Sound mixing and music composition may seem to be unrelated tasks when it comes to the creation of a film. But both tasks go to toward the betterment of a given film’s overall soundtrack, the audible experience that can add to the enjoyment of a film as much as the most beautiful of landscapes or the most dazzling of visual effects sequences. I recently had the opportunity to speak to a composer and sound mixer who are in the thick of this year’s award races in their respective categories.

Alexandre Desplat gave us the music for both Stephen Frears’s “The Queen” and John Curran’s “The Painted Veil” and is garnering kudos mentions for each, perhaps heading toward his first Academy Award nomination. Greg P. Russell, meanwhile, added healthily to the suspense of Mel Gibson’s “Apocalypto” and seems to once again be in the running for a nod, which would be his eleventh to date. Interestingly, Russell’s eleventh nomination would be the nineteenth for longtime collaborator Kevin O’Connell, who holds the unfortunate record of “most Oscar nominations without a win.”

The cinema is largely seen as the director’s medium. So it’s not altogether surprising that both of these craftsmen commented on the importance of the helmer in their work.

“It’s the director you spend the most time with in composing,” Desplat acknowledges. “Most of my best friends are directors. Artists such as Jacques Audiard (‘Read My Lips,’ ‘The Beat My Heart Skipped’) inspire me.”

“Establishing a relationship with a filmmaker builds trust,” Russell explains. “Jerry Bruckheimer and Tony Scott, who we’ve worked with many times, let us put our spin on our work. This is not to say they won’t pick it apart, but we get to assemble it as we think is best.”

Filmmakers also affected the creative directions taken by the two men as they went about work on their 2006 titles.

“Stephen didn’t guide me precisely on ‘The Queen,’ but it was a great collaboration,” Desplat reminisces. “We shared ideas of where and how to place music and what emotions to highlight at certain moments. I had a short time to write, so I appreciated it even more. Stephen is so quick to articulate his ideas.”

With respect to “The Painted Veil,” director John Curran knew Desplat’s work and was a considerable fan. The temp track for the film was already scattered with Desplat’s music, in fact. From there, the composer created a score that would eventually lead to his third Golden Globe nomination. His two films remain apparent as the awards race marches forward.

Russell, on the other hand, mixed the soundtracks of a diverse array of titles in 2006 – seven, to be exact.

“It’s been kind of a wild year,” he says. “It started with Barry Sonnefeld’s ‘RV’ and then ‘The Da Vinci Code,’ which I thoroughly enjoyed as I was looking forward to finally working with Ron Howard. He has a great crew he always works with.

“‘The Pursuit of Happyness’ was a pretty straightforward movie,” he continues. “Gabriele [Mucino] didn’t have many changes to make after we showed him what we constructed. But that’s the exception. A Tony Scott, who we worked with again on ‘Déjà Vu,’ or a Mel Gibson dissects everything, listening to aspects such as dialogue and music, wanting to understand everything and then be able to make their artistic choices.”

Russell also worked on James Gartner’s “Glory Road” and Adam McKay’s “Talladega Nights: The Ballad of Ricky Bobby” in 2006.

In addition to the different filmmakers they work with, both Desplat and Russell commented specifically on the unique challenges of the projects they recently tackled.

“‘The Queen’ is not a movie where you can spread music everywhere,” Desplat begins. “It has to be sparse and delicate. You have to learn to respect what’s on the screen already. I always had to think that ‘less is more,’ from volume to strength to size of orchestra.”

But “The Painted Veil” proved to be a different experience for the composer. “It has the epic feel and takes place in different cultures,” he says. “But it also has the delicate romantic story. These all had to be balanced in the most appropriate ways possible.”

After gaining fame writing scores in the French film industry, Desplat has only recently, though quickly, made a name for himself in the States. He says that the differences between working in the two environments are certainly apparent, but those differences don’t necessarily affect his approach to the work. And his experiences on the more intimate and restrained films that come out of the French market have certainly buttressed his work on equally intimate recent affairs such as Jonathan Glazer’s “Birth” and Peter Webber’s “Girl with a Pearl Earring.”

A particular challenge Russell discusses with respect to sound mixing is that of authenticity.

“What does Spider-Man flying through New York sound like,” he ponders. “We don’t know, so we can choose. Yet this is not the same as ‘Pearl Harbor,’ which we knew veterans were going to watch and they would know if we were being inaccurate. We have to bear in mind the target audience for a film.”

