Get Your Tally Sheets Ready, It's Time To Walk The Red Carpet

By SHANNON HICKS

Published: Mar 21, 2001 12:00 am

Get Your Tally Sheets Ready, Itâs Time To Walk The Red Carpet

The ballots have been sent, the golden statues have been polished, the actors are being primped, and the good folks at Pricewaterhouse-Coopers are praying they wonât have to stomach any bad jokes about chads or recounts. Yep, itâs Oscar time. Since we already spoke a few columns ago on some of the worthy efforts that got overlooked, letâs get right into discussing who among this yearâs nominated class deserves to walk away on Sunday with an Academy Award for their mantle.

Best Supporting Actress: Judi Dench (Chocolat), Marcia Gay Harden (Pollock), Kate Hudson (Almost Famous), Frances McDormand (Almost Famous) and Julie Walters (Billy Elliot). Over the years Iâve done this Oscar column, you typically get some early diatribe about how these are my subjective picks for who should win, and not a prediction of who the Academy will choose on Oscar night.Â However, this year, many of my personal picks are also folks I think will go home happy on March 25. That trend kicks off here in this category as Hudson gets my vote, slightly edging out her fine co-star and co-nominee, the ever-reliable yet always surprising McDormand.

Best Supporting Actor: Jeff Bridges (The Contender), Willem Dafoe (Shadow of the Vampire), Benicio Del Toro (Traffic), Albert Finney (Erin Brockovich) and Joaquin Phoenix (Gladiator). Although Del Toro will probably win, this is one of the few categories for which I wouldnât be upset if any of the five took home the trophy. However, I must admit that after early leanings towards Phoenixâs performance, Iâm beginning to warm to Dafoeâs work as actor Max Shrek reimagined as an actual vampire.

Best Actress: Joan Allen (The Contender), Juliette Binoche (Chocolat), Ellen Burstyn (Requiem for a Dream), Laura Linney (You Can Count on Me) and Julia Roberts (Erin Brockovich). Though Iâm greatly enamored with the superb work of both Linney and Burstyn in their undeniably fine performances, the closest thing to a sure bet among this yearâs nominees is Roberts, who will, and should, win her first Oscar for her high-wattage portrayal of a crusading everywoman. Perhaps the highest compliment to be given is a role that on paper seemed like it should have been played by someone else, now could be done better by no one else.

Best Actor: Javier Bardem (Before Night Falls), Russell Crowe (Gladiator), Tom Hanks (Cast Away), Ed Harris (Pollock) and Geoffrey Rush (Quills). There are no slouches here in a very competitive category. One has to believe that Rush and Bardem, both of whom gave quite daringperformances, are at a disadvantage because so few saw their films. Thus, I belive the race will be a three-way battle between Harris, Crowe and Hanks. Iâm not sure who will emerge victorious on Oscar night, but my personal favorite here is Crowe, who turned what could have been a stock action figure into a layered, thoughtful and involving protogonist.

Best Director: Stephen Daldry (Billy Elliot), Ang Lee (Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon), Ridley Scott (Gladiator), Steven Soderbergh (Erin Brockovich) and Steven Soderbergh (Traffic). To be nominated twice in one category may be nice (the last person to do it was Michael Curtiz in 1939), but SoderberghÂ may also find that to be his sole consolation when he is defeated by Lee, who masterfully helmed the artful yet accessible Crouching Tiger.

Best Picture: Chocolat, Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, Erin Brockovich, Gladiator and Traffic.Â Finally, we conclude with the top honor of the evening, the Best Picture award. Although Traffic has an outside shot, I believe this to be a face-off between Gladiator and Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon. I began thinking I would award the trophy to Gladiator, a film I truly enjoyed and found to be surprisingly operatic, grandiose and over-achieving for a summer blockbuster. Yet, I find that as we approach the final hours leading up to awards night, my affections have turned towards Crouching Tiger, a film whose epic sweep and energy is also marked by moments of tenderness, stillness, rich emotion and glorious fantasy.Â Itâs a movie that succeeds in telling a culturally specific, genre tale in a universal way without ever betraying its uniqueness or pandering to the mass audience, yet gaining them all the while.

