moneyball
Tree of Life
War Horse

Less Likely But Not Impossible:

The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo
Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close

And, here’s the question.  How do we even predict these nominations when we don’t know how many there will be?  Quick review; the Academy instituted a rule change with will allow for anywhere from 5 to 10 nominees, based on the proportion of first placed votes they get on the nomination ballots.  So what the heck does that mean?  We simply don’t know.  No one thinks there will will 10 nominees.  Everyone thinks they know who the top five would be (though that’s silly – trust me, the top five was almost never exactly who you thought it would be).

Some things are clear.  The Artist, The Descendants, The Help and Hugo should sail through.  For me, the real question is how many of the others will make it.  The movie everyone assumes would be number five is Midnight in Paris, and while I wouldn’t bet money on it absolutely being in the top five, with these allowances, it feels like a safe bet.  But of War Horse, Moneyball and Tree of Life?  So, so tough.  Now, that would be 8 nominees, and that could totally happen.  I can’t help thinking that the number of nominations will fall on the lower end, though; six or seven.  And my best guest is the pesky dinosaurs will knock down Malick’s visual poem and leave Moneyball – a movie about baseball salaries and staffing choices which shouldn’t work but does – and the epic War Horse on the dais.

So that’s it.  Those are the big guesses!  I cannot wait to see how it goes tomorrow morning.

Lesser thoughts on the subject: you can expect cinematography, score and costume nods for The Artist at the very least, in addition to the two acting prizes, picture and director; it’s also quite likely to pick up nods for editing and – don’t snicker – sound.  If nothing else, The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo should also garner a nod for Trent Reznor’s score.  Expect The Adventures of Tintin to be one of the five animated feature nominees, along with Rango and such brilliant fare as Cars 2 and Puss in Boots. Don’t even get me started on how frustrating it that this dull year for animation, there’ll be five nominees and last year, when there were so many brilliant offerings, there were only three.  Maddening that the number of nominees is based on the number of films in contention rather than their quality.  Kristen Wiig is about to become an Oscar nominee for the original screenplay of Bridesmaids.  Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 will get a few technical nods, but not nearly what it deserves.  The Iron Lady darn well better get a make up nod.  The Muppets might end up dominating the Original Song category (here’s to Jason Segal, Oscar nominee!) unless Glenn Close and the Twilight film unite to defeat them.  Finally, I’m going to share with you my most common typos of the Oscar season: The Ideas of March and The Irony Lady.

Let me know what you think!  And check back in the morning to compare notes.

M: You’re right, I am!  Now, I know that the show was taped months ago, and that our piece on literally has only had 14 views, but it felt like they read all of my criticisms and everyone, contestants, judges and producers alike, all stepped up.  And yes, I know that that is amazingly narcissistic of me.  I think I’ve been seeing too much of Newt Gingrich.

E: You said it, not me.

M: Gotta call a spade a spade.

E: So true.  But to return to the show, this was everything we could have asked for in a Top Chef episode.  That’s enough chili and barbeque and Texas themed challenges, producers.  This was play.  This was wonderful.

M: Exactly!  They finally let them cook, let them cook on their own, and let them cook with some real flair.

E: I’ve been thinking about your complaint that these contestants don’t seem as impressive as past seasons.  While I think we always feel that (and really, what season will live up to 2 or 4?) but in this case it’s probably exacerbated by the fact that, as you noted, we’ve mostly seen them off their games – cooking food they don’t normally make, all cooking the same food within a very tight set of parameters which allowed little originality, cooking thematically appropriate but (for the purposes of the show) not very thrilling food.  But this challenge smashed that problem to bits.

M: I think the last two non-Masters, non-All Star seasons compared favorably to any season, actually.  Now, back to this week, I loved, loved, LOVED this challenge.  I love challenges that give them a theme or a disadvantage, but then give them a lot of leeway to cook their own way within that.  Anything that lets them show off their skills and their creativity is good in my book.  The more whimsical the better, too.

E: Really the only bad thing about it was that someone had to go home for a meal the likes of which we’ve maybe never seen on Top Chef. Certainly not this early in the competition.  I kept hoping that, as with the All Stars pre-finale episode, they’d keep everyone.  But no such luck.

