II. Abrams’ Yeoman’s work on “Star Trek,” much like Nolan’s similar genre-revitalizing work on “Batman Begins,” has been rewarded by b.o. , critical accolades, and franchise promise. The Academy Awards long have been uneven and questionable in their apprisals, especially with regard to the lesser categories, but even I would be disappointed to see “Star Trek” among the ten nominees. The story was entertaining but NOT Oscar quality.

III. I also fear “Phantom Menace”-ing from “Avatar,” particularly in light of the low ROI that was the fourth “Indiana Jones” film, despite the collaboration of two of Cameron’s peers. However, despite the 12-year absence, I am willing to give Cameron a mulligan, as he has been one of the very few directors making films MEANT for the big screen – for that reason alone, I will screen “Avatar.”

IV. Jackson admittedly now is known for F/X but as JFWayne noted, “Heavenly Creatures” was a well-done character piece. Whether the years-long absence from directing such work has diminished him remains to be seen, but it may be overlooked that his masterpiece “Lord of the Rings” was an adaptation as well. I do not expect Oscar-worthiness, but I do expect a well-crafted, thoughtful, grown-up film.

V. Clooney, like Downey, Jr., currently is beloved by the Academy, so there will be no small effort to acknowledge his work this year. The long-form preview I screened of “Up in the Air” suggested a more legitimate Oscar buzz for Farmiga, who seems to be garnering a second-life career as a good actress in grown-up, non-television fare.
I rather enjoyed “Smoking” and “Juno,” so I expect the Reitman-esque sharpness to be on display; Clooney’s experience with the Coens has taught him how to navigate such an enviroment. As the film technically is a comedy, however, I do not expect it to achieve a Top 10 nod on its merit alone.

2. As a Trekker, the thought of Star Trek (2009) getting a best picture nomination makes me throw up in my mouth a little. And I agree with Jimmy C, last year’s crop was so much better than this year is sort of embarassing.

3. I think South Park described Avatar best in their episode, “Dances With Smurfs.”

And as for 4 and 5, meh. I still need to see Heavenly Creatures or anything directed by Reitman. I am waaay behind the curve.

1. I think Sherlock Holmes will be a well-made film, a fun guilty pleasure, and great counter-programming for the depressing and pretentious Oscar season films. It will do well and be well-liked, but nothing more.

2. Mainstream films this year have been good, but not great. And compared to last year’s excellent crop (The Dark Knight, Gran Torino), they’ve been downright disappointing. I don’t see any of them crashing the Oscar party, no matter how many Best Picture slots there are. Inglorious Basterds might have an outside shot, but that’s about it.

3. Avatar will be this year’s Phantom Menace; it’ll make decent money but will be a huge disappointment. All the hype in the world doesn’t change the fact that the special effects look lame and that the plot looks even lamer (one blogger described it as “Captain Planet with cats”).

4. I have high hopes for The Lovely Bones. Peter Jackson showed with Heavenly Creatures that he can make a good film without trolls or apes, but he’s never been a gentle or subtle filmmaker, and that could be what’s missing from this film. Only time will tell, though.

5. Jason Reitman is a fantastic director, but Up In the Air looks incredibly dull, and Clooney still can’t open a movie on his own. With it’s standard anti-corporate message and its smug leading man, the film will probably get some Oscar nominations just for existing, but I doubt it will get much love outside of NY or LA.