The vastly infamous Oscar awards are approaching to seal the end of an intriguing award season. The 98th Oscars are being hosted on the 15th of March (Which I'm aware will be preceding the release of this article, I assure you that these predictions have been made long before the results of the Oscars) by comedian Conan O’Brien in the utopia of Los Angeles, California. This last year of cinema has been record breaking, with Ryan Coogler's ‘Sinners’ being nominated for an astounding 16 awards by the academy, as well as being an increase in the use of IMAX cameras in films. IMAX’s aspect ratio is visually existential and cannot be replicated in common movie theatres, making the impending release of Christopher Nolan's ‘The Odyssey’ that more anticipated and artful. 

Before we delve into both mine and Stanwell's Oscar predictions, let me preface who the academy are and what may influence their ‘controversial’ decision making. ‘The Academy’ actually refers to ‘The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences’ which is an increasingly prestigious worldwide film premiere organization. The 11,000+ privileged members make that crucial decision which shapes a once hopeful performer to either a renowned Hollywood darling, or a ‘falieur’.

 So why is their decision making ‘controversial’? The academy's members have in recent times become fairly outdated, with them not being as well informed or interested in cinema as they once were. To get into this highly exclusive committee you must be nominated by not one but two current academy members and then go under review until you are either accepted or denied. Unfortunately, just like the industry itself, it's all about who you know. This means that there is a lack of diversity in the Academy's voters which means that films that meet a certain formula are awarded, not for its skill or for the movie itself. Members have also admitted to not watching the films or having them on in the ‘background’. In fact, some have publicly stated they voted for their films of choice purely ‘off the vibes’. Overall the Oscars have been stated to be illegitimate or biased, but largely their reward receivers are very much deserving. 

Let's delve into the whos and whys of this year's most anticipated event.

1. Best Actor in a lead role.

The line up for best actor this year is beyond iconic. From Timothee Chalamet's performance 

of the arrogant, ambition chasing Marty Mauser, Leonardo DiCaprio's portrayal of Bob Ferguson, 

Ethan Hawke's performance in ‘Blue Moon’ all which have reviewers going wild. ‘ Ethan Hawke 

brings to life one of the best screenplays that Hollywood has ever seen with a performance that 

needs to be seen to be believed.'1. And Wagner Moura’s eccentric performance in ‘The Secret Agent’. 

However, none of these compare to Michael B. Jordan's unbelievable portrayal of the Smoke-Stack 

twins in ‘Sinners’. I feel as if his winning of this award is a no brainer. His attention to detail when 

differentiating the twins is like a surgeon's when performing surgery. To embody himself in the two 

roles, Jordan admitted to wearing different sized shoes for each twin as it changed his stance and 

agility. It is a largely impressive feat to play two roles so well that the audience forgets it's the same person playing both. 

In my questionnaire, 50% of the participants voted for Timothee Chalamet in Marty Supreme, whilst 25% voted for Michael B Jordan and 25% for Leonardo Dicaprio. Despite conflicting reviews, I do believe that Marty Supreme was an incredible film with an incredible performance from Timothee Chalamet. However, due to his recent press interviews it seems that Chalamet was playing an extreme version of his own demeanor, which unfortunately just made his performance not as impressive as Michael B. Jordan's. 

2. Best Actor in a supporting role.

This category is harder to decide than the lead roles. Up for the glamorous reward is Jacob Elordi for his portrayal of the ‘Monster’ in Guillermo Del Toro's ‘Frankenstein’, Both Sean Penn and Benicio del Toro for their roles in ‘One battle after another’, Delroy Lindo’s loveable performance in ‘Sinners’ and finally Stellan Skarsgård for ‘Sentimental Value’ (Which unfortunately may face disadvantages as an international film in an English film dominated category)

As someone studying Del Toro's work currently, I found that Frankenstein was nothing short of a classic Del Toro masterpiece. I have hopes that Jacob Elordi, the new up and comer in Hollywood, will take the renowned Oscar home on Sunday as the results of the questionnaire agree. Three thirds of respondents have voted for Elordi, for reasons such as Lilyanas; ‘I voted for Jacob Elordi because he embodied his character’. However, I must agree with this responders comment; ‘He is an incredible actor, but it is a toss up between him and Sean Penn.’ due to the opinion of this responder that ‘One battle after another is designed for awards’. Now, I don't agree with their point in completion, due to the fact that Sean Penn's performance in ‘One battle after another’ was indeed captivating as well as the film's plot. His complete descent into obsession was disturbing and effectively encapsulated. I do believe that Sean Penn is more likely to be recognised by the Academy than Jacob Elordi.

3. Best Actress in a leading role.

This category is highly competitive this year, however the winner seems predictable. In the running, we have Emma Stone’s stone cold portrayal of Michelle for Bugonia. Rose Bryne ‘The often under-utilised actor gives a monumental performance' 2 as Linda in ‘If I had legs I’d kick you’. The ever famous and talented Kate Hudson in Song Song Blue, Renate Reinseve in ‘Sentimental Value’, and finally Jessie Buckley in ‘Hamnet’. 

