5:02 P.M. Alright, here are my picks for the tech categories:

• Best Art Direction
  • Will win: “The King’s Speech“
  • Could win: “True Grit“
  • Should win: “Inception“
  • Should be nominated: ”Black Swan“
• Best Costume Design
  • Will win: “The King’s Speech“
  • Could win: “True Grit“
  • Should win: “True Grit“
  • Should be nominated: “Black Swan“
• Best Cinematography
  • Will win: “Inception“
  • Could win: “True Grit“
  • Should win: “Black Swan“
  • Should be nominated: “127 Hours“
• Best Film Editing
  • Will win: “The Social Network“
  • Could win: “The King’s Speech“
  • Should win: “127 Hours“
  • Should be nominated: “Inception“
• Best Makeup
  • Will win: “The Wolfman“
  • Could win: “Barney’s Version”
  • Should win: “Barney’s Version”
  • Should be nominated: “Black Swan“
• Best Original Score
  • Will win: “The King’s Speech“
  • Could win: “The Social Network“
  • Should win: “The Social Network“
  • Should be nominated: “Black Swan” (despite being ineligible)
• Best Original Song
  • Will win: “We Belong Together” from “Toy Story 3“
  • Could win: “If I Rise” from “127 Hours“
  • Should win: “I See The Light” from “Tangled“
  • Should be nominated: “African Child” from “Get Him to the Greek“
• Best Visual Effects
  • Will win: “Inception“
  • Could win: “Alice in Wonderland”
  • Should win: “Inception“
  • Should be nominated: “TRON Legacy“
• Best Sound Mixing
  • Will win: “Inception“
  • Could win: “The Social Network“
  • Should win: “Inception“
  • Should be nominated: “Black Swan“
• Best Sound Editing
  • Will win: “Inception“
  • Could win: “True Grit“
  • Should win: “Inception“
  • Should be nominated: “127 Hours“

5:20 P.M. Red carpet update: Jennifer Lawrence and Mila Kunis look SMOKING hot.  Hailee Steinfeld’s tutu is a little unfortunate.  Onto some of the other non-major categories, most of which don’t even get more than a winner pick.

• Best Animated Film – honestly, why bother to nominate a movie other than “Toy Story 3?”
• Best Foreign Film – conventional wisdom says not to pick the Golden Globe winner or the one you might have heard of, so I’m going with Canada’s “Incendies.”
• Best Documentary – they could be hipster and go with “Exit Through the Gift Shop,” but my money is on “Inside Job” for a much deserved win.
• Best Short Film (Animated) – No idea how to predict the shorts.  My guess is on “Day and Night” because everyone saw it.
• Best Short Film (Live Action) – “God of Love” sounds like a winner.
• Best Short Film (Documentary) – “Poster Girl” sounds good.

5:27 P.M. Amy Adams and Michelle Williams, usually good looking, fell flat.  Bummer.  Here are some more major picks.

• Best Original Screenplay
  • Will win: “The King’s Speech“
  • Could win: “Inception“
  • Should win: “Inception“
  • Should be nominated: “Black Swan“

I think given the overwhelming momentum for “The King’s Speech” and the story of its screenwriter, David Seidler, this is a pretty easy victory to call.  ”Inception” after winning the WGA probably comes in a close second.

• Best Adapted Screenplay
  • Will win: “The Social Network“
  • Could win: “True Grit“
  • Should win: “The Social Network“
  • Should be nominated: “Rabbit Hole“

As close to a no-brainer as 2010 can give us.  Aaron Sorkin will almost certainly walk away with an Oscar for the best script in recent memory and provide at least one statue for “The Social Network.”

• Best Supporting Actor
  • Will win: Christian Bale, “The Fighter“
  • Could win: Geoffrey Rush, “The King’s Speech“
  • Should win: Christian Bale, “The Fighter“
  • Should be nominated: Andrew Garfield, “The Social Network“

Given the overwhelming Bale love throughout the season, he should be able to overcome Rush in a sweep scenario.  It also helps that Bale has no Oscar and Rush does.  I’ll still be biting my nails for this, but I feel confident with this pick.

• Best Supporting Actress
  • Will win: Hailee Steinfeld, “True Grit“
  • Could win: Melissa Leo, “The Fighter“
  • Should win: Amy Adams, “The Fighter“
  • Should be nominated: Barbara Hershey, “Black Swan“

The category, as it often does, provides as much suspense as the show can give us.  Honestly, anyone but Jacki Weaver could win.  Carter could ride the coattails of “The King’s Speech” to victory, and Adams could win for being the best.  Smart money is probably on Leo, who has won most of the big precursors leading up to Oscar night.  But with 10 nominations for “True Grit,” the Academy clearly has to give something to the movie.  This is an easy way for them to do that, and the Academy did this with Tilda Swinton in 2007 for “Michael Clayton.”

5:42 P.M. Here comes leading acting categories…

• Best Actor
  • Will win: Colin Firth,”The King’s Speech“
  • Could win: Jesse Eisenberg, “The Social Network“
  • Should win: James Franco, “127 Hours“
  • Should be nominated: Aaron Eckhart, “Rabbit Hole“

Firth seems like a lock.  Eisenberg could take it in an Adrien Brody/”The Pianist” scenario, but that’s a long shot at best.

• Best Actress
  • Will win: Natalie Portman, “Black Swan“
  • Could win: Annette Bening, “The Kids Are All Right“
  • Should win: Natalie Portman, “Black Swan“
  • Should be nominated: Julianne Moore, “The Kids Are All Right“

If Natalie Portman doesn’t win, the Academy is going to have to work BIG TIME in the next few years to regain my respect.  This is the performance of a lifetime, and if they don’t reward it, I’m going to be furious.  Annette Bening could win on the conservative theme of the year, but I’m still confident in Natalie Portman.  I think they realize that Bening wasn’t THAT good…

6:45 P.M. Just dined and then changed into my “The Social Network” T-shirt.  For reference, I was wearing my “I Kept My Eyes Open for 127 Hours” T-shirt beforehand.  Here’s my pick for Best Director:

• Best Director
  • Will win: David Fincher, “The Social Network“
  • Could win: Tom Hooper, “The King’s Speech“
  • Should win: Darren Aronofsky, “Black Swan“
  • Should be nominated: Christopher Nolan, “Inception“

Another shaky category.  Sure, Tom Hooper won the DGA, but that membership is made up of mainly TV directors.  Of course they want to reward Hooper, one of their own.  The Oscars embraced Roman Polanski, a prickly director indeed, in 2002 over DGA winner Rob Marshall, whose “Chicago” went on to win Best Picture.  It doesn’t seem wise to predict a split as most Academy voters don’t think that the Best Picture directs itself.  But I have a feeling that the voters took a step back and asked what the best directed movie of the year was, and they probably knew the name of the director that undertook the job.

Then again, Hooper and Fincher could split votes, making the way for Aronofsky to win, much like in 2000 when Soderbergh eked out a victory over Ang Lee and Ridley Scott for “Traffic.”  But I’m counting on Fincher riding to victory, making “The Social Network” the third movie to win Best Editing, Best Screenplay, and Best Director without Best Picture.

6:50 P.M. Sandra Bullock has had some MAJOR work done to her face.  No other big red carpet arrivals to blow me away with the exception of Penelope Cruz.  Jennifer Lawrence is still tops.

Without further ado, here are my thoughts on Best Picture:

• Best Picture
  • Will win: “The King’s Speech“
  • Could win: “The Social Network“
  • Should win: “Black Swan“
  • Should be nominated: “Inside Job“

This is what it all comes down to.  The past vs. the present, the critics vs. the guilds, the heart vs. the head.  You’ve heard it analyzed and overanalyzed if you pay any attention the race.  But know this: 2010 marks a watershed decision for the Oscars.  These two movies have come to represent two entirely different camps of moviemaking and moviegoers, and the critics unanimously chose “The Social Network” as their Best Picture of the year.  But then the guilds fired back with their pick for Best Picture being almost unanimously “The King’s Speech.”  It’s never smart to bet against the guilds, so I have to pick “The King’s Speech” since it has their support and clearly has the momentum.  It is the most nominated movie tonight, which is also a help.  I have a hard time calling a split, but I will.  I simply can’t predict “The Social Network” to win even though I so desperately want it to prevail.

That being said, how happy would it make you if “Toy Story 3″ came out of nowhere and won?  Talk about something that would simultaneously silence and please everyone.

7:00 P.M. Time to switch from E! to ABC.  Just saw Natalie Portman … all is good.

(graphic perfectly provided by Awards Daily)

7:03 P.M. Natalie Portman still looks perfect.  Even when she’s pregnant.

7:22 P.M. AHHHH 8 MINUTES!!! I’ve been where they had the red carpet and I’ve been on that stage, by the way.  It’s not a big deal.

7:37 P.M. This opening sequence is so funny I can’t even handle it.  ”YOU JUST GOT INCEPTION’D.”  And the Morgan Freeman cameo is golden.

7:43 P.M. These meta-Oscars are too much for me to handle.  I feel like they are setting up a sweep for “The King’s Speech” and trying to justify their pick by comparing it to history.

