Day 1: Friday, March 10

Austin! Capital city of Texas, and one of the least Texas-y cities in the state, from what I’m told. You don’t hear as many Texas accents as you’d expect, nor see as many cowboy hats and giant belt buckles, nor witness as many lynchings and public hangings. Austin is becoming known as a hip, cool city, with a lot of young people and a vibrant music scene.

I am here to ignore all of that and watch movies, of course. The South by Southwest Film Festival (SXSW to you), celebrating its 13th year, has been lauded as a fresher, more fun version of Sundance. There are still sobering documentaries about transsexuals in prison and poor children without access to proper dental care and all the other social issues that populate much of Sundance’s slate. But SXSW also has premieres of movies like “V for Vendetta” and (in previous years) “Phone Booth” and “A Mighty Wind.” SXSW is almost as big as Sundance, but just a little less serious.

Today was the festival’s first day, with the first screenings at 6 p.m. Having arrived in town yesterday — the plane ticket was $100 cheaper that way, and even with the $40 I had to drop on a hotel last night, I was still saving money — I spent today checking in, getting my pass, and walking around downtown Austin. It was very warm (in the 80s) and more humid than the west-of-the-Rockies atmospheres I’m used to. I asked the cab driver on the way from the airport to the hotel yesterday if it was typically this warm this time of year and he said, “I wouldn’t say it’s typical, but it’s going to be. The whole world is heating up because of global warming.” That seemed like an odd way to respond to a casual question about the weather, so I didn’t talk to him anymore after that.

The main avenue running the length of downtown is Congress, with the Texas state capitol building at the top of it. Most of the SXSW movie venues are on or near this street, as are the other sorts of things you’d expect to find in a large city’s downtown area: hotels, offices, restaurants, amputees in wheelchairs wanting change, men asleep on bus stop benches, and so forth.

At the Scholtzsky’s Deli where I had lunch, there was a teenage boy wearing a black T-shirt that said “Water Valley Wildcats” on the front, presumably the name of his school’s sports team. On the back it said, “We pray before we play!!,” like that, with two exclamation marks. Because praying before you play is AWESOME!! I guess they skipped the part of the Bible where Jesus said not to go around bragging about how much you pray. That, or they’re a Muslim team, and all their games take place just after 5 p.m. But that seems unlikely, considering this is Texas.

HollywoodB****slap.com has a strong presence at SXSW this year. Scott Weinberg and Erik Childress are veterans (this is their fourth year); Laura Kyle is a student at University of Texas, so she’s nearby; Chris “Oz” Parry, another regular, will be here Monday; and making our SXSW debuts are myself and Florida’s own William Goss. Scott, Erik, Laura and Will were hanging out at the Austin Hilton when I found them, in the room reserved for Scott and Erik in which I would be camping.

We five went to dinner at some BBQ/beer place then split up. They all went to see “Thank You for Smoking” (which I’d already seen at Sundance), and I went back to the hotel room to watch a screener DVD of a movie called “S&Man.” It’s pronounced “Sandman” (get it?) and it’s allegedly a documentary about underground horror films, the particularly grisly and horrific ones shot on video and distributed within small circles of aficionados. I say “allegedly” because there are elements of the film that seem to be fictional, in a way that I think we’re supposed to catch. There’s a filmmaker interviewed whose manner is shifty and whose movies are a little TOO realistic. I haven’t quite made up my mind about “S&Man,” but I think I like what director JT Petty is doing.

Then I walked to the Paramount Theatre on Congress Avenue for the premiere of Robert Altman’s “A Prairie Home Companion.” Scott, Erik and Will were there, too, and we sat in the balcony of this beautiful, ornate theater for this rather amusing film. It’s set onstage and backstage at a performance of Garrison Keillor’s famed radio show, with Keillor playing himself and people like Meryl Streep and Lily Tomlin playing fictionalized versions of Keillor regulars. (If you saw Tomlin and Streep at the Oscars last week, seeming to be drunk, they weren’t. They were introducing Altman’s lifetime achievement award by doing a scene in the style of his movies. Although I guess they could have been drunk, too.) The movie’s a bit funnier than Keillor’s real radio show, which I don’t think is particularly funny at all. Maybe you have to be from the Midwest.

