2026 Oscar Nominations Predictions in the Major Categories ...Middle East

As Roger Ebert loved to say, movies are our greatest teacher of empathy. I’ve been reminding myself of that while working on these predictions for the past week, during fleeting breaks from doom scrolling. Maybe some of the movies discussed below could help teach empathy to so many Americans who seem to desperately need it. I have to believe small things like that matter, and if receiving awards attention inspires more people to see these movies, that’s a good thing. 

While there are still plenty of questions about how these categories will get filled out, we pretty much know Thursday will be a great morning for some truly wonderful cinematic achievements, including “One Battle After Another,” “Sinners,” “It Was Just an Accident,” “Marty Supreme,” “Hamnet,” and “Sentimental Value.” And we’ll probably get our very first Best Picture lineup with three foreign-language films, which is absolutely worth celebrating. It’s a reminder that no matter how many people are desperately trying to make America more insular and less diverse, they will inevitably fail in the long run. The full breadth of the world just has too much to offer. 

Below is a listing of all the potential nominees in each of the major categories, ranked in order of how likely I think they are to secure a nomination. They’re also all sorted into three broad tiers: Locks, Contenders, and Long Shots. My official predictions are the top five listed in each category (except for Best Picture, where it’s the top ten). 

BEST PICTURE

Locks

Contenders

Long Shots

The top seven are no-brainers. They’ve all dominated the year in film in one way or another (usually in several ways), from critic’s lists to festival buzz to Letterboxd gushing to precursor awards. Even if “Frankenstein” looked vulnerable due to middling reviews, the craft-branch adoration for Guillermo del Toro should easily lift it into the Best Picture race.

“Train Dreams” and “The Secret Agent” also feel like near-locks at this point. I was too leery to put the “Lock” label on nine out of ten nomination slots, but it would be a legitimate surprise if either missed out on a Best Picture nomination. 

And then it gets interesting. There’s seemingly only one slot left, and a whole lot of movies that seem unlikely to be the one that grabs it. The “Avatar” and “Wicked” sequels were both presumptive Best Picture nominees prior to their premieres (the previous installments of both franchises received Best Picture nominations), but mixed reviews changed that pretty quickly. If voters want populism but aren’t feeling particularly inspired by those big-budget sequels, “Weapons” may be an attractive option. But also, a lot of voters won’t go near horror movies. 

“No Other Choice” and “Sirāt” are both widely acclaimed (and “Sirāt” really overperformed on the craft-category short lists), but could a fourth international film really crash the Best Picture field? Especially considering the same distributor, Neon, is juggling the campaigns for all of them? “Jay Kelly” remains a faint possibility because of its subject matter (a Hollywood star), but response to it has been tepid at best. “Bugonia” also stands a chance because of its Yorgos Lanthimos/ Emma Stone pedigree, but the film’s ending will likely be way too weird for many voters. 

So which one of these unlikely possibilities will pull through? In the end, I’m right back where I was in the first place. “Avatar: Fire and Ash” didn’t wow critics, and that lukewarm critical response hurt the film’s showing with the Golden Globe nominations, which ultimately knocked it out of many Oscar predictions. But the Globe nominations (which barely matter in the first place) came out before the film had opened in theaters. Now the film has been out for a month, and it’s yet another financial juggernaut. And if we’re assuming “Frankenstein” will land in the Best Picture race largely on the backs of voters in the craft branches, why wouldn’t we assume the same of “Avatar?” Against suspect competition, being number one at the box office during voting should push “Avatar: Fire and Ash” into the final Best Picture slot. 

BEST DIRECTOR

Locks

Contenders

Long Shots

It may seem surprising to only call one name a lock, but there are a few reasons for that. First is the simple math; seven films have dominated the awards season, and the Best Director race only has room for five of them. Looking at those seven names individually, it’s easy to talk yourself into all of them being locks. But once you realize that’s impossible the only other conclusion is that maybe none of them are locks. Plus, no Academy branch more consistently provides the biggest shock of nomination morning than the Directors Branch. Remember when Great Gerwig was left out for “Barbie” two years ago? Yeah. No one here is safe. Except Paul Thomas Anderson. He’s an actual lock. 

But everyone else is at significant risk of missing out here. So where do we start? Jafar Panahi feels the safest to me. Voters should be wowed by how he shot his film in secret, even on public streets, and the general tenor of what’s happening in Iran—combined with Panahi’s likely jail sentence when he returns home—should be enough to get him a nomination. 

