Well, we’ve finally got our wishes. For the first time in 5 years or so, the Oscars race seems fairly unpredictable. It’s been interesting to watch the so-called “front-runners” change throughout the year, starting with Carol earning strong buzz from Cannes and melting all the critics hearts. But when Tom McCarthy‘s Spotlight hit Telluride and Toronto festivals, the tidal shifted to a new standout. It wasn’t until very end of the year that another serious contender emerged, last year’s Oscar winner Alejandro G. Inarritu for The Revenant. And while the hands on favorite to win Best Picture this year is The Revenant (after wins from the Golden Globes, BAFTA, and DGA), it’s by no means a lock. There’s even been a slight surge from Adam McKay‘s housing market collapse film The Big Short, which shakes up the competition even more. Aside from a few categories, this year’s Oscar winners are difficult to predict and because of it should be entertaining to see who walks away with a golden statue.

Watch the 88th Academy Awards on Feb. 28th live at 7 p.m. ET/ 4 p.m. PST on ABC.

2016 Oscar Predictions

Best Picture:

The Big Short
Bridge of Spies
Brooklyn
Mad Max: Fury Road
The Martian
The Revenant
Room
Spotlight

Best Director

Adam McKay, The Big Short
George Miller, Mad Max: Fury Road
Alejandro G. Inarritu, The Revenant
Lenny Abrahamson, Room
Tom McCarthy, Spotlight

Best Actress in a Leading Role

Cate Blanchett, Carol
Brie Larson, Room
Jennifer Lawrence, Joy
Charlotte Rampling, 45 Years
Saoirse Ronan, Brooklyn

Best Actor in a Leading Role

Bryan Cranston, Trumbo
Matt Damon, The Martian
Leonardo DiCaprio, The Revenant
Michael Fassbender, Steve Jobs
Eddie Redmayne, The Danish Girl

Actress in a Supporting Role

Jennifer Jason Leigh, The Hateful Eight
Rooney Mara, Carol
Rachel McAdams, Spotlight
Alicia Vikander, The Danish Girl
Kate Winslet, Steve Jobs

Actor in a Supporting Role

Christian Bale, The Big Short
Tom Hardy, The Revenant
Mark Ruffalo, Spotlight
Mark Rylance, Bridge of Spies
Sylvester Stallone, Creed

Best Originial Screenplay

Bridge of Spies
Ex Machina
Inside Out
Spotlight
Straight Outta Compton

Best Adapted Screenplay

The Big Short
Brooklyn
Carol
The Martian
Room

Best Animated Feature

Anomalisa
Boy and the World
Inside Out
Shaun The Sheep
When Marnie Was There

Best Foreign Language Film

Embrace of the Serpent
Mustang
Son of Saul
Theeb
A War

Best Documentary

Amy
Cartel Land
The Look of Silence
What Happened, Miss Simone?
Winter on Fire: Ukraine’s Fight for Freedom

Best Cinematography

Carol
Mad Max: Fury Road
The Hateful Eight
The Revenant
Sicario

Visual Effects

Ex Machina
Mad Max: Fury Road
The Martian
The Revenant
Star Wars: The Force Awakens

Film Editing

The Big Short
Mad Max: Fury Road
The Revenant
Spotlight
Star Wars: The Force Awakens

Production Design

Bridge of Spies
The Danish Girl
Mad Max: Fury Road
The Martian
The Revenant

Best Costume Design

Carol
Cinderella
The Danish Girl
Mad Max: Fury Road
The Revenant

Best Original Score

Bridge of Spies
Carol
The Hateful Eight
Sicario
Star Wars: The Force Awakens

Best Original Song

“Earned It” from Fifty Shades of Grey
“Manta Ray” from Racing Extinction
“Simple Song No. 3” from Youth
“Til It Happens To You” from The Hunting Ground
“Writing’s on the Wall” from Spectre

Achievement in Makeup and Hairstyling

Mad Max Fury Road
The 100-Year Old Men Who Climbed Out The Window and Disappeared
The Revenant

Achievement in Sound Mixing

Bridge of Spies
Mad Max: Fury Road
The Martian
The Revenant
Star Wars: The Force Awakens

Achievement in Sound Editing

Mad Max: Fury Road
The Martian
The Revenant
Sicario
Star Wars: The Force Awakens

Best Live Action Short Film

Ave Maria
Day One
Everything Will Be Okay (Alles Wird Gut)
Shok
Stutterer

Best Documentary Short Subject

Body Team 12
Chau, Beyond the Lines
Claude Lanzmann: Spectres of the Shoah
A Girl in the River: The Price of Forgiveness
Last Day of Freedom

Best Animated Short Film

Bear Story
Prologue
Sanjay’s Super Team
We Can’t Live Without Cosmos
World of Tomorrow

Since its premiere at Cannes in May 2015, Ciro Guerra’s Embrace of the Serpent has been stunning audiences all over the world with its tale of Karamakate, an Amazonian shaman who helps two different explorers over two periods of time as they hunt down a rare psychedelic plant. In order to provide an accurate portrait of the Amazon location and the early 20th century time period, Guerra and his crew ventured into the Colombian Amazon to work with the native tribes and bring their vision to life. And while the film has its fair share of stunning imagery—it was shot in black and white on 35mm film—Guerra doesn’t avoid confronting the horrors of colonization going on at the time, using his narrative to explore the devastating short-term and long-term effects of the West’s destruction of Amazonian cultures.

