The last couple of years of awards circuits have seen predictable sweeps for Oscar Best Picture winners, but predicting what will win this year has not been quite as easy.

Awards Patterns

What is one thing Everything Everywhere All at Once and Oppenheimer have in common? Of course, the two films are both Academy Award winners in the Best Picture category, but even more similarly, both of the films had been predicted to win the Academy’s top prize well in advance of their respective live ceremonies. 

The last two years of film awards have seen predictable wins across several categories. These wins can be traced back through other award ceremonies throughout a given awards season, such as the Golden Globes, the Critics’ Choice Awards, the BAFTAs and the union awards like the Screen Actors Guild or the Directors Guild of America. 

The Best Picture winner of 2024, Christopher Nolan’s Oppenheimer, was unanimously predicted to take home the Academy’s top prize after sweeping the Golden Globes, Critics’ Choice, BAFTAs, Screen Actors’ Guild and Directors’ Guild.

2022’s winner, the low-budget Sundance success CODA, wasn’t even on awards insiders’ radar as a front-runner until roughly a month before the Oscars, when it picked up traction by winning SAG’s Outstanding Performance by a Cast in a Motion Picture award. Often referred to as Best Ensemble, this SAG award has become an increasingly popular indication of a film’s potential to take home the Academy’s Best Picture award.

In 30 years of the SAG Awards, 15 winners for Best Cast Ensemble have won the Oscar for Best Picture. In the past three years, the winners of Best Cast Ensemble also won Best Picture. 

The Academy’s Voting Process

The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Science voting body is composed of over 10,500 members who vote across 18 different branches. These branches include directing, cinematography, film editing, hair and makeup, costume design, sound and more for the 23 awards distributed at the ceremony.

Nominations are mostly determined by members of the corresponding branch, meaning actors nominating actors and editors nominating editors.  However, all active members of the Academy are invited to vote for both nominees and winners for Best Picture.

The Academy utilizes a preferential voting system where voting members rank the nominees from one to ten, with one being their favorite and ten being their least favorite. The film that gets 50% or more of the votes is deemed the winner.

If a movie doesn’t receive 50% of votes, the one with the fewest votes is eliminated and the members who voted with that film as their top choice have their votes redistributed to the film that was next on their list. This process repeats until one movie gets 50% or more of all the votes.

What Determines the Winners

Awards analysts comb through years’ worth of Oscar data and pull numbers that compare similarly timed releases or campaign budgets, the success of festival runs, voter biases and more to predict the outcome of a film’s success in the awards season. There is no perfect combination of factors that produce a perfect Best Picture-winning movie, but there are some patterns that Academy voters tend to lean towards.

The term “Oscar bait” often gets thrown around in the film community to describe films that seem to have been produced and marketed with Oscar voting biases in mind. These films often have star-studded casts, sparkling narratives that follow patterns of previous winners, ambitious directorial choices and huge marketing budgets.

While “Oscar bait” films might appear to be threats, they often don’t find Oscar success outside of their nominations, which is sometimes the only goal. A new threat has been on the horizon in the last couple of years, which is that of the “legacy award.” This idea of the “legacy award” revolves around the thought that specific performers or filmmakers are deserving of an Academy Award, just maybe not for the particular project they were nominated for.

These awards are typically associated with acting awards, but the trend in awarding industry veterans with Academy Awards for the sake of their career achievement has sparked conversations about whether this could become a pattern that emerges outside of the acting categories.

Certain trends point to the direction of what Academy voters like in a Best Picture winner. In terms of genre, there is often a preference for dramas, historical dramas, dark comedies, war movies, musicals and biopics. For subject matter, voters seem to enjoy movies about the film industry, movies about racism that are palatable for white audiences or stories of treasured cultural icons.

An issue among voting members that can prohibit a film from reaching its fullest potential as a Best Picture winner is that many voters typically don’t watch every movie that is nominated. Two Academy voters anonymously revealed to the Los Angeles Times in 2014 that they didn’t watch the year’s Best Picture winner, 12 Years a Slave, but voted for the film anyway, noting the film’s social relevance and their feelings of obligation to vote for it.

