The Timeliness of War Horse

To judge a year in cinematic terms is easier to do some years than others, but in particularly strong years one can see strong trends in thematic elements explored throughout some of the more popular films of the year that reflect a certain air in the zeitgeist. As the Bush era was drawing to a close, darker fare like No Country for Old Men or There Will Be Blood were among the first names out of the lips of those familiar with the cinematic atmosphere of 2007. Entering the Obama age, an uptick in hopefulness brought about films like Slumdog Millionaire dominating the filmic discourse. Whatever this says about our current place in the annals of history this year — disillusionment with the social climate, a yearning for a better time — the trend as of late has dealt with strong feelings of nostalgia, revisiting your past, even confronting your new future. One could have seen this last year in 2010 between an emotionally awkward youth reshaping the social landscape at the costs of leaving behind those who simply couldn't keep up (Eduardo Saverin and the Winklevii) with the new era in The Social Network or a British monarch who needed serious help in adapting to the new technology of radio to keep his country together as war loomed in The King's Speech. More notably this year is how much those themes and sentiments have been vocalized so clearly in such a plethora of the very defining films of this year.

Terrence Malick's magnum opus The Tree of Life, arguably the most aesthetically significant cinematic event of the new millennium, juxtaposes at once the reflection of suburban childhood in the 1950s with the prehistoric past of the Earth to dwarf its significance in the longer scheme of its epochs of the past heading into future millennia. Owen Wilson's character in Allen's Midnight in Paris literally finds himself able to go back in time to his favorite era only to find there the same weariness of their own times. Nicolas Winding Refn's Drive mimics the flashy stylings of 80s action flicks with a sense of slowly churning dark dread underpinning the action sequences (not unlike the 1980-set No Country for Old Men) the same way Michel Hazanavicius' The Artist harkens back to Hollywood in the silent era as unwilling stars from the time watch it transition to sound. The introduction of the new technology resonates with those in the industry as it clearly parallels contemporary Hollywood as 3D increasingly finds profitability in the marketplace, as evidenced by Martin Scorsese's utilization of the newly expressive potential the technology adds to the cinematic language in Hugo, a film in which film pioneer Georges Méliès himself stops shying away from his past in the film industry and acknowledges just how forward he pushed the new medium in his own time.

What positions this year as a landmark in Steven Spielberg's career is how his two films this year places into the conversation in very similar means. The Adventures of Tin Tin uses a 3D motion capture technology on the surface but is still said to flow with the very cinematically adventurous gusto that defined Spielberg's career in the first half of his career with films like the Indiana Jones series. War Horse, however, is singularly as definitive of Spielberg's abilities and career as anything he's ever made. John William's swelling score awaits viewers of this film at every turn as a backdrop to Janusz Kaminski's lensing each shot in the vein of films like The Searchers or Gone with the Wind, among others. Nothing in the film is left unsaid, nothing is made unclear, parts of it as as sweet as the most cinematically sugary entries in his canon as the scenes of World War I trench warfare seem as brutal and viscerally trying as the storming of Normandy he chronicled in Saving Private Ryan. As he operates on this film full throttle firing on every cylinder in the most Spielbergian sense, it either works for you or it doesn't. For me I was much more easily able to look pass the emotional obviousness of some of the scenes, the predictability and the clear need to suspend disbelief at certain points because the rest of the film simply worked. The score that informed every emotion you were meant to feel, each reaction shot as a close-up allowing the talented group of actors little in way of subtle emotional expression, something about it still just managed to keep me tuned in and enjoy the ride at every turn.

If this kind of thing has never worked for you in a Spielberg film, though, it's not going to now. That reason being that the main functionality of War Horse in the cinematic conversation, what feels like the central purpose in every bone of its being, is how it harkens back to its own artistic voices behind the film at their peak in the same way that Drive does to 80s action films or The Artist does to the silent studio films and, in fact, this did somewhat to the quintessential American films of John Ford in spite of its strictly European settings (but not entirely unlike how the largely French creators and cast behind The Artist approached that film with accessible contemporaneity). Maybe better and less obviously than any other film has attempted to this year, War Horse will best satisfy the nostalgic thirst clearly evident in the desires of moviegoers this year at this time by simply being closest to that thrill and classic feel of such a story told this way that seems to have been missing in the marketplace for so long. The romanticization of the landscape, the scope of the story going between Scottish farmers and German soldiers and French civilians all affected by the War, the risk and stakes apparent in trench warfare, and the very resilience of this central character you find in this strong horse and the universal sentimentality he inspires in anyone who crosses his path.

