It's the start of a new year, which has always meant one thing more than anything else - it is time for me to predict the Oscars in all their cinematic and statistical glory. Since I became obsessed with movies, the Oscars - also known as the Academy Awards - have been my Super Bowl.
Even if my team (read: my favorite movie) doesn't make the playoffs, as a lover of the sport, I am obliged to watch and comment - and yes, predict - this culmination of the year in film. Last year, I achieved new heights in my fascination with the Academy, closely tracking the successes and failures of my favorite films of the year: among them, Oscar favorites Everything Everywhere All at Once, The Banshees of Inisherin, and All Quiet on the Western Front.
Though it might be hard to top the sheer elation I felt getting up at 5:00 in the morning last year and watching the cataclysmic snubs and surprises of the Oscar nominations, my accuracy leaves a little bit to be desired - a mere 80% - and so this year, I look to improve. And yes, you heard me correctly, I'm just predicting the nominations for now; don't believe anyone, even the most trustworthy pundit, if they tell you they can predict Oscar winners three months in advance.
And speaking of Oscar pundits, my 80% on nomination morning still far outperformed outlets like Variety, The Hollywood Reporter, and even the brilliant YouTube channel The Oscar Expert… so don't click away just yet! Let's review the seven major Oscar categories, discussing the season's precursor awards and their impact on our final field of nominees.
Okay, I lied. There are eight major Oscar categories. I'm just combining Original and Adapted Screenplay for the sake of time.
Many precursor awards, including most independent critics' circles and the Golden Globes, only have a single screenplay category, meaning it's prudent to think about the field as a singular batch of a dozen or so films split into two groups. The batch of films looking to garner acclaim in Screenplay are mostly identical to hopefuls in Best Picture, so don't look for detailed explanations of their plot until then.
Leading the charge in the Original Screenplay, somewhat narrowly, is The Holdovers, a dramedy about a lovingly grumpy professor (Paul Giamatti) and the student he must watch during winter break. It was noted as a festival crowd-pleaser in my article about 2023's film festivals and the films to watch. The Holdovers is joined by an exploration of nostalgic relationships and the immigrant experience in Sundance's Past Lives and the courtroom drama Anatomy of a Fall, which recently had a major win at the Golden Globes in this category, which makes me think it looks like strong competition.
Past Lives also has a Golden Globe nomination for Screenplay, which Holdovers cannot claim, having an altogether weaker Globes performance than the other two. Regarding critics circles, however, all three movies seem incredibly strong for the Original Screenplay nomination. May-December seems like a fair bet for a fourth slot.
It is a melodramatic story about a couple with a dramatic (formerly criminal) age disparity. It is visited by an actress wishing to portray their lives, which have been successful with critics. This category has been sparse since Barbie moved to the Adapted category. Still, Leonard Bernstein's biopic Maestro has the buzz elsewhere - and the witty dialogue - to bump it into the category as the final slot.
Adapted Screenplay didn't have an actual frontrunner until the news dropped that Barbie was being ruled as Adapted by the Academy - that film is now a strong favorite to win here. Fantastical black comedy Poor Things, nuclear biography Oppenheimer, and Scorsese-helmed crime drama Killers of the Flower Moon likewise received Golden Globe nominations.
It can basically lock in their Oscar nods now, seeing as they legitimately have no conceivable way of missing. Racial satire American Fiction, similar to Holdovers, is a well-liked festival dramedy that seems very strong with critics in Screenplay but likely just missed out on a Globes mention.
The sixth slot in both categories is a moot point, seeing as these five are very solid Best Picture contenders, but before the Barbie ruling, acclaimed indie romance All of Us Strangers and experimental Holocaust film The Zone of Interest have popped up in this category multiple times in the absence of our favorite record-breaking doll. I would bet my life savings that neither of these films will make the final Adapted Screenplay Five, seeing as the one I'm predicting is rock solid.
The opposite is true in Original, which is so weak that films could squeeze in the category as their only nomination, among them the controversial thriller Saltburn and the inspirational Nike story Air.
