Achievers, rejoice. The No. 1 bum of all moviedom gets a brilliant Blu-ray makeover in a special, limited edition, hardcover book-bound package that is a must for all devotees of The Dude.

Jeff Bridges as slacker extraordinaire Jeffrey Lebowski — aka His Dudeness, Duder or El Duderino “if you’re not into the whole brevity thing” — never looked more righteously rumpled in this visually vivid version of Joel and Ethan Coen’s 1998 comedy about mistaken identity, kidnapping, cannabis, bowling and carefree unemployment in sunny Los Angeles.

Following the misadventures of The Dude is, for many of us, more fun with each successive viewing as we watch witless thugs mistake him for a shady millionaire of the same name, thus dragging him into a Raymond Chandler-esque intrigue that also involves his best friends and bowling teammates, Walter (the priceless John Goodman), a pistol-toting Vietnam vet and Judaism convert with anger issues, and Donny (a hilariously sad-sack Steve Buscemi), a naive and easygoing loser who is constantly interrupting Walter’s tirades, which prompts one of the film’s many oft-quoted lines, “Shut the (bleep) up, Donny.”

But for the true “achiever” (that’s what we Lebowski fanatics have been dubbed), the uniquely uproarious Lebowski experience is enhanced in this limited edition with a 28-page book containing profiles of all the off-the-chain characters (such as John Turturro’s one-of-a-kind Jesus Quintana, a Cuban-American convicted pederast who is The Dude’s intimidating, purple-clad bowling rival), the recipe for the White Russian, which is The Dude’s adult refreshment of choice, and an interview with film promoter Jeff Dowd, the real-life inspiration for The Dude and the man who helped distribute the Coens’ first film, “Blood Simple.” And exclusive to the Blu-ray disc is “Worthy Adversaries: What’s My Line Trivia,” a two-player game that challenges achievers to finish iconic lines of dialogue from the film, such as “Hey careful, man, there’s a beverage here!” and the immortal “Oh, the usual. I bowl. Drive around. The occasional acid flashback.”

— Gene Triplett

BY GENE TRIPLETT

Fact is giving fiction a run for its money in this year’s Oscar race, with four of the 10 Best Picture nominees based on true stories and real people.
Biopics of a pair of boxing brothers and a canyoneering survivor were good box office bets on critics’ tip sheets in 2010, but true tales of an Internet innovator and a stammering king are the odds-on favorites in this year’s run for Academy gold.
Here’s how this Oklahoma critic is calling the winners during Sunday night’s moments of truth at Hollywood’s Kodak Theatre.

Best picture

Gene says: A few weeks ago, one didn’t need a computer to figure the odds favored “The Social Network,” the superbly crafted movie screenwriter Aaron Sorkin and director David Fincher made out of Ben Mezrich’s bestselling book, “The Accidental Billionaires,” about the creation of the most powerful electronic narcotic to sweep the world since the advent of the Internet itself. Just like everyone else, most Academy voters are probably Facebook junkies by now, and the story of the gifted geek who invented it is too timely–and the film too well-acted, well-written and utterly intriguing–to be ignored.
You would think.
But it now looks like voters could be swayed by Tom Hooper‘s “The King’s Speech,” the true story of a monarch who struggled against an impossible obstacle to communicate with his subjects on an inspiring, human level. Historically, heart-rending period pieces with British accents have been Oscar magnets.
Still, I’m going to stick with my sucker’s bet …
Should win: “The King’s Speech”
Will win: “The Social Network”

Best actor

Gene says: Colin Firth will have some more public speaking to do Sunday night when he accepts this award for his keen ability to portray the male versions of vulnerable, frightened and courageous all at once, while affecting a startlingly realistic speech impediment that is heartbreaking to witness in “The King’s Speech.” Few of his contemporaries could handle as dodgy a role as this with such perfection. His deserving “A Single Man” performance lost out to Jeff Bridges’ “Crazy Heart” last year, and while I loved the way Bridges outgunned John Wayne with some real acting in the Coen brothers’ “True Grit” remake, my allegiance this year is to Firth’s stuttering King George VI.

