and the nominees might be...

Tomorrow morning, they will announce the nominees for the Academy Awards. And we still don't know if the show will go on. At least, we don't know in which form they may happen. Anyway, I thought I would predict the nominees for the "major" categories and choose the likely winners from my hypotheses. Below, I've also included some wishful thinking. (I'd wanted to predict the winners of the Golden Globes, but I only had the craving to post about that 30 minutes prior to the start of the glossy "press conference," which I didn't even watch. I favored Masterpiece Classic's airing of Persuasion [2007] instead. But that is neither here nor there.)

Best Adapted Screenplay:

1.) There Will Be Blood (2007) by Paul Thomas Anderson
2.) The Diving Bell and the Butterfly (2007) by Ronald Harwood
3.) No Country for Old Men (2007) by Joel and Ethan Coen
4.) Atonement (2007) by Christopher Hampton
5.) Into the Wild (2007) by Sean Penn

The Likely Winner: I think this category is a toss-up, really. I was not exactly impressed when the Brothers Coen won the Globe. I was expecting Atonement to win because it fabulously translated the "un-filmable" Ian McEwan novel to the screen. I think Atonement has a shot in this race despite the previous Old Men win(s). Would, however, like to see The Diving Bell win because it was my favorite film of the year (not that I saw so many movies this year) and, not to mention, it was apparently Harwood's idea that the film be shot largely from Jean-Do's point-of-view, to help the audience empathize with him for having the condition called "locked-in syndrome" following his stroke.

By the way, I debated a bit about who would fill the final slot: American Gangster (2007) or Into the Wild. I chose the latter because supposedly the fact that almost everything in American Gangster was fabricated for dramatic effect and bears almost no resemblance to the story of Frank Lucas, voters will not favor it. This is sort of stupid, because who says that the film story must be close to the actual story? A story is a story. Anyway, I figured Into the Wild would get it over Gangster because don't they love Sean Penn and American bestsellers?

Best Original Screenplay:

1.) Juno (2007) by Diablo Cody
2.) Michael Clayton (2007) by Tony Gilroy
3.) Ratatouille (2007) by Brad Bird
4.) The Savages (2007) by Tamara Jenkins
5.) Lars and the Real Girl (2007) by Nancy Oliver

The Likely Winner: Before I "announce" the Likely Winner, it's interesting to me that women dominate in this category. (Of course this means nothing since these are only my predictions.) Unfortunately, Juno seems like the most likely winner, but perhaps all that buzz will kill it stone dead. Clayton seems likely to be at least nominated because it was a "smart" movie for the thinking "grown-ups" among audiences. Plus it's a political thriller that hearkens back to some of the classics. Having said all this, I would like to see, among these nominees I've selected, Ratatouille win because that film is art all around, anchored by a fantastic script. The script itself elevates the animated film to a much higher level.

By the way, I should say that this category is much more difficult to predict than Adapted Screenplay because it seems like all the darlings of this award season are based on previously published material. This pretty much explains my choices for the fourth and fifth spots.

Best Supporting Actress:

1.) Amy Ryan for Gone Baby Gone (2007)
2.) Cate Blanchett for I'm Not There (2007)
3.) Saoirse Ronan for Atonement
4.) Vanessa Redgrave for Atonement
5.) Tilda Swinton for Michael Clayton

The Likely Winner: It's probably between Numbers 1 and 2. Would be extremely distressful (for me, at least) if Blanchett won because that would mean she has two Oscars for IMPERSONATING HISTORICAL FIGURES. I'm sorry, but in my opinion, that is not acting. Of course she does not always impersonate people, but she would go down in history as nothing but an impressionist. I don't think that it is likely she will win an Oscar for Best Actress ever, really. There, I said it. (Can you tell I am not exactly a fan of hers, either? I admit to some extreme bias.) I think perhaps both Ronan and Redgrave will be nominated. Choosing Redgrave, you may be thinking, is ridiculous, but Judi Dench won for what? 13 minutes of screen time in Shakespeare in Love (1998)? It's entirely possible. Plus, don't they love nominating the old and the ridiculously young? I don't have a personal choice to win. I'd be happy with anyone but Blanchett.

Best Supporting Actor:

1.) Javier Bardem for No Country for Old Men
2.) Tom Wilkinson for Michael Clayton
3.) Casey Affleck for The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford (2007)
4.) Hal Holbrook for Into the Wild
5.) Philip Seymour Hoffman for Charlie Wilson's War (2007)

The Likely Winner: Do I even need to say this? I bet it will be Javier. He's one of my favorite actors, and even though it's a "supporting role," it's definitely a good, meaty one to win for. In fact, I don't think there's a leading role in this film. It's very much an ensemble piece, which is why none are nominated for leading roles. His is possibly the biggest and the most important. It's practically because of Anton that everything else takes place.

Also, I want to add that this category is tough to pin down because I think Paul Dano could easily get nominated for his work in There Will Be Blood, but I don't know who he would knock off if he got nominated: Affleck, Wilkinson, Holbrook, or Hoffman (who will be nominated, I think, because he apparently stole the movie from Hanks).

