IMHO there are at least a dozen different Guild-award-driven reasons why NCFOM will win so I can't believe Juno will snatch it. Ivan Reitman's Hollywood-bred silver spoon offspring may have some talent -- Thank You For Smoking worked for me -- but just because his grosses are over $125M his film gets the nod over the Coens? Last year was Scorsese's year; this year the boys from Minnesota will be clutching multiple statuettes.

The only upside to Juno winning best picture is my general distaste at its rapturous reception would immediately be justified, as legions of critics, film snobs, and internet movie geeks the world over would proclaim it the worst Oscar decision of all time, thus tarnishing the film's reputation further, hastening the date when everyone will look back and say, "Uh, why did everyone like that movie again?"

Or something.

Crash a travesty? Yes. Gladiator - not even close.

This is the same bullshit that was being spread around last year when the whispers were for a Little Miss Sunshine upset. Yet, amazingly, The Departed won.

They let these rumors slip out of a possible upset so we will tune in to the show and boost the ratings. Juno DOES NOT have an Editing nomination. For over 2 decades, you MUST have an Editing nomination to win Best Picture.

It hasn't won much of anything up until this point, and now we're supposed to believe it'll magically take the crown? Fuck no.

Jason Reitman strikes me as a guy with an extremely soft, limp and possibly damp handshake, Jake Kasdan even more so. Non sequitur I know, but that's the impression I get every time I see them interviewed.

Guy: Gladiator was a solid work of cinema but Traffic was the superior entry in 2000.

Maybe if Harrison Ford had taken the Drug Czar role he improved in the development stage it would've propelled the film over the top with the Academy (and Ford to an Oscar himself).

Jake Kasdan is such an extraordinary nebbish he makes Woody Allen look like Russell Crowe.

Q: '....just because his grosses are over $125M his film gets the nod over the Coens?'

A: 'I wrote my director friend right back last night and asked "What do you mean 'everywhere'? Who are you talking to? ...." He wrote right back: "Producers." '

Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon would also have been a more legitimate winner for 2000. Gladiator was a great summer film, that had more depth than the average blockbuster. But I couldn't believe what I was seeing as it continued through the awards season.

Thankfully, Ridley Scott was prevented from cheapening the Director award any further than Ron Howard had the year before. Soderbergh winning was one of my all-time favorite moments as I had followed his career since Sex, Lies. Great speech about respecting anyone who "creates".

At this point I'm so indifferent to the actual Oscar results that this is just more sauce for the goose.

Coens rewarded? Great.

Juno wins? Just something else for so many of you to complain about in the coming years.

Of course I'm an Oscar fan and would like to see what I consider the better film recognized, but in the grand scheme of things, I shrug.

At this point, I'd love to see JUNO win just to watch the film snobs and fanboys go berserk.

"Thankfully, Ridley Scott was prevented from cheapening the Director award..."

There would be nothing cheap about awarding the director of Alien, Bladerunner, Gladiator, Black Hawk Down, American Gangster, Matchstick Men, Kingdom of Heaven, and Thelma & Louise with a best director Oscar. Nothing cheap about that at all. Ridley will win next year for Body of Lies...mark it down.

I think everyone can now agree that Traffic deserved best picture over Gladiator. Seriously, Traffic is perfect.

No Country is overrated, but I'd like to see it win over Juno.

That being said, any talk of undeserved Oscar Best Picture wins is incomplete without discussing the formulaic, Lifetime movie-ish Million Dollar Baby.

JUNO is a sprightly comedy, and will succeed at the Oscars like no comedy has in quite a while - by winning a screenplay Oscar.

Even though Jason Reitman's nom allows some prognosticators to make a strong case that the film could well win best picture, I'm not hearing that that will be the case - only one person in the AMPAS world has "whispered" about a JUNO/Coens split scenario. THe Reitman pic is definitely the cash cow among the nominees, though, and a good Oscar watcher never fully discounts that.

(Again, the lack of a film editing nom for JUNO doesn't indicate much of anything here in my opinion - the last outright comedy to win the top prize - ANNIE HALL in 1977 - received noms in all the same categories JUNO did, plus an additional bid for best actor (for which JUNO had no contender.)

KRAMER VS. KRAMER over APOCALYPSE NOW. DRIVING MISS DAISY over DO THE RIGHT THING (not even nominated). SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE over SAVING PRIVATE RYAN. Really so suprisingly if they go for the warm feeling again?

THE PATRIOT mostly sucked and GLADIATOR was only slightly better, but somehow won best picture. SAVING PRIVATE RYAN is considered a classic, while you can't even pay people to watch SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE, even if you throw in a free colonoscopy.

Let's face it. Winning the Oscar for best picture is a mixed bag. It turns the film into a bland brand name. I'm looking at the winners from the last 40 years. I could maybe sit through nine of them without throwing up.

Great, so Brit voters are liking Juno. Combine it with the other hundreds of Brits that no doubt will go with Atonement (since they got the thing nominated). They also love Atonement. Obviously. So?

This is kind of a dark thought but I think the Oscars noms are going to get better 10 years from now... by that time a lot of old Hollywood who don't seem to get films like Do The Right Thing and Traffic will be in that gated community in the sky.

