"Oscar did it again!" roars our forums poster "Academy Awards Guru" upon hearing the news that the latest best actress champ (Reese Witherspoon) busted up with her beau (Ryan Phillippe) soon after hooking up with Hollywood's naked golden boy.

Other examples include Hilary Swank and Chad Lowe, Marlee Matlin and William Hurt, Jane Fonda and Roger Vadim, Halle Berry and Eric Benet, Julia Roberts and Benjamin Bratt and Helen Hunt and Hank Azaria.

I'm not sure I buy into this whole linkage idea, which implies that these guys, beset with jealousy, couldn't handle their gals' success. Turns out Chad had a whole secret drug thing going on and Hilary stood by him as long as she could cope; ditto for Halle's tolerance level for Eric's philandering. And why should Ryan be jealous of Reese's kudos success since he actually topped it that same Oscar night when his film — "Crash" — pulled off one of the biggest shockeroos in the history of the best picture race?

Yes, that's true, but Ryan didn't seem to enjoy himself at Vanity Fair's post-Oscars fete. "He sat by himself looking pretty resentful," a witness told Life & Style magazine.

Personally, I happen to think something else busted up Reese and Ryan: bad chemistry. They never seemed right for each other. She always struck me as a gung-ho, pancake-flipping momma who belongs to the PTA, St. John's Church Christmas decoration committee and the Eagle Scouts' recycling drive. By contrast, he seemed to be a foggy-headed slacker and loner, who the tabloids kept catching smoking pot in cars with rolled-up windows not too far away from where a befuddled Reese, tapping a foot, fumed, "Golly darn, where the heck is that boy?!"

"I think everyone has their own set of problems, and sometimes I feel I'm in the middle of the biggest challenge of my life just trying to maintain normalcy in a kind of crazy lifestyle," she has said in the past. "Many people worry so much about managing their careers, but rarely spend half that much energy managing their lives. I want to make my life, not just my job, the best it can be. The rest will work itself out."

"Marriage is hard," Reese once told Vanity Fair. "(It's) not about expecting someone to make you happy every day or to complete your life."

Join our forums discussion — CLICK HERE!

Photo: Ryan and Reese appeared disconnected as they arrived at the Oscars back in March.
(L.A. Times photo by Myung J. Chun)

Below is a list of how the current Oscar ponies fare with critics' ratings. The percentage number is the film's "Cream of the Crop" score at RottenTomatoes.com (not its over-all score). Italicized numbers are from Metacritic.com: the first is its critics' tally (then, in parenthesis, is the site's users' scores). The roman-font number at the end of each line is the score it receives from members of the Broadcast Film Critics Association, which bestows the Critics Choice Awards.

Just for fun, I threw in "Jackass Number Two" to see where it lands compared to major Oscar players.

What I find fascinating are some of the injustices that clearly jump out — like the ranking of "Infamous" — which is being dismissed by many Oscarologists just because of last year's "Capote" — over other strong contenders like "Babel" and "World Trade Center."

Also intriguing is the reality check provided by Metacritic.com users who don't necessarily follow film critics' groupthink when told to, actually breaking from the wolfpacks with scores somewhat lower for "The Queen," "Half Nelson," "United 93," "World Trade Center" and "Marie-Antoinette."

Movies that get notably higher rank by site users over stingy or closed-minded film critics: "Running with Scissors," "Babel," "Infamous," "Deliver Us from Evil, "Driving Lessons," "The Prestige," "The Devil Wears Prada," "Monster House," "Over the Hedge," and, of course, "Jackass Number Two."

"The Queen" — 100%, 91 (6.4), 95
"51 Birch Street" — 100%, 79
"Dixie Chicks: Shut Up & Sing" — 100%, 74, 85
"Half Nelson" — 94%, 85 (7.5)
"The Departed" — 93%, 85 (8.3), 91
"United 93" — 92%, 90 (7.7), 95
"Last King of Scotland" — 92%, 74 (7.9), 88
"Little Children" — 91%, 76 (9.1), 95
"Little Miss Sunshine" — 90%, 80 (8.1), 94
"The Illustionist" — 88%, 68 (8.5), 81
"Deliver Us from Evil" — 84%, 86 (9.6)
"The Devil Wears Prada" — 84%, 63 (7.5), 83
"Quinceanera" — 83%, 72 (7.8)
"Volver" — 80%, 85, 91
"Flags of Our Fathers" — 78%, 78 (7.3), 93
"Cars" — 78%, 73 (6.8), 89
"Thank You for Smoking" — 77%, 71 (7.8), 83
"Catch a Fire" — 75%, 62 (6.5), 80
"Infamous" — 74% 68 (8.7) , 80
"World Trade Center" — 74%, 66 (4.9), 88
"Superman Returns" — 73%, 72 (6.6), 89
"Babel" — 71%, 71 (8.6), 94
"A Prairie Home Companion" — 71%, 75 (6.3), 85
"Monster House" — 67%, 68 (7.6), 80
"Over the Hedge" — 63%, 67 (8.3), 81
"Mission: Impossible 3" — 62%, 66 (6.7), 81
"Hollywoodland" — 61%, 62 (5.5), 81
"Jackass Number Two" — 59%, 66 (7.1)"
Ant Bully" — 59% 59 (5.1) , 78
"Driving Lessons" — 57%, 59 (10), 71
"The Prestige" — 54%, 66 (8.4), 83
"Marie-Antoinette" — 49%, 65 (4.7), 75
"Running with Scissors" — 32%, 52 (7.1), 71

