Analysis: 'Chicago' in 'Gangs' fight

BEVERLY HILLS, Calif., Feb. 11 (UPI) -- It's a snap judgment to be sure, but "Chicago" and "Gangs of New York" seem to be headed for an Oscar showdown in March -- with a slight edge for "Chicago."

For starters, "Chicago" has 13 nominations to 10 for "Gangs" -- and that puts historical precedent on its side. Over the past 20 years, the movie with the most nominations has gone on to win for Best Picture 18 times.

The only exceptions were in 1991, when "Bugsy" led the pack with 10 nominations and "The Silence of the Lambs" took the top prize, and last year, when "The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring" had 13 nominations but "A Beautiful Mind" took the top prize.

After the statuettes were handed out in March 1992, academy voters might well have wondered what they ever saw in "Bugsy," which took home only two Oscars -- one for art direction and one for costume design. Meantime, "The Silence of the Lambs" pulled off a sweep not seen since "Once Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest" in 1976 -- winning not only for best picture, but also for director, actor, actress and screenplay.

That hasn't happened since "The Silence of the Lambs," and it won't happen this year. None of the Best Picture nominees is nominated in all five of the top categories.

"Chicago" had the most acting nominations, four -- including Best Actress for Renée Zellweger, Supporting Actor for John C. Reilly and Supporting Actress for Queen Latifah and Catherine Zeta-Jones. "Gangs" managed just one acting nomination, Best Actor for Daniel Day-Lewis.

All four of "Chicago's" acting nominees face an uphill struggle the rest of the way on the road to Oscar gold.

Zellweger is up against Nicole Kidman, whose performance as Virginia Woolf in "The Hours" is widely regarded as unquestionably Oscar-worthy. The field also includes Salma Hayek ("Frida"), Diane Lane ("Unfaithful") and Julianne Moore ("Far from Heaven").

Kidman won the Golden Globe for Best Actress in a drama, while Zellweger won for Best Actress in a musical or comedy. Both were nominated for Best Actress last year.

In the supporting actor category, Reilly faces tough sledding against Chris Cooper, a Golden Globe winner for his stunning performance as orchid thief-lover John Laroche in "Adaptation." If Cooper doesn't win the Oscar, then Ed Harris probably will, for his performance as the suicidal writer Richard Brown in "The Hours."

Harris has turned in a batch of top-notch performances over the past two decades -- "Pollock," "The Truman Show" and "Apollo 13" to name a few -- but has yet to nail down an Oscar. He might be due.

The other two nominees in the category -- Paul Newman ("Road to Perdition") and Christopher Walken ("Catch Me If You Can") -- might want to have a thank-you speech handy on March 23. But they're likely to get more use out of the old, reliable "it's an honor just to be nominated" routine.

Two of Harris' cast-mates in "The Hours," Meryl Streep and Julianne Moore, are up for Best Supporting Actress, along with Kathy Bates for "About Schmidt." That's a heap of competition for Queen Latifah and Zeta-Jones, but the two "Chicago" stars could well be up to the challenge in what has turned out to be a typically competitive field of supporting actress finalists.

Interestingly, the competition for Best Actor -- Day-Lewis, Adrien Brody ("The Pianist"), Nicolas Cage ("Adaptation"), Michael Caine ("The Quiet American") and Jack Nicholson ("About Schmidt") -- is not likely to have any effect one way or the other on the Best Picture race. However, the competition for Best Director could prove to be a key to prognosticating the Oscar outcome.

Martin Scorsese has been nominated three times for the Academy Award -- for "GoodFellas" (1990), "The Last Temptation of Christ" (1988) and "Raging Bull" (1980) -- but has never won.

This year, it's different.

There is a formidable bandwagon in Hollywood intent on bringing home an Oscar for the "Gangs of New York" director. Miramax honcho Harvey Weinstein and Oscar-winning director Steven Spielberg are both on board.

On top of that, the Directors Guild of America has already announced that it will give Scorsese its highest honor -- a lifetime achievement award. There are strong indications that the Hollywood directing community is more or less coalescing around Scorsese, and that could result in an Oscar for him at long last.

On the other hand, the field of Oscar-nominated directors is particularly strong this year.

Steven Daldry ("The Hours") and Rob Marshall ("Chicago") are associated with movies that received more generally positive reviews than "Gangs of New York" so they have to be considered strong favorites for the Oscar.

Roman Polanski ("The Pianist") might still be carrying too much baggage from a 1970s morals charge for academy voters to go all the way and give him an Oscar. Pedro Almodóvar ("Talk to Her") managed a directing nomination against all odds -- with a Spanish-language movie that hardly any U.S. audiences have seen. Even the DGA did not include Almodóvar in its list of DGA Award nominees.

If Scorsese wins the directing Oscar, it will be tempting to look at the historical record and conclude that "Gangs of New York" will win for Best Picture -- since the record shows that the directing and best picture honors usually go hand in hand.

Regardless of the many predictions that are sure to be made over the next five-and-a-half weeks, no one knows a thing right now about who will go home with Oscar on the last Sunday in March.