Scott Mantz

LOS ANGELES, Calif. --

I don’t know about you, but I’m kind of digging the peripheral effect the Writers Strike is having on all the awards shows this season.

We’re all used to the vast array of dog-and-pony shows that precede the awards presentations, the biggest of which by far is the Golden Globes. It doesn’t matter that the Hollywood Foreign Press Association – which votes for the Globes – is made up of less than 90 so-called journalists (most of whom don’t even work in the entertainment industry on a full-time basis). The fact is that all the stars show up for the big party, and when you consider that the Golden Globes honor both TV and film – and that the major acting categories are divided between “drama” and “musical or comedy” – you’re talking about virtual gridlock on the red carpet.

It’s a foregone conclusion that if the Globes took place after the Oscars, they wouldn’t really matter, and they definitely wouldn’t air on a major television network like NBC. But timing is everything, so the Foreign Press Association gets to stage its overblown shindig with an arrivals line that’s unlike any other in Hollywood. And of course, it hardly matters what the attendees are actually nominated for, as more attention is paid to what they’re wearing, who their dates are, when they’re gonna have babies, how they survived rehab, etc, etc, etc.

That’s why I found the 35-minute Golden Globes press conference to be a breath of fresh air. Look, I know the Writers Strike is costing Hollywood hundreds of millions of dollars, and I completely feel for everyone who’s out of work – especially those below-the-line workers who don’t stand to gain anything from the outcome of the strike. But when the Foreign Press canceled their big event and scrambled to produce a truncated news conference in which the winners were announced at a fast and furious pace, I found that to be quite refreshing. Just cut to the chase, tell me who the winners are, and call it a day.

Now the big question is whether or not the same fate will fall to the Oscars on February 24. On the surface, the Motion Picture Academy – which, contrary to the tiny Foreign Press, is more than 5,800 members strong – is moving forward as if everything was status quo. But behind closed doors, producers are preparing for two possible scenarios: one in which the strike is settled and the telecast will air as planned, and the other if the strike enforces a scaled-back dinner reception not unlike the very first Oscar ceremony on May 16, 1929.

I, for one, would not mind one bit if the Oscars kept it tight and lean, but on the other hand, we are talking about the Oscars here, and it would be a crying shame if “the biggest night in Hollywood” could not live up to its well-deserved reputation. Yes, we all know what that means – tons of nonsensical questions to the well-dressed attendees on the red carpet. But in the end, the awards themselves will prevail, especially if the winners in the major categories shape up to look something like this…

Best Supporting Actress:
The Nominees: Cate Blanchett (“I’m Not There”), Ruby Dee (“American Gangster”), Saoirse Ronan (“Atonement”), Amy Ryan (“Gone Baby Gone”), Tilda Swinton (“Michael Clayton”)

Should win: Amy Ryan ("Gone Baby Gone") - Ryan gave a spectacular breakthrough performance as a trash-talking mother, who remained completely self-absorbed despite the ominous fate of her missing child. You really felt bad for her — not because of her nightmarish predicament, but because she was such a pathetic excuse for a human being.

Will win: Cate Blanchett ("I'm Not There") - in Todd Haynes remarkable, abstract, non-linear examination of Bob Dylan at the prime of his cultural influence, Blanchett's take on the legendary icon resonated so strongly, it was easy to forget that it was being performed by a woman.

Best Supporting Actor:
The Nominees: Casey Affleck (“The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford”), Javier Bardem (“No Country for Old Men”), Hal Holbrook (“Into the Wild”), Philip Seymour Hoffman (“Charlie Wilson’s War”), Tom Wilkinson (“Michael Clayton”)

Should win/Will win: Javier Bardem ("No Country for Old Men") - Bardem's unforgettable performance as an offbeat, vicious, resourceful hitman trying to retrieve $2 million in stolen drug money was just as terrifying as it was sort-of funny (thanks to that fishbowl haircut). For better or worse, it’s the performance by which all of Bardem's future performances will be judged.

Best Actress:
The Nominees: Cate Blanchett (“Elizabeth: The Golden Age”), Julie Christie (“Away from Her”), Marion Cotillard (“La Vie en Rose”), Laura Linney (“The Savages”), Ellen Page (“Juno”)

Should win: Marion Cotillard ("La Vie en Rose") - Cotillard's mind-blowing depiction of troubled singer Edith Piaf was one for the books. She went through so many drastic physical and emotional transformations, it was hard to believe the same person performed the role.

Will win: Julie Christie (“Away from Her”) - in what was easily the most moving film of the year, Christie’s heartbreaking depiction of a woman surrendering to the ravages of Alzheimer’s was graceful and quietly devastating — a jewel in the crown of the screen legend’s illustrious career.

Best Actor:
The Nominees: George Clooney (“Michael Clayton”), Daniel Day-Lewis (“There Will Be Blood”), Johnny Depp (“Sweeney Todd”), Tommy Lee Jones (“In the Valley of Elah”), Viggo Mortensen (“Eastern Promises”)

Should win: George Clooney ("Michael Clayton") - talk about an actor who keeps getting better with age, Clooney topped himself as a burned-out and conflicted legal fixer who suffered a crisis of conscience.

Will win: Daniel Day-Lewis ("There Will Be Blood") - everyone agrees that Lewis gave a fiercely committed performance as a ruthless oil driller, but in my opinion, he laid it on a little too thick. I just felt like I was watching someone act, and it was all-too-reminiscent of his scene-stealing turn in “Gangs of New York.”

Best Director:
The Nominees: Julian Schnabel (“The Diving Bell and the Butterfly”), Jason Reitman (“Juno”), Tony Gilroy (“Michael Clayton”), Joel Coen and Ethan Coen (“No Country for Old Men”), Paul Thomas Anderson (“There Will Be Blood”)

Should win: Julian Schnabel ("The Diving Bell and the Butterfly") - what could have been an overly sentimental movie-of-the-week turned out to be an impressive film, thanks to Schnabel's brilliant approach to telling the story of a paralyzed fashion editor from the perspective of his still-working left eye.

Will win: Joel Coen and Ethan Coen ("No Country for Old Men") – it’s all about the Coens right now, and that vibe could weigh heavily in their favor come Oscar time. That said, "No Country" is still a visually impressive and incredibly intense cat-and-mouse game, and it has an ending that people will be dissecting for years to come.

Best Picture:
The Nominees: “Atonement,” “Juno,” “Michael Clayton,” “No Country for Old Men,” “There Will Be Blood”

Should win: "3:10 to Yuma" - yeah, yeah, I know it wasn’t even nominated, but where Westerns were concerned, this was as good as it gets. It was so well written, brilliantly acted and incredibly entertaining, it appealed to moviegoers who don’t usually saddle up to this type of genre.

Will win: "No Country for Old Men" - between the acting, the directing, the cinematography, the intensity and the humor (what little of it there was), “No Country” has been the movie to beat all season long.

Copyright 2008 by NBC Universal, Inc. All rights reserved.
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.