#it's got a lot of interesting women in but if barry's section is THAT bad i'm not sure how much else i can trust

[oh2e]

A classmate showed me a book called Wild Irish Women today. I am literally three paragraphs in and there is so much wrong

Born 1799 they say. Okay right. (He was born about ten years before that as he was 15/16 in 1804)

“Mary-Ann Bulkley and her two daughters the youngest of which” ….apparently Barry has an older sister now

“Barry claimed to be ten at time of enrolment [in university] though may have been up to four years older”

Absolutely not. James Barry LOOKED young but was most likely around 18 when he enrolled. (Though yes he did claim to be about 5 years younger than he actually was - most likely so people wouldn’t guess he was afab)

“Signed her name for the first time as James Miranda Stuart Barry”

…..did he though? Because as far as I can tell he never used either Miranda or Steuert. His thesis is just under James Barry. Queen Victoria promoted only James Barry to inspector general of hospitals. Any documents I have seen from Barry’s life (including a letter he signed) name him only as Dr James Barry. Someone said that they think Miranda came around with June Rose in the 1970s and I think that might be right but I can’t prove it yet. It’s definitely a more recent thing anyway. Possibly as a way to feminise him along with calling him ‘she’ which even the people in 1865 after his death don’t do. (They call him a woman yes but not she.)

Love how this book completely glosses over his deportation from the Cape and says he was “posted” to Mauritius which…he wasn’t. He just went. Didn’t go down well with the superiors.

Was seen naked by two doctors who confirmed years later she was a woman? Why?? There was a WOMAN who said she may have seen Barry undressed but she was a cleaner or slave or something and people didn’t listen to her.

[sgt-paul]

I have been reading some interviews and I don’t like how Paul talks about Jane. Why does he downplayed her so much? Meanwhile Jane has never said anything bad about him. I think Paul have a tendency to downplay people that are close to his heart, the same with John. Maybe is because both of them abandon him. What is your opinion?

hi! well, i think i would start this answer with a barry miles’ quote concering MYFN, where he makes a very vital point: 

“…[Paul] only asked for two changes. One was a girlfriend who he had seen on-and-off for some years right up until the day before his marriage to Linda, who we cut out completely, and the other change was one of tone. Linda had been diagnosed with cancer and throughout the taping of the questions this fact hung heavily over the proceedings. As the book concerned only the Beatles period, with a final section on the death of John Lennon, it was inevitably very much about Jane Asher as well. In some sections, though by no means all, Paul asked for the phrase ‘and Jane’ to be taken out when I was describing some event they had attended together ‘because it makes the book seem like the Paul and Jane story.’ I could understand why he didn’t want it to seem that way, particularly as Linda was ill, and so I made all the requested changes.”

this quote from barry lets us get an insight into paul’s mindset at the time, which is quite important to consider, when we’re reading about his relationship with jane in MYFN. if paul is being so picky about the “and jane” phrase, we sure as hell are not going to get from his part some lovey-dovey reminiscing, or for that matter mature and deep analyzing. so what stays is the objective, rightful representation of jane’s extremely important role, along with paul’s occasional passive aggressive, evasive, sometimes a tad childish behaviour, and the bare minimum of acceptance regarding his love for jane. okay, it’s not all that bad!! sometimes he’s lovely, and he seems like he would be willing to talk seriously, but as the book proceeds, it’s like he is becoming less and less willing to acknowledge stuff (at least that’s how i remember it…). and you know, for example when it comes to his songs, he’s usually name-dropping jane if it’s about arguments, and that can create a very one-sided picture to some. and sometimes that can also lead to a few stupid lines from him like: “I suspect it was about another argument. I don’t have easy relationships with women, I never have. I talk too much truth.” which he said about for no one…wtf dude (although these songs and paul’s opinions on them are extremely telling as well, as they often deal with his worry and anger over jane’s lack of presence and what he perceived as her lack of commitment) thankfully barry is a great balance overall!..  

i know i’m only discussing this one particular bio, but since most people use this book as the main source of paul’s take on their relationship i feel like it’s important to put his comments in context. + i don’t think this quote is only exclusive to MYFN, it also shows us what his general perspective became over the years. 

