The Foreign Language Committee won’t announce its list of nine short-listed Best Foreign-Language Oscar contenders for another six or seven weeks (i.e., early January). Six films will be chosen by the regular committee, per custom, and three will be chosen by the executive committee.

I’m telling you right now there are going to howls of protest if Asghar Farhadi ‘s A Separation (Iran) and Gerardo Naranjo‘s Miss Bala (Mexico) are not among the nine. And I’m saying this in particular because I know a guy who’s spoken to a couple of Academy members who’ve seen it and they’ve been kind of “meh.” This is how the Academy denies merit and recognition to great films — they “meh” them to death at parties.

The executive committee needs to step in and do the right thing if the regular committee schmucks (who made history four years ago when they ignominiously failed to include Cristian Mungiu‘s 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days on the shortlist) fail to include Miss Bala or A Separation on the shortlist.

Sixty-three countries, including first-time entrant New Zealand, have submitted films for consideration. I’ve narrowed the list down to 17 likely contenders, meaning that at least seven of these are going to be left out in the cold, and from the nine, of course, only five final contenders will emerge. In any case here, in alphabetical order, are HE’s most likely 2011 finalists along with sporadic instant comments:

(1) Bullhead, d: Michael R. Roskam (Belgium). Instant verdict: “Popular film festival attraction, many awards, exceptionally well made. Thuggish, castrated, bull-like protagonist makes it a bit of a tough sit.”

(2) Elite Squad: The Enemy Within, d: Jose Padilha (Brazil). Instant verdict: Alleged prejudice against genre films might make it a bit tough for this police thriller. I still haven’t seen it. Thoughts?

(3) Monsieur Lazhar, d: Philippe Falardeau (Canada). Instant verdict: Nothing, zip. Seeing it next week.

(4) The Flowers of War, d: Zhang Yimou (China). A friend recently saw it and says “highly likely, real chance, Christian Bale, excellent, beautifully shot, big mass rape scene,” etc.

(5) Superclassico, d: Ole Christian Madsen (Danish). Instant verdict: “Kinda light, comedic…has played really well with the committee.”

(6) Le Havre, d: Aki Kaurismäki (Finland). Instant verdict: Old man, young boy, humanism, compassion, class act. Highly impassioned Cannes reception.

(7) Declaration of War, d: Valerie Donzelli (France). Instant verdict: “Good, not great,” says one involved observer. “Mark Johnson really liked it,” says another.

(8) Pina, d: Wim Wenders (Germany). Instant verdict: excellent 3D ballet film but fighting against foreign-language-committee prejudice regarding docs.

(9) The Turin Horse, d: Bela Tarr (Hungary). Instant verdict: Too slow, too meditative, too Tarr-ish. Observer #1: “I can’t imagine it making the short llst.” Observer #2: “No way.”

(10) A Separation, d: Asghar Farhadi (Iran). Instant verdict: Slam dunk, pre-ordained. “One way or the other it’ll get in,” a non-vested observer declares. Likely top-five nominee.

(11) Footnote, d: Joseph Cedar (Israel). Instant verdict: Highly regarded, stirringly cerebral but more of a performance film than a high achiever in its own right.

(12) Terraferma, d: Emanuele Crialese (Italy). Instant verdict: Generally posaitive response although I myself haven’t seen it.

(13) Miss Bala, d: Gerardo Naranjo (Mexico). Instant verdict: Foreign-language-committee prejudice against action films will not be tolerated because this, in a very real stylistic sense, is an art movie by Michelangelo Antonioni. “Tough film,” says one Oscar consultant. WHAT? He/she means that the not-very-bright types are going to say “meh…action, guns, Mexican mafioso, drugs, killings…not an award-calibre thing.” WRONG…it is that. Will probably need to be “saved’ by the exec committee.

(14) Happy, Happy, d: Anne Sewitsky (Norway). Instant verdict: Light, likable, genuine.

(15) In Darkness, d: Agnieszka Holland. Instant verdict: Holocaust subject gives it the usual advantage. Has played quite well. One Academy guy told a friend he was more impressed by this than by A Separation.

(16) Once upon a Time in Anatolia, d: Nuri Bilge Ceylan (Turkey). Instant verdict: Austere. Tough sit. “No way,” one guy says.

