Oscar analysis

American cinema hasn't had a year like 2007 for decades, and chances are it will not have another year like it for many more to come. Directors and screenwriters saw which way the wind was blowing and crafted rich, dark portraits of our country. All that, and Americans still had time to chuckle about this year's Little Miss Teen Pregnancy.

It's almost a shame that after so many great films, we have to cap off a year of excellence with the Academy Awards. The Writer's Guild folded just in time to keep the Oscars on the air and so, in similar fashion, Diversions' editors and writers sat down to discuss our Oscar picks.

diversionsdbk@gmail.com

BEST ACTOR:

Zachary Herrmann: Is anyone really going to argue against Daniel Day-Lewis (There Will Be Blood) and if so, how?

Dan Benamor: It's definitely the showiest role.

ZH: Day-Lewis is going to be remembered forever for this role.

Roxana Hadadi: Half of these nominees are pity nominees. Johnny Depp (Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street) was good, but it was similar to Denzel Washington's nomination for Training Day to make up for his loss as best actor in a leading role for Malcolm X. It is one of those things where you get nominated and you probably won't get it, but the academy is like, "Yo, we still like ya, kid."

Staff pick: Daniel Day-Lewis in There Will Be Blood.

BEST ACTRESS:

ZH: I'd put it between Marion Cotillard (La Vie en Rose) and Laura Linney (The Savages).

Thomas Floyd: As much as I loved Ellen Page's performance in Juno and I would say it's among the best three of the year with her, Cotillard and Julie Christie (Away From Her), I actually think her role might not have enough heavy material to get the win. She definitely deserves the nomination. She encompasses the role in a way that completely creates a believable character and makes the movie, but I don't think she really deserves to win this time. The fact that Christie has never won an Oscar shocked me.

RH: I think it's gonna be Cotillard, because no one saw the movie.

DB: I think Cotillard had the showiest role, so I think she will win. As for who deserves to win, I'd love to see Linney win.

ZH: I'd love to see Linney win too. I think Cotillard deserves to win but Christie will win because she's never won - and because she's American. No, seriously, that goes a long way. They don't traditionally give it to the foreign actors.

RH: Look what Roberto Benigni (La Vita è Bella) did, they don't want a repeat performance of that insanity at the awards.

Staff pick: Marion Cotillard, La Vie En Rose

BEST DIRECTOR:

ZH: For director it's such a hard choice.

RH: No Country for Old Men: I'll give it to Joel and Ethan Coen because the movie is a clusterf---, with a real good chase, tension, palpable, everything out of control. And they do a really good job of balancing it all and still leaving you on that depressing note of, 'this is what the world is like.' The world is f---ed up, things go wrong, crimes go by that no one ever solves and there's never any justice. But that is the Coen brothers, and that doesn't make their film as good as Paul Anderson's There Will Be Blood .

DB: Blood for Anderson is kind of a departure for him and it's much more simple. While I think it's a much better movie than in the actual directing and the way everything was staged, No Country requires a lot more from the Coen brothers, and I think it achieves a lot more.

Rudi Greenberg: You have to look at what the Coen brothers did with nothing. They had no music, nothing, and they keep suspense up more than Anderson did in Blood.

Staff pick: Joel and Ethan Coen, No Country For Old Men.

BEST PICTURE:

DB: I think we'll probably end up agreeing that Blood is the best picture. For me, No Country is a great movie, but to some extent it's sort of this vague philosophy of, "Yeah things have gotten worse." I saw it with my father, who's like, 45, and he's like, "Terrible things happened when I was young, too."

In terms of ambition and what they say, Blood reaches so much farther and says so much more. And there's so much more you can sorta grab on to and take from that movie as opposed to No Country, which to some extent is just an excellently executed genre piece. People have said Blood will be studied for years and years to come, and in all my classes where we study American classics, the American dream and capitalism, I keep thinking back to Blood, because there's so much resonance there in what it means to be American.

ZH: It is a great American film. Once again I'll say I think you can make the case for either. I agree about Blood being an American film - it's capitalism and evangelism duking it out, what could be more American? It's bloody, it's got corruption, it's got Day-Lewis - I would totally back that.

RH: I think the one fear I have is, what if the Academy decides to pee in all of our faces and pick Juno or Atonement?

RG: Here's what's going to happen. Everyone is comparing No Country and Blood as the same kind of movie, but I'm really concerned it's going to be a split between the two of those and then a movie such as Atonement, but probably not Juno. Michael Clayton could also pull a Herbie Hancock [this year's Grammy Award winner for Best Album] and win out of nowhere, but I honestly think that while both Blood and No Country are deserving, neither may win, just because the vote may be split.

ZH: Don't underestimate the power of the period romance on the Oscar judges because they love that shit. With Atonement the cinematography is very pretty and it was good, so I could see them picking that.

TF: The strong point about Atonement is the that last 10 minutes of the movie put it into a perspective that just raises the rest of it up. The thing with Juno is, it's the movie that everybody really likes ... I'm kinda playing devil's advocate because I would vote for Blood, but I'm just kind of putting the argument there because the thing with Juno is that it's the best film in its genre [comedy] in such a long time.

RG: The problem is, Juno isn't even the best comedy this year; you could put Knocked Up or Superbad over that. Juno is good at what it did. It's very enjoyable. I'm very surprised at what it did. The fact that it became the No. 1 picture and had the No. 1 soundtrack, and now it's even nominated in this many categories - I really didn't expect that from this kind of movie. But the fact of the matter is, it's not the best picture of the year - it's not even the best comedy of the year.

RH: The thing is, though, you can't even compare these movies. Day-Lewis is not the same as Michael Cera (Juno), I'm sorry.

DB: As far Atonement goes, it's so incredibly overrated; just because it's Oscar-ish and has all this shit reminiscent of Titanic does not make it a good movie. There's a reason why it's not nominated in any of the acting categories, because it's not that good of a movie and it's not really emotionally engaging - it's just really pretty.

TF: The thing I really loved about Blood is it has two of the most engaging character relationships in film this year. Day-Lewis and Paul Dano and then with his son H.W. (Dillon Freasier). Those two relationships drive the movie and it's so amazing looking into those mentalities.

ZH: "Bastard from a basket!"

Staff pick: There Will Be Blood