Playing the Oscar Game Like a ‘Piano’? : Movies: Despite the clamor, some argue that ‘Schindler’s List’ may not be a shoo-in at the Academy Awards. Miramax ups the ante with a huge ad campaign for its underdog.

In the 1976 Oscar race, the buzz focused on what appeared to be the two leading contenders for best motion picture, “Network” and “All the President’s Men.” But the Oscar went to “Rocky.”

In 1981, the talk was high on “Reds” and “On Golden Pond.” But the Oscar went to “Chariots of Fire.”

These are the kinds of tales that keep Academy Awards shows quirky and surprising. They are what keeps anyone, with any sense of history, from saying that any anticipated award is a “sure thing.”

They are also what keeps hopes alive for the four best picture nominees in a year that seems dominated by the fifth nominee, “Schindler’s List.”

“I keep hearing that ‘Chariots of Fire’ music,” said an optimistic Harvey Weinstein, co-chairman of Miramax Films, the distributor of the best picture-nominated “The Piano.” Also in contention are “The Fugitive,” “In the Name of the Father” and “The Remains of the Day.”

In particular, however, it has been a campaign on behalf of “The Piano” that has drawn the most attention because it has been the most aggressive. The Miramax people learned how to put on a campaign when they brought the unlikely “The Crying Game” into Oscar prominence a year ago.

Weinstein knows that “Schindler’s List” is the film most people consider the odds-on favorite to win. It has all the historic precedents going for it and director Steven Spielberg won the Directors Guild of America prize, which, in the history of the movie awards, is tantamount to winning the Oscar.

But Weinstein contends there is no sure thing. “Look, you have to keep it interesting. No one wants to be told by the media that the whole thing is wrapped up,” he said. And, of course, short of winning the Oscar, Miramax also clearly hopes to help boost ticket sales as well as its prestige with the cerebral art-house film.

So he and his partner, brother Robert Weinstein, have engineered an amazing--and some say amazingly overblown--ad campaign in the Hollywood trade newspapers, the mailing of an elegant booklet on the movie printed on expensive parchment and some heavy advertising in general. Full-page ads that boast the achievement of women in the making of “The Piano” have numbered as many as seven per day in Daily Variety and the Hollywood Reporter. They are congratulatory in tone, with director Jane Campion, for instance, singing the praises of the film’s Oscar-nominated star, Holly Hunter.

The sheer volume of the ads, especially for such a modest and relatively inexpensive film, has raised eyebrows, even among some veteran Oscar observers.

*

For his part, Weinstein claims the cost of the campaign is $250,000. “Our ads are black and white. They don’t cost as much.” On the other hand, he noted that ads for Universal Picture’s “Schindler’s List” and that studio’s other best picture nominee, “In the Name of the Father,” used color and cost more.

But off the record, some individuals involved with placing Oscar advertising say that Weinstein is understating the cost. One estimate for the cost of the ads runs as high as $750,000. “It cost almost as much as the movie did to make,” was the sarcastic comment of one.

“I’m glad the campaign has been so effective that it seems like we’re spending more than we did,” was Weinstein’s reaction. “I’ll bet we spent 50% of what the other studios spent.”

One of the more unusual aspects of “The Piano” campaign has been the emphasis on the achievements of women. The film has garnered nominations for women in seven categories. Among those is a best director nomination for Campion, only the second woman ever to be nominated for best director. The first was Lina Wertmuller for 1976’s “Seven Beauties.”

“It’s clearly a women’s achievement,” Weinstein said. But taking that advertising line with the academy, whose membership is only about 15% to 20% female, is risky, he believes.

“Basically, we’re just trying to say, hey, we’re here. That the race isn’t over.”

Weinstein’s contention that the race isn’t over was, in part, supported by a theory put forth recently by Hollywood Reporter columnist Martin Grove. It was Grove’s thinking that in years when there are two strong films, it paves the way for a third film to win.

But Grove’s theory wouldn’t necessarily warm Weinstein’s heart: “Schindler’s List” is the strong film in terms of Oscar votes, and “In the Name of the Father” is gaining in support, Grove said. But Grove’s thinking is that this rivalry might even pave the way for “The Fugitive” to win.

Only a plurality of votes is needed in the five-way race and no one but the accountants working for the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences ever knows the tallies. This year the Oscar ballots are due at the accountants on Tuesday.

Producer Irwin Winkler, who with former partner Robert Chartoff, has been on both the winning side (“Rocky”) and the “sure thing” side that loses (“The Right Stuff”), knows full well the unpredictability of the academy.

“The night that ‘The Right Stuff’ was up for best picture, we won four Oscars in a row (for other categories). So I thought we’re gonna win.” But the winner for 1983 turned out to be “Terms of Endearment.”

“I really didn’t think ‘Rocky,’ with a story about a fighter who was a million-to-one shot, would win. But it did,” Winkler said. “Very often the academy votes with their heart. They loved that theme of ‘Rocky,’ that if you believe in your heart, you can win.”