As Oscar voting approaches, is there a possibility that “Jury No. 2” and “Challengers” will be a surprise?

In The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King, Frodo says this after destroying the One Ring while sitting on a rock surrounded by a river of lava.

The nomination voting period for the 97th Academy Awards has officially ended after two extensions due to the devastating wildfires in Los Angeles. The Producers Guild of America, Writers Guild of America, and other major guilds have provided some insight into which films could dominate this year’s Oscars, but one thing is for sure: Surprises are virtually guaranteed when it comes to the academy.

For veteran awards experts, Oscar predictions have always involved careful calculations, heated debates and whispered off-the-record conversations with Academy voters. These chats are usually full of insider insights and candid opinions, but this year they took on a different tone. In the wake of the wildfires that devastated parts of Los Angeles, many experts were hesitant to help. Remarkably, voters began reaching out, leading to thoughtful questions about the well-being of journalists and their families. It was a moving reminder that even in Hollywood, humanity transcends glamor.

After some pleasantries were exchanged, the conversation naturally turned to movies, which helped distract us from the chaos. For voters, discussing the film became a source of comfort during difficult times. In these conversations, trends and insights about this year’s race began to take shape. From potential Best Picture front-runners to unexpected snubs, here are nine takeaways from our conversations with Academy members, and some burning questions ahead of the nominations announcement on January 23rd. I will.

Have voters finished reading The Brutalist?

Brady Corbet’s “The Brutalist” is a strong contender in this year’s race, boosted by its Golden Globe win. However, some voters admitted that they “couldn’t get through” or “couldn’t follow through” due to the demanding running time and intense subject matter. While this won’t derail the film’s chances of being nominated (many predict it will secure at least the top eight), Felicity, a supporting actress candidate whose key role doesn’t appear until the second half, -This may explain why Jones wasn’t nominated. Gained more traction.

Winning a Golden Globe remains important.

While the relevance of the Globes continues to be debated, winning at the ceremony definitely carries weight. Some voters noted that the Globes influenced their watchlists, spotlighting films such as “I’m Still Here,” starring Fernanda Torres, and “Real Pain,” starring Kieran Culkin. acknowledged. On the other hand, notable players such as Jacques Audiard’s “Emilia Pérez” and Edward Berger’s “Conclave” have achieved notable status thanks to their victories in specific categories. For films that are likely to attract the attention of voters, that rating can be the difference between nomination and failure.

Critics and Audiences ≠ Academy Voters

This year, the gulf between critics, audiences, and Academy members is especially felt. For example, critics like Ramel Ross’ “Nickel Boys” and Mike Leigh’s “Hard Truth” have struggled to convert their momentum into voter enthusiasm. Meanwhile, “Emilia Perez,” which received a low score on Rotten Tomatoes (76% critics, 40% audience), swept the nominations and was widely expected to become the most nominated non-English film in Oscar history. are.

Similarly, James Mangold’s Bob Dylan biopic A Complete Unknown (79% on Rotten Tomatoes) received enthusiastic support among Academy members despite mixed reviews elsewhere. Obtained. These cases highlight that Academy voters operate on their own wavelength, driven by personal taste, nostalgia, and film resonance rather than external metrics.

Strange incident of “category fraud” and possibility of actor replacement

“Category fraud” has become the buzzword of this year’s awards season, with social media and voters alike criticizing campaigns for seemingly starring performances that help boost their awards chances. Zoe Saldaña in “Emilia Perez,” Kieran Culkin in “Real Pain,” and Ariana Grande in “Wicked” all had controversial performances that were touted as supporting roles despite their long screen time. This is just one example.

“We love them, but to be honest, she’s the star,” a representative chapter member said of Saldaña. Such dynamics could lead to unexpected results, vote splits, or unexpected rankings, reflecting past Oscar shocks.

This will give you some scenarios (not predictions…yet?) as to how the nominations will look on nomination morning. Please be patient. I’m a journalist who tries to explain things using math (not my forte).

The first is business as usual for “Emilia Pérez,” with Carla Sofia Gascón becoming the first openly transgender actor nominated for a lead role, and Saldaña remaining a top contender for a supporting role. I’m pursuing it.

But what if there was a twist?

