Magazines
CONDITIONING: THE TEARS OF RAMAZAN – Newspaper
The holy month in Pakistan has its own patterns: work is relaxed, charity is abundant and patience in short supply. Another recurring feature is the surge in sporting activity, running late into the night, with padel now joining long-established Ramazan fixtures such as cricket, volleyball and futsal.
Those getting caught up in the excitement often include people who have spent the past 11 months largely sedentary.
As a regular player — balancing volleyball and football alongside cricket — I can attest to the increase in frequency of matches and the intensity that comes with it. This is particularly visible during small tourneys — I had played three volleyball tournaments by the time this went to print — where the competitive spirit tends to take over and people end up jumping higher, hitting harder and diving farther than they usually would. I know I have also been pushing myself despite the recurring, albeit manageable, pain in my wrist and persistent stiffness in several fingers.
This results in more-than-usual strain on a body that is already less hydrated and sleep-deprived from fasting. The question, then, is whether Ramazan and injury risk are meaningfully connected.
>Every year during the holy month, thousands of Pakistanis dust off their racquets, lace up their trainers and head to the nearest padel or volleyball court or cricket ground. The spirit is willing, but the body may not be ready…
NOT THE FAST, BUT THE GAP
The first thing every specialist Eos spoke to was keen to establish is that fasting itself is not the direct culprit.
“Basically, there is no such rise in sports injuries specifically because of fasting,” says Professor Badaruddin Sahito, an orthopaedic surgeon at the Civil Hospital, Karachi. Dr Mansoor Ali Khan, the chair of the orthopaedic department at Aga Khan University Hospital, echoes this: “Injuries are not directly related to fasting,” he tells Eos.
The real issue, they agree, is the sudden and dramatic increase in physical activity by people who have done very little of it for months — or years. “Many people play sports at night, often after many years’ gap,” notes Dr Khan.
Dr Amina Bhatti, a chiropractor, puts it plainly: “It’s not limited to Ramazan. Anyone who suddenly increases their activity level without following a routine will precipitate an injury.”
The Ramazan recreational sportsman — what Prof Sahito calls the “yearly Ramazan sportsman” — is therefore in a category of his own. They are enthusiastic, competitive, typically in their thirties or forties — and wholly unprepared for what they are about to ask their body to do.
WHAT GOES WRONG, AND WHERE
When injuries do occur, they follow recognisable patterns. Soft tissue damage is the most common category: ligament sprains, muscle strains and overuse injuries that accumulate across multiple sessions.
Around the knee, ligament injuries are particularly frequent, as are twisting injuries to the ankle. Tennis and badminton players tend to suffer shoulder problems, specifically rotator cuff injuries, while elbow complaints — the medial pain of golfer’s elbow and the lateral pain of tennis elbow — are also regularly seen.
Padel’s injury picture has its own character — a sport built on lateral movement, sudden stops and overhead shots. “When a player is under-recovered, dehydrated and still attempting to play at full intensity, that’s usually when problems occur,” padel instructor Samad Shajani tells Eos.
Tennis and padel instructor Nameer Shamsi identifies tennis elbow as the single most common complaint he sees, followed by lower back and knee injuries. He also points to a dynamic that is easy to overlook: padel’s social appeal. “The addictive nature of the game means that some people end up over-playing, and the body doesn’t get enough time to recover,” he tells Eos.
Away from the padel courts, a quieter but equally familiar Ramazan scene plays out in parks and open grounds across cities and towns: the neighbourhood volleyball game. Requiring nothing more than a net and enough players, volleyball has been a Ramazan fixture long before padel arrived. But its injury risks are no less real.
Repetitive jumping loads the knees heavily — patellar tendinopathy, or jumper’s knee, is among the most common complaints — while ankle sprains from awkward landings and shoulder strain from spiking and serving are routine.
The risk is compounded by surface: concrete courtyards and uneven ground offer none of the shock absorption of a proper indoor floor, and the near-total absence of any warm-up means conditions for injury are set from the opening serve.
THE DEHYDRATION FACTOR
While fasting alone does not cause injuries, one of its physiological consequences does increase risk. Prolonged dehydration — the result of going 12 to 16 hours without fluid intake — compromises muscle function, slows reaction times and reduces the body’s ability to absorb impact and strain.
“Dehydration definitely increases muscle injuries,” says Dr Khan. Prof Sahito explains the mechanism: glycogen, derived from glucose in the blood, is the primary energy source for working muscles. On depleted reserves, muscles become more susceptible to tears and cramps.
The risk is highest in the hour or two before iftar, when the fast is at its longest and the body’s reserves are lowest. Dr Bhatti’s advice is, therefore, to schedule training at one of two optimal windows: after sehri, when the body is hydrated and fuelled for the hours ahead, or after iftar, once fluid and energy levels have been restored. “The timing of the workout is essential,” she says. “Choose optimal windows when the muscle will perform efficiently.”
CONDITIONING, WARM-UP AND THE AGE FACTOR
Beyond hydration and timing, the specialists converge on a third factor: the almost universal neglect of warm-up, cool-down and basic conditioning. “The injuries I come across are related to poor conditioning and loading joints far more than they are used to,” says Dr Bhatti.
Prof Sahito’s advice to recreational players begins with the same point: do some exercise and take a practice session before rushing directly into sport. Dr Khan’s guidance is equally direct: “Know your level of fitness and proceed slowly.”
This is harder than it sounds — the social atmosphere of group sessions and friendly rivalry creates constant pressure to push beyond what the body is ready for. Dr Bhatti describes a “brain-body disconnect” that develops in group settings, where players override genuine warning signs because others around them appear to be managing fine.
Age compounds everything. “You can’t be 45 or 55 and decide one day you want to change your lifestyle,” she says. “That’s admirable — but it should come with a foundation of activation exercises, stretches, warm-ups and cool-downs built into the routine first.”
THE PRESCRIPTION
The advice from the specialists, taken together, is consistent and not complicated.