as to why he is behaving like this when it comes to jane, there are probably multiple reasons. 1. as mentioned by miles, linda’s illness had clearly affected the picture paul was about to present on his relationship with jane. obviously he wasn’t going to gush over their relationship and upset linda who is already going through a lot. instead he’ll be nonchalant and evasive, and with this he’s basically protecting linda’s emotional state, which is totally understandable. 2. i mean… he was prooobably very much hurt by jane’s sudden final decision, and that “tainted” his whole approach. 3. he wasn’t the “prevailing party” in this case, he’s got a big ego and great pride, can you imagine him going “yeah of course i was devastated when jane broke up with me because i was acting like an asshole, and although the end was almost inevitable, we were engaged and losing her was a terrible feeling and shock and i tried to get her to forgive me but she didn’t want to hear about it, and in the following weeks/months i went through one of the most hectic periods of my life” … of course not.. so he tried his best to minimize the significance of this event/era. 4. i’m also sure that the fact that jane has never spoken about their relationship puts him in an odd position (shoutout to jane for being one of the classiest ladies in beatles history). 5. and we all know that he is an extremely private northern dude, so unless it’s “necessary”, he doesn’t go into serious details about his relationships and his feelings.

(there is a great great post concerning their relationship, written by the crew of the akom podcast, i can only urge everyone to read it)

of course i’m not trying to make paul’s opinion and his experiences less valid either, we all know that him and jane did have serious problems and difficulties in their relationship, and we could go on discussing them for hours. for the full picture, you gotta look at the situation from every side. this also applies to not getting all your information from paul’s retrospective interviews etc, but also from people who were around them at the time.

(the girlfriend “who he had seen on-and-off for some years” is maggie mcgivern, they met in 1966 and maggie even accompanied paul to paris that year. as miles says, they were seeing each other right up until paul’s marriage, paul went to see her a few days before the wedding. which, and this is just my personal speculation, might have had something to do with the big row paul and linda had the night before the ceremony. so anyway, in her case as well, it’s clear that the fact that they avoided mentioning her can be traced back to, well, first of all paul’s marriage to linda, and also linda’s illness.)

as for the parallel with john, it’s an interesting one, but personally i have never really seen him downplay his relationship with john like that, and even if he had said things that can qualify as downplaying, i don’t necessarily think the two situations would be comparable. but i’m open to hear more about your thoughts, maybe i’m just missing something!

also, sometimes paul’s just an asshole, simple as that, lol :)

[pekorosu]

Hi! I wanted to ask about the 'essay' by Toshio Okada featured in the latest release of BF Another Story. I guess there is no fan translation of it. But Okada mentions how he got to be featured in Another Story in a video on his Youtube channel. The video (entitled 'seminar 29 October...') is uploaded on 3 Nov 2017. He only talks about BF in general for a few minutes starting at 36:32. And I kinda got curious about what he says. If it's not too much trouble, would you be able to summarise it?

ooh interesting! uh, i have no idea if it has a fan translation… and i’m unsure if you’re asking for a summary of the video or the essay so i’ll just give a rough one for both? hope you don’t mind it being really really rough though :o

in the video:

- he introduces the manga, explaining that the one he hasthere is the bunko version. he briefly explains that “another story” containsside stories that come after the main series has ended.

- his ex-wife took all the yellow banana fish books with her whenthey got divorced lol. but he has them on kindle now.

- he brings up the scene where ash had to take anintelligence test and answer the questions by scanning bar codes. then he talks about how it’s been referenced in a veryrecent manga. in volume 1 of “the promised neverland,” there’s a scene where everyone is taking an intelligence test and the method it’s administered is exactly the same as banana fish.

- the idea of scanning the answer through bar codes is p unique, which is why he remembers it so clearly. so when he was reading that scene in “the promised neverland,” banana fishimmediately came to mind. there were so many other ways to go about it and yet.

“seriously. it’s looks like the same scene haha”

- so in a way, it can be said that banana fish is influential enough to be referenced all over the place.

- he mentions that it’s getting an anime on noitamina’s latenight slot next year. talks about how a section of fujoshi women are freakingout rn. but they are also saying things like, “don’t read banana fish like a bl!” or towards the anime staff, “don’t MAKE it like abl!!”

he thinks that story-wise, it feels very hard-boiled and aimed at men, kindalike Barry Seal from the 1980s (?? idk anything about this).

so some of those women are upset over how male readers who see the story that way might (or already are) complaining about the anime being “made for fujoshi” or ���bl”

- but anyway, the manga itself is definitely good, so he thinksthat fact alone would make the anime worth checking out.

