Look, I never cared much about the Oscars growing up. When you have to drive twenty-five miles to see a moving picture show, it's hard to develop an interest. But my first job out of college was working at a movie theater. I learned many things in sixteen months of wearing bow ties and repeating vapid snack inducements ad nauseam. Because I always had to work Friday nights, I found out I really hated missing The X-Files. I found out that people with entirely too much time and money could be shocked that a theater simultaneously screening Bushwhacked and Striptease would have the audacity not to stock Perrier. More intriguingly, I found out that Oscar-nominated films almost inevitably belonged to one of five categories, and each year there would be at least one film nominated from four of these five categories. So, without the benefit of watching Ebert and Roper or being able to spell Gohldun Glaubz, I will now predict which films will get the nod this year. Either that, or avoid grading papers for a couple of hours.

CATEGORY ONE: THE FILM I REALLY LIKED AND THEREFORE DOESN'T HAVE A CHANCE IN HELL OF WINNING.
That's right. If I actually see and thoroughly enjoy a film, there's a chance it will get nominated. But it has absolutely no chance of toting Mr. Clean home. I've even toyed with the idea of seeing all the Miramax holiday releases one year, on the off chance that I could plant my furry kiss of death on them all. It would serve the hyper-self-promoting bastards right. (If a rival studio would be interested in paying me to see all of Miramax's holiday releases next year, I'm listening.)

This year's Category One Nominee: The Two Towers.

Previous Category One Nominees: Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon; The Sixth Sense; L. A. Confidential.

CATEGORY TWO: THE SURPRISINGLY POPULAR FILM THAT EVERYONE ELSE ADORES AND I CAN"T STAND THE THOUGHT OF SEEING.
Also called "The Thrown Bone." You know how most of the nominations are geared toward arty films that won't make as much money as I spend in a year on chips and salsa? Well, just to show that it doesn't have utter contempt for the public at large, the Academy will nominate a film that people outside of New York and L. A. actually liked and paid decent money to see. Sometimes this is a straight-on popcorn flick; more likely it is a smaller film that wildly exceeds its modest ambitions. Occasionally, this one snags the trophy, but this is quite rare. I usually don't want to see this film, to the point of feigning death to avoid catching a matinee.

This year's Category Two Nominee: My Big Fat Greek Wedding. Forced to choose between seeing this and gouging out my own eyes with curly fries…congratulations, Arby's, you just made ninety-nine cents. Incidentally, my parents saw this film and my mom, naturally, really liked it. My dad says he did too. Just between you and me, there's no way he really liked this film as much as he says. There are no mutants in it, and no one gets ingested. They've been married thirty-two years, and he's still finding new ways to give ground.

Previous Category Two Nominees: Gladiator, Titanic, Jerry Maguire

CATEGORY THREE: THE FILM I PROBABLY WOULD HAVE SEEN ANYWAY, BUT AM DRIVEN TO BY OSCAR BUZZ.
Yeah, yeah, the Oscars are partly about marketing, and I'm as susceptible as anyone. Sometimes I don't even see a Category Three until after the bids are announced. I don't know what to make of the fact that a disproportionate number of these films have red-headed actresses or red-headed female protagonists. Not so thoroughly doomed as Category One films, but real longshots nonetheless.

This year's Category Three Nominee: The Hours. I have yet to see this, but I admire the book on which it's based, and it stars Nicole Kidman AND Julianne Moore, though I don't know what that has to do with anything. Just what are you implying?

Previous Category Three Nominees: In the Bedroom, American Beauty, Elizabeth

CATEGORY FOUR: THE FILM I FEEL LIKE I SHOULD SEE, BUT NEVER WILL.
These films are often Based on a True Story. They feature Outstanding Performances. They have Important Things to Say. They're Uplifting. For whatever reason, I just don't see these movies, even though (or because?) they just might make me a Better Person. John Keats once said, "We hate poetry that has a palpable design upon us," and I feel the same way about movies. That being said, there seems to be precious little to distinguish a Category One film from a Category Four film, aside from my actual attendance, and the fact that Category Four films do significantly better on Oscar night. Yes, that is a threat. (If you're a studio interested in providing financial incentive to make sure I don't go to see your future Oscar contenders, I'm listening.)

This year's Category Four Nominee: Gangs of New York. Digression: I usually think the Academy's regrettably timid, but can you imagine anything more headstrong and intrepid than repeatedly nominating and repeatedly snubbing the director who brought us Taxi Driver and Goodfellas? This strikes me as dangerously stupid and irresistibly amusing all at the same time. It's like teasing that hungry-looking dog with the brittle-looking chain. It's even more fun if he's foaming at the mouth.

Previous Category Four Nominees: Traffic, The Insider, Shine

CATEGORY FIVE: DON'T HATE ME BECAUSE I'M A BEAUTIFUL MIND.
Either slow-moving character pieces with no obvious flaws, or admittedly stylish forays lacking in depth, these win more trophies than you might expect by transforming their inoffensiveness into a kind of critic-proof vest. You nod when you hear this film has been nominated, but shrug if you hear it's won. You're not annoyed exactly, but you can't help thinking that there must have been a more deserving film somewhere. I usually catch these on video, sometime when it's not baseball season.

This year's Category Five Nominee (I suspect also the winner): Chicago

Previous Category Five Nominees: A Beautiful Mind, The English Patient, Apollo 13