Rehydrate thoroughly after iftar before playing. Eat for sustained energy rather than simply breaking the fast with sugar-heavy foods that produce a spike and a crash. Warm up properly — not a token stretch, but genuine activation of the muscles and joints you are about to load. Don’t play five nights in a row if your body has no base fitness to draw on. And if something hurts, stop.
“Keep playing throughout the year,” urges Prof Sahito. “That is the key. Keep playing, and it will keep you healthy and active.”
The Ramazan courts will fill regardless. They always do. But the difference between a month that leaves you fitter and one that leaves you in a brace often comes down to the 15 minutes before play — and the honesty to admit when you have done enough.
As I type this with a sprained wrist, it is something I should perhaps have mulled over sooner.
The writer is a member of staff. X: @hydada83
Published in Dawn, EOS, March 15th, 2026
I finally watched Dhurandhar. For those of you who have been living under a rock and have no idea what Dhurandhar is, it’s one of the highest-grossing Indian movies in the history of Bollywood, with a second part due to come out this summer.
Set in Lyari, Karachi, Dhurandhar explores the Pakistani political scene through the eyes of an oblivious and rather fanciful Indian writer. It has an ensemble cast, including Ranveer Singh, Akshaye Khanna, Sanjay Dutt, Arjun Rampal, Sara Arjun, Rakesh Bedi, Gaurav Gera and Danish Pandor, some of whom play characters inspired by real-life and well-known characters from Karachi.
The trailer showed promise, and the box-office numbers prove one thing conclusively: good marketing, coupled with jingoism, sells.
I won’t get into the absurd story, the hypernationalist Indian propaganda, or the exaggerated importance of Lyari in Pakistan’s political ecosystem. That debate has already been done to death. What I will talk about is something far more basic: the glaring gaps left by director Aditya Dhar and the art direction team, led by production designer Saini S. Johray, with art directors Yogesh Bansode, Choudhari Nilesh and Neeraj Kumar Singh.
Set primarily in early 2000s Karachi, the Bollywood film Dhurandhar is one of the biggest box office earners of all time in India. However, a closer look reveals a film riddled with glaring errors, making it an unintentional comedy of errors
At times, the oversights are so obvious that it seems that, midway through the film, they all just stopped caring about details.
Before someone says it: yes, I’m deliberately not ranting about poor Urdu pronunciation (“Mai Kalochi” instead of Mai Kolachi) or hilariously incorrect wardrobes. I’m also willing to forgive geographical inaccuracies. The film was shot in Thailand; the greenery and water bodies around the Shershah Bridge, which can be seen in the film’s version of Karachi, are a limitation of location. Fine. I can live with that. My real problem here is the complete disregard for time periods and timelines.
The film opens on the day of the Mumbai terror attacks on November 26, 2008, and then jumps back to 2001, staying largely within the 2001–2002 time frame. This is where things go completely off the rails, either intentionally or due to sheer negligence. Add to that a total lack of understanding of what Pakistan had and what it absolutely did not, and you end up with Dhurandhar: a high-budget comedy of errors.
Given the film’s time frame, here are some highlights — or lowlights — of the errors in the movie:
1. A Pakistan police car in 2001 is featured in the film that Pakistan still doesn’t have. Not to mention police sedans that the police simply did not operate at the time. It was old pick-ups and Suzuki Margallas, period.
2. A bike that looks like a cousin of the Honda CBF 125 or its Chinese equivalents, launched globally post-2010 and in Pakistan around 2015. That’s a casual 15-year slip. Similarly, Toyota Vigos (AN10/20), which were launched in 2005, and Revos from 2015 are sprinkled generously for good measure.
3. Jameel Jamali, played by Rakesh Bedi, clearly modelled on politician Nabeel Gabol, who was born and raised in Lyari, is seen driving a Mercedes-Maybach S-Class (W222). Its production began in 2015. The Maybach badge shown didn’t even exist in that form in 2001.
4. Rehman Dakait, played by the now very viral Akshaye Khanna, the leader of the Baloch gang who formed the Peoples Aman Committee, gifts Hamza Ali Mazari (Ranveer Singh), the protagonist — an undercover Indian intelligence agent who is sent to Lyari to stop possible future attacks on his country — a Royal Enfield 650 Twin. This is a bike that was launched in 2018. The film overshoots the timeline by 17 years.
5. Jameel Jamali, upon someone’s mention of Superintendent of Police Chaudhry Aslam (Sanjay Dutt), quips with humour, “Aslam kaun? Atif Aslam?” Atif Aslam’s debut song (as part of the band Jal) Aadat was released in December 2003. Atif Aslam did not exist in the national consciousness in 2001. And let’s not forget Chaudhry Aslam’s intro scene, which features a 2007 Land Cruiser and a 2016 Revo pick-up.
6. Using Rs1,000 currency notes that were introduced in 2005. Pre-2005 notes were larger and looked completely different.
7. An AR-15 style rifle is used in the gang-wars — a platform that only became widely common after the Iraq War, post-2003.
8. Dubai Airport is shown with Terminal 3 and the modern Dubai Airport logo. Terminal 3 opened in 2008.
9. Casually, one day, Hamza picks up Jameel Jamali’s daughter, Yalina, played by Sarah Arjun, from her house in Karachi on his bike and, in the very next scene, they’re in a high-altitude, Indus-side landscape that looks suspiciously like Skardu. The bike is still there, so no, they didn’t fly. Minutes later, he drops her back home. This means they had casually ridden from Karachi to Skardu (over 2,000 km by road) and back in a day on a bike, and still had time for romance.
10. Casio G-Shock watches from 2013–2015 being worn in early-2000s Karachi. A touchscreen iPhone (from the iPhone 4S era) casually appears as well. In fact, this was peak Nokia 3310 phone time. And in a 2009 scene, Jamali is using the same phone his daughter was using in 2001. Eight years later. Same model. Same world. Apparently, phones in this universe age better than humans.
Last but not least, the biggest and funniest goof-up: during a scene, the on-screen text reads “Aqib Ali Zanwari”, while the banner behind clearly says “Asif Ali Zardari.”