 - he talks about the plot and how yoshida akimi is amazing tohave come up with something like that during that time. it’s oneof his favourite stories and he was very surprised but also grateful when he was requested to provide a commentary for the last vol of the bunkoversion (there’s one at the end of each vol).

- he thinks it reads less like a commentary and more like a column… or a funny essay. what he heard from the editor is that yoshida akimi herself enjoyed it so he was really happy to hear that.

- “another story” is not on kindle though. he thinks they might release a special edition of the entire manga next yearto commemorate it getting an anime and all, so that book might finally get akindle version. “but my ‘column’ would probably get left out(laughs)”

- either way, it will remain a book that he can never throwout.

speaking of the commentaries… actually, i’ve not read them yet. well except his one bc i sorta accidentally read it lol. i’ve forgottenwhat it’s about though so i just did a quick re-read. 

basically, he discusses stuff like the possibility of bf getting a sequel and talks about how lots of famous mangas end up getting really disappointing sequels. he also speculates on the types of sequels it could possibly get, for example: 

a) side stories like the ones in “another story” 

b) a sequel where an ash look-like(his long lost twin?)shows up in NY 

c) a sequel where ash is actually alive but loses hismemories and becomes a heartless killing machine.

then he clarifies that even though he’s come up with so many ideas, he’s not actually hoping for a sequel. apparently there’s an old belief that if you say something out loud or think about something before it happens and pray that itdoesn’t happen, hopefully it just won’t? that’s what he’s doing. LOL.

here’s how it ends:

“it would be in bad taste to revive the leopard at thetop of mount kilimanjaro. banana fish is over. so let’s read it again from the very beginning, shall we?”

and then i yelled “NOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!” at the book andtossed it put it back on the shelf :)

[andytgerm]

Oscar Picks! Get Your Fresh Unique Oscar Picks Here!

TI did good this year! In terms of preparation, I mean. These picks are probably godawful, a losing combination of switching between going with my gut or my heart or my head. But, I have seen all but THREE of the nominated films (2 animated, 1 foreign language), which is, I think, very good for someone with no connections for screener access. Also, I thought it was, on the whole, a good group of nominees, in that I only wanted to die while watching, like, 3 of the movies.

So, without further ado, my mostly informed picks for tonight!

Best picture: “Arrival” “Fences” “Hacksaw Ridge” “Hell or High Water” “Hidden Figures” “La La Land” “Lion” “Manchester by the Sea” “Moonlight”

La La Land has been “controversial” since more than festival-goers saw it because it’s been the front runner for so long. But it will surprise few to learn that I think it’s great! Deeply considered and moving, and with thematic depth, plus the kind of razzmatazz I’m a complete sucker for. Frankly, I don’t see a ton of differences between it and, say, Mad Max: Fury Road in terms of craft and skill displayed, but it’s been dinged because the perception is that it is light and unserious and a rip-off or what-have-you. Or too jazzy, or maybe the wrong kind of jazzy? Anyway, it’s definitely winning, and in a line-up with only 2.5 movies I didn’t as least think were “mostly good” (Hacksaw is pretty bad, Lion is meh-nipulative, and Hidden Figures is a little obvious, but otherwise I like ‘em all!), I’m not really mad about it and probably would vote for it because it appeals to my taste so specifically.

Will Win: La La Land Should Win: La La Land Dark Horse: Moonlight

Lead actor: Casey Affleck, “Manchester by the Sea” Andrew Garfield, “Hacksaw Ridge” Ryan Gosling, “La La Land,” Viggo Mortensen, “Captain Fantastic” Denzel Washington, “Fences”

The most high profile competitive race, despite it being one of the weaker categories this year. The battle of the narratives is strong here, and I wonder if it’s been overblown a little bit. BUT, the competitor is who I would pick, so I’m going to lean into hope and go in that direction. Garfield is nominated for the wrong movie (you didn’t see Silence, but he was great), and he’s kind of a cartoon in Hacksaw with his VERY broad accent. Gosling’s charming, but the center of the so-called “backlash” against LLL with his jazz love. Captain Fantastic is a bad movie that buys into Viggo’s characters world-view too much to be anything but self-indulgent claptrap and also has no support anywhere else. Affleck’s got the momentum and a great performance, but Washington’s got the monologues. Both playing frustrating characters, one for talking so much without doing enough listening, the other for not communicating at all. My vote goes to the excellent August Wilson interpretation, again, due to personal taste leanings.

