Oscar insight

Again this year, we haven't seen all the Oscar nominees yet. But we know someone who has, our own Hollywood correspondent -- television writer/producer Randall Anderson, who's Stan's college roommate and Kathleen's poker pal. So before we sit down with a bowl of popcorn and a beverage Sunday, we asked him to handicap the winners. "Randy," we wrote, "It's the 'King's Speech,' right?" His prompt response:

The sentimental Oscar establishment, being dominated by suckers for schmaltz, always gives trophies to actors and actresses who play characters who are blind, deaf, dying, senile, cancer-ridden, or afflicted with such syndromes as Tourette's (see Hoffman, Dustin, in "Rain Man").

So, yes, "King's Speech," about a stutterer, is already in the lead in the Oscar race. And will win several awards. Bet on it. Colin Firth is a slam dunk for Best Actor. Helen Bonham Carter is a long shot for Best Supporting Actress. Hollywood, and America, thinks the Brits have more class and talent. Still.

Natalie Portman, with her tasteless comments at the Golden Globes, might've badly hurt her chances ("Black Swan") for a gold-plated nude statue. No Audrey Hepburn, she. And the movie was a bit of a downer. Hollywood loves uplifting bullshit.

"True Grit," although a Western (and Westerns always get down-graded in Hollywood as not "serious"), will surely garner some awards...with young Hallee Steinfeld almost a shoo-in for Best Supporting Actress.

The Oscar voters are mostly old, farting codgers, and techno-phobic, and so "Social Network" probably won't win much. No one seems that enamored of the uber-slacker schtick of Jesse Eisenberg, either.

Dark horses for some trophies: "Winter's Bone" and "The Fighter."

But it's "The King's Speech" in a land-slide.

----------------------------------------

Oscar's son, Randy.