[Jesse and Jim are interrupting their conversation on the mid-season TV shows to talk about the 2009 Oscar nominations.  Now that we are done with our picks, go ahead and send in your own.  The scoring rules are located at the end of this entry.  Here is part one, part two, part three, and part four.]

Best Original Score
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, Defiance, Milk, Slumdog Millionaire, WALL-E

Jim's take

As you so astutely (and correctly) observed, Slumdog Millionaire is pretty close to being a musical. So it wins this one.

Jesse's take

Slumdog wins. Of course, I'm predicting that Slumdog will carry the night - if TCCOBB has more support than I thought, maybe it swoops in. Also, Slumdog was a musical, but WALL-E was a dialogue-free-but-not-silent-film, so maybe that score as some support... or maybe I just want to throw everyone off my trail so I win the pool...

Best Original Song
Down to Earth (WALL-E), Jai Ho (Slumdog Millionaire), O Saya (Slumdog Millionaire)

Jim's take

There was some technicality that kept Springsteen from getting nominated here, no? Because "The Wrestler" only played over the end credits of the film? The same kind of stupid technicality that kept Eddie Vedder from getting a nomination for the Into the Wild score?

Regardless, Peter Gabriel is no Phil Collins.... Jai Ho is my choice for this one.

Jesse's take

Nice, I love Genesis humor.

Springsteen was not eliminated due to a technicality. The song just didn't get a high enough score in the Oscar's convoluted song-nominating process.

Here is the reason I think you are wrong: Slumdog is going to split the difference in the Oscar voting. Am I supposed to listen to a song from Slumdog Millionaire and then remember if I just heard Jai Ho or O Saya? Or will I vote for "The Slumdog Song", resulting in a 50/50 split between the two that leaves the door open for WALL-E?

Best Director
Danny Boyle, Stephen Daldry, David Fincher, Ron Howard, Gus Van Sant

Jim's take

It's a travesty that Darren Aronofsky's name is omitted from this list. Travesty. His direction of The Wrestler perfectly complements Rourke's performance. The faded 16mm film stock, handheld camera work, and constant use of a wide-angle lens draw the viewer into the world of the film. There is a moment, late in the film, that is simply perfect. I have no other way to describe it. I'll simply say that it involves Guns 'n Roses, and that if the film speaks to you, it will be the image that you take away.

But, seeing as he's not nominated, Aronofsky isn't going to win this one. Apparently he only gets love from the Academy when he's making dull, depressing films about how heroin is bad for you...

My personal preference for this award, from those eligible, is Gus Van Sant. Milk was my second-favorite movie of 2008, and his direction was a big part of that. Van Sant hit my cinematography buttons, with a cinema verite approach to camerawork and a liberal use of high-speed/grain film stock

However, my preference is not in line with the voters. I'm thinking this is Danny Boyle's year.

Jesse's take

You are upset about the snub of the Wrestler. I am surprised by the snub of The Dark Knight. And here's why:

I think you and I long ago got over the pretension that this or any awards show will find "The Best Picture".  Defining the Best is subjective and personal and blah blah blah. Even last year, when a pretty great film, No Country For Old Men, won, I don't think there is any consensus that it was the Best Picture of last year.

Instead, I think of the Oscars as a culture-wide Movie Night Movie Project. And in order for that process to have any kind of legitimacy, people need to actually care. Who the fuck cares about a single film in this milquetoast field? Now here's an Academy Awards best picture roster that people would actually care about:

Milk, Slumdog Millionaire, The Dark Knight, The Wrestler, WALL-E

You know why? Because that list includes movies that are great and that people HAVE ACTUALLY SEEN.

Yes, we are talking about Best Director, but in this year (and most years) the correlation of Director to Picture nominees is one to one.

Now I'm done bitching about what a boring show this is going to be, and I'll make a pick already: Danny Boyle wins director.

Best Picture
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, Frost/Nixon, Milk, The Reader, Slumdog Millionaire

Jim's take

Did I mention that The Wrestler should be nominated, and should win this award yet? Ad naseum, eh? Ok, let's move on.

You mentioned that you were surprised to see The Reader here. I am too, although I did enjoy the film very much. I certainly liked it better than Button. It was a nice little movie, a compelling story that was competently told, with great acting.... but best picture? Not in my eyes.

Having still not seen Frost/Nixon, this leaves us with Indian game shows and gay Sean Penn. My personal preference here is Milk. It's a good Van Sant film -- more in the vein of "My Own Private Idaho" rather than "Finding Forrester."

At the end of the day, though, Milk doesn't win this. I'm getting this odd sense of Slumdog momentum, after the Globes and the SAG awards... I'm going to fill that out on my pool, just so I can be disgusted and bitter when Benjamin Button wins. (My pick: Slumdog Millionaire)

Jesse's take

Jim, how DARE you badmouth Finding Forrester. How dare you. YOU'RE THE MAN NOW DAWWG!

You and I both agree that Slumdog is the night's big winner. Slumdog momentum. Slumdogmentum? Whatever.

Final Thoughts

Jim's take

Your dream Best Picture short-list is perfect. If those were the five nominees for the big prize, I'd be on the edge of my seat. As it stands, I can't remember the last time the five best movies of the year made up the field of nominees. Johnny Wikipedia tells me that it's 1975 (Cuckoo's Nest, Barry Lyndon, Dog Day Afternoon, Jaws, and Nashville).

Trivia: One of the five directors of the aforementioned films did not get a Director nomination that year: Steven Spielberg. He was bumped in favor of Federico Fellini, for Amarcord. Now, *that* is a freaking field. Milos Forman, Stanley Kubrick, Sidney Lumet, Robert Altman, and Federico Fellini. Will we ever see that again?

I also wanted to congratulate both of us for writing ten emails about the Oscars with "Milk" being nominated all over the place, without making one "I.... DRINK.... YOUR.... MILKSHAKE" joke. Seriously, that's self-control.

Jesse's take

Maybe we are over-reacting, because this is a pretty terrible year for movies. Look at last year's list of nominees. Isn't that a pretty good list? A couple of blockbusters, an indie underdog, and at least two really fantastic movies. That's all I want. Everybody has something to root for. This year the only thing I have to root for is a nomination recount.

Well, Jim, its been fun. If anybody is still reading this, they should send me their Oscar picks and see if they can beat either of us, or last year's winner, Yaworm. And speaking of last year's winner: can you believe I've been doing this stupid website for almost a year already? But more on that another time.

Here are the rules:

Top prize (Best Picture): 5 points
Major categories (Best Director, Actor, Actress, Original Screenplay, Adapted Screenplay): 4 points
Intermediate categories (Supporting Actor, Supporting Actress, Foreign Film, Animated Feature, Documentary Feature): 3 points
Minor categories: (Cinematography, Score, Original Song, Film Editing): 2 points
Random bullshit categories: (Everything else) 1 point

Most points = winner. In the event of a tie, I will pick a winner based on whatever random criteria I make up on the spot. Good luck, and I'LL SEE YOU AT THE OSCARS!!!!!