Will Win: Denzel Washington Should Win: Denzel Washington Dark Horse Smart Pick: Casey Affleck

Lead actress: Isabelle Huppert, “Elle” Ruth Negga, “Loving” Natalie Portman, “Jackie” Emma Stone, “La La Land” Meryl Streep, “Florence Foster Jenkins”

GREAT category. God, so many great female lead performances this year. My personal pick is probably the sadly un-nominated Annette Benning in 20th Century Woman, who is so subtle and great and does some of the best “watching and listening” acting you’ll ever see. But Ruth Negga probably takes the subtle and unshowy slot, and she’s terrific too, so I can’t complain too much. Given this choice selection, I’d go for the probable winner, because, seriously, Emma Stone is charming and funny and deep and complicated in La La Land, plus she gets to do a big 11 o’clock number. Huppert’s probably the potential upset, she’s got momentum and gets to do a LOT of different unusual things in Elle. Portman never seemed to reach full potential, but she’s a strong center in Jackie once you get used to the big choices and latch on to the movie’s wavelength. Streep Streeps it up and does all the things you love.

Will Win: Emma Stone Should Win: Annette Benning Emma Stone Dark Horse: Isabelle Huppert

Supporting actor: Mahershala Ali, “Moonlight” Jeff Bridges, “Hell or High Water” Lucas Hedges, “Manchester by the Sea” Dev Patel, “Lion” Michael Shannon, “Nocturnal Animals”

Another strong category, though the Shannon nomination for that nothingburger of a movie is regrettable (he’s at least the CORRECT supporting actor to go with). Bridges is great, turning on a dime when The Big Dramatic Thing happens at the end of that terrific movie, having kept you laughing the whole way to that moment. Patel’s fine, but his section of the movie does not fulfill the potential suggested by in the first part. Mahershala Ali is another great watching and listening performance, and his raw and simple connection with Little, especially in the scene where he explains what “faggot” means to him, is so delicately beautiful. Hedges, though, is unexpected and confounding in the best way. His character is trying his best to make the best of a bad situation, giving his all, even though he’s not grown up enough to have that be enough all the time. It’s a terrific honest and unexpected portrait of grief in a movie full of contrasting pictures, and I’m really excited to see what he does next.

Will Win: Mahershala Ali Should Win: Lucas Hedges Dark Horse: Jeff Bridges

Supporting actress: Viola Davis, “Fences” Naomie Harris, “Moonlight” Nicole Kidman, “Lion” Octavia Spencer, “Hidden Figures” Michelle Williams, “Manchester by the Sea”

Octavia would not be my Hidden Figures pick (how about that Janelle Monae, huh?) but she does have that killer line in that great scene with Kirsten Dunst. Kidman I sadly found forgettable (but check out Big Little Lies on HBO, you guys). Naomie Harris gets the most recognizable/predictable arc in Moonlight, but she sells the hell out of it. And doing it in three days!? That’s incredible. Michelle has the big scene that’s the closest we get to catharsis in Manchester, and is maybe doing the best job of “Supporting” in a way that many of these other performances aren’t. But holy hell does Viola deliver everything you would want her to in that part. I have no beef with her placement here, and she gives great watching/listening, great monologuing, and has the best scene of the movie (that night time phone call) centered on her. Gosh it’ll be great to see her win.

Will Win: Viola Davis Should Win: Viola Davis Dark Horse: Michelle Williams, I guess, but c’mon.

Best director: “La La Land,” Damien Chazelle “Hacksaw Ridge,” Mel Gibson “Moonlight,” Barry Jenkins “Manchester by the Sea,” Kenneth Lonergan “Arrival,” Denis Villeneuve

Oh, hey, I haven’t had the chance to say anything about it yet, but Arrival is really great and full of ideas and feelings, and to see it nominated here is great! But this is a Jenkins/Chazelle race, and La La Land fever is definitely strong within the Academy.

