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