Saldaña’s performance, along with her co-star, was cited in the lead role in Kate Winslet’s (The Reader) latest film Switch-A-Lou, making them the first recognized co-leading duo since Geena Davis and Geena Davis. What would happen if you watched it? Susan Sarandon, Thelma & Louise (1991)

Another result was that Gascón was completely removed from the list, leaving Saldaña as the only supporting actress to represent the film. According to Academy rules, if a performance is in the top five for both leading and supporting roles in the same performance, the one with the most votes will be nominated. The race for Best Actress is extremely competitive, and it will be interesting to see how the votes are distributed among all the nominees.

And, coincidentally, the last scenario that seems the most far-fetched of all these theories, but also the most likely, is the one starring LaKeith Stanfield, who was on the campaign trail. It is a repeat of the shocking “Judas and the Black Messiah” (2021). The actor, who was active throughout the season, surprisingly showed up in support along with his eventual Oscar-winning co-star Daniel Kaluuya. After receiving the 2021 nomination, we explained why.

In conversations with chapter member representatives, when asked if they would vote for Gascón, they replied: “Oh, yeah, I support you, right?”

When informed that Gascon was in the lead and Saldaña was in support, they immediately shouted “Support?!” We don’t know where they ultimately voted, but that’s what caused the potential alarm. How would that affect the race and who would it displace? I can’t even wrap my head around that.

Will women and POC be shut out of the Best Director award?

The best director category has long been a difficult field for women and people of color to enter, and this year is no exception. Jon M. Chu (“Wicked”), Ramel Ross (“Nickel Boys”), Coralie Fargeet (“The Substance”), and Payal Kapadia (“All We Imagine as Right”) Although they have received critical acclaim, none of them are considered rock. With Jacques Audiard, Brady Corbett, Edward Berger and Sean Baker all looking certain to remain in this race, the final slot will likely be a safer, more traditional one like James Mangold or Denis Villeneuve. He looks destined to be a potential pick or even a wild card.

Can Clint Eastwood’s Juror No. 2 pull off the ultimate shocker?

Among this season’s surprises, Clint Eastwood’s “Juror No. 2″ has been mentioned far more among voters than I expected, and potentially for all of us to find out. It could be a strong candidate for the final Best Picture slot. The film, which is rumored to be Eastwood’s final project, has drawn praise from voters in the producer and director categories, many of whom saw their vote as a symbolic gesture to the legendary filmmaker. I think this is a “middle finger” to Warner Bros. who gave us this work. Limited release. Its inclusion alone is shocking, but it’s enough. In addition, it may be the only film nominated, making it the first time since 1943’s The Ox-bow Incident received a solo nomination for Best Picture. It might be crazy enough to make sense.

Jamie Lee Curtis is the best Oscar activist right now.

If there was a campaigner to win the top Oscar award, Jamie Lee Curtis would win by a landslide. The veteran actress won her first Oscar for “Everything Everywhere All at Once,” and has been actively promoting her film “The Last Showgirl,” with co-star Pamela Anderson. Curtis’s genuine enthusiasm and unrelenting advocacy has been noticed, with voters praising her charisma. Having secured SAG and BAFTA nominations, Curtis is well-positioned for a second Oscar nomination. The studio needs to give her the role as a frontrunner for what you envision to be the best production. She will get you to the finish line for you.

Voters like “challengers,” but are there enough of them?

Challengers, the intense tennis drama directed by Luca Guadagnino and starring Zendaya, has quietly built a passionate fan base among voters. The film’s blend of sports and sexual tension resonates with young Academy members. However, his chances of attracting attention remain uncertain after shutouts at BAFTA, PGA and SAG. Its best shot appears to be in the original screenplay and score (which it won at the Globes) category, and it will likely win Best Picture as well. But it’s hard to call.

Voters are looking for movies that “make them feel good.”

One thing that’s become clear from these conversations is that voters want movies that offer joy, escapism, and upliftment. After a week of bad news from the wildfires, many people found the energy to watch a few more movies, especially those based in Los Angeles, and gravitated toward movies they thought were “easy to watch.” It was getting worse. This included everything from the folk-era nostalgia of “A Complete Unknown” to the green and pink musicality of “Wicked.”

My theory is that that sentiment may have had a profound impact on some international characteristics. Many of the 15 shortlisted candidates were deemed “depressing” by multiple voters. Still, it’s worth noting that this could potentially influence films like Germany’s The Sacred Fig Seed. The film is 2 hours and 40 minutes long and admittedly demanding (albeit great), so it may not have been a priority for voters when casting. Ballot paper.

Final predictions will drop next week. Until then, have fun making predictions.