The Oscar nominees are out, and while you might have heard quite a bit about the various snubs (was Greta Gerwig robbed?!) you might not have heard as much about some of the actual nominees. For that, I offer up this guide to the ten Best Picture nominees and give you some background on the nominees, an evaluation of their awards chances, and my own thoughts on the films. I hope this guide can help you in your journey of winning your Oscar ballot and beating all of your friends appreciating this great year of cinema. 

American Fiction

American Fiction stars Jeffery Wright as Monk Ellison, an author fed up with the publishing industry’s treatment of Black writers and literature. He swears not to stoop to the levels of artistic degradation he sees in his contemporaries, yet when his estranged family faces several crises, in desperation, he writes a novel that embodies everything he hates. When it becomes an unexpected success, Monk finds his life spiraling as he tries to keep up his lie. 

The film received five nominations: Best Picture, Best Actor for Jeffrey Wright, Best Supporting Actor for Sterling K. Brown, Best Original Score, and Best Adapted Screenplay by Cord Jefferson (based on the book Erasure by Percival Everett). This is also Jefferson’s directorial debut. While the trailers make this seem like a full-on comedy (and there are some very funny scenes of satire), the majority of the film is actually a serious family drama. 

It is unlikely that American Fiction will win in any of its categories due to bigger contenders. Its best chance is Adapted Screenplay, which tends to reward more experimental films that don’t win best picture but are highly respected (such as last year’s Women Talking, 2019’s JoJo Rabbit, 2018’s BlacKkKlansman, 2017’s Call Me By Your Name). I think American Fiction’s greatest competition in that category is Barbie. There doesn’t seem to be much momentum for American Fiction yet, but perhaps the film can rally and secure that win. 

I personally didn’t enjoy American Fiction as much as I wanted to. I think Jefferson has a lot of interesting ideas and a few of them are brilliantly executed, but only a few of them. I think the movie buckles under the weight of too many threads and ideas that aren’t fully explored or resolved. I also found the family drama a bit stilted. While I don’t know if this role as Monk’s brother is his best role, I love Sterling K. Brown and would be thrilled for an upset win for him, although he is in what may be the most competitive category of the whole ceremony. Jeffrey Wright is also excellent and very deserving, although he is up against Cillian Murphy and Paul Giamatti, so a win is very unlikely. While it might not walk away with anything, I do hope this gives Jefferson’s career momentum so he can make another film. He’s certainly a filmmaker to watch and I look forward to his next project. 

Anatomy of a Fall

Anatomy of a Fall, one of two international features on this list, is a French drama about a writer (Sandra Hüller, who also stars in The Zone of Interest) who is accused of pushing her husband to his death out of a window, a crime to which their blind son is the only witness. The film is half family-drama, half-court drama, with explorations of gender politics, marriage, and morality. And, like American Fiction, it is about a writer and the level of identification an artist may or may not feel with their material, and if we can morally judge a writer for what they write. The entire cast here is excellent. Milo Machado Graner, who plays the son, is a wonderful discovery; I hope he gets more work. While at times slow, the film ended up grabbing me with the careful way the pieces of the puzzle are unveiled in this compelling mystery.

It is nominated in four other categories: Best Actress for Sandra Hüller, Best Director for Justine Triet, Film Editing, and Original Screenplay. It is unusual that it is not nominated for Best International Feature (the reason why is quite a saga), but even if it were, it would have still been competing against fellow Best Picture nominee The Zone of Interest and dark-horse contender Society of the Snow. In the end, I don’t think Anatomy of a Fall will take home any awards. It did win Best Screenplay at the Golden Globes, so that would be my strongest guess for a win, but I think if the Academy takes a democratic approach this year, they’ll use this screenplay category to reward The Holdovers or Past Lives. It would be a shame for it to not get any wins, but I’m glad it is getting the attention it deserves with the nominations. 

Barbie

Barbie was one of the most talked-about films of the year, breaking multiple box office records and being widely well-received and reviewed. If you somehow didn’t know, it is about Barbie (yes the toy doll) leaving Barbieland and going into the real world and fighting the patriarchy.

