Who Will Win Big at the Oscars?
A Nation reader from American Fiction to The Zone of Interest
The Oscars are upon us. It happens—every year, in fact. At The Nation we are often good at diagnosing the contradictions of capitalism, offering trenchant essays on new books, albums, and art exhibitions, and sometimes predicting the rise and fall of political regimes. When it comes to the Oscars, do we really know who will win take home a statue? No. But our critics—J. Hoberman, Tarpley Hitt, Beatrice Loayza, Jorge Cotte, Adolph Reed Jr., Mike Duncan, Erin Schwartz, Katha Pollitt, and Stephen Kearse—have written some very smart essays and reviews about the films up for nomination and that will help you make some educated guesses.
Oppenheimer
Jorge Cotte: “Nolan neither indicts nor vindicates Oppenheimer. Instead, he stays in an intimate proximity to him, documenting his captivating, then horrible, achievements and his eventual downfall.”
American Fiction
Stephen Kearse: “Written and directed by Cord Jefferson, American Fiction loosely adapts Percival Everett’s 2001 novel Erasure. But where Everett was concerned with literary culture and the plight of the Black author, Jefferson widens the story to address cultural production as a whole.”
Killers of the Flower Moon
Jorge Cotte: “Scorsese has made a career of colorful epics. His 27th feature, a sweeping story painted on a grand Western canvas, is no different. Yet unlike the flat landscape of a traditional western, the horizon in this film is not the unbounded space of American freedom: This is a horizon hedged in by the upward sprays of oil and the stark verticality of oil rigs.”
Barbie
Tarpley Hitt: “In making Barbie, Greta Gerwig…needed to tell a story about an icon that purposefully did not have one. Gerwig’s approach: to literalize Barbie’s malleability in almost every absurd way.”
Erin Schwartz: “Barbie sets up philosophical questions that are more daunting than a film based on a children’s toy might need to drive its plot forward—it gives itself the particularly hard task, for example, of summarizing contemporary feminism without skewing corny or jargon-y, something it does with mixed success.”
Katha Pollitt: “The message of Barbie is that girls can be anything, but you still have to be gorgeous while you’re doing it. Even Weird Barbie, whose hair has been chopped off and whose face is covered with crayon scribbles, is adorable.”
Napoleon
Mike Duncan: “To tell the story of the Age of Revolution, one must engage with its contradictions in one way or another. But Scott is not really interested in history.”
Popular
“swipe left below to view more authors”Swipe →May December
Beatrice Loayza: “Working from a screenplay by Samy Burch that resonates to an uncanny degree with Haynes’s enduring thematic obsessions, the director spins another tale of repression and desire, performance and spectatorship—this time anchored in the humdrum aftermath of a true-crime spectacle.”
The Zone of Interest
J. Hoberman: “The critic Thomas Puhr compared Glazer’s earlier films to a lake ‘whose surface remains calm and untouched so that we can better see our reflections in it,’ and that may be most true with The Zone of Interest: It is a movie that prompts contemplation even as it inspires disgust.”
Rustin
Adolph Reed Jr.: “Standard-issue Hollywood biopics perpetually fail to capture how movements are reproduced as mass projects, from the bottom up and top down, in a constantly improvised trajectory plotted in response to and in anticipation of layers of internal and external pressures.”
Thank you for reading The Nation!
We hope you enjoyed the story you just read. It’s just one of many examples of incisive, deeply-reported journalism we publish—journalism that shifts the needle on important issues, uncovers malfeasance and corruption, and uplifts voices and perspectives that often go unheard in mainstream media. For nearly 160 years, The Nation has spoken truth to power and shone a light on issues that would otherwise be swept under the rug.
In a critical election year as well as a time of media austerity, independent journalism needs your continued support. The best way to do this is with a recurring donation. This month, we are asking readers like you who value truth and democracy to step up and support The Nation with a monthly contribution. We call these monthly donors Sustainers, a small but mighty group of supporters who ensure our team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers have the resources they need to report on breaking news, investigative feature stories that often take weeks or months to report, and much more.
There’s a lot to talk about in the coming months, from the presidential election and Supreme Court battles to the fight for bodily autonomy. We’ll cover all these issues and more, but this is only made possible with support from sustaining donors. Donate today—any amount you can spare each month is appreciated, even just the price of a cup of coffee.
The Nation does not bow to the interests of a corporate owner or advertisers—we answer only to readers like you who make our work possible. Set up a recurring donation today and ensure we can continue to hold the powerful accountable.
Thank you for your generosity.