Best Actress:

1.) Julie Christie for Away From Her (2007)
2.) Marion Cotillard for La Vie en rose (2007)
3.) Ellen Page for Juno
4.) Angelina Jolie for A Mighty Heart (2007)
5.) Keira Knightley for Atonement

The Likely Winner: Between Numbers 1 and 2, but I think the gong will go to Christie. That is, if she's actually nominated. (Ha!) I listed this set from the actress most likely to win to the actress least likely. Knightley is the dark horse in this race because I do not think her role was meaty enough to be classified as a leading role, but it was definitely meatier than a supporting one. In other words, Atonement is very much James McAvoy's film. Angelina Jolie will get the nomination, I think, over Blanchett's reprisal of Elizabeth I simply because Blanchett merely yelled out of frustration and modeled fancy sixteenth century dresses. Jolie at least sank into her role, taking it very seriously, and I think it paid off. Whatever. It doesn't matter because Christie will win.

Best Actor:

1.) Daniel Day-Lewis for There Will Be Blood
2.) George Clooney for Michael Clayton
3.) James McAvoy for Atonement
4.) Viggo Mortensen for Eastern Promises (2007)
5.) Emile Hirsch for Into the Wild

The Likely Winner: Day-Lewis.

Best Director:

1.) Joel and Ethan Coen for No Country for Old Men
2.) Julian Schnabel for The Diving Bell and the Butterfly
3.) Joe Wright for Atonement
4.) Sean Penn for Into the Wild
5.) Paul Thomas Anderson for There Will Be Blood

The Likely Winner: I think it's between Numbers 1 and 2, but maybe even Number 3 can edge his way in there. He should be able to because Atonement oozes in his style. Would prefer it if Wright or Schnabel won, honestly. Then again, I think it would be cool if Brad Bird were nominated for Ratatouille. Again, this nomination would demonstrate that some animated films are capable of rising above that "animated" stigma.

Best Picture:

1.) No Country for Old Men
2.) Atonement
3.) There Will Be Blood
4.) Michael Clayton
5.) The Diving Bell and the Butterfly

The Likely Winner: I've decided against predicting the winner among these five simply because I don't want to get my hopes up. And I don't even know which hopes I should be concerned about. I would love to see The Diving Bell win, but the truth is it's probably the dark horse among them. Yes, its recent nomination over at the Producers Guild of America Awards helps it. Since it cannot be nominated for Best Foreign Language Film (and France's pick Persepolis [2007] didn't even make the shortlist), this is its best shot.

Fingers crossed, yeah.

kick out your tv

Well, I have gone and done it. After months of talking about it, after weeks of sitting on the fence about it and feeling ashamed that it never looked like I was going to, I have moved the TV out of my room.

What? Were you expecting me to say that I got a tattoo?

Feeling daunted by all the reading I have to complete this week and realizing this amount of work is only likely to continue, I decided the only way I was going to get done what I needed to was if I simulated as closely as possible my room in England. No, I didn't move around any furniture, but I figured that if I could live/survive without a TV for eight months, I could do it here, too. After all, there are TVs everywhere in this house and I happen to live with two people who like to keep them on especially when they are not in the same room as they TV they profess to be in control of. Yes, this means that their noises might hamper my plans on having quiet, reading-full days. But we'll cross that bridge when we come to it.

I have resolved to limit my hours of TV to no more than a couple hours a day. And I really shouldn't watch TV during the day. Evenings can be for relaxation if I am productive during the day. Hopefully these plans will go so well that I will feel motivated to work on studying for the GRE and preparing grad school applications. (Where am I applying, first of all?)

I'll keep you updated on my progress.

what the fuck do I want?

I should probably tell you more about this "frustration." Well, it comes from all directions, actually. I am frustrated because I have hit writer's block in this essay on La comunidad (2000). I am frustrated because the schedule I assembled for next semester is falling spectacularly to pieces. I am frustrated because I don't know what I really want.

The first problem has gotten better. I spent hours in the library today, outlining by hand my Spanish cultural studies paper. My approach is much more narrowly and clearly defined, and I will start writing it tomorrow. So I feel better about that.

I had arranged a schedule for the fall semester that complemented my honors thesis. Turns out I cannot or must wait until I get back to find out if I can take certain courses. I have to plan for backups. And the original plan was hard to come by! I cannot justify these new alternatives the same way I can explain why the others fit into my coursework and independent study plans. For once, I wasn't paranoid. I didn't "plan on a change of plans."

Spanish the language is posing another problem. I don't think I want to take it this summer after all. Do you know anyone who is more indecisive than me? I certainly don't. Why don't I want to take it now?

1.) It won't make much of a dent. I doubt my speaking skills will improve dramatically.

2.) I cannot justify spending almost $1000 for just 36 hours of classroom study spread over six weeks and twelve sessions of three hours each. If I were to take the class in the fall, I wouldn't have to shell out this extra cash because I don't pay by the credit hour in the formal semesters.