This scene passed through the director, editor, production designer, art directors, colourist, post-production, actors during dubbing, and studio approvals. No one thought, “Maybe we should make the name on the banner and the text match”? This is literally a 10-minute post-production fix.
Every other day, I see posts praising the film’s “peak detailing.” People cite things like how trained assassins grip guns versus street criminals. Honestly, that’s laughable. The director and art directors may have their own set of strengths, but attention to detail is not one of them.
Ultimately, Dhurandhar was a disappointment, except for the last half-hour climax and a kick-ass soundtrack, which genuinely worked. The rest felt like a film that wanted applause for realism… while being spectacularly careless about it.
The writer is a filmmaker, creative director and branded content specialist with over 20 years of experience across South Asia and the Middle East. He can be reached at sami.qahar@gmail.com
Published in Dawn, ICON, March 15th, 2026
During our weeks-long binge-watching sessions of nearly 35 titles that led to this year’s predictions, we quickly realised an undeniable fact: unlike the past few disappointing years, the 98th Academy Awards — which air tomorrow — have one of the best nominated line-ups in recent memory.
However, Icon’s latest Oscar predictions may turn out to be the most predictable.
Since the Oscars take place at the tail-end of awards season, we’ve come to the conclusion that, for the betterment of the industry — and the future well-being of the Academy Awards — the ceremony should be pushed ahead of the guild and union awards.
The awards conferred by the British Academy of Film and Television Arts (Bafta), the Directors Guild of America (DGA), the Producers Guild of America (PGA), the Screen Actors Guild (SAG), the Writers Guild of America (WGA), the American Cinema Editors (ACE Eddie), the American Society of Cinematographers (ASC), the Annie Awards and the Visual Effects Society (VES) are useful barometers. But following them slavishly has turned Oscar night into a lacklustre, predictable conclusion to the awards season.
Given that the ceremony is going global and will be streamed on YouTube from 2029, it should have a mandate to shake up both the industry and its viewers.
The 98th Academy Awards will be televised early Monday morning, Pakistan time. In keeping with our yearly tradition, Icon presents the key contenders for the awards and our knowledgeable film reviewers’ predictions…
Irrespective of the predictability, merit shines brightly this year. Having watched all but three nominated titles at the time of writing — we haven’t been able to see Cutting Through Rocks in Documentary Feature (which isn’t available to screen), Kukuho and The Ugly Stepsister (both nominated in Make-up and Hairstyling) — we can say that the line-up is eclectic and baffling at the same time, especially when one looks at a certain title’s nomination counts and asks: did this film actually merit so many nominations?
FOR THE RECORD
Sinners leads with 16 nominations — surpassing Titanic and All About Eve, both at 14. Despite the industry’s dogged insistence to make the film a spoiler in every category, getting nominations does not guarantee accolades.
All About Eve won six, Ben-Hur had 12 and won 11 — the same number of trophies Titanic took home. The only exception in the entire history of the Oscars was The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King which won all 11 awards it was nominated for.
The supernatural thriller is a fine film, but is it brilliant? Not by a long shot. Does it represent balance and celebrate the black community in Hollywood? Absolutely.
Director Ryan Coogler is blessed to have great PR at his disposal that has a knack for distorting facts in his favour. For example, Black Panther was a box-office phenomenon, but it was not the first black superhero film to make its mark. Blade was, and before that there was Robert Townsend’s The Meteor Man in 1993.
The Vista Vision format, much-touted in Sinners’ campaign, is no longer a novelty — Bugonia, One Battle After Another, The Brutalist and Wuthering Heights were all shot in it. Looking closely at the ‘making of’ videos, one finds that many shots and frames have been extensively retouched, expanded and manipulated in post-production. So where precisely does the cinematography — and the film’s large canvas — end and the visual effects (VFX) begin?
Cross-referencing the guild awards narrows the field considerably. In Original Screenplay, Marty Supreme and Sinners are the only repeated titles across the Baftas and the WGA, effectively cancelling out Blue Moon, Sentimental Value and It Was Just an Accident.
In International Film, the Bafta nominees are largely repeated. The Voice of Hind Rajab — the harrowing re-enactment of a Palestinian child whose final moments were broadcast to the world as she was gunned down by the Israel Defence Forces (IDF) — initially felt like the obvious frontrunner. Truthfully, as filmmaking goes, it feels rushed and unpolished.
The win — if it happens — would be more about statement-making than merit. If it doesn’t — Sirāt, It Was Just an Accident and Sentimental Value are stronger contenders — and the winner will tell us exactly where power still tilts in Hollywood.
In Documentary Feature, only Mr Nobody Against Putin and The Perfect Neighbour appeared in both the Baftas and the PGA. Mr Nobody took the Bafta; My Mom Jane — a title not nominated at the Oscars, or anywhere else — took the PGA. The odds automatically favour Mr Nobody, even when a much better film, The Alabama Solution, sits in the line-up.
In an article titled ‘Anonymous Oscar Ballots: Sinners, One Battle After Another, and the Chaos of the Oscar Race’, Variety pulled back the curtain on how certain Oscar voters may think. From this year onwards, the Academy’s screening rooms operate under a new system: members are required to watch all nominated films before voting opens on the digital ballot.
The Academy now has over 10,894 total members, with 9,905 qualified voters. The average voter is a producer, director or actor in their 50s and 60s. Recent diversity initiatives have brought in younger, globally representative members who may already be shifting the vote in International Film, Documentary and acting categories. Whether this shift is enough to upset the old guard’s consensus will be the question of the night.
WHEN THE CURTAINS PART
Considering the above — mirrored by our own analysis and correspondences within Hollywood — the 98th Oscars make for a predictable, perhaps underwhelming night.
The race appears to favour a handful of titles with One Battle After Another, Sinners, Frankenstein — three good, though not great films — and the extraordinary Kpop Demon Hunters sweeping the night. F1, Train Dreams, Sentimental Value, Bugonia, Hamnet and Weapons might win here and there — if they win at all; Bugonia and Train Dreams likely won’t.
