Who will win an Oscar Sunday night? One of America's favorite guessing games is going on right now, and the Beacon asked those among us who regularly follow movies -- all sorts of movies -- to give us their educated guesses on the major categories.

Here are the picks of Beacon movie reviewer Harper Barnes, Beacon issues and politics editor Susan Hegger, Cinema St. Louis head Cliff Froehlich and Beacon contributor Nick Otten.

By the way, most people may prefer to watch the Oscars while curled up on the couch (and making snarky comments about fashion during the "pre" telecasts), but Cinema St. Louis will be hosting the only Academy-sanctioned Oscar-watching party in St. Louis, Oscar Night America. The event ($50-$75) will run from 6-10:30 p.m., March 7, at the Crowne Plaza Grill and Restaurant, 7750 Carondelet Avenue. To find out more, click here .

And for a look at all the categories, check out Robert Hunt's posts in The Lens .

Best Actor

• Jeff Bridges in "Crazy Heart"
• George Clooney in "Up in the Air"
• Colin Firth in "A Single Man"
• Morgan Freeman in "Invictus"
• Jeremy Renner in "The Hurt Locker"

Harper Barnes: Will win: Jeff Bridges; Should win: Jeff Bridges

Why: For Jeff Bridges, this is the year the chickens come home to roost, and in his case they are mighty fine chickens. Bridges, who has already won a plethora of awards this year, will also win the Oscar for best actor, and he should win -- not just for a seemingly effortless performance as a burnt-out outlaw country singer in "Crazy Heart," but for a notably distinguished career in which he has evolved from a quirky leading man to a strong character actor. Bridges is the Dude, but he's a lot more than that, as he has proved in movies as disparate as "The Last Picture Show," "Fat City," "Rancho Deluxe," "Cutter's Way," "Tucker," "The Fabulous Baker Boys," "Fearless" and, of course, "The Big Lebowski." Plus he comes from a Hollywood family.

Susan Hegger: Will win: Jeff Bridges; Should win: Jeff Bridges

Why: This year, the stars do seem aligned for Jeff Bridges, whose naturalistic, fearless, lived-in performance as country singer and songwriter Bad Blake was note-perfect. Bridges captured the talent, the dissipation, the yearning and the emptiness of a man who finds love just before he hits bottom and makes it all painfully real. The film has some shortcomings -- would a younger, talented journalist really fall for a grizzled, alcoholic musician? -- but Bridges never falters. While George Clooney and Colin Firth were also terrific, Bridges is due.

Nick Otten: Will win: Jeff Bridges; Should win: Colin Firth

Why: In a close contest, Jeff Bridges in "Crazy Heart" or George Clooney in "Up in the Air" both do what they always do perfectly. Bridges is woozy-wild, Clooney is hopelessly charming. But figure Bridges will probably win for all the earlier near-misses. (He sang the best song this year, too.) Colin Firth in "A Single Man" subtly acts out an entire funeral on his face and in his eyes, all in the space of a single telephone call -- a master's class in acting for the camera -- and that's just one minute in the movie.

Cliff Froehlich: Will win: Jeff Bridges; Should win: Jeff Bridges

Why: This is by far the strongest field in this year's Oscars, and although Freeman's performance is too constrained by his film's sanctification of Nelson Mandela, there are legitimate reasons to support any of the other contenders, whether Renner's wired soldier, Firth's depressed professor or Clooney's rueful charmer. Bridges, however, is far past overdue for recognition: His body of work is so substantial, so varied and so consistent that his utterly convincing incarnation of dissolute country singer Bad Blake seems a dead certainty to win. And he's fully deserving of the accolade, despite the film's by-the-numbers predictability.

Best supporting actor

• Matt Damon in "Invictus"
• Woody Harrelson in "The Messenger"
• Christopher Plummer in "The Last Station"
• Stanley Tucci in "The Lovely Bones"
• Christoph Waltz in "Inglourious Basterds"

Barnes: Will win: Christoph Waltz; Should win: Woody Harrelson or Stanley Tucci

Why: Christoph Waltz has been named best supporting actor by the Screen Actors Guild and the Golden Globe auslanders and is a prohibitive favorite to win the Oscar for his mercurial performance in "Inglourious Basterds" as a ruthless S.S. colonel with a touch of Groucho Marx in his soul. It's hard to deny his performance was a tour de force. And in four languages, to boot. But I preferred Woody Harrelson and Stanley Tucci playing strongly against type in "The Messenger" and "The Lovely Bones." Who would have thought that the let-it-all-hang-out hippie Harrelson could be so convincing and empathetic as a straight-necked career military man bottled up to the point of explosion, or that Tucci, known for his skillful light touch, could be so disturbing and downright scary as a fussy serial killer pruning his roses?

