Unfortunately, the Academy and I are wildly out of step this year. Of the ten nominees for Best Picture, I only enjoyed less than half and have very major problems with many of the others. I’ve resigned myself to the fact that many movies that I don’t like very much are going to be labeled the best.
Soon, I’ll give out my own version of a awards show, but for now, I want to briefly say why each Best Picture nominee should, or shouldn’t, win the top prize. This is a challenge to me to see the glass as half full on some movies that really didn’t work for me. It’s also (hopefully) a recap of sorts as a lot of these movies came out a while ago (three of them were summer releases!).
Movies are listed in the order they appear on the Oscars website.
American Fiction
Why it should win: Anchored by a strong lead performance by Jeffrey Wright and surrounded by many memorable supporting scene stealers, American Fiction is well-performed movie with occasional technical excellence. The satire of it is palatable, appealing to a broad audience. It’s a movie of the moment, at least sort of. I think of it as similar to Don’t Look Up a few years ago, though American Fiction is a lot better.
Why it shouldn’t win: The satire doesn’t work to the point where the movie actually says anything of substance or pushes for actual change. It bungles a few elements of the adaptation especially regarding updating a book that’s more than 20 years old.
How I would feel if it won: It would be a huge upset, so shock more than anything. It’s not a horrible choice though. I’d mostly feel like the Academy didn’t get the joke which was on them.
Anatomy of a Fall
Why it should win: It’s easily one of the year’s best films. Anatomy of a Fall is a finely crafted cinematic machine, lulling you into a state of complacency just to shake things up at the right moment. It’s a mystery that pulls off the remarkable feat of making you not care that it’s a mystery. The reality of what happened just doesn’t matter as much as how people feel about what happened. The performances are incredible, and the ending is one of the most memorable in recent years.
Why it shouldn’t win: I really struggle to think of a reason. I guess because it very likely won’t. It’s also a touch—just a touch—slow around the 45-minute mark.
How I would feel if it won: I would be speechless and ecstatic, maybe even more emotional than when Parasite won. It would be a shocking upset, but really, there have been more shocking upsets. It could happen, but it’s a long shot.
Barbie
Why it should win: It was the biggest movie of the year! It was also the biggest blockbuster in a long time to actually bring something new and fresh. The music is great and the messaging, though simple and a little empty, connected with a lot of people. The performances are great, and the many references to film history are a gift from Greta Gerwig to us all.
Why it shouldn’t win: It gets less substantial the more you think about it. And I’ve thought about it a lot (and written about it a lot, like here, and here, and also here). Barbie certainly isn’t the “best” film of the year by most metrics.
How I would feel if it won: I’d be very glad for Gerwig though a little disappointed that she was awarded for her least excellent movie of the three she’s made so far. I would then recoil in horror at how toxic the next week would be in film spaces.
The Holdovers
Why it should win: The Holdovers feels like Oscar comfort food. A lot of movies like this—cross-generational crowd pleasures with strong performances and a good mix of humor and heart—have won Best Picture for decades. Paul Giamatti gives a near career best performance, and Dominic Sessa wows as a newcomer. Nearly everyone who’s seen this movie enjoys it.
Why it shouldn’t win: It’s not the most ambitious or technically dazzling film. It doesn’t “rewrite” what film can do. Some might find its reliance on 70s film style derivative.
How I would feel if it won: I’d be really happy. I like this movie a lot and have been a fan of Alexander Payne for a long time. If someone upsets Oppenheimer, I think The Holdovers has the best shot, so this is the realistic outcome I’m hoping for.
Killers of the Flower Moon
Why it should win: It’s big! And might (probably won’t be) the last film of Martin Scorsese. Lily Gladstone is incredibly good in it. And did I mention the scale?
Why it shouldn’t win: It’s VERY long and very bloated. You could cut an hour with no ill effects to the story. And that story is incredibly dismissive of the Native American populations it seems to want to focus on. People belonging to these native groups have spoken out against the film frequently.
