For years now, the Academy Award for Best Sound Editing has been given out from among three nominees, with those three nominees having been chosen by a committee from seven finalists. This year will mark a departure in this regard, as the category abandons the bakeoff stage in the nominations process and also expands to five nominees.

Sound editing (previously called by the more explanatory name sound effects editing) refers to the integration of artificially created sound effects – the “clinks,” “clanks” and “zaps” (to put it crudely) – into the film’s broader soundtrack. What films typically show up here? Lots of action movies, for starters, with a good number of science fiction, war and animated movies as well. These genres particularly necessitate artificial sounds being seamlessly immersed into a film. In fact, I’m willing to say those genres account for almost all of the nominees. Then again, “Memoirs of a Geisha” was nominated here last year. I’m willing to consider that a rather strange fluke nomination for the beloved Wylie Stateman.

It’ll be interesting to see how the race changes now that the nominations process – and number of nominees – has changed. It’s going to make the process of predicting a lot more difficult.

“Flags of Our Fathers” is a showcase for sound effects, mostly for the chaotic sounds of rifles and tanks during the battle of Iwo Jima. Sound editors Bub Asman and Robert Alan Murray have worked with Clint Eastwood since 1990’s “The Rookie” in Asman’s case and 1980’s “Bronco Billy” in the case of Murray. They were last nominated in this category for Eastwood’s “Space Cowboys” in 2000, which was Asman’s second nod and Murray’s fourth. I suspect we may very well see them collecting their first statuettes this year.

Pixar’s “Cars” has all the makings of a nominee as well, seeing as all the sounds in this very noisy film had to be created. And on top of this, the movie is about racecars…come on! They will probably eat this up with a spoon, especially as sound editor Michael Silvers has been nominated in this category for the last three Pixar efforts, winning for “The Incredibles” in 2004.

As mentioned above, Wylie Stateman managed a nod (the third of his career) last year for “Memoirs of a Geisha,” the sort of film that usually comes nowhere near a nomination in this category. This year, he’s handling the work on “World Trade Center” with longtime industry staple Michael D. Wilhoit. The film was heavily reliant on sound effects in the collapse of the title object and, even more memorably, in the sounds that disrupted the eerie quiet of Michael Peña and Nicolas Cage trapped in the rubble.

“Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest” was considered an artistic disappointment in the eyes of many. Yet supervising sound editors George Waters II and Christopher Boyes have accumulated 15 nominations and 6 wins between them to date. And one could hardly call their work on this film – by far the year’s highest grosser – shabby. They seem likely to follow the initial installment into the Best Sound Editing competition.

“Superman Returns” was another film for which sound effects were critical to the film’s success. The film fits the mould of a nominee in this category like a glove. But it remains a major money loser (never a good sign in any category), and Craig Berkley is an Oscar virgin, so I could really see this one going either way.

Other summer blockbusters may have the necessary quality of work but they seem to have many factors working against them as far as I’m concerned. “Poseidon?” The film tanked with both the critics and at the box office. “Miami Vice?” Another across-the-board disappointment. “X-Men: The Last Stand?” I can’t see it scoring where the first two missed when they were such better films. Ditto for “Mission: Impossible III” (it’s actually better than #2 in the series, but that was before Tom Cruise became the butt of jokes.)

And speaking of celebrities who have become the butt of jokes, Mel Gibson’s drunken rants have probably damaged “Apocalypto”’s chances everywhere. Though I still suspect that the film will exhibit impressive sound design, so we’ll see how that pans out.

When I think of Martin Scorsese’s “The Departed,” the sound effects are not what readily comes to mind. But when one considers the film’s action scenes, they certainly rush back to memory. Eugene Gearty and Philip Stockton have been on the brink in this category for some time (they probably just missed for “The Aviator”), so while I would not bet on a nod personally, I’d consider it a genuine possibility.

“The Prestige” sports sound effects courtesy of Richard King, who won this award in 2003 for “Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World” and was nominated again last year for “War of the Worlds.” But the sound work on Christopher Nolan’s effort was hardly the film’s most memorable technical accomplishment, nor up to the caliber of work for which King has twice been previously nominated. He still somehow strikes me as a dark horse possibility, though.