Photo: The L.A. Times said of "The Queen" in its review: "In a commanding performance that is as compelling as it is unexpected, Mirren has turned 'The Queen' into something you never imagined it could be: a crackling dramatic story that's intelligent, thoughtful and moving."
(Photo: Miramax)

"Titanic" composer James Horner started out this derby year with three shots at the Oscar: "The Good Shepherd," "All the King's Men" and "Apocalypto." His hope for "King's Men" probably got shot down along with Willie Stark when film critics took aim at the remake of the 1949 Oscar best-picture champ. Now he's down to just "Apocalypto." Horner and director Robert De Niro had creative differences over "Shepherd," so the film score is now being done (and that means right now, given the film's December release) by Marcelo Zarvos ("Hollywoodland") and Bruce Fowler (an orchestrator who composed "additional music" to Hans Zimmer's score of "Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest," which isn't eligible now because so much was pickup from "Curse of the Black Pearl").

Kris Tapley of InContention.com broke the news about Horner's departure, but didn't provide the names of the composers who took over.

Photo: Robert De Niro has had his hands full directing "The Good Shepherd," considering all of the A-Listers involved both on the screen (like Angelina Jolie, shown here with the boss) and off (music composer James Horner).
(Universal)

Academy members say they got two more DVD screeners in the mail today: "Half Nelson" and "Friends with Money." That brings to five the total that the full membership has received so far, including "Little Miss Sunshine," "World Trade Center" and "United 93." Of course, campaign DVDs of "United 93" are everywhere in Hollywood right now, although I was mightily surprised the other day that I didn't automatically get one with my latte at the Starbucks at Sunset and Gower.

"We're going for it!" a gleeful Focus Features exec told me weeks ago, sounding like a gutsy Notre Dame quarterback aiming for a 60-yard gain with a "Hail Mary" pass. He was actually referring to the studio's bold plan to roll out "Catch a Fire" to 1,300 theaters, which is truly daring considering the modest releases of other art-house Oscar hopefuls without big-bucket popcorn appeal: "The Queen" to 152 theaters and "Running with Scissors" to 586.

Such is the studio's confidence in the anti-Apartheid drama that dared to tell its story from the point of view of a black African. Other western movies about the Dark Continent that have done well at past Oscars ("The Constant Gardener," "Out of Africa") were told from Caucasian perspectives — like another contender this year, "Last King of Scotland."

But "Fire" ended up earning less money than "Scissors" — $2 million ($1,500 per screen) vs. $2.5 million ($4,300 per screen) — and only slightly more than "The Queen" ($1.9 million, $12,600 per screen).

Happily, reviews have remained strong for Derek Luke's performance as a reluctant rebel, which should keep him in the Oscar derby. The L.A. Times called his role "intense, passionate." Jack Mathews of the New York Daily News says, "The movie belongs to Luke, who brings the heroic Patrick Chamusso to life as richly as Forest Whitaker does the evil Ugandan dictator Idi Amin in 'The Last King of Scotland.'"

Photo: The Hollywood Reporter says of "Catch a Fire": "Continuing to tell stories of conflict between indigenous people and white intruders, Phillip Noyce goes to 1980s South Africa for a feature that is less ruminative than 'The Quiet American' and 'Rabbit-Proof Fence' and more likely to connect, if on a modest scale, with American audiences."
(Focus Features)

Much mystery surrounds the selection of the next inductees into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, but at least nine nominees have been revealed: Chic, Dave Clark Five, Grandmaster Flash, R.E.M., Ronettes, Patti Smith, Stooges, Joe Tex and — reaping its first bid ever — Van Halen.

Will there be any more? Usually, there are 15 finalists on the ballot. And is Grandmaster Flash nommed without The Furious Five? Patti Smith is nominated solo this time, but has been nommed with her band in the past. Probe these questions in our forums with other Envelopers while dishing who got snubbed, too! — CLICK HERE!

Photo: WB/ Wea/ Rhino

How dare those Oscars gossipistas push Jack Nicholson around! He's not going into the lead race for "The Departed," like it or not! Jeff Wells of Hollywood-Elsewhere.com reports that Warner Bros. has decided Jack will not campaign for best actor, which is smart, frankly. A supporting Oscar is still an Oscar and three-time champ Jack needs that fourth one so he can be tied with Katharine Hepburn, which he already is in terms of nominations (12 each as of now). He's likely to nab number 13 soon, which would normally put him just one bid behind Meryl Streep's championship record if only Meryl would just agree to stay put, which she won't. This year she's up for lead with "The Devil Wears Prada" and supporting with "A Prairie Home Companion."