7:47 P.M. There goes the momentum for “The King’s Speech!”  That art direction win for “Alice in Wonderland” was quite a shock.  But HOORAY FOR THE “INCEPTION” BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY WIN!  That makes me so happy!  And here’s to a future win for “The Dark Knight Rises!”  Ballot is 1/2 at the moment.

7:57 P.M. And the winner of Best Supporting Actress is … after much delay, sweet Kirk Douglas … Melissa Leo!  Well, there could be worse.  Called that one wrong!

8:00 P.M. Melissa Leo dropped the F-bomb!  She’ll never live that down … awkward moment for an awkward speech with a silent crowd.  And that whole moment with Kirk Douglas felt kinda staged.

8:20 P.M. Sorry for the massive delay, I had to restart my computer.  Much expected wins for “The King’s Speech” and “The Social Network” followed by incredibly charming and winning speeches by David Seidler and Aaron Sorkin.  The two juggernauts are tied at one apiece.  (And the Melissa Leo F-bomb makes for a nice recurring theme.  Better than Justin Timberlake wishing he was Banksy.  Millions of viewers at home are scratching their heads.)

8:25 P.M. Props to Anne Hathaway for whipping out the “Les Miserables.”  She just won my total approval.

8:33 P.M. And the Oscar goes to … CHRISTIAN BALE!!!  Good choice, Academy!  And a very nice speech to follow – although I think he forgot his wife’s name!  (Take that, “The King’s Speech!”  1/5!)

8:36 P.M. Side note: the trailer for “Super 8″ makes me REALLY excited for 2011!  Is it too early to call a Best Picture nominee for next year?  I’ll be incredibly proud if I can look back next year and see that I got this right.

8:41 P.M. The THX sound brings back SO many bad memories from my childhood!  Ahhh, I was so scared of that thing!

8:44 P.M. Best Original Score, another category I love!  The winner is … “THE SOCIAL NETWORK!”  I’m ecstatic, that really was the best score of the year!  Ok, now I think that “The Social Network” might win Best Picture!!!!!!!  Hooray!  That deserves…

8:47 P.M. Best Sound Mixing and Editing?  ”Inception” as expected!  Hooray!  That makes 3 for “Inception,” 2 for “The Fighter,” 2 for “The Social Network,” and 1 for “The King’s Speech.”

8:56 P.M. The meta-Oscars need to go for next year.

8:57 P.M. Cate Blanchett had it right when she said “that’s gross.”  The fact that we can say “the Academy Award-winning film The Wolfman” is sad.

8:59 P.M. DIE I AM LOVE!  But no “The King’s Speech” again!?!?!  That’s a shocker.  ”Alice in Wonderland” has also momentarily eclipsed “The King’s Speech” in Oscar wins.

9:02 P.M. Observation only relevant for tonight: “The King’s Speech” is 1/8 so far.  That means at best, it will have 5 wins.  Most likely only 4.  Possibly only 3.  So much for Sasha Stone on Awards Daily saying that you had to predict the movie to win 6 statues.  I’m really thinking “The Social Network” will win Best Picture now.

9:04 P.M. Ok, the song from “Toy Story 3″ is officially the most adorable thing in the world.  I’ll be upset now if it doesn’t win.

9:10 P.M. Wait, are the Oscars actually going to finish … on time?  Stay tuned for this exciting development.

9:14 P.M. Aaaaaand more meta-Oscars!  STOP!

9:16 P.M. “God of Love” for the win!  That’s one of my three short film guesses that panned out!

9:18 P.M. “The Social Network: The Musical” is catchy.  Can’t wait to see Justin Timberlake headline the original broadway cast!

9:22 P.M. HOORAY FOR CHARLES FERGUSON AND “INSIDE JOB!!!”  The best documentary I have ever seen just won a very deserved Academy Award!  Hopefully the politics of the speech don’t hurt him later… (And did anyone else see the Coen Brothers looking insanely bored!?)

9:28 P.M. I miss Billy Crystal hosting the Oscars!  He is so my childhood watching the Oscars!  And also, I’d like him to make a comeback in movies.

9:34 P.M. LOL to the top reference.  That makes it FOUR for “Inception!”

9:35 P.M. “The Social Network” wins AGAIN!  That’s three!  Hooray, things are looking up for team Facebook!!!

9:45 P.M. Woah, Gwyneth Paltrow is REALLY flat!  Yikes…

9:47 P.M. “Toy Story 3″ wins!  That makes two and a very big smile on my face!!!  I heart Randy Newman.

9:51 P.M. I can dig the “Modern Family” Oscar charades commercial becoming an annual tradition.  ”Eat Pray Chest!”

9:52 P.M. And having Celine Dion sing during the In Memoriam sequence just ruined it.  Way to go, Academy…

10:02 P.M. Entering the last half hour … with Best Director?!?  Before acting?

10:03 P.M. Booo!!!  David Fincher (or at least Darren Aronofsky) deserved it!  This awards ceremony is eerily reminiscent of the trajectory of the awards season.  Total buzzkill for “The Social Network.”

10:06 P.M. Seeing Annette Bening makes me really worried … if Natalie doesn’t win …

10:09 P.M. They can’t do this with Best Director again.  It makes the pit in my stomach last for 20 minutes as opposed to 5 minutes.  Not OK.

10:10 P.M. And there had better be some MASSIVE tribute to the Best Picture nominees coming up!  Because otherwise they got gypped!

10:16 P.M. ^^^ THIS GIRL JUST WON AN OSCAR!!!! I’M OBSESSED WITH NATALIE PORTMAN!!!!!! HOORAY FOR MAKING ONE GOOD PICK TONIGHT!

10:17 P.M. OH MY GOSH YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  I LOVE “BLACK SWAN!”

10:19 P.M. Who cares if her speech wasn’t that good, I’m so happy!!!!! Academy Award winner Natalie Portman!

10:25 P.M. And what we’ve been predicting for five months delivers.  Way to go, Colin Firth!

10:28 P.M. Only one award left…AHHH!!!

10:36 P.M. And the Academy’s Best Picture of the Year is … “The King’s Speech.”  They’ll regret this one later.  Way to send the message, “Yes!  You can make a movie that tailors to every single one of our needs!  We will give it four Oscars!”

10:38 P.M. Four for “Inception” and “The King’s Speech,” three for “The Social Network,” two for “Alice in Wonderland,” “The Fighter,” and “Toy Story 3.”

10:40 P.M. Cool group photo?  Weird ending…

11:03 P.M. Just saw some of the arrivals to the after-parties on E! while unloading the dishwasher.  Not entertaining enough to keep me from doing my homework/studying … until next awards season, my friends!

That’s what my KNOW YOUR NOMINEES series hopes to do.  Every three days, I’ll feature ten interesting facts about the ten Best Picture nominees of 2010 that would be fascinating to pepper into any conversation.  My hope is that you will come away with an enhanced appreciation of the movies but also enjoy learning strange and interesting things about them.

So, as we proceed in alphabetical order, our next stop on the tour is “The King’s Speech.”

“The King’s Speech” should feel like a very personal movie for a number of reasons, but probably chief among them is screenwriter David Seidler.  As a boy growing up in England in the 1930s and ’40s, Seidler was a stammerer and idolized King George VI for his ability to overcome his problem.  He had to wait many years to secure the rights to write a movie about his hero, mainly due to being asked personally by the Queen Mother (played by Helena Bonham Carter in the film) to pass away.  Seidler then wrote it as a play, which director Tom Hooper saw and decided to make into a movie.

The director then added his own personal touch to the movie as well.  Hooper stated in an interview that “The King’s Speech” is really a movie about his family.  For example, the opening scene of the movie showing the preparations for the radio broadcast is an homage to his sister, a presenter for Radio 4.  But mainly the connection comes from the relationship between the British Bertie and Australian Logue as Hooper has an Australian mother and an English father. He talked greatly in interviews about the interesting relationship between the two countries and how he conveyed it in the movie.

Lionel Logue, King George’s speech therapist played in the movie by Geoffrey Rush, kept a detailed set of diaries chronicling his work (although they don’t start until the coronation of the king).  However, the diaries were not made available to the filmmakers until nine weeks before the shoot.  Hooper has said that the only changes they made were for the sake of accuracy, and nothing was drastically altered.  He also stated in an interview that some of the best lines in the movie were taken directly from the diary.  For example, after the climactic speech, Logue jokingly says, “You still stammered on the w,” to which King George replies, “Well, I had to throw in a few so they knew that it was me.”

Colin Firth looks like a sure-fire winner for Best Actor, but this easily could have been someone else.  Firth was actually the third choice to play King George VI and only received the role after first Paul Bettany and then Hugh Grant passed.  Neither have Oscars at home on their mantle, so I’m pretty sure that both are regretting this decision.

So how did Firth nail down that stammer, which he executes so immaculately in “The King’s Speech?”  What might be surprising is that Firth did not work with a speech therapist.  He did, however, use a dialogue coach who helped him make the stammer come from a very personal place while also not affecting the pacing of the movie (imagine how dreadful the movie would be if it took him 20 minutes to utter each word).  A speech therapist did come to some of the rehearsals for the movie, and Firth’s sister is also a vocal therapist, which he claims was very helpful for consulting purposes.  He also talked a lot with screenwriter David Seidler, who compared stuttering to being “underwater.”