Serious minded December fare such as “The Good German,” “Children of Men” and “Blood Diamond” may be reliant on sound effects editing to capture the feel of their very different settings in place and time. But they don’t really strike me as fitting the mould of a typical nominee as such. We’ll know better when we see them (or should I say hear them?) I suppose.

Then there are the other animated films. “Happy Feet” and “Over the Hedge” don’t immediately seem to be the sort of animated films that get nominated. But “Monster House” is sorely deserving of a nomination for the work of Dennis Leonard (Oscar-nominated for “The Polar Express”). The film didn’t inspire a whole lot of love, however, even if it got generally favorable reviews. Leonard also has “Eragon” coming our way in December.

Lastly we come to our so-called Best Picture frontrunner, “Dreamgirls.” Musicals really are not a showcase for sound effects – not a lot of artificial creation in the mix. Then again, “Ray” and “Walk the Line” made the bakeoff phase in each of the last two years, which struck me as odd. So if this film becomes an across-the-board sweeper…let’s just say a nod wouldn’t shock me to death.

Well there’s another category behind us! Next week, we take a look and Costume Design.

The Academy Award for Best Art Direction is annually presented to two notable individuals from the victorious film’s art department: the production designer, responsible for set creation and design, and the set decorator, largely in charge of the details and knick knacks that bring a given set to life. (Much apologies for gross oversimplification of these roles). A film’s art department is not only assigned the responsibility of creating sets and props appropriate and serving of a film’s narrative, but they also need to make sure these sets and props can physically withstand the process of shooting the film. Practicality goes a long way.

The art directors’ branch tends to favor period work, probably because the work necessitates being loyal to time period while also presenting an opportunity to stand out from the sort of scenes we see in everyday life. Fantasy work frequently finds a home here, too. At least one fantastical film is nominated in this category more often than not.

Perhaps the first place to look for a nomination this year is last year’s winner, John Myhre. Myhre (Oscar-winner for Rob Marshall’s “Memoirs of a Geisha” and “Chicago” and also a nominee for Shekhar Kapur’s “Elizabeth”) will have the responsibility of recreating the highs and lows of the Dreamettes’ epic Motown journey in Bill Condon’s “Dreamgirls.” This film looks like it could be a craft powerhouse. With set decoration by four-time nominee Nancy Haigh (winner for Barry Levinson’s “Bugsy”), I suspect we’ll be seeing both of these individuals next February at the Kodak.

Myhre’s collaborating set decorator from last year, Gretchen Rau, sadly passed away this March. She was sick at the time of the Oscars, and was unable to collect her statuette. The swansong of her career will be coming out this December in the form of Robert De Niro’s “The Good Shepherd.” The film boasts three-time Oscar nominee Jeannine Claudia Oppewall as its production designer and will showcase many period offices and homes from the 1940s through the 1960s, which will necessitate authenticity but perhaps not extreme showiness.

Another individual we lost this year is the legendary Henry Bumstead, who worked on over 100 films in his 58-year career. The last efforts he designed were Clint Eastwood’s double bill of Iwo Jima efforts – “Flags of Our Fathers” and “Letters from Iwo Jima.” War films don’t tend to be showcases for production design on account of often being heavily reliant on exteriors, but “Flags of Our Fathers” may still have some memorable sets in the scenes that take place in America. If the film really strikes a chord with the Academy, the art directors may pay tribute to Bumstead with a final tip of the hat.

Sofia Coppola’s “Marie Antoinette” is an obvious opportunity for a production designer to shine. K. K. Barrett, known for contemporary work on films such as Spike Jonze’s “Being John Malkovich” and Coppola’s “Lost in Translation,” is at the head of the department. The work will undoubtedly be grand, showy and necessitate sets appropriate to the period. I would be surprised if the effort failed to at least receive a nomination – which would be Barrett’s first to date.