So, with these indications, it is hard to muster the enthusiasm to watch the event live. Perhaps by 2029 — with a global broadcast on YouTube and the world’s eyes on the screen — the show will remember that it is supposed to surprise us. In any case, let’s see how many of our predictions hit the target.
BEST PICTURE
Will Win: One Battle After Another
Upset: Sinners
For weeks, the race has been a toss-up between these two. One Battle, about revolution rooted in American counterculture, is exactly the kind of film the industry’s old guard — who once cheered Robert Altman and John Cassavetes — will rally behind. Sinners, pushing for black representation, carries its own cultural momentum. However, One Battle’s PGA, DGA and Bafta wins have all but written the result. The upset, if it comes, will likely be a statement from a new generation of voters.
DIRECTOR
Will Win/Should Win: Paul Thomas Anderson, One Battle After Another
Upset: Ryan Coogler, Sinners
Surprise! Anderson has never won an Oscar. That is an injustice, not a minor oversight. One Battle is a director’s film through and through, and every major directorial award this season has all but locked the win for Anderson. If Coogler wins, it will be from the younger lot’s momentum.
CASTING
Will Win: Sinners
Should Win: Hamnet
Upset: One Battle After Another
Sinners’ casting is arguably its strongest creative achievement. Michael B. Jordan plays twin brothers — Smoke and Stack — two men shaped by the same blood but pulled in opposite directions by ambition and loyalty. The ensemble around him — Hailee Steinfeld, Miles Caton, Delroy Lindo, Wunmi Mosaku — is equally effective as a whole.
Paul Mescal, Jessie Buckley, Emily Watson and others in Hamnet, in Icon’s opinion, earn the should-win because one might not immediately think of these actors for the film, yet they naturally fit the era and tone of Maggie O’Farrell’s novel. The Casting Society of America’s Artios Award and SAG’s Ensemble are the guild indicators here, and they tilt toward Sinners.
ACTOR IN A LEADING ROLE
Will Win: Michael B. Jordan, Sinners
Should Win: Ethan Hawke, Blue Moon
Upset: Leonardo DiCaprio, One Battle After Another
Jordan’s performance is effective, but not the strongest in the line-up. DiCaprio already has an Oscar. In a fair world — and the Oscars are rarely that — Hawke would win. He transforms himself entirely for Blue Moon, playing Lorenz Hart, the lyricist of musical maestro Richard Rodgers, before Rodgers partnered with Hammerstein. Sidelining Hawke has been one of the bigger injustices of this year.
ACTRESS IN A LEADING ROLE
Will Win: Jessie Buckley, Hamnet
Should Win: Rose Byrne, If I Had Legs I’d Kick You
Buckley has wins to back her extraordinary performance, but Byrne’s film is the one that truly haunts the core. If I Had Legs I’d Kick You tells the story of a mother whose gravely ill daughter is confined to a motel when their house is flooded. In different ways, both are prisoners of debilitating circumstances. The camera is locked on Byrne for most of the film, never straying, as she gives a career-defining, deeply layered performance that deserves far more attention than it has received.
ACTOR IN A SUPPORTING ROLE
Will Win: Sean Penn, One Battle After Another
Should Win: Stellan Skarsgård, Sentimental Value
Penn has the campaign’s full weight behind him. It is fine work, but pales beside Skarsgård in Sentimental Value — Joachim Trier’s meticulous and deep exploration of a fractured family. Restrained, precise and heartbreaking, the film does everything quietly… which, in Oscar terms, carries the risk of being overlooked.
ACTRESS IN A SUPPORTING ROLE
Will Win/Should Win: Amy Madigan, Weapons
Upset: Teyana Taylor, One Battle After Another
Taylor’s Perfidia Beverly Hills is a chaotic, kinetic force that practically propels the film with her own energy. Madigan’s performance in Weapons, where she plays a modern-day witch, is something rarer: unsettling, creepy and controlled — the kind of work that lingers for days, if not weeks.
ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY
Will Win: Sinners
Should Win: Sentimental Value
Strange as it may be, only Sinners and Marty Supreme carry over from the Baftas to the WGA, making it effectively a two-horse race… with Marty trailing. Marty is an excellently written study of a deeply flawed, entirely self-absorbed, destructive character, but it doesn’t carry the emotional weight of Sentimental Value — a screenplay built on the painful, realistic and fractured lives of a family that is — yet isn’t — broken.
Irrespective of the predictability, merit shines brightly this year. Having watched all but three nominated titles at the time of writing, we can say that the line-up is eclectic and baffling at the same time, especially when one looks at a certain title’s nomination counts and asks: did this film actually merit so many nominations?
ADAPTED SCREENPLAY
Will Win: One Battle After Another
Should Win: Train Dreams, Hamnet, Bugonia
After Bafta, WGA and USC Scripter wins, there is little room for discussion. Our personal preferences lie with the rest: Train Dreams — spare and quietly devastating; Hamnet, stirring and grounded; Bugonia, inventive to the hilt. The Academy will likely disagree.
CINEMATOGRAPHY
Will Win: One Battle After Another
Should Win: Train Dreams
Upset: Sinners
After Bafta, ASC and SOC (Society of Camera Operators) wins, One Battle is unstoppable. Train Dreams, however, is the film one should be talking about. It is among the best-shot films of the decade. Sinners’ Vista Vision push has been marketed relentlessly but, given the extent of its post-production frame manipulation, the claim to pure cinematography is shakier than what the momentum suggests.
EDITING
Will Win: One Battle After Another or Sinners
Should Win: F1
The editing race mirrors Best Picture — and will likely be a toss-up between the two frontrunners. F1 should have led the race (and maybe it still might). Anyone with film editing experience will tell you that it is a masterclass of emotion and pace balanced down to the split-second cut.
PRODUCTION DESIGN
Will Win/Should Win: Frankenstein
Upset: Sinners
Frankenstein, like all of Guillermo Del Toro’s films, builds a complete gothic world from the ground up — laboratory interiors, the creature’s desolate environments and a richly atmospheric recreation of 19th century Europe. It won the Bafta and the Art Directors Guild (ADG) period category, the most direct predictor for this Oscar. Sinners’ production design — the meticulous recreation of the 1930s Mississippi Delta juke joints and rural landscapes — is accomplished work. The competition is essentially realism versus fantastic world-building. The fantastic usually wins.