Does stammering come with side effects?  For Colin Firth, it did.  During the shoot, he claims to have suffered from some headaches and neck tension.  But the more debilitating toll was on his arm, which became numb, went to sleep and thus hard to use.  He went to the set doctor who had little to offer due to the lack of precedent.

Helena Bonham Carter received her second Academy Award nomination for her work in “The King’s Speech,” but just as the case was with many of this year’s nominees, she almost missed the chance.  Due to her commitment on the “Harry Potter” movies, Carter turned down the role numerous times despite director Tom Hooper’s insistence.  Yet she did star in “The King’s Speech” by making what she calls an “illegal” maneuver – shooting BOTH at the same time.  Carter would go off on the weekends and shoot her scenes for Tom Hooper while never being truly “released” from the “Harry Potter” sets.

How do you get a good actor – an Academy Award winning actor, for that matter – to play a convincing mediocre actor?  Tom Hooper got Geoffrey Rush to do some unconvincing Shakespeare by shooting the scene on the first day with English actors in the room who knew that Rush had some experience with Shakespeare. To quote Rush, “I was nervous and I was bad, and he just shot it.”

What of the royal reaction to the film? Queen Elizabeth II, George’s daughter portrayed in the movie as a young girl, gave “The King’s Speech” her seal of approval.  Cynics might ask how much Harvey Weinstein paid for it; others are probably just thrilled to see the royal family showing interest in popular culture.

Cynics might also say that “The King’s Speech” is a stuffy British royal family costume drama that’s totally designed to win over the Academy.  The last part seems to be somewhat true, but it’s hardly stuffy like most other movies about royal life.  Director Tom Hooper is largely responsible for that.  He stated in an interview that he purposefully set up the opening and closing shots of Bertie/George VI so that the movie would stand apart from others in the genre.  We first meet Bertie in normal clothes, not looking all snazzy in his royal get-up.  The movie closes reaffirming King George and Lionel Logue’s friendship, not with him cured of his stammer as if by magic or medicine.

Check back on February 13 as the KNOW YOUR NOMINEES series continues with “127 Hours.”

That’s what my KNOW YOUR NOMINEES series hopes to do.  Every three days, I’ll feature ten interesting facts about the ten Best Picture nominees of 2010 that would be fascinating to pepper into any conversation.  My hope is that you will come away with an enhanced appreciation of the movies but also enjoy learning strange and interesting things about them.

So, as we proceed in alphabetical order, our next stop on the tour is “The Kids Are All Right.”

“The Kids Are All Right” is set in Los Angeles, fairly obviously although not entirely prominently.  But according to writer/director Lisa Choldenko, the movie was originally set in New York.  The availability of Annette Bening, however, was contingent on moving production to Los Angeles.  Cholodenko decided to rewrite the script with the setting changing coasts, and she claims that it helped bring the characters more to life.

Cholodenko also claims that the movie is slightly autobiographical, mainly at the beginning as she and her partner in real life were looking to be impregnated by a sperm donor.  In walks co-writer Stuart Blumberg, who was a sperm donor himself.  He wondered what children he brought into the world, and the two of them came up with what we now know as “The Kids Are All Right.”  In 2006, the movie was nearly greenlit for production – but Cholodenko became pregnant and shelved the project for family matters.

The revision process was also grueling.  The initial draft took a month to write, and as we know, nothing is perfect the first time.  So Cholodenko and Blumberg re-wrote every character, scene, and line at least 10 times.

Who was the first actor onto the project?  Several years before production began on “The Kids Are All Right,” Julianne Moore met Cholodenko and expressed her admiration for the director’s work.  The two kept in touch, and Cholodenko sent Moore the script for her next movie around 2004, which the high-profile actress was attached to for many years.

When Annette Bening came aboard the project later, Cholodenko has stated the she retouched the script to make the character fit Bening better.  The character Nic that we see in the movie better serves a vessel for her voice.

Mark Ruffalo received his first Academy Award nomination for his role in “The Kids Are All Right,” but it might interest you to know that he intially turned down the role.  He was cast sequentially after Moore and Bening, and he was approved from a list that Cholodenko had made for potential actors to play the character.  After his initial refusal, Moore used her personal relationship with Ruffalo, who she starred with in “Blindness,” to reel the actor in, even texting his wife.

How did the kids come aboard?  Cholodenko chose Mia Wasikowska after seeing her work in HBO’s “In Treatment.” On the other hand, her on-screen sibling didn’t have it quite so easy.  Josh Hutcherson received got the script and auditioned for the role.  I guess “Zathura” wasn’t quite convincing enough…

Indie movies are, by their nature, independently financed.  But for the quality of filmmaking you get from “The Kids Are All Right,” you’d be surprised how rushed the schedule was.  The entire movie was filmed in 23 days. And as for the budget, the movie was made on $5 million; according to Ruffalo, the stars made almost no money just like virtually any indie movie.  Oh, and they only had five days to rehearse.

Unlike “The Social Network,” which was shot word-for-word for Aaron Sorkin’s script, “The Kids Are All Right” underwent some metamorphosis during the filming process.  Two scenes were added during the shoot, and the last line of the movie that appears in the final version wasn’t written until pre-production.

Ok, and what about the movie’s politics?  Lisa Cholodenko acknowledges that the political climate in which “The Kids Are All Right” is being released in makes most people believe that it has an agenda.  But in numerous interviews, she has stated that she did not see this as a gay movie.  What she wanted to get at with the movie was something more universal.  It’s a movie about family in any way, shape, or form.  All the stars said they didn’t need to do any research on same-sex parenting because they approached it like any family movie.

Check back on February 10 as the KNOW YOUR NOMINEES series continues with “The King’s Speech.”

That’s what my KNOW YOUR NOMINEES series hopes to do.  Every three days, I’ll feature ten interesting facts about the ten Best Picture nominees of 2010 that would be fascinating to pepper into any conversation.  My hope is that you will come away with an enhanced appreciation of the movies but also enjoy learning strange and interesting things about them.

So, as we proceed in alphabetical order, our next stop on the tour is “Inception.”

So what was the inception of “Inception?”  According to director/screenwriter Christopher Nolan, the movie began as a heist film mainly as a way to provide entertainment and exposition for the complicated dream structure.  But concerned with the cold emotional detachment to the characters in a heist film, he began to add the hero’s story to get the audience to connect with the movie.

What’s real and what isn’t was a big talking point about “Inception,” but it may interest you to know what was shot on location (real) and what was shot on a soundstage or studio lot (not real).  The snow fortress was a built set, as was Saito’s castle. With a few other exceptions, most scenes were shot on location in Tokyo, Paris, Mombasa, Los Angeles, and a small town in Nolan’s home country, England.

How about that spectacular anti-gravity fight scene in the hotel hallway.  According to Christopher Nolan, Joseph Gordon-Levitt did all his own stunts for the scene, only using a double out of necessity for one scene.  The scene was done by creating a spinning set, not through CG.

Another fantastically well-executed scene of mind-blowing visual proportions was the scene at the Parisian café where the city implodes.  How did they shoot that?  According to cinematographer Wally Pfister, they used a camera that captures 1,500 frames per second (in contrast to the average camera which captures 24) to create the slow-motion effect.  In post-production, the visuals team added effects to make the objects look like they were floating.  (Everything was shot out of air cannons for the explosion effect.)

Throughout the second half of the movie, we saw plenty of the van falling off the bridge.  But what you might not know about this scene is that it took months to film and entire days were dedicated to the shot.  But it gets better: the van was shot out of an air cannon and when the van hit the water, the actors actually had to stay underwater for four to five minutes holding their breath and taking air from a tank.  How’s that for dedication?

The ensemble cast turned out perfectly, but it wasn’t always what it was.  Before shooting, Evan Rachel Wood was slated to play Ariadne but dropped out and the role went to Ellen Page.  Another big casting shift was the exit of James Franco, who was originally cast to play Arthur, due to scheduling issues; the role ultimately went to Joseph Gordon-Levitt.

Fans of Marion Cotillard got a chuckle when they heard “Non, je ne regrette rien,” the closing song of the film “La Vie En Rose” which won her an Oscar for Best Actress.  The title means “No, I regret nothing” when translated literally into English.  Was it a clever nod to her previous role?  Actually, no.  Nolan and composer Hans Zimmer chose the song before Cotillard became attached to the project because of its booming rhythmic qualities, not because of its association with the actress.

Many people have seen “Inception” as a metaphor for filmmaking, and Nolan has said that these musings aren’t entirely off-base.  But the craft he was most interested in exploring was architecture.  In an interview with WiReD, he stated, “I’m very interested in the similarities or analogies between the way in which we experience a three–dimensional space that an architect has created and the way in which an audience experiences a cinematic narrative that constructs a three–dimensional -reality from a two-dimensional medium—assembled shot by shot. I think there’s a narrative component to architecture that’s kind of fascinating.”

NEWS FLASH: The kids at the end of the movie are not the same as the ones before! Adjust your explanations of “Inception” as necessary.

Don’t worry, no top theories here.  Only some insight on where the idea came from – not exactly inception.  Nolan gave a top as a gift to his wife and then rediscovered it, incorporating it into “Inception.”  The one used in the movie was symbolically designed by the prop department to represent Cobb’s universe.

Check back on February 7 as the KNOW YOUR NOMINEES series continues with “The Kids Are All Right.”