Also seeking a first nod this year is Philip Messina, once again working with director Steven Soderbergh after “Erin Brockovich,” “Traffic,” “Solaris” and the “Oceans” movies. “The Good German” will be his most Oscar-friendly effort to date, capturing post-war Europe in black-and-white, homage-style. The film remains one of the few unseen sights remaining this year, though, so lots of questions remain.

Nathan Crowley missed a nomination for “Batman Begins” last year despite earning citations from both the BAFTA and the Art Directors Guild for his efforts. He’s working with director Christopher Nolan again this year on “The Prestige,” a film that looks like it should be a showcase for memorable sets and especially props. Nolan is certainly a respected young director. Should this effort receive fine, if not necessarily overwhelming, critical notices, it could be the perfect opportunity to make things up to Crowley.

Alfonso Cuarón’s “Children of Men” takes us 21 years into the future. The opportunity to be creative and memorable will certainly be there for co-production designers Geoffrey Kirkland (Oscar-nominee for Robert Zmeckis’s “Forrest Gump”) and Jim Clay. The film received relatively positive notices out of the Venice International Film Festival before fading back into the realm of anticipations once again. And should Universal’s bet on “The Good Shepherd” fall flat, “Children of Men,” also opening on Christmas, might become their lead horse.

When speaking of fantasy, one must take note of Guillermo Del Toro’s “Pan’s Labyrinth.” The film looks like an absolute showcase for production design, Eugenio Caballero’s highest profile work to date. I feel Del Toro’s film will show up in many end-of-the-year top ten lists, and that it will be “Volver”’s main competition for the Best Foreign Language Film. Should that love cross over to any other category, I’d suspect Best Art Direction would be first to the table.

Also on the foreign front this year we have Zhang Yimou’s “Curse of the Golden Flower” from Tingxiao Huo, who worked with Zhang on “House of Flying Daggers.” The art direction on this effort will probably be showy, but at the risk of sounding crude, I can’t help but wonder if the many high-profile historical Asian actions films in the past few years have decreased the novelty of each one for American audiences – and the Academy.

Two-time nominee Tom Sanders (“Saving Private Ryan”, “Bram Stoker’s Dracula”) will have the responsibility of recreating the Mayan culture on Mel Gibson’s “Apocalypto.” Recreating an ancient world will be a daunting task, but I suspect the film will likely be more remembered for its exteriors. Gibson’s last two efforts also failed to score here, and drunken, racist rage in Malibu ain’t helping matters.

In the realm of blockbusters, the work from Rick Heinrichs on “Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest” was not only very memorable but also arguably one of few improvements on the original. It is admittedly very strange for a sequel to score where its predecessor did not, especially when widely considered inferior to the first film. Heinrichs won an Oscar in 1999 for sprawling fantasy work on “Sleepy Hollow,” and he probably came close to another with “Lemony Snicket’s A Series of Unfortunate Events” in 2004. Set Decorator Cheryl Carasik is also a four-time nominee, awaiting her first win.

Some of the best art direction of the year is on display in “Running with Scissors”: quirky, clever, original and, most importantly, film-serving. But the work is the sort that would find difficulty garnering traction as is, especially as Richard Sherman and Matthew “Flood” Ferguson are hardly major industry names from the branch. And the critical reaction to the film appears surprisingly unkind in a number of circles thus far.

Elsewhere, in Emilio Estevez’s “Bobby,” production designer Patti Podesta recreates the late 1960s subtly, and in a film-serving manner. Then again, her work is hardly the most memorable among the film’s technical achievements, and the film is divisive in any case. Meanwhile, Judy Becker’s work on “Infamous” was among the most memorable aspects of her film. But the film is on its way to becoming the “Valmont” to “Capote”’s “Dangerous Liaisons.” Finally, the great Dante Ferretti also put out great work on “The Black Dahlia” this year, only to see his film tank with both critics and audiences alike.

In closing, a film I consider greatly deserving of a nomination for Best Art Direction is “World Trade Center,” with production design coming from Jan Roelfs (nominated for “Orlando” and “Gattaca”). The recreating of Ground Zero alone was frighteningly realistic, and it ultimately became a character in the film. Alas, I’m not so sure this is the sort of thing the branch would go for, as contemporary work tends to experience an uphill struggle, even when memorable. Alex McDowell failed to be nominated for “The Terminal” in 2004 despite creating an entire airport!