M: I was hoping that they might pull that out again, but having already had a two part opening episode and one double elimination, I was betting against it simply because of scheduling reasons.

E: We’re getting ahead of ourselves, however.  Eric Ripert shows up for the Quickfire, and offers them a particularly challenging challenge; pick three items off a moving conveyor belt and incorporate them in a dish.  The trick?  The better the item, the later it will appear, and so the less time you’ll have to cook it.

M: And that was a total lie!  A few of them kept waiting, and the best stuff came out in the middle, there were no last minute great ingredients that came out.

E: Not that we saw, anyway – and only if you consider 24 minutes into the challenge in the middle, because that’s when the fish came out.  (And whole fish, holy cow!)

M: Wow, I didn’t realize it was that early.

E: I found the saga of Chris particularly hilarious; by the time he’s run over to the conveyor belt for the bucket of lobster, it’s gone, and it doesn’t come back in the next revolution.  On his third try, he actually reaches back through the little curtain flap and grabs a single snapping lobster.

M: I couldn’t believe they did that twice, where it made one lap and didn’t reappear, that was just cruel.  None of the other ingredients, at least that we saw, got pulled back.  And waiting for it kind of screwed him, as he ended up fixating on the lobster and losing the rest of his dish because of it.

E: Ironically, the top three are last week’s most unhappy winners: Beverly, Sarah and Lindsay.

M: The three of them seemed to all make good choices about the ingredients they picked, while others made really rash decisions.  Paul panicked, ending up taking something called bitter melon, that I’d never heard of before, and apparently with good reason.  Ed ended up taking things that would have been good on their own, but didn’t work together at all.  Sarah did panic a little with the saltines, but made a smart decision to use a protein from the pantry and not try to wait for something better.

E: In the final manic moments of the challenge, Beverly forgets to put her curried rice crispies on the plate, and so loses immunity to Lindsay and her bouillabaisse.  Lindsay – who apparently was still delusional enough to harbor ill will for not winning Restaurant Wars – accepted her win with ill grace.  Of course, when Eric Ripert says that Beverly’s food was the best by a mile, you can see her feeling less than complimented.

M: I didn’t think it was ill grace, I thought that her comments were appropriate.  They told her that she won by disqualification, which is kind of like not really winning.  I didn’t have a problem with those comments.  The way she and Sarah continued to treat Beverly, different story.  But we discussed that enough last week, let’s move on.

E: With pleasure. Once the Quickfire is done and the immunity is awarded, the contestants get a tremendous surprise.

M: In walked Charlize Theron, one of only two African-American women to win a Best Actress Oscar (though she was merely African at the time), their guest judge for the week.

E: Ha.  According to Tom’s blog, Charlize is a good “home cook” whom he’s actually cooked with, and also a huge fan of the show.

M: She’s also starring as the evil queen in the new macabre live action version of Snow White called Snow White And The Huntsman (we assume it’s not Jon Huntsman).

E: Wow, you’re all about the politics suddenly.

M: It’s election season, I can’t help it.  Now, the challenge that we were gushing so much about at the top of this post is to create a meal fit for an evil queen.  E, I’m not sure if you pay attention when they put this stuff up but I try to, they each got $250 to spend and were only cooking one dish for five people.  That had to have helped!

E: Actually no, I didn’t hear that, and I’m sure it did help.  As a random bit in the home portion of the show, we get to see how much Chris Jones loves his wife, and just how much she believes in him.  This immediately led me to assume he’d be going home.

M: As I was watching that I literally said out loud “Oh well, he’s going home”.  Which was really weird for me to do, as I was watching it alone.

E: The cheftestants…

M: …oh, it had been such a wonderfully long time since I’d heard that evil word.  Stop it, stop it now!

E: …generally go nuts with the theme.  It’s spectacular.

M: When they have a very specific theme like this it’s always interesting to see how far people will go with it, and who, if anyone will choose to ignore it.  When it boils down to it, it’s always about how the food tastes, so when people go overboard it can derail them, like Chris J’s cigar earlier in the season.  However, ignoring the parameters and just cooking your food will do you in, but we’ll get to that.  Of course, it’s so much more fun when they embrace it!