A probably drawn out opening act that establishes this horse and his young owner's borderline Equus-like obsession with him embodies the spirit of a youthful pre-World War naïveté that can reflect a spectator's fond memories of when they themselves felt that same spirit before surrounding events hardened them to the point where Peter Mullan's character as a drunken father was in the beginning bogged down by his own traumatic memories of war and a life plagued by poverty and poor luck. Exaggerated though it may be, though at a certain point exaggeration becomes the norm in a film like this, Mullan's character almost serves as the entire audience who watches all of the events in this film unfurl in a way that forever wipes away that spirit of pre-war naïveté amongst everyone else and the realization everyone seems to come to of just how cyclical the nature of these sorts of sentiments are that our moviegoing sensibilities seem to be feeling as evidenced by the strikingly similar themes in all of these films out there this year. Last year we went through being confronted by a future we were unsure how to face to a nostalgic escape to the past only to find that it's our present and, ultimately, that scary future that we must ultimately face and come to terms with. Read more!

Best of 2011, so far:

Here we are. It's August, and as the summer season winds to a close we find ourselves headed towards festival season as the New York Film Festival announced their lineup this week. Last year I was able to see greats there like Uncle Boonmee Who Can Recall His Past Lives, Another Year, Poetry and Certified Copy with a few duds thrown in like Of Gods and Men and Aurora. More or less, however, that's when my figures by which to evaluate the "best of the year" begin to take shape. I'm still ruminating on what to catch there, although I do expect A Separation, The Artist and This Is Not a Film to all at least be the definites. I do think, though, that 2011 has been a fairly solid year so far already, and I want to use this post as a place to provide some of what I feel are the highlights thus far.



I'll start with Beginners by Mike Mills which, though well responded to, was a charming little surprise for me. Christopher Plummer may well take home an Oscar this year for playing an elderly man who comes out as gay immediately upon the death of his long-time wife and spends the short remainder of his own life trying to live the gay lifestyle deprived of him for so long. Ewan McGregor plays his son who narrates this story, who steals the show as an artist living with the pressures of his commercial work getting in the way of his desire for further expression, the sympathetic memories of his mother absent of a true husband all her adult life and keeping a girlfriend as lonely and pained as he is. His performance grounds the film in a no-nonsense realism and simplicity that balls up all these humane layers and throws it at you straight. It's fine work from all the actors involved with the help of a substantive, relatable, mature and honest script.



This summer has largely been dubbed the summer of R-rated comedies. I'm not really sure why but I guess there's been a lot of fairly successful ones released, but none quite reach the level of towering achievement as the Kristen Wiig vehicle Bridesmaids. Parts of it are equally as funny as they are painfully sad as they are harmless fun as they are simply compelling. Co-writer Kristen Wiig seemed to write herself a character that brilliantly displays her versatility in shining form, necessary for her to get past her reputation of little more than successful caricature-artist on Saturday Night Live. Her character is someone suffering through a hole of bad economic times, crushed dreams and romantic loneliness that there seems to be no foreseeable way out of. It drowns her with a deflated sense of self that's easily irritated with any further fear, envy, heartbreak or inadequacy that becomes all but guaranteed when her childhood friend asks her to be her maid of honor at her wedding. It's a tour de force of comedic performing with a better acted ensemble than, say, last year's The Fighter, more timely and resonant with the economic atmosphere than Up in the Air, more successful gross-out humor than either Hangover and funnier than any film since the last SNL star-penned script of Mean Girls by Tina Fey. It's brazenly fearless in how much emotionality Wiig throws into the story, utterly ruthless in how long she'll subject the audience to long awkward moments that are funny but leave you feeling as hopeless as necessary to connect with her central character's woes throughout the film — central to both its hilarity and its sadness.