SXSW’s official opening night party, open to all press and passholders, was at a bar a few blocks away, so Erik, Scott and I headed over after the movie. Austin doesn’t allow smoking in bars, which was VERY nice, I don’t care what Scott says. We saw actor John C. Reilly (who has a hilarious supporting role in “Prairie Home Companion”) almost immediately. It was pretty cool that a celebrity was actually hanging out at the official SXSW party instead of some invitation-only soiree, and the fact that he left within 10 minutes of arriving didn’t lessen our esteem of him in any way.

A few minutes later, I spotted Kirby Dick, the documentarian behind “This Film Is Not Yet Rated,” which we enjoyed very much at Sundance and which is playing here, too. I went up to him, told him how much I admired his film, introduced myself, and chatted with him about the movie. He seemed distracted, though, and then he said, “Didn’t you write about the film for EFilmCritic?” I said a few of us had, including me. He said, “Are you the one who said I was gay? Because I’m not.” I told him I HAD thought he was gay, but that I didn’t think I had mentioned it in my discussion of the film, and that whoever did, I apologized on behalf of them.

Scott and Erik came up then and engaged him in conversation, and that’s when I realized: Holy crap, I DID say he was gay! I mentioned it as being the probable reason that he’d included a somewhat irrelevant scene in his movie: The scene dealt with gay rights, and since he’s gay himself, it made sense that he would feel sympathetic enough to include it even though it didn’t really fit. Except apparently he ISN’T gay. So now I don’t know why he used the scene.

The point is, I had made a huge mistake in something I’d written. Here I am, the guy who e-mails Roger Ebert when he makes an error of fact in his reviews (which is like three times a week, seriously), and I’d outed a gay who isn’t even gay. I was certain I had read it somewhere; somehow I “knew” it as a piece of background about him, the same way I know Schwarzenegger is from Austria or that Tom Cruise is a Scientologist. I would never double-check those facts, because I KNOW them. And somehow I had “Kirby Dick is gay” filed away as one of those facts, and it proved to be wrong.

By now we had moved away from Kirby Dick and were mingling in the party. We smelled marijuana, and I noticed several people’s noses in the air like bloodhounds, trying to determine where it was coming from. SXSW has a music festival going on, too, and if there’s a group of people who love pot more than film geeks, it’s music hipsters.

Having eventually enjoyed as much of the party as we could stand, we headed back out into the moist night. It was after midnight, but it was still in the 70s, and the humidity was intense. It was probably the moistest place I’ve ever been, except maybe for the womb. Kirby Dick was outside, so I hurried over and said, “After I talked to you, I realized it WAS me who said you were gay, and I’m sorry!” I explained myself and apologized some more and said I would fix the error online. He seemed more amused than offended — I doubt it’s the first time someone has thought he was gay; I’m just sayin’ — and we parted amiably.

East 6th Street in Austin (the numbered streets run east and west, with Congress as the divider between east and west addresses) is the equivalent of Park City’s Main Street during Sundance. Several blocks are barricaded to traffic, which is wise, because the street is lined with bars, clubs, restaurants, and hundreds of revelers. What’s more, unlike Park City, all these establishments are actually open after 10 p.m. We were able to buy slices of pizza on our way back to the hotel, where we collapsed for the night, Erik and Scott in their beds and me on the roll-away bed-like structure that had been brought up.

The hotel clerk had initially said we couldn’t have a roll-away bed because it was a “fire hazard,” but we dismissed this as the ravings of a lazy clerk, because seriously, “fire hazard” is everybody’s excuse for everything when they don’t feel like doing extra work. We talked to a higher-up and got the bed, only to discover it really is a fire hazard: The only place in the room where the bed will fit is immediately in front of the door. Which means if there’s a fire, Erik and Scott had better hope I stand the bed up on its side before I flee.