I talked with Ciro Guerra about Embrace of the Serpent last year at the Toronto International Film Festival, and since then the film has gone on to earn an Oscar nomination for Best Foreign Language Film. Read on for the full interview below, where Guerra talks about his intensive research process and what filmmaking means to him.

Embrace of the Serpent opens in New York City on February 17th before expanding to Los Angeles, Toronto and more cities on February 19th.

Tell me about your research process for this film.

It was about 3 and a half years of research during which the script was developed. The starting point was the journals of the explorers. I found them fascinating when I read them. I thought it was a great story that had not been told. I was fascinated by these men who left everything behind, who left their families and their lives to go three, four, even 17 years in the case of Schultes, to an unknown place and just tell the world about it. I first traveled to the Amazon region after reading them, and what I found was completely different. The region is completely transformed. So [the film] is part of a desire to bring back this Amazon to the way it used to be, and it was a big effort. People don’t dress like that anymore, and most of the traditions and languages are lost or in the process of disappearing.

We contacted the communities and we asked them if they want to be a part of the film. They said, “Our condition is that, in order to give you permission to shoot here, we are part of the film.” That made us very happy because we were able to collaborate. And for them, it was like bringing back the stories of their grandfathers or their ancestors they have heard from before. We wanted to bring an image of that to life because history has no image of that moment.

Were you initially nervous about approaching the communities in the Amazon?

I think the people of the Amazon are really open and friendly and enthusiastic. They are very joyous people. They can see through you, so if you’re transparent and you’re not carrying any second intentions they can see that immediately. But they ask you the really important questions, which are “What’s the real reason you want to make this film? What’s the true reason?” And for me, it meant going back and looking in the mirror and asking myself, “What is the reason I want to make this film?” When I understood that I wanted to learn and share the knowledge, I felt comfortable saying this is the reason. If the reason had been that I want to work, I want to go to a festival, win awards or make money, I should have quit at that moment.

How did you initially come upon the two journals that you based the film on?

I had a lifelong dream of making a film in the Amazon. I had come from making my first two films, which were personal and about my life, my memories, my childhood, and my culture. For this film I wanted to go the opposite way, to take a journey into the unknown. The Amazon is half of Colombia and it’s completely unknown to Colombians. It’s a place that we have very little knowledge of. I have a friend who’s an anthropologist, who was an actor in my previous film, who said if I want to go into the Amazon I should start with the journals of the explorers. I related heavily to [the journals] because, to me, making a film is like that. It’s a journey into something where you never know what’s going to happen. It’s uncharted territory every time you make a film. I related strongly to that quest and hunger for knowledge.

Your previous film Wind Journeys was shot in 80 locations, and with Embrace of the Serpent, you’re going to the Amazon to make it. You’re doing much more than other people might normally do when making a movie. Is this something you feel like you need to do in order to make a film?

I think films should be an experience, both making them and watching them. When you sit in the theatre in the dark you want to be taken somewhere. You want to be changed, you want to live an experience. For me, with the process of making a film, I like to tackle it that way. I want a film to take me somewhere, to change my point of view, to confront my ideas in life and the world. Filmmaking is a really intense experience, and I think it should be. It shouldn’t be an office job. It shouldn’t be predictable or safe. It should be risky. When there’s that excitement on your part, from the people making the film, the audience feels that.

What made you decide to shoot on 35mm?

The look of the film was inspired by the photographs that the explorers took. [They’re] almost daguerreotype kind of pictures, but they have an organic quality, and in order to have this organic quality there’s no match for film. I have no problem with high definition video. I think it’s right for urban stories, modern stories, and artificial light, but when you want to get the real texture of nature, film is the way to go. It’s not possible to think of something else. But it also gives you some limitations.

There are strengths with film. The cameras are more [like] battle cameras. Some of them were made to shoot wars, so they are good for shooting in rough terrain. They do better with humidity and external conditions while video cameras are not so tough with these environments. But there was also something else. Since we had to shoot on film, we had limited stock, so we only had two takes for each shot. With video, you can do 17 takes for one shot, but here it’s two takes, and that makes every take precious. It focuses the actors, the crew, everyone. When we used to take photographs on film, every photograph was valuable. We had to choose and take care of it. Today with the digital age, you take thousands of photographs but they have no value. You never look at them again. You don’t frame them. In film you’re making a leap of faith, and that’s fascinating.

Was it a very stressful shoot then?