Best actress

Gene says: In “The Kids Are All Right,” Annette Bening effortlessly claimed hearts with her smart, funny and deeply sensitive portrayal of a lesbian mom who fears the alienation of her family’s affections when her children seek out their sperm donor father and attempt to bring him into the fold. Her performance was controlled, convincing and enormously engaging, deftly avoiding the emotional showboating this kind of role can tempt in lesser talents. But “Black Swan” star Natalie Portman has youth and popularity going for her and she never misstepped in the dramatically rich role of a prima ballerina pushed to mental breakdown. Still, Bening’s been nominated three times before, so maybe her times has come.

Should win: Annette Bening
Will win: Natalie Portman

Best supporting actor

Gene says: Geoffrey Rush’s sly, low-key take on the oddball Australian speech therapist who comes to the aid of a stammering monarch in “The King’s Speech” was easily one of the most interesting characterizations of the past year, as was John Hawkes’ unsettlingly dark backwoods criminal in “Winter’s Bone.” But Christian Bale was part of the stunning one-two punch of “The Fighter” as the ex-con, failed-boxer-turned-crackhead who trains his half-brother for the welterweight title. His convincingly wired, wild-eyed performance had an unforgettable clout that will no doubt win him the decision.

Should win: Geoffrey Rush
Will win: Christian Bale

Best supporting actress

Gene says: Former Tulsa resident Melissa Leo was the other half of “The Fighter’s” double whammy as the domineering matriarch of a blue collar Lowell, Mass., family and the abrasive manager of her two boxing sons. She nailed the part perfectly, right down the Massachusetts accent. The only other contender who comes close is 14-year-old newcomer Hailee Steinfeld as the spitfire farm girl out for justice in the Coen brothers’ version of “True Grit,” although she should have been nominated as a leading actress in that role.

Should and will win: Melissa Leo

Best director

Gene says: It stands to reason that the person who helmed the Best Picture should win the Best Director prize, but reason seems to have little to do with the thought processes of the average Academy voter. In a perfect world, David Fincher (“Fight Club,” “Seven,” “Zodiak,” “Benjamin Button”) should take the statuette for the stylish visuals, taut pacing and superlative performances found in “The Social Network.” Hooper (“The Damned United”) could pull an upset, however, for his majestic craftsmanship in “The King’s Speech,” or Darren Aronofsky (“The Wrestler”) could dance away with the trophy for his adventurous flair in “Black Swan.”

Should and will win: David Fincher

A few extra bets:

Best original screenplay

Christopher Nolan, “Inception”

Best adapted screenplay

Aaron Sorkin, “The Social Network”

Best animated feature

“Toy Story 3”

Best documentary feature

“Exit through the Gift Shop”

These days, it seems that everything in popular culture is fair game for pundits to politicize.

Example: When it comes to portraying Rooster Cogburn, the “one-eyed fat man” in the two film interpretations of Charles Portis’ “True Grit,” it seems that stars John Wayne (in Henry Hathaway’s 1969 version) and Jeff Bridges (in the Coen brothers new version) don’t exactly see eye to eye.

In the novel, Cogburn is said to have lost one eye in a Civil War skirmish. But, although Portis describes the gnarly old lawman as sporting a mustache, he says nothing about Rooster wearing an eye patch.

In both film versions, Rooster wears an eye patch, although Wayne, the hardcore conservative, portrays him as clean-shaven while Bridges, the outspoken liberal, plays him wearing a scruffy beard.

But it’s the placement of the eye patch really sets political bloggers off on wild tears of conspiratorial speculation.

Consider this from the political blog American Thinker:

“One of the interesting decisions that was made during the filming of ‘True Grit’ was the placement of Rooster Cogburn’s famous eye patch. In the original film John Wayne wore the eye patch over his left eye which allowed him to view the world through his right eye, as the Duke was inclined to do. … In the remake Jeff Bridges covers his right eye leaving his left eye fully exposed, as a subtle reminder of where his ‘Crazy Heart’ resides.”

The blogger goes on to speculate, “If this film should achieve the level of success that many are predicting it will, it could open the door to other revisionist remakes. Imagine if you will (liberal actors) Matt Damon starring in ‘Sergeant York,’ Sean Penn and George Clooney in ‘Big Jim McLain’ or Josh Brolin playing George Gipp in ‘Knute Rockne, All American.’”