Next week we’ll turn our attention to Best Sound Editing, which will be a very different sort of race than in year’s past this time around. See you then.

The film editor’s task is not only to establish an appropriate length for a given film, but also to make sure the experience is well paced while remaining engaging throughout. Without quality juxtaposition, the viewing experience would certainly be a trying one.

Traditionally, the lineup for Best Film Editing closely mirrors the Best Picture lineup. A 4/5 crossover is common, with a 3/5 crossover being almost always the case. In 2002, the five Best Picture nominees were the five nominees here. Yet last year, only two of the nominees were for films cited for Best Picture: the great Michael Kahn for “Munich” and eventual winner Hughes Winborne for “Crash.”

Genres such as the musical and the action film tend to do relatively well here. Musical numbers and action sequences not only pose a special challenge for editors who seek to make them visually coherent, but these scenes also have to be well integrated into the film. But while such endeavors pose the opportunity for showy editing, I hardly feel that they warrant awards attention for that reason alone. Films where the flow feels truly seamless represent, in my humble opinion, some of the best film editing on display in a given year.

This is also perhaps the group in which the Academy that is most embracing of new nominees, with at least a couple of first-timers joining the ranks every year. In 1999, in fact, all nominees were first-timers. Directors David Lean and Joel Coen (with brother Ethan) have also both managed nominations for editing their own films, “A Passage to India” and “Fargo” respectively.

Last year’s winner, Hughes Winborne, will pop up once again this awards season with “The Pursuit of Happyness.” The film is not the sort that announces an editing showcase, but if it’s a hit, and especially if it’s an ultimate Best Picture contender, Winborne could ride goodwill from last year to a second nomination.

As mentioned above, musicals seem to be regular nominees. When they are Best Picture contenders, they are always in the mix. Bill Condon’s “Dreamgirls” certainly seems to fit this mold, and Virginia Katz has been developing a good relationship with Condon for years, having edited both “Gods and Monsters” and “Kinsey” for the director (earning an American Cinema Editors nomination for the latter). I think it would be a mistake to bet against her this time around.

Another favorite in the category is the war film, where drama must be blended with coherent and certainly thematically viable action sequences. This year, expect to see Joel Cox in the running for Clint Eastwood’s “Flags of Our Fathers.” Cox has worked with Eastwood on over a dozen occasions, winning the Oscar for “Unforgiven” in 1992 and being nominated again for “Million Dollar Baby” in 2004.

As previously mentioned, it is not uncommon for an action film to score a nomination for Best Film Editing. And when the editor responsible is none other than the legendary Thelma Schoonmaker, we have a bona fide contender on our hands. Martin Scorsese’s “The Departed” hardly plays like a traditional Best Picture nominee given the level of violence and mode of genre, but the critical acclaim has been immense. Schoonmaker’s work on the film also certainly ranks among the finest efforts of her career.

Ensemble films are another variety that the editing branch tends to gravitate toward. “Traffic” and “Crash” have both won the Oscar this decade for constructing vast narratives out of many characters that intersect in the most unlikely of ways. Emilio Estevez’s nostalgic “Bobby” is already considered a divisive film, but one cannot fault veteran Richard Chew (Oscar-winner for “Star Wars” 29 years ago) for his work piecing together many characters and sub-plots into the overall narrative.

Stephen Mirrione and Douglas Crise will also have the responsibility of fashioning a tight ensemble piece in Alejandro González Iñárritu’s “Babel.” The film increasingly looks solid for a Best Picture nomination, and Mirrione is a past winner in this category for another ensemble film as it is, the aforementioned “Traffic.”

“United 93” features what I consider to be some of the best film editing of the year. Not only is the film’s visual juxtaposition superb, but also the pacing is riveting and the sheer number of cuts is massive. The film credits three editors who are Oscar virgins – Richard Pearson and Christopher Rouse (who worked with “United 93” helmer Paul Greengrass on “The Bourne Supremacy”), as well as Clare Douglas (another former Greengrass collaborator on 2002’s “Bloody Sunday”). It’ll be interesting to see the degree to which the critics can revive the buzz on “United 93,” but the first place I’d expect to see the film earn awards attention would be in this category.