Despite the challenges and continual differences in the films on which they work, it is clear that both of artists love what they do.

“There’s a magical thing in a movie,” Desplat says, “where so many artists are at work. Of course, as the art of the sound has improved, the way one works for cinema has changed.”

“It’s something I’m very passionate about,” Russell explains. “On ‘Apocalypto,’ we combined many types of sound. It’s like painting with different colors and it becomes unique and satisfying. I was so happy when Randy Thom, winning the sound editing Oscar for ‘The Incredibles,’ acknowledged the work consisted of artistic decisions.”

Yet in spite of the intrinsic love of what they do, both craftsmen acknowledge appreciation for any congratulations their work might receive.

“You’re in a studio in silence and you’re alone,” Desplat says. “It’s very lonely, lonely, lonely work. But I enjoy it and I love to go on the set, go to the premiere, meet the actors and cinematographer. You come at the end and you’re the cherry on the cake and you have to respect the work of people who came before you, but it’s great to hear that people like what you’ve written.”

Russell, meanwhile, hopes to see “Apocalypto” among the Best Sound Mixing nominees. But it’s also clear he feels no entitlement during the awards season. He applauds the work of Gregg Rudloff and company on “Flags of Our Fathers,” for instance. “But,” he adds, “we aren’t going to get away from the big musical.”

As I mentioned when I introduced the category in September, there is a two-stage process in determining the nominees for Best Visual Effects. And guess what? Stage One has now passed!

Last Friday, the following titles were announced as finalists in the category:

“Casino Royale”
“Eragon”
“Night at the Museum”
“Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest”
“Poseidon”
“Superman Returns”
“X-Men: The Last Stand”

The committee will now screen pre-selected scenes from these titles and choose three nominees from among them.

To start, a few notes on some surprising omissions. The failure of “The Fountain” and “Pan’s Labyrinth” to make this list has resulted in several eyebrows being raised. I won’t dispute the deservedness of these contenders. However, I can hardly say that their being left off the list shocks me. Both contenders are notably lacking in the CGI, which has come to dominate this category in recent years. Moreover, both are small, very artistic and somewhat atypical affairs. This is the category that is most embracing of the mainstream blockbusters, mind you.

More surprising omissions in the eyes of this viewer come in “Charlotte’s Web” and “Flags of Our Fathers.” It is true that neither of these titles burned up the box office, but both embody the sort of work the branch loves.

“Charlotte’s Web” featured a massive visual effects crew and was an acclaimed film with talking animals – a good start for a prospective contender. Maybe they just thought the work wasn’t good enough or innovative enough?

“Flags” was also very well received, still seemingly all set to be a high-profile contender in many other categories (always a bonus). The effects were impressive and had even been highlighted in “for your consideration” ads. Then again, the crew was totally unseasoned from an awards perspective, which may or may not have attributed to its coming up short.

Let’s take a look at the films that DID make it into play:

“Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest” must be considered an overwhelming favorite here. From massive storms at sea to a monstrous Kraken and, most memorably, the creation of Davy Jones and his crew, the visual effects work on this film was extremely showy, extremely acclaimed and very much the sort of effort that the branch loves. And the behemoth box office take makes for some tasty gravy.

All things considered, I’d be floored if John Knoll and his crew, including Hal Hickel, Charles Gibson and Allen Hall (all of whom have experienced Oscar love before) fail to make the cut. In fact, I’d venture to say they’re almost certainly headed towards the win.

The only film that could conceivably stop them on their way to the statuette is Bryan Singer’s “Superman Returns.” The effects designed for this film sent the budget through the roof (and consequently, pretty much prevented the film from achieving profitability). But that didn’t stop the critical praise from coming for the work which was front and center in almost every scene in the movie. The film probably received the best critical reception of the finalists and, despite number crunching, it remains the third highest grossing of the seven from the perspective of box office.

Oscar winner Mark Stetson heads the crew. Past winners Neil Corbould and Jon Thum are also on board, along with past nominee Richard R. Hoover. I’ll be very surprised if they aren’t all heading to the Kodak once more.

The battle for the third spot is quite competitive. Despite the fact that the effects were a major selling point of their films, however, I’d be surprised if “Poseidon” or “Eragon” managed to sneak in. Both films have been critically reviled. I will concede that this does not always matter in the crafts categories, but it nevertheless makes it more difficult. And these two films don’t really have the box office to overcome this hurdle, despite sporting some veteran and respected crewmembers.