The predictions in the Original:
Anatomy of a Fall - Justine Triet and Arthur Harari
The Holdovers - David Hemingson
Maestro - Bradley Cooper and Josh Singer
May December - Samy Burch
Past Lives - Celine Song
Alternatives: Air - Alex Convery; Saltburn - Emerald Fennell
The predictions in Adapted:
American Fiction - Cord Jefferson
Barbie - Greta Gerwig and Noah Baumbach
Killers of the Flower Moon - Eric Roth and Martin Scorsese
Oppenheimer - Christopher Nolan
Poor Things - Tony McNamara
Alternatives: All of Us Strangers - Andrew Haigh; The Zone of Interest - Jonathan Glazer
Best Supporting Actor
Usually, the Supporting categories are a lot of fun to predict. But this year, I'm a man on a mission. Last year, I guessed a mere 3 out of 5 in Best Supporting Actor, an abysmal result for anyone looking to improve beyond 80%.
The task is not easy this year, with many talented performers vying for just five slots. Two really safe bets are names you've probably heard - Ryan Gosling in Barbie and Robert Downey Jr in Oppenheimer. Gosling and Downey, who play Ken and Lewis Strauss, respectively, are crucial to their films, providing foils to their titular protagonists, and haven't missed a major award yet.
Early in the season, there were doubts about whether the veteran actor Robert De Niro could pull off a nomination for Best Supporting Actor, but my money is that he will in this field. Killers of the Flower Moon has proved to be a major contender across the board, and in a complicated race like Best Supporting Actor, De Niro seems like too much of a respected name not to be awarded for his nuanced portrayal of the truly despicable crime boss William "King" Hale.
It could go many ways, however, since the bulk of Flower Moon's acting hype has gone to the Actress category, so I'm just crossing my fingers.
After that, things get really tricky. Charles Melton, whose sensitive turn as Joe in May December is arguably the best supporting performance of the year, has looked very unsafe ever since his movie began to show signs of weakness with awards groups; Melton is missing precursors like BAFTA (British Academy) and SAG (Screen Actors' Guild). But Melton injects this wounded, stilted soul into his character that makes his performance unforgettable, and he's received enough attention elsewhere that I have him being nominated.
Though surgical sibling Sterling K. Brown in American Fiction has been present since his appearances at Critics Choice and SAG, the fifth slot in my mind is a race between Mark Ruffalo and Willem Dafoe, both for Poor Things. Both could easily fit in the lineup without Charles Melton or Robert De Niro here, making this race so challenging.
Still, since Willem Dafoe's leapfrogging Ruffalo at SAG, I have considered the same thing happening at the Oscars. There is precedent for such a thing happening between two actors in the same film - it happened twice in 2021 with Belfast and once last year with The Fabelmans.
The situation with those two was much of the same. The names heard most often all season long were Jamie Dornan, Caitriona Balfe, and Paul Dano. Mark Ruffalo's scene-stealing performance in Poor Things as a mustache-twirling, foppish fool has been the equivalent of these three, a comparatively younger actor playing a role with more screen time.
Willem Dafoe, on the other hand, is more akin to the three actors that replaced those who I just mentioned: Ciáran Hinds, Judi Dench, and Judd Hirsch - a veteran portraying an older, endearing figure. This is by far one of the most difficult and surprising predictions I have ever had to make.
Ryan Gosling, Barbie
Robert De Niro, Killers of the Flower Moon
Charles Melton, May December
Robert Downey Jr, Oppenheimer
Willem Dafoe, Poor Things
Alternatives: Sterling K. Brown, American Fiction; Mark Ruffalo, Poor Things
Best Supporting Actress
The fun doesn't stop there because I could easily be wrong about Supporting Actress, too. I'll tell you one thing for certain: Da'Vine Joy Randolph in The Holdovers is winning.
She plays a mourning mother of a student killed serving in Vietnam, who joins Giamatti and Sessa in their Christmas exploits due to her position as the school's cook. Randolph is guaranteed the Oscar due to her stellar performance at every single awards body, boasting over two dozen wins at critics circles in addition to her wins at the Golden Globes and Critics Choice; I told you not to trust win predictions this early, but you can trust this one.
Though the lack of victories for other actresses has made it difficult to sense genuine strength in the remainder of the field, it seems like a good bet to predict Emily Blunt in Oppenheimer for her portrayal of the nuclear physicist's wife, seeing as the movie is an awards juggernaut and she hasn't missed many nominations. Once an across-the-board contender, the Color Purple has dwindled in terms of possible nominations to just its standout performance, Danielle Brooks, who still looks to continue her streak as the film's only recognition.
Like in Supporting Actor, the final two slots are genuine tossups. Jodie Foster in the marathon swimming biopic Nyad, who plays the titular character's (Annette Bening) coach, has happened everywhere. But Nyad has been widely criticized for its unexciting storytelling, making her a very unsteady prediction and downright unthinkable for some pundits. I am reminded, however, of another similar supporting performance, Glenn Close's in Hillbilly Elegy, which showed up as a nominee everywhere despite the film's poor reception.
