Silly as this may all be, it can all still be fun. This writer, has been regularly betting with friends on the Academy Awards since high school. Early on, I used to lose my shirt.

My mistake in my youth was that I made my wagers based on my perception of the artistic merits of the nominated films. This approach may work well if one is betting on the outcome of the Golden Globes or the New York Film Critics Circle Awards, because critics, who ostensibly make choices based on talent, choose those accolades. It must be remembered that the Oscars are voted on by the artists' peers -- that is other actors, actresses and filmmakers, who may be also voting for themselves, their friends, or their financial investments. Therefore, when one is wagering on the Oscars, one must realize that it, indeed, is also very much a popularity contest as well.

Over the years, I became employed as a film critic for a video/film magazine and started approaching the Oscar predictions with a greater degree of accuracy (well…sometimes). I quickly realized that there is sometimes a vast difference in what films will win from what films should win. So, I will render my opinion on who or what I think will win based on Hollywood politics. Your assignment, dear reader, should you choose to accept it, is to employ your own finesse to personally determine the balance which will help you pick the most likely winners.

Therefore, without further ado, submitted for your approval are my double-edged predictions for the individual categories of 74th Annual Academy Awards. Consult your checklists for the full roster of nominees.

As a film critic, I can not sing praises high enough for artistic merits of MOULIN ROUGE. This film has both revived and reinvented the musical genre. Breathtakingly original, MOULIN ROUGE is one of those rare cinema experiences where five minutes into the picture you know that you are watching a classic. I would rank this film on my personal "top ten list" of the best movies ever made. However, I think it is highly unlikely that this picture will win the grand prize.

This is because with rare exception, the movie that wins for Best Picture also has its director take the honors in that category. Australian wunderkind, Baz Luhrmann, who directed MOULIN ROUGE, was not even nominated. This omission seems to be a confounding mystery unless the politics are considered. It must be remembered that in 1942, CITIZEN KANE, which is a movie that is now almost universally regarded as the greatest cinematic achievement of all time, was all but overlooked by the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences.

A safer bet, for political purposes, would be A BEAUTIFUL MIND. It covers all bases safely. It is a powerful and engaging story that is even more compelling, because it is largely based on truth; although certain facts have been changed or omitted for the sake of keeping the central character, John Forbes Nash Jr. more sympathetic. The movie boasts solid performances from its entire cast. Also it represents a new plateau for the director, Ron Howard, who is enormously popular in Hollywood and is reputed to be one of the nicest guys working in the industry. These factors combined with the fact that many consider that Ron Howard deserves payback (because he got ripped-off when he didn't even get nominated for APOLLO 13 in 1995) should make A BEAUTIFUL MIND the odds-on favorite for the major category.

In this category, regarding the candidates nominated, my opinion on who should, as well as who is most likely to win, is the same. Ron Howard has delivered his best and most mature work to date. The biopic, A BEAUTIFUL MIND stands head and shoulders over his best work; and it is light years above the atrocious THE GRINCH, which was his previous project. They should give him the Oscar as an incentive to abstain from foisting onto the public any more such execrable "family films" in the future.

Until recently, the venerated Robert Altman seemed to the hands-down favorite in this field, because of his impressive resume of which in addition to GOSFORD PARK, includes M*A*S*H*, NASHVILLE, THE PLAYER, and COOKIE'S FORTUNE. However, he more than likely knocked himself out of the running after recently being quoted in the press making incomprehensibly stupid and ill-timed anti-American remarks in this "Post-9/11 Era."

However, left out altogether, most glaringly, from the running is Baz Luhrmann. The nonobservance of his brilliant cinematic contributions in MOULIN ROUGE may be remembered by future generations of film historians as among the Academy's most egregious omissions. Perhaps the Australian auteur can gain small comfort from the fact that he is in good company. Orson Welles, Stanley Kubrick, Alfred Hitchcock, Sam Peckinpah and Roman Polanski, who all stand among the front ranks of Hollywood's greatest filmmakers, were never honored by the Academy with an Oscar for their directing talents.

Russell Crowe deserves to win for his impeccable and complex performance in A BEAUTIFUL MIND. However, the Academy may deem that he is still coasting well enough on the wave of his victory last year for his eponymous role in GLADIATOR.

Sean Penn has an apparent political edge for I AM SAM, inasmuch as he has paid his dues, has been consistently impressive, and is generally hailed as the "actor of his generation." As awesome as Will Smith was in his biopic, ALI, he did (ever so slightly) cross the line from character into caricature in his rendition of "The Greatest." Denzel Washington makes a nice career transition as a villain in TRAINING DAY, but his movie has not had enough exposure. Tom Wilkinson does good solid work in IN THE BEDROOM; but he is not enough of a household name to garner the necessary votes.

The glaring omission in this category is Guy Pearce who was unrecognized for his riveting and challenging performance in what was one of the most intriguing and compelling movies of recent years. Why he was not even nominated for MEMENTO is a mystery.

Nicole Kidman currently shines as Filmdom's ultimate "movie star/actress." In MOULIN ROUGE, she is resplendently beautiful and eminently watchable. In addition, her talents (especially since her work with Stanley Kubrick in EYES WIDE SHUT and evidently as early as her performance under Gus Van Sant's guidance in TO DIE FOR) have matured like fine wine. Her body of work in the three films she has had released in the last twelve months alone (MOULIN ROUGE, THE OTHERS, and BIRTHDAY GIRL) has illustrated an incredible range.