“Casino Royale” was an interesting inclusion among the finalists. A Bond film hasn’t scored an Oscar nomination since “For Your Eyes Only”’s Best Original Song nomination a quarter-century ago. But 007 hasn’t had this sort of critical reception in, well, a very, VERY long time. And when one considers the public’s embracing of the film, not to mention the work in that Venice climax sequence, this nomination seems even more possible.

Then again, if you remove that scene in Venice, is there a whole lot here that sticks out as warranting a nomination? To boot, the crew isn’t peppered with Oscar veterans (at least from looking at the IMDb). A nomination wouldn’t shock me, but I’m certainly not counting on it.

“Night at the Museum” seems like it could be a very substantial hit over the holiday season. The visual effects work also looks quite integral to the film, supervised by three-time Oscar winner Jim Rygiel (of “The Lord of the Rings” fame). But the film also has a great deal of uncertainty surrounding it. Will it actually live up to its box office promise? What will the critics say? Just how substantial are the visual effects (I haven’t seen it yet)? Lots of questions. Answers should be coming shortly.

To me, it looks like “X-Men: The Last Stand” is probably going to sneak that last nomination. It was the franchise’s biggest hit, and did it ever feature extremely showy, “look-at-me” visual effects. John Bruno (a perennial nominee in this category in the mid-80s and mid-90s) is also leading the crew.

But then again, the first two films were much better received critically. And they actually had a respected director at the helm (Bryan Singer). Moreover, this could suffer from “been there, done that” syndrome when the “there and that” weren’t embraced by the branch. It would also be rather odd if this were the only “X-Men” film to garner an Oscar nomination. Alas, sometimes that’s the Academy. After all, “Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban” was the first – and, to date, only, entry in its series to garner a nomination in this category.

Barring something very unexpected happening when the Visual Effects Society announces their nominees next month, this is my last in-depth look at this category. We’ll see what the AMPAS does six weeks from now.

Four months ago, I began this column by taking a look at those craftspeople who have not been nominated to date and were hoping for their first citations from AMPAS this year; I was speculating on how their 2006 efforts would affect this race.

Today, I want to look at the opposite end of the spectrum – the veterans. The men and women who have toiled in their movie-making professions for years (usually at least a couple of decades for most of the people I’m going to mention) and who have been rewarded for their past efforts by the Academy. Veterans bring a unique presence to the race, often representing the old guard in their fields and always representing those who have gone through this process before.

The expected presence of veterans among the nominees is something that varies by branch. The cinematographers’ branch, for instance, actually tends to spread the wealth around a great deal. At least two new nominees tend to be cited every year and, with the exception of the late Conrad L. Hall, no director of photography has passed the five-nomination mark for over two decades.

Someone who might have been expected to garner his sixth nomination this year would be Robert Richardson, who has accumulated five nominations and two wins since he made a name for himself collaborating with Oliver Stone twenty years ago on films such as “Salvador,” “Platoon” and “Born on the Fourth of July.” However, his latest film, Robert De Niro’s “The Good Shepherd,” has been getting a rather underwhelming critical response thus far. And truth be told, Richardson has been snubbed almost as often as he’s been nominated for equally effective work (“Kill Bill,” “The Horse Whisperer,” “A Few Good Men”).

Hungarian vet Vilmos Zsigmond, with 3 nominations and a win to his credit, seemed poised to return to the Oscar game after an absence of over 20 years with textured work on Brian De Palma’s “The Black Dahlia.” But the film has flopped with both critics and audiences, likely dashing his hopes.

Michael Ballhaus, on the other hand, wasn’t exactly given an Oscar-screaming opportunity in Martin Scorsese’s “The Departed.” But he made the most of it and then some. A frequent Scorsese collaborator, the 71-year old lenser could very well land his fourth nomination this year. Ballhaus has truly worked his way up the ladder, having begun his career working on German TV movies back in the early 1960s. Mr. Ballhaus is also receiving the career achievement award from the American Society of Cinematographers this year.

