Chariots and Dark Horses

Hollywood's Buzz Factories Make a Lot of Noise at Oscar Time, but Our Handicapper Cuts Through the Clamor

Up for Best Picture, clockwise from left: "Gladiator," with Russell Crowe; "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon,' with Zhang Ziyi; "Traffic," with Benicio Del Toro; "Chocolat," with Juliette Binoche and Johnny Depp; "Erin Brockovich," with Julia Roberts.

LOS ANGELES -- Every year we tell you that Oscar campaigns couldn't get more frantic, more expensive, more insidious. Foiled again.

This year studios like Universal, Miramax and DreamWorks spent millions more dollars to win attention from Oscar voters for their nominees, using craftier tactics and unexpected venues. There were endless full-page ads in the Los Angeles Times and New York Times promoting even old films like "Erin Brockovich," in addition to the glossy covers in Daily Variety and the Hollywood Reporter. Miramax ran treacly infomercials on TV with Johnny Depp praising the virtues of "Chocolat," in which he co-starred. And this kind of exposure doesn't always have to be bought and paid for: By way of a discussion about the drug war, "Nightline" ended up doing a five-part promotional event for "Traffic."

Nominated stars showed up for every critics' and guild award imaginable (Russell Crowe, seeking to shed his bad-boy image, skidded in late to the Directors Guild to present an award for the absent Ridley Scott). At the British Oscars, the BAFTA awards, they had to drag Tom Hanks (he lost) off the arm of an aging winner he was ostensibly helping to the stage.

And, as usual, some studios stepped over the line. Sony was slapped on the hand and docked some Academy Award tickets for sending to Oscar voters both the DVD and the video of its nominated epic, "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon" (only the video is permitted). An overeager DreamWorks -- perhaps projecting a bit -- was fined four tickets for using images of the Oscar statuette in its ads.

Was it worth it? The buzz machine in the clubby world of Hollywood has been grinding away, but even with the voting closed, even with a finely tuned ear to the ground, most agree this is a very tough year for picking winners. Here's what we know.

BEST PICTURE. "Gladiator" seems to have the inside track. It has the most nominations (12), and in all but one of the past 18 years the movie with the most nominations took the top prize. Also, it's flashy, epic and reminiscent of the Roman-toga films that many Academy members might have seen as kids. A textbook Best Picture in many ways. Then again, "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon" has captivated a lot of moviegoers. It's both a critical and commercial success, which Academy members seem to like, and would be an innovative choice. On the other hand, the Academy may choose to reward this film in the foreign-language category. Steven Soderbergh's "Traffic," while riding an astounding wave of debate and praise in the serious media, seems too dark to win this category, and "Erin Brockovich" doesn't seem important enough. "Chocolat" is nominated here only because Miramax is indefatigable and -- you know already, right? -- it's a weak movie year. The pick: "Gladiator."

BEST ACTOR. This may turn out to be the most difficult category in which to pick a winner, and competition for this slot is always killer. Russell Crowe started out with the inside track, largely because the Australian is becoming a great big movie star and came into focus alongside the most nominated film. He also delivered a great performance in "The Insider" and did not win last year. But there was that little scandal involving him and a certain married American sweetheart star, Meg Ryan, whom he wooed, then apparently dumped. Bad form, matey. Which left a wide breach for Hollywood Student Body President Tom Hanks to sneak in and remind everyone what a good guy he is (decent, married, American) and how unique and daring his performance was in "Cast Away." Never mind that he's already won two statues in this category and no one has ever won three; Hanks's biggest obstacle will be that few in the Academy really liked his movie. That may leave an opening for Ed Harris, who has been campaigning madly for "Pollock," his labor of love. Javier Bardem might deserve to win for playing Cuban poet Reinaldo Arenas, but not enough people know him or have seen the film "Before Night Falls." And the delicious Geoffrey Rush lost momentum before he was even nominated, when critics and audiences failed to embrace the overly gory "Quills," in which he plays the Marquis de Sade. The oh-heck-let's-be-daring pick: A vote split might give it to Harris.