I did a review of Paddy Considine's directorial debut Tyrannosaur a little while ago, but what's especially worth mentioning with the film now is it as a performance vehicle. To me, there seems to be no films on the horizon for the rest of the year that will be as jam packed with such a plethora of mindblowing performances. Considine in his directing and both Marsan and Mullan in their performances bring an uncanny ability to bring horrifying empathy to monsters and other monstrosities. Mullan, in particular, does wonders with so little; never falling into traps of going over the top to cheaply capitalize on melodramatic emotion nor does he underplay with an illusion of depth. What sums up how impressive his performance is can be pointed to the fact that his showiest and shoutiest moments are still shaded with many nuanced layers of subtlety and complexities that very few other actors — even those as well seasoned and as advanced in ability as Mullan — are capable of pulling off. Olivia Colman plays antithetical to the entire film and ultimately reveals a profound darkness in her purity and grace. In my opinion, she has less to do overall than Mullan but still matches him in plenty of scenes — including her "big scene," which I would bet money will remain to be the single most well acted scene of this year when everything else is all said and done.



I've already talked earlier this year on this blog about how beautiful I felt Bal is, and it remains to this day strong enough in my mind to be a worthy runner-up to talk about the best of this year, and I at least don't see it leaving a top 3 by the end of it. The cinematography is truthfully as beautiful as any film I believe that you'll ever see and encompasses everything great cinematography should be; it's beautiful but unobtrusive, it adds a layer of perspective to the storytelling and isn't just there to look pretty (looking at you, Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford!). And the child performance by Bora Altas at the center of it remains, in my mind, the best child performance period since Mohammad Ramezani in The Color of Paradise.



I don't think I've gotten the opportunity yet this Summer to muse on Terrence Malick's long awaited Tree of Life on this blog. To be honest, I was kind of dreading it. And I do find it very difficult to discuss, or to write about, or just to verbalize in any other way. Partly because the film is hardly wordy. It's not too rooted or concerned with plot. To its credit, it is ultimately cinematic. It is ultimately a story that could have only been told through Malick's imagery. It's themes and messages and "meanings" could only be told through the emotional interaction one has with the images on screen. It's not inherently a better form of cinema, but to me an undoubtedly purer one that's of the utmost difficulty. It's life and love and dreams and loss and sadness and greatness and family and grace and coming of age and coming to terms. It is as humane a film as you'll ever see, and Robert De Niro's jury at Cannes assured it status in the larger realm of film history, as well as the FIPRESCI group of critics naming it the best film of the past year, that it is the most important movie you'll see this year. Whether it's the best movie you'll see this year? Obviously that's up for you to decide. It's not a matter of "getting it" or "not getting it" or being purposefully pompous and pretentious versus intellectual vapidity, it's simply a matter of whether you emotionally connect with it or not. For me, I did. I let the images wash over me in what seemed to me as one of the grandest sensory visual experiences I've ever had in a cinema; and whether or not you'd like the film I would recommend the theatrical experience to anyone who possibly can make their way there. To me, it's the finest film of the year so far and will be tough to knock off the top spot. Read more!

April Fool's Predictions

I know we just got over Oscar season, but keeping track of the kinds of things being predicted this early in the year does allow one to know which movies to be on the lookout for later this year and judge for yourself. It's also kind of fun just looking back at the end of it to see how wrong you were. So, let's see how wrong I'll be.

I'll only do Picture, Director, and the Acting categories. Because otherwise, naturally, I haven't the slightest clue.

Best Picture:
A Better Life
Beginners
Carnage
A Dangerous Method
The Ides of March
J. Edgar
My Week With Marylin
The Tree of Life
War Horse
Young Adult

When you think of the kinds of things that appeal to the Academy, you have to look at several factors; the pedigree of the director and how dependable their track record is in appealing to the Academy, the actors involved (actors by far making up the largest branch of voters), those behind distribution (I would not predict My Week With Marylin without the Harvey factor), and some wild guesses at the token indie slots. Last year there were two slots for movies that really embodied the indie "spirit" in The Kids Are All Right and Winter's Bone. One was a gay comedy released in the summer and the other was a quiet and somber study of a lesser represented region of this country also released in the summer in Winter's Bone. In fact, there were four movies nominated last year released in the summer — Inception and Toy Story 3 joining the two indies mentioned. Those were two significant blockbuster films, as there were two blockbuster films nominated the year before in District 9, from that Summer, and, of course, Avatar from that Winter. These predictions include three movies to be released this summer — Beginners, A Better Life, and The Tree of Life; technically all indies, but the latter with something like a $200 million budget. War Horse is another expected blockbuster to be released later in the year.

