> (5) As someone else mentioned, nominating "O Brother Where Art Thou" for Adapted Screenplay is the silliest nomination since Kenneth Branagh was nominated for Adapted Screenplay for "Hamlet" despite not changing a single word.

Not to be pedantic, but, actually, he did change a word. *One* word. I.v.166-167: "There are more things in Heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy." In the Branaugh version, that line reads "... in our philosophy." A nitpick, but, hey, I'm a Shakespeare nerd. And I legitimately *did* notice that watching the movie the *first* time. :-}

More notably than that, he changed the order of some of the scenes (though I fail to remember which offhand).

> (6) "Gladiator" really wasn't a good movie. I know I said that before, but it bears repeating.

It bears *endless* repeating. It's a much poorer nomination than "Chocolat." If it wins, well, we'll have another "Tom Jones." :-}

> (8) It's entirely possibly that we see some real Oscar history being made. Tom Hanks is a real possibility to be the first person to take three Best Actor awards (one of Nicholson's three was a Supporting). And, of course, we may well see our first foreign-language Best Picture winner.

I think both are very likely. Hanks' performance made that movie ("Cast Away"), and "Crouching Tiger," while (by most accounts) not Lee's best, is a cinch to win, provided the Academy members are not as drunk as they were when they nominated "Gladiator." "Traffic" should be its primary competition, but I think "Crouching Tiger" will win, if only as a nod to the people who keep harping at the Academy for never picking any "different" kinds of movies (foreign films, action flicks, sci-fi...). For that matter, that may well be why "Gladiator" is on the list to begin with. :-}