I took these screenshots July 4th on the “In Contention” site, which is devoted to all things Oscar. I wanted to see how far-ranging their predictions were. Who was considered a front-runner back then? Who had the buzz? And whose buzz proved short-lived?.

Here:

From the photos alone you get a sense of the evanescence of buzz. “J. Edgar” as leading best picture contender? Spielberg touted for his direction of “War Horse”? Where does this buzz come from? Publicists? Why aren't we shooing this shit away? More: Why do we need to talk about anything we haven't seen? What's the point in it? Not to get too Yoda here but all of our lives we look away to the future, to the horizon. Never our minds on where we are. Hmm? What we are doing.

This is IC's tally:

• Best Picture: 7 of 9. They missed “The Help” and “Moneyball.” They thought “Ides of March,” “J. Edgar” and “Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy.”
• Best Directing: 3 of 5: Picking Eastwood and Spielberg, missing Malick and Allen.
• Best Actor: 3 of 5. Missing Bachir and Pitt. Was there really a time when Jeremy Irvine was touted as best actor?
• Best Actress: 2 of 5. No Viola, Rooney or Michelle. Back when people still thought highly of “Martha Marcy May Marlene.” Well, some people.
• Best Supporting Actor: 2 of 5: Missed Hilly, Nolte and Von Sydow for Broadbent, Brooks and P.S. Hoffman
• Best Supporting Actress: 0 for 5. Fun! Including two performances (Tomei and Watts) that barely left a mark.

In the acting categories alone, they were 7 for 20.

This is not to slam IC, which has good writing, even if the site itself has gone over to Hitfix; it's not to slam the work of the artists who didn't make the cut, since we can argue about that forever. (Charlize, honey, you wuz robbed!) It's just a reminder, I guess. I like thinking about what we once thought about. That's my Yoda problem. All my life I've looked back into the past. There's less money in it but greater clarity.

All previous entries