(17) Where Do We Go Now? d: Nadine Lenaki (Lebanon). Instant verdict: Good response, won audience award in Toronto.

Boxoffice.com‘s Phil Contrino is reporting that The Descendants made $39,777 from 5 locations yesterday, or an average of $7955. By comparison J. Edgar‘s opening day brought in $52,645 from 7 situations, or an average of $7520. He’s nonetheless calling it “a solid start for Payne’s film. I’m sure word of mouth will be much better for The Descendants than it is for J. Edgar. It expands to 29 locations on Friday, and we think it’ll crack the top 10. We’re forecasting $1.6 million over the weekend.”

If nothing else, the men and women of the Criterion Collection are known for adhering to purist principles in transferring older films to DVD and Bluray. Whatever and however a film in question looked to audiences when it first came out, this is how the Criterion team will present it — no ifs, ands or buts. But to go by information on a Criterion webpage for its forthcoming Bluray of Otto Preminger‘s Anatomy of a Murder (’59), the aspect-ratio brain police have wormed their way into Criterion and are imposing an Orwellian reassessment.

Frame capture from ColTriStar Home Video’s 11 year-old Anatomy of a Murder DVD

Frame capture supplied by Criterion Co. website page about its Anatomy of a Murder Bluray.

A movie that was very pleasingly and beautifully filmed with a protected aspect ratio of 1.33 to 1 — an aspect ratio which has been seen thousands of times on broadcast and cable TV, and which was presented on a 2000 Anatomy of a Murder DVD, and which the jacket copy for said disc proclaimed as “the original theatrical aspect ratio” — will be presented by Criterion next February with a 1.85 to 1 cropping.

In other words, Criterion is going to pull out its samurai blade and whack the living hell out of this film. I mean, that’s a lot of visual information being chopped out of the top and bottom of the frame. Despite those 1.33 framings being so visually pleasing, so elegant, so 1950s-looking, so boxy and fuddy-duddy, so “your grandfather’s living-room TV.”

But once again, as with Sony Home Video’s recent The Caine Mutiny Bluray, we’re going to see compositions on the Anatomy Bluray that feel sliced down and compressed and confined…like they’re in prison.

Except we were told a few weeks back that Sony’s restoration guy Grover Crisp cropped The Caine Mutiny Bluray down to1.85 because he’d reviewed the film’s original notes and logs about Edward Dmytryk‘s intended aspect ratio and that this was indeed the correct way to present it. (I still say “no” to this but that’s an earlier story.)

See the dog? You can see most of it. It’s almost a whole dog.

See the half-doggy? Do you GET IT NOW, fascists? Anyone who says that the half-doggy framing is better is in DEEP DENIAL and needs to be ignored or, better yet, slapped around.

Now, if Grover was technically correct in cropping Caine to 1.85 (and one assumes he based it on original notes and specifications, even though it was a highly questionable call from aesthetic perspective), how could Sony have approved or allowed jacket copy on the 2000 Anatomy DVD stating that 1.33 to 1 is “the original theatrical aspect ratio“?

What’s good for the goose should be good for the gander, no?

In other words, how and why could the Criterion people approve a 1.85 to 1 aspect ratio on their forthcoming Anatomy Bluray if the original aspect ratio (according to Sony Home Video) was 1.33 to 1?

The apparent answer is that Criterion is going with a 1.85 to 1 a.r. because they damn well feel like it. Because they’ve decided “to hell with it, this is what we’re going with and fuck off.” But either Sony was correct with its 1.33 proclamation in 2000 or Criterion is right about its forthcoming Bluray. They can’t both be right.

The answer, I believe, is the rule of simple expediency. A boxier aspect ratio worked fine with 1.37 to 1 analog TVs 11 years ago, but it doesn’t work with today’s 16 x 9 high-def flat screens. It seems to be that simple. I think it’s a flat-out travesty to whack Anatomy of a Murder down to 1.85, and I had the power and the influence I would lead a smelly unkempt mob into Criterion’s Manhattan headquarters, and we would refuse to leave until they re-think things and, knowing that the fascist mindset refuses to consider 1.33 any more, agree to at least crop it down to 1.66, which I would find more tolerable. Occupy Criterion!