I fear that Jessie Buckley's performance not only has imploded the internet with fascination, but imprinted itself into the public's mind. The Guardian couldn't have put it better; ‘Buckley is a dead cert for best actress at the Oscars; by itself, the raw howl of grief she makes after the death of her son should bagsy her the statue’ 3. Her transformative portrayal of a once ‘dumbed down’ figure of Shakespeare's life as an illiterate woman who has a significant age gap with her husband who was plagued as a cougar and witless to beautifully complex and empowered is awe inspiring. She is guaranteed this award. Our questionnaire agrees too, with only one vote against Buckley to Stone, with responders calling her performance ‘Genuine and artistic’. 

4. Best actress in a supporting role. 

Here is another lineup that will have me clenching my teeth together before its bestowment. We have the beautifully eccentric Elle Fanning and Inga Isdotter Lilleaas in Sentimental Value, the wonderfully captivating portrayal of Perfidia in ‘One battle after another’, the comforting yet commanding performance from Wunmi Mosaku in ‘Sinners’ and Amy Madigan in ‘Weapons’. 

I simply cannot reach a confident position. Wunmi Mosaku has had a wonderful award season so far, and it would fill me with an insane pride if she won an Oscar for her otherworldly portrayal of Annie. As someone who has been fortunate enough to see this masterpiece of a piece of art four times now, her performance is not tiresome but reinvented every time I watch it. However, Amy Madigan in ‘Weapons’ was downright haunting. From her mannerisms to her fierce yet welcoming glare, Madigan is a force to be reckoned with in her role as Gladys. If either of these simply admirable women win, I will be satisfied. 

To my surprise, the questionnaire has opposed me. Whilst 25% of participants voted for Amy Madigan, 25% for Wunmi Mosaku too, Elle Fanning emerged victorious with 50% of responders promoting her performance in ‘Sentimental Value’. However, Owain Fortunka has given validation to Fanning's commendable win; ‘Elle fanning is deserving for recognition more than film performance’. As a long time fan of fanning, I must agree. 

And now… for the category we have all been in anticipation for…

5. Best Picture.

There are a whopping 10 films in this category. These films include:

• Bugonia

• F1

• Frankenstein

• Hamnet

• Marty Supreme

• One battle after another

• The secret Agent

• Sentimental Value

• Sinners

• Train Dreams

Which do I think is most deserving of this impeccable achievement award? I am in analysis-paralysis over this. My heart goes, unfortunately, to Marty Supreme. Do I wish Sinners would win? Yes. Very deeply. However, Marty Supreme's cinematography, hyper engaging plot, incredible performances from all involved, and the fact it practically frames its actors for awards. I believe it will prevail. Sinners was a piece of impeccable art, and if it lost it would be a massive robbery of the cast and crew's efforts, in which a participant of the questionnaire explains simply; ‘It should be Sinners but this is a highly competitive list’. In my ideal world, both would win. This decision is made in spite of Marty Supreme's character, as I despised him impeccably. I suppose that shows a job well done. 

Finally, what do you think? From a sample of Stanwell's students and many interviews, 50% of participants believe that Sinners will be rewarded this lifetime achievement as ‘It has impacted film forever’. 25% Believe that one battle after another will win, which I do believe the Academy will favour despite the brilliance of the film itself. Furthermore, 25% voted for F1, which is plain wrong in my eyes when this list is so highly competitive. 

Citations:

1.https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/blue_moon_2025

2.https://www.theguardian.com/film/2025/jan/24/if-i-had-legs-id-kick-you-review-rose-byrne

3. https://www.theguardian.com/film/2026/mar/06/hamnet-oscars-jessie-buckley-paul-mescal-chloe-zhao

What is Stardew Valley?

Stardew Valley is a quaint farming game, where you, the player, join the residents of Pelican Town on adventures while expanding your farm and building relationships. Stardew Valley is a very low stress game where you can choose to spend your time romancing the village jock or fishing for several hours to make money. How you play it is up to you! There are so many amazing features, including moral choices, maintaining relationships and even children! While there are many paths to go about the game and many tasks that each villager sets up in the storyline, there is one overarching decision: do you build / restore the Community Centre or Joja Mart.

A Moral Standpoint

For me, this is a no brainer; Community Centre is the only acceptable option. Why would you support a capitalist, albeit fictional, corporation that doesn't need more money when you could be supporting local people in a local store? It is even mentioned in the gameplay by Penny that things have been going down for Pierre even since they moved in, as he has to compete with their longer open times and pricing. In addition, they even stuck their entitled noses into his store to offer discounts to HIS customers, driving them out of the store when he has a family to feed. If that is not enough to convince you, look at the Junimos, the adorable spirits of Stardew Valley. After the community center completion, they rejoin their brethren in the spirit world. Without that, they would have been run out of the center by the Joja Corporation to build a warehouse where a building that's beneficial to the local people should be!