Julianne Moore, though not as lauded as Melton, plays the most recognizable character of the film's trio in May and December, and how she depicts her actions and motivations will be hard to ignore. But I cannot let my love for the film get the better of me a third time, and I choose to break my streak of predicting uncertain nominations for the film here.
Instead, America Ferrera in Barbie may be next in line. This category, though seemingly very crowded, is only that way due to a general weakness in terms of the lack of actresses who appear in Best Picture contenders - Ferrera, with her compelling speech about feminism, appears in one of those said contenders.
For similar reasons, Sandra Hüller in The Zone of Interest may appear, as that film looks like a probable Best Picture nominee, and that performance has shown strength at international bodies. Since Hüller is certainly being nominated for a different performance (see Best Actress), the double nod would be strange but not unheard of - in 2019, Scarlett Johansson received nominations in Actress for Marriage Story and Supporting for Jojo Rabbit.
Don't think Hüller is the remaining contender, either: take your pick from Rosamund Pike in Saltburn (Golden Globe and Critics Choice nominated) or Penelope Cruz in Ferrari (SAG nominated) if you don't like my selection.
America Ferrera, Barbie
Danielle Brooks, The Color Purple
Da'Vine Joy Randolph, The Holdovers
Jodie Foster, Nyad
Emily Blunt, Oppenheimer
Alternatives: Julianne Moore, May December; Sandra Hüller, The Zone of Interest
Let's take a brief hiatus from the arduous job of predicting acting nominations - an absolutely dreadful business that only the asylum-worthy like me would fully commit to - to predict a category that even your complete beginner is capable of somewhat grasping: Best Director. Director lineups usually have three season-long locks from the year's top technical and cinematic achievements, along with a slot determined mostly by major precursors, rounded out by a BAFTA-selected "prestige" pick that usually hails from Cannes. This year fits that to a tee.
Our three ladies and gentlemen's locks could mostly be discerned by a chimpanzee, albeit one familiar with 2023 in cinema. Christopher Nolan's Oppenheimer, Martin Scorsese's Killers of the Flower Moon, and Yorgos Lanthimos' Poor Things are the year's three biggest achievements in terms of scope and sheer weight and three well-established auteurs that have each made their mark not only on the year but on filmmaking history with each of their newest projects. Nolan is almost certainly the frontrunner, but these two will give him an engrossing fight all season long.
But those of you who prefer Barbie to Oppenheimer need not be afraid, for even though the latter is almost certainly a safer choice, Greta Gerwig's direction for Barbie still seems like the populist option that the Oscars would typically embrace. Barbie, of course, is just as big of a Picture contender as the aforementioned trio of films. Though its direction is not quite as baity, the film is stylized enough for Gerwig to be heavily in the conversation.
My confidence in a nomination for Gerwig is not matched in the general awards community. However, many believe she does not match this branch's taste, and I predict she opposes that sentiment.
The other options this wing of fellow Oscar amateurs have posited include Past Lives, directed by Celine Song, and the oft-mentioned Holdovers, directed by Alexander Payne. Past Lives, like Barbie, is stylized but has mostly found acclaim with its script, whereas The Holdovers has a bit more strength in its Critics Choice and DGA nods that show some love for Payne's period work.
I think both of them, especially Payne, stand a chance, but Gerwig is by far the biggest name. It would be a concern to witness an all-male director lineup in a year where Barbie grossed more money than any other film, but that could be the headline.
As for the artsy international festival pick, which has consistently proven to be a staple at the Oscars' Director lineup in the past five years - I'll spare you the list - it is fairly simple this year. Jonathan Glazer has earned endless acclaim for his direction in The Zone of Interest, said to be immaculately genre-bending, a cold and chilling look at the apathy of evil that promises to be one of the most unforgettable pieces of filmmaking of the year.
Glazer's acclaim out of Cannes fits the bill perfectly, and only fellow Cannes contender Anatomy of a Fall (director Justine Triet) can topple him. However, this seems unlikely due to the nature of the respective films.