Meanwhile, Oliver Stone is a filmmaker somewhat infamous for his films’ editing. I personally consider “JFK” a showcase for the most accomplished film editing in the medium’s history. Like Greengrass, Stone has also explored the events of 9/11 this year. “World Trade Center” pieces together that fateful day with Julie Monroe on board, along with Oscar-winner David Brenner (“Born on the Fourth of July”). I don’t think a nomination is out of the question, but Paramount has a stacked plate this fall, so we’ll see if the film can get back in the game.

Tariq Anwar (Oscar nominee for “American Beauty”) will have the task of making “The Good Shepherd” compelling across many years of history with subject matter that could possibly be too dry. An elaborate flashback structure certainly won’t hurt matters. The film seems the sort that Oscar might eat up…if it’s any good. Time will tell.

Should the branch be in a fantastical mood, Alex Rodríguez’s piecing together of a futuristic world in “Children of Men” might just be up their alley. The project certainly sounds intriguing and a potential opportunity for an editor to shine.

“The Prestige” features the talents of Lee Smith, an editor I feel deserves more Oscar love than he’s received. Though cited for outstanding work on Peter Weir’s “Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World,” Lee missed for his clever pacing of Weir’s “The Truman Show” and last year’s riveting “Batman Begins” from Christopher Nolan. Smart editing will be integral to the success of Nolan’s “The Prestige.” Here’s hoping Nolan has given Smith another great opportunity.

Best Picture contenders should always be watched for in this category, so “The Queen” (concisely cut by Lucia Zucchetti) and, to a lesser extent, “Little Miss Sunshine” (Pamela Martin), ought not to be ruled out.

Elsewhere, Todd Field’s “Little Children” was a surprisingly tension-filled affair. And while the reviews have been good, they probably haven’t represented the wave of immediate acceptance New Line might have been hoping for. “Little Children” isn’t really the sort of film that would tend to grab a nomination for film editing without being a very strong Best Picture contender (which this film will have trouble becoming). But for some reason, Leo Trombetta’s work is sticking in my head as a dark horse contender for a nomination. I can’t put my finger on why, but there it is.

Then we have “Catch a Fire,” a film that is difficult to dislike yet obviously has factors preventing it from greatness. That said, veteran editor Jill Bilcock creates a surprising amount of suspense in the film’s narrative. She came up to promote the film during the Toronto International Film Festival (rare for a craftsperson), and Noyce said he “was lost when she left the set.” So if the film manages to garner any traction in the awards race, this might just be one of few spots.

Like last week, I’ll finish with discussing Steven Soderbergh’s “The Good German.” In the same manner that he shoots the film under the pseudonym “Peter Andrews,” he edits it as “Mary Ann Bernard.” The Coen Brothers were nominated here for “Fargo” despite being credited as “Roderick Jaynes,” so a mention for Soderbergh isn’t out of the question. Maybe it’s just a question of paperwork for eligibility, I’m not sure. But “The Good German” remains one of the few unknown entities in this year’s race.

That's it for this week. Next time, we take a look at one of my personal favorite categories – Best Art Direction.

The essence of cinema is born out of the motion picture camera, and the task of capturing a film’s visual dynamics falls upon the shoulders of the cinematographer. Here is an individual whose artistic choices – from lighting to camera positioning to choice of film stock – influence a film in immeasurable ways. Truly great cinematography also serves the director’s vision. A good relationship between director and cinematographer is integral to a film, making it not surprising that many directors re-team with a particular D.P. (director of photography) after previous successful collaborations (the great Roger Deakins’ relationship with the Coen brothers immediately comes to mind).

The Academy Award for Best Cinematography is always one of the races I look forward the most every year. This is not only because I admire the work so much but also because I am truly happy to see these individuals rewarded, even when personal favorites fail to make the cut. I’ve found it to be a nice touch that the five nominees have been shown on the television screen in the past three years in the same way that the directing and acting nominees are shown together before the envelope is opened.