In my opinion, there is no world in which choosing the Joja Mart is the correct moral decision, but if you are the kind of person who values gameplay over morals, I have some answers.

Community Center - Pros and Cons

Pros:

• Have a variety of rewards for each bundle

• Have the ability to unlock different aspects of the game such as the Greenhouse, minecarts and bus stops

• Improves relationships with villagers overall and restores Pelican Town to its former glory

• Each room completed in The Community Centre has long term benefits and adds new features

• Individual cutscenes for each room completion

• Pierre's store becomes opened on Wednesdays and a new cutscene “The Local Legend” is unlocked

• Creates short goals for you to focus on and gives a sense of accomplishment

• Fits better with the players goal at the start of the game and makes the story flow better

Cons:

• It requires 26 different bundles, designed to have you experience all aspects of the game, great for new players not so good for experienced ones

• The building has very little practical effect

• It is harder to obtain the Auto-petter as it can no longer be purchased from Morris

• You have to find rather than buy items to progress in the game

Joja Mart - Pros and Cons

Pros:

• You can buy the expansions to the game such as Greenhouse, minecarts and Bus stops instead of having to unlock it

• It allows for a quicker completion of the overall story line

• No need to search for Auto Petters in the Skull Cavern as it can be purchased from Morris for 50,000 gold

• It is open longer than Pierre's general store with times of 9am to 11pm

• Cheaper prices once you have bought a membership

• You don't have to fish or forage if you don't want to and can focus on money making or industrial farming if that is your game style

• Gives you a free Joja Cola machine which gives a free source of energy (and also a helpful gift to Skater boy Sam)

• You do not need to find specific fish, crops or items and are not rushed to do so before a season ends

Cons:

• You will have to spend 135,000 gold in total to complete all the tasks

• No real goal other than to make money

• You miss out on free items given by the Junimos for completing bundles (e.g seeds, machines, tools)

• Morris replaces the Junimos leading to less rewarding cutscenes

• You miss out on 2-heart friendship boosts with villagers from the bulletin bundle

• Characters may have more depressed dialogue and the town becomes more industrial

Why Teenagers Feel Both Younger and Older 

By Anna O'Neill

Teenagers' ears are filled with “grow up!”, as we are supposedly ‘not acting our age’ and are expected to plan out our entire future. Only to be reduced to ‘just kids’ so soon after. The expectation held on teenagers to act mature yet also be constantly reminded that they’re ‘just a kid’, inevitably confuses many adolescents. What is true? Are teenagers too immature for today’s society? Or, should most teenagers be humbled? My focus lies on what the causes of this confusion are and how it makes teenagers feel younger and older simultaneously.

As a pre-teen, we choose our GCSE options; these options may direct the path of what we later choose for our A-Levels. Without realising it, a major decision in our life is gone, and if it isn’t taken seriously, it can be detrimental to a student’s school life. Though at the same age, we are told we are ‘too young’ to take anything too seriously. How can we be expected to take this decision fully into account if we are ridiculed for doing so? With academic pressure and prospects becoming more and more apparent in teenage lives, many teens will feel their youth slipping away as their focus is on their future. 

Advancements in technology and the pandemic have brought this generation into great reliance on social media. For many teens, social media platforms can leave them crying with laughter from funny, relatable content on TikTok or enjoying cute animal videos on Instagram. However, this connection to social media can subconsciously lead many teenagers to mature more quickly due to large levels of exposure to adult issues. The danger of youth being made aware of serious subjects outside of a safe space is making young people grow up faster and faster, losing their childhood and innocence. Whilst it isn’t fair to say a 14-year-old like me is as emotionally mature as someone in their early 20s today, since it would be entirely untrue. The relationship between young people and social media is only expanding, so the question of whether, in 10 years, social media has progressed so much to a point where a 14-year-old could be as mature as a 20-year-old is something that, at this moment, we cannot be sure of. 

Teenagers today are growing up in a world that expects independence from a young age. From choosing career paths to managing online exposure, many feel forced to mature quicker than ever before. Yet at the same time, their feelings are dismissed simply because of their age. 

Society is very much guilty of treating teens differently depending on the situation, usually for its own convenience. When young people achieve something impressive, they may be told they have so much time and ‘freedom’ to be able to. Yet, when a teen is exploring their identity and who they are, they may be told there’s no time for it. Whilst still seen to have the maturity of a teen, teens are expected to have the responsibility of an adult. But also be granted no credit for the responsibility that they take on. For young people, even making minor mistakes can be judged harshly. 

Being young means that you’re still developing your emotions, identity, and confidence, and it shouldn’t be rushed or shamed. These various factors can affect the way that teenagers think and lead them to feel an in-between angst, whilst they navigate what can be very difficult years of their lives.