How I would feel if it won: It’s very likely not going to, so I don’t have to worry too much, but I would be incredibly upset if it won. Not only do I think this is a really bad film, I also think that represents the worst impulses in movie making—lavish and unnecessary spending, myopic focus on a director, tokenizing minority experience and framing it from a perspective of whiteness. I would be in a bad place if this won, like when Green Book took the award home.
Maestro
Why it should win: It’s a cinematically rich biopic of a key figure in American music. It’s the kind of movie that the Oscars often love. The performances are considered by some to be really good (even playing Devil’s advocate here, I can’t praise Bradley Cooper; I found him unwatchable).
Why it shouldn’t win: This is awards bait of the worst level. It has no real regard for the actual life of Leonard Bernstein, only what it can wring out of it cinematically. It’s also courted controversy for its presentation of Jewishness.
How I would feel if it won: This would be such a shock with so little backing, I might never give a second thought to the Oscars ever again. It would become as infamous as the wins by Crash and Shakespeare in Love (a movie I actually liked quite a bit when I saw it).
Oppenheimer
Why it should win: Oppenheimer checks all the boxes. It was an epic sprawling almost-war picture while also being an intimate character study. The effects are really something to behold. The parts of it that work really work to a degree that makes it easy to forgive places where it gets overly confusing or drags a bit.
Why it shouldn’t win: Less easy to overlook is how it completely ignores how the bomb effects anyone that’s not a white scientist of focus. This includes the Native people effected by the tests and the Japanese people absolutely destroyed by the actual bombing. Oppenheimer’s moral conundrum is framed as a minor one, connected to his other personal foibles not as like, you know, mass murder. Read more or my harsh thoughts here.
How I would feel if it won: It’s a huge favorite and so will very likely win. And I’ll feel disappointed and empty, but I’ve resigned myself to the fact that there’s no stopping it. I’ve already started bracing myself for how annoying the film community will be the next week (and this on the heels of Dune! It’s going to be a tough couple weeks for me).
Past Lives
Why it should win: It’s an interesting, well-told story of human relationships across time and space. Many have (I think rightly) lauded it as one of the year’s best films. Almost everyone I know who has seen it liked it.
Why it shouldn’t win: A24 is growing as a brand, but they still aren’t one of the biggest studios. Last year they garnered top honors with Everything Everywhere All at Once, but Past Lives is a much smaller film. It’s also reasonable to say that the character development isn’t as strong as it could be. But the hold thing holding this movie back is just how small it is.
How I would feel if it won: It would be quite a surprise, but I’d be happy. I think Past Lives is a really good movie and would be a more than worthy winner.
Poor Things
Why it should win: The production design really is something else. Many consider the acting performances good, too.
Why it shouldn’t win: Aside from all the stuff that makes me uncomfortable that I wrote about last time, even fans of the movie have to admit that the ending is a mess. The movie really collapses in the final third, testing how much good will it built up to that point (which on my viewing was none). It’s also just too weird for some people.
How I would feel if it won: I think there are three movies that have a realistic chance of upsetting Oppenheimer, and, unfortunately, this is one of them. I would be really sad and upset, at least based on how the movie hit me first watch. But I’d be happy for Yorgos Lanthimos who could/should have won Best Picture for The Favourite over Green Book at the very least.
The Zone of Interest
Why it should win: It very well could be the best film of this Oscar batch. And it’s even more likely to stand the test of time as one of the best and most important films of 2020s if not the 21st century as a whole.
Why it shouldn’t win: The pace and abstract storytelling will put some people off.
How I would feel if it won: It’s surging at the right time, though still behind Oppenheimer. Can that surge get it all the way to the top spot? This is the kind of movie a lot voters tend to like for Best Picture. We’ll see. I’d be extremely glad if it won.
So there you have my thoughts about the good and bad of the best picture nominees. I would say Oppenheimer is a clear frontrunner and probably a prohibitive favorite. The Holdovers, Poor Things, and The Zone of Interest still have a chance at the upset. Betting markets right now have Barbie in that mix, too, but I don’t see it.
Now that I’ve finally seen the last of these movies, I’ll be back soon with my version of an awards show in which you’ll just how little the Academy and are thinking alike this year. Till then!