COSTUME DESIGN
Will Win: Frankenstein
Should Win: Hamnet
Upset: Sinners
Frankenstein’s Bafta win and CDGA (Costume Designers Guild) period category victory make it the frontrunner; it is also one of our favourites, alongside Hamnet. The latter inches ahead in our books — though that may not be the case when the envelope opens tomorrow.
MAKE-UP AND HAIRSTYLING
Will Win/Should Win: Frankenstein
Upset: Sinners
The Creature is a work of art in Frankenstein. The Make-up Artists and Hair Stylists Guild (MUAHS) and Bafta both confirmed it with their trophies. Historically, the Academy has a long, consistent record of rewarding prosthetic-heavy physical transformations in this category — Vice, Darkest Hour and Dallas Buyers Club. Frankenstein continues that lineage. Sinners, with its period styling, may however upset the race.
VISUAL EFFECTS
Will Win/Should Win: Avatar: Fire and Ash
Upset: Sinners
One of the year’s strongest, most justifiably nominated categories. Avatar: Fire and Ash has won both the VES Photoreal Feature category and a Bafta. Sinners may put a spanner in the works because of its VES Photoreal Supporting win. Like most of Sinners’ “potential upsets”, we doubt it.
SOUND
Will Win: F1
Should Win: Sirāt
Upset: Sinners
The Cinema Audio Society (CAS) and Motion Picture Sound Editors (MPSE) guild awards are the key predictors here, and both tilt toward F1. The film — though an Apple release — was built as a theatrical experience from the ground up. The sound design — engine roars, tyresqueals, the radio crackle of the pit lane — is a chef’s kiss. Sirāt, surprisingly, is an unexpected contender — a film in which sound is literally a character in the narrative. If Sinners wins, we’ll be upset.
ORIGINAL SCORE
Will Win/Should Win: Sinners
The score of Sinners is perhaps the film’s greatest achievement. The Delta blues, gospel and a contemporary mix by executive producer and composer Ludwig Göransson (Oppenheimer, Black Panther — he won for both) is central to the film’s identity. The Bafta confirms the lead — and deservedly so. Remove the music and the film loses its soul.
ORIGINAL SONG
Will Win/Should Win: ‘Golden’, Kpop Demon Hunters
Upset: ‘I Lied to You’, Sinners
There is no mistaking ‘Golden’ as a simple K-pop entry. It is technically complex, genuinely addictive, and engineered to bridge K-pop and American pop in a way that feels native to both. The other contenders — Train Dreams and its namesake song, ‘I Lied to You’ (Sinners), and ‘Sweet Dreams of Joy’ (Viva Verdi!) — make excellent company.
ANIMATED FEATURE FILM
Will Win: Kpop Demon Hunters
Kpop Demon Hunters is the rare crossover entry that arrives with a globally passionate fanbase extending well beyond the animation circuit. With wins at the Annie Awards — the Oscars of the animation world— does one need to say more? Yes:the film is fantastic, both in its experience and in its technical craft.
INTERNATIONAL FEATURE FILM
Will Win: Sentimental Value
Should Win: The Voice of Hind Rajab
Upset: Sirāt
Sentimental Value edges ahead by our estimate. Sirāt has earned recognition in guilds where international titles rarely appear; only a fool would dismiss it outright. The Voice of Hind Rajab had genuine traction earlier — the keyword here is had. The film feels unpolished, and its subject matter deserved a firmer directorial hand to refine the pace and land the emotion. A Hind Rajab win would be a statement of the highest order. It would tell us where Hollywood’s conscience truly resides.
DOCUMENTARY FEATURE
Will Win: Mr Nobody Against Putin
Should Win: The Alabama Solution
Upset: The Perfect Neighbour
Mr Nobody Against Putin follows the relentless campaign of a lone activist against the full machinery of the Russian state. It won a Bafta. The Perfect Neighbour uses police bodycam footage to tell the story of a two-year dispute in Ocala, Florida, that culminates in white resident Susan Lorincz fatally shooting her black neighbour, Ajike Owens, through a locked door. It is competent and unlike similar documentaries that surface year-round. However, The Alabama Solution is a different ballgame — a searing, haunting account of the politically corrupt, deeply unjust conditions inside Alabama’s prisons, and how the predominantly black inmate community attempts to dismantle the system from within. It should win.
Whatever the case, we’ll find out one way or another in less than a day’s time.
The writers are Icon’s film reviewers goes, it feels rushed and unpolished.
The win — if it happens — would be more about statement-making than merit. If it doesn’t — Sirāt, It Was Just an Accident and Sentimental Value are stronger contenders — and the winner will tell us exactly where power still tilts in Hollywood.
In Documentary Feature, only Mr Nobody Against Putin and The Perfect Neighbour appeared in both the Baftas and the PGA. Mr Nobody took the Bafta; My Mom Jane — a title not nominated at the Oscars, or anywhere else — took the PGA. The odds automatically favour Mr Nobody, even when a much better film, The Alabama Solution, sits in the line-up.
In an article titled ‘Anonymous Oscar Ballots: Sinners, One Battle After Another, and the Chaos of the Oscar Race’, Variety pulled back the curtain on how certain Oscar voters may think. From this year onwards, the Academy’s screening rooms operate under a new system: members are required to watch all nominated films before voting opens on the digital ballot.
The Academy now has over 10,894 total members, with 9,905 qualified voters. The average voter is a producer, director or actor in their 50s and 60s. Recent diversity initiatives have brought in younger, globally representative members who may already be shifting the vote in International Film, Documentary and acting categories. Whether this shift is enough to upset the old guard’s consensus will be the question of the night.
WHEN THE CURTAINS PART
Considering the above — mirrored by our own analysis and correspondences within Hollywood — the 98th Oscars make for a predictable, perhaps underwhelming night.