Hegger: Will win: Christoph Waltz; Should win: Christoph Waltz

Why: Christoph Waltz deserves the Oscar if only because of his superlative performance in German, French, English and even Italian -- all in one movie. If that weren't hard enough, Waltz also managed to be compelling and over the top as the Nazi "Jew hunter" Col. Hans Landa, a character by turns sophisticated, solicitous and sadistic. It was the kind of daring, high-wire, thrilling performance that electrifies a film and an audience. No other actor in this category came close to dazzling us like Waltz.

Froehlich: Will win: Christoph Waltz; Should win: Christoph Waltz

Why: I'm handicapped in this category by having not yet seen either "The Messenger" or "The Last Station," but I suspect a number of Oscar voters will also have missed those smaller-scale films, thereby diminishing the chances of Harrelson and Plummer, however worthy their performances. Tucci's blandly creepy serial killer helps salvage the wreckage of "The Lovely Bones," and Damon is surprisingly effective as a South African rugby player, but I'd argue that both give more nuanced performances in their other 2009 films: Tucci in "Julie & Julia," Damon in the woefully underappreciated "The Informant!" And no one equals Waltz's out-of-the-blue show-stopper as a suavely menacing Nazi.

Otten: Will win: Christoph Waltz; Should win: Christoph Waltz

Why: A frightening and superb villain, Waltz is the moral center of a movie almost pornographically violent that unapologetically re-writes World War II as "Pulp Fiction."

Best actress

• Sandra Bullock in "The Blind Side"
• Helen Mirren in "The Last Station"
• Carey Mulligan in "An Education"
  
• Gabourey Sidibe in "Precious: Based on the Novel 'Push' by Sapphire"
• Meryl Streep in "Julie & Julia"

Barnes: Will win: Sandra Bullock; Should win: Gabourey Sidibe

Why: If we don't care deeply about the outwardly off-putting character at the center of "Precious," the movie might well be what some of its mostly male critics call it - yet another melodramatic exploitation of a cliched and inaccurate version of black ghetto life. But young Gabourey Sidibe lets us see past layers of physical and emotional armor into the title character's mind and soul, and understand that she is an intelligent and decent person who, like her mother, is the victim of many generations of abuse and racism. Her performance is brave and compelling. The favorites for the award are Sandra Bullock ("Blind Side") and Meryl Streep ("Julie and Julia"). Both won best-actress Golden Globes (Bullock for drama, Streep for comedy). Bullock has been in the business for a couple of decades, has never been nominated - unlike Streep, who holds the record for most nominations -- and I suspect it is Bullock's turn.

Hegger: Will win: Sandra Bullock; Should win: Meryl Streep

Why: Poor Meryl Streep looks to be foiled again. The onetime favorite is about to be blindsided by Sandra Bullock, in her version of Julia Roberts' "Erin Brockovich" win. That's like rewarding a hamburger over boeuf Bourguignon. Granted, "Julie and Julia" isn't the best movie; the Julie part is definitely half-baked. But Streep takes a cultural icon, who was easily caricatured, and turns her into a full-blooded woman with a boundless appetite for life, love and cooking. That should be a recipe for victory.

Froehlich: Will win: Sandra Bullock; Should win: Carey Mulligan

Why: I'm again forced to confess ignorance, this time on a larger scale: Not only did I not see Mirren in "The Last Station," I also missed frontrunner Bullock in "The Blind Side." I base my prediction exclusively on Bullock's triumph at the Screen Actors Guild's awards, which frequently - though not infallibly - prophesize the acting awards. Streep could surprise, but it's notable that she's won only twice, despite her 16 nominations. As for my preference, both the youngsters in the race give undeniably remarkable performances, but Sibide works within a narrower bandwidth than Mulligan, who believably conveys both adolescent infatuation and adult regret, emotional vulnerability and intellectual grit.

Otten: Will win: Sandra Bullock; Should win: Too close to call

Bullock goes beyond cute-and-cool and gets Suthrun-and-hard-as-manicured-nails. In a rare year of great roles for actresses, all five nominees are worthy -- two seasoned pros (Mirren & Streep) one underestimated comic actress (Bullock), and two young discoveries (Sidibe & Mulligan). I do suspect we will see much more of Carey Mulligan in the future.