Cheer And Merriment At 40th Newtown Holiday Festival

Governor Directs Flags To Half-Staff Sunday For Anniversary Of 12/14

Choral Society Performs Program Of ‘Songs Of The Glorious Season’

Hiram Lodge #18 Makes Donation To Toys For Tots

Sandy Hook Community Gets Together For Annual Tree Lighting

Unfortunately, I think this is likely to get worse, not better... Based on both public comments and private conversations, I’m increasingly concerned that our newly elected First Selectman intends not just to install these cameras, but to expand their use for full-blown enforcement and fines. Try getting a straight answer out of him about the long-term plan and you quickly realize how vague the responses become. Tyler is absolutely right to raise the privacy issue. These systems don’t just “catch speeders” — they quietly build a database of where we drive, when we drive, and who is in our vehicles. Once that infrastructure is in place, it becomes very easy to justify expanding its scope: more cameras, more locations, more uses, and eventually more automated enforcement. If Newtown is going down this road, residents deserve clear, written answers to some basic questions before anything is expanded: What limits will be placed on how and where cameras are used? Will footage and plate data be used only for speed enforcement, or for other investigations too? How long will data be stored, and who can access it? What safeguards will prevent vendors and individuals from abusing this information? Without firm, enforceable rules in place, “just a few cameras to slow traffic” can turn into something very different over time. I support safe roads — but not at the cost of unchecked surveillance and vague promises from our leaders. You try getting straight answers out of our First Selectman, myself and others have not been able to...

Discusses Traffic Cameras

I had to hold back a laugh at the idea that 7:30 pm is apparently such a late-night hardship that we’re already talking about moving meetings earlier. For a lot of residents, 7:30 is the earliest they can realistically get to Town Hall after work, family obligations, and the rest of real life. Shifting BOS meetings to 7:00 might make the calendar look tidier for those in the building, but it makes participation harder for the people who pay for the building. If the new First Selectman’s week is already booked solid and evening meetings feel like a strain, that’s not a reason to move the goalposts on public access—it's a reminder that the job is supposed to be demanding. Public service means accommodating the public, even when it’s inconvenient.

Walczak Adjusts To New Role, First Board Meeting

Real people were just in a frightening car accident. To immediately frame their misfortune as rhetorical ammunition against new housing — affordable housing included — feels less like concern for “health and safety” and more like opportunistically using a scary moment to support a pre-existing position. If we’re going to debate this proposal, we should do it honestly: with data on traffic volume, accident history, engineering recommendations, and the town’s housing needs, not by seizing on a single crash as proof that 300 apartments are inherently unsafe. Newtown deserves a thoughtful, fact-based conversation about growth, safety, and affordability — one that doesn’t turn other people’s bad day into a political talking point.

How Many Accidents Will It Take?

To add context that did not occur at the meeting would not be an accurate representation of the meeting and would, in fact, be editorializing to shape public opinion. The editorial staff here do not consider ourselves to be final arbiters of what the truth is (and if we did, it would make us partisan and biased), and we would need to provide a source for any dissenting information (sourcing all information in an article is literally Journalism 101). There were no such sources present at the meeting in question, and so it would not be appropriate to include such information in an article about the meeting. Dissenting voices appear in meeting stories when there were active participants with dissenting opinions, such as during public participation or the words of a council member who disagreed. It should be noted that the Interfaith Council, like many local boards and commissions, conduct meetings that are open to the public. This was not an article on the actions of the Greater Danbury Area Unites for Immigrants, or on immigrants, or on ICE's actions in the community, where including other voices or perspectives would be appropriate. We appreciate your opinion, but we stand by our meeting coverage and consider this discussion closed.

NIC Speaks With Danbury Unites For Immigrants, Discusses 12/14 Service

Propaganda is the systematic dissemination of information, often biased or misleading, to shape public perception and behavior toward a specific political cause or point of view. I'm not asking for Newtown Bee to editorialize, but providing context, where appropriate, to provide the reader with a more holistic view of the facts seems like a reasonable practice, particularly when encouraging the reader to decide what to believe/not to believe. Absent that context, this feels biased and misleading and intended to shape public perception.

<< Dec 2025 >>
S	M	T	W	T	F	S
30	1	2	3	4	5	6
7	8	9	10	11	12	13
14	15	16	17	18	19	20
21	22	23	24	25	26	27
28	29	30	31	1	2	3

Log In

Get Your Tally Sheets Ready, It's Time To Walk The Red Carpet

Leave a Reply Cancel reply