The race appears to favour a handful of titles with One Battle After Another, Sinners, Frankenstein — three good, though not great films — and the extraordinary Kpop Demon Hunters sweeping the night. F1, Train Dreams, Sentimental Value, Bugonia, Hamnet and Weapons might win here and there — if they win at all; Bugonia and Train Dreams likely won’t.
So, with these indications, it is hard to muster the enthusiasm to watch the event live. Perhaps by 2029 — with a global broadcast on YouTube and the world’s eyes on the screen — the show will remember that it is supposed to surprise us. In any case, let’s see how many of our predictions hit the target.
BEST PICTURE
Will Win: One Battle After Another
Upset: Sinners
For weeks, the race has been a toss-up between these two. One Battle, about revolution rooted in American counterculture, is exactly the kind of film the industry’s old guard — who once cheered Robert Altman and John Cassavetes — will rally behind. Sinners, pushing for black representation, carries its own cultural momentum. However, One Battle’s PGA, DGA and Bafta wins have all but written the result. The upset, if it comes, will likely be a statement from a new generation of voters.
DIRECTOR
Will Win/Should Win: Paul Thomas Anderson, One Battle After Another
Upset: Ryan Coogler, Sinners
Surprise! Anderson has never won an Oscar. That is an injustice, not a minor oversight. One Battle is a director’s film through and through, and every major directorial award this season has all but locked the win for Anderson. If Coogler wins, it will be from the younger lot’s momentum.
CASTING
Will Win: Sinners
Should Win: Hamnet
Upset: One Battle After Another
Sinners’ casting is arguably its strongest creative achievement. Michael B. Jordan plays twin brothers — Smoke and Stack — two men shaped by the same blood but pulled in opposite directions by ambition and loyalty. The ensemble around him — Hailee Steinfeld, Miles Caton, Delroy Lindo, Wunmi Mosaku — is equally effective as a whole.
Paul Mescal, Jessie Buckley, Emily Watson and others in Hamnet, in Icon’s opinion, earn the should-win because one might not immediately think of these actors for the film, yet they naturally fit the era and tone of Maggie O’Farrell’s novel. The Casting Society of America’s Artios Award and SAG’s Ensemble are the guild indicators here, and they tilt toward Sinners.
ACTOR IN A LEADING ROLE
Will Win: Michael B. Jordan, Sinners
Should Win: Ethan Hawke, Blue Moon
Upset: Leonardo DiCaprio, One Battle After Another
Jordan’s performance is effective, but not the strongest in the line-up. DiCaprio already has an Oscar. In a fair world — and the Oscars are rarely that — Hawke would win. He transforms himself entirely for Blue Moon, playing Lorenz Hart, the lyricist of musical maestro Richard Rodgers, before Rodgers partnered with Hammerstein. Sidelining Hawke has been one of the bigger injustices of this year.
ACTRESS IN A LEADING ROLE
Will Win: Jessie Buckley, Hamnet
Should Win: Rose Byrne, If I Had Legs I’d Kick You
Buckley has wins to back her extraordinary performance, but Byrne’s film is the one that truly haunts the core. If I Had Legs I’d Kick You tells the story of a mother whose gravely ill daughter is confined to a motel when their house is flooded. In different ways, both are prisoners of debilitating circumstances. The camera is locked on Byrne for most of the film, never straying, as she gives a career-defining, deeply layered performance that deserves far more attention than it has received.
ACTOR IN A SUPPORTING ROLE
Will Win: Sean Penn, One Battle After Another
Should Win: Stellan Skarsgård, Sentimental Value
Penn has the campaign’s full weight behind him. It is fine work, but pales beside Skarsgård in Sentimental Value — Joachim Trier’s meticulous and deep exploration of a fractured family. Restrained, precise and heartbreaking, the film does everything quietly… which, in Oscar terms, carries the risk of being overlooked.
ACTRESS IN A SUPPORTING ROLE
Will Win/Should Win: Amy Madigan, Weapons
Upset: Teyana Taylor, One Battle After Another
Taylor’s Perfidia Beverly Hills is a chaotic, kinetic force that practically propels the film with her own energy. Madigan’s performance in Weapons, where she plays a modern-day witch, is something rarer: unsettling, creepy and controlled — the kind of work that lingers for days, if not weeks.
ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY
Will Win: Sinners
Should Win: Sentimental Value
Strange as it may be, only Sinners and Marty Supreme carry over from the Baftas to the WGA, making it effectively a two-horse race… with Marty trailing. Marty is an excellently written study of a deeply flawed, entirely self-absorbed, destructive character, but it doesn’t carry the emotional weight of Sentimental Value — a screenplay built on the painful, realistic and fractured lives of a family that is — yet isn’t — broken.
ADAPTED SCREENPLAY
Will Win: One Battle After Another
Should Win: Train Dreams, Hamnet, Bugonia
After Bafta, WGA and USC Scripter wins, there is little room for discussion. Our personal preferences lie with the rest: Train Dreams — spare and quietly devastating; Hamnet, stirring and grounded; Bugonia, inventive to the hilt. The Academy will likely disagree.
CINEMATOGRAPHY
Will Win: One Battle After Another
Should Win: Train Dreams
Upset: Sinners
After Bafta, ASC and SOC (Society of Camera Operators) wins, One Battle is unstoppable. Train Dreams, however, is the film one should be talking about. It is among the best-shot films of the decade. Sinners’ Vista Vision push has been marketed relentlessly but, given the extent of its post-production frame manipulation, the claim to pure cinematography is shakier than what the momentum suggests.
EDITING
Will Win: One Battle After Another or Sinners
Should Win: F1
The editing race mirrors Best Picture — and will likely be a toss-up between the two frontrunners. F1 should have led the race (and maybe it still might). Anyone with film editing experience will tell you that it is a masterclass of emotion and pace balanced down to the split-second cut.