Academy members are supposed to view all the movies in the categories they are eligible to vote in, but there are a variety of factors that prevent voters from seeing all the nominees, such as limited distribution or busy schedules.

Most disappointingly, some voters forgo considering work altogether that they don’t see as the right fit for the award. A Vulture poll from 2018 assessed incoming Academy voters’ mindsets surrounding the Best Picture-nominated film Get Out and touched on older voters’ hesitancy to even watch the film out of concern for its impact on future nominated films. 

The Academy has rigorous voting and campaigning regulations in place that should ensure proper voting, but Hollywood always has its secrets, and Academy members will notoriously try and bend rules where they see fit. A popular tactic that has become extremely relevant within the last 30 years is For Your Consideration screenings. In addition to Academy-regulated screenings, FYC campaigns also include mailing digital screeners directly to voters, hosting live and virtual FYC screenings and, of course, harnessing the power of social media.

Special screenings can often be arranged by what the Academy’s Awards Campaign Promotional Regulations refer to as “motion picture companies,” which are defined as studios, production companies, distributors, public-relations firms, agencies, management companies and additional companies contracted to promote eligible films. Motion picture companies host screenings for films in consideration, both for nominations and for wins, across the world with the intention of having their films seen by both voting members and fans. These screenings often include Q&As with the filmmakers and film talent.

Harvey Weinstein pioneered awards campaigning in the late 1990s by taking a political approach to promote Daniel Day-Lewis’ performance in his film My Left Foot. From holding screenings at the Capitol to calling voters directly to ensure they had received their screener tapes, no aspect of this campaign was left unthought –– and it worked. Since then, awards campaign budgets have become a huge aspect of marketing a film for awards consideration.

2025: The Odd Year

2025 has probably had the least predictable awards season in the last few years. From poor distribution to scandals, it has been a noticeably different year for the industry.

Many of the Best Picture nominees faced very limited theatrical rollouts, meaning that fewer people saw them and, in turn, fewer people took to social media to discuss them and generate excitement.

Brazilian biopic I’m Still Here was only released in the U.S. on January 17, the same day nomination voting ended, while “Wicked” had been going strong in theaters worldwide since Thanksgiving.

Scandals have also emerged, particularly surrounding the use of artificial intelligence in two Best Picture-nominated films and actors’ offensive posts on social media. These controversies have sparked an online debate that has made film lovers wonder if online conversations truly hold weight in voting members’ opinions. 

On February 4, Variety spoke with three Academy voters about Karla Sofía Gascón’s hateful online posts and was met with staggeringly different opinions on whether or not factors outside of a film’s content will impact their vote. Opinions ranged from wanting to separate the actress’ outside actions from the film’s content to directly associating her posts with the film’s story.

“Category fraud,” a phrase referring to a misplaced nomination in an acting category, has also been called into question. There is some concern about Kieran Culkin’s Best Supporting Actor-nominated performance in A Real Pain and Zoe Saldaña’s Best Supporting Actress-nominated performance in Emilia Pérez. 

Given both actors’ high amount of screen time and lines in each of their respective films, it is widely speculated that they were nominated in supporting acting categories so they would stand a better chance at taking home an Oscar.

All of these factors and more have made for one of the most intriguing awards seasons in recent years. There’s no real telling of what will happen at this year’s ceremony on Sunday, March 2, but with competition as stiff as this one, there is certainly plenty of room for surprises.

The Best Picture Nominees of 2025

Anora

Sean Baker’s sex worker Cinderella story, Anora kicked off this year’s awards conversation with a bang by winning the Palme d’Or at the Cannes Film Festival in May 2024.

This marked distributor Neon’s fifth consecutive win of the top prize at Cannes, throwing Sean Baker and his cast of mostly unknown actors into the spotlight and earning them six Academy Award nominations.