Best supporting actress

• Penelope Cruz in "Nine"
• Vera Farmiga in "Up in the Air"
• Maggie Gyllenhaal in "Crazy Heart"
• Anna Kendrick in "Up in the Air"
• Mo'Nique in "Precious: Based on the Novel 'Push' by Sapphire"

Barnes: Will win: Mo'Nique; Should win: Mo'Nique

Why: Although her performance lacks the subtlety and depth Sidibe brings to the role of the daughter in "Precious," Mo'Nique as the mother succeeds in showing us the mixture of anger, fear and jealousy that drive this pitiful monster. In another year, either Anna Kendrick or Vera Farmiga of "Up in the Air" might deserve to win.

Hegger: Will win: Mo'Nique; Should win: Mo'Nique

Why: Mo'Nique has a lock on this category -- and for good reason. She did the impossible. She took a character that one could only describe as a monster and turned her into a human being, a vile but recognizable human being. In her pivotal, nuanced scene in a social worker's office, she shows us how a woman who defines herself as victimized and vulnerable turns into a predator. It is one of the most chilling moments on screen ever. The other performances in this category were wonderful, especially the two women in "Up in the Air," but Mo'Nique has her feet firmly planted in the winner's circle.

Froehlich: Will win: Mo'Nique; Should win: Mo'Nique

Why: Gyllenhaal adds remarkable shading to a sketchily drawn character, Cruz provides much-needed energy to the soporific "Nine," and both maturely sexy Farmiga and wound-tight Kendrick help lift "Up in the Air" star Clooney to new heights. But the frightening power of Mo'Nique's abusive mother should overwhelm Academy voters. Nor is hers a one-note performance: The self-pitying breakdown at the climax of "Precious" hardly excuses the character's behavior, but Mo'Nique manages the difficult task of modestly humanizing the monster.

Otten: Will win: Mo'Nique; Should win: Mo'Nique

Why: Holy cow! Mo'Nique fearlessly makes us hate her, doing in front of a camera what most of us wouldn't dare try in private. More unique than I would have thought possible.

Best animated Feature

• "Coraline"
• "Fantastic Mr. Fox"
• "The Princess and the Frog"
• "The Secret of Kells"
• "Up"

Barnes: Will win: "Up"; Should win: "Up"

Why: The two apparent favorites - "Up" and "The Fantastic Mr. Fox" - are fine films made as much for adults as for children. "Up" gets the nod here because the first 10 minutes or so, encapsulating a novel's worth of character development, comedy and tragedy, provide one of the most daring and effective openings in any recent film, animated or not.

Hegger: Will win: "Up"; Should win: "Up"

Why: What's not to love about "Up"? It has engaging characters -- a perfectly crotchety old guy, voiced by crotchety Ed Asner; an insistently helpful boy scout; and talking dogs. It has a captivating plot, including a touching, surprisingly mature love story. It also has the most glorious visuals, making stunning use of the animator's art. The images, such as those of Mr. Fredricksen's house swathed in a gazillion balloons, were frequently breath-taking but also emotionally resonant. Who couldn't feel the weight of Carl Fredricksen's past as he slogged through the jungle lugging his house?

Froehlich: Will win: "Up"; Should win: "The Fantastic Mr. Fox"

Why: Pixar is animation's unstoppable force, and the charming "Up" seems certain to claim the studio's fifth Oscar (in seven tries) in this category. Traditional cel animation was newly resurgent with two nominees, Disney's "The Princess and the Frog" and the largely unseen "The Secret of Kells," with the latter film shocking animaniacs by taking the slot most would have reserved for Hayao Miyazaki's "Ponyo." As much as I admire "Up," my own animated faves this year were the two stop-motion masterpieces: Henry Selick's delightfully frightening "Coraline" and Wes Anderson's quirky Roald Dahl adaptation, "Fantastic Mr. Fox."

Otten: Will win: "Up"; Should win: "Up"

Why: Just splendid. The introductory back-story alone is a better tale than many a summer blockbuster. People will watch it again and again for years.

Achievement in directing

• "Avatar" James Cameron
• "The Hurt Locker" Kathryn Bigelow
• "Inglourious Basterds" Quentin Tarantino
• "Precious: Based on the Novel 'Push' by Sapphire" Lee Daniels
• "Up in the Air" Jason Reitman

Barnes: Will win: Kathryn Bigelow; Should win: Kathryn Bigelow

Why: Even if Kathryn Bigelow's "The Hurt Locker" doesn't win the best picture Oscar (see below), she will probably be named best director for her work with actors in this riveting, painfully human war movie. Her directing is also remarkable for the rhythm and control of her action scenes, always giving episodes time to develop, using cuts that further action and character and don't just pump adrenaline. This movie will be taught in film school, if it isn't already. Her main competitor (and ex-husband) James Cameron did a remarkable, groundbreaking job in creating the universe of "Avatar," but the cliched battle scenes and too-familiar characters detract from the overall effect of the movie.