Will Win: Damien Chazelle Should Win: Really, I’d be glad do see anyone but Gibson, but I guess I’d go with Denis Villeneuve in the interest of spreading the wealth? Dark Horse: Barry Jenkins

Animated feature: “Kubo and the Two Strings,” Travis Knight and Arianne Sutner “Moana,” John Musker, Ron Clements and Osnat Shurer “My Life as a Zucchini,” Claude Barras and Max Karli “The Red Turtle,” Michael Dudok de Wit and Toshio Suzuki “Zootopia,” Byron Howard, Rich Moore and Clark Spencer

This is one of my “I haven’t seen them all categories” which is too bad because I like seeing animated films a bunch, but Zucchini and Red Turtle have not made it to my neck of the woods yet. I liked Zootopia a lot, though I found its second half less engaging on second viewing, and I think the villain is telegraphed a bit too heavily. But that beginning, and getting to know the world, plus its thematic depth will make it a worthy winner. Kubo is GREAT and fun and moving, perhaps a bit let down by its vocal cast, but otherwise gives you everything you could want in an animated film. But Moana is a Disney musical, and if you haven’t figured it out already, I’m a sucker for those (they make me cry just by, like, structure? Like, opening establishing musical numbers emotionally move me to tears just because they exist?). And it’s one that doesn’t forget it’s a musical halfway through.

Will Win: Zootopia Should Win: Moana Dark Horse: Kubo and the Two Strings

Animated short: “Blind Vaysha,” Theodore Ushev “Borrowed Time,” Andrew Coats and Lou Hamou-Lhadj “Pear Cider and Cigarettes,” Robert Valley and Cara Speller “Pearl,” Patrick Osborne “Piper,” Alan Barillaro and Marc Sondheimer

This crop was just ok this year, I thought, though seeking out the shorts is always one of my favorite parts of Oscar season. Borrowed Time was my surprise favorite, and is heftier than you think it’s going to be. Pear Cider is... a lot, and not always in a good way, but the style is good. Blind Vaysha’s a bit much, but has got a great Caroline Dhavernas voice-over. Piper’s level of detail is jaw-dropping. And Pearl’s got tech innovations and well-calibrated sentimentality, so that gives it the edge for me.

Will Win: Pearl Should Win: Borrowed Time Dark Horse: Piper

Adapted screenplay: “Arrival,” Eric Heisserer “Fences,” August Wilson “Hidden Figures,” Allison Schroeder and Theodore Melfi “Lion,” Luke Davies “Moonlight,” Barry Jenkins; Story by Tarell Alvin McCraney

I mean, am I gonna not give a theoretical award to August Wilson? Well, predictions-wise, yes, but god that script is so deep and fascinating. This is an easy area for them to recognize the great achievement of Moonlight, and it is certainly a win I can get behind, three well-told connected stories is no easy feat.

Will Win: Moonlight Should Win: Fences Dark Horse: Arrival

Original screenplay: “20th Century Women,” Mike Mills “Hell or High Water,” Taylor Sheridan “La La Land,” Damien Chazelle “The Lobster,” Yorgos Lanthimos, Efthimis Filippou “Manchester by the Sea,” Kenneth Lonergan

20th Century Women! That’s a hell of a script, and it moves so beautifully and delicately. What a wonder of a miracle that movie is! The Lobster is prickly and the dialogue is very mannered, but the conceptual originality is undeniable. Hell or High Water has a lot more on its mind than you go in expecting, and was a huge surprise favorite for me, with some terrific duet scenes (Pine and his kid! Pine and Bridges!) and wonderful cameo sized characters (Texans with guns! Waitresses!). In hopes of a “spread the wealth” mentality, I’m predicting Manchester, though, as it’s not favored much elsewhere, and it certainly is written with depth and insight.

Will Win: Manchester by the Sea Should Win: 20th Century Women Dark Horse Smart Pick: La La Land

Cinematography: “Arrival,” Bradford Young “La La Land,” Linus Sandgren “Lion,” Greig Fraser “Moonlight,” James Laxton “Silence,” Rodrigo Prieto

These are all great!

Will Win: La La Land Should Win: Moonlight Dark Horse: Moonlight

Best documentary feature: “13th,” Ava DuVernay, Spencer Averick and Howard Barish “Fire at Sea,” Gianfranco Rosi and Donatella Palermo “I Am Not Your Negro,” Raoul Peck, Remi Grellety and Hebert Peck “Life, Animated,” Roger Ross Williams and Julie Goldman “O.J.: Made in America,” Ezra Edelman and Caroline Waterlow

Many of these are also great! And the three that are centered on the African American experience are a nice trilogy together. But, c’mon, OJ is a TV miniseries.