Despite its success, there has been a noticeable souring towards the film, starting with Jo Koy’s comments on the film in his Golden Globes monologue. Then the nominations came out and there was an uproar about the perceived snubs of Greta Gerwig for director and Margot Robbie for Best Actress, particularly in light of Ryan Gosling’s Best Supporting Actor nomination as Ken (ignoring that America Ferrera did get a Best Supporting Actress nomination). Then there was a backlash to the backlash, saying the uproar over the snubs distracts from Ferrera’s success and they are not really snubs. I think all of the talk has made it much harder to predict how Barbie will end up faring– will Academy voters, sick of the drama, ignore the film? Or will they feel bad for Gerwig and Robbie and award the film? Do they see the box office and critical acclaim as enough? 

I enjoyed Barbie (and I particularly enjoyed the “Barbenheimer” phenomenon), but it did not move me deeply. But it did truly move and capture the imaginations of many people I know, men and women alike, and it created ongoing conversations about feminism, film, and the history of Barbie toys and pop-culture significance the whole year. I think there is something deeply impressive in that. Regarding the perceived snubs, I do not think Robbie was snubbed. I think she gave a great performance that grounded the movie, but I think her biggest contribution to the film was her work as a producer, for which she is recognized with the best picture nomination. 

As for Gerwig, I think there is an interesting contrast in how Christopher Nolan and Greta Gerwig have been treated in terms of being considered “auteurs.” The narrative around Oppenheimer has been incredibly Nolan-centric, focusing on his love of cinema, and how he did not compromise on his desire to use certain filming techniques, to shoot on film, and to use practical effects. This is his magnum opus. Meanwhile, the narrative around Barbie has been much more democratic, with Gerwig and Robbie giving much praise to their cast and to each other. However, I would argue Barbie is as distinctly directed as Oppenheimer, with its successful elements very indebted to Gerwig’s artistic point of view and themes that can be seen in her earlier works of Little Women and Lady Bird (yes Nolan has been working a lot longer, but also Gerwig has only made three films and all of them have been nominated for best picture). While Gerwig certainly received praise for Barbie, I have to wonder if the narrative around the film had been more focused on her, if that would have helped her be seen as an auteur worth recognizing.

That being said, she still has other shots at winning an award. Outside of Best Picture and the Supporting Actor and Actress, it was nominated for Costume Design, two Best Original songs for “What Was I Made For,” and “I’m Just Ken,” Production Design, and Best Adapted Screenplay for Gerwig and Noah Baumbach. My hunch is that Barbie will get a few of the technical awards, and one of the songs (I think “I’m Just Ken” should win, but “What Was I Made For” is also excellent and probably feels more respectable to the Academy). I think it is in a neck-and-neck race against American Fiction for screenplay, with maybe the perceived snubs meaning people will choose Gerwig to make up for the slight. If Barbie goes home empty-handed, there will be plenty of commentary on whether it was because of misogyny or not. But it is worth considering that the Academy has a history of not rewarding films that are big blockbusters, which Barbie certainly was. But as long as Ryan Gosling performs “I’m Just Ken,” at least we, the audience, will be winners. 

The Holdovers

Full transparency: The Holdovers is my favorite film of the year. The story of a curmudgeonly teacher at a New England boarding school who bonds with a student and a cook left over the winter break is perfectly and sincerely made. I can see myself watching it for holidays to come. Initially, the buzz around its debut at Telluride made it seem for a moment like it was the Best Picture frontrunner, but its awards momentum has since dwindled, although it remains a favorite among many.

While it has nominations for picture, Film Editing, and Original Screenplay, it is in the actor and supporting actress categories that the film has the strongest chance. Paul Giamatti won the Golden Globe for the film in the musical or comedy category, as did Da’Vine Joy Randolph for supporting. However, Giamatti will now be going up against Cillian Murphy for Oppenheimer, who won the Golden Globe for drama. This is a classic toss-up: will the Oscars want to award a long career like Giamatti, or an exciting (relatively new-ish) up-and-comer like Cillian Murphy? My bet is on Murphy, but I think we’ll only really be able to tell where the momentum is close to the ceremony. 

 Randolph’s main competition should be Danielle Brooks, who accomplished something in The Color Purple that I will never forget– truly a lightning bolt of a performance. However, I did love Randolph’s work here, and The Color Purple’s award chances have significantly fallen, and with that, Brook’s opportunity. Otherwise, America Ferrera is the dark horse contender if the Academy rallies around Barbie. I don’t see The Holdovers going home completely empty-handed though, between Giamatti and Randolph. And it shouldn’t- go see it!

