Any Oscar-Caliber Films in Coming Nominations?

Wednesday is going to be a long day in Hollywood.

At precisely 5:30 a.m., with dawn still hovering somewhere around Phoenix, scores of journalists will scramble down the aisles of the main theater in the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences in Beverly Hills to grab up their packets containing the 1988 Oscar nominees and begin spreading the news.

In the evening, after a day of second-guessing and ho-humming about the actual finalists, after distributors have altered the ad campaigns for their nominated films and mapped out strategies for the final Oscar campaign, it is off to the opening of the re-release of “Lawrence of Arabia.”

It seems safe to say that at the end of “Lawrence,” some tired observer will be heard to say, “Now, that is an Academy Award movie!”

The general feeling in Hollywood--since mid-December when the various critics groups held the first heats in the long Academy Award race--is that there are no “Oscar-type” films in contention this season. Nothing with the sweep and grandeur of “Lawrence of Arabia,” or last year’s “The Last Emperor,” nothing with high ideals, literary pretensions or transcendent humanitarian themes.

That doesn’t mean it’s a more open competition. “Rain Man,” a film that was carefully overlooked by all of the critics groups in their awards, appears to have run off with the sentimental vote and its selection as the best picture of 1988 may be the most foregone Academy Award conclusion of the decade.

For a few days in December, it looked as if the film to beat would be “Mississippi Burning.” The picture, based on the Klan-ordered executions of three civil rights workers in Mississippi in 1964, is a brilliantly made suspense-action movie that seems to push all the right emotional buttons and prompt all the right moral conclusions.

Early reviews were rapturous, and members of the academic-oriented National Board of Review took “Mississippi Burning” right out of the box and proclaimed it the best movie of the year.

But when veteran civil rights leaders protested the film’s wide variances with fact--its portrayal of heroic white FBI agents, its exclusion of black activists and its eye-for-an-eye resolution--they knocked the liberal pins right out from under it.

“Mississippi Burning” may still be the best made movie of 1988, but as one marketing executive sympathetic to the film said, “The perceived liberality of the academy is terribly confused by the film, and when they’re confused about a film, they don’t vote for it.”

“Burning” was shut out at the Golden Globes, awards that are held in low regard by critics but which are often influential with the general body of academy voters. As more direct evidence of a backlash, the script was passed over for a peer nomination by the Writers Guild of America last week.

Despite the backlash, “Mississippi Burning” ought to receive several nominations, including one for best picture and probably one for its director, Alan Parker, who has been praised and excoriated with equal passion. Parker, an English director accustomed to controversy (he also did “Midnight Express” and “Angel Heart”), did receive a nomination from the Directors Guild of America.

The actors branch of the academy is not likely to penalize the actors for the indictment of the script. Gene Hackman, playing a Southern sheriff-turned-impatient-FBI agent, is sure to be nominated for best actor and Frances McDormand, the conscience-struck wife of a Klan killer, would seem safely in as a best supporting actress nominee.

(With the exception of the best picture category, which is voted on by all academy members, the nominations are made by the individual branches of the academy. For the Oscars themselves, all members vote in all categories.)

The critics’ groups were not very helpful to the Oscar process this year. Usually, they agree on a few things and provide momentum for a couple of movies. This year, there is a good chance that the films honored with best picture awards by the Los Angeles Film Critics (“Little Dorrit”), the New York Film Critics Circle (“Accidental Tourist”) and the National Society of Film Critics (“The Unbearable Lightness of Being”) will all be missing from the best picture list.

Other films with seeming Oscar credentials either divided critics too widely (Clint Eastwood’s “Bird” actually prompted Pauline Kael to go on the road discrediting colleagues who had liked it) or weren’t seen by enough people to make a critical impression (“A Cry in the Dark,” “A World Apart”).

Besides “Rain Man” and “Mississippi Burning,” the most likely best picture nominees are “Who Framed Roger Rabbit,” which will make the list on the strengths of both its innovation and popularity, “Working Girl,” a contemporary fairy tale that charmed folks right out of their senses, and either “Dangerous Liaisons” or, speaking of the unbearable lightness of being, “Big.”