The cinematographers’ branch is certainly a group within the AMPAS that singles out favorites year after year. Roger Deakins, Caleb Deschanel and Robert Richardson have all accumulated their fifth career nominations this decade, for instance. But paradoxically, they also spread the wealth around a great deal. With the exception of the late, great Conrad L. Hall, there hasn’t been a cinematographer who has reached a career tally of more than five nominations in over 20 years!

While memorable landscapes and gorgeous vistas are certainly commonplace among a typical list of nominees, films with such beautiful scenery on display are certainly not the only sort to find recognition. Just last year, for instance, the branch nominated the creative and intense work of Wally Pfister on “Batman Begins,” as well as Robert Elswit’s moody and intimate lensing of “Good Night, and Good Luck.”

So who should we expect to be seen in contention this year?

Robert Richardson may actually break that elusive six nomination barrier come January. The 20-year veteran, who has won Oscars for his outstanding photography of both Oliver Stone’s “JFK” and Martin Scorsese’s “The Aviator,” will this year be lensing Robert De Niro’s “The Good Shepherd.” Richardson has experienced considerable Oscar love, but he’s also missed for memorable work on “The Horse Whisperer” (for which he was singled out by the American Society of Cinematographers), Best Picture nominee “A Few Good Men,” and visual feast “Kill Bill,” among others.

Tom Stern worked in camera departments for over 20 years before Clint Eastwood adopted him as his cinematographer of choice earlier this decade. Having lensed Best Picture nominees “Mystic River” and “Million Dollar Baby” for Eastwood, he will have his most Oscar-friendly effort to date this year with “Flags of Our Fathers.” Also the D.P. of “Letters from Iwo Jima,” the timing would seem right for Stern’s first nomination should the films live up to their visual potential.

Also seeking a first nomination this year is Tobias Schliessler, working on Bill Condon’s “Dreamgirls.” This is an endeavor that will necessitate exquisite lighting in a variety of musical numbers. The cinematographers also love musicals, having nominated every such film nominated for Best Picture. This is not to mention such mediocre nominated efforts as “A Star in Born” (1976), “The Wiz” and “The Phantom of the Opera.” I’d say Schliessler, despite having had a relatively low profile in the business to date, must be considered in solid shape this year.

Rodrigo Prieto earned his first nomination last year for Ang Lee’s “Brokeback Mountain” after an early, blossoming career sporting entries like Julie Taymor’s “Frida,” Alejandro González Iñárritu’s “21 Grams” and Oliver Stone’s “Alexander.” This year, Prieto again collaborates with Iñárritu on “Babel.” Failing to win last year (especially after being considered the frontrunner in the eyes of many) could very well help Prieto in a bid for a second nod.

Also seeking a second nomination after garnering his first just last year is Wally Pfister. His aforementioned nomination for “Batman Begins” remains, in my opinion, one of the coolest Oscar notices in recent years. This year, Pfister will be working for Nolan once more, on the genre magician drama “The Prestige.” This movie may be of a rather commercial nature, but then so was “Begins.” And, once again, his camera work will likely be integral not only in fashioning the mood but also in creating a sensation of effects when such work would often be done with computers these days.

Emmanuel Lubezki is yet another cinematographer who is coming off a nomination in 2005. The only individual cited by the Academy for Terrence Malick’s “The New World,” this was Lubezki’s third nomination after Alfonso Cuarón “A Little Princess” in 1995 and, most notably, Tim Burton’s visually amazing “Sleepy Hollow” in 1999. That all three of these nominations have come for films that were minor Oscar players in their respective years shows that the branch obviously respects Lubezki’s singular style. His latest effort on Cuarón’s “Children of Men” has already been received with much acclaim at Venice where he won the “Outstanding Technical Contribution” Award.