Hegger: Will win: Kathryn Bigelow; Should win: Quentin Tarantino

Why: The director's race is really between ex-spouses James Cameron and Kathryn Bigelow, with all of the ironies that entails. Bigelow, long an under-appreciated director, may have the edge right now for her tense, gritty film. And part of me wants her to win -- the first woman to win for directing and for a hyper-masculine war movie to boot. But talk about blowing up the war movie -- Quentin Tarantino did that with chutzpah to spare. And, in the process, he got sly performances from Brad Pitt and Christoph Waltz.

Froehlich: Will win: Kathryn Bigelow; Should win: Quentin Tarantino

Why: Conventional Oscar wisdom has consigned Tarantino, Daniels and Reitman to the sidelines, where they'll watch a David-vs.-Goliath tussle between former spouses Cameron and Bigelow. Controversies that surfaced just before ballots were due may have eroded some of "The Hurt Locker's" support, but I suspect that Bigelow's aim will remain true and she'll slay the "Avatar" behemoth, becoming the first woman to win honors as best director. Although I'm a longtime admirer of Bigelow's work and think highly of "The Hurt Locker," if I had my druthers, I'd instead reward Tarantino for so deftly handling the wild tonal shifts of "Inglourious Basterds."

Otten: Will win: Kathryn Bigelow; Should win: James Cameron

Why: It's been said before, the best picture should also win for best director, but emotions can cloud the issue. And this is so delicious: an ex-husband vs. an ex-wife.

Best picture

• "Avatar"
• "The Blind Side"
• "District 9"
• "An Education"
• "The Hurt Locker"
• "Inglourious Basterds"
• "Precious: Based on the Novel 'Push' by Sapphire"
• "A Serious Man"
• "Up"
• "Up in the Air"

Barnes: Will win: "Avatar"; Should win: "The Hurt Locker"

Why: Nobody has ever seen anything like the first half of "Avatar," with its awe-inspiring creation of an alien universe that is just familiar enough to be comprehensible but clearly much more than just your basic back-lot jungle with blue people running around in it. But then the movie descends into war movie cliches ("Let's Boogie!" screams one commander of the 22nd century), something that "The Hurt Locker" never does. The last time director James Cameron made a movie that broke all existing box office records, he was anointed "the king of the world," and he probably will be again. One footnote: Because of the new way of choosing the best picture Oscar, with the 5,000-odd Academy member ranking all 10 nominees in order of preference, "The Hurt Locker" might sneak in even if it doesn't have a plurality of first-place votes - perhaps there are enough members who dislike the overbearing Cameron to rank his movie way down on the list, lowering his total score.

Hegger: Will win: "Avatar"; Should win: "Avatar," no "Inglourious Basterds," no "Up in the Air" -- I give up

Why: It's easy to trash Avatar, with its goofy dialogue and derivative plot. But I was enthralled by its creation of an extravagantly beautiful world. Avatar made me remember how exciting -- and transporting -- movies were for me as a kid. Inglourious Basterds, which is more about movies than World War II, made me realize how exciting -- and intellectually provocative -- movies can be for adults. And Up in the Air? Wry, understated, spare and compassionate, it showed that you don't have to blow up a planet, a country, or even a movie theater, to bowl an audience over. Well-written, well-acted, Up in the Air artfully probes the lives of the walking wounded.

Froehlich: Will win: "Avatar"; Should win: "Inglourious Basterds"

Why: The dazzling technical achievement and outsized box-office performance of "Avatar" will likely allow Cameron to again declare himself "king of the world," though the scrappy "The Hurt Locker" may yet prevail. I certainly find much to admire in "An Education," "Precious," "A Serious Man" and "Up in the Air," but if given a vote, I'd opt again for "Inglourious Basterds," a delirious mash-up of war film, black comedy and spaghetti Western. Of course, in an ideal world, my own favorite films of 2009 - "Fantastic Mr. Fox," "Summer Hours," "The White Ribbon" and "The Beaches of Agnes" - would top the 10 nominees.

Otten: Will win: "Avatar"; Should win "District 9"

Why: "Avatar": Derivative, yes. "Dances With Wolves in Outer Space." But awesomely beautiful. Watching blue warriors race up impossible mountains in mid-air is what people go to movies for. The question is whether it will win only for technics (like "Star Wars") or win the big one for overwhelming viewers (like "Gone With the Wind" or "Titanic"). Notably, "Avatar" is no actor's movie, but not simple either. How many movies teach people a new word without their knowing?

"District 9": Stunning, painful but riveting, "District 9" is like "Avatar" after the ghettoes have been built for the aliens who definitely did not win. Probably the year's best foreign film, but didn't even qualify because that category (Best Foreign Language Film) is such a mess.