Bridges, when informed of the eye-patch debate by one newspaper writer, reportedly joked, “I’m a commie,” then shrugged off any political subtext by explaining simply, “I tried it on the right eye, and it felt good. But on the left eye, not so good.”

So in the blink of an eye, political conspiracy squelched.

- Dennis King

Jeremy Renner in a scene from "The Hurt Locker."

BY DENNIS KING

Having earned a living for a couple of decades by babbling on about movies, it is perhaps impolitic to admit that I’m not very good at guessing Oscar winners. The average popcorn Joe predicting in the average Oscar office pool probably has as good a track record at picking winners as me.

It’s not a function of movie knowledge or keen insight or anything like that. It’s just that quirky tastes in movies often lead to quirky predictions when it comes Oscar time (I’d much rather vote the low-budget underdog than the fabulous front-runner). That, and the fact that reading the tea leaves on how 6,000 or so official Oscar voters will vote (they are indeed a fractious bunch) is sheer folly.

My favorite axiom on Oscar expertise is drawn from that grand screenwriter and two-time Oscar-winner William Goldman, who famously wrote, “In Hollywood, nobody knows anything.”

Early on in my tenure as a professional “film cricket” (Homer Simpson’s term), I concocted an admittedly goofy experiment in which I tacked lists of Oscar nominees on a dart board and let fly a dart at each of the Big Six categories (supporting actor, supporting actress, actor, actress, director and best movie). Then I compared my own furrow-browed prognostications with the whims of the dart.

And the dart’s random picks were more successful than mine. D’oh!

So anyway, after that long-winded prelude, here are my best guesses at statuette winners of the 82^nd Academy Awards to be presented Sunday evening in an overstuffed ceremony airing on ABC from Hollywood’s Kodak Theatre.

Best actress in a supporting role: Maggie Gyllenhaal, “Crazy Heart.” (The Academy’s actors’ branch is the largest and most politically fragmented voting body, and it’s often in supporting categories that upsets and surprises occur. But Gyllenhaal, so good in this gritty, naturalistic serio-comedy, is a popular candidate who’s compiled an impressive body of work. So it just feels like her time.)

Best actor in a supporting role: Woody Harrelson, “The Messenger.” (The movie, one of several fine meditations of late on the terrible toll of war, is perhaps too grim and little seen to attract voters. But the sometimes erratic Harrelson proves himself a serious acting force in this tightly contained yet volatile performance. It is indeed Oscar-worthy.)

Best actress in a leading role: Sandra Bullock, “The Blind Side.” (Another popular – and populist – actress who is finally nominated for a role weighty and inspirational enough to attract lots of sympathetic voters. It just feels like she’s due.)

Best actor in a leading role: Jeff Bridges, “Crazy Heart.” (Call it the Lebowski Effect, but Bridges inhabits broken-down, psychically damaged roles like Bad Blake as if he were born on a barstool in a bowling alley. He’s another actor whose body of superb work should win him loads of popular support among fellow actors, even in a shaggy-dog movie such as this.)

Best director: Kathryn Bigelow, “The Hurt Locker.” (All indicators – previous awards ceremonies – point to a breakthrough Oscar for Bigelow. First woman ever to win and all that. Aside from the juicy satisfaction of seeing her beat out James “King of the World” Cameron, her ex-husband with his monumental ego, Bigelow simply deserves to win for a superior piece of film storytelling – rich in detail, complex human dimension and thrumming dramatic impact.)

Best picture. “The Hurt Locker.” (With all the hoopla about expanding the best picture category to 10 nominees, in the final run it seemed to narrow down to a two-picture race between “The Hurt Locker” and “Avatar.” Low-budget indie grit versus big-budget special-effects razzle-dazzle. Gut-level storytelling versus high-tech eye-candy. Art versus commerce. Perhaps setting up this David-and-Goliath dynamic will succeed in drawing in more viewers to the Oscar telecast, but if Oscars are in truth about celebrating some mythic “best” in the year’s movies, then all 10 nominees are winners. But “The Hurt Locker” should be first among equals.)