Lead actress Mikey Madison revealed in Variety’s Actors on Actors series that, per her request, there was not an intimacy coordinator present on set, which many fans found shocking considering the amount of sexual content in the film.

Despite this, Anora is currently one of awards analysts’ top choices to take home the Best Picture award.

The Brutalist

Of all of this year’s nominees, Brady Corbet’s The Brutalist feels very in line with what one might expect from an Academy Best Picture winner. Starting off with a coveted, and successful, premiere at the Venice Film Festival, The Brutalist was an immediate attention-grabber for this season.

This fictional historical drama has a staggering 215-minute runtime, split in half by a 15-minute intermission, but it has been praised for its use of its runtime. Starring Adrien Brody as a Hungarian architect who immigrated to the United States, this decades-sweeping narrative is right up the alley of voter-favorite genre and narrative choices.

Recently, the film has been under fire for its use of artificial intelligence. The film’s editor, Dávid Jancsó, revealed in an interview with the technology magazine Red Shark News that the program Respeecher was used to improve the quality of Hungarian language dialogue between the film’s two stars, Brody and Felicity Jones. Jancsó also revealed that The Brutalist, which has been lauded for its highly crafted production design, also used generative AI in its renderings of Brody’s character’s architectural drawings.

What was once considered the season’s front-runner has now seriously diminished in confidence as conversations continue to emerge about the use and acknowledgment of AI in the film industry.

A Complete Unknown

Telling the story of a beloved genre-shifting musical icon, James Mangold’s A Complete Unknown almost feels like it’s too safe of a choice for Best Picture, but Bob Dylan tends to always exceed expectations.

Timothée Chalamet portrays Dylan in an ode to the musician’s upbringing in folk music and lyricism into his transition to rock.

Mangold is the sort of director who has had a substantial career that the industry has always felt inclined toward, so the Best Picture nomination A Complete Unknown received can feel a bit like a legacy award in a way. 

For a biopic, a genre known for its frequent lack of fresh angles, this film stands out from its predecessors and is serious competition. It centers on Dylan and Joan Baez’s relationship at the forefront of their careers, emphasizing the impact the two had on one another. Highlighting both singers’ politics during the time offered a unique perspective on an otherwise very straightforward narrative.

Conclave

Edward Berger’s quietly unassuming Catholic pope election drama, Conclave, has been a real contender for Best Picture as controversies for other films have risen. The film’s message of the future of politics in the Catholic church is an ever-present world issue with the final act of the film leaving audiences shocked.

This film has the opportunity to hold a lot of weight among Academy voters. Its modest dramatic humor, relevant messages and compelling lead performance from Ralph Fiennes have positioned it as an unexpected competitive threat next to others that have had substantial online controversies –– especially with a powerful fanbase for Conclave on X.

Dune: Part Two

The second installment of Denis Villeneuve’s Dune series has once again proved that remakes can sometimes be even better than the original. Dune: Part Two showcases Villeneuve’s talent for building a world far beyond our own and accentuates his impact as a director.

The film started 2024’s box office year out with a bang despite its delayed release due to the 2023 Hollywood labor disputes. With a star-studded cast of upcoming generational talents, Dune: Part Two has every right to win big at the Academy Awards.

However, with a spring release comes one of the biggest misfortunes of film distribution, which is getting lost in the sea of great films that come out in a year. While Dune: Part Two raised the bar for the year, it may find difficulty in maintaining its acclaim.

Emilia Pérez

The Cannes Film Festival smash hit Emilia Pérez has been on the film industry’s radar since it won the festival’s Jury Prize in May. The avant-garde musical about a Mexican drug cartel leader’s gender transition was initially praised by critics for its ensemble cast, flashy musical sequences and transgender representation.

On paper, this film has everything it needs to go big at the Oscars, but it has faced huge contention in online circles. From Karla Sofía Gasćon’s offensive posts on X to its use of Respeecher to enhance accents, Emilia Pérez has faced immense backlash.

