It’s that time of year, folks! The 97th Oscars are fast approaching and this year’s nominations have been released. Luckily for you, Courtney and Owen decided to give their much-anticipated two cents on this year’s nominees. Together, they will tell you everything that matters to better inform your Oscar betting ventures.
ON A SCALE OF 1-10, DO WE EVEN CARE ABOUT THE 2025 OSCARS?
Courtney VanAuken: In the grand scheme of Oscar seasons, this one offers me nothing special. After doing some deep, deep soul searching, I have decided that on a scale of 1-10, the degree to which I care about the 2025 Oscars is a four. Maybe I’ll care more as I get around to watching all of the Best Picture nominees and the nominated shorts. But for now, I feel very detached. It’s hard for the Oscars to surpass the hype I held for the 2020-2023 Oscars ceremonies. Scratch that. If Colman Domingo manages to walk away with the award for Best Actor, THAT would be exciting. In the meantime, though, I won’t be holding my breath.
Owen Noble: The films up for awards this year aren’t interesting. Where’s the novelty? I want “Megalopolis” to be nominated and to WIN. Not because it’s good or anything, but because it would be EXCITING. Throw in “Joker: Folie á Deux” for Best Actor, M. Night Shyamalan for Best Director, “It Ends with Us” for Best Adapted Screenplay — anything to keep these Oscars from being the most boring in years.
SNUBS:
CV: Let’s have a moment of silence to acknowledge the snubs of years past like Adam Sandler in “Uncut Gems” and “Iron Claw.” This year’s recency bias feels very high with movies like “Challengers,” which was released in April 2024 and received Oscar buzz upon release but received zero nominations. I understand that for competitive categories, it can be difficult to walk away with a nomination, but I thought at the very least “Challengers” would get one for Best Score. In the case of “Challengers,” I’m not mourning too heavily, because the featured actors will likely have long careers in Hollywood with many opportunities yet to come. One thing to celebrate is that “The Substance” has beaten the horror genre Oscar snub curse with five nominations in leading categories like Best Director, Best Actress, and Best Screenplay.
ON: Snubs make up most of my contempt for the Oscars this year. My top three movies this year didn’t receive any nominations: “I Saw the TV Glow,” “Monkey Man,” and “Saturday Night.” None of these would be traditional Oscar picks — an artsy low-budget film with transgender themes, a gory action film critiquing a very real foreign government, and last but not least, a comedy. Although I wasn’t expecting any of these to obtain nominations, it still hurts. In my opinion, “Oscar Bait” only leads to homogeneity, making the ceremony itself boring. If the “goal” of the Oscars is to celebrate a year in film, those celebrations should focus on innovations, boundary-pushing, and the weird.
BEST PICTURE PREDICTION:
CV: It’s not going to be “Anora.” Did I like “Anora”? I loved it. It won’t win though. This still leaves nine films in the category. Have I seen all of the nominated films yet? No. As of now, I am sitting at a solid four out of ten watched so far. Based on those odds, I’m going to go with my gut and select two movies that I think will be the front runners for the award this year. I haven’t seen “Conclave” yet, but everything about this film says “give me an Oscar, puh-LEEESEEE!” Stanley Tucci? Popes? That’s the recipe for an Oscar-bait film. My second pick for Best Picture frontrunner is “The Brutalist.” Despite conversations on AI use and the backlash that has gotten recently, that will have more of an impact on Adrien Brody’s chances of winning an award for his performance than it will on “The Brutalist” sweeping in every other category, Best Picture included.
ON: “A Complete Unknown,” despite most likely influencing a generation of artsy white guys such as myself, will probably not win. Biopics often feature a very different kind of acting, where the line between impressionistic and dramatic performance is blurred. As far as biopics go, “A Complete Unknown” is… just okay. Moving right along, we have “Emilia Pérez,” a film that has garnered much controversy. Critics of the film have labeled it an inaccurate portrayal of the transgender experience, a debasement of Mexican culture, and, worst of all, mid. For the sake of transparency, I have not seen this one, but existing on the internet has me convinced that this movie winning would be a massive upset. Finally, “Wicked,” a film I did like, probably won’t win. For starters, it’s only the first part of a larger story. On top of that, the Academy seems to be biased against musicals. Even then, if it still had a chance, it’s an adaptation, putting the nails in the proverbial coffin that is being an Oscar-nominated box office darling.
BEST ANIMATED FEATURE:
CV: We feel the same way about the category of Best Animated Feature. It has to be “Wallace and Gromit: Vengeance Most Foul.” The movie explores automation and AI through the venue of stop-motion animation (which involves such tedious and meticulously executed artisanship that will leave it as one of the media practices least likely to be put out by AI). Not only is the messaging elevated by the venue in which it is being communicated, but the movie is also a hoot and a half. Gromit is my darling, darling, beautiful boy. You can tell how much thought and care was put into this film in the scene where Gromit is in his bedroom reading “A Room of One’s Own” by Virginia “Woof” and you catch a glimpse of Gromit’s record collection (yes, Gromit collects records), which includes the album “Walkies on The Wild Side” by “Roo Lead.”
ON: Feathers McGraw gives a performance in “Vengeance Most Foul” that would make Scorsese cry. So much emotion, or lack thereof, is conveyed through his eyes, and it’s incredible. I have no doubts that the School of Drama will use this film as a masterclass for years to come. It’s so incredible that we exist in the same era as such an icon, nay, genius, as McGraw.
