Film editing is a craft that I often feel is not properly understood by the movie-going public. Many people seem to think the job is much more limited in scope than it actually is, and, indeed, fail to define it as the art form that it is. Rather, a film editor is responsible for a film’s coherence, pacing and mood, among other aspects. And in many ways, the less you notice a film’s editing, the more accomplished it may be.

Even so, the Academy tends to award showy editing, with action films, musicals and non-linear narratives tending to be major players every year. Early this decade, it appeared as though the category was incredibly tied to the Best Picture race, with match-ups of at least 3/5, usually 4/5 and, in 2002, 5/5 occurring. The last two years, however, have showed a match-up of 2/5. Perhaps we’re moving away from this?

It strikes me as a good idea to start analysis of this category with musicals, where the integration of song and dance always draws attention to the editing.

“Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street” will attempt to slash its way into the Oscar race in big fashion as Tim Burton takes Sondheim’s masterpiece to the screen. Editor Chris Lebenzon has been nominated twice before (“Top Gun” and “Crimson Tide”) so if – and this is still a big if – the film delivers, I’d expect another nod.

“Hairspray” was a surprising hit this summer and I’d say it’ll be a factor this awards season, getting a good kick start with the BFCA and Golden Globe nominations. Should it pick up steam into January, I’d say longtime veteran Michael Tronick could be looking at his first nomination. I still think “Sweeney Todd” has the better shot of the two musicals from this vantage point but, if it disappoints, that may change.

“I’m Not There” is also a musical of sorts with a very strange narrative structure. Jay Rabinowitz thoroughly deserved a nomination here for “Requiem for a Dream” as far as I’m concerned, but Haynes’s film strikes me as simply too unconventional to score a nod for the editor this time around.

In the realm of action, “American Gangster” could be leading the charge. Pietro Scalia has two Oscars to his name for “Black Hawk Down” and “JFK” (which I personally consider the best edited film ever – I mean that with no hyperbole whatsoever). “Gangster” received very solid reviews and box office and I could easily see Scalia with nomination #5 come January.

The Coen brothers are known for editing their films under the pseudonym “Roderick Jaynes.” “No Country for Old Men” has been praised for its tightness and creation of suspense. It also is bound to be a huge player this awards season. (I realize the editor of this site is being a notable holdout on its likelihood as a Best Picture nominee but there’s no denying it’ll be in the heat of contention.) While I’m not sure of history on this front, Mr. Jaynes may become the first fictional person ever to get a second nomination.

Another editing vet is John Bloom, a three-time nominee who won this award 25 years ago for “Gandhi.” This year, he’s in charge of cutting Mike Nichols’ “Charlie Wilson’s War.” The film could be a major player; it'll depend on where consensus ends up.

Arguably leading the Best Picture charge is Joe Wright‘s “Atonement.” Editor Paul Tothill will be blending three eras and very different points-of-view and storylines. I think he is probably heading for his first nomination.

“Into the Wild” is also in the thick of the Best Picture race. Sean Penn’s editor of choice, Jay Cassidy, has the best chance of his career for a nomination with this film as he guides Emile Hirsch through his journey. If the film earns a Best Picture nomination, Cassidy could very well follow with the crew to the Kodak.

Matt Chesse’s career has essentially been Marc Forster’s career. The duo collaborates again this year on “The Kite Runner.” Chesse was nominated three year ago for Forster’s Best Picture nominee “Finding Neverland.” “The Kite Runner,” like that film, strikes me as a movie that will only score in this category if it were to also make headway in the big race. So we’ll have to wait for public and critical consensus on the movie.

John Gilroy’s pacing and creation of suspense in “Michael Clayton” was well done indeed. The film’s structure could also help him out. Again, however, I think this one is dependent on how much traction the film can garner in the Best Picture race.

“There Will Be Blood” seems poised to be a critical darling. Its awards potential is more questionable but it certainly exists. Having read the script, I sense it could be a very uniquely paced film – which could work to its advantage or disadvantage in this category. Dylan Tichenor, who has had a difficult time gaining Oscar traction, is leading the charge as editor.

“3:10 to Yuma” takes us back to the Old West in grand fashion. The gun fights, the excitement and the pacing were all top-notch. Michael McKusker got a nomination two years ago for James Mangold’s last film, “Walk the Line.” Should “Yuma” get the end of year attention it deserves, I’d say he has a solid shot at returning.

Juliette Welfing ought not to be ruled out for “The Diving Bell and the Butterfly.” I have yet to see Julian Schnabel‘s film, but it’s said to be dazzling on its crafts fronts. In my opinion, it’s ultimately a question of how much traction the film can garner, especially with Miramax pushing “No Country for Old Men.”

I’ll finish with a living legend, Anne V. Coates, who is cutting “The Golden Compass.” This adaptation of Philip Pullman’s famous novel will be hitting theatres a week from Friday. Consensus on it is still unclear but should it hit, Coates, who won this award 45 years ago for “Lawrence of Arabia,” could very well be headed for another nomination.

This ends first looks at nine of the ten crafts categories. I won’t deal with the last one, Original Song, until the list of eligible tunes comes out. It’s hard to believe we’re already entering December but indeed we are. Soon, the precursors and top ten lists will be giving us more clues.