PRODUCTION DESIGN
Will Win/Should Win: Frankenstein
Upset: Sinners
Frankenstein, like all of Guillermo Del Toro’s films, builds a complete gothic world from the ground up — laboratory interiors, the creature’s desolate environments and a richly atmospheric recreation of 19th century Europe. It won the Bafta and the Art Directors Guild (ADG) period category, the most direct predictor for this Oscar. Sinners’ production design — the meticulous recreation of the 1930s Mississippi Delta juke joints and rural landscapes — is accomplished work. The competition is essentially realism versus fantastic world-building. The fantastic usually wins.
COSTUME DESIGN
Will Win: Frankenstein
Should Win: Hamnet
Upset: Sinners
Frankenstein’s Bafta win and CDGA (Costume Designers Guild) period category victory make it the frontrunner; it is also one of our favourites, alongside Hamnet. The latter inches ahead in our books — though that may not be the case when the envelope opens tomorrow.
MAKE-UP AND HAIRSTYLING
Will Win/Should Win: Frankenstein
Upset: Sinners
The Creature is a work of art in Frankenstein. The Make-up Artists and Hair Stylists Guild (MUAHS) and Bafta both confirmed it with their trophies. Historically, the Academy has a long, consistent record of rewarding prosthetic-heavy physical transformations in this category — Vice, Darkest Hour and Dallas Buyers Club. Frankenstein continues that lineage. Sinners, with its period styling, may however upset the race.
VISUAL EFFECTS
Will Win/Should Win: Avatar: Fire and Ash
Upset: Sinners
One of the year’s strongest, most justifiably nominated categories. Avatar: Fire and Ash has won both the VES Photoreal Feature category and a Bafta. Sinners may put a spanner in the works because of its VES Photoreal Supporting win. Like most of Sinners’ “potential upsets”, we doubt it.
SOUND
Will Win: F1
Should Win: Sirāt
Upset: Sinners
The Cinema Audio Society (CAS) and Motion Picture Sound Editors (MPSE) guild awards are the key predictors here, and both tilt toward F1. The film — though an Apple release — was built as a theatrical experience from the ground up. The sound design — engine roars, tyresqueals, the radio crackle of the pit lane — is a chef’s kiss. Sirāt, surprisingly, is an unexpected contender — a film in which sound is literally a character in the narrative. If Sinners wins, we’ll be upset.
ORIGINAL SCORE
Will Win/Should Win: Sinners
The score of Sinners is perhaps the film’s greatest achievement. The Delta blues, gospel and a contemporary mix by executive producer and composer Ludwig Göransson (Oppenheimer, Black Panther — he won for both) is central to the film’s identity. The Bafta confirms the lead — and deservedly so. Remove the music and the film loses its soul.
ORIGINAL SONG
Will Win/Should Win: ‘Golden’, Kpop Demon Hunters
Upset: ‘I Lied to You’, Sinners
There is no mistaking ‘Golden’ as a simple K-pop entry. It is technically complex, genuinely addictive, and engineered to bridge K-pop and American pop in a way that feels native to both. The other contenders — Train Dreams and its namesake song, ‘I Lied to You’ (Sinners), and ‘Sweet Dreams of Joy’ (Viva Verdi!) — make excellent company.
ANIMATED FEATURE FILM
Will Win: Kpop Demon Hunters
Kpop Demon Hunters is the rare crossover entry that arrives with a globally passionate fanbase extending well beyond the animation circuit. With wins at the Annie Awards — the Oscars of the animation world— does one need to say more? Yes: the film is fantastic, both in its experience and in its technical craft.
INTERNATIONAL FEATURE FILM
Will Win: Sentimental Value
Should Win: The Voice of Hind Rajab
Upset: Sirāt
Sentimental Value edges ahead by our estimate. Sirāt has earned recognition in guilds where international titles rarely appear; only a fool would dismiss it outright. The Voice of Hind Rajab had genuine traction earlier — the keyword here is had. The film feels unpolished, and its subject matter deserved a firmer directorial hand to refine the pace and land the emotion. A Hind Rajab win would be a statement of the highest order. It would tell us where Hollywood’s conscience truly resides.
DOCUMENTARY FEATURE
Will Win: Mr Nobody Against Putin
Should Win: The Alabama Solution
Upset: The Perfect Neighbour
Mr Nobody Against Putin follows the relentless campaign of a lone activist against the full machinery of the Russian state. It won a Bafta. The Perfect Neighbour uses police bodycam footage to tell the story of a two-year dispute in Ocala, Florida, that culminates in white resident Susan Lorincz fatally shooting her black neighbour, Ajike Owens, through a locked door. It is competent and unlike similar documentaries that surface year-round. However, The Alabama Solution is a different ballgame — a searing, haunting account of the politically corrupt, deeply unjust conditions inside Alabama’s prisons, and how the predominantly black inmate community attempts to dismantle the system from within. It should win.
Whatever the case, we’ll find out one way or another in less than a day’s time.
The writers are Icon’s film reviewers
Published in Dawn, ICON, March 15th, 2026
The bilateral relationship between the United States and Israel has long been characterised as an enduring alliance. Yet, it remains arguably the most contentious partnership in modern geopolitical history. To many observers, this bond is viewed as a primary source of destabilisation in the Middle East, providing a perpetual spark for conflict.
In the early months of this year, this partnership has reached a volatile peak. While historically framed as a marriage of shared ‘democratic values’ and common security interests, the alliance has evolved into a radical ideological project, personified by a messianic theological synergy between US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
The theological dimension of the relationship has dramatically shifted from a matter of private belief to a central pillar of statecraft and military justification. This ‘sacralisation’ of foreign policy is driven by a convergence of interests between Netanyahu’s religious-nationalist coalition and Trump’s second term administration, which relies heavily on the support of Christian-Evangelical and Zionist votes.
Historically, though, the American commitment to a Zionist state was far from absolute. According to the American political scientist Robert O. Freedman, US President Woodrow Wilson (1913–21) offered little more than symbolic gestures toward the Zionist movement.