Greta Gerwig, Barbie
Martin Scorsese, Killers of the Flower Moon
Christopher Nolan, Oppenheimer
Yorgos Lanthimos, Poor Things
Jonathan Glazer, The Zone of Interest
Alternatives: Alexander Payne, The Holdovers; Celine Song, Past Lives
And we're back to acting with Lead Actor, or just Actor if you're not in the mood for redundancies - "Supporting" is merely an adjunct qualifier, I've had this argument - and I, for one, am not in that mood. Best Actor is jam-packed with contenders, a consistently performing five that would seem borderline locked in if not for the actors vying to displace it. The conversation here for who will win is far more interesting than the nomination discussion. Still, I promised to only briefly mention my musings in that regard - a different, future article would be far more accurate.
Cillian Murphy and Bradley Cooper's eponymous performances in Oppenheimer and Maestro, respectively, are among the men in contention for the win; there is no doubt in the slightest that they will be nominated. Murphy's haunted, intellectual portrayal is probably the most publicly well-known and just won the Golden Globe, showing unexpected weakness for Cooper. But there is still time for the more conventional performance to come out on top.
In contrast, Murphy is grim and traumatized. Cooper is sweepingly emotional, covered in makeup, and Maestro's filmmaker to boot.
Joining these two is Paul Giamatti in The Holdovers, a surprise contender to steal both men's Oscars after his successive wins at the Globes (in Comedy) and, more surprisingly, at the Critics Choice (over Murphy). My bet is still on Murphy, but Giamatti is the face of one of this article's most often talked-about films, grouchy and heartwarming in all the right ways. Another surefire nomination is Jeffrey Wright in American Fiction, whose frustrated, hypocritical depiction of Fiction's leading man seems to have hit all the right notes.
This year's pattern seems to be an open fifth slot that anybody could take, but Leonardo DiCaprio seems a likely contender in the Best Actor race for his performance in Killers of the Flower Moon. There was always some concern that he and De Niro would be overshadowed by Lily Gladstone's stunning, emotional, star-making performance (scroll for more hyperbole about Gladstone) as the greedy antagonists the movie is trying to condemn, and this has proven true for DiCaprio at SAG, where he missed for Colman Domingo in Rustin, star of the titular civil rights biopic.
Though both of these men still have widespread support and give excellent performances that have been widely awarded, I am going to have to take another wild swing here to justify the very real weaknesses I see with both DiCaprio and Domingo, the latter of which has gotten everything he needs, but has one of the most obscure and forgettable films to his name of any acting contender this year. Instead, Andrew Scott in All of Us Strangers is a performance that could simply slide into a crowded category.
This more high-brow pick stems from recognition at the Golden Globes and BAFTA, akin to Paul Mescal in Aftersun last year.
Andrew Scott, All of Us Strangers
Jeffrey Wright, American Fiction
Paul Giamatti, The Holdovers
Bradley Cooper, Maestro
Cillian Murphy, Oppenheimer
Alternatives: Leonardo DiCaprio, Killers of the Flower Moon; Colman Domingo, Rustin
If you're bored at this point, don't worry because things are about to get exciting. If there's any category that can compete with Best Picture in terms of predictive entertainment value, it's Best Actress. The category is typically full to bursting, with last year seeing at least eight serious contenders for the nomination and a subsequent hubbub on nomination morning over just who got the nod. Though I won't be predicting anything genuinely random - as occurred last year, it's a long story - there's still plenty of fun to be had here.
The frontrunner status more or less boils down to two women, Lily Gladstone in Killers of the Flower Moon and Emma Stone in Poor Things. Though it's debatable if Gladstone is a lead in Killers, Apple has campaigned her as such, and ever since, she has been at the forefront of the category. I would consider Gladstone supporting, but I would also consider her breakout performance as one of the decade's most sensational displays of acting.
This soft and stern portrayal effortlessly conveys the film's tragedy. Gladstone won the Golden Globes and has a compelling narrative as the potential first indigenous woman ever to win an Oscar.
Her competition with Emma Stone as the wide-eyed and expressive Bella Baxter, who has garnered effusive praise, will be fascinating to watch. Stone already has an Oscar for La La Land and is solidly in the race. Though she trails Gladstone narrowly in critical recognition, her wins at Critics Choice and the Globes put her in an identical position to Giamatti.
Unlike him, she gives a showier performance than her competitor. Stone is my personal favorite in the category for her hilarious and awe-inspiring exhibition of infantile learning and growth. It was a brilliant performance among the best of all time for me, and I would like to see her win. Think she has the chops too.