Sissy Spacek seems most likely to win for her powerful and emotionally visceral performance in IN THE BEDROOM. Although she has won an Oscar before for COALMINER'S DAUGHTER, that was long enough ago as to present no political obstacle.

Jennifer Connelly should win for her stellar performance as the long-suffering Alicia Nash in A BEAUTIFUL MIND; but she really deserved it for her unforgettable job in last year's REQUIEM FOR A DREAM, in which she played upscale party girl whose flirtation with heroin plunges her into a junkie hell. Although she is still very young, she has paid her dues. (Trivia buffs may recall that Jennifer made her one of her first film appearance in Sergio Leone's final masterpiece, ONCE UPON A TIME IN AMERICA way back in 1984 when she was only twelve years old.) Strikingly beautiful enough to easily make it as a star, Jennifer is brave enough to take the difficult and even risky parts. With those credentials, She may soon rise to be the most likely threat to Nicole Kidman's crown.

However, the award will probably go to one of the actresses in GOSFORD PARK, only because Hollywood is so full of Anglophiles, who kowtow to anything British; and the Academy will be too scared not to grant some prize to a movie packed with such professional clout. Helen Mirren appears to be the most likely candidate, because she is, indeed, an outstanding performer of stage and screen; and she has never won an Oscar before. (However, Helen Mirren has done better work in the past. Rent THE COOK, THE THIEF, HIS WIFE, AND HER LOVER and I am sure you will agree.) Politically, Maggie Smith (GOSFORD PARK) runs a close second; but she already has two statuettes on her mantle for THE PRIME OF MISS JEAN BRODIE (1969) and CALIFORNIA SUITE (1978); so it's likely that the voters may think that she wouldn't need a third bookend.

Ian McKellan is hailed by many as the greatest actor working today, albeit, his best work has been on the stage. Yet his portrayal in THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING deserves high praise. He brings Gandalf the Grey to life as vividly as if the wizard rose directly from the pages of the book. Of the actors nominated, he should and probably will win the award. His only possible obstacle is that he will be playing the same character over the next two years in the already filmed and presumably more spectacular and subsequent installments of the trilogy.

Ben Kingley in SEXY BEAST is deft but the movie is too avant-guard for mainstream tastes. Jim Broadbent is great in IRIS; but he was better in MOULIN ROUGE for which he was not nominated. Some have claimed that John Voight was too cartoonish in ALI, in spite of the fact that Howard Cosell was famous for being the closest thing to a living cartoon. The fact that Ethan Hawke was nominated for TRAINING DAY may be regarded by many as reward enough, inasmuch as that recognition enough acknowledges him in the Hollywood community as him now being regarded as a serious actor.

Shockingly ignored was Joe Pantoliano who was unforgettably as the nefarious Teddy in MEMENTO, which was the best supporting performance of the year.

For BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY the award should go to Christopher Nolan for his intricately labyrinthine work on MEMENTO, which may very well represent the pinnacle of screenwriting accomplishment of the past decade. As an Independent film it did not receive a wide release or big box office numbers, but it remains the most original murder mystery every written (catch it on video). However, the Hollywood establishment is far more likely to vote for Julian Fellowes for GOSFORD PARK because it will enable the Academy members able to congratulate themselves for their own classy taste.

For BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY, the award should probably go to IN THE BEDROOM for the harrowing pathos it portrays. Yet the Academy will probably honor A BEAUTIFUL MIND because it so imaginatively illustrates a challenging premise, in spite of liberties taken with the truth of the subject matter.

Likewise, MOULIN ROUGE should win for BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY; yet the hobbits may prove tough to beat in that category as well.

As far as the films nominated for BEST COSTUME DESIGN, it seems given that THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING will win. However, the most deserving of all is MOULIN ROUGE for it's spectacular, impressionistic interpretation of the costumes of that era. (How did the aggravating HARRY POTTER AND THE SORCERER'S STONE and the obscure THE AFFAIR OF THE NECKLACE edge their way in here?)

For BEST MUSIC SCORE, I hope the Academy takes a tasteful turn and honors THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING instead of the incessantly irritating HARRY POTTER AND THE SORCERER'S STONE, which maintains an edge only because of the iconic stature of the composer, John Williams. Once again, it seems to be insultingly inconceivable that the musical, MOULIN ROUGE was ignored here as well as in the category for BEST MUSIC (SONG).

For BEST VISUAL EFFECTS it seems axiomatic by all accounts that this award belongs to THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING.

For BEST FOREIGN LANGUAGE FILM, the Oscar will most likely be snatched by AMÉLIE from France, because it has been doing the best in ticket sales and in USA distribution. However, a more courageous choice would be to award NO MAN'S LAND from Bosnia, which is a film of far greater significance to our world today.

For the newly created category of BEST ANIMATED FEATURE, the safest bet seems to be SHREK, because it was so clever and successful. However, MONSTERS, INC. does more to deserve the award because it had a bigger heart.

Now, there are many people out there who find little importance in this article. It is a fact that curmudgeons do exist who may dismiss the entire extravaganza as frivolous -- or even as trivial, with justification. Surely, in their defense, one may argue that there are tasks more difficult than picking the winners of this year's Academy Awards off a list of nominees. Just try naming all of last year's winners by memory! However, it must be remembered that not too long ago, due to the difficulties of war-torn times, there was talk of either holding the ceremonies under conditions of maximum security at some military base -- or even of canceling the festivities altogether. This year, all red blooded Americans must watch the Academy Awards on March 24. It is your patriotic duty!