As far as the art directors go, there usually are no more than a couple of newbies nominated every year. But then again, with a few exceptions, rarely have career nomination tallies reached beyond the “five” mark in recent years. An exception to this would be the great Dante Ferretti, who finally won an Oscar on his eighth nomination two years ago for “The Aviator.” But like Zsigmond, mentioned above, Ferretti will potentially be done in by ill regard toward “The Black Dahlia.”

This branch does, however, have their final chance to cite a veteran in every sense of the word. I am talking about Henry Bumstead, who passed away in May at the age of 91, following a career that spanned over a hundred films and 58 years. Four nominations and two wins from the AMPAS came over this period. In recent years, he solely worked for director Clint Eastwood, and the swansong to his career comes in “Letters from Iwo Jima” and “Flags of Our Fathers.” War films are traditionally more noted for their exteriors, but this could very well be a special case to bid adieu to the man who worked on classics such as “Vertigo” and “To Kill a Mockingbird.”

With the costume designers, there is almost invariably a spot open for at least one, usually two, new nominees every year. They certainly have their favorites, though, with career tallies in the 5-10 nomination range. Undoubtedly the first person popping to mind to fill such a spot this year is the legendary Milena Canonero. Gaining fame working for Stanley Kubrick in the early 1970s, Canonero has amassed seven nominations and two wins over the past three decades, despite having less than 30 films to her credit. Given the eye-popping nature of her threads for Sofia Coppola’s “Marie Antoinette,” I have little doubt she’ll be nominated yet again come January.

Other beloved veterans may be hampered by lack of love for their films. It is not impossible a respected designer to garner a nomination for a mediocre effort (like Canonero for “The Affair of the Necklace”); but it is challenging nonetheless. Jenny Beavan has earned eight nominations over the past 22 years for period work, notably with the Merchant-Ivory films. But as mentioned, “The Black Dahlia” seems to already be a forgotten bomb.

Anthony Powell is always a threat when he works (which is not very often), and “Miss Potter” seems like a typical costume nominee from the Academy. But the buzz on the film is almost non-existent at the moment, some mentions of its mediocrity popping up here and there.

Finally we come to Ann Roth, a 43-year veteran with more than one hundred films on her resume. Ironically, the Academy doesn’t actually nominate her that often; four nominations, including a win, is not shabby by any means, but it does not indicate favoritism as far as I’m concerned. And the response to “The Good Shepherd”, her latest effort, has been decidedly underwhelming.

The film editors are actually a group that doesn’t seem to value past nominations all that highly. In the last seven years, there have been 19 first-time nominees in their category. With the exception of Michael Kahn, no editor has received a career nomination tally of higher than five for a very long time indeed (going back for the last 20 years, anyway). No editor has ever received more than eight nominations.

Nevertheless, they still have their favorites, and I expect of one them to earn her sixth nomination this year. I am talking, of course, about the great Thelma Schoonmaker, who has been working with Martin Scorsese since they were on the same editing crew on “Woodstock” (for which she received her first nomination) all the way back in 1970. Schoonmaker has since won Oscars for Scorsese’s “Raging Bull” and “The Aviator” and been nominated for “Goodfellas” and “Gangs of New York” as well. I’d be very surprised if she doesn’t get her sixth nomination this year for the very tense, very electrifying “The Departed.”

Apart from Schoonmaker, however, there does not seem to be a single person in the running with more than two career nominations to their credit. Joel Cox has admittedly been around for a long time, however, editing the films of Clint Eastwood since 1977’s “The Gauntlet.” Yet he has only been nominated for Eastwood’s two Best Picture winners – “Unforgiven” (for which he won the award) and “Million Dollar Baby.” This year, he has edited both “Flags of Our Fathers” and “Letters from Iwo Jima” for the director. War films tend to do well in this category, so I expect him to show up for at least one of these efforts, most likely “Letters” (which seems likelier to be the bigger player overall).

Standing in sharp contrast to the editors are the musicians. This is a group that is very inclusive, having often chosen to send “their own” to the Kodak in recent years over higher profile work by up-and-comers.

Ironically enough, the vets in contention this year look poised to struggle. Eight-time nominee Hans Zimmer (“The Da Vinci Code”) and six-time nominee James Newton Howard (“Blood Diamond,” “Lady in the Water”) will fight to overcome ill feelings towars their films to garner traction. (Though Howard was nominated for “The Village” of all things, so one never knows what will happen.)