Killers of the Flower Moon

Martin Scorsese’s epic about the murder of the Osage in 1920s Oklahoma scored ten nominations, including Best Director, Robert De Niro for Best Supporting Actor, Lily Gladstone for Best Actress, Cinematography, Costume Design, Editing, Score, Original Song (“Wahzhazhe (A song for my People)”), and Production Design. Leonardo DiCaprio was notably snubbed, after receiving a Best Actor nom from the Golden Globes.

The film’s best shot seems to be Lily Gladstone, who won the Golden Globe in the drama category, but she faces fierce competition from Emma Stone for Poor Things, who won the Golden Globe in the musical/comedy section. Stone has already won an Oscar (for La La Land), and there seems to be a strong push for Gladstone, making her my choice. The second best guess would be a director win for Scorsese, although all signs are pointing towards Christopher Nolan.

Most award seasons tend to have a movie that garners tons of nominations and acclaim but walks away empty-handed (including Scorsese’s own Gangs of New York and The Irishman, both films with over 10 noms but no wins). If Gladstone doesn’t win, that could be this film’s fate, which I think would be a shame. While I feel there were some structural issues in the film that weakened the momentum of the story, in comparison to the book, and the effort to center the Osage people derailed by Marty’s love of gangster stories and Leonardo Dicaprio, I think the film overall was incredibly powerful, well-told, and memorable. 

Maestro

Maestro, a biopic about the life of composer and conductor Leonard Bernstein, and written, directed, and starring Bradley Cooper, has been a strange film in the awards race. There seems to be an air of obligation around its nominations, with the general sense being that yes, this is a very well-made film about an important subject, and Cooper swings for the fences, and Carey Mulligan is very good…but also isn’t it a little obnoxious how self-important and perfectly awards-tuned this film is? Doesn’t it sometimes border on feeling like a sketch about an award-winning film? I’ve yet to hear anyone say Maestro is their favorite film of the year. It all makes me wonder if Maestro actually has enough support from the Academy to garner a win, especially after not taking anything home at the Golden Globes and the snub of Cooper for director.

It’s nominated in seven categories, with Cooper and Mulligan for lead actor and actress, Cinematography, Makeup and Hairstyling, Sound, and Original Screenplay. I would gladly give it Cinematography, I think that is the best part of the film and representative of its technical brilliance, but even that seems unlikely, as does any other win. I’m not heartbroken over this; while there are moments I appreciated in the movie and I think the lead performances are indeed excellent, the film was confusingly structured and I walked away not feeling like I understood Bernstein’s career, his marriage, or his inner life well. It felt like the movie was so concerned with being grand that it forgot to be good.

Oppenheimer

Oppenheimer has garnered the most nominations with thirteen. My prediction, based on its Golden Globe wins and buzz, is that it will win six of them: Director for Christopher Nolan, Best Actor for Cillian Murphy, Robert Downey Jr. for Best Supporting, Cinematography, Film Editing, and Score. I do not think it will win Best Supporting Actress for Emily Blunt (a nomination that puzzles me; Blunt did her best with the material but I didn’t find the role or her casting to be unique or revelatory), Costume Design, Adapted Screenplay, Sound, Production Design, or Makeup and Hairstyling.

Oppenheimer feels like the ideal movie to award- it was critically acclaimed, a giant box-office success (but not toooo successful, and in part due to Barbie/Barbenheimer), an awe-inspiring ensemble, and a chance to give Christopher Nolan a career award and right the wrong of the snub of The Dark Knight, which arguably haunts the Oscars to this day. It’s also a biopic and a World War II movie and a movie about a tortured scientist genius, all of which tend to do very well with the Academy. It’s a great awards narrative and a very respectable choice. Oppenheimer was not one of my personal favorite films of the year, but I appreciated what it accomplished and the epic scope of the story it told. It was tremendously acted and crafted. I wouldn’t be opposed to any of those wins, and I certainly think it represents and defines 2023 in film more than many of the other nominees. 