I thought it was going to be. We were prepared for the worst, and it was a very demanding and tough shoot, but it wasn’t stressful. The choice that we made to be very respectful to the environment, to the communities, to make as little impact as possible, meant that we felt that the jungle was playing to our side. We felt a connection with each other and the place that we were in, so it became a very profound and spiritual experience for all of us. I feel that, when you try to bring a foreign shoot into a place like this and try to obey all the rules of the place, you can turn the place against you. But, in this case, I felt that we had the protection of the place and the spiritual support of the community, so it turned into a very happy experience for all of us.

Tell me about the way you developed Karamakate.

The interesting thing to me was not to make [something] usually seen in this kind of movie, where you have the main point of view from the explorer. It was very clear to me that to make this story unique I had to switch the point of view. There was a character in the journals who had a very small appearance and I found him fascinating, so I started developing on him. But I had to switch something in my mind in order to write him and create him. That took about 2 years of writing and researching to really understand how this character sees the world. Not only that, I also had to make it understandable for an audience. It’s a role that’s so foreign that it’s easy to get lost, and I was really lost for a while.

But then we found the actors. They were really a part of developing the character. They brought their own experience and their own views, and they enrichen the characters through dialogue and action. But I think we were safe because it was a fiction, so we had some liberties.

Do you feel that what these explorers were doing was vital, or did it just contribute further to the colonization going on at the time?

I feel that what they did was vital because, if those encounters didn’t take place, these cultures would have been erased by capitalism and we would have never noticed them. These encounters in the jungle had a really big impact because this knowledge that was liberated for the first time really changed the world during the middle of the 20th century. All of the first ecological movements were influenced by these journals. The writers of the Beat Generation were influenced. For example, Burroughs went to Colombia to see if this was all true. It had a big influence on what became psychedelia and the hippie movement, and also the change of consciousness that brings us today to a world where environmental issues are a thing. A hundred years ago it would be impossible to discuss these matters of preserving other cultures and other languages, or being respectful to these people who, at that time, were seen as primitive, subhuman and souls that needed to be rescued. I think that the journals of the explorers really helped change that.

What made you bring in the concept of the Chullachaqui myth?

During the [research] process, I came upon the Machiguenga myth of the Peruvian amazon. It struck me because I was exploring the German culture at the time, and there was a direct resonance with the myth of the doppelganger. But then it struck even harder because it’s an ancient myth that speaks to contemporary men. We’re living in an age where people are communicating through virtual avatars. It was something timeless that was contemporary as well. It also gave me an idea of how I could find a way to express the feelings of a character who feels that their culture is disappearing and about to be lost. I decided that it was going to be the driving myth behind the film’s structure.

When did you come up with the idea to link these journals together and use Karamakate as the connective tissue?

I was looking at a way we could bring the viewer into a different world or view. In the journals of Theodor Koch-Grunberg, the German explorer that I was inspired by, he came following the footsteps of another German explorer named Schomburgk, who had been there 40 years before. Koch-Grunberg reached a community on the border of Colombia and Venezuela. They welcomed him and, for that generation, he was the first white man they had ever seen. He spent two months there, and all the time they talked about the myth of Surumbukú. After a while, he realized that Surumbukú was Schomburgk. The other explorer became an Amazonian myth, and now he was also Surumbukú. He was the same. So he understood that, for them, there was only one man going back in time every time. He was one soul traveling through different men who are coming in search of knowledge. I thought that was brilliant, and I was excited by that. This was a really great way of telling a story in which time is not a linear thing, but a multiplicity of things, which is the way they see time.

The Best Foreign Language Film category, whether it’s at the Oscars or any other awards show, always poses a strange question: how can you whittle the entire non-English speaking world down to five titles? When you compare this to the eight English-language nominees for Best Picture, it seems like an unfair balance. Now, granted, the Best Picture category isn’t limited to just English-language productions, but you’d be crazy to suggest that foreign productions have the same shot at getting a Best Picture nod as something like The Revenant or Brooklyn (past foreign language nominees like Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon and Amour are exceptions to the norm).

Even stranger is the method of selecting the nominees, which requires countries to submit only one film for consideration in the category. That means France, a country that consistently puts out some of the best cinema in the world every year, can only pick one film to represent their country in the category. But even then, the selected film needs to have a theatrical release within a specific time frame in their home country in order to truly qualify for the category. Those rules can get frustrating for some foreign language films, and the idea of contorting a release in one’s own home country just for the possibility of one award nomination thousands of miles away isn’t exactly an appealing one: in 2013, the French distributor of Blue is the Warmest Colour refused to change their release strategy, meaning one of the most buzzed about films of that year didn’t even qualify for the only category it had a shot of getting nominated in.