Additionally, the film’s content and presentation have resonated with critics, but not so much with audiences. There is a significant disconnect among general audiences, as represented by its 72% critical score and 16% audience score on Rotten Tomatoes.

The majority of this criticism comes from audiences’ disapproval of the portrayal of its transgender lead character. The film doesn’t empower the community by any means; it perpetuates transphobic tropes, uses harmful language and completely overlooks the hardships that transgender individuals, particularly transgender women, face in Latin America.

Since Emilia Pérez performed so well in its festival run and with critics, it was the front-runner for a majority of the season. But as Gascón’s comments have breached the surface of the internet, opinions of the film were only further polarized. It ultimately raises the question of whether these critical versus audience disparities will have any influence on the Academy Awards.

I’m Still Here

The Brazilian film I’m Still Here has had the unfortunate disservice of being given an extremely limited theatrical release window, a window that was also very late in terms of Oscar voting. It was a welcomed surprise to see this film nominated for Best Picture.

One of the positives of this film’s late distribution is that I’m Still Here is getting its conversation right as Oscar voting is opening up. It has a strong fanbase in Brazil, particularly for its lead actress, Fernanda Torres, who scored a Best Actress nomination.

I’m Still Here tells the true story of a mother, portrayed by Torres, and her family as they live in Rio de Janeiro during its military occupation in the 1970s. It’s a gut-wrenchingly real film with very strong writing, but it may have a hard time showing its power against films that have had more domestic success.

Nickel Boys

Nickel Boys was another surprising, yet well-deserved nomination. Unfortunately, its chance of winning Best Picture is pretty slim, but this devastatingly poignant film deserves its flowers.

Directed by RaMell Ross, Nickel Boys takes an innovative perspective on adapting a story from novel to screen by literally placing the perspective onto its lead character. Following the story of a young boy at a reformation camp in the Jim Crow south, this point-of-view style cinematography might be seen as divisive among voters who could see it as either gimmicky or refreshing.

This film suffered from limited distribution. It was initially set to have limited theatrical releases in only New York and Los Angeles with a later, slightly wider release in other major cities. However, its releases were pushed back several times, giving this film a theatrical run that was inadequate for more Oscar attention.

The Substance

The Best Picture nomination that The Substance received was far from unexpected, given its major theatrical and critical success. But it’s hard to fathom that a film as viscerally grotesque as this has received such immense attention from the Academy.

Coralie Fargeat’s body horror film about a former A-lister’s experience with a drug that can produce a younger, more attractive version of her had completely enraptured audiences and critics alike.  

The Substance is an intense turn in direction for the Academy and is a true wild card in comparison to nominees of years past. It might be too daring of a choice for the Academy to pool their votes in its direction this year, but this nomination serves as an indication of the future of the Academy Awards.

Wicked

Similar to films like The Brutalist or Anora which performed extremely well at their respective festival premieres at Venice or Cannes, Wicked sparked immediate buzz for a Best Picture nomination upon its prime-time fall premiere.

When a well-loved existing property gets adapted to the silver screen, eager fans can only pray that the cinematic recreation is as emotionally evocative as the original. In the instance of Wicked, fans were thrilled by the result, as indicated by the film’s 95% audience score on Rotten Tomatoes.

Despite some below-par technical choices like coloring and lighting, Jon M. Chu’s adaptation of a beloved Broadway classic held up quite well to demanding audience expectations and even took some creative liberty in reconfiguring the story to be even more of service to the fans.

Ariana Grande and Cynthia Erivo’s live vocals and a generally compelling narrative highlighting the themes of sisterhood and standing up for what’s right have made Wicked emerge as more of a threat than awards analysts would have anticipated.

The 97th Academy Awards will be broadcast on ABC and streamed live on Hulu at 6 p.m. on Sunday, March 2.

Header photo: “The Carpet Crowd” taken by david.torcivia on March 2, 2011 is licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0.