BEST ACTRESS. Julia Roberts. Next. Oh, are there other nominees? Joan Allen is much respected and her performance in "The Contender" well regarded, but the film was tainted by charges that it was tweaked in the editing room to make the liberals look nicer. Ellen Burstyn may be the most deserving, giving a fearless, frenzied performance in "Requiem for a Dream"; in another year she might have won, since she gets points for attacking such a difficult role late in her career. But "Requiem" is hard to watch, and probably not everyone will. So no one beats Queen Julia this year. Laura Linney has a shot, but the understated role as single mother and caring sister in a New England town in "You Can Count on Me" may not be considered challenging enough. Juliette Binoche, up for playing an itinerant chocolatier in "Chocolat," won previously, and no one seems to think this performance, while lovely, is deserving of a statue.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR. This award has Benicio Del Toro written all over it. Benicio -- it's Spanish for "very cool dude" -- has already won the Golden Globe, Screen Actors Guild (for best actor, go figure) and numerous critics' awards for playing a moral cop in Mexico amid the morass of the drug war in "Traffic." His closest competitor, however, is Albert Finney in "Erin Brockovich." Finney, who has been nominated four times for Best Actor and never won, is beloved by numerous older (which is to say, most) members of the Academy who know and respect his career, but he's spent no time at all schmoozing them. A fatal error, perhaps. Willem Dafoe is also well regarded, but his portrayal of a bloodsucker in "Shadow of a Vampire" might be too much for those outside the acting branch. Jeff Bridges is well liked but the movie was too small, as was his role in it ("The Contender"; he was the president). Joaquin Phoenix was impressive, but he's still young and not ready for the sculpted gold naked man. The Pick: Toro! Toro! Toro!

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS. Another tough category, with possibilities rife for a split vote. Kate Hudson seems the obvious choice; the Academy frequently gives this statue to a promising ingenue (Marisa Tomei, Mira Sorvino) whose career promptly tanks (Marisa Tomei, Mira Sorvino). Hudson was a lovely surprise in "Almost Famous," is Hollywood royalty -- the daughter of Goldie Hawn -- and scores big points in the adorability department. Can't wait for her speech. But you can never count out the formidable Frances McDormand, a powerhouse as the protective, professorial mother in the same film, who gave another great performance this year in "Wonder Boys." Marcia Gay Harden, who matches every bit of Ed Harris's ferocity in "Pollock" as artist Lee Krasner, may suffer from the film being small, and not enough people seeing it. Julie Walters ("Billy Elliot") is way off the buzz-meter, but never, never underestimate Dame Judi Dench, who won for nine minutes as Queen Elizabeth I in "Shakespeare in Love" and pulled out a surprise win this year at the Screen Actors Guild for "Chocolat." The pick: Kate Hudson, though not by much.

BEST DIRECTOR. Ang Lee has been a darling of the critics, the media and his fellow craftsmen for months on end. He won the Directors Guild award, and he has a body of impressive work, unrewarded so far by an Oscar. Most Academy members probably know the saga of making "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon," a 10-month shoot in China under difficult conditions, which gives him an extra push. In fact, it's hard to see who could knock him out of this race except for Ridley Scott, whose technical skill and visual mastery make "Gladiator" what it is, a blood-racing (not to mention bloody), thrilling tableau with good acting to boot. Steven Soderbergh -- poor Steven Soderbergh -- may well have won this category if not for the fact that his fans may be split between two works, "Traffic" and "Erin Brockovich." Consensus seems to be that "Traffic" is more deserving of the two, but it's not clear that all the voters will agree on this. Stephen Daldry, a Brit who has been absent from the Oscar campaigns, is not even in the final heat for the charming "Billy Elliot." The pick: Ang Lee.

BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY. "Traffic" seems the likely winner for numerous reasons. One, it's a masterpiece of interwoven story lines and gripping dialogue. Two, screenwriter Stephen Gaghan has spilled his guts in the media about his own struggle with addiction and his difficult climb toward sobriety, so there's a heroic aspect. Three, he's already won the Writers Guild and Golden Globe. Four, look at what he's up against: an almost dialogue-free martial-arts extravaganza, "Crouching Tiger"; a quirky musical that doesn't really seem to be adapted from "The Odyssey," "O Brother, Where Art Thou?"; a whimsical but lightweight fable, "Chocolat"; and the only real competition, the critically praised "Wonder Boys," but that film doesn't seem to have much momentum. The critics loved it, but almost nobody else did. The pick: "Traffic."

BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY. It's a showdown between the ever-skilled and much-loved writer-director Cameron Crowe for his personal tale about an adolescent rock writer, "Almost Famous," and talented newcomer Kenneth Lonergan, also a writer-director, with his intimate and heartfelt fictional tale "You Can Count on Me." Universal has been promoting Susannah Grant's screenplay for "Erin Brockovich" like mad, running full-page ads with chunks of dialogue, but the Academy may figure this film is rewarded enough with the anointment of Queen Julia. "Gladiator" seems likely to sweep the technical awards but is an unlikely winner here given the competition. "Billy Elliot" is sweet, but let's face it -- not only is it foreign, but with the thick accents and local slang, much may be lost in the lack of translation. The pick: "You Can Count on Me," by a hair.