The point of all of this is that, like everything else at the Oscars, politics abound, and these nominees need to be taken with a big grain of salt. These five films are hardly representative of the best world cinema has to offer, but they’re far from being the worst either. This year, the Foreign Language category provided one big, welcome surprise: the nomination of Theeb, director Naji Abu Nowar’s film about a young member of a Bedouin tribe who gets caught up in the war taking place far from his community. I saw Theeb back at its New Directors/New Films screening and came away pleasantly surprised at its assuredness, especially coming from a first-time director. The fact that Theeb got a theatrical release in the US was great news on its own; its Oscar nomination should hopefully turn more people on to a great film that deserves to be seen (Theeb is currently out in limited theatrical release from Film Movement).

From the surprising to the not-so-surprising, it shouldn’t come as a shock that Hungary’s Son of Saul received a nomination in this category. It premiered at Cannes in 2015, where it scored the Grand Prix along with a nice distribution deal from Sony Pictures Classics. That, combined with the fact that it’s a Holocaust film, solidified Son of Saul’s appearance here, since at least one foreign language nominee must deal with the Holocaust in some way, shape or form. Critics and audiences have been over the moon for Son of Saul since its Cannes debut, but I came away disappointed after seeing it. Director Laszlo Nemes and cinematographer Matyas Erdely show off their formal skills with the film’s precise construction, using shallow focus and long takes to “immerse” viewers into the horrors of surviving Auschwitz, but it only calls attention to the film’s own technical achievements. And combining a form that’s all about showing itself off with one of mankind’s greatest tragedies makes for a pairing that’s ugly for all the wrong reasons. It’s disappointing to see that, in a year with so many strong films both nominated and eligible for the category, the award will wind up going to Son of Saul, whose bland, digestible form of “difficult” cinema makes its win more about people congratulating their own broadened cinematic horizons than celebrating the best nominee (Son of Saul is currently out in limited theatrical release from Sony Pictures Classics).

That brings me to Mustang, Deniz Gamze Erguven’s film which France submitted this year over Jacques Audiard’s Dheepan, a film most assumed would have been selected given its Palme d’Or win last year. It’s a choice only people who haven’t seen Mustang might find surprising, since those who have seen Mustang know it’s a legitimately great film through and through. Following five orphaned sisters living in a tiny Turkish village, the film portrays the girls’ struggles to fight back against old cultural, religious and patriarchal standards as they’re married off one-by-one in arranged ceremonies. The film may get a little too contrived as it goes along, but it’s impossible to deny that Erguven has crafted one powerful story of a fight for independence and freedom from the old, archaic ways of the past. Mustang has a small but fervent following since its US release in late 2015, and because of that, it might be the only film with a shot at taking the trophy away from Son of Saul (Mustang is currently out in limited theatrical release from Cohen Media Group).

For a nominee like Ciro Guerra’s Embrace of the Serpent, it should just be happy that it got nominated in the first place, as it’s probably too “out there” for people to consider choosing as the winner. Taking place between two periods of time, Guerra shows a shaman living deep in the Amazon as he helps two different scientists try to find a rare plant within the jungle. Embrace has its fair share of gorgeous cinematography, but like last year’s winner Ida it’s hard to find much to enjoy beyond its aesthetics. Unlike Son of Saul, Guerra’s form feels sincere in its attempts to pay respect to the location and cultures he profiles, but other than its pointed look at the devastating effects of colonialism the film comes across as Herzog-lite (Embrace of the Serpent will come out in limited theatrical release on Friday, February 17^th from Oscilloscope Pictures).

Finally, Tobias Lindholm’s A War is a fine follow-up to A Hijacking, which suffered an unfortunate case of timing when it came out around the same time as Paul Greengrass’ Captain Phillips. Taking place in Afghanistan, Lindholm focuses on a Danish army commander who winds up getting accused of a war crime after making a rash decision during a firefight. Denmark is no stranger to impressive yet overly manipulated drama—see previous Oscar nominee The Hunt, which Lindholm co-wrote—and A War is more of the same, showcasing a complex and nuanced situation with the efficiency of a procedural. Fans of this form of storytelling will find plenty to like here, while those who bristle at the staidness should stay far away. Lindholm continues to show he’s an excellent dramatist, and no matter what A War’s chances of winning might be, it’s difficult to argue against its presence in this category.

CJ and Bernard tackle the #OscarsSoWhite controversy on this week’s episode, delving into the complexities of the pre-awards show debacle and the larger social issue it stems from. To help balance out the heavy shit, we’ll check in on Darth Dissenter himself as he finally shares with us his thoughts on Star Wars: The Force Awakens. Better late than never! Plus, Bernard fills us in on a mildly traumatic experience he had involving the legendary Sally Field. All that, plus our Indie Picks of the Week, on this episode of the Way Too Indiecast!

Topics

• Indie Picks (3:10)
• CJ’s Star Wars: The Force Awakens Thoughts (13:49)
• Bernard’s Sally Field Incident (26:35)
• #OscarsSoWhite Debacle (39:43)

Articles Referenced

• Cartel Land Review
• Cartel Land Interview
• Star Wars: The Force Awakens Indiecast

Subscribe to the Way Too Indiecast

• Subscribe to our podcast on iTunes
• Subscribe on Stitcher

One of the great trademarks of Oscar-nominated shorts (in any category) is the diversity of the nominees. That diversity reflects not only in the countries represented but also the languages and themes of each film. The 2016 Oscar-nominated Live Action Shorts are no different.