Beginners, like The Kids Are All Right, is a gay themed comedy. Of course, I'm not only predicting the movie parallel to The Kids Are All Right's nomination last year, but because of the pedigree of the actors — many people would love to see Christopher Plummer not just nominated, but winning while they still have the chance to reward the 81 year old who only just received his first nomination two years ago for The Last Station. Ewan McGregor and Mélanie Laurent have also been in films successful with the Academy before, and with an indie film like this, despite what you might think it takes away from the indie "spirit," you need actors of a certain caliber to bring it Academy attention (as The Kids Are All Right had done with the likes of Annette Bening, Julianne Moore and Mark Ruffalo). A Better Life, I compare to Winter's Bone because of what seems like its subdued nature as well as its dealings with themes of poverty (manifested through the issue of immigration in A Better Life). What convinces me to predict this, again, is not its similarities to Winter's Bone but because of Dave Karger's insistence that it's a film that should appeal to the Academy despite its low key nature. Remember, Dave Karger was at one time the ONLY pundit predicting The King's Speech to win Best Picture which, ultimately, it of course did, while The Social Network had been winning every award known to man until that point.

Meanwhile, The Tree of Life looks slated to take the spot of the summer blockbuster hit that was also critically reviewed assuming Malick does not disappoint with this film that those paying attention have been waiting years for. Another completely possible idea is for the second installment of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, with good enough reviews and even better box office than expected, to take the slot with the help of tech branches trying to reward the very lucrative and iconic series as a whole. There is often, too, an animated feature that could feature in the slot as Toy Story 3 and Up have the past two years and the likes of WALL·E, Ratatouille and Finding Nemo could well have done prior. Funny thing is, those are all Pixar films, and unless Cars 2 highly exceeds the expectations set by their more underwhelming original, I don't think they'll repeat their success this year. And if they can't do it, I don't think any of the other animated films this year will, either. The other blockbuster I am predicting, however, is Steven Spielberg's War Horse. Of a grander scale than anything he's done recently, it seems as though Spielberg can make something serious when he wants to and get it Oscar nominated even though he refuses to campaign. Refusing to campaign, Schindler's List still swept the Oscars. Refusing to campaign, he still won Best Director for Saving Private Ryan. Refusing to campaign, even with lesser reviews and little talk of the possibilities, motherfucking Munich still brought him nominations for both Picture and Director. If he's serious about this, even if it's not that good, I feel like War Horse is very possible to feature in next year's Oscar show.

Going beyond that, of course, is slightly harder to prognosticate. I have My Week With Marylin featured because of an all star cast, a lot of British interest and a Harvey Weinstein endorsement. These are all the same factors evident in The King's Speech, although with less bait-inducing factors to its story (though still perfectly up the Academy's alley). That seems to check off plenty of demographics that one would have to perform strongly with to get nominated. Carnage is the upcoming Roman Polanski film based on the Pulitzer winning play with strong actors — John C. Reilly, Jodie Foster, Kate Winslet and Christoph Waltz — playing strong roles. I expect it to be highly lauded and for the actors and director to bring a lot of attention and adoration for the picture. Many seem eager for David Cronenberg to break through at the Academy Awards, as he's slowly been getting closer to all his career, and seems like it's possible with this year's A Dangerous Method — a biopic featuring Freud and Jung starring an illustrious cast including Viggo Mortensen, Keira Knightley, and Michael Fassbender (who will be in no less than five movies this year and seeming overdue for Hollywood star status after a sudden spout of several great consecutive years of performances). George Clooney also looks slated to have a banner year starring in the ever popular Alexander Payne's upcoming The Descendants, but more importantly acting and directing The Ides of March — another play adaptation with a killer cast (Ryan Gosling, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Clooney, Marisa Tomei) with thinly veiled political messages as well. If you ask me, it could be the film to get Ryan Gosling an Oscar and the whole film could go all the way as well. Clint Eastwood's been less successful with the Academy lately, but he hasn't come up with anything nearly as baity as J. Edgar in a long time with a central performance as Oscar-hungry as DiCaprio's is destined to be. Not to mention a screenplay penned by already Oscar winning Dustin Lance Black, and juicy looking supporting performances by Judi Dench and Armie Hammer. And, last but not least, Young Adult seems like it could be a continuation of Jason Reitman's stunning hot streak of Picture, Director, and performance nominations that seemed at its apex two years ago with Up in the Air.