Thomas Newman’s work on Steven Soderbergh’s “The Good German” is the sort of sweeping score one would think they’d nominate; it would be the eighth nomination of his career. But he too will have to face negative feelings with regards to the film. He also has more understated work in play this year in Todd Field’s “Little Children.”

Newman’s cousin, Randy Newman, earned sixteen nominations before finally winning an Oscar in 2001. He’ll try to get back in the race for “Cars” this year. It’s not his best work, but that doesn’t always matter.

Then we come to James Horner. The hopes of this nine-time nominee will be riding on Mel Gibson’s “Apocalytpo.” Precursor attention hasn’t come yet, but that doesn’t necessarily matter for this branch; I feel he remains a good bet for this epic, action score.

All things considered, the music branch might have to venture out to those with only one or two nominations to date, such as Philip Glass, Gustavo Sanataolalla and Alberto Iglesias. Then there are those awaiting their first citation, such as Alexandre Desplat, Craig Armstrong, Clint Eastwood and son Kyle Eastwood, who arranged the score for “Letters from Iwo Jima” along with “Million Dollar Baby” alum Michael Stevens.

In the world of makeup, I’ll simply mention one name – Ve Neill. The 7-time nominee and 3-time winner (“Ed Wood,” “Mrs. Doubtfire,” “Beetlejuice”) has very showy and memorable work on display this year with “Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest.” Really the only person of her status in the race this year, she could very well be looking at her fourth statuette.

I’m tempted to venture into the world of visual effects artists and sound mixers, as past nominees frequent these categories all the time. Kevin O’Connell and Greg P. Russell tend to be nominated about every other year, for example. But the fact of the matter is that these efforts are largely team-based and feature multiple nominees for any nominated film. And the odds of a nominee not having at least one past nominee on its crew are slim indeed. So allow me to simply say that having a beloved vet certainly helps.

So there’s a look at the veterans who will be seeking to return once more to the Kodak this year. The Meryl Streeps and the Jack Nicholsons do have their comrades on the craft side of things.

Over the past couple of months, we’ve overviewed each of the individual races here at “Tech Support.” Over the next few weeks, most places will be previewing – and posting their reactions towards – the many precursor awards coming up. Obviously, I’ll be doing that for the guilds. But the fact of the matter is the influence on the tech races of these earlier awards bodies is not all that consequential.

So over the next couple of weeks, I personally plan to do a few different things, and today I’m going to do something a little personal – and make pleas for some favorites who need all the help they can get.

These aren’t necessarily contenders with no chance. In fact, I expect all of them to garner, at the very least, precursor attention of at least some sort. But these candidates will also need all the help they can get to make it across the finish line come Oscar time.

So without further adieu, my personal pleas…

BEST ART DIRECTION
“World Trade Center” (Jan Roelfs; Beth Rubino)

I must confess that I did not find Oliver Stone’s “World Trade Center” to be an overwhelming experience. But the production design nevertheless managed to accomplish a truly amazing thing: become a character in the movie. Not only did the work seem frighteningly realistic, it trapped the characters both physically and emotionally as we watched the story unfold around them.

Alas, contemporary films are seldom nominees in this category. “Men in Black” and “Gattaca” (by Roelfs himself) were both nominated in 1997, but were quite fantastical, so we’d probably have to go all the way back to 1996’s “The Birdcage” for such a precedent. Roelfs also deserved a nod for Stone’s “Alexander” as far as I’m concerned, but the reaction to that film did in his chances. Let’s hope the setting of “World Trade Center” does not keep him and set decorator Beth Rubino out this year.

BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY
“The Good German” (Peter Andrews, a.k.a. Steven Soderbergh)

I’m not sure if this contender is even eligible due to the issue of the pseudonym (EDITOR'SNOTE: It seems to have more to do with the cinematographers having issue with Soderbergh being a one-man-crew, thereby snubbing his work in this category.) But even if eligible, the branch is awfully protective of their own. No director has been nominated for lensing their own film (whereas they have scored in the music and editing categories).

And that’s a damn shame. Because the cinematography of “Andrews” is so unique, so appropriate as homage, yet also so ultimately film-serving and memorable, that it really deserves recognition. Here’s hoping against hope that a nod somehow comes to fruition.

BEST COSTUME DESIGN
“The Devil Wears Prada” (Patricia Field)

If you think the art directors are resentful of contemporary films, get a load of the costume designers. Not since “The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert” (all the way back in 1994) has a film set in the present been nominated here. But if anyone can buck this trend, it just might be Patricia Field for “The Devil Wears Prada”.