Postscript: I’ve sent emails about this issue both to Sony’s Crisp and the Criterion people. But they both reside in very thick and deep concrete bunkers, so to speak, and they rarely discuss aspect ratio matters with press people. It is their refusal to come out in the sunlight and talk turkey, really, that gets me so angry about this stuff.

It would be dishonest to report that the resignation of chief Academy of Motion Pictures Arst and Sciences publicist Leslie Unger has been met with great sadness among each and every LA-based entertainment journalist. She was known for having had a combative relationship with one or two journos in my sphere. Her days were numbered when AMPAS CEO Dawn Hudson brought in Christina Kounelias as the org’s CMO (chief media officer), a position senior to Ungar’s title of Director of Communications.

Unger’s departure is “not surprising,” says a journalist pal. What he meant was that it’s not unwelcome. “As soon we hang up, I’m going to dance a little jig,” he said.

The legendary eye chemistry between Warren Beatty and Julie Christie in the final scene of Heaven Can Wait (starting at the 6:00 mark in this clip) is all about spirit and pangs and possibility. But the eye current between Jeremy Irons and Juliette Binoche in this clip from Louis Malle‘s Damage is shamelessly carnal. They’ve just met six seconds earlier and it’s a done deal.

This kind of instant-green-light, good-to-go chemistry doesn’t happen all that often in dramas, or at least not as convincingly as it does here. But maybe my memory is faulty. I’m asking for other scenes that have this kind of current. One look, one touch…and there’s no doubt about what’s going to happen. It’s simply a matter of time and circumstance and somebody making the first call.

I’ve been there many times. It’s always the woman’s decision and you always know within minutes if not seconds. Losers like to think they can alpha-vibe or chitty-chat or sweet-talk their way into a woman’s boudoir. Maybe this happens every so often, but 90% of the time if a woman hasn’t given you the come-hither within three minutes or less you’re probably wasting your time.

Now, that doesn’t mean you can’t screw things up after the initial invitation. There are 50 ways you can motivate a woman out of a romantic mood, and if you can think of 35 of them in advance you’re a genius. But that green-light look is unmistakable.

Remember the days when Cameron Crowe was the eloquent hip guy, the cool guy, the ex-Rolling Stone reporter and smoothly accomplished, musically-driven director-screenwriter who made smart, rich, soulful movies (Almost Famous, Jerry Maguire, Say Anything) that the vast majority of elite critics used to embrace with the exception of Vanilla Sky, of course, and before the absolute meltdown calamity of Elizabethtown?

I’m asking this because today’s announcement about the Thanksgiving sneak of We Bought A Zoo signifies that he’s now in league with the goody-two-shoes PG family crowd. This is a guy who used to hang out with degenerate rock bands on the Sunset Strip in the ’70s. This is a former boy genius who articulated to the world how cool it was to be “uncool,” and who reminded all journalists the value of being honest and unmerciful. What happened to his hip cred? What would Lester Bangs say?

20th Century Fox’s decision to do a nationwide commercial sneak of Cameron Crowe‘s We Bought a Zoo on 11.26 — four weeks before the Matt Damon-Scarlett Johansson-Thomas Haden Church family film opens nationwide on 12.23 — is brave and radical and unprecedented. In all sincerity, hats off.

Mat Damon, Scarlett Johansson in We Bought A Zoo.

This is being done, of course, in order to present the film directly to Joe and Jane Popcorn and in so doing bypass the big-city online smartass crowd, which, Fox apparently suspects, will probably piss on it. I for one admire Fox’s brass in doing this. They’re not hiding behind high stone walls or cowering in their boots, and are more or less following Disney’s War Horse approach — let Joe Hinterland see it concurrently with the critics and thereby remove the cynical filter of early online reviews.

“Once in a while, we’re lucky enough to have a picture to which audiences of all kinds and all ages respond so strongly, that it demands a big and unexpected event,” said Fox marketing honcho Oren Aviv. “We Bought a Zoo is that kind of picture — and Thanksgiving is a great time to share it via this special very early preview.”

Best HE Comment (from “dino velvet“): “This has the whiff of FUCK, we’re up against Sherlock 2, MI4, Dragon Tattoo, Tintin, Alvin and the Chipmunks 3 AND War Horse.”