Ave Maria (directed by Basil Kalil)

Five nuns based on the West Bank of Palestine have their dinner—and their vow of silence—disrupted when an Israeli man crashes his car into their statue of the Virgin Mary. Khalil’s delightfully funny short is rich with juxtaposition, not only of faith but also of family.

Day One (directed by Henry Hughes)

The title of Hughes’ effective war-based drama refers to the first day on the job for Feda (Layla Alizada), a US Army interpreter stationed with a unit in Afghanistan. When that unit arrests a bomb maker at his home, their routine mission becomes anything but when the bomb maker’s wife goes into labor. Religious rule forbids a male doctor from touching the mother, so Feda must deliver the baby. Alizada shines in the role.

Everything Will Be Okay (directed by Patrick Vollrath)

In this family drama, a divorced father picks up his 8-year-old daughter for what appears to be a routine weekend. But as the day unfolds the day becomes anything but routine, and the young child knows it. The fist half of Vollrath’s film unfolds with great tension but loses a little steam once it makes its big reveal.

Shok (directed by Jamie Donoughue)

Based on true events, Donoughue’s film begins in the present day when a man finds an old, beat-up bicycle on the road. This triggers memories of two Albanian boys, best friends Petrit (Lum Veseli) and Oki (Andi Bajgora), living in Serbia during the Kosovo War. Petrit makes some bad decisions and brings Oki down with him. The drama lacks tension in the early stages but it closes strong with a stunning ending.

Stutterer (directed by Benjamin Cleary)

Matthew Needham plays Greenwood, a typographer with a stutter so crippling, he has taken to learn sign language to communicate. He has carried on a six-month online romance with Ellie (Chloe Pirrie), and when she suggests they finally meet in person, Greenwood goes into a panic. Cleary’s drama, while the least intense of the nominees, is the most intimate and accessible. Credit must also be given to the film’s sound editor, Gustaf Jackson. Greenwood’s thoughts are audible to the viewer and spoken perfectly in his head, creating a need for Jackson to overlay a lot of competing (and panicked) dialogue; it’s surgical-like editing.

If I had an Academy vote, I would place mine for Day One. I really liked Ave Maria, and it’s the most entertaining of the five films, but the sustained intensity of the on-the-job war drama, coupled with Alizada’s performance, makes it the winner for me.

With characters ranging from a bear to a young Hindu boy, themes ranging from familial loss to the Soviet space program, and animation styles ranging from CGI to pencil-and-paper, the field of nominees for the 2016 Best Animated Short Oscar offers something for every taste. And regardless of your preference, there’s something for everyone in this year’s shorts.

Bear Story (directed by Gabriel Osorio Varga)

The most touching of all five nominees, Bear Story shows a bear telling his story about the fate of his family. The CGI animation of the bear is perfectly fine, but it’s magnificent when the bear presents his tale via something akin to a mechanical nickelodeon. There’s also an overt animal rights message here too.

Prologue (directed by Richard Williams)

Animation veteran Williams, a three-time Oscar winner, returns with a tale of a battle between Spartans and Athenians. There is not plot, per se; it’s simply about a battle of opposing forces. The animation—old-school pencil-on-paper work—is gorgeous.

Sanjay’s Super Team (directed by Sanjay Patel)

This animated short was inspired by director Patel’s own youth. Sanjay, a young Hindu boy, is made to pray with his father but he yearns to return to the superhero cartoon he was just watching. His meditation turns into a daydream, where the Hindu gods he worships are actually superheroes. Pixar is back with another wonderful short rich in theme and intended much more for adults than for children (despite it being screened before The Good Dinosaur in 2015).

We Can’t Live Without Cosmos (directed by Konstantin Bronzit)

Titled ы не можем жить без космоса in its native Russian, this film tells the tale of best friends and aspiring cosmonauts facing the rigors of space training. Bronzit wonderfully blends the joy of youthful dreams, the desire to bring those dreams to life, and the psychological effects when those dreams don’t go quite as planned (This film is also part of the 17th Annual Animation Show of Shows. Our review of that can be found here).

World of Tomorrow (directed by Don Hertzfeldt)

This hysterical film, illustrated crudely and presented with unbridled vision, is about a little girl who is visited by a future version of herself. That future version offers lessons in history (past and future), life, love, birth, and death. And quantum physics (This film is also part of the 17th Annual Animation Show of Shows. Our review of that can be found here).

If I had an Academy vote, it would be a tough choice, but I would have to go with We Can’t Live Without Cosmos.  Sanjay’s Super Team is wonderful for its diversity and a welcome return to form for Pixar (remember Lava?). As for World of Tomorrow, it pulls off quite the stunt of being both dense and hilarious.  But as entire packages go, from story to execution, We Can’t Live Without Cosmos delivers better than its fellow nominees.