Ryan Coogler should also, theoretically, be safe, and for my money the centerpiece musical sequence in “Sinners” is the directorial achievement of the year. But the Directors Branch doesn’t have a great track record when it comes to recognizing diversity, and I can sadly picture a nomination morning where a Coogler snub dominates headlines. Even still, I think he gets in. 

Chloé Zhao won Best Director five years ago for “Nomadland,” so theoretically we know the voters are impressed by her work. But again, there are precious few examples of this branch honoring women for directing films about women. Joachim Trier feels safer to me, as “Sentimental Value” is about a filmmaker, and every last voter in this branch will surely chortle at the stack of DVDs he gifts to a child in the movie—a true director’s joke if ever there was one.

Josh Safdie and Guillermo del Toro are absolutely strong contenders here, and I wouldn’t be remotely surprised if either—or even both—received nominations. But in a race that’s impossible to predict, they’re the two I think miss out. Safdie’s film might be just a bit too flashy and into itself, while del Toro’s movie is arguably the weakest of the bunch from a quality standpoint. And for all their flaws, the Directors Branch probably has the best taste in the Academy. 

BEST ACTRESS

Locks

Contenders

Long Shots

As the only two people with a serious chance to actually win this category, Jessie Buckley and Rose Byrne are the only two locks. Behind them are four people trying to squeeze into three slots. 

Kate Hudson is a near-lock for me. Think about what “Song Sung Blue” demands of her: she nails an accent, does her own singing, and plays both a disability and an addiction. That’s the Mount Rushmore of Actors Branch catnip. Likewise, it’s impossible to watch “Bugonia” without knowing Emma Stone clearly went through hell for the role, which should be enough to earn her a nomination even if voters don’t love the film.

If I’m right that the final slot comes down to Renate Reinsve and Chase Infiniti, it’s basically a toss-up for which one gets in. I’d give a slight edge to Reinsve for a few reasons. Most obviously, she’s playing an actor, and her stage-fright sequence that opens “Sentimental Value” should have real resonance for voters. And many voters may feel like she’s past due for a nomination, having missed out for “The Worst Person in the World” four years ago. It’s painful to predict Chase Infiniti to miss out, but someone has to. 

BEST ACTOR

Locks

Contenders

Long Shots

Best Actor has been my favorite race this awards season, because it’s so gleefully subverted conventional wisdom. “Jay Kelly,” “Springsteen: Deliver Me from Nowhere,” “The Smashing Machine,” and “Nuremberg” are all movies that seem like they were genetically engineered in a lab for the sole purpose of receiving a Best Actor nomination. But it’s looking almost certain that none of them will, because their films were all disappointing. It’s a nice reminder that quality really does matter with this stuff, and Oscar nominations don’t just get rubber stamped on paper. 

So who will be nominated instead? Leo and Timmy are obvious, while Wagner Moura increasingly feels like a sure thing for his subtly wonderful work in “The Secret Agent.” The way so much of that film rests on Moura’s shoulders is also why Michael B. Jordan potentially feels vulnerable to miss out here; for as great as the acting in “Sinners” is, it’s a film that never feels like the acting is the star of the show. But against questionable competition, I still think Jordan gets in. 

Ethan Hawke gave my personal favorite lead actor performance of the year, and he’s on screen for virtually every moment of “Blue Moon.” I believe Hawke stands a real chance to win the Oscar if he can eke out a nomination, but that’s a big if. Will enough voters watch “Blue Moon?” That’s the true obstacle for Hawke’s contention. But Sony Pictures Classics has often been very good at drumming up acting nominations for films with smaller profiles, and as long as they can get their film in front of voters, Hawke should have no problem getting nominated. 

If voters don’t watch “Blue Moon,” that last slot will likely go to Joel Edgerton or Jesse Plemons. But Edgerton’s work is so understated in “Train Dreams” that it’s easy to love the film without even thinking much about his performance, while Plemons could be overshadowed by Emma Stone’s much showier work in “Bugonia.” So I’ll give voters the benefit of the doubt and predict that they’ll watch “Blue Moon.” 

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS

Locks

Contenders

Long Shots 

I waffled back and forth on whether to consider Amy Madigan a lock. But I’m trying to use that term as literally as possible, and the Academy’s history with horror movies makes me nervous. Even still, it’s difficult to imagine her missing, partially because the competition is so all over the place. 

This race is dominated by pairs of actresses in the same movie, with “One Battle After Another,” “Sentimental Value,” “Sinners,” and “Marty Supreme” all in contention for two nominees. That could play out in multiple ways. Vote splitting could hurt both potential nominees, or a rising tide for the film could elevate both. 