Not only are Field’s threads showcased front-and-center in the film, they also play an integral role in the plot. And Field is no stranger to awards for her television efforts on “Sex and the City” (she has four Costume Designers Guild awards and an Emmy for such work). We’re still talking about a contemporary film in “The Devil Wears Prada,” so my fingers will have to remain absolutely crossed.

BEST FILM EDITING
“United 93” (Clare Douglas, Richard Pearson, Christopher Rouse)

This might seem like a sure thing. Incredibly showy, memorable, unique and film-serving work in one of the most acclaimed films of the year. The editors’ branch, however, is known to closely mirror the Best Picture race with their picks. “United 93” is the sort of film that will really struggle to garner traction in the top categories, and none of these three editors have earned Oscar love prior to this.

BEST MAKEUP
“Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest” (Martin Samuel, Ve Neill)

Again, this might seem to be a sure bet. But as I pointed out in the Best Makeup column a few weeks ago, it is also the sort of work that could be deemed ineligible on account of the computerized Davy Jones character, while other makeup is awfully similar to the first film. I nevertheless consider the makeup effects in “Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest” to be the best of the year. So I really hope the branch gives Neill and Samuel the nod, paving the way to a win.

BEST MUSIC – ORIGINAL SCORE
“Babel” (Gustavo Santaolalla)

Gustavo Santaolalla’s venture into feature films has been one of the great treats of film music this decade. “21 Grams,” “The Motorcycle Diaries” and “Brokeback Mountain” have all been wonderfully scored films in unique ways, truly embracing the attitude of “less is more.”

Santaolalla followed up this year with another low-key but beautiful, range-filled and film-serving score for “Babel”. But the fact remains that his music is not necessarily traditional Oscar fodder and, having just won, the Academy might not feel they owe him anything.

BEST MUSIC – ORIGINAL SONG
“I Need to Wake Up” (Melissa Ethridge, “An Inconvenient Truth”)

Famous writer. Fantastic song. Great campaign behind it. Suiting to one of the most acclaimed films of the year.

So why am I bothering tossing this title out? Because there is no precedent for a documentary being nominated in this category. I’m inviting the music branch to make history here.

BEST SOUND MIXING
“Cars” (Gary Summers, Tom Myers)

Two years ago, the sound branch did something they hadn’t done in 12 years by nominating an animated film in this category. And they nominated TWO of them – “The Incredibles” and “The Polar Express”.

This year, we were treated to another exquisite sound mixing job on an animated film. The work on John Lasseter’s “Cars”, blended many types of sound effects, dialogue and mention the well-chosen musical soundtrack, to fantastic, memorable and film-serving effect. So here’s hoping that two years ago wasn’t just a fluke.

BEST SOUND EDITING
“Monster House” (Dennis Leonard)

The sound effects on “Monster House” were scary, zany, fun and film-serving. With five nominations in this category this year, one might expect this could find a home among the eventual nominees. But the film remains low-key and did not really catch on with the public in a big way.

Dennis Leonard did receive a somewhat surprising nomination two years ago in this category, however, so here’s hoping. (The great Randy Thom might share the nomination with him, as he did on “The Polar Express,” but the credits on the film do not make this clear.)

BEST VISUAL EFFECTS
“The Fountain” (Dan Schrecker, Jeremy Dawson)

I found the script for Darren Arronofsky’s “The Fountain” to be so poor that the movie could not rise above it. Visually, however, the film is a treat. Aronofsky’s unique integration of effects had no “look at me” CGI characters or moments where the effects overwhelmed the audience. Yet they were beautifully and seamlessly integrated to tell the story he wanted to tell. Creative understatement can often be the best choice.

Alas, the film has more or less flopped with both critics and audiences, and this is the category where films that “pay the bills” find their home more than anywhere else. It’s going to have a very tough struggle for a nomination.

Within the next week, we’ll see nomination announcements from the Hollywood Foreign Press Association and the Broadcast Film Critics Association. My favorite two awards-giving bodies, the New York Film Critics Circle, and the Los Angeles Film Critics Association, also give out their awards. Lots will happen between now and the next column. But before the madness truly hits us (if it already hasn’t), at least I’ve made my case for some favorites in need of help.