OFF THE CARPET: Handicapping 2009 a year in advance!?

Ahh.  The dust is settling.  And on the horizon, just visible through the mist and waiting to drive us all up the wall once again: the 2009 Oscar season.

I’ve been writing this year-in-advance column for probably six years now, and I always look forward to gazing ahead.  No one dives in so pathetically deep this far out as yours truly, but in exchange for not having a life for the past few months, I get to unload this burden the day after our annual season’s peak and forget about little gold men entirely for a few months.

It’s quite liberating.

The most interesting thing about the season to come, from my vantage point, is the lack of a dreaded “frontrunner status” for any of the contenders.  Some might say Clint Eastwood’s Nelson Mandela project (which is not called “The Human Factor,” mind you — the director says the film is currently untitled and is based on John Carlin’s book “Playing the Enemy”).

Others might say Rob Marshall’s “Nine” (coming from a money-tight company hoping to avoid echoes of “Memoirs of a Geisha”).  But I don’t see a “Geisha” from here, or a “Charlie Wilson’s War,” expected heavies waiting to miss the mark.  The field is curiously flat, and as a result, excitingly broad.

Let’s get to it, shall we?

It seems to me the most film-heavy slate of films will be over on Lankershim Boulevard as Universal Pictures has at least seven contenders that could make a play.  While the populism of Judd Apatow’s “Funny People” or Kevin MacDonald’s “State of Play” may or may not register with Academy members, Richard Curtis’s “The Boat That Rocked” or a currently untitled Nancy Meyers project starring Meryl Streep and Alec Baldwin could sneak up on the awards watching community.

A wise betting man would keep his eyes on Michael Mann’s “Public Enemies” and Paul Greengrass’s “Green Zone,” and what a delight that should be for Uni publicity.  These are two of the most exciting filmmakers working today.  The former has the most AMPAS appeal by all accounts, but the studio led Greengrass to Oscar pastures for 2006’s “United 93,” so watch out for his latest Matt Damon starrer.

Add Focus Features’ quartet of hopefuls and you’re looking at a dozen hopefuls under GE’s belt.  Who needs DreamWorks?  Most fetching of all would have to be Ang Lee’s “Taking Woodstock,” scripted by Focus honcho James Schamus and a period vehicle that could be awards bait for a studio looking to capitalize after a good run with “Milk” last season.

Meanwhile, Sam Mendes switches gears from the heart-wrenching drama of “Revolutionary Road” to the lighter fare of “Away We Go,” a comedy starring “The Office”‘s John Krasinski and “Saturday Night Live” alumn Maya Rudolph.  Alejandro González Iñárritu will be back in the fray three years after “Babel” with “Biutiful,” starring Javier Bardem and Rubén Ochandiano.

Finally, the Coen brothers are sticking with comedy with “A Serious Man,” which could be a sudden awards vehicle for character actor Richard Kind.  What’s most interesting about the Focus lineup, however, is that the studio will be releasing two unconventional animated endeavors into the marketplace that may or may not make an impact with Oscar: Shane Acker’s “9” (based on his short film) and the Neil Gaiman adaptation “Coraline” (from famed animator Henry Selick).

Speaking of animation, it seems as good a time as any to detour into a category that could see five — count ’em — five Disney films nominated.

The safest assumption, as always, is that Pixar’s “Up” will find room in the category.  Seriously, it’s becoming a surer thing than John Williams.  Meanwhile, traditional animation could rear its head with “The Princess and the Frog,” while Hayao Miyazaki might certainly find the respect of his colleagues once again with “Ponyo on the Cliff by the Sea.”

And let’s not forget Robert Zemeckis’s “A Christmas Carol,” starring Jim Carrey in a multitude of roles.  But will animators scoff at Zemeckis’s “animation” process like they did two years ago with “Beowulf?”  Or perhaps “G-Force,” which was teased during the credits of last night’s Oscarcast.

Elsewhere, there is a new “Ice Age” film to contend with as well as Paramount’s “Monsters vs. Aliens,” among others.  Check the newly re-stocked Contenders section for the scoop.

Speaking of Paramount, the studio that wishes “Slumdog Millionaire” had gone straight to DVD as planned has a trio of live action contenders in the fray, none of them, I’m told, specifically aimed at the awards season.  But who wants to say they’re aiming for the awards season this far out?

The first is Peter Jackson’s “The Lovely Bones,” which might have too many prognosticators getting ahead of themselves from afar.  I’m told Jackson really digs in on the difficult material in this adaptation and that as a result, “Oscar movie” isn’t being thrown around by those involved — for now.  And last year’s holdover, “The Soloist,” will essentially be dumped into a more fiscally sound spot this year but may still carry enough weight to land a supporting actor nomination for Jamie Foxx.

The big hopeful on Melrose Avenue will be Martin Scorsese’s “Shutter Island,” and even though I’m hearing that no one in Marty’s camp wants to think about the “O” word, the fact is you don’t go around describing the film as “a period ‘Departed’” without thinking maybe — just maybe — something can come of it.

The only other film in the Paramount stable that seems fetching (for the moment) is one many are chalking up as a Globes contender more so than an Oscar favorite: Jason Reitman’s “Up in the Air,” starring George Clooney and Vera Farmiga.  The director didn’t do too bad the last time he found himself in the hunt.  Same goes for Clooney.  Oh, and sure-fire blockbusters “Star Trek” and “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen” will do well in the tech categories for the studio.