We have two letters to discuss in this installment of Eric’s Sack of Mail. First, a reader named Carl wrote in response to my review of “Madea’s Family Reunion,” which ends: “‘Madea’s Family Reunion’ is better than its predecessor, but only in the same way that the bomb on Nagasaki was better than the one on Hiroshima.” Carl writes:

While I’ve generally agreed with your movie reviews for the last seven years, this is the first time I’ve wondered enough about your choice of imagery to write an email. Specifically, I wonder how appropriate is the comparison of the two atomic bombs and two crappy movies? Seems like the death toll from the movies is smaller. It also seems like the mention of a nuclear bomb is a little strong for the average person; especially when it’s the only nuclear bomb ever used against another country. I just think it’s a little strong even as a joke. Of course, I did read your review of The Aristocrats so maybe I’m a little off the mark as to what makes a good joke. I don’t know for sure, I never majored in journalism or film, so maybe my thoughts on a choice of words doesn’t mean much.

The question of whether the mention of an atomic bomb in a joke is too much for the average person is a fair one. I can say that yours is the only e-mail I’ve gotten so far.

The thing about jokes is that everyone has an internal list of things that they consider off-limits — and everyone’s list is different. What offends one person might not bother someone else at all. That’s why I rely on my readers to let me know if they feel like I’ve crossed a line, and so I thank you for letting me know that for you, I did.

Next, Sara has a question about my review of “Tristram Shandy: A Cock and Bull Story” — specifically, the part at the end where I explain the film’s potentially objectionable content: “Rated R, a fair amount of harsh profanity, some strong (but comic and non-sensual) sexuality, brief nudity.” Sara says:

I’m curious as to what “some strong (but comic and non-sensual) sexuality” means. I get the “comic” part, but am a little fuzzy on “non-sensual sexuality.”

Well, it’s a man and his wife in bed, having marital relations under the covers, but no naked bits are visible, and it’s happening very mechanically and dully. It’s very obviously being done out of duty, with neither of them enjoying it. That makes it not only funny, but very non-sexy, in my book. I meant for “non-sensual” to suggest that there’s no way anyone would find it arousing or lascivious.

That’s all for this edition of Eric’s Sack of Mail. Keep those cards and letters coming!

If you haven’t yet seen this brief video (a commercial for a health-care company), I urge you to do so, because it is three kinds of hilarious.

“Injured. Injured bad.”

Furthermore, if you haven’t seen the “Simpsons” opening sequence re-created with live actors, you should also do that. It’s pretty impressive.

Live-action “Simpsons”

First of all, Jon Stewart was great. His jokes were consistently funny and smart, the pre-recorded bits were hilarious, and his responses to the evening’s events were all on the mark. He was everything a host should be: funny, charming, respectful of the Oscar legacy, but not too serious about it.

Now then. The huge shock of “Crash” winning Best Picture was the night’s only real surprise, but it was a doozy. “Brokeback Mountain” was a lock. The polls of Academy insiders and Hollywood types had everyone 100 percent sure it would win.

But when you look at the night, it makes sense. It’s not like “Brokeback” was sweeping the Oscars up until the end. It had lost Cinematography (which was a surprise), and it had lost its three acting nods (which wasn’t).

However, “Brokeback” HAD won Best Director. Best Picture and Best Director usually match up. Tonight’s split marks only the 21st time out of 78 that that’s happened. (It happened a lot more frequently in the early days of the Oscars, at a time when directors were still viewed mostly as studio employees rather than artists who put their own imprimatur on their work. During the period of 1968-1980, considered to be a golden age of great directors and great films, it happened only once.)

When all was said and done, “Brokeback” had three Oscars — which is also how many Best Picture “Crash” had. And “King Kong.” And “Memoirs of a Geisha,” which everyone HATED.

