ILNews

And the Winner is: Hammerle's Preliminary 2013 Oscar Picks

Robert Hammerle
February 13, 2013
Keywords
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

For those of us who are unapologetic movie fans, it is THAT TIME OF THE YEAR AGAIN! The Academy Awards will occur in late February, so it is time to stick our neck out and make predictions. Sure, I could be wrong, but when has that ever happened before? These are only preliminary picks, and I reserve the right to make occasional changes before Judgment Day.



BEST PICTURE – This is one of the toughest calls this year, and I think it comes down to “Lincoln,” “Life of Pi,” and “Silver Linings Playbook.”

Though “Argo” has swept this award given by other organizations, I don’t see how it can win given the fact that Ben Affleck did not receive an Oscar nod for Best Director.

Clearly, “Lincoln” has been favored for a lot of good reasons, not the least of which is the fact that we have just celebrated the second inaugural of America’s first African-American president. “Life of Pi” is a stunning work of art, and it is an experience that almost transforms the human spirit. “LesMiserables” was superior and “Django Unchained” was excellent if you exclude the last 30 minutes, but I sense that they have already received their reward which comes from their nomination. However, I’m going to have to call this for “Silver Linings Playbook.” This is a unique, accomplished film that deserves this award, and I hope it gets it.

And the Winner is: “Silver Linings Playbook”



BEST ACTRESS – Cutting to the heart of this nomination, I think it is a choice between Jessica Chastain for “Zero Dark Thirty” and Jennifer Lawrence for “Silver Linings Playbook.” These are two great, deserving actresses, and you really couldn’t fault the winner, regardless of who it proves to be.

However, Jennifer Lawrence was magnificent as a young, mentally troubled young woman in love with a mentally troubled young man. It is an extraordinarily memorable performance, and that is why I pick her as the winner.

And the Winner is: Jennifer Lawrence



BEST ACTOR – Quite honestly, in any other year Bradley Cooper should win this award for “Silver Linings Playbook.” It is an unforgettable performance, and spectacular in every respect. Hugh Jackman captured “Les Miserables,” and Denzel Washington was, well, Denzel Washington in “Flight.” However, for the third time this award belongs to Daniel Day-Lewis for a portrayal of Abraham Lincoln that is a performance for the ages. Wrap it up and give it to him.

And the Winner is: Daniel Day-Lewis

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS – Again, “Silver Linings Playbook” had a positively darling additional actress in Jacki Weaver. However, though Sally Field would be a popular selection for “Lincoln,” this award belongs to Anne Hathaway for “Les Miserables.” It is a role nearly as memorable as Daniel Day-Lewis’ Lincoln, and I expect her to be recognized.

And the Winner is: Anne Hathaway



BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR – This is the most difficult category to pick other than the winner for Best Picture. To begin with, while all of the nominees are deserving, so was the overlooked Javier Bardem for his stunning role in this year’s great Bond movie, “Skyfall.”

All of the nominees have won before. Phillip Seymour Hoffman is a truly brilliant actor, but I don’t see his performance in “The Master” as breaking through in any respect. Alan Arkin, along with John Goodman, really made “Argo” a sensational picture, but I think the award goes elsewhere.

In the end, it comes down to Tommy Lee Jones in “Lincoln,” Christoph Waltz in “Django Unchained” and Robert DeNiro in “Silver Linings Playbook.” To be quite honest, Mr. Waltz’ performance may be the best of the three, but I see Mr. DeNiro being recognized after last winning in 1974 for “The Godfather, Part 2.” He played an extraordinary blue collar dad, and it is again an unforgettable performance.

And the Winner is: Robert DeNiro



BEST DIRECTOR – This is the third difficult choice to pick. Cutting to the heart of the matter, I think it comes down once again to the three best movies of the year, in this case Ang Lee’s “Life of Pi,” Steven Spielberg’s “Lincoln” and David O. Russell’s “Silver Linings Playbook.” While I may be wrong, I’m rolling the dice on David Russell as the winner. Regardless, Mr. Lee and Mr. Spielberg are already shining in the artistic night sky, and it would be great for Mr. Russell to be there also. Although he could miss out given the fact that he also wrote the screenplay, it would be a deserving award.

And the Winner is: David O. Russell



In any event, make your picks, and get on board. After all, nothing is gained in life unless you are willing to make a profound ass out of yourself.•