Past Lives

Past Lives is my second favorite film out of these nominees. Written and directed by Celine Song, starring Greta Lee, Teo Yoo, and John Magaro (all three of whom I would have loved to see nominated), the film follows Nora (Lee), a writer whose family immigrated from South Korea to Canada when she was young, leaving behind her childhood sweetheart, Hae (Yoo). Nora marries an American man (Magaro), but feels herself torn between her husband and her past when Hae comes to visit her in New York, reuniting the two after 24 years.

There’s so much to be said about this movie, which I’ll talk more about in my next post about my favorite films of the year (stay tuned!). But I agree with all the critics who say it is one of the best films of the year and has an incredibly tight script, wonderful performances, and explores its subject matter gracefully and with focus and tenderness. The movie only has two nominations, for Best Picture and Original Screenplay for Song. While The Holdovers and Anatomy of a Fall give it hard competition, since it has barely a chance at best picture (I think its acclaim peaked too early), I’d love to see Past Lives win for screenplay. Don’t miss this one!

Poor Things

This is the one nominee I have not seen, so I cannot speak to the quality of Poor Things, I can only give it some context. Directed by Yorgos Lanthimos (The Favourite, The Lobster), this Frankenstein-esque tale of a woman brought to life and setting out on a journey of self-discovery has been garnering buzz for a long time. It won the Golden Globe for musical or comedy (Oppenheimer won for drama) and won a Best Actress award for Emma Stone, whose performance has been near-universally praised. Outside of Best Picture and Actress, the film is also nominated for Director, Cinematography, Costume Design, Editing, Makeup and Hairstyling, Score, Production Design, Adapted Screenplay, and Best Supporting Actor for Mark Ruffalo.

I’m very fond of Ruffalo (mostly because of his work in one of the greatest films of all time) and I think people forget that he has a strong awards history- this will be his fourth Best Supporting Actor nomination (the others being for The Kids Are Alright, Foxcatcher, and Spotlight). I’m not sure this is his best performance (in fact, I sincerely doubt it when we’ve got Dark Waters, Zodiac, Infinitely Polar Bear, and, of course, Now You See Me 2) and he’s probably going to be beaten by Marvel co-star Robert Downey Jr, but this is a nice career boost for him. Along with a potential win from Stone over Lily Gladstone, I could see the film winning Costume Design, Makeup and Hairstyling, and Production Design.

While there is a lot of love for Poor Things, it has also been controversial due to its extreme sexual content and questions over whether it is truly as empowering as it seems. I think this might mean there is a quiet but substantial section of the Academy that will not vote for it for Best Picture. It’s the dark horse contender, but I still think Oppenheimer is the one to beat. 

The Zone of Interest

The Zone of Interest is the most unsettling, unique film of the year (except perhaps for Poor Things). The movie focuses on Auschwitz commander Rudolf Höss and his wife Hedwig as they raise their family and chase domestic bliss in their home right outside of the concentration camp. The film never directly shows what is happening inside the camp. Instead, it’s all about the details. Screaming and gunshots can be heard faintly in the distance in nearly every scene. A servant washes blood off of Rudolf’s boots. The children swim in the pool, and in the background a train passes by. The family sits around the dinner table and an imposing tower of the camp stands behind them. The movie is all about being complicit, about how seeking comfort can lead to willful ignorance and detachment. It is about the Holocaust, yes, but it is also about all of us.

The film has been criticized by some for not directly showing the atrocities in the camp, but I think that is completely missing the entire point of the film. That is a strength of the movie, not a flaw. We’re to the point where there is an entire genre of Holocaust films that has its own tropes and cliches. How have we turned one of the greatest human atrocities into something predictable? Zone of Interest, in its radical detachment, interrogates this entire genre. If we’re hoping the Oscars reward novelty and breaking boundaries in film, I think Zone of Interest deserves some wins.

The film received five nominations, with Best Director for Jonathan Glazer, Adapted Screenplay, Sound, and International Feature. I would personally vote for Jonathan Glazer for Best Director, but I think it is almost certainly going to Nolan. Zone of Interest should, and most definitely will, win for Sound and International Feature (especially since it’s not going up against Anatomy of a Fall in that category). Very well deserved.

In Summary:

I predict will win: Oppenheimer

Dark horse pick: Poor Things 

My personal favorites: The Holdovers, Past Lives, Anatomy of a Fall, The Zone of Interest, Killers of the Flower Moon