Much to my delight, Naomi Watts has once again been recognized by the Academy, earning her second Best Actress nomination. Much to my chagrin, she won’t win. Much to my post-chagrin delight, that’s fine by me. She shouldn’t win. Not now. Not for The Impossible anyway.

There is nothing wrong with the movie itself per se, just as there is nothing wrong with Watts’ performance. On the contrary, The Impossible is just about the best film about the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami one could hope for (even if the backlash against director J.A. Bayona’s decision to focus on the ultimately triumphant story of a vacationing British family instead of its broader devastation does warrant some pause), and I wouldn’t necessarily have cast another actress to play Maria Bennett, a severely wounded mother trying to locate her husband (Ewan McGregor, who has a moment in the film that may be his finest) and two of her three children (the extraordinary child actor Tom Holland plays the son she’s able to keep by her side) among the wreckage.

Well, it happened again. Nominations day has come and gone and again I was blindsided by some truly shocking inclusions and snubs. Ben Affleck shut out of the directors field? Bigelow, too? Life of Pi AND Flight score screenplay noms? The Avengers only manages one measly nod despite critical praise and a box office bonanza, while its more awards-hungry brother The Dark Knight Rises is completely shut out. No love for Matthew McConaughey?!?

Obviously, different inclusions and exclusions bothered different people, but obviously Beasts of the Southern Wild proved me wrong (though I had it just missing out) and Amour rode a late wave of critical and old fogey Academy member adoration to steal a slot away from The Master.

This is, of course, potentially disastrous news for the film’s chances of taking home the Best Picture prize at this year’s Oscars since generally speaking, a nominated film doesn’t win if its director isn’t at least in the running herself. While Jessica Chastain still seems a lock to take home Best Actress and David Boal’s screenplay stands a decent chance of emerging victorious (there are several other technical awards Zero will likely grab as well), the exclusion of Bigelow in the race is a bizarre, controversial development indeed. Bigelow’s Hurt Locker comeback, after years of being diminished to little more than James Cameron’s ex-wife and reportedly being passed up for big Hollywood films that ultimately went to flashier male directors, offered an irresistible narrative to complement Locker’s unprecedented slow-burn success. Bigelow telling the story of the decade-long hunt for Osama Bin Laden and his ultimate assassination—all apparently orchestrated by an obsessively committed female operative—seemed a natural fit, and her path to Best Director perfectly paved. Until last week, that is, when the nominations were announced and she was conspicuously absent.

Year after year movies with innovative cinematography—which means an efficient, groundbreaking use of not only light but also camera movement—get snubbed in favor of classically lit works that evoke old paintings and photographs. However, year after year we also see movies—often photographed by newish DP’s—that should be getting more notices during awards season. This is a list of those that made a lasting impression in 2012.

Nicole Kidman should have won her first Best Supporting Actress Oscar nomination today for The Paperboy. The actress already has three under her belt 2001’s Best Actress nomination for Moulin Rouge! (the same year she was also infinitely-nominatable The Others), 2002’s Best Actress win for her “Virginia Woolf” in The Hours, and a nomination for 2010’s Rabbit Hole, and following SAG and Golden Globe nominations, many thought she was a lock for a nomination today. However, history tells us that Kidman’s finest work is almost always left off Oscar’s list.