What are some other possibilities? I'd actually look out for some foreign fare to finally break through in the top 10 with many high profile international filmmakers bringing work out this year. Consider Oscar winner Almodovar's The Skin I Inhabit this year, or Berlin winning Iranian film A Separation which, it seems — thrilling news for me — a new height reached for the Iranian film scene never before matched.

Naturally, the director nominees will come from this list. Who will be the five who stand out? In my opinion:

Best Director:
George Clooney - The Ides of March
Clint Eastwood - J. Edgar
Terrence Malick - The Tree of Life
Roman Polanski - Carnage
Steven Spielberg - War Horse

Of course, though, this list does seem a bit too "all-star." There's usually a Tom Hooper thrown in for good measure. But I'm just going with names I know they love. The director's branch is kind to actors turned directors, and everyone loves George Clooney. They just do. The Academy also loves Eastwood and Spielberg. If Malick hits Tree of Life out of the park then I don't see how he isn't nominated. As for Polanski, well, not only do they love/support him but I think they'll genuinely love the film. Also consider, however, some comedic directors in the form of Alexander Payne for The Descendants or Jason Reitman for Young Adult. Remember, Reitman even got Director nominated for Juno. Juno. Not that it wasn't one of the most refreshing choices of the past decade, but...it's Juno. Director nominated film Juno.

Best Actor in a Leading Role:
Demián Bichir - A Better Life
Leonardo DiCaprio - J. Edgar
Michael Fassbender - A Dangerous Method
Ryan Gosling - The Ides of March
Gary Oldman - Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy

A Better Life is overall a bit of a gamble for me, but as I said, these categories aren't always simply all-star names. And sometimes, if a film really connects with voters, an lesser known central performer will reap the benefits as such. As I said before, DiCaprio is bloodthirsty for an Oscar, Fassbender has five films this year and I can only hope his good talents are finally recognized this year for a baity project, and Gosling looks to be working on a juicy role that he can completely nail (potentially as perfectly as he embodied Dean in Blue Valentine — high praise coming from me, mind you). Gary Oldman, however, is of the perfect age to win an Oscar and many have been astounded for two decades that the man has yet to be nominated. Going simply on technical factors, Oldman would look to be the one to beat. That said, many people are awaiting Johnny Depp (also beloved by the Academy) to even potentially win for The Rum Diaries. Although, if you ask me, the film's delay from last year to this year seems like a bad omen (apparently they didn't want him to compete with himself in The Tourist — color me skeptical). Also, as I mentioned before, if The Skin I Inhabit does well then look for Antonio Banderas to continue Bardem's tradition of nominated spanish speaking roles.

It could be my own favoritism speaking, here, but I think Peter Mullan could very well be the Javier Bardem of this year. That is to say, someone who simply gets in on the merits of their performances being that good. And, if you ask me, Mullan is even better than Bardem was. Although Bardem did have heavy Hollywood support and active campaigning from the likes of Julia Roberts. We'll see, though (he needs critics' support, although I learned last year not to trust them to reward the rightfully inspired performances).

Best Actress in a Leading Role:
Glenn Close - Albert Nobbs
Jodie Foster - Carnage
Meryl Streep - The Iron Lady
Charlize Theron - Young Adult
Michelle Williams - My Week with Marylin

First, my suspicions: this list skews particularly old. It would be a refreshing change, but the starlets always break through. It's never too young, but consider Sidibe and Mulligan '09. Consider Lawrence and Williams and Portman '10. However, this is a list I have trouble straying from. Glenn Close is consider one of the most overdue actresses for an Oscar win, ever, and in Albert Nobbs she crossdresses in World War II England. Any questions? There shouldn't be any doubt that people desperately want Meryl Streep to win a third Oscar, let alone the one Glenn Close doesn't yet have, as evidenced by her string of consecutive nominations for any vaguely caricature performance a la The Devil Wears Prada, Doubt or Julie & Julia. Each time she ran arguably in second place. Playing Margaret Thatcher, she's one I would think of as even safer for a nomination than Glenn Close (although I don't think she'll win her third until she plays a more natural, humane character a la Adaptation. which I think she can get in a few years with August: Osage County). Jodie Foster will have a very good year also directing The Beaver which, despite the Gibson factor, people seem to be enjoying. Meanwhile she's won two Oscars already and shows no sign of wain in talent, and there's no evidence that she won't give a terrific performance at the hands of the performance maestro who is Roman Polanski. And Charlie Theron would consider the Reitman tradition of nominated central performers – Ellen Page, George Clooney, and now Charlize Theron.