Also in the realm of three-time nominees awaiting a first win would be Michael Ballhaus, who has collaborated with Martin Scorsese for the sixth time this year on “The Departed.” The praise for the technical aspects of this film has been loud and consistent. The work may not exactly be the sort of sweeping vistas that would normally help in a bid for Academy recognition, but time and again we’ve seen examples of this not being a necessity. We’ll see how much traction in this year’s race this film can garner.

The great Vilmos Zsigmond will be attempting a comeback this year after 22 years away from Oscar love. After winning an Oscar for Steven Spielberg’s “Close Encounters of the Third Kind” in 1977 and, following it up with nominations for Michael Cimino’s “The Deer Hunter” and Mark Rydell’s “The River,” the Hungarian cinematographer largely disappeared from the Oscar race. His efforts on 1996’s “The Ghost and the Darkness” ten years ago stirred minor buzz, but beyond that, nothing. Zsigmond’s work on Brian De Palma’s “The Black Dahlia” has been acclaimed as appropriately stylized and utterly gorgeous, though it remains to be seen if the branch will nominate such a critically disdained film. But that didn’t stop “Memoirs of a Geisha” from across-the-board technical praise last year.

Lance Acord has already worked on many films that have experienced Oscar glory in his young career, most notably “Adaptation” and “Being John Malkovich” for Spike Jonze and “Lost in Translation” for Sofia Coppola. Acord is once again collaborating with Coppola this year on “Marie Antoinette,” and his work has received considerable notice following a world premiere at the Cannes International Film Festival. But aside from technical accomplishment, the overall reaction to the film was not particularly kind in Cannes.

Xiaoding Zhao received an Oscar nomination for his first effort as a D.P. on Zhang Yimou’s “House of Flying Daggers” two years ago. This year, he’ll have another Yimou historical action epic to lens in “Curse of the Golden Flower.” Such endeavors are always opportunities for visual splendor, and the cinematography category has certainly proven itself open this decade to foreign-language films, having nominated seven in the past six years.

Eduardo Serra is one of our finest working cinematographers in my humble opinion, with splendid efforts such as “What Dreams May Come,” “The Wings of the Dove” and “Girl With a Pearl Earring” in his repertoire (earning Oscar nods for the latter two). Serra rarely ventures into English language films, but this year he’ll have the opportunity to capture the chaos of war-torn Sierra Leone in Edward Zwick’s “Blood Diamond.” While “The Last Samurai” strangely missed in this category (John Toll is a typical favorite), two previous Zwick efforts – “Legends of the Falls” (also lensed by Toll) and “Glory” (from the legendary Freddie Francis) – have ultimately won here.

And then we come to Dean Semler. The Australian D.P. won an Oscar upon receiving his first nomination for Kevin Costner’s “Dances with Wolves” sixteen years ago. And frankly, he hasn’t really ever been close to contention since. This year may very well provide Semler’s best opportunity to return to the awards scene as Mel Gibson utilizes his talents on “Apocalypto.” No matter what one thinks of Gibson’s storytelling ability, there’s no denying he has tremendous visual flare as a director. His last two films have both earned nominations in this category (with “Braveheart” winning the award) and “Apocalypto” will also surely be epic in scope. Then again, one cannot help but wonder if Gibson’s drunken antics will hurt his film’s chances across the board.

On a final note, it should be mentioned that the cinematography branch occasionally embraces black-and-white efforts. Janusz Kaminski’s work on “Schindler’s List” won the award. Roger Deakins’s noir-rooted atmosphere on “The Man Who Wasn’t There” won the ASC award and was also nominated by the Acdemy. And Robert Elswit’s nostalgic work last year on “Good Night, and Good Luck.” also claimed a spot amongst the final five. All of this may lead many to think that “Peter Andrews” (a.k.a. Steven Soderbergh) could make a run for what appears to be unique, homage-style cinematography in “The Good German.” Many branches, however, have rules against nominating people working under pseudonyms. To boot, the craft categories tend to be protective of their own. So it might be safe to wait that possibility out for the time being.

So that’s an early look at this year’s roster of cinematography contenders. Did I miss anyone? It’s possible. Drop a line if you feel I have. Next week, we take an initial glance at the race for Best Film Editing.