Many thanks to Dona for this breaking news story.

I just learned about the Oscar nominees, and wow is it a mixed bag. Also I have a lot of work to do if I expect to see all of the major-category nominees like I did last year. The only two predictions I made last year turned out to be correct--albeit they were no-brainers (Best Actress = Julia Roberts and Best Picture = Gladiator). Since I've seen so few of the major nominees this year I doubt my predictions will be anywhere near as close, but here's what my instincts (or wild guessing) tell me:

Best Picture: A Beautiful Mind
All reviews I've read have all been glowing, and I doubt the Academy will care terribly much about the grumbling of taking factual liberties. Gosford Park has gotten even more rave reviews, and might be the elegant-but-not-stuffy picture the academy needs to earn back some cred after choosing increasingly "popcorn" movies the last few years. Oscar's reluctance to take comedies seriously might hinder its chances, however. A close race. Lord of the Rings and Moulin Rouge are too genre-y to sway more snobby voters. In the Bedroom is too indie, and it's lack of a directing nod decreases it's chances. LOTR is the only one of these films I've seen.

Best Director : Robert Altman (Gosford Park)
Last year proved that "Best Picture" and "Best Director" need not go hand in hand, and the Academy seems reluctant to give Opie a statue. They may be more compelled to reward the oft-nominated Altman for making what many see as a comeback film, and they may see it as their last chance to give this respected director an Oscar. LOTR's genre-ness pushes out Peter Jackson, plus I'm not the only one who felt the film wasn't all that compelling. Ridley Scott apparently has a spot saved for him every year, but if he didn't win for Gladiator, he won't win for Black Hawk Down. For all Mulholland Drive's thumbs-ups, David Lynch is still too "love him or hate him" for this to be any more than a vain attempt to appear as cool as Cannes. Of these nominees, the only films I saw were Mulholland Drive and LOTR.

Best Animated Feature Film : Shrek
This new category breathes some life into this year's Oscars, and all I can say is it's a shame that Osmosis Jones wasn't nominated (perhaps not eligible?). As such, it's a true toss-up between the two giants--did anyone over the age of ten even see Jimmy Neutron?--so I'm guessing Shrek by a nose because Monsters Inc. should win, and that usually means it won't. Also, Shrek is my mom's favorite movie, for reasons I still don't understand. For its rabid fans, Shrek's beauty-in-the-eye-of-the-beholder moral and self-conciously hip cultural references (and, I admit, some genuinely funny moments) seem to make up for its creepy animation. Indeed, Monsters Inc.'s downfall may be that the animation is so gorgeous, and the characters so fully realized, that the Academy will forget it's animated at all.

Best Actor : Russell Crowe/Denzel Washington
Since I haven't seen any of the nominated films, I can only guess, with the help of reputation and history. Based on the Academy's apparent desire to ignore black actors, Russell Crowe is the only choice here, particularly if Beautiful Mind pulls off Best Picture. But the Academy's reluctance to Tom-Hanks-ify Crowe may lead them to honor five-time nominee Washington for what many have lauded as the performance of his career. However, the unlikability of Washington's Training Day character might give Will Smith an edge; his remarkable transformation into the legendary boxer (as well as his undeniable charm) could easily make up for Ali's spotty reviews and his status as a rookie nominee. I Am Sam is seen by many as too-obvious an attempt by Sean Penn to claim the gold, but could possibly upset in the case of a split vote. As far as the fifth nominee, I expect there will be a lot of whispers of "Tom Wilkinson who?" come voting time.

Best Actress : Nicole Kidman
The undisputed "It" woman of last year, and still going strong, Nicole is the easiest choice of all the categories. Not only did she win the P.R. battle with her ex-husband--a 2001 Oscar loser, let's not forget--she was also widely seen as responsible for the sleeper success of The Others and is still fresh with good reviews for Birthday Girl. Although Sissy Spacek or perennial favorite Judi Dench could offer real competition, since when has talent triumphed over popularity of this magnitude? It didn't work for Ellen Burstyn last year. I thought Renee Zellweger was fabulous in Bridget Jones' Diary (the only film on this list I saw), but her overhyped weight gain and competent English accent won't outshine Nicole's star. Neither will Halle Berry's breasts, though this is probably less her fault than Monster's Ball's tepid reviews.

Best Adapted Screenplay : A Beautiful Mind
It is my fervent hope that Ghost World actually pulls it off, but more likely a strong showing by "Beautiful Mind" in other categories will take this one right along with it.

Best Original Screenplay : Memento
This is the Academy's only chance to honor the most innovative film of last year. Sadly, Memento's lack of impact in other categories and it's early-in-the-year indie release may cause it to be overlooked by conservative Acaedmy members, especially if Gosford Park picks up other major awards.

Best Supporting Whatever : Who Cares?
The only way this would be really interesting is if Marisa Tomei wins again!

** 100% Spoiler-free Edition **

I got the Vanity Fair with Hayden and Natalie on the cover, because I had to. I am sucker for pretty pictures, not to mention pretty pictures related to Star Wars. And indeed, Natalie and Hayden are both luminous beings (not this crude matter), particularly suited to Anne Leibovitz's lush photography. But if you're thinking of picking up this issue, be warned that there are potential spoilers for those who wish to be completely in the dark about the upcoming Attack of the Clones. The most egregious of which is a snippet of the actual opening crawl (!), which is treading on dangerous ground indeed. Other than that, it's mostly speculation and hinting, which goes farther than the average spoiler-phobe would want to tread. This time around I don't worry much about finding out information, though I'm not actively seeking it, either. If you don't want to know, just look at the photos, but skip the skimpy article and the captions. There are many other fine articles in the issue.

So, I braved the pouring rain, wearing my best New York uppa-crust uniform, and confronted the Giraudon store with my slightly-used off-sized shoes (see below). The rocker-type woman working was completely cool, and promptly got me a new pair. I was out of there in five minutes. Yes, I did try on the shoes and walk around in them a bit. They felt better than the other ones, and The Rockstress assured me they would stretch out a lot. The thing I find funny about all this is that I sat on a train for probably an hour (round-trip) so that I could be above-ground in Manhattan for less than ten minutes.

On the way back I stopped at the health food store in Park Slope to stock up on the gravel, bugs and birdseed I'm eating these days. I also had a returns issue--I bought some vitamins last week and realized they were the wrong formula. Unfortunately, I had already opened them, AND I had already thrown away the receipt. I thought it was sort of a long shot, but I figured I'd try to return them. I talked to the vitamin guy who first said forget it, then I guess I looked bummed out enough (and he, too, got confused by the nearly-identical labels of two different formulas of vitamins), so he said, very dad-like "I'll do it THIS time, but never again!" Whew. I certainly don't plan on buying vitamins I don't want.

Two for two, not bad!