E: Honestly, when each course came out, I thought, wow, they’ve liked so many – surely the next course will be the one to fall flat.  There’s always this suspense when they do a multi-course dinner service. But none of them did.

M: I felt the same way.  They just kept loving the food, and loving the food, and loving the food.  With Chris being last, and having had the extra camera time earlier in the episode I was sure he was going to be the one that failed, but no!

E: And he had dessert, which ought to have been doubly against him.

M: Yes, dessert, along with front-of-the-house and risotto, are the biggest contestant killers in Top Chef history.

E: As for specifics, in no particular order, Sarah cooks bloody red wine risotto with lamb’s heart.

M: If she hadn’t had the lamb’s heart then red risotto would have been a total cop out, but she pulled it off.  Admittedly she landed in the bottom, but only because of nit picking and how great everyone’s dishes were.

E: Grayson cooks black chicken, and serves an entire leg with the claw attached, along with beets to look like the gizzards, and fried egg to represent the pregnant chicken’s slaughtered child.

M: I thought that was one of the most visually stunning dishes I’ve seen in the history of the show.  Heck, even outside the show.  The claw and talons on the leg were SOOOO perfect, and they loved the taste AND presentation.  Even with nit picking (salty greens?  really?  I rewound and looked at the dish a few times and could never see any greens on it), I felt that for the artistic value and the chances she took she shouldn’t have been in the bottom.

E: Agreed. Paul puts a “bloody” handprint on his plate.

M: That, along with his “enchanted forrest” of 14 different components including foie gras, bacon and pickled jalapenos (which for some reason spell check wants to correct to Galapagos), took home the win.  I loved listening to the judges questioning if he had a glove on when he did it, and acting kind of scared that he might not have.

E: Ed does bloody red tartar with crispy fish skin to make little barbs (along with a good white sauce fighting an evil dark one on the plate).  Chris bakes and stuffs a little apple, covering the top with pie dough and serving it with smoke (and little rice krispies to look like maggots, and one gummy worm coming out of it).  The judges cannot stop praising the contestants and the food.

M: Lindsay made a perfectly cooked scallop with a “witches’ stew” that included dragon beans.  I’ve never heard of dragon beans, but to echo the judges, I can’t think of a more perfect ingredient for this challenge.

E: I was gutted to see Beverly go home, although at least she can do it with pride.

M: I was, too, but she was the only one that didn’t embrace the challenge.  Forbidden rice was the only thing in her dish that even remotely approached the theme, and the presentation just looked like a regular Top Chef dish.  If someone else had struggled or missed the mark, she definitely would have survived based on her flavors, and of course she would have survived if she’d gotten all the components on her dish in the Quickfire and won immunity…

E: Ugh.  How heartbreaking is that?

M: …but neither of those things happened.  That was the chance that she took in not embracing the challenge, with everything else being about equal, she didn’t do what they asked.  She still cooked a great dish, though, which continued to shove it in the face of the bullies.  More on THAT to come, too.

E: I didn’t really want to see any of those three contestants go; when she’s not being a deluded bully, Sarah seems really nice, and she’s very clearly a superior chef.

M: I have to say, I would have been happier seeing Sarah or Lindsay go because of their treatment of Beverly.

E: Yes. I can’t disagree. And though I have been rooting for Nyesha all the way through the LCK, I was pretty pleased for Beverly to beat her, especially after every single contestant insisted that Nyesha would win. I mean, fine, Nyesha was on a total tear, but that was just rude.

M: To be fair, only two people actually said they thought Nyesha was going to win, and Keith did in a much kinder way than SuperBully.

E: Snort.

M: I was sad to see Nyesha lose, I hated the double elimination and still feel like she deserves to be in the competition.  It was even harder because she had to make a dish out of Beverly’s ingredients, not her own.  That was a pretty cruel twist.  I was happy to see for Beverly shove it in Heather’s face, though!

E: Right, but if Beverly could only cook Asian food like SuperBully often insisted, she wouldn’t have been able to produce a winning dish with Nyesha’s ingredients, either.  We’ll see how Beverly does with the next contestant!  This is the toughest point of the competition; I either like or respect all of the remaining contestants, or both.

M: I agree.  I think because of their behavior Sarah and Lindsey are at the bottom for me, but that could easily change.  We’ll see!