Warner Bros. Pictures hit a brick wall on January 22 this year when “The Dark Knight” failed to land an unlikely Oscar nomination, but the studio will jump right back on the horse this year.  I don’t think anyone expects Oscar heights for Guy Ritchie’s “Sherlock Holmes,” but you never know.  There’s an esteemed below-the-line crew on that production.  However, there are two contenders that could be quite formidable over in Burbank: Eastwood’s “Untitled Nelson Mandela Project” and Steven Soderbergh’s “The Informant” (which I’m hearing is quite good).

Eastwood’s film will likely land Morgan Freeman his fifth nomination (“It seems to be the role he was born to play,” the director said at the Santa Barbara International Film Festival in January), while Soderbergh’s agri-business thriller could pit Freeman against his “Mandela” co-star Matt Damon.  In fact, Damon could be a double nominee this year if a supporting bid is also in store for his work in Eastwood’s film.

Did someone say double nominee?  Penélope Cruz just won her first Oscar for “Vicky Cristina Barcelona,” but she’s already one of the most buzzed performers of the new season with a leading role in Pedro Almodóvar’s “Broken Embraces” (from Sony Pictures Classics, which also has high hopes for Sundance sensation “An Education”) and the most exciting supporting role of Rob Marshall’s “Nine.”

Which brings us to Harvey Weinstein, who crashed the 2008 Oscar party with his first Best Picture nomination since venturing out on his own with brother Bob.  In addition to “Nine,” which could bring any number of tech nominations in addition to potential gongs for actors like Daniel Day-Lewis, Marion Cotillard and Judi Dench, The Weinstein Company will finally get around to releasing the Cormac McCarthy adaptation “The Road.”

The earliest word I heard on this film was dreadful, but recent screenings have lit a more positive fire under the film.  Perhaps there is enough water left in the McCarthy well for another run, but best bets are assuredly Viggo Mortensen in the lead actor category and relative newcomer Kodi Smit-McPhee in supporting.

The Weinsteins will also have the Andrew Jarecki-directed “All Good Things,” which may or may not be something former nominees Ryan Gosling and Frank Langella can sink their teeth into.  We’ll see.  And let’s not forget Quentin Tarantino’s “Inglourious Basterds.” Better yet, let’s try to forget it…

I briefly mentioned Sundance and Sony Classics’ “An Education,” but another film worth discussing in that vein is “Precious” (formerly “Push: Based on the Novel by Sapphire”), which dominated Park City this year.  Mo’Nique seems set for a supporting actress campaign while newcomer Gabourey Sidibe may even be a competitor in lead.  We’ll just have to see if Lionsgate can compete.

Moving on, Miramax Films didn’t manage a Best Picture nod for last year’s “Doubt,” but perhaps the studio can get somewhere with the already critically approved “Chéri.” We all know a certain Oscar blogger who’ll lose his mind if Michelle Pfeiffer can manage another lead actress nomination, which she certainly might.  Strangely enough, I’m more interested in Miramax’s “The Tempest” from visionary director Julie Taymor.  A gender switch in the lead role could bring a fourth Oscar nomination for Helen Mirren (if currently distributorless films like “The Last Station” and “Love Ranch” can’t turn the trick for her).

We can’t wrap things up without discussing this decade’s Cinderella story: Fox Searchlight Pictures.  Peter Rice’s company finally brought home the gold this year after fighting the good fight for a long time and this writer couldn’t have been happier.  The studio started 2008 without a horse in the derby but soon picked up “Slumdog Millionaire” and “The Wrestler” in Toronto.  This year, things look somewhat similar.  Beyond the rather standard-looking “Amelia” (from director Mira Nair, and very possibly an Oscar pony to compete with), there isn’t much on the slate.  Maybe a trip through the festival circuit will change that.

With that in mind, there are a number of films without current U.S. distribution that could quite easily fight their way into the Oscar season.  Jane Campion’s “Bright Star,” Scott Cooper’s “Crazy Heart,” Jon Amiel’s “Creation,” Grant Heslov’s “Men Who Stare at Goats,” Terence Malick’s “The Tree of Life” and Jean-Marc Vallée’s “The Young Victoria” are a few examples.  It is a general rule that I don’t list a film in my Oscar charts until it picks up distribution (or has deafening buzz and therefore seems destined to pick one up soon).  That’s why a number of these flicks are absent from my year-in-advance charts, but all films, with or without U.S. distribution, are accounted for in the Contenders section.

And of course, who knows what eventual Oscar heavies I haven’t listed here or elsewhere in our so-early-it’s-pathetic coverage of the 2009 season?  Something always creeps up on us, and it generally waits until right when the season is heating up — seven months from now — to do it.  But it would be foolhardy to take this or any year-in-advance speculation to heart.  I think I’ve done plenty of heavy lifting for anyone who wants to shed more light on the upcoming season, though, so have at it if you must.  For now, I’m off the Oscar beat.  At least for a little while (save for the expected scattered coverage of last night’s fallout).

You take a break, too.  You deserve it.

(P.S.: One film I didn’t mention in the column is James Cameron’s “Avatar.” You can tell by the materials below that it’s clearly on my mind.  However, I can’t really figure out how to qualify it for awards quite yet.  We really need to see what he’s come up with first.  It could be a game changer or merely a technical dazzler.  Time will tell.)

Have your say.  What are your insane year-in-advance predictions for the 2009 Oscar season?

Main Category Charts
Technical Category Charts
The Contenders
Oscar Prediction Archives