Photo: Studio Oscar gurus have decided to play down Jack Nicholson's profile in the acting races.
(Warner Bros.)

After failing to conquer theaters this past week the way Yankee soldiers once took the beaches of Iwo Jima, "Flags of Our Fathers" didn't drop much in the best picture rankings at our new Buzzmeter.

The Buzzmeter ranks the kudos forecasts of our team of stellar Oscarologists: Edward Douglas (ComingSoon.net), Claudia Puig (USA Today), Richard Roeper (Ebert & Roeper), Gene Seymour (Newsday), Art Spiegelman (Rueters), Peter Travers (Rolling Stone), Jeffrey Wells (Hollywood-Elsewhere.com) and, well, me. These are our pundits who piped in a week ago with their initial rankings. This week, five of us offer new, updated predix. Out of those five, three of us (Puig, Travers and me) continue to include "Flags," although it's dropped a rung or two in the overall best-pic lineup. Douglas and Wells didn't list it earlier (they're among the minority of critics who gave it bad reviews) and, of course, still don't.

Currently, "Flags" lands at number four in our overall ranking in the top Oscar race. To check out the Buzzmeter — CLICK HERE!

Once on the Buzzmeter page, make a point of clicking on one of the links marked "Individual Panelist's Rankings" to see our separate forecasts. There's a drop-down menu on top to compare this week's rankings with last week's. Please ignore my predix from last week. When this new gizmo launched we were told that we could change our minds whenever we want (instead of once per week, which is really the case), so I started screwing around with it, trying to see how radically I could skew the composite rankings by pushing longshots up high in a few races at my listings. When I was done playing and tried to enter my real predix, the gizmo wouldn't let me! Ah, well, at least this week I was able to set things right.

By the way, when you're on the main Buzzmeter page, please make a point of clicking on "Meet the Panel" to read the bios of our esteemed contributors.

Please check our rankings every week to see how they change! That's the fun part. We also feature predix of the upcoming Country Music Association Awards and will soon include the Grammys as well.

Many Oscar pundits are declaring that "Flags of Our Fathers" is doomed in the best picture race because of its disappointing performance at the box office. Last weekend Edward Douglas of ComingSoon.net predicted it would earn $16 million. Gitesh Pandya of BoxOfficeGuru.com forecast $13 million. Alas, it pulled in only slightly more than $10 million.

But, wait — that's not bad! "Flags" unfurled nationally in less than 2,000 theaters, earning a respectable $5,400 per screen. That's pretty good for a movie about a downer old subject (World War II) with no superstars in it.

However, Edward drops a bomb on its Oscar hopes, declaring, "'Flags' is out. I just think there are way too many stronger movies out and on the way."

Gitesh disagrees and believes that it's still in the running: "I think Clint Eastwood is academy royalty and the box office performance will mean little. Oscar members will judge it based on its merits."

Actually, Gitesh doesn't find "Flags'" initial box office performance alarming: "Movies like 'Flags' typically have pretty good legs since older adults do not rush out on opening weekend like 'The Grudge' crowd does. So it could do 5 or 6 times its opening weekend gross. Exit polls are pretty good."

However, even if "Flags" does make six times its opening gross, the studio's ultimate net return will be less than half of the movie's production cost. There's no way international ticket sales can make up the difference.

Edward believes it will fail financially: "I don't think it will make back its $90 million budget. Theaters are going to start dropping it like a hot potato in November with things like 'Casino Royale' and 'Happy Feet' offering guaranteed business. It will be hard for DreamWorks to get it back into theaters after that."

As a result, he adds, "I don't think it will be a big player in the Oscars (maybe for cinematography, sound design, production design, etc)."

But that's an important issue — the trans-academy support a movie has across the crafts categories can lift it up to the best picture category even if it's considered a disappointment like "Gangs of New York." This year there aren't that many movies that will have wide academy reach, but "Flags" is one of them. Therefore, I think Gitesh is right: don't count it out yet.

Photo: Did you notice that the L.A. Times' usage of the famous Iwo Jima photo on page one during WWII was featured in "Flags of Our Fathers"? As of Wednesday, the movie had earned $12.8 million domestically. ComingSoon.net predicts it will earn only $7 million this weekend when it expands to 2,190 theaters nationally.
(DreamWorks)

It's just a primer offering an overview survey of the Oscar contest for best actress, but my feature article presents some perspective and trivia that you may not know.

For example, this surprise — my warning to take an ironic possibility quite seriously: Catherine O'Hara as a whacked-out best-actress contender in that snarky spoof of Oscar campaigning, "For Your Consideration."

The big story this year: Not only is the lead actress category more competitive and interesting than the actors' race (finally!), but, as my article notes, "It's a dramatic face-off pitting the usual beauty-pageant contestants against a battery of feisty older gals who seem determined to reclaim the category in the spirit of Bette Davis and Katharine Hepburn."

Read more — CLICK HERE!

Photo: Watch out for Cate Blanchett ("The Good German") in the best actress race! I rank her third in my rundown at the Buzzmeter.
(Warner Bros.)