Oscars: Is ‘Oppenheimer’ Actually Winning Best Picture? Watch Out for ‘Poor Things’!

This is one of those years where I have this nagging feeling that the presumptive Best Picture frontrunner might not turn out to be the actual frontrunner.

Christopher Nolan’s “Oppenheimer” is being touted to win the big prize next March, and it’s a film that most pundits seem to agree is the frontrunner, but something feels … off.

Firstly, I should again mention the EW article, published last month, that predicted “Oppenheimer” might break the record for most Oscar nominations for a single film, with 15. That’s really saying something about how confident some folks are about an “Oppenheimer” win.

Do you blame them? “Oppenheimer” was a box office behemoth, with almost $940 million grossed worldwide, and a major critical hit, currently the third most-listed film on critics’ top 10 lists.

And yet, these last few weeks I’ve spoken to more than a few Oscar voters who were underwhelmed by the film; there’s no doubt that it has its detractors, but will there be a large enough dissent to prevent it from winning the top prize?

“Oppenheimer” will most likely maintain its frontrunner status well into early next year. It’s only when the Producers Guild of America (PGA) announces its top winner, in late February, that we’ll really know for sure how strong its chances are.

If not “Oppenheimer,” then what film wins the top prize? “Barbie” is too commercial. “The Holdovers” might be too plain. “Maestro” is too divisive. “Past Lives” too small. There are only two other films that I see having a legitimate shot at Best Picture: Martin Scorsese’s “Killers of the Flower Moon” and, particularly, Yorgos Lanthimos’ “Poor Things.”

“Killers of the Flower Moon” is the critical darling. The lengthy runtime, 3.5 hours, seems to continuously be coming up in conversations. If it were to win Best Picture then it would become the longest one to do so in the last 20 years. I believe it’s a great film, with a staggering vision, that, despite its flaws, leaves an indelible mark on the viewer. Scorsese is also well loved by the Academy — that counts for something.

However, there are plenty of folks out there who don’t believe that it’s great. You just have to read the room. Yes, it’s the most acclaimed film of 2023, but critics don’t decide what wins Best Picture. As far as I’m concerned, it’ll be a tough hill to climb for ‘Killers’ to win Best Picture.

And then there’s “Poor Things.” Lanthimos’ film crashed the race with an incredible showing at Venice, winning the Golden Lion and becoming the big film of this year’s fall fests. “Poor Things” continued its stellar festival performance at NYFF and BFI London. The film’s star, Emma Stone, is also the frontrunner to win Best Actress.

It’s also the weirdest of this year’s Best Picture contenders and that might play to its advantage — remember, this is the same Academy that gave “The Shape of Water” and “EEAAO” it’s top prize. It’s also, much like those films,is very accessible. A singular vision that manages to hit many genres, demographics, is incredibly moving and also very relatable.

I don’t believe, unlike some pundits, that “Poor Things” will turn some voters off. Its risqué material and in-your-face sex scenes are part of the charm. Searchlight is hoping for a large enough audience to show up when the film expands to 800 theaters this coming Friday.

As the end of the year approaches, this is how I currently see the Best Picture race —

(1) “Oppenheimer”
(2) “Poor Things”
(3) “Killers of the Flower Moon”
(4) “Barbie”
(5) “The Holdovers”
(6) “Past Lives”
(7) “Maestro”
(8) “Anatomy of A Fall”
(9) “American Fiction”
(10) “The Zone of Interest”