The fact that you're hearing talk about Juno votes and Clayton votes and maybe Blood votes is simply recreating the same scenario that has been giving No Country the edge all along - the more passionately loved those movies are, the more they split up the non-No Country vote among them, leaving No Country the clear winner.

Same thing with The Departed last year. So much support for the other films ensured that the popular pick triumphed. Having said, I have been thinking upset for a while now - I just don't know what movie could actually have enough going for it to win.

Awesome post! You go Zimmergirl!!!!!!

if you check out my website, it has a list of voters likely going for JUNO. pretty intense.

Actually, when you click on the link, you see a YouTube of Rick Astley.

"I would [be] very, very upset if Juno wins."

Why? Why in the world would that change your passion for NO COUNTRY? This is not like rooting for a favorite sports team and watching them lose (I know you love sports). This is like rooting for a figure skater in the Olympics, only without voter transparency or direct comparability, and with (maybe) less politics.

Please explain why an Oscar win matters so much to you. It has almost no bearing on longevity (see: majority of winners from previous 30 years) and is far from a good judge of art.

The National Film Registry. That's where it's at.

Are we really arguing 2000 films? For the record, I like neither Traffic nor Gladiator, but did like Crouching Tiger. But the best films of the year were In the Mood For Love, Requiem for a Dream, George Washington, and Amores Perros.

And Ratcatcher.

And remarkably life will go on regardless of which film wins Best Pic.

Now, if Hillary wins the nom we're all doomed, DOOMED!

sarcasm

Traffic was Crash before Crash was Crash. It was speechy and not good. Very not good. Benicio was amazing, the rest of the film wasn't there, especially anything related to Michael Douglas' character and family. Blech. Very bad. Very broad.

Requiem... was excellent and Amores Perros was patchy with excellent parts.

"Soderbergh winning was one of my all-time favorite moments as I had followed his career since Sex, Lies. Great speech about respecting anyone who "creates".

Ditto. One of the classiest speeches ever.

As for Juno, the great disappointment would be that it is the indie comedy to finally break through, when there are far better examples. Just take the ones set in high school. Is it a better film than Rushmore or Election? I think not.

RATCATHER is better than most of the films that have been discussed on HE in the last six months.

Traffic is speechy? Apparently you've never seen the movie.

Apparently Mr. Gittes hasn't seen Traffic in awhile. Yes, very speechy.

No one else thinks it's funny that Prager got RickRoll'd?

Where have you gone, Lynne Ramsey?

Apparently if you have one guy talk at a podium at the end of your film, it's speechy.

Whatever.

And considering Gaghan went through a significant portion of what was in his film personally, it's not exactly speaking from an uninformed position.

Another deserved Oscar win for that film, by the way.

I love Juno, and would not be outraged if it won, but I would be puzzled; it's slightly short of the mark in a few technical ways -- screenplay and editing glitches especially. Then again, I thought Crash was outright slop in all the categories it won -- editing specually -- so why should that matter?

But come on: there's no significant Juno groundswell, at least not compared with the solid cross-guild support for No Country.

I almost hate to admit that I liked Crash. Some good performances and it did have something to say about race. Maybe not the most eloquent statement on the subject, but it kept my interest. That being said, it wasn't a best picture.

"editing specually"

Sorry; accidentally hit tab while I was fixing that blunder.

Juno blows. Her dialogue reminded me of a bad Dawson's Creek episode. Too think that a generation of kids is going to imitate her cloying nonsense is nauseating.

Jennifer Garner was creepy. The dork in the yellow running shorts needed a beatdown. Only funny parts were her parents but their reactions were ridonkeylous. The folky cutesy songs were kitsch that grows thin after the first 30 seconds.
Bateman was the only hint of realism in the entire thing.

Any of the other nominees are way more deserving.

Wells - maybe you can post your son's reactions to Juno - would be curious to see what smart kids in their demographic think

Mentioning Gladiator winning best picture, back when it did I was very upset that it won over Traffic... but as time has passed this bothers me less and less. Not to say I don't still believe Traffic is the better film, but Gladiator has held up better than expected, and I think I like it more now than I did in 2000.

While I certainly enjoyed Juno, I just can't believe people would vote for it for best picture. I'm not a huge fan of No Country but I respect it, so I can understand someone not voting for it, but do that many people think Juno is a better film than both There Will Be Blood and Michael Clayton? I'd be happy if either of those two films won, and I wouldn't be upset if No Country won, but JUNO???? Really???? Nice little film and all, but best picture? C'mon...

"Who would be delighted about that besides the filmmakers and Fox Searchlight?"

I just bet €20.00 On Juno to win at 12-1, so I'd be very happy if Juno makes it. Go on ya good thing.

Though well made, Traffic is essentially an illustrated civics lesson. Gladiator is good, bloody fun.

I can't believe Juno is even being considered a chance for best picture. Movie most likely to make you want to kill a busker, maybe. It's an intermittently snappy script and Ellen Page rules, but the Coen brothers are in another galaxy. And BTW, Traffic sucked.