“Sentimental Value” probably has the best chance at getting two nominees in the field, but Elle Fanning’s role in the film—as an actress who isn’t quite right for a part—may work against her. Her co-star, Inga Ibsdotter Lilleaas, should be safe, as she anchors the film’s potent emotional climax. 

Who does that leave? I’m betting Odessa A’zion and Ariana Grande will get in mostly because they’re given more to do than any of their most likely competition. But don’t count out Miriam Afshari in “It Was Just an Accident.” She hasn’t received any precursor nominations, but if voters really love that film, it may be hard to keep her off their ballots. 

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR

Locks

Contenders

Long Shots

Benicio del Toro, Sean Penn, and Stellan Skarsgård all completely own extended sequences of their films, which is why it’s inconceivable that any of them miss out here. If Penn didn’t already have two Oscars, this would be a three-way race all the way to Oscar night. 

Despite a surprise win at the Critic’s Choice Awards, Jacob Elordi isn’t a total lock for a nomination because there are only two spots left, and too many big names fighting for them. Having said that, I think he gets in mostly because I just don’t trust voters to care enough about “Jay Kelly.” Adam Sandler and Billy Crudup both have showcase scenes in the film, but that may not matter in a film that seems to mostly disappoint people. If that means the final slot comes down to Paul Mescal or Miles Caton, I’d bet on Mescal. Partially because he’s the bigger name, but mostly because he’s really a co-lead of “Hamnet,” while Caton is part of a larger ensemble (and he may split votes with Delroy Lindo). 

BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY

Locks

Contenders

Long Shots

Sometimes you get a year where one of the two Screenplay categories struggles to field a full team. “One Battle After Another” and “Hamnet” are the obvious juggernauts of this category, and “Train Dreams” should cruise to a nomination because there’s so little competition. 

The first two “Knives Out” movies both received Oscar nominations for their scripts, so “Wake Up Dead Man” should be a presumptive nominee for that reason alone. And given how few other serious contenders there are, it’s a near lock. 

That lost slot is a true mystery. “Frankenstein” is the only other sure-thing Best Picture nominee with an adapted script, but most people view the script as the weakest element of the film. “Bugonia” is also a possibility here, but if voters think the film goes off the rails in the third act, that doesn’t exactly scream “Screenplay Nominee.” All of which could mean “No Other Choice” is the only other choice. 

BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY

Locks

Contenders

Long Shots

Best Original Screenplay is the toughest major category on the board, and the one I’ve most procrastinated in writing about. “Sentimental Value” and “It Was Just an Accident” both hinge on the potency of their innovative story construction, so they’re the two obvious threats to win here. From there it’s a total guessing game, with six legitimate contenders for the remaining three spots. Drawing three names out of a hat seems just as potentially successful as trying to game it out, but that’s not how we roll. 

The film I’m most drawn to as a likely nominee is “Blue Moon,” because it’s the most obvious “Writer’s Movie” of the bunch. Not only is it about a writer, but it’s about that unique feeling of replaceability that all writers have existential fears about. It’s about someone with a gift for words, but whose flaws in seemingly every other area of life have conspired to undo him. It should be a sure-thing nominee if voters watch it. That makes predicting it a risk when it’s up against three likely Best Picture nominees. 

“Sorry, Baby” feels like the classic example of a film that gets recognized for its screenplay but is way too cool for the rest of the Academy. But here’s the thing—“Marty Supreme” and “Sinners” also feel like classic examples of that kind of movie, it’s just that now the Academy has much better taste, and it actually is cool enough to recognize those films elsewhere. And then there’s “The Secret Agent,” which also kind of feels like that kind of movie, and “Weapons” which creates an incredible circular tapestry with its script, deftly moving around in both time and POV. 

Again, any three of these six could get nominated. So in the absence of any better reasoning, I’ll go with the two films I’m absolutely certain will get Best Picture nominations (“Marty Supreme” and “Sinners”) and the one movie that feels the most like a dog whistle for writers (“Blue Moon”). 

Hence then, the article about 2026 oscar nominations predictions in the major categories was published today ( Monday 19/01/2026 - 05:50 PM ) and is available on Roger Ebert ( Middle East ) The editorial team at PressBee has edited and verified it, and it may have been modified, fully republished, or quoted. You can read and follow the updates of this news or article from its original source.

Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( 2026 Oscar Nominations Predictions in the Major Categories )

Also on site :

• Cruise ship boss sues P&O for massive £9.7m over claims slip in toilet ended career
• '90s Alternative Rock Band Announces U.S. Tour Dates After Dropping New EP
• Today’s NYT ‘Strands’ Hints, Spangram and Answers for Monday, January 19, 2026