Sean Penn probably deserved it, but...

Photo: Chris Carlson, AP

I still haven't seen many of the films nominated in last night's Academy Awards, including Milk and The Wrestler. So I can't really tell you who I thought should have won any of the awards last night. But what I do know is what the press and other more-informed, wider published critics predicted, and five of the six big categories were unsurprisingly what they predicted; Kate Winslet avoided being the Oscar's Susan Lucci, Penelope Cruz said something in Spanish, the Joker got the last laugh, Slumdogs cleaned up the top prizes.

But what of the Best Actor award? That was the big mystery of the night. Would they go with the heavily hyped comeback of Mickey Rourke? Or would they get topical and give a third award to Sean "Commie-Homo-Loving-Son-of-a-Gun" Penn? Most people were placing their hopes in Rourke, because his pitch is the great story - the fuck-up who comes away with gold. He doesn't wear the whole "now I'm on the straight and narrow" suit that convincingly, but that's what makes him so cool. He's this mad dog who could potentially get the highest acting award in the world.

But of course, the award didn't go to him. Sean Penn took his third gold plated statue home for playing the real-life assassinated homosexual politician Harvey Milk. It shouldn't be that surprising in theory; when given the choice, the Academy seems to prefer an actor who plays a person based on real life. Only four of the best actor winners this decade have won playing original characters, this as opposed to eight in the previous decade.

But there's another precedent worth noting - Penn's first Best Actor award in 2004 for his role in Mystic River. Because I haven't seen that film yet either, I can't really say with any critical honesty whether or not I thought he deserved that award. That's really aside the point. But look who his main competition was that year. Bill Murray for Lost In Translation. Here was a comic actor, a guy who made a career as a smart-ass turning more introspective with age, in a movie with My Bloody Valentine on the soundtrack. Johnny Depp channeling Keith Richards not withstanding, Murray was like Rourke, the dark horse with a shot at gold - the cool nominee (or for you Depp fans, the cool nominee who actually had a shot of winning.)

But then they gave the award to Penn. What does one make of this? It'd be a stretch to call Penn a safe choice. He's one of the most well-respected actors in Hollywood, but he also has a reputation of being a passionate risk-taker, which some might call cool in its own right. But not as cool, because he can be a bit too serious about his art. Maybe that's why he'd get picked over the cool guys. Who knows what sort of irreverent places Rourke and Murray could have taken the award?

Or he could just be a better actor getting awards based solely on the merit his work