With respect to all short filmmakers, documentary short films are the most challenging to execute. Sure, animated shorts may require the added dimension of art, and both animated and live action shorts may require the adoption of a traditional three-act structure in a greatly condensed form. But neither animation nor live action shorts bear any burden of proof. There aren’t facts to present, histories to tell, or cases to make. Documentary shorts have those facets. Documentary shorts also come with mandatory moments that must be made to fit within the condensed narrative, and they do not enjoy the luxury of creative fictional exits. These are challenges greater than any of those faced by other types of short films. This year’s slate of Oscar nominees is no exception to those challenges.

Body Team 12 (directed by David Darg)

For many, if not most, the Ebola virus is something far away, something we only read about in the news. In his impactful and efficient documentary, Darg brings viewers through the screen, drops them into Liberia, and puts them on a harrowing ride-along with the members of Body Team 12. This team, part of the Liberian Red Cross, has the difficult task of removing the bodies of those who have succumbed to the virus. The film pays particular attention to the sole female member of the team, Garmai Sumo. This may be the shortest short of the bunch, but it uses every second of that time to solid effect.

Chau, Beyond the Lines (directed by Courtney Marsh)

The subject of this documentary is Chau, a teenager living at the Lang Hao Binh Agent Orange Camp in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. The camp is special in that it caters only to those children who have been born with physical handicaps as a result of Agent Orange used during the Vietnam War. Unlike the other members of the camp, Chau has aspirations to become a professional artist and clothing designer. This means he has to leave the confines of the camp and make it on his own. The ravaging effects of Agent Orange on the collection of children make this film difficult to watch at times, and oddly, once Chau is on his own, the film slows.

Claude Lanzmann: Spectres of the Shoah (directed by Adam Benzine)

Shoah is generally regarded as the greatest film about the Holocaust ever committed to celluloid. Clocking in at more than 9 hours, Shoah took 12 years to produce, five of which were spent editing the 200+ hours of footage. Benzine’s documentary, a reflective one on the masterpiece, is part history lesson, part film studies course, part behind-the-scenes feature, and part biography of Shoah‘s creator, Claude Lanzmann. While loaded with interesting information, the biggest challenge this Oscar-nominated short faces is doing justice to its subject. To capture anything of substance about or related to a 9-hour epic, and to do so in only 40 minutes, is a tall order. Benzine touches only a little on as many points as possible.

A Girl in the River: The Price of Forgiveness (directed by Sharmeen Obaid-Chinoy)

The subject of this unbelievable documentary is a young Pakistani woman who survived an attempted honor killing. This practice is, at least anecdotally according to Obaid-Chinoy’s film, a growing trend in Pakistan and one that Pakistani courts are actually tolerating. The survivor of an attempt and the focal point of this film, Saba Maqsood, made a decision her family took issue with, so her father and uncle took matters into their own hands. Saba survived, creating a dynamic of guilt and forgiveness that doesn’t accompany most instances like these. This documentary is spellbinding from the first frame, capturing Saba’s personal struggles, her family’s defiance, and the complexity’s of a culture that allows such awful behavior.

Last Day of Freedom (directed by Dee Hibbert-Jones and Nomi Talisman)

While each of the nominated docs are personal in their own ways, this film feels more personal that the others, thanks largely in part to how it is presented. Bill is the narrator of the story about his brother, Manny, and the lifelong struggles Manny faced including illiteracy, several tours in Vietnam, PTSD, and finally a date with the executioner for a murder he committed. The fact that Bill narrates gives the film emotional heft, but it’s the animated presentation accompanying the story that serves as a double-edged sword. It offers an engaging visual style, and as effective as it may be, ultimately it’s one artist’s interpretations of another person’s words. Stick around for the closing title cards—they’re chilling.

If I had an Academy vote, I would cast it for A Girl in the River without hesitation. It combines excellent technical execution, a riveting tale, a protagonist to root for, and the most shocking of subject matters, particularly in the 21st century. It also bears the distinction of being the only doc of the five I want to re-watch, which is a good barometer for me.

From the National Board of Review to the recent handing out of the Golden Globes, the 2016 Oscar season has been nothing short of unpredictable. Yet, when the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences announced their nominations in the early morning of Thursday, January 14th, there were few shocks or notable omissions, except for the exclusion of critical darling Carol and its director Todd Haynes.

When the announcements started, the legion of Carol fans were given the chance to rest easy as it scored all of its expected nominations: cinematography, costumes, screenplay, score, best supporting actress and best actress. Yet, when surprise nominee Lenny Abrahamson was announced in Best Director and Carol was nowhere to be seen in Best Picture, it looked like a typical case of Oscar voters favoring the middlebrow over the high brow.

Not too long ago, pundits and insiders thought that Carol could surprise and win Best Picture after critical praise and an extensive stint on the festival circuit. Despite missing an important Producer’s Guild nomination, Carol was overperforming at many Oscar precursors, scoring a slew of nominations at the Golden Globes, BAFTAs and BFCA Awards. Going into the morning of the 14th, it finally looked like one of America’s greatest auteurs working today could get support from The Academy, but why did the nominations come up short?