The prediction for best picture: “Rain Man,” “Who Framed Roger Rabbit,” “Working Girl,” “Mississippi Burning,” “Dangerous Liaisons.”

The directors usually match up closely with best picture nominees, so four of five spots in that category ought to go to DGA nominees Parker, Barry Levinson (“Rain Man”), Robert Zemeckis (“Who Framed Roger Rabbit”) and Mike Nichols (“Working Girl”).

The fifth DGA nominee, Charles Crichton (“A Fish Called Wanda”) is a long shot for an Oscar nomination. That fifth spot seems more likely to go to Lawrence Kasdan (“Accidental Tourist”), Stephen Frears (“Dangerous Liaisons”) or Philip Kaufman (“The Unbearable Lightness of Being”).

In recent years, however, the directors’ branch of the academy has done some eccentric things, like excluding Steven Spielberg from the lineup while his picture “The Color Purple” was getting 11 other nominations, and including David Lynch while his too-hot-to-handle “Blue Velvet” was being snubbed by everyone else.

So, don’t be too surprised if David Cronenberg (“Dead Ringers”) or Clint Eastwood show up on the directors’ list of nominees.

The prediction for best director: Levinson, Zemeckis, Parker, Nichols, Eastwood.

A lot of people predict the best actor category will be a “5H Club,” with Hackman, Hoffman, Bob Hoskins (“Who Framed Roger Rabbit”), William Hurt (“Accidental Tourist”) and Tom Hanks (“Big”). There is even an H in reserve--Tom Hulce (“Dominick and Eugene”).

Hanks’ nomination would overcome a longstanding bias. The actors’ branch has frequently recognized the work of comedians crossing over into drama, but it has routinely shunned comedy actors in comedy roles (ask Steve Martin).

If there is a 5H Club, some very good performances will have been overlooked, not least Tom Cruise’s undervalued work as Hoffman’s brash young brother in “Rain Man.” Many critics thought Cruise’s was the more difficult role and the better executed, but the attention has predictably focused on the character--an autistic savant--who stands out most.

A greater omission would be Forest Whitaker, winner of the Cannes Film Festival award for his work as Charlie Parker in “Bird.” Whitaker seemed a sure nominee when the film was released early last fall, but the declining fate of the little-seen film may have taken him down, as well.

Among others who figured to have a lot of support in the category: Jeremy Irons (“Dead Ringers”), Edward James Olmos (“Stand and Deliver”) and John Malkovich (“Dangerous Liasons”).

The prediction for best actor: Hackman, Hoffman, Cruise, Hanks, Whitaker.

In the best actress category, there are some odd developments. Melanie Griffith, who had third billing in “Working Girl,” is sure to be nominated as best actress, while top-billed Sigourney Weaver may end up with a best supporting actress nomination.

Weaver, in fact, could end up with two nominations, supporting actress for “Working Girl,” and best actress for “Gorillas in the Mist.” That would give the academy a chance to repeat its kindness of 1982 when it overlooked Jessica Lange for best actress in “Frances” (Meryl Streep won for “Sophie’s Choice”) and gave the Oscar to her for best supporting actress for “Tootsie.”

In fact, the academy may give itself two chances. It would not be a surprise if Barbara Hershey ended up with nominations as best actress for “A World Apart” and best supporting actress for “The Last Temptation of Christ.”

Jodie Foster also seems assured of a spot for her performance as a woman fighting for dignity after a gang rape that her assailants, chortling eyewitnesses and the police think she invited.

As an Australian woman accused of murdering her child in “A Cry in the Dark,” Meryl Streep gave what many critics thought was her best performance. But there’s a sense that voters have overdosed on Streep and her outrageous ease with accents. This is not the year to snub her, but it may occur.

Other actresses frequently mentioned as potential nominees are Glenn Close (“Dangerous Liaisons”), Susan Sarandon (“Bull Durham”) and Christine Lahti (“Running on Empty”).

The prediction for best actress: Griffith, Foster, Streep, Weaver, Sarandon.