That’s what my KNOW YOUR NOMINEES series hopes to do.  Every three days, I’ll feature ten interesting facts about the ten Best Picture nominees of 2010 that would be fascinating to pepper into any conversation.  My hope is that you will come away with an enhanced appreciation of the movies but also enjoy learning strange and interesting things about them.

So, as we proceed in alphabetical order, the second movie on our countdown of the Academy’s best of 2010 is “The Fighter.”

You’ve probably heard “The Fighter” described as Mark Wahlberg’s passion project, and his fight for four years to get the movie made has finally hit the silver screen thanks to the personal identification the star has with the story.  Both Wahlberg and his character Ward grew up in large Massachusetts families with nine siblings.  Both had tenacious mothers who favored their older brothers – which, in Wahlberg’s case, happens to be the New Kid on the Block Donnie Wahlberg.  As Micky became the “Pride of Lowell,” Mark Wahlberg idolized the prize fighter and is now starring and producing the ultimate tribute to him.  In an interview, Wahlberg said that the only difference between the two of them is that “Micky’s a fighter and I’m an entertainer.”

A nice little under-the-radar Oscar story of 2010 has been David O. Russell’s comeback directing “The Fighter,” which is in itself a comeback story.  But it wasn’t always going to be that way.  Remember seeing in the opening credits that Darren Aronofsky was an executive producer of the movie?  Originally, he was going to direct the movie but eventually abandoned the movie to make “Black Swan.”  That makes him connected to two Best Picture nominees this year.  Also worth noting about the director’s chair – Martin Scorsese turned the project down, claiming that “Raging Bull” was enough boxing for him.

Aronofsky’s exit wasn’t the only major change that “The Fighter” underwent before production began.  Matt Damon and Brad Pitt were both attached to play Dickie Eklund, the former fighter and older brother to Mark Wahlberg’s Micky Ward that is played in the movie by Christian Bale.

And what of the documentary HBO made about Eklund?  Called “High on Crack Street: Lost Lives in Lowell,” the movie is real, not just a plot device in “The Fighter.”  Thanks to the beauty of the Internet, you don’t have to wait for it to hit the circuit on cable – you can watch it FOR FREE on SnagFilms.  (In case you didn’t catch it, I embedded the link in that bolded statement.)

Mark Wahlberg did plenty of physical preparation for “The Fighter.”  He claims that his last few movies have been carefully selected as training and preparing to play Micky Ward.  He built a boxing ring in his own home and spent four years training with boxing coaches, even bringing them with him to his other movie sets.  Wahlberg did all the fighting himself, refusing to use a fighting double.  By the time all was said and done for Wahlberg’s training, he spent more preparing than he made.

Wahlberg wasn’t the only cast member altering their body for “The Fighter.”  Christian Bale noticeably dropped 30 pounds to play Dickie, giving him the look of both an ex-fighter and a crack addict.  But more under the radar, Amy Adams also did her part to inhabit the character of Charlene.  To make her character look like she’d been in one too many bars, Adams gained about 10 pounds to get a bit of a beer gut.

How about that wild family in “The Fighter?”  Director David O. Russell said these wildly over-the-top characters were actually toned down from their real-life counterparts.  I find this hard to believe in the case of the seven sisters, which are played by a particularly interesting group of actresses.  One sister is played by Conan O’Brien’s sister, Kate.  Another actress, Jill Quigg, was recently arrested in Boston for robbery and is now in jail.  (How’s that for some authenticity?)

Did the cinematography of the fights look a little bit different than the rest of the movie?  That’s because David O. Russell brought in camera crews from HBO to shoot them in the same style they were televised in for the sake of authenticity.  I found it to be an interesting touch that definitely set the fights apart from the rest of the movie.  They also feel real because the real Micky Ward was heavily involved in their production.

Just how real is “The Fighter,” though?  According to the real life Micky Ward in an interview with Sports Illustrated, he said, “It was pretty much right on. Christian Bale did an excellent job.”  The movie’s historical accuracy was greatly aided by Wahlberg’s close relationship with the real Ward and Ecklund, who often stayed in his guest house for weeks at a time.  The veracity was also undoubtedly aided by Mickey O’Keefe, Ward’s real-life trainer who played himself in the movie.

And the big question: since Dickie Ecklund is still alive, how did he react to the movie?  Apparently he saw it for the first time without an audience and was not a fan.  Understandable for anyone to react unfavorably to a shrinking down of their life’s struggles and mistakes into two hours.  But then Wahlberg and Bale convinced him to see it a few more times with a crowd, and once he saw their reaction, Ecklund was proud of how his overcoming of crack addiction moved the audience.  How’s that for a feel-good story?

Check back on February 4 as the KNOW YOUR NOMINEES series continues with “Inception.”

That’s what my KNOW YOUR NOMINEES series hopes to do.  Every three days, I’ll feature ten interesting facts about the ten Best Picture nominees of 2010 that would be fascinating to pepper into any conversation.  My hope is that you will come away with an enhanced appreciation of the movies but also enjoy learning strange and interesting things about them.

So, as we proceed in alphabetical order, the logical starting place is “Black Swan.”

For all the acclaim “Black Swan” is receiving now, it seems silly that anyone WOULDN’T want to pour money into making the movie.  Yet according to director Darren Aronfosky, the movie was a surprisingly hard sell to production companies even with Natalie Portman and the rest of the cast all lined up.  When financing finally lined up, Aronofsky was forced to make the movie on $15 million, which was $10 million less than what he had hoped to have.  This meant a streamlined shooting schedule; for example, each act of the “Swan Lake” ballet shown at the end of the movie was shot in one day.

Maybe you’ve heard the mutterings that “Black Swan” was once the same movie as “The Wrestler.”  They are true. Director Darren Aronofsky brought it up once, and ever since, he’s been carefully clarifying exactly what he meant by that.  The movies originated out of the same idea: two performers whose craft drives them to physical and emotional extremes.  The end results are entirely different, but the two work together nicely as companion pieces.

A lot has been made of Nina’s sanity in the movie.  Is she ever sane?  When does she lose her mind?  Darren Aronofsky, in an interview with Cinema Blend said that “the only time she’s normal is right at the beginning of the film when she’s dancing before the demon shows up. That very first shot, she’s clear.”

We’ve all heard about Natalie Portman’s year of training to get ready for the role of Nina Sayers.  You’ve probably heard that she worked five hours a day doing swimming and ballet for eleven months and then a shocking eight hours a day in the final month.  She lost over 20 pounds practically starving herself to slim down.  But ballerinas have a long, lanky physique that’s hard to simply tone into.  So how did Portman overcome this challenge?  She had people pull on her arms and legs every day to stretch her out!

There was more to Natalie Portman’s physical commitment to “Black Swan” than her training.  While filming the movie, Portman broke a rib during a lift.  The film’s tight budget meant no on-screen doctor to help her, and the tight filming schedule didn’t exactly allow for much recovery time.  So how did they work around it?  They simply readjusted the lift.

And there’s even more commitment on Natalie Portman’s part than just physically embodying a ballerina.  She has been attached to “Black Swan” since 2000 when she met Darren Aronofsky in Times Square and said she wanted in on the project.   She claims Aronofsky had most of the movie laid out then.  Many other members of the crew have been committed to the movie for multiple years as well.

Did you see Winona Ryder in “Black Swan” and go “Woah, haven’t seen her in a while!”  According to Darren Aronofsky, Ryder was cast in the role of Beth because it echoes her career.  The “metacasting,” as he calls it, was crucial because the audience would likely feel more impacted by Beth if someone largely at the same point in their artistic life was playing her.

The movie could have been impossible to make as the acting qualifications were just as vital to the movie as the ability to dance ballet were.  Luckily, Natalie Portman took ballet from age 4 to 13, ultimately stopping to pursue only her acting career.  Thus, when she was needed to tap back into her ballet skills to prepare for “Black Swan,” the groundwork was already laid.

What was the hardest part of the movie to get right?  According to the choreographer, it was Natalie Portman’s undulating arms at the end of the movie that gave them such a hard time.

In case you haven’t heard, Portman is pregnant and engaged to Benjamin Millepied.  He was the film’s choreographer, and the two met on set.  Millepied also had a role in the film as pretty much the only male other than Vincent Cassel to speak in the movie – the lead dancer that drops Portman on opening night.  Portman referenced an ironic line he’s asked in the movie – “Would you f*** that girl?”

Check back on February 1 as the KNOW YOUR NOMINEES series continues with “The Fighter.”

I’ll delve into my opinion after the cut, but before I go any further, let me post the nominees!