In a year with many female-driven projects as possible contenders, most were predicting at least one of these films to miss out on Oscar morning. Historically, The Academy, which features an alarming number of older, white men, have favored male-led films. In fact, of last year’s eight Best Picture nominees, every single film focused on the life of a male. So, for many, having films like Mad Max: Fury Road, Brooklyn, Room, and Carol in contention indicated a step forward for the Oscars. Yet, aside from Carol, all of these films embrace the plight of the male condition. Even though Mad Max: Fury Road is unflinchingly feminist in its commentary, the audience split was still heavily skewed in favor of the male. Brooklyn devolves into a typical love-triangle story with its leading men representing a woman torn between her family home in Ireland and new home in America. And even though Room tackles a woman’s struggle with media perception, it’s the son of Brie Larson’s character that ends up rescuing her from depression.

Carol never shies away from being a film about women and their strength in a time of repression. Carol and Therese are perceived as classy, intelligent and demure, whereas their male suitors are presented as bullish oafs. Before romance even begins to bud between Therese and Carol, the Todd Haynes film is already at a disadvantage in The Academy by displaying women as interesting and independent, especially at the expense of their men.

As diminutive as classifying Carol as a lesbian romance may be, at the heart of the film is the blossoming love between Carol and Therese. It’s easy to point to the 2006 Oscar ceremony, where Crash won Best Picture over projected favorite Brokeback Mountain, to create a narrative for The Academy’s aversion for homosexual films and performances, but in the past decade a handful of men portraying gay figures have been nominated or awarded. On the other hand, actresses portraying lesbians have had a much harder time breaking through, and it is especially hard when the characters are “just” lesbians rather than transgender, bisexual or queer. The films these women star in often have an even harder time scoring picture nominations.

In recent years, the only film driven by a lesbian couple to be nominated for Best Picture is The Kids Are All Right, a dramedy with a meaty supporting role by a well-respected male actor. In fact, The Kids Are All Right isn’t like Carol at all—it is a conservative film The Academy could have an easier time embracing. Its relative lightness paints a lesbian partnership as something less serious than a straight relationship, whereas Carol illustrates the heavy struggles of lesbians in the middle of the 20th century with dire conviction. By principle, The Kids Are All Right diminishes the family that the lesbian couple has made by putting a man in the middle of it—something The Academy members can get behind.

But the single biggest travesty of this year’s Oscar season might be Todd Haynes missing a Best Director nomination. Haynes has always been treasured by crowds of more refined taste, evident by his many directing mentions from critics’ groups in New York City and Los Angeles, but Carol had him primed for an academic breakout. Haynes’ work in Carol is marked with his usual excellence, manifested in every performance and the fully realized 1950s time period. In recent years, the directing branch has made left-field or highbrow choices compared to the Directors Guild or other committees; meditative and “artsy” films such as Amour and The Tree of Life have garnered nominations for auteurs Michael Haneke and Terrence Malick, respectively. Yet Todd Haynes, who has been making acclaimed films for more than two decades, missed a nomination for his most accessible film to date. Despite his huge influence in the important New Queer Cinema movement, he won’t be joining the ranks of the few openly gay directors to receive an Oscar nomination.

Perhaps Carol’s Oscar problems aren’t exclusive to its production in front of the camera. For the first time since 2008, The Weinstein Company missed out on a Best Picture nod after having two of the biggest front runners at the start of the season. The Weinstein Company has had a tumultuous year after laying off a few dozen staff members, along with box office flops like Burnt. TWC toned down its usual campaigning techniques and perhaps, due to this, not enough Academy members were properly convinced. But Carol has been campaigning for itself ever since its Cannes premiere. It deserved to be a film that could rest easily on its accolades and prestige.

Ultimately, Carol has ended up being The Academy’s biggest Best Picture oversight of the 21st century. Even though The Dark Knight‘s snub in 2009 signaled a need for an expanded picture category to give more genre films a chance, its support was exclusively guilds based, and the lack of picture or director nominations were all but determined after it missed those at BAFTA and the Golden Globes. Carol‘s snub is much more indicative of Hollywood and the AMPAS’ greatest aversions, whether that be the highbrow cinema, gay filmmakers, or women’s sexuality.

In a week where the Golden Globes proved once again how much of a navel gazing joke and an obvious excuse for televised drunkenness it is, one has to look at this morning’s freshly announced Academy Award nominations and hope Academy voters will renew a little faith in the practice of picking out the best and brightest of the year in cinema.

The Revenant and Mad Max: Fury Road—both a bit more action-oriented than we’re used to seeing in Oscar forerunners—were the favorites with 12 and 10 nominations given to the two films respectively. And if suffering for your art earns you an Oscar these days, Leonardo DiCaprio might just finally take home a little gold dude. Fifth time’s the charm, Leo!

