Disclosure Day Is Lurking in Exactly the Right Places

That might be exactly where a Steven Spielberg movie wants to be in August.

The film opened in June to strong, if not euphoric, reviews. Rotten Tomatoes currently has it at 80 percent from more than 400 critics. The site's consensus calls Emily Blunt's work a career highlight. The Associated Press described the movie as a return to Spielberg's classic adventure instincts, while The Guardian praised Blunt and the film's mixture of conspiracy thriller, wonder and sentiment.

The reservations have been consistent too. Some critics find the plotting overextended, the final stretch less satisfying than the setup, and the movie more emotionally persuasive in individual moments than as a complete narrative.

That response does not scream Best Picture winner.

It does create a lot of categories.

Blunt is the center of TSR's acting case. We currently have her third in Best Actress, behind Inde Navarrette and Olivia Wilde.

The external race is less settled. She is not currently in Next Best Picture's top five, but her reviews have been strong enough to keep the possibility alive. Gold Derby began discussing her Oscar prospects immediately after release, and Rotten Tomatoes' consensus specifically identifies the performance as one of the film's major strengths.

That kind of critical agreement matters more than a June ranking.

Blunt's role is also unusually well matched to Spielberg. She spends much of the movie reacting to things that should be impossible, and Spielberg has spent decades directing faces in the moment disbelief becomes wonder. The performance does not need to compete with the visual effects. It is the reason they mean anything.

Then there is Spielberg himself.

TSR currently has him third in Director. That is aggressive compared with several external boards, but the logic is straightforward. Disclosure Day is a movie whose pleasures are inseparable from direction. The movement through crowds, the geography of the chases, the transition from paranoia to awe, the use of John Williams' music and the control of tone all carry a filmmaker's signature.

The movie is not trying to prove Spielberg can still direct.

It is reminding voters how much of this kind of filmmaking they associate with him in the first place.

The crafts provide the quieter route.

John Williams is already high in score predictions. Next Best Picture's current panel has 15 of 17 pundits predicting him for a nomination, while its user model gives him a strong place near the top of the category. Disclosure Day also appears in sound predictions, even if it is not leading them.

Those are not random nominations.

They create the outline of a film the Academy can respect across branches even if it never becomes the season's obsession.

That is how movies remain alive.

A June release does not need every conversation to be about Best Picture. It needs a series of smaller conversations that keep returning people to the film. Blunt can do that. Williams can do that. Spielberg can do that. Sound can do that. The broader craft can do that.

By the time nominations are approaching, those separate arguments can begin reinforcing one another.

The risk is that Disclosure Day becomes everybody's sixth choice.

There are films with stronger current Best Picture momentum. There are directors carrying newer narratives. Best Actress is brutal. Original Score is already filled with major names and major films. Science fiction can collect technical nominations without converting them into top-category support.

And Spielberg does not have an overdue story.

No voter needs to be told the Academy should recognize him before it is too late. They already have.

That means Disclosure Day must survive on the film itself.

The good news is that the movie keeps giving voters reasons to return to it.

The campaign does not need to convince the industry that this is Spielberg's masterpiece. It needs to make the case that one of the year's most accomplished mainstream films deserves to be represented in the categories where its strengths are clearest.

That is a smaller argument.

It may also be a more effective one.