Best Picture

• Black Swan
• The Fighter
• Inception
• The Kids Are All Right
• The King’s Speech
• 127 Hours
• The Social Network
• Toy Story 3
• True Grit
• Winter’s Bone

Best Director

• Darren Aronofsky, “Black Swan“
• Joel & Ethan Coen, “True Grit“
• David Fincher, “The Social Network“
• Tom Hooper, “The King’s Speech“
• David O. Russell, “The Fighter“

Best Actor

• Javier Bardem, “Biutiful“
• Jeff Bridges, “True Grit“
• Jesse Eisenberg, “The Social Network“
• Colin Firth, “The King’s Speech“
• James Franco, “127 Hours“

Best Actress

• Annette Bening, “The Kids Are All Right“
• Nicole Kidman, “Rabbit Hole“
• Jennifer Lawrence, “Winter’s Bone“
• Natalie Portman, “Black Swan“
• Michelle Williams, “Blue Valentine“

Best Supporting Actor

• Christian Bale, “The Fighter“
• John Hawkes, “Winter’s Bone“
• Jeremy Renner, “The Town“
• Mark Ruffalo, “The Kids Are All Right“
• Geoffrey Rush, “The King’s Speech“

Best Supporting Actress

• Amy Adams, “The Fighter“
• Helena Bonham Carter, “The King’s Speech“
• Melissa Leo, “The Fighter“
• Hailee Steinfeld, “True Grit“
• Jacki Weaver, “Animal Kingdom“

Best Original Screenplay

• Another Year
• The Fighter
• Inception
• The Kids Are All Right
• The King’s Speech

Best Adapted Screenplay

• 127 Hours
• The Social Network
• Toy Story 3
• True Grit
• Winter’s Bone

Read on for more.

Winners

“True Grit,” in my mind, made an astounding showing with 10 nominations.  The director nomination was a surprise, and I’m wondering if it’s in the Academy top 5 instead of “Black Swan” or “Inception.”  It appears that it really caught on and that Coen Brothers love is in full swing.

Leading the day, though, was “The King’s Speech” as most expected.  With 12 nominations, six of which coming in the major categories, it has put itself in a good position to take it all from “The Social Network.”  It’s known that the movie with the most nominations stands the best chance to cash in on them, and I think even if it loses Best Picture, we could see an Oscar night situation like 2004 – “Million Dollar Baby” takes the important prizes but “The Aviator” wins the most statues.

Losers

“Black Swan” with only 5 nominations surprisingly underwhelmed.  Despite being nominated by EVERY guild, it only scored two technical nominations, Cinematography and Editing.  I’m thrilled that it scored a Best Director nomination, but it’s clear to me that this movie just didn’t connect with a lot of Academy voters in the way we thought it would.  No Best Original Screenplay was a bit of a shock.  The Mila Kunis snub hurt, too.

And so much for “The Town.”  Despite BFCA/PGA nominations for Best Picture, the critically acclaimed movie only scored one nomination for supporting man Jeremy Renner.  Too bad, I really liked it.  Nothing monumental, but just a good movie.

Surprises

I could be happier to say that “127 Hours” was a big hit with Academy folk with 6 nominations, including a Best Picture nomination that many people assumed would elude its grasp.  While I’m a little upset it wasn’t nominated for Best Cinematography, the movie made a surprisingly strong showing, trumping fellow Fox Searchlight picture “Black Swan” in nominations.

The love for “Winter’s Bone,” which garnered 4 nominations, also came as a bit of a shock to me.  I was expecting a Best Adapted Screenplay and Best Actress nomination, but I honestly didn’t think it would pop up in Best Picture or Best Supporting Actor.  In a way, it makes sense as it is the most independent-feeling of the indie movies, and the movie represents a style of moviemaking that isn’t particularly well-represented this year.  Or ever, for that matter.

Javier Bardem’s nomination for “Biutiful” was a nice surprise, but not a huge shocker.  I should have seen it coming with the BAFTA nod and his prior win.  Alas, a nice gasp this morning was welcome – and it didn’t come at the expense of anyone I loved.

I was really hoping to see Michelle Williams’ fantastic performance in “Blue Valentine” get recognize by the Academy, but I didn’t think it would happen without a Ryan Gosling nomination.  The movie was also pretty underseen, but apparently that didn’t deter the voters from giving her what she deserved.

Disappointments

Dear Academy Director’s Branch, you will forever be hated until you accept Christopher Nolan.  Until then, you will forever be out of touch.

I’m ecstatic to see Hailee Steinfeld get a much deserved nomination for her work in “True Grit.”  However, I’m a little peeved that category fraud wasn’t corrected and she scored her nomination in Best Supporting Actress rather than where she should have been placed, Best Actress.  Sure, she’ll have a better shot at the win there, but will it mean as much?

Snubs

I’m more than a little upset that Andrew Garfield didn’t get a Best Supporting Actor nomination.  He was a very central figure to “The Social Network,” and I thought he gave one of the best performances of the year.  But the Academy preferred John Hawkes in “Winter’s Bone” – big mistake.  Huge.

And while I wasn’t fawning over Mila Kunis’ performance in “Black Swan,” I sure thought she was more deserving of a nomination than Melissa Leo, Jacki Weaver, and ESPECIALLY Helena Bonham Carter.  Oh well, you can’t win ‘em all.

Summary

The showdown we’ve been predicting since September has come to fruition.  It’s timely vs. timeless, brain vs. heart, and genius vs. charm.  In these next 33 days, we will debate endlessly over which will prevail, but one thing is for certain.  This will be a watershed year for the Academy as they will be faced with a choice between two very different movies that represent two very different styles of filmmaking.

1. The Social Network 
2. The King’s Speech 
3. The Fighter 
4. Black Swan  (5)
5. Inception  (4)
6. True Grit  (9)
7. Toy Story 3  (6)
8. The Kids Are All Right  (7)
9. 127 Hours  (10)
10. The Town  (NR)

In case you needed any reminder of why the movie in the top spot is comfortably perched there, look above.

“The Social Network” is way ahead in the lead, and I personally don’t think that anything is going to stop it.  But “The King’s Speech” threw an interesting twist into the race with its PGA victory on Saturday night with the help of a preferential ballot, and more discussion about this will be appropriate once the slate is officially set for February 27.

At this point, I honestly think that “The Fighter” could be the only movie with a chance to knock it out of the top slot.  It could easily take the SAG ensemble win, and it has popped up unexpectedly in many guilds.  The movie has also positioned itself to win two acting awards after victories with the BFCA and HFPA.  I just get a sinking sensation that this is the movie that has enough across-the-board love to pull an upset on a preferential ballot.

“Black Swan” has popped up on EVERY guild list this year, something that could make it the most nominated movie of the year.  This is obviously huge for the movie, but now that it’s assured a nomination, I’m thinking about how likely a win would be.  Given that the movie tends to polarize, the chances are small.  And as I’ve said about “The King’s Speech” all year, it’s not the Academy’s type of movie anymore, so I still have a hard time seeing it win.  ”Inception” is out of the running because it missed out on a SAG ensemble nod despite being star-studded, and you need the support of the actors to win.

Those are the five certainties, and I’d be awestruck if any of those five miss.  I think “True Grit” and “Toy Story 3″ are locks for nominations as well.  ”The Kids Are All Right” is in, but I still stand by my assertion earlier this year that it would not shock me to see it left off.

It’s down to three movies – “127 Hours,” “The Town,” and “Winter’s Bone” – to battle it out for the final two slots.  There could, of course, be lurking surprises like “The Blind Side” last year, but no movie seems to have positioned its chips to make a big move on nominations day.  Every critical darling is underseen, and all the box office smashes are poorly reviewed.

I think “127 Hours” is in because it has a passionate base of supporters that should be able to overcome the faction of the Academy that simply won’t watch the movie.  It’s from Danny Boyle, who is clearly an Academy favorite after his “Slumdog Millionaire” orchestrated a sweep of the Oscars in 2008 that we only see once or twice a decade.  This a powerful movie, and those who can sit through it walk out with an enhanced appreciation of life.  I think they can easily power it to a nomination.

Previously, I had predicted “Winter’s Bone” to take that final slot.  But ever since the PGA left it on the outside looking in, I’ve been more inclined to favor “The Town.”  As I said on the LAMBcast, putting Ben Affleck’s movie in the field would make for a perfect 50-50 split between indies and blockbusters.  It would give a nice sense of “something for everyone” to Best Picture, which is kind of what I think the idea was when they expanded the field.

But “Winter’s Bone” does have a few things going for it.  While I don’t think many people LOVE “The Town,” I do think that there is a significant handful of people that do love “Winter’s Bone.”  It’s nothing like any of the other Best Picture nominees this year; it’s understated, quiet, stars no-name actors, and is truly of an independent sensibility.

The other so-called “indies” in the race feature recognizable actors and have largely entered mainstream consciousness.  I wouldn’t count out the desire to represent a part of the industry that isn’t manifest in the first 9 nominees, but my pick is still on “The Town.”  For better or for worse.

In case you were really hankering for my no guts no glory pick for a Best Picture nominee, it would be “Shutter Island.”  But I don’t think that’s likely.

Best Director

1. David Fincher, “The Social Network” 
2. Darren Aronofsky, “Black Swan”  (3)
3. Tom Hooper, “The King’s Speech”  (4)
4. Christopher Nolan, “Inception”  (2)
5. David O. Russell, “The Fighter” 

No real change in the field here.  If there’s any surprise in this category, it will likely come at the expense of David O. Russell, a prickly figure in Hollywood.  But since this would be his first nomination, and those likely to replace him have won in the past three years (Danny Boyle/The Coen Brothers), he seems like a good bet.  I’d also say that Christopher Nolan isn’t as safe as most would like him to be; the DGA has shortlisted him twice and the Academy has yet to recognize him in this category.  A snub would be shocking but not unforseeable.