Cameron and his tech homies need to upgrade three problematic CG shots: (1) A little CG sailboat that Titanic passes on the way out of Southampton has always looked ludicrous; (2) there’s a wide shot of Titanic pulling out to sea in which the first officer (i.e., the guy who shoots himself in Act Three) is shown walking across the deck, strolling along like a little CG playdough robot; and (3) there’s a Kate Winslet face-paste used as she and Leo are running from approaching sea water that never worked…fix it.

I have to admit this seems overly broad but spottily amusing. A Snow White movie that has nothing to do with fable and everything to do with our pornographic obsession with the appearance of youth. For me, it’s the very first Tarsem Singh film that hasn’t seemed (emphasis on the “s” word) like an outright problem.

I tried watching The Immortals last weekend, and it gave me a throbbing headache. To me Singh is a commercial slut.

Yesterday I mistakenly ignored Pete Hammond‘s Deadline story about how DreamWorks had officially submitted The Help to the HFPA/Golden Globeys as a Best Picture contender in the Comedy or Musical category. That was because Hammond’s lead — “Bridesmaids, The Artist, Paris Try To Buck Oscar’s Prejudice Against Comedy” — sounded like an evergreen about how comedies can’t get no awards respect.

Hammond’s kicker is that two days ago (i.e., Monday) “an HFPA committee rejected The Help in comedy and determined it would compete as a drama, where it will go head-to-head with Disney/DreamWorks’ other big hopeful, War Horse (assuming both get nominated, as seems likely).

“It’s not surprising,” Hammond comments. “At a recent event I attended, a lot of HFPA members were voicing concerns about having to judge The Help as a comedy. The film was indeed initially sold by Disney and DreamWorks with an emphasis on its lighter elements, and past Globe winners in the category such as Driving Miss Daisy were similar in tone.

“Still, that would have meant Viola Davis would compete in the Best Actress-Comedy or Musical category, and no matter how you slice it, her character — a civil rights-era maid — just wasn’t that funny.”

War Horse “wasn’t as manipulative as I expected,” a New York-based critic confesses. “But I was hoping for an emotional catharsis at the end and I didn’t get it. So I’m calling it good Spielberg but not great Spielberg, and very heavy on the overdone John Williams score. If the Academy really thinks this is as good as it gets — in a year that has given us The Descendants, Drive and Moneyball — that would be a profound shame.”

Disney screened War Horse for 10 or 12 journalists last week at the Animation screening room on the Burbank Disney lot. A guy who saw it and is a huge fan (“If you like animals…”) told me it was him and 10 or 11 others. It was also shown to a bunch of Manhattan guys a short while ago — EW‘s Owen Gleiberman, Rex Reed, Hoberman, etc. Not all of the NYFCC members but a lot of them.

This morning I was kicking around the reactions to War Horse and The Descendants with a friend, and he/she said that The Descendants holds up well on a second viewing “but I just don’t know if it’s a Best Picture winner. This feels like a really lackluster year for movies in general.”

To which I replied: “It’s absolutely truthful and real and so well sculpted. Those last 20 or 25 minutes or so starting with Robert Forster coming to visit his daughter in the hospital room and then Judy Greer arrives and Clooney’s goodbye and that final gaze at that virgin property in Kauai and onto the dumping of the ashes and then the three of them on the couch at the very end is perfect.

“It isn’t a BIG SHAMELESS EMOTIONAL GUT-GRAB WHAMMO movie, true, but God help us if we’re only sufficiently moved to hand out the Best Picture Oscar to films of that sort. The magical realism of Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close might take it in the end, but heaven save us from the inevitablity of poor scared horsey and all those shells bursting everywhere.”

To which he/she replied: “I don’t know. I am not giving up yet on Dragon Tattoo. It may turn out that Incredibly Loud or War Horse will seem too affected or syrupy sweet for Oscar voters and they’ll look for something exciting to vote for. I remember when it was Bugsy up against Silence of the Lambs and how everyone thought Bugsy would win because it was an ‘Oscar movie.’ But in the end, it wasn’t. Bugsy didn’t offer up a Hollywood ending, though Silence really did — the bad guy got punished.” Or eaten, rather.

“The Descendants is the closest to a winner we have right now. I don’t think The Artist will finally cut it, and not Moneyball either. It’s gonna be The Descendants vs. whatever’s coming next.”