And then there's Michelle Williams. In my opinion, undoubtedly the most talented actress of her generation. No one her age has given a performance as good as Brokeback Mountain, or Wendy & Lucy, or (and especially) Blue Valentine. She was very shaky on getting a nomination this past year but Harvey Weinstein got her there, and much of her campaigning then was around the premise of awaiting her turn as Marylin Monroe in My Week With Marylin. Many people question whether she can simply do it — whether she can mimic the sex appeal that dripped out of Monroe. However, when Michelle Williams talked about her difficulty and how much scrutiny she put into analyzing the ways Monroe would manipulate her physicality, it seems like Williams is well aware. And, frankly, she's a talented enough actress to pull it off more than actress who may bear a superficial resemblance to Monroe. Two pictures have been released so far of Williams' role — one looked more like Marylin than the other — but the fact remains that she'll have the full force of Harvey Weinstein behind her and she is more of the mold of the standard actress winner — the younger, hotter starlet. In a biopic role. With a Weinstein-driven campaign. Not to mention, just how talented this young starlet is. It frankly reminds me of the talk Colin Firth had for The King's Speech while he was campaigning for A Single Man. And we all know how that ended up.

There is a lot to look out for, though. Look out, for example, for Elizabeth Olsen in the Sundance hit Martha Marcy May Marlene. Yes, Elizbeth Olsen, as in the younger sister of the Olsen twins who had two indie movies premiere at Sundance to stunning notice. Past starlets to have been nominated after Sundance premieres include Jennifer Lawrence, Carey Mulligan and Gabourey Sidibe. Also from Sundance is Felicity Jones from Like Crazy — which one the biggest prize (as did Winter's Bone and Precious). People are also hoping Kirstin Dunst could have a major comeback playing the usual tortured woman in a Lars Von Trier (director of Antichrist, Dancer in the Dark, Dogville, etc.) flick and be the first woman since Emily Watson in 1996 to be nominated for a Trier film.

Best Actress in a Supporting Role:
Jessica Chastain - Take Shelter
Judi Dench - My Week With Marylin
Vanessa Redgrave - Coriolanus
Marisa Tomei - The Ides of March
Kate Winslet - Carnage

Jessica Chastain looks like she'll shine in Malick's The Tree of Life, but we have to remember that Malick's never directed a nominated performance ever. She also, however, has a performance in what looks like a good (don't know about baity, though) Take Shelter. But you can interchange that performance with hers in The Tree of Life for the purposes of these predictions. Same with Judi Dench, who will also be in J. Edgar. I'm not sure which role will be more substantial, though. Vanessa Redgrave is said to be astounding in Ralph Fiennes' Iraqi update of the Shakespearean play, while Kate Winslet plays an extraordinarily difficult role in Carnage that I trust she will pull off. Consider Marisa Tomei a hunch considering just how brilliantly she plays supporting roles again and again, whether nominated or not (although in the slightest of baity films, she tends to get nominated). Mia Wasikowska has also had a highlight couple of years, however, and you can look out for her this year in Albert Nobbs as well.

Best Actor in a Supporting Role:
John Hawkes - Martha Marcy May Marlene
Viggo Mortenson - A Dangerous Method
Brad Pitt - The Tree of Life
Christopher Plummer - Beginners
Christoph Waltz - Carnage

This category is the most difficult for me to pin down. I think John Hawkes' role is one that seems tailor made for this category, and could end up being the frontrunner for the top prize after breaking through last year (Oscar-wise) with Winter's Bone. Ironically, I think Mortensen will be nominated for the role Waltz dropped out of (for which Cronenberg called Waltz a "coward") while Waltz can still very well get nominated this year for what's a lead role, really, but someone needs to go supporting! As I said, Plummer's old as hell. Meanwhile, it is a gamble to predict a Malick performance, but Pitt's going to have a busy year as well with Moneyball and this seems to be a category with room for him. Although, this is all ignoring the likes of Armie Hammer, who will be playing J. Edgar Hoover's right hand man and love interest in J. Edgar, and David Thewlis who could sneak in as an only acting nomination for Spielberg's War Horse. Read more!