Will Win: O.J.: Made in America Should Win: I Am Not Your Negro Dark Horse: 13th

Best documentary short subject: “4.1 Miles,” Daphne Matziaraki “Extremis,” Dan Krauss “Joe’s Violin,” Kahane Cooperman and Raphaela Neihausen “Watani: My Homeland,” Marcel Mettelsiefen and Stephen Ellis “The White Helmets,” Orlando von Einsiedel and Joanna Natasegara

Boy, this is an emotional killer of a category. After seeing all 5 in one night on the big screen, I tweeted “Saw all the Oscar doc shorts tonight, and they were crushing, but if seeing all of any 1 category would make one a better person, that's it.“ and I stand by that. Illuminating and tough, a great group of shorts.

Will Win: The White Helmets Should Win: Watani: My Homeland Dark Horse: Extremis

Best live action short film: “Ennemis Interieurs,” Selim Azzazi “La Femme et le TGV,” Timo von Gunten and Giacun Caduff “Silent Nights,” Aske Bang and Kim Magnusson “Sing,” Kristof Deak and Anna Udvardy “Timecode,” Juanjo Gimenez

This was definitely the weakest shorts category. I enthusiastically liked one of them (Sing) and thought another one was fun (Timecode), but the rest I found inaccessible (Ennemis Interieurs) or verging on sappy (La Femme/Silent Nights). My cynical self thought Silent Nights (sentimental, but deals with Important Social Issues) would win the moment I saw it, though I have heard of no one who is a fan. Still gonna guess it, so I can be pleasantly surprised when it loses.

Will Win: Silent Nights Should Win: Sing Dark Horse: Ennemis Interiurs

Best foreign language film: “A Man Called Ove,” Sweden “Land of Mine,” Denmark “Tanna,” Australia “The Salesman,” Iran “Toni Erdmann,” Germany

I was blown away and cannot stop thinking about The Salesman. That movies got staying power, plus it received extra attention with the awful Travel Ban, so that makes it an easy prediction. I haven’t seen Land of Mine. Tanna was pretty and simple and unique, but didn’t really hold together upon reflection. Ove is pitched right to the older sentimental voter, and I guess it’s a pretty ok version of that story. Toni Erdmann’s got the cool film fan vote, and it had like 3 of my deepest, most gut-busting laughs of the crop, but it took a long time for me to get on board with it.

Will Win: The Salesman Should Win: The Salesman Dark Horse: Toni Erdmann

Film editing: “Arrival,” Joe Walker “Hacksaw Ridge,” John Gilbert “Hell or High Water,” Jake Roberts “La La Land,” Tom Cross “Moonlight,” Nat Sanders and Joi McMillon

Another easy area for La La Land to rack up a sweep, and it’s certainly got rhythm and pizzazz going for it. Moonlight’s got some terrific wordless sequences though, and can hold a long shot with the best of them.

Will Win: La La Land Should Win: Moonlight Dark Horse: Moonlight

Sound editing: “Arrival,” Sylvain Bellemare “Deep Water Horizon,” Wylie Stateman and Renee Tondelli “Hacksaw Ridge,” Robert Mackenzie and Andy Wright “La La Land,” Ai-Ling Lee and Mildred Iatrou Morgan “Sully,” Alan Robert Murray and Bub Asman

Arrival made up all those alien noises, which were really essential to you buying into the movie. Deepwater Horizon was a better watch than I expected, and it certainly explores all the different ways an oil rig can blow up with sound. Sully’s got those birds. Don’t forget the birds. But this is a big war movie category, and the most high profile one of the night will *sigh* probably win here.

Will Win: Hacksaw Ridge Should Win: Arrival Dark Horse: La La Land (sweeps can be powerful, you guys)

Sound mixing: “Arrival,” Bernard Gariepy Strobl and Claude La Haye “Hacksaw Ridge,” Kevin O’Connell, Andy Wright, Robert Mackenzie and Peter Grace “La La Land,” Andy Nelson, Ai-Ling Lee and Steve A. Morrow “Rogue One: A Star Wars Story,” David Parker, Christopher Scarabosio and Stuart Wilson “13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi,” Gary Summers, Jeffrey J. Haboush and Mac Ruth

I watched Michael Bay’s Benghazi movie and all I got was vague credibility when predicting this lousy Oscars category (it was bad). Musicals do well here, though I think La La Land is weaker than many think here because a lot of folks complain that they couldn’t understand the lyrics (I thought the mixing was fine, but they maybe should have chosen singers with more powerful voices?).