The US-Israel partnership has evolved from a strategic Cold War alliance into a religiously infused political project that is holding the Middle East hostage
Franklin D. Roosevelt (1933–45) was hesitant to support the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine. He prioritised the security of oil interests through his growing relationship with the then newly formed Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
According to Freedman, had Roosevelt survived past 1945, the creation of Israel might never have received American backing. It was Roosevelt’s successor, Harry S. Truman (1945–53), who, against the stern counsel of his secretary of state, recognised Israel at the time of its creation in 1948.
Even then, the relationship between the two countries remained cool. In 1956, President Dwight D. Eisenhower (1953–61) famously forced Israel, alongside Britain and France, to withdraw their troops from Egypt during the Suez Crisis. Eisenhower threatened Israel with severe economic sanctions if it failed to comply.
The presidency of John F. Kennedy (1961–63) was also marked by a deep-seated suspicion towards Israel. The most significant point of contention was the discovery of a nuclear reactor by the US at Dimona in Israel. Kennedy issued an ultimatum that American support to Israel could be “seriously jeopardised” if it did not allow regular inspections of the Dimona site. Kennedy brokered a deal in 1962 to sell Hawk anti-aircraft missiles to Israel, marking the first major US arms sale to the country. This was Kennedy offering a carrot to ensure cooperation on the nuclear issue.
According to declassified documents from the National Security Archive in the US, Israeli officials engaged in elaborate deceptions, such as disguising parts of the Dimona site to prevent American inspectors from discovering the true nature of Israel’s weapons programme. However, the US was also becoming increasingly concerned about the growing influence of the Soviet Union in Arab countries, such as Iraq, Syria, Egypt and the erstwhile South Yemen, and within most anti-Israel Palestinian groups.
A definitive turn in the US-Israel relationship occurred following the 1967 Six-Day War, in which Israel defeated the Soviet-backed forces of Egypt and Syria. This is when the US started to view Israel as a Cold War asset and ‘special ally.’
By the early 1980s, military and intelligence cooperation between the two countries had become deeply entrenched, though not without some friction. A report in The Washington Post in January 1982 highlighted that Israeli intelligence agencies had engaged in the bugging, wiretapping and bribery of American government employees to secure sensitive data. But despite such episodes, the strategic ‘blind support’ provided by the US to Israel continued to grow, often bypassing the pragmatism that governs relations between most nation states.
In 2026, the partnership has moved beyond mere realpolitik into the realm of a ‘civilisational crusade.’ This shift is most evident in the rhetoric of Trump and Netanyahu. Trump has increasingly framed military action as a struggle between ‘civilisation and barbarism’, frequently utilising biblical language to justify unilateral strikes and bypass Congressional oversight.
Netanyahu, cast by Trump as a ‘divine wartime leader’, has mirrored this sentiment. The Times of Israel recently quoted Netanyahu as describing the current war by the US and Israel against Iran as a messianic mission to “extinguish darkness and preserve the light of the West.”
This religious framing by Trump and Nethanyahu serves a dual purpose. It solidifies both leaders’ respective populist bases through Judeo-Christian identity politics while providing a moral gloss to operations that ignore international law. The apex of this collaboration is Operation Epic Fury, the massive joint military offensive launched in February this year against Iran. The operation has targeted the Iranian leadership and its infrastructure with multiple strikes, killing thousands of Iranians.
Iran’s subsequent retaliation has been swift, involving ballistic missile swarms against Israel and at US bases in Bahrain, Qatar and the UAE. Despite the military ‘successes’ touted by Washington and Tel Aviv, the alliance is facing a profound crisis of legitimacy at home. For the first time in the history of modern Middle Eastern conflicts, American domestic sentiment has seen a reversal. A recent Gallup poll revealed that 41 percent of Americans now express more sympathy for Palestinians, compared to just 36 percent for Israelis.
This shift is driven largely by younger demographics, who view the conflict through the lens of human rights. The furious nature of recent Israeli military actions, combined with the heavy-handed religious rhetoric of the Trump administration, is failing to resonate with the still largely secular polity in the US.
The US-Israel relationship has transformed from a cautious partnership into a full-scale regional ‘crusade’, driven by personal and religious agendas. While the alliance currently wields unprecedented military power, its reliance on messianic fervour and unilateral force has continued to isolate it from traditional allies.
Criminal charges hovering over Trump and Netanyahu are making both men desperate to emerge as ‘heroes’ from their war against Iran. But even if the alliance ‘wins’, it will be a pyrrhic victory, because the future of the relationship may no longer depend on shared strategic necessity. Instead, it will depend on whether it can survive the internal and external fallouts of its own making.
Trump and Netanyahu might be curating a new world, but it could be one which may not have any room for its curators.
Published in Dawn, EOS, May 15th, 2026
ایران نے بھارت کے دو بحری جہازوں کو آبنائے ہرمز سے گزرنے کی اجازت دے دی
BLOOPER REEL: SO MUCH FOR ‘PEAK DETAILING’
وزیراعلیٰ پنجاب کلائمٹ لیڈر شپ ڈویلپمنٹ انٹرن شپ پروگرام کا آغاز
Story Time: Culinary Disasters – Newspaper
PRIME TIME: THE RAMAZAN EXCEPTION – Newspaper
Ali Ansari On Falling in Love With More Than One Person
-
Magazines1 week agoStory Time: Culinary Disasters – Newspaper
-
Magazines2 weeks ago
PRIME TIME: THE RAMAZAN EXCEPTION – Newspaper
-
Entertainment2 weeks ago
Ali Ansari On Falling in Love With More Than One Person
-
Sports2 weeks ago
Samson’s 97 puts India into T20 World Cup semi-final against England – Sport
-
Business2 weeks ago
Privatisation Commission board recommends Fauji Fertiliser’s inclusion in consortium that won PIA auction – Pakistan
-
Magazines2 weeks ago
THE ICON INTERVIEW: THE FUTURE’S ALWAYS BRIGHT FOR HIM – Newspaper
-
Sports1 week ago
Bangladesh recall Litton, Afif for Pakistan ODI series – Sport
-
Sports2 weeks ago
Haris among 14 Pakistanis on The Hundred final list – Sport