__________

To read the rest of Hammerle’s picks in other award categories, visit his website: www.bigmouthbobs.com.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Brian W, I fear I have not been sufficiently entertaining to bring you back. Here is a real laugh track that just might do it. When one is grabbed by the scruff of his worldview and made to choose between his Confession and his profession ... it is a not a hard choice, given the Confession affects eternity. But then comes the hardship in this world. Imagine how often I hear taunts like yours ... "what, you could not even pass character and fitness after they let you sit and pass their bar exam ... dude, there must really be something wrong with you!" Even one of the Bishop's foremost courtiers said that, when explaining why the RCC refused to stand with me. You want entertaining? How about watching your personal economy crash while you have a wife and five kids to clothe and feed. And you can't because you cannot work, because those demanding you cast off your Confession to be allowed into "their" profession have all the control. And you know that they are wrong, dead wrong, and that even the professional code itself allows your Faithful stand, to wit: "A lawyer may refuse to comply with an obligation imposed by law upon a good faith belief that no valid obligation exists. The provisions of Rule 1.2(d) concerning a good faith challenge to the validity, scope, meaning or application of the law apply to challenges of legal regulation of the practice of law." YET YOU ARE A NONPERSON before the BLE, and will not be heard on your rights or their duties to the law -- you are under tyranny, not law. And so they win in this world, you lose, and you lose even your belief in the rule of law, and demoralization joins poverty, and very troubling thoughts impeaching self worth rush in to fill the void where your career once lived. Thoughts you did not think possible. You find yourself a failure ... in your profession, in your support of your family, in the mirror. And there is little to keep hope alive, because tyranny rules so firmly and none, not the church, not the NGO's, none truly give a damn. Not even a new court, who pay such lip service to justice and ancient role models. You want entertainment? Well if you are on the side of the courtiers running the system that has crushed me, as I suspect you are, then Orwell must be a real riot: "There will be no curiosity, no enjoyment of the process of life. All competing pleasures will be destroyed. But always — do not forget this, Winston — always there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing subtler. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face — forever." I never thought they would win, I always thought that at the end of the day the rule of law would prevail. Yes, the rule of man's law. Instead power prevailed, so many rules broken by the system to break me. It took years, but, finally, the end that Dr Bowman predicted is upon me, the end that she advised the BLE to take to break me. Ironically, that is the one thing in her far left of center report that the BLE (after stamping, in red ink, on Jan 22) is uninterested in, as that the BLE and ADA office that used the federal statute as a sword now refuses to even dialogue on her dire prediction as to my fate. "C'est la vie" Entertaining enough for you, status quo defender?

  2. Low energy. Next!

  3. Had William Pryor made such provocative statements as a candidate for the Indiana bar he could have been blackballed as I have documented elsewhere on this ezine. That would have solved this huuuge problem for the Left and abortion industry the good old boy (and even girl) Indiana way. Note that Diane Sykes could have made a huuge difference, but she chose to look away like most all jurists who should certainly recognize a blatantly unconstitutional system when filed on their docket. See footnotes 1 & 2 here: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1592921.html Sykes and Kanne could have applied a well established exception to Rooker Feldman, but instead seemingly decided that was not available to conservative whistleblowers, it would seem. Just a loss and two nice footnotes to numb the pain. A few short years later Sykes ruled the very opposite on the RF question, just as she had ruled the very opposite on RF a few short years before. Indy and the abortion industry wanted me on the ground ... they got it. Thank God Alabama is not so corrupted! MAGA!!!

  4. OK, take notice. Those wondering just how corrupt the Indiana system is can see the picture in this post. Attorney Donald James did not criticize any judges, he merely, it would seem, caused some clients to file against him and then ignored his own defense. James thus disrespected the system via ignoring all and was also ordered to reimburse the commission $525.88 for the costs of prosecuting the first case against him. Yes, nearly $526 for all the costs, the state having proved it all. Ouch, right? Now consider whistleblower and constitutionalist and citizen journalist Paul Ogden who criticized a judge, defended himself in such a professional fashion as to have half the case against him thrown out by the ISC and was then handed a career ending $10,000 bill as "half the costs" of the state crucifying him. http://www.theindianalawyer.com/ogden-quitting-law-citing-high-disciplinary-fine/PARAMS/article/35323 THE TAKEAWAY MESSAGE for any who have ears to hear ... resist Star Chamber and pay with your career ... welcome to the Indiana system of (cough) justice.

  5. GMA Ranger, I, too, was warned against posting on how the Ind govt was attempting to destroy me professionally, and visit great costs and even destitution upon my family through their processing. No doubt the discussion in Indy today is likely how to ban me from this site (I expect I soon will be), just as they have banned me from emailing them at the BLE and Office of Bar Admission and ADA coordinator -- or, if that fails, whether they can file a complaint against my Kansas or SCOTUS law license for telling just how they operate and offering all of my files over the past decade to any of good will. The elitist insiders running the Hoosier social control mechanisms realize that knowledge and a unified response will be the end of their unjust reign. They fear exposure and accountability. I was banned for life from the Indiana bar for questioning government processing, that is, for being a whistleblower. Hoosier whistleblowers suffer much. I have no doubt, Gma Ranger, of what you report. They fear us, but realize as long as they keep us in fear of them, they can control us. Kinda like the kids' show Ants. Tyrannical governments the world over are being shaken by empowered citizens. Hoosiers dealing with The Capitol are often dealing with tyranny. Time to rise up: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/jan/17/governments-struggling-to-retain-trust-of-citizens-global-survey-finds Back to the Founders! MAGA!

ADVERTISEMENT