Stone and Gladstone are the extent of the race for the Best Actress Oscar, but the nomination is what we're predicting here. Though not having the most stellar critics performance, Carey Mulligan's performance in Maestro is a heartwarming turn that ranks among Mulligan's best - and showiest - performances. Deserving of more recognition, though unfortunately in a category with two juggernauts, is Anatomy of a Fall's stunning, ambiguous Sandra Hüller, whose layered and multi-dimensional performance in the legal battle of Anatomy is astounding.
The fifth slot is really quite easy for me. Margot Robbie in Barbie has absolutely no reason to miss the nomination. She has campaigned for the film more than anybody else, except for maybe its writer and Director, Greta Gerwig.
She has become one of the most recognizable movie stars in Hollywood overnight - and she was already famous, a two-time nominee for I, Tonya, and Bombshell. I cannot, in good conscience, see her missing. However, Greta Lee is often hailed as the highlight of the successful Past Lives, and if that film is as strong as it seems to be, she could replace somebody… I'm just not sure who.
Sandra Hüller, Anatomy of a Fall
Margot Robbie, Barbie
Lily Gladstone, Killers of the Flower Moon
Carey Mulligan, Maestro
Emma Stone, Poor Things
Alternatives: Annette Bening, Nyad; Greta Lee, Past Lives
Alright, here's what you've been waiting for. Or maybe you just scrolled down to the Picture predictions as soon as you realized how much I would ramble about the other categories. The thing is, Best Picture is highly dependent on what nominations its films get elsewhere, even in categories too unimportant to discuss in a breezy article such as this one.
This is only the third year that the Academy has had a required ten nominees in Best Picture, instead of the fluctuating eight or nine that was typical when I began predicting the Oscars. Luckily, the expanded lineup makes things much, much more interesting.
Perhaps no film can be a more obvious inclusion than Barbie, the more popular half of a double feature sensation that swept the nation - and the world - this summer, becoming the highest-grossing original film in years and earning enormous acclaim from impressed critics and audiences. While Barbie is a bit of an unconventional Oscar contender, the same feminist commentary orchestrated by Greta Gerwig that led to its monumental cultural impact has likewise impressed both critics and the industry.
Gerwig's vision landed a record-breaking 18 Critics Choice nominations recently, which becomes mind-shattering when you realize the previous record holder was last year's Best Picture winner, Everything Everywhere All at Once, at 14. It doesn't seem a stretch to say Barbie could score upwards of a dozen nominations and even position itself for a (admittedly long-shot) victory in Best Picture.
Barbie's dreams of a win may be limited. However, when you introduce the other side of the Barbenheimer craze, Christopher Nolan's pivotal biography of a tragic, Prometheus-like figure, J. Robert Oppenheimer.
Oppenheimer is one of my favorite films of all time, but beyond my own hype for it, it seems to have taken the world by storm. Its tale of frightening nuclear annihilation, whether by meme (which Oppenheimer's images are fond of doubling as) or by genuine name recognition on the part of Nolan, the R-rated prestige drama managed to pull off a unique box office performance, dwarfed by Barbie yet in many ways more impressive. As a thrilling historical drama poised to take multiple trophies home, who's to say one of them won't be Best Picture?
It's easy to call Barbie and Oppenheimer the Oscar frontrunners. Still, one has to remember that the Academy isn't necessarily in lock-step with the general populace and that, in general, movie lovers are a different bunch than regular people. While I would tentatively label those two as the top contenders for the win, Scorsese's Killers of the Flower Moon has been the most likely nominee since it was announced two years ago.
It has shortcomings regarding the representation of the Osage people, who are the titular "Flower Moon" that get killed. Is it a spoiler to say killed? It's in the title - by white men for their wealth. However, those shortcomings have not been widely acknowledged by many people besides the Osage themselves, as evidenced by its status as the frontrunner for critics groups at the moment.
Though its addition to the Best Picture race has been comparatively recent compared to the aforementioned three, only slotted in after its stellar reception at fall festivals, the debaucherous and off-kilter Poor Things is undoubtedly the final film in contention for the win. Some would say it has the most legitimate shot at beating Oppenheimer, a scenario which I delight in, seeing as Poor Things would also be my personal runner-up to Oppenheimer in this race. The film is certifiably insane, following a reanimated (as in, she's an adult who has the brain of a baby) woman named Bella Baxter who goes on a philosophical and romantic discovery journey.
The film may be too silly and strange to win Best Picture, but that didn't stop Everything Everywhere All at Once. If Poor Things can pick up steam, it might be unstoppable.