Will Win: La La Land Should Win: Arrival Dark Horse: Hacksaw Ridge

Production design: “Arrival,” Patrice Vermette, Paul Hotte “Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them,” Stuart Craig, Anna Pinnock “Hail, Caesar!,” Jess Gonchor, Nancy Haigh “La La Land,” David Wasco, Sandy Reynolds-Wasco “Passengers,” Guy Hendrix Dyas, Gene Serdena

Sweepin’ gonna sweep. How bout Hail, Caesar!, tho?

Will Win: La La Land Should Win: Hail, Caesar! Dark Horse: Arrival

Original score: “Jackie,” Mica Levi “La La Land,” Justin Hurwitz “Lion,” Dustin O’Halloran and Hauschka “Moonlight,” Nicholas Britell “Passengers,” Thomas Newman

Original musical! I’ve been humming and feeling the great instrumental themes form La La Land since I saw it.

Will Win: La La Land Should Win: La La Land Dark Horse: Jackie

Original song: “Audition (The Fools Who Dream),” “La La Land” — Music by Justin Hurwitz; Lyric by Benj Pasek and Justin Paul “Can’t Stop the Feeling,” “Trolls” — Music and Lyric by Justin Timberlake, Max Martin and Karl Johan Schuster “City of Stars,” “La La Land” — Music by Justin Hurwitz; Lyric by Benj Pasek and Justin Paul “The Empty Chair,” “Jim: The James Foley Story” — Music and Lyric by J. Ralph and Sting “How Far I’ll Go,” “Moana” — Music and Lyric by Lin-Manuel Miranda

This is a heartbreaker category, where is Popstar? Where is Swiss Army Man? Where is Sing Street? Why those La La Land songs? I’ve gotta go with my sort-of Twitter buddy Lin Manuel Miranda (he followed me for a little while, OK? Get off my back!), even if he’s many not who most are predicting. Plus, if Pasek and Paul lap him and EGOT in a year, I’ll be pissed at how rude that is.

Will Win: “How Far I’ll Go” Should Win: “How Far I’ll Go” (really for the second reprise, but it’s good at first too!) Dark Horse: “City of Stars” (though Audition is better, and Someone in the Crowd’s the best song in the movie)

Makeup and hair: “A Man Called Ove,” Eva von Bahr and Love Larson “Star Trek Beyond,” Joel Harlow and Richard Alonzo “Suicide Squad,” Alessandro Bertolazzi, Giorgio Gregorini and Christopher Nelson

Realistic old person makeup is hard to bet against, and I really don’t want to live in the Oscar Winner Suicide Squad world. Star Trek’s got really good work in this category, too, though.

Will Win: A Man Called Ove Should Win: Star Trek Beyond Dark Horse: Star Trek Beyond

Costume design: “Allied,” Joanna Johnston “Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them,” Colleen Atwood “Florence Foster Jenkins,” Consolata Boyle “Jackie,” Madeline Fontaine “La La Land,” Mary Zophres

This is far from my best/most knowledgable category, but I’ll be happy if contemporary memorable designs from La La Land get it as expected.

Will Win: La La Land Should Win: La La Land Dark Horse: Jackie

Visual effects: “Deepwater Horizon,” Craig Hammack, Jason Snell, Jason Billington and Burt Dalton “Doctor Strange,” Stephane Ceretti, Richard Bluff, Vincent Cirelli and Paul Corbould “The Jungle Book,” Robert Legato, Adam Valdez, Andrew R. Jones and Dan Lemmon “Kubo and the Two Strings,” Steve Emerson, Oliver Jones, Brian McLean and Brad Schiff “Rogue One: A Star Wars Story,” John Knoll, Mohen Leo, Hal Hickel and Neil Corbould

Did you see all those animals in the Jungle Book? And the note at the end about how it was filmed in California? That was really cool. Doctor Strange was great fun in this area too. But Kubo had a special features real showcasing this work during the credits, so it moves up in the running for me.

Will Win: The Jungle Book Should Win: The Jungle Book Dark Horse: Kubo and the Two Strings