Entertainment Weekly

Subscribe

Stay Connected

Subscribe

Advertise With Us

Learn More

Skip to content
Emmys 2017
Every unforgettable moment, every gorgeous dress.Click here

Article

Oscars 1993: Our predictions

Oscars 1993: Our predictions — Our take on each nominee in the six major award categories

Posted on

Predicting Oscar winners is a task best left to professionals. So Entertainment Weekly spent months devising a logarithmically complex formula to account for every known variable pertaining to a nominated star or film: number of advertising pages bought in Variety; star’s grosses divided by salary; nose job (yes or no). Then we threw the formula out. Why? Because you can’t put a gut feeling into numbers. What follows is our best take on each nominee in the six major categories, with pros and cons roughly weighted to their importance. You say you can do better? Call us the morning after Oscar night — then we’ll talk.

Best Actor

ROBERT DOWNEY JR. (CHAPLIN)
Pluses: Highly regarded in industry as a former wild man — turned-hardworking professional — and remember, Oscars are awarded by peers (+18). Plays a Great Man and gets to age on screen (+10). Critics raved (+3). Residual Tinseltown guilt for running Chaplin out of the country (+1). Minuses: Film was an expensive flop and critics despised it (-20). He is young and untested compared with others in this category (-10). Total: 2 points

CLINT EASTWOOD (UNFORGIVEN)
Pluses: A living legend who has aged with tremendous grace (+51). Payback — he has never been nominated (+33). Role is provocative critique of every silent killer he has ever played (+27). Won Los Angeles Film Critics Association award (+10). Minuses: Voters may divide the spoils, awarding him Best Director and someone else Best Actor (-27). Some people may still write him off as a nonactor (-24). Total: 70 points

STEPHEN REA (THE CRYING GAME)
Pluses: Academy loves a star-is-born saga, like Daniel Day-Lewis’ win for My Left Foot (+55). Currently in well-received Broadway play, Someone Who’ll Watch Over Me (+16). Subtle acting in tricky role (+13). Minuses: First-time nominee who’s not exactly a household name (-33). Backlash against movie’s immense PR blitz (-18). Glamour quotient low (-16). Subtle acting in tricky role (-13). Total: 4 points

AL PACINO (SCENT OF A WOMAN)
Pluses: Nominated six times before and never won (+66). Recent tribute banquet in New York caps mid-career makeover from Method-obsessed prickly pear to sweet-natured shy guy (+41). Disability Factor — he plays a blind man (+17). Won Golden Globe for Best Actor in a Drama (+10). Minuses: Possible backlash against overpraised movie (-28). Film isn’t a career capper like Unforgiven (-20). Double nomination; could be thrown Best Supporting Actor bone for Glengarry Glen Ross, or could split both votes and win neither (-15). Total: 71 points

DENZEL WASHINGTON (MALCOLM X)
Pluses: Plum role in year’s most highly anticipated movie (+45). Finally beginning to be perceived as one of the foremost actors of his generation (+36). And he’s a hunk (+16). Plays a Great Man and gets to age on screen (+10). Won New York Film Critics Circle award (+10). If the Academy wants ) to absolve itself of charges of racism for overlooking director Spike Lee, Washington’s their man (+6). Minuses: Backlash against Lee’s provocative PR tactics (-39). Film was a commercial disappointment (-23). Has already won a Supporting Actor Oscar (-17). Total: 44 points