I could see Depp getting a "Here's a safe, well-done Depp role to vote for, even though what we really liked him in was PotC but all the other critics will laugh and laugh if we give him an Oscar for that" best actor award.

Critics don't vote for the Oscars, though -- the voting is done by members of each branch. Depp was nominated last year for PotC, and didn't win. It's possible he could get it, but honestly I don't think this is his year.

It used to be a pretty strong rule of thumb that the actor who had the best "overcoming misfortune" part got the Oscar. (Hence Tom Hanks for "Forrest Gump," Geoffrey Rush for "Shine," etc.) I don't know if that still holds true, but if it does, Foxx will win. I don't think his lack of a body of work will be that large of a handicap.

I don't think his lack of a body of work will be that large of a handicap.

I hope not. I don't think Oscars should be based on cumulative work.

I'd also love it if JF got both awards, because then he'd be the first person to win (assuming that's the case) regardless of race.

I haven't seen Ray yet, but from the clips I have seen I'd say Foxx has Best Actor sewn up. I forgot I was looking at someone other than Ray Charles for a minute, whereas it's been years since Leonardo DiCaprio has convinced me that he's anyone other than himself. (Which did make the end of Titanic more enjoyable for me, I'll admit...)

the voting is done by members of each branch.

Legislative, judicial, and executive? Or, um, not I guess. Do you mean actors, directors, writers, techies, etc?

It's possible he could get it, but honestly I don't think this is his year.

I'm inclined to agree. I think he did a great job with his role in Neverland, but I don't think the role itself was all that.

I finally got around to seeing him in Man in the Iron Mask over the weekend (well, most of it), and boy, was he annoyingly bad in it! Actually, all the actors were not at their best, especially the four Musketeers.

Do you mean actors, directors, writers, techies, etc?

Yes. And then everyone votes for best movie. (I think. I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong.)

here's the iMDb's list of past winners, in case that helps anyone else handicap winners.

The nomination is done by the branches, the voting is by everyone.

I hope not. I don't think Oscars should be based on cumulative work.

But they tend to be. There are a lot of Oscars that boil down to "Oops, you did great work last year (or even years ago), so here's the statue retroactively." See, for instance, Al Pacino in Scent of a Woman. There's a great list here (scroll down) [link] .

I wonder why Phantom gets best Art Direction (it had great art direction, don't get me wrong) and not a costume nom?

I haven't seen a single best picture, best actor, best supporting, best actress, or best supporting actress. Go me and the mindless movie-going! My motto: Candy is dandy.

There are a lot of Oscars that boil down to "Oops, you did great work last year (or even years ago), so here's the statue retroactively."

I thought Sean Penn last year was half for "Mystic River," half because he didn't win for "I Am Sam." (He lost to Denzel Washington in "Training Day," which was another "body of work" Oscar.)

It looks like for the last five years, best actress has always gone to a part that could be described as "pretty actress makes self ugly/grotesque." Is there anything in that category this year?