Oscar Predictions: Supporting Actor, Actress

There's not much suspense in the acting categories for this year's Academy Awards, as three of the categories have mortal locks for winners, including both of the supporting acting slates. For Best Supporting Actress, Mo'Nique, as the monstrous mother from Precious has been working out by ascending to podiums, and there seems to be no reason to think that she won't do the same come Oscar night. There was a brief tempest of controversy before she was nominated, when she made statements that seemed to indicate that she would not participate in the awards-season campaign process without being paid for her trouble. And, indeed, she did not attend the New York Film Critics Awards. But she did graciously accept the Golden Globe and Screen Actors Guild Awards, dispelling any notion of a backlash.

Even if there were voters who harbored some animus, who would be the alternative? Before the nominations were announced, and mean-spirited attacks on Mo'Nique were being made by the likes of Jeffrey Wells, I thought Julianne Moore from A Single Man might be the spoiler, as she is due for a win after being nominated four times without winning. But then she up and didn't get nominated. Who does that leave as the first runner-up? You got me, and unless you work for PriceWaterhouseCoopers you'll never know. My guess would be Maggie Gyllenhaal for Crazy Heart, who was a surprise nominee but could get some votes for being associated with the putative Best Actor winner, Jeff Bridges.

The two ladies nominated from Up in the Air, Vera Farmiga and Anna Kendrick, would be stronger competitors if they weren't from the same film--it would be hard for a voter to choose between them. Kendrick had the early heat, but Mo'Nique's winning streak has tamped it down. Running in the fifth spot would have to be Penelope Cruz for Nine. Not only did she win just last year, but the film was a colossal critical and box office dud.

The race in Best Supporting Actor is even more one-sided, if that's possible. Christoph Waltz, as the suavely evil Nazi in Inglourious Basterds, has had this puppy sewn up since the film premiered in August. Though heretofore unknown, he took a great role and knocked it out of the park, becoming memorable to anyone who saw the film. He has been on an awards spree himself, with the oddly off-putting habit of tailoring his speech around the name of the award. One wonders how he'll work the name "Oscar" into his acceptance speech.

Again, if Waltz were to lose, who would it be to? I'm hard pressed to even rank the runners-up. Woody Harrelson, as the alcoholic family-notification offer in The Messenger? The Academy loves actors who play angry drunks, and he's been around a long time. Stanley Tucci is also a well-respected character actor who received his first nomination, but it's for playing a child-murderer in the critically dismissed The Lovely Bones. Christopher Plummer is also a well-respected actor, mostly for his stage work, though many know him as Captain Von Trapp in The Sound of Music, and he received his first nomination as Tolstoy in The Last Station. But the film is little seen and esoteric.

That leaves Matt Damon, as the rugby star in Invictus. I find this nomination puzzling, as Damon, a fine actor (he would be my choice for Best Actor this year for The Informant! but he wasn't nominated). Damon has won an Oscar for screenwriting, and aside from impressing those for being able to look like a world-class athlete, there's little in the performance to suggest it's Oscar-worthy.

So, as he we have seen time and again this awards season, it will be Mo'Nique and Waltz for the win. If this does not happen I will be flabbergasted beyond measure.