This year we have eight films vying for Best Picture and not a single person of color nominated in a lead or supporting role, which likely has more to do with the lack of diverse films being greenlit and less to do with biased voters, but still an unfortunate truth. Those who so dutifully championed Tangerine this past year are likely feeling the sting of rejection.

Despite nabbing Lead and Supporting nominations, Carol was shut out of the Best Picture and Best Director categories. Ridley Scott was also noticeably absent from the Best Director list for The Martian (which, in case there’s been confusion, is NOT a comedy). Quentin Tarantino might also be feeling a bit overlooked this morning, with only three nominations for The Hateful Eight, but, at least, one is for cinematography, supporting Tarantino’s decision to shoot on 70mm. Star Wars: The Force Awakens asserts itself plenty in technical categories, another unsurprising feat for this box office behemoth.

All in all, it’s not an especially unpredictable list of nominations, but the real fun comes in guessing the winners. The 88th Academy Awards will be held on Feb. 28th and will air at 7 p.m. ET/ 4 p.m. PST on ABC. Check back for our continued 2016 Academy Awards coverage and read on for the full list of nominees.

List of 2016 Oscar Nominations

Best Picture
The Big Short
Bridge of Spies
Brooklyn
Mad Max: Fury Road
The Martian
The Revenant
Room
Spotlight

Best Actress in a Leading Role
Cate Blanchett, Carol
Brie Larson, Room
Jennifer Lawrence, Joy
Charlotte Rampling, 45 Years
Saoirse Ronan, Brooklyn

Best Actor in a Leading Role
Bryan Cranston, Trumbo
Matt Damon, The Martian
Leonardo DiCaprio, The Revenant
Michael Fassbender, Steve Jobs
Eddie Redmayne, The Danish Girl

Actress in a Supporting Role
Jennifer Jason Leigh, The Hateful Eight
Rooney Mara, Carol
Rachel McAdams, Spotlight
Alicia Vikander, The Danish Girl
Kate Winslet, Steve Jobs

Actor in a Supporting Role
Christian Bale, The Big Short
Tom Hardy, The Revenant
Mark Ruffalo, Spotlight
Mark Rylance, Bridge of Spies
Sylvester Stallone, Creed

Best Director
Adam McKay, The Big Short
George Miller, Mad Max: Fury Road
Alejandro G. Inarritu, The Revenant
Lenny Abrahamson, Room
Tom McCarthy, Spotlight

Visual Effects
Ex Machina
Mad Max: Fury Road
The Martian
The Revenant
Star Wars: The Force Awakens

Best Foreign Language Film
Embrace of the Serpent, Colombia
Mustang, France
Son of Saul, Hungary
Theeb, Jordan
A War,Denmark

Best Animated Feature
Anomalisa
Boy and the World
Inside Out
Shaun The Sheep
When Marnie Was There

Best Screenplay
Bridge of Spies
Ex Machina
Inside Out
Spotlight
Straight Outta Compton

Best Adapted Screenplay
The Big Short
Brooklyn
Carol
The Martian
Room

Best Documentary
Amy
Cartel Land
The Look of Silence
What Happened, Miss Simone?
Winter on Fire: Ukraine’s Fight for Freedom

Editing
The Big Short
Mad Max: Fury Road
The Revenant
Spotlight
Star Wars: The Force Awakens

Production Design
Bridge of Spies
The Danish Girl
Mad Max: Fury Road
The Martian
The Revenant

Best Original Score
Bridge of Spies
Carol
The Hateful Eight
Sicario
Star Wars: The Force Awakens

Best Original Song
“Earned It” from Fifty Shades of Grey
“Manta Ray” from Racing Extinction
“Simple Song No. 3” from Youth
“Til It Happens To You” from The Hunting Ground
“Writing’s on the Wall” from Spectre

Achievement in Makeup and Hairstyling
Mad Max Fury Road
The 100-Year Old Men Who Climbed Out The Window and Disappeared
The Revenant

Best Cinematography
Carol
Mad Max: Fury Road
The Hateful Eight
The Revenant
Sicario

Achievement in Sound Mixing
Bridge of Spies
Mad Max: Fury Road
The Martian
The Revenant
Star Wars: The Force Awakens

Achievement in Sound Editing
Mad Max: Fury Road
The Martian
The Revenant
Sicario
Star Wars: The Force Awakens

Best Costume Design
Carol
Cinderella
The Danish Girl
Mad Max: Fury Road
The Revenant

Best Live Action Short Film
Ave Maria
Day One
Everything Will Be Okay (Alles Wird Gut)
Shok
Stutterer

Best Documentary Short Subject
Body Team 12
Chau, Beyond the Lines
Claude Lanzmann: Spectres of the Shoah
A Girl in the River: The Price of Forgiveness
Last Day of Freedom

Best Animated Short Film
Bear Story
Prologue
Sanjay’s Super Team
We Can’t Live Without Cosmos
World of Tomorrow