3.) I don't need to speak it for grad school. I only have to be able to read and write it. I can study to meet those ends for free with my books, on my own. This I consider a compromise. I will work on my reading and writing, I swear, but I'll forget about spending so much money on speaking it. Maybe I can get a speaking partner...

This problem is connected directly to my travel to Spain. It has been repeatedly suggested that I go to Spain while I am over here because flights are much cheaper than if they originate in the U.S. I understand this, but finding the right one that doesn't cost a lot of money, one that goes to Madrid (because I rather go there than Barcelona), or one that doesn't arrive in the wee hours of the morning at an airport miles upon miles outside the city has proven most difficult for me. It has exhausted me to the point where I don't care that my father wants me home as early as possible so I can go to Louis's specialized training graduation. It's not as if my presence at home is requested for nothing.

But I still want to go to Spain. Do I wait for another time when the trip will undoubtedly be more expensive because I will be flying from the U.S. instead of England? I keep telling myself that Spain isn't going anywhere. It is frustrating to think that I am missing something when I really am not. I don't even know what I am missing.

Having to come home earlier than I was expecting means that I can't go to Berlin in the summer either. I have tentative plans to go for a few days just before exams start. I think I should go, even if I have to go alone. I owe it to myself. It's not expensive. I can swing it. But I might honestly have to do everything alone. I'll be so sick of myself after so many days in a foreign city, a foreign country, thinking (and talking) to myself in English but hearing German everywhere else. Maybe I need to go just to see if I can make it, to see if I can stand me. I may have taken this step to live on my own in England, but can I up and leave here by myself? I can't wait to see, but at the same time I am scared.

¡viva el español!

Being engulfed this academic year in only European Studies courses has had a tremendous effect on me in numerous ways. However, right now, I will only discuss the two major (and long-lasting) effects:

1. I miss American Studies. Of course the concepts and ideas, readings, and cultural history that I had studied at home about America has greatly aided me in my study of Europe. But it is sometimes frustrating when my classmates don't know certain concepts. For example, in a class on the cross-cultural narrative with final-year students, I was the only one familiar with the terms anthropology, ethnography, postcolonialism (as Brits, how could they not know this one?), postmodernism, etc. The seminar group depended on my explanations of what they were because I was the only one who dared to tackle defining the terms.

I also miss American Studies because all I do is study Europe. Of course I chose this concentration in my major coursework for comparison, but sometimes you really just can't bring in America all the time. I'm often itching in my seat to comment comparatively, but if I do, it would be a digression. Race, for instance, is not the same, and you'd think it didn't matter at all in my courses sometimes. But at least I can still talk about gender till everyone's blue in the face.

2. I miss my language studies. Over the two terms, I have taken three country-specific courses: Spanish film, Spanish cultural studies, and French film. The courses on offer here in the European Studies Department are fantastic. I would love to take them all, but I can't because they are conducted in the individual languages. (My three are in English.)

I quit studying languages when I quit linguistics. I was spreading myself too thinly by trying to study three languages at once since high school. In subsequent years, I have lost so much Spanish, I fear. I used to be a really good writer, and I can only understand and read Spanish now. (I could never speak it, which is why I quit.)

I'd been enchanted by French off and on. The last time I formally studied it, it was an intensive elementary review over a year ago. I haven't lost much since then, but since I am in two Spanish courses this year and listening to it is always a delight, I feel that it is tempting me to start up again. I don't know if I can ever forgive myself for abandoning it for French, and I don't know if I am prepared to abandon French for Spanish, either. All I know for certain is: I cannot have both. I won't progress. I need to concentrate. I'm so indecisive.

My friend Denise helped to quell my anxiety over my pervasive indecisiveness. She said if I can't decide between two things, then clearly I don't want either one enough so I don't need to choose. This is not to say that I should necessarily choose a third. I don't need to choose anything.

Oh, but I miss Spanish. In high school, it was my favorite subject. It was the only way I studied (any) culture. I was a good writer and I loved to read it. How could I ever have convinced myself to give it up? Why didn't anyone remind me of what it made me feel? Confident. Even if I couldn't speak it.

You heard it here first: I think I want to continue studying Spanish formally. Besides, it complements my burgeoning interest in Latin American history, cinema, culture, etc. Especially Mexico's.

she's got the whole world in her hands

I just entered to win a World Traveler (as in STA Travel) contest to four countries. I can share the experience with just one other person. I hope the countries I chose on the entry form are not set in stone if I win; I doubt she'd like to go to Denmark, New Zealand, Peru, and Kenya. There are other countries I want to go to ahead of Peru and Kenya, but since I am already in Europe, the chances of me going to Spain and Germany are greater now than after I win the contest. That is, if I win it at all.

we've got time to start again

I once had a blog, a long, long time ago. And then I stopped writing in it. Didn't want to air out my dirty laundry for everyone and anyone to read. But I'm indecisive--and bored--so I've changed my mind. I've started anew. There's still this urge in me to want to create something, to want to put a stamp on it. And I figured now is as good a time as any to start (again).