That’s right, folks. No sweeps at all. The most Oscars anything won was THREE, and four movies did it. That’s the smallest haul for the “big winner” of the night since 1949. A 56-year streak of the most-awarded film always having at least four wins, and tonight we broke it. (Five is the average “most wins” number.)

(This year really was a return to old-fashioned Hollywood, as they kept telling us. Before 1949, there were six separate years where nothing won more than three awards. In 1940, no film won more than two Oscars, and five films got that many. And the second year the Oscars were given out, for films from 1928-29 [they went August-July in those days], the awards were completely even in their distribution: Seven awards were given, and they each went to a different film.)

What this big distribution of awards says to me is that while there were many excellent films last year, there was nothing that jumped out as being the clear-cut most awesome blow-you-away best picture. I noticed that when I compiled my top 10 list. My top three or four films could have gone in any order, really.

Some big shut-outs this year. “Munich” had five nominations and got nothing. “Good Night, and Good Luck” had SIX and also got nothing.

All four acting awards were their films’ only wins, despite multiple nominations for each of them.

Thanks to my 11th-hour decision to change my prediction for Best Supporting Actor, I correctly guessed 16 out of 24 awards. (It would have been 15 if I’d stuck with Matt Dillon.) My friend Chris Clark, who beats me every year, got 21 — a truly impressive figure. He and I only differed in seven categories, and in six of those instances, he was right. (We both missed the pimp number winning Best Song. I mean, who saw THAT coming?)

In the 17 categories where our predictions were identical, we both missed two. We had “Brokeback” for Cinematography and Best Picture; it won neither. But I think everyone mis-called Best Picture, so I don’t feel too bad about it.

For the record, here is the list of winners:

Best Picture: “Crash”
Actor: Philip Seymour Hoffman, “Capote”
Actress: Reese Witherspoon, “Walk the Line”
Supporting Actor: George Clooney, “Syriana”
Supporting Actress: Rachel Weisz, “The Constant Gardener”
Director: Ang Lee, “Brokeback Mountain”
Foreign Film: “Tsotsi,” South Africa
Adapted Screenplay: “Brokeback Mountain”
Original Screenplay: “Crash”
Animated Feature Film: “Wallace & Gromit: The Curse of the Were-Rabbit”
Art Direction: “Memoirs of a Geisha”
Cinematography: “Memoirs of a Geisha”
Sound Mixing: “King Kong”
Sound Editing: “King Kong”
Original Score: “Brokeback Mountain”
Original Song: “It’s Hard out Here for a Pimp,” from “Hustle & Flow”
Costume Design: “Memoirs of a Geisha”
Documentary Feature: “March of the Penguins”
Documentary Short: “A Note of Triumph: The Golden Age of Norman Corwin”
Film Editing: “Crash”
Makeup: “The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe”
Animated Short: “The Moon and the Sun”
Live Action Short: “Six Shooter”
Visual Effects: “King Kong”

Here are my predictions for the Oscars, which commence live at 8 p.m. Eastern/5 p.m. Pacific this Sunday on ABC.

Best Picture:
Nominees: “Brokeback Mountain,” “Capote,” “Crash,” “Good Night, and Good Luck,” “Munich”
Should win: Except for “Crash,” of which I’m not a fan, I think all the nominees would make worthy winners. Forced to choose, however, I would go with “Brokeback Mountain,” which is a more resonant and haunting story than the others.
Will win: The film with the most nominations usually wins Best Picture, and despite some last-minute momentum from “Crash,” I believe it’s going to be a “Brokeback” night. (Take that as you will.)

Actor:
Nominees: Philip Seymour Hoffman, “Capote”; Terrence Howard, “Hustle & Flow”; Heath Ledger, “Brokeback Mountain”; Joaquin Phoenix, “Walk the Line”; David Strathairn, “Good Night, and Good Luck”
Should win: Strathairn, Ledger and Hoffman are all phenomenal, but I’d give my vote to Strathairn, perhaps because his work as a fearless journalist hits so close to home, being a craven pseudo-journalist myself.
Will win: One of the few almost-sure bets tonight is Hoffman. Ledger starred in the more famous film, but Hoffman’s performance was showier and more attention-grabbing. Plus, he’s been around longer and has racked up more honorable performances. This is Ledger’s first, because we’re not counting “10 Things I Hate About You.”

Actress:
Nominees: Judi Dench, “Mrs. Henderson Presents”; Felicity Huffman, “Transamerica”; Keira Knightley, “Pride & Prejudice”; Charlize Theron, “North Country”; Reese Witherspoon, “Walk the Line”
Should win: Felicity Huffman, no question. Her work in “Transamerica” is the very picture of honest, professional, emotional acting.
Will win: Unfortunately, “Transamerica” doesn’t have much support generally, and it’s not a great film. “Walk the Line,” on the other hand, has an actress everybody loves in a simple, mainstream story. The Oscar goes to Reese Witherspoon. (Nobody cares about “North Country”; Knightley should be stunned at even being nominated; and Judi Dench only got nominated because someone called the Academy and said, “Um, excuse me? Dame Judi Dench was in a movie, so … you’ll probably want to be nominating her, I guess?”)

Supporting Actor:
Nominees: George Clooney, “Syriana”; Matt Dillon, “Crash”; Paul Giamatti, “Cinderella Man”; Jake Gyllenhaal, “Brokeback Mountain”; William Hurt, “A History of Violence”
Should win: Of those five, I’d probably give it to Giamatti just so everyone can quit talking about how he keeps being overlooked.
Will win: Gyllenhaal is overshadowed by Ledger, Giamatti’s role isn’t meaty enough, and Hurt is only onscreen for 10 minutes and is goofy/weird for all of it. That leaves Dillon and Clooney. I was thinking Clooney would be skipped because he’s nominated in other categories, but as of Sunday afternoon, I’ve changed my mind no that. So now my prediction is a win for Clooney.

Supporting Actress:
Nominees: Amy Adams, “Junebug”; Catherine Keener, “Capote”; Frances McDormand, “North Country”; Rachel Weisz, “The Constant Gardener”; Michelle Williams, “Brokeback Mountain”
Should win: If you haven’t seen “Junebug,” I urge you to do so at once. Amy Adams is absolutely captivating. She gets my vote in a heartbeat.
Will win: Adams has a chance. This is a very unpredictable category, and often one that rewards performances in otherwise-unnominated movies. But the buzz seems to be for Weisz as the murdered wife seen in flashbacks throughout “The Constant Gardener.” So I predict Weisz.

Director:
Nominees: Ang Lee, “Brokeback Mountain”; Bennett Miller, “Capote”; Paul Haggis, “Crash”; George Clooney, “Good Night, and Good Luck”; Steven Spielberg, “Munich”
Should win: All are worthy, but Ang Lee is worthiest for making a story that can be summarized in two words — “gay cowboys” — feel so universal, powerful and dramatic.
Will win: The Oscar voters agree with me here, I can feel it. Haggis and Miller don’t stand a chance (too new), Spielberg’s film never got a strong enough following, and while Clooney may one day be respected as a director, this won’t be the year he starts winning. Look how long it took Opie.

Foreign Film:
Nominees: “Don’t Tell,” Italy; “Joyeux Noel,” France; “Paradise Now,” Palestine; “Sophie Scholl – The Final Days,” Germany; “Tsotsi,” South Africa.
Should win: I’ve only seen “Joyeux Noel” and “Tsotsi,” so I can’t really judge.
Will win: The buzz is for “Tsotsi,” a South African story about a gangster who kidnaps (and is tamed by) a baby. “Paradise Now” is the best film, by most accounts, but it’s too controversial to win, especially with Jewish groups protesting its nomination because Palestine isn’t officially a country, yada yada yada. If there’s an upset, it could be from “Sophie Scholl,” which is, after all, about the Holocaust.

Adapted Screenplay:
Nominees: Larry McMurtry & Diana Ossana, “Brokeback Mountain”; Dan Futterman, “Capote”; Jeffrey Caine, “The Constant Gardener”; Josh Olson, “A History of Violence”; Tony Kushner and Eric Roth, “Munich”
Should win: For me it’s a toss-up between “Brokeback Mountain” and “A History of Violence,” both of which are lean, efficient, exquisitely well-structured stories.
Will win: McMurtry and Ossana probably deserve an award for taking a sparse short story called “Brokeback Mountain” and working it into a beautiful full-length screenplay.

Original Screenplay:
Nominees: Paul Haggis & Bobby Moresco, “Crash”; George Clooney & Grant Heslov, “Good Night, and Good Luck”; Woody Allen, “Match Point”; Noah Baumbach, “The Squid and the Whale”; Stephen Gaghan, “Syriana”
Should win: “Match Point” is Woody Allen’s best script in, I don’t know, 15 years. Considering he writes about one a year, that’s pretty impressive.
Will win: “Crash” all the way. Voters want to reward this movie.

Animated Feature Film:
Nominees: “Howl’s Moving Castle,” “Tim Burton’s Corpse Bride,” “Wallace & Gromit: The Curse of the Were-Rabbit”
Should win: “Howl” and “Corpse Bride” have their charms, but come on. How can you not love — and I mean LOOOOVE — the Wallace & Gromit movie?
Will win: W&G earn the cheese.

Art Direction:
Nominees: “Good Night, and Good Luck,” “Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire,” “King Kong,” “Memoirs of a Geisha,” “Pride & Prejudice”
Should win: The others are great, but nothing matches the magical world of Harry Potter for imagination and detail.
Will win: I think this is where things start to look up for “King Kong,” which so many people wanted to love — before it came out, people thought it would be a major Oscar contender — and which certainly deserves SOME recognition.

Cinematography:
Nominees: “Batman Begins,” “Brokeback Mountain,” “Good Night, and Good Luck,” “Memoirs of a Geisha,” “The New World”
Should win: The landscapes of the West have seldom looked so beautiful as in “Brokeback Mountain.”
Will win: “Batman Begins” isn’t a serious contender amongst these prestige films, the black-and-white of “Good Night” is hard to appreciate, “The New World” has been entirely forgotten by every one living in the new world, and people hated “Memoirs.” That leaves everyone’s favorite: “Brokeback Mountain.”

Sound Mixing:
Nominees: “The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe,” “King Kong,” “Memoirs of a Geisha,” “Walk the Line,” “War of the Worlds”
Should win: The difference between this and Sound Editing is this: Sound Mixing is for the actual sounds actually recorded by the AV geeks on the set and in the lab afterward, while Sound Editing is for the way the sound effects and made-up sounds are combined with the dialogue and music. That said, the Sound Mixing award should go to “Walk the Line,” which seamlessly blends music and dialogue and makes them part of one musical story.
Will win: “Walk the Line” really is an Oscar kind of movie, and here’s another chance for the Academy to vote for it.

Sound Editing:
Nominees: “King Kong,” “Memoirs of a Geisha,” “War of the Worlds”
Should win: “King Kong,” for its many fictitious and frightening sound effects deployed so realistically.
Will win: “King Kong.”

Original Score:
Nominees: Gustavo Santaolalla, “Brokeback Mountain”; Alberto Iglesias, “The Constant Gardener”; John Williams, “Memoirs of a Geisha”; John Williams, “Munich”; Dario Marianelli, “Pride & Prejudice”
Should win: Having recently re-watched parts of “Pride & Prejudice,” I’m smitten again with Marianelli’s lush, romantic score.
Will win: John Williams cancels himself out, nobody remembers the music in “Constant Gardener,” and “Pride & Prejudice” ain’t goin’ nowhere. It’s a “Brokeback” night, remember?

Original Song:
Nominees: “In the Deep” from “Crash,” Kathleen ‘Bird’ York and Michael Becker; “It’s Hard Out Here for a Pimp” from “Hustle & Flow,” Jordan Houston, Cedric Coleman and Paul Beauregard; “Travelin’ Thru” from “Transamerica,” Dolly Parton
Should win: I have no particular feelings about any of these songs.
Will win: There isn’t enough overall love for “Transamerica,” so count Dolly out. And while “Hustle & Flow” is beloved, and while Eminem did win an Oscar for a rap song a few years ago, I really don’t think the Academy is quite ready to give an Oscar to a song called “It’s Hard Out Here for a Pimp.” That leaves “In the Deep,” from “Crash,” which is even more beloved.

Costume:
Nominees: “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory,” “Memoirs of a Geisha,” “Mrs. Henderson Presents,” “Pride & Prejudice,” “Walk the Line”
Should win: Just to be crazy, I’d vote for “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.” The costumes really are very whimsical.
Will win: It’s a tough one. Nobody’s going to vote for “Charlie” for anything, “Mrs. Henderson Presents” is more about the ABSENCE of costumes, and everyone hates “Geisha.” Considering all they had to do for “Walk the Line” was put people in clothes from the 1950s and ’60s — ooh, real hard — that’s probably what the Academy will vote for, the big sillies.

Documentary Feature:
Nominees: “Darwin’s Nightmare,” “Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room,” “March of the Penguins,” “Murderball,” “Street Fight”
Should win: “Murderball” is by far the strongest entry here.
Will win: On the rare occasions that a documentary does anything interesting at the box office, it usually portends Oscar victory, too. So bring on the penguins!

Documentary (short subject):
Nominees: “The Death of Kevin Carter: Casualty of the Bang Bang Club,” “God Sleeps in Rwanda,” “The Mushroom Club,” “A Note of Triumph: The Golden Age of Norman Corwin”
Should win: Haven’t seen ‘em.
Will win: Entertainment Weekly is calling for “The Death of Kevin Carter,” and who am I to argue with scripture?

Film Editing:
Nominees: “Cinderella Man,” “The Constant Gardener,” “Crash,” “Munich,” “Walk the Line”
Should win: “Munich” boasts some extraordinarily suspenseful scenes, and suspense is all about the editing.
Will win: “Crash” probably takes home the gold for interweaving its separate stories.

Makeup:
Nominees: “The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe,” “Cinderella Man,” “Star Wars Episode III: Revenge of the Sith”
Should win: Of these three boring choices, I guess it’s the “Chronic(what?)cles of Narnia.” (Seriously, “Cinderella Man”? What, for making a boxer’s eye look bruised? Geez!)
Will win: Yeah, “Narnia,” sure, why not.

Animated Short Film:
Nominees: “Badgered,” “The Moon and the Son: An Imagined Conversation,” “The Mysterious Geographic Explorations of Jasper Morello,” “9,” “One Man Band”
Should win: Haven’t seen ‘em.
Will win: “One Man Band” is from Pixar. Enough said.

Live Action Short Film:
Nominees: “Ausreisser (The Runaway),” “Cashback,” “The Last Farm,” “Our Time Is Up,” “Six Shooter”
Should win: Haven’t seen ‘em.
Will win: I’ll defer to scripture again: EW says “Ausreisser.”

Visual Effects:
Nominees: “The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe,” “King Kong,” “War of the Worlds”
Should win: For me, it’s down to “King Kong” and “War of the Worlds.” Both looked fantastic, but there are moments in “King Kong” that look fake. I don’t recall a single fake-looking shot in “War of the Worlds,” though, and that includes some very impressive long takes that required a lot of post-production to make them look right.
Will win: But nobody’s thinking about “War of the Worlds,” from way back in May. “King Kong” gets it.

For an alternate view, I refer you to my friend Chris Clark. He makes predictions every year, and every year he gets more right than I do — BUT JUST BARELY! Usually one or two. I’m confident, however, that this is the year I overtake him. Look at his picks anyway, though, if you want a second opinion. But I’m telling you: I’m right this time.