It is somewhat ironic that the Academy Award for art direction is not actually awarded to a film’s art director. Since William Cameron Menzies adopted the title “production designer” for his mammoth undertaking of supervising the set construction of “Gone with the Wind” almost seventy years ago, the name of the category has been a throwback to how art departments worked in the earliest days of cinema.

The production designer is the individual who is ultimately responsible for a film’s set design and its general artwork. This is the individual who ultimately receives the Oscar. The fact of the matter is that the set decorator – the individual responsible for filling up the production with specifics and props – shares the award. But primarily, one considers the production designer as responsible for a film’s sets.

This category is a haven for period and fantasy films. Designing the sets for worlds so far removed from our own is a dream for any production designer as they are given an opportunity to do something unique in the face of our typical day-to-day experience. “Amelie” is the only film nominated this decade that could realistically be described as contemporary. And even that is a fantastical film in a sense.

I often lament that the super-realistic and film-serving work of Alex McDowell on “The Terminal” wasn’t nominated. Ditto for the creativity consistently seen from David Wasco on endeavors such as Quentin Tarantino’s “Kill Bill” and Wes Anderson’s “The Royal Tenenbaums.”

But these are musings on the nature of the category. On to the contenders…

Three years ago, Dante Ferretti finally won an Academy Award in this category for “The Aviator” after seven nominations including efforts on films such as “Gangs of New York” and “Interview with the Vampire.” Tim Burton’s “Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street” ought to be period, elaborate and exactly what this category goes for. Barring the film being a disaster, I totally expect Ferretti to be amongst the nominees once more.

Another film I admit to being skeptical about with regards to how it will play overall, but I have no doubt with respect to its production design, is “The Golden Compass.” Dennis Gassner, who won the Oscar for “Bugsy” and was nominated for “Barton Fink” and “Road to Perdition,” is in charge of this endeavor. I’ll be surprised (not to mention disappointed) if his work isn’t up to snuff here. Philip Pullman’s world opens up a fantastic range of possibilities to test Gassner’s creativity.

Two years ago, Sarah Greenwood was cited with a nomination for her work on Joe Wright’s “Pride and Prejudice.” This year, she again collaborates with Wright on “Atonement,” where she’ll be able to capture war-time London, the chaos of war-torn France and an upper scale 1930s English villa. The film is already a favorite in many categories. I fully expect this nomination to come along.

David Gropman also has one and only one nomination to his credit, having been nominated eight years ago for “The Cider House Rules.” This year, he recreated all the necessary cheesiness of 1960s Baltimore for “Hairspray.” I’m skeptical that a film that is frankly as silly, if as fun, as this one will get much traction in the big race. But it could still be a big player in the crafts races and Gropman’s work is totally the sort this category embraces.

“Elizabeth: The Golden Age” has not been well received at all. But given its prestige, its grandiose and its setting, I still feel it is very much in the hunt here. Guy Dyas has been around for awhile and his work last year on “Superman Returns” was really quite impressive. He could find his first trip to the Kodak this year.

In “The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford,” Patricia Norris brings us back to the Old West of the 1880s. Norris was once a staple in the costume design category, earning five nominations from the late 1970s to late 1980s. Her work as both a costume designer and a production designer brings her right back to the centre of this year’s crafts races. Depending on how much love is shown for the film at the end of the year, a nomination here is possible.

Paul Thomas Anderson’s “There Will Be Blood” was unveiled last week to rapturous response. Production designer Jack Fisk has the responsibility of crafting early 20th century oil wells as well as the houses, churches, mansions and villages which the characters in Anderson’s epic inhabit. Fisk is married to Sissy Spacek and has been in the industry for decades (notably, he has designed the sets for all four Terrence Malick films.) The need for period accuracy will be paramount and having read the script, there will be possibility for range in the sets. Perhaps his time has come?

Occasionally, grand, fantastical sets for family films find a place in this category. “Mr. Magorium’s Wonder Emporium” could easily be such a film (in the vein of “Lemony Snicket’s A Series of Unfortunate Events”) and Thérèse DePrez’s sets really do look memorable and special. I’m admittedly not sure about how much love this film will receive, and DePrez is not seasoned on the awards circuit. So I’ll wait this one out while keeping my eye on it.

I personally loved James Mangold’s “3:10 to Yuma,” and Andrew Menzies’s production design perfectly captured the era – period, sparse, memorable yet not overpowering. But no one seems to be talking about the film in spite of very good reviews and very solid box office. I have this hunch inside of me that it’ll ultimately emerge with a single nomination to show for itself. Alas, I’m not confident that this will be the category, if it manages to get notice anywhere.

Normally, I treat sequels with extreme caution, especially when some of their predecessors failed to make the cut. But the “Pirates of the Caribbean” and “Harry Potter” series have already managed to overcome the odds in this respect. Moreover, Rick Heinrichs (“Pirates”) and especially Stuart Craig (“Potter”) are extremely respected and oft-nominated production designers. I love Heinrichs’s work on his series. I don’t see what is so great about Craig’s. But my opinion does not matter. Both artists ought not to be dismissed for “Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End” and “Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix,” respectively.

And then there’s always the possibility of something completely unexpected coming out of the woodwork and garnering traction. We shall see.

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.