For the win, it’s Fincher way out in front.  Even if “The King’s Speech” or “The Fighter” makes headway in the Best Picture race, there is no doubt that this award will be going to “The Social Network” and its genius helmer.  It would be foolish to place your money anywhere else.

Best Actor

1. Colin Firth, “The King’s Speech” 
2. Jesse Eisenberg, “The Social Network” 
3. James Franco, “127 Hours” 
4. Jeff Bridges, “True Grit”  (NR)
5. Mark Wahlberg, “The Fighter”  (4)

Firth, Eisenberg, and Franco are the three certainties here.  Barring a shocking upset at the SAG awards, Firth is poised to orchestrate a clean sweep on the way to an Oscar victory.

Given the runaway box office success of “True Grit,” I think Bridges is a likely nominee.  He has SAG support, which is crucial in the Oscar race.  I had qualms with him missing out on a Globe nod and being last year’s winner, but he’s such a likable figure in the industry that my qualms have been fairly assuaged.

As for that tricky last spot, some will say it’s Robert Duvall thanks to the BFCA/SAG nods, his status as an Academy favorite, and his age.  But in spite of all of that, what love has ANYONE shown “Get Low” this year?  As much as they love Duvall, my gut opinion is that they will choose someone in a more lauded movie.  The SAG is notoriously sentimental for older actors, and Duvall has won before.  There’s no necessity to bring him back into the race for a role that doesn’t stand up to his towering prior ones.

BAFTA nominee Javier Bardem for “Biutiful” is a possibility, as is Globe nominee Ryan Gosling for “Blue Valentine.”  But since very few people have seen either of those movies, my final pick for Best Actor is the leading man in a movie I’m pretty sure just about every Academy member saw – Mark Wahlberg in “The Fighter.”  He may not have been a huge force in the precursor awards, and his supporting co-stars are probably all better than him.  But he’s at the heart of the movie, and he produced the sure-fire Best Picture nominee.  A second nomination for Wahlberg just feels right to me.

Best Actress

1. Natalie Portman, “Black Swan” 
2. Annette Bening, “The Kids Are All Right” 
3. Jennifer Lawrence, “Winter’s Bone” 
4. Nicole Kidman, “Rabbit Hole”  (5)
5. Hailee Steinfeld, “True Grit”  (NR)

Portman is the clear frontrunner thanks to a BFCA win against Bening and a Globe win against Lawrence/Kidman.  If she wins the SAG, all signs point to her victory.

Bening is assured a nomination, of course, due to her two-decade history with the Academy.  She won the Globe in comedy over little competition and has racked up every important precursor on the way to the Oscars.  Something that should not be discounted in her favor is that she is the president of the actor’s branch of the Academy.

Lawrence is another lock, and while I hesitate to classify Kidman as one, I don’t really see too many scenarios with her on the outside looking in.  Her slot is up for grabs, but she’s in the best position to grab it.

The last slot has a lot of people scratching their heads.  Could it be SAG nominee Hilary Swank for “Conviction?”  BFCA nominee Noomi Rapace for “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo?”  BFCA/Globe nominee Michelle Williams for “Blue Valentine?”  Globe nominee Julianne Moore for “The Kids Are All Right?”  NBR winner Lesley Manville for “Another Year?”

There are so many possibilities, but my instinct is telling me that it will be Hailee Steinfeld for “True Grit.”  Sure, she was campaigned in Best Supporting Actress, but the Academy has corrected category fraud several times in the past decade.  She is so clearly a lead that I feel like many people would see it as a travesty for to be nominated in Best Supporting Actress.  She is the shining star of the film, so I feel pretty confident that she will pop up here.

But if the Academy follows the herd mentality and places her unjustly in Best Supporting Actress?  My bet would be on Julianne Moore, the better of the two actresses in that movie AND the one with more Oscar nominations to her name.

Best Supporting Actor

1. Christian Bale, “The Fighter” 
2. Geoffrey Rush, “The King’s Speech” 
3. Jeremy Renner, “The Town” 
4. Andrew Garfield, “The Social Network” 
5. Mark Ruffalo, “The Kids Are All Right” 

No change here since the last predictions, neither in nominees nor in order.  Bale is poised to run away with the Oscar after BFCA/Globes victories.  Love for “The King’s Speech” could fuel a surprise Rush win, but Bale gives the performance of the year.  I don’t really see him losing.

As for the other nominees, Renner seems strong after BFCA/Globes/SAG nominations.  After “The Hurt Locker,” he’s popular with Academy members – and his movie is likely to be a Best Picture nominee.  With “The Social Network” so out in front of the Best Picture race, I think Andrew Garfield can ride on the coattails of the movie’s success to overcome the SAG snub.

And even though I didn’t think all that highly of Mark Ruffalo in “The Kids Are All Right,” he has SAG support, which means a lot.  He wasn’t nominated by the Globes, but nowadays that doesn’t mean all that much.  He’s the strongest of the “other” contenders, two of which were in pretty poorly received movies – Sam Rockwell in “Conviction,” Michael Douglas in “Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps” – and one of which, John Hawkes for “Winter’s Bone,” is hardly a recognizable name.  Hawkes could steal Garfield or Ruffalo’s slot, but I feel comfortable with this slate of five.

Best Supporting Actress

1. Melissa Leo, “The Fighter” 
2. Helena Bonham Carter, “The King’s Speech”  (3)
3. Amy Adams, “The Fighter”  (4)
4. Mila Kunis, “Black Swan”  (2)
5. Jacki Weaver, “Animal Kingdom” 

I’m expecting the most nomination morning surprises in the Best Supporting Actress category.  The only true lock, in my mind, is Melissa Leo for “The Fighter,” who won the prize from many critics groups in addition to high-profile BFCA/Globes victories.

I think Helena Bonham Carter is pretty much assured a nomination because she’s in “The King’s Speech” and has received nods from the BFCA/Globes/SAG.  But I wonder if a flag will go up in voters minds, as did in mine, that she doesn’t GIVE a performance.  Sure, we like her, but does this deserve an Oscar nomination?  I have a feeling most will unfortunately reply yes.

Amy Adams is safe in my mind, but there’s a chance that voters will only make room for one supporting lady from “The Fighter.”  I think their first choice would be Leo, yet I think voters will happily reward Adams with her third Oscar nomination.

Besides those three, I’m really shaky.  Mila Kunis seems like she would be a shoo-in after receiving major nominations from the BFCA/Globes/SAG.  ”Black Swan” has a lot of respect, and this is a category favorable to younger actresses.  Yet maybe she’s too young, and maybe she’s been in too much other stuff that’s crummy.  Cameron Diaz received the holy trio of nominations for “Vanilla Sky” and got snubbed by the Oscars, and it could happen again.  But since Kunis is a Best Picture-nominated film, I feel good about her being nominated.

And then that pesky final slot.  It could be Lesley Manville, who was nominated here as opposed to lead by the BAFTAs, for “Another Year.”  It could be Hailee Steinfeld if the Oscars don’t auto-correct category fraud.  But something tells me it will be Jacki Weaver for “Animal Kingdom.”  I still think there could be name recognition issues, and there are likely many voters that haven’t seen the movie.  However, I’m at a bit of a loss of who else to predict here.

Best Original Screenplay

1. The King’s Speech  (3)
2. Inception  (1)
3. The Kids Are All Right  (2)
4. Black Swan 
5. The Fighter  (NR)

This category intrigues me.

There are three incredibly different movies vying for the win – historical drama “The King’s Speech,” humorously dramatic “The Kids Are All Right,” and creatively crafted action flick “Inception.”  All have different strengths, making this an incredibly hard category to predict.

Smart money would probably be on “The King’s Speech” since it’s the leading Best Picture contender of the bunch.  But since it was ineligible for the WGA awards, we don’t have any trial run for the Oscars.  I think the race becomes “The King’s Speech” vs. whoever wins the WGA, “The Kids Are All Right” or “Inception.”  I give the edge to the latter since the writer’s branch of the Academy has nominated Christopher Nolan before.

I filled the last two slots with Best Picture nominees “Black Swan” and “The Fighter,” but both are on the bubble and could be replaced by Mike Leigh’s “Another Year.”  The Academy is notorious for worshipping Leigh, particularly for his writing.  However, it’s been a pretty dry year for he and his movie, and I just don’t see him getting nominated again.

Best Adapted Screenplay

1. The Social Network 
2. Toy Story 3 
3. 127 Hours 
4. True Grit  (5)
5. Winter’s Bone  (4)

Pixar is popular with the writers branch, so “Toy Story 3″ makes the cut.  Danny Boyle and Christian Colson are also Academy favorites, so “127 Hours” makes the cut (and the Globe nomination helps).  The Coen Brothers are beloved by the writers branch, so “True Grit” seems incredibly likely.  It’s a battle royale for that fifth slot between “Winter’s Bone” and “The Town,” much like they are fighting for that last Best Picture slot.  But I see Deborah Granik’s “Winter’s Bone” taking this as a consolation prize as it has received more attention for its writing throughout the season.

What do YOU expect to hear called tomorrow morning? What Oscar nominees are you hoping for?  Sound off in the comments!!

So, before I get started laying out what happened, let me present to you the beginning of my campaign for the LAMMY for Best Awards Season Coverage.  Last weekend, I led the LAMBcast in a discussion of the major categories of the Oscars this year.  Hopefully you can hear the knowledge that I impart through writing with this column.  So click on the picture below to download the podcast, or you could also check it out over at the LAMB or at Blog Cabins.  (A big thanks to Tom, James, Nick, and Dylan for being such great participants!)

We have our five. If were back in ancient times (think 2008), we would have a pretty good guess at what the five Best Picture nominees would be.  The Directors Guild and the American Cinema Editors, two incredibly reliable prognosticators of the field, have aligned perfectly.  They also happen to match the Golden Globes drama category as well.  In case you need those movies repeated (or can’t decode them from the convenient graphic above), here they are:

• “Black Swan“
• “The Fighter“
• “Inception“
• “The King’s Speech“
• “The Social Network“

It was a little surprising to see David O. Russell get a nod from the Directors Guild as he has a pretty bad reputation thanks to his temper.  But his story runs parallel to the second chance aspect of “The Fighter,” and the Academy could be won over by that connection.  Or, they could give him the cold shoulder and include an old winner like Joel & Ethan Coen for “True Grit” or Danny Boyle for “127 Hours.”  Unfortunately, you can’t discount Nolan for a snub either as he has been recognized twice by the DGA but never before by the Academy.

As for the editing guild, it was probably most surprising to see “The King’s Speech” (or perhaps “The Fighter”) in the field over a really flashily edited movie like “True Grit,” “127 Hours,” or “Shutter Island,” the latter of which was directed by a hallowed industry veteran.  But since they sprung for both of the Best Picture frontrunners, it just makes things all the more clear for who to look at for the win.

ASC announces. The American Society of Cinematographers, on the other hand, did not adhere to the five.  It replaced “The Fighter” with “True Grit,” which is considered by many to be the frontrunner as Roger Deakins’ photography is stunning.  He’s won twice from the society but has never been rewarded by the Academy despite an astounding EIGHT nominations.  Forget Annette Bening, here’s a deserving candidate for a lifetime achievement Oscar.

It was also quite surprising to see “The King’s Speech,” which did not have a very flashy visual style, take a nomination over “127 Hours.”  Danny Boyle’s movie had two directors of photography, one of which has won an Oscar and ASC award for his work.  But it shows a surprising amount of technical admiration for “The King’s Speech,” which seems to be an across-the-board favorite.  The only problem is that “The Social Network” and “Black Swan” have pretty much matched it step by step.  Look for “The King’s Speech” to take the most nominations simply because it will have three actors going for the gold,  but all three movies could have 10 nominations.

“The Social Network” piles it on. The movie continued its domination of the critics circuit by taking home top honors from the National Society of Film Critics.  Aside from the usual holy Best Picture/Director/Screenplay triumvirate, Jesse Eisenberg won Best Actor.  I’d still say that he could pull an Adrien Brody come Oscar night, the young actor taking down some more established contenders.

It also took Best Picture honors from the Alliance of Women Film Journalists and the Toronto Critics, although “Inception” did take the North Texas Film Critics, who have an ENORMOUS say on the state of the Oscar race as we know it.

Fincher chimes in with his take on the race. Interestingly enough, the man considered the frontrunner for Best Director doesn’t engage in hyperbolizing his movie.  Here’s what he had to say about “The Social Network” and awards season.

“I hate the awards part of the moviemaking process…And besides, on ‘[The] Social Network,’ I didn’t really agree with the critics’ praise. It interested me that ‘[The] Social Network’ was about friendships that dissolved through this thing that promised friendships, but I didn’t think we were ripping the lid off anything. The movie is true to a time and a kind of person, but I was never trying to turn a mirror on a generation…Let’s hope we strove to get at something interesting, but Social Network is not earth-shattering.”

I think his honesty will ultimately go a long way as some people have been overdoing and exaggerating the praise for the movie from dramatic effect.

Ditto Helena Bonham Carter. I was not a big fan of Carter in “The King’s Speech,” not because I don’t like the actress but because I thought she just showed up.  I didn’t really see much of a performance.  Apparently, she thinks similarly:

“I thought it was a boys’ film … Sometimes you get nominated for the wrong things. I’m not knocking it, because I want the good roles, so if it helps me get another really good part, that’s great.  For that moment, when you’re nominated, you get offered parts you wouldn’t otherwise be offered.  After ‘Wings of a Dove’ [sic], I got ‘Fight Club.’ When you are up for awards, they remember you’re still alive.”

She will still get nominated, but it’s interesting that she’s even willing to admit the misplaced politics of the Oscar season.

“Black Swan” and “True Grit” roll. Oscar season can turn independently-spirited movies into box office smashes, and this year has two beneficiaries of this phenomenon.  ”True Grit,” after three weeks, has shot to the #1 slot and has exceeded almost every expectation set out for it.  The movie will soon become one of the highest-grossing westerns ever.

And “Black Swan” has only been gaining more steam with time.  Last weekend, it only dropped 6% in the standings and entered the top 5.  With curiosity about the movie building (due somewhat in part to its high-profile parody on “SNL“), Fox Searchlight has added about 700 theaters this weekend, expanding “Black Swan” into nearly 2,500 theaters nationwide.  For such a small indie, this is huge.  It has about $65 million in its coffers now and should cruise to $100 million with more buzz coming with inevitable high-profile wins for Portman and loads of Oscar nominations.

If you told me at the beginning of the year that a movie about “Swan Lake” would make more money than a movie about Facebook, I wouldn’t have believed you.  But “Black Swan” is becoming a big audience favorite and has entered pop culture consciousness in a way that no one could have expected.  Obviously it’s a nominee, but it could be a dark horse to win the prize.

“Toy Story 3″ stands resolute. The underdog everyone’s secretly rooting for, “Toy Story 3” is the one movie outside the five worth taking seriously for the win.  Thanks to the preferential voting system now in place, it could be the greatest common denominator for Academy members as there’s really no one who didn’t like the movie.  The ad campaign for the movie has been aggressive yet never hitting a sour note.  It’s the highest grossing and best reviewed movie of the year.  If it weren’t animated, it would be a lock for Best Picture.

We talk about it being “time” for a lot of things; last year, it was a woman winning Best Director.  It’s been a muted theme throughout the year, but maybe it’s time for an animated movie to win Best Picture.  It’s the most deserving candidate from the genre in a long time, perhaps ever.  It would be a well-earned salute to Pixar, which has served to redefine the boundaries and scope of animation as we know it.  The “Toy Story” series is what started it all, and its touching farewell may be the best chance ever for an animated movie to win Hollywood’s biggest honor.

It popped up as a BFCA and PGA nominee for Best Picture, but since it’s animated, it can’t pick up much steam with the guilds.  It has to glide on heart, something that is unfortunately immeasurable in the awards season.  A “Toy Story 3” win isn’t out of sight, but it’s impossible to predict.  Some jaws would drop on Oscar night, but out of those mouths would come cheers.

Golden Globe Predictions

I mean, why not?  There’s not much else to talk about this week.

Best Picture (Drama): Smart money is on “The King’s Speech,” but I’m going to stick by “The Social Network” even with less nominations and being less of a Globes film.  I think the movie is going to steamroll through the season much like “Slumdog Millionaire” did in 2008, but if it loses, then we have a fun race.  I wouldn’t count out “The Fighter” here.

Best Picture (Musical/Comedy): “The Kids Are All Right” in a landslide.  Next?

Best Director: David Fincher has won pretty much every award so far, this should be no exception.

Best Actor (Drama): Firth all the way.  Perhaps an Eisenberg upset could be at works here, which would make this an interesting race.  But at the moment, we have a clear frontrunner and an apparently clear winner.

Best Actor (Musical/Comedy): This category has been slim pickings for many years, and they bounce between choosing fluffier movies (Downey for “Sherlock Holmes“) and artistic movies (Farrell for “In Bruges”).  There are two low-brow performances here (Johnny Depp and Johnny Depp) and two high-brow, little-seen performances (Kevin Spacey and Paul Giamatti).  Big money says Depp for “Alice in Wonderland,” high art says Giamatti for “Barney’s Version.”  I’m saying they’ll meet at a middle ground and reward Jake Gyllenhaal for his great and very agreeable performance in “Love & Other Drugs.”

Best Actress (Drama): No contest for Natalie Portman, if not for it being the performance, then at least because she’s the only actress in a Best Picture candidate.  The Globes do love Nicole Kidman and could shock us by giving her a fourth trophy, but it seems doubtful at best.

Best Actress (Musical/Comedy): Annette Bening had better be practicing her acceptance speech because she’s the biggest lock of the night.  However, I’d sure love to see Julianne Moore take her down.

Best Supporting Actor: Bale takes it to cement his status as a lock to win.  Perhaps Rush if they really like “The King’s Speech.”

Best Supporting Actress: The Globes aren’t the greatest mirror of the Oscar race with their winner.  They usually skew younger, so I’m inclined to discount Melissa Leo, who wasn’t recognized here in 2008 for her Oscar-nominated turn in “Frozen River,” and Jacki Weaver on those grounds.  I’m probably out of my mind declaring this a race between Adams and Kunis, but I’m getting a sinking sensation that Mila Kunis will win here.  They gave this statue to Natalie Portman for “Closer” back in 2004 at a younger age, so I don’t think it’s all that crazy to predict her as the victor.

Best Screenplay: Aaron Sorkin’s script for “The Social Network” should continue its domination here, although since it does face some original scripts, it could lose to “The King’s Speech.”

What are your thoughts on the Oscars at the moment?  On the Golden Globes?  Does “Toy Story 3″ have a chance?  Sound off below in the COMMENTS!

So, without further ado, here are some developments in the Oscar race worth nothing:

The Producers Guild nominates. A group representing the interests of Hollywood producers, the Producers Guild is generally a pretty good indicator of how the Academy will ultimately shape their field.  They ultimately solidified that we have eight almost sure-fire nominees, leaving the two remaining spots up for grabs by a few movies.  In case you don’t know which eight movies I’m referring to, here they are in a convenient bulleted list (in alphabetical order):

• Black Swan
• The Fighter
• Inception
• The Kids Are All Right
• The King’s Speech
• The Social Network
• Toy Story 3
• True Grit

Some might argue that “The Kids Are All Right” isn’t a lock since it missed a BFCA nomination and wasn’t a big audience favorite; others might say that “True Grit” isn’t certain because it was totally snubbed at the Golden Globes.  I think that both will ultimately get nominated, but “True Grit” is safer because of its robust box office numbers.

But for their last two nominees, they chose Danny Boyle’s “127 Hours” and Ben Affleck’s “The Town.”  Both were BFCA nominees for Best Picture that missed Golden Globe nominations for the same award.  Neither were big hits with the SAG, only garnering one nomination.

The big story is that Debra Granik’s “Winter’s Bone” was left out in the cold after garnering a BFCA nod for Best Picture and two SAG nominations.  It’s been basically narrowed down to “Winter’s Bone,” “127 Hours,” and “The Town” to fight for those last two spots, and missing out on the PGA nomination really hurt here.  It’s not a big movie for producers being the tiny budget indie that it is.

I’d also say that the indie portion of Best Picture has been covered without “Winter’s Bone.” Three nominees for the Best Independent Film at the Independent Spirit Awards, “127 Hours,” “The Kids Are All Right,” and “Black Swan,” will likely be represented in the Academy’s field.  These three movies had better box office than “Winter’s Bone,” which only made $6 million this summer.  So, in other words, “The Town” has leap-frogged “Winter’s Bone” in my predictions.

For historical reference, the PGA chose 8 of the Academy’s 10 selections, choosing “Invictus” and “Star Trek” over “The Blind Side” and “A Serious Man.”

The Writers Guild nominates. Before listing the nominees, it’s worth noting that there were many high profile ineligibilities this year.  In original screenplay, “Another Year,” “Blue Valentine,” and “The King’s Speech” were among the most notable; in adapted screenplay, they excluded “Toy Story 3” and “Winter’s Bone.”

In original screenplay, the surprise nominee was “Please Give,” which will compete against probable Best Picture nominees “Black Swan,” “The Fighter,” “Inception,” and “The Kids Are All Right.”  I envision this race as a battle between the latter two movies; the winner will then have to go head-to-head with “The King’s Speech” at the Oscars.  (All three were nominated at the Golden Globes but will probably lose to “The Social Network.”)  As for “The Fighter,” it will probably be fighting “Another Year” for the final slot in the category – and will most likely be snubbed due to the Academy’s worshipping of Mike Leigh.

In adapted screenplay, they threw a total curveball by throwing “I Love You Phillip Morris” into a field that included “127 Hours,” “The Social Network,” “The Town,” and “True Grit.”  Aaron Sorkin is going to run away with this category, but I wouldn’t be surprised to see “The Town” and “True Grit” make way for “Toy Story 3″ and “Winter’s Bone” at the Oscars.

The USC Scripter finalists announced. An award for film adaptations of literature, the USC Scripter award is a nice award for screenwriters to pick up on the way to Best Adapted Screenplay.  (In case you couldn’t deduce it, “Toy Story 3″ was ineligible.)

The surprise nominee was “The Ghost Writer” among potential Oscar nominees “127 Hours,” “The Social Network,” “True Grit,” and “Winter’s Bone.”  It’s a nice boost for Roman Polanski’s movie, and it certainly gives it a blip on the awards radar.  But given how unofficial the award is, it’s probably unwise to look to much into it.

Besides, as I already said, it’s the year of Aaron Sorkin.  However, many people believe it to be practically an original screenplay as Sorkin finished his screenplay before Ben Mezrich finished his book, “The Accidental Billionaires.”  Mezrich sent Sorkin his notes and research while he was writing the book, and “The Social Network” is based on those – NOT the final book.  So perhaps as an adaptation, it’s not the kind of movie that could win this.

BAFTA longlists announced. The real nominations for the BAFTAs (the British version of the Oscars) aren’t announced until January 18, but for some strange reason, they choose to announce a field of 15 in each category that they will ultimately select their nominees from.

The result is ultimately a bunch of clutter not worth looking too much into.  ”The King’s Speech” and “Black Swan” led the long list with 15 mentions each.  Obviously the former, being such a prominent British title, stands a pretty good chance of taking the most nominations when the real ones are announced.

They did star the top five vote-getters in the preliminary rounds which do provide some interesting insight into their ultimate nominees.  So with that in mind, here are some highlights from the list so you don’t have to look at it yourself:

• “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo” made their Best Picture longlist.  (They didn’t star any nominees in the category.)
• Danny Boyle was one of the starred directors.  This is a good sign for Boyle, who seems to be slipping with his movie in the Best Director race.  If the British contingent is behind him, he could outmuscle the Coen Brothers for the final slot.
• Aaron Eckhart was longlisted for “Rabbit Hole” (personal favorite, sorry) as were both Leonardo DiCaprio performancesi in 2010.  Starred were the usual suspects Eisenberg, Firth, and Franco as well as Jeff Bridges and surprisingly Javier Bardem, who could use a boost right now other than an endorsement of “Biutiful” by Julia Roberts.
• Among likely Best Actress nominees Annette Bening, Natalie Portman, and Michelle Williams, starred selections included Carey Mulligan for “Never Let Me Go” and Julianne Moore for “The Kids Are All Right.”  This is big for the latter, who seems to be bullied out of the Best Actress category by her co-star Bening.
• Justin Timberlake was longlisted for “The Social Network,” but co-star Andrew Garfield was starred, along with favorites Bale, Rush, and Ruffalo.  Also starred was Bob Hoskins in the British movie “Made in Dagenham.”
• All three of the supporting females in “Black Swan” were on the longlist, including Winona Ryder.  Surprisingly, it was Barbara Hershey and not Mila Kunis who was starred.  (Fingers crossed Hershey could score an Oscar nod!)
• Melissa Leo, the apparent frontrunner in Best Supporting Actress for her role in “The Fighter,” was not starred.  Her co-star Amy Adams was starred, as was Miranda Richardson was starred for “Made in Dagenham.”
• Category fraud was seemingly corrected by placing Hailee Steinfeld in leading actress for “True Grit” and Lesley Manville in supporting actress for “Another Year.”
• Don’t trust them too much – “Alice in Wonderland” was listed as a potential Best Director and Best Actor nominee.

See the full longlists HERE at In Contention.

Technical guilds chime in. The Cinema Audio Society announced its five picks for Best Sound Mixing, which included “Black Swan,” “Inception,” “Shutter Island,” “The Social Network,” and “True Grit.”  Perhaps the most surprising nominee is “The Social Network,” which isn’t perceived as a big technical movie.  Yet if it continues to pick up nominations, it will prove how widely appealing the movie is – and make it that much more likely to win Best Picture.  The more nominations it can pick up, the better.

The Art Directors Guild recognized excellence in three categories as follows:

Period Film
“Get Low”
“The King’s Speech”
“Robin Hood”
“Shutter Island”
“True Grit”

Fantasy Film
“Alice in Wonderland”
“The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader”
“Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part I”
“Inception”
“TRON Legacy”

Contemporary Film
“Black Swan”
“The Fighter”
“127 Hours”
“The Social Network”
“The Town”

Again, it’s good for “The Social Network” that it picked up a mention.  But perhaps the movie most in need of technical guild support is “Inception,” which came up blank at the SAG Awards.  To take home Best Picture, it’s going to need to make a strong showing with these guilds.

“Shutter Island” showed up on both guild lists, setting it up as a dark horse Best Picture nominee.  I doubt it happens, but now it can’t be totally unforeseen.

Critics groups all but wrap up. In case you didn’t hear, “The Social Network” swept pretty much all of the critics groups in 2010.  It earned its status as “critical darling,” taking home Best Picture from just about everyone.  Here are those that dared to be different:

• Austin – “Black Swan”
• Central Ohio – “Inception”
• Dublin – “A Prophet”
• Phoenix – “The King’s Speech”
• San Diego – “Winter’s Bone”
• Utah – “127 Hours” (tied with “The Social Network”)

So as you can see, there was no clear second place movie for critics to “The Social Network.”  But someone with the time to calculate the results wrote that “Black Swan” took the second-most honors from critics groups.

The first phase of the Oscar race in 2010 is over, and “The Social Network” has clearly won.  But can it keep the lead?  Or will another movie come and steal awards from the BFCA, Golden Globes, or SAG?  Check back next week as phase two begins.