Though I don't find the somewhat prevalent consideration of The Holdovers as a potential Best Picture winner credible, its nomination is all but assured. The heartwarming antics of Holdovers have seemingly infected all who have seen it, a clear victim of the "they don't make movies like they used to" treatment, seeing as the film openly aims to capture the 1970s holiday movie aesthetic and explore genuinely intimate character dynamics rather than tackle any broader theme.
The Screenplay's tactile nature and the cast's nature have cemented the film as an undeniable staple of the awards conversation. Ultimately, its scale is far too small to win Best Picture in the current era of the Academy, but I will not be surprised if the film does extremely well otherwise.
After these five, I'm still rather confident in my picks for Best Picture. They seem widely predicted and generally have all it takes to become a nominee, especially American Fiction and Maestro. Both are major Best Actor contenders who have succeeded at festivals and hailed as obvious "Oscar bait" movies.
American Fiction has excellent critics' reviews, hailed as a marvelous satire tackling racial themes in a witty way. A general rule of thumb is to keep films with safe Lead Acting, and Screenplay nods in your lineup. Maestro may not have the stellar critical reception that Fiction does, but its audience score is up to snuff, and the black-and-white Leonard Bernstein biopic will almost certainly resonate with the Academy, regardless of pretense.
And then there's Past Lives, a film that feels very safe in the Best Picture race but is sometimes hard to justify to an outsider. The film's acclaim is boundless, and it refuses to miss any notable critic groups and claims safe positions at the Golden Globes and Critics Choice. It seems so deep in the ten due to its success in Picture and Screenplay that I am very fond of my choice to predict it.
The one issue is my lack of willingness to add Greta Lee and Celine Song to my Best Actress and Best Director predictions, respectively. I explained why up above, but to me, they feel like coattails in crowded categories. Films have gotten only Picture and Screenplay before - it happened just last year with Women Talking - but it still feels just a tiny bit risky. Only time will tell.
The last two slots are a little trickier. I've not gotten Best Picture 100% accurate for three years, so the pressure is really on here. A film I find to look very strong right now is Justine Triet's Anatomy of a Fall, one of my favorites of the year, a courtroom drama about a woman on trial for the alleged murder of her husband.
The titular fall refers both to the husband's death and their deteriorating relationship before it. The film's strong international performance at the Golden Globes makes me think it seems like an excellent candidate, but I hope I am not letting my bias intervene. Anatomy of a Fall is the type of movie that would be entirely safe for Best Picture if it was American rather than a half-English, half-French Cannes contender, so missing it would be a sad sight.
A crucial pit stop for Anatomy and another fellow international contender, The Zone of Interest, Glazer's avant-garde Holocaust horror film was the British Academy (BAFTA), where both garnered enormous success. European audiences have adored both films, and the BAFTA is generally a good signifier of which international films will break into the Oscar race. Glazer looks solid as Director due to the recurring Cannes stat, while Triet's Screenplay nod at the Globes is also a strong sign.
I have minor doubts that both will get Best Picture - two critically acclaimed foreign language films are too good to be true - but both seem equally strong at the moment, and I will not discard either from my predictions. Anatomy and Zone are fierce competitors, but I choose optimism here, looking at BAFTA's embracing of both.
Another reason to predict the pair is the lack of good replacements. The Color Purple was the popular choice before the Golden Globes. Still, a bombastic musical missing the category reserved for musicals probably isn't a good sign, and the film has slipped quickly in categories that aren't Supporting Actress, where Danielle Brooks has hung on.
Its miss at PGA truly sealed its fate. If you don't like the ten films I'm predicting, I don't know what to tell you. Short of a massive shocker for Origin, a strange grassroots contender that has popped up in my feed recently, I feel safe predicting this ten - and safety is never a good feeling when it comes to predicting the Oscar nominations.
In conclusion, the Oscar nominations are a mysterious, often shocking, scary, yet incredibly exciting ceremony for me. Though I'm aware my fascination with prying predictions out of shaky identifications of luck and cinematic strength is bizarre, I hope that my predictions will finally be perfect this year and that you enjoyed my analyses of the major races.
They say enthusiasm is infectious, and there's so much to be enthusiastic about when it comes to discussing the best films of 2023. From the Barbenheimer sensation to the excitingly quirky Haynes, Glazer, and Lanthimos projects to the typical yet consistently remarkable Oscar mainstays such as Scorsese and Payne, I hope this year's batch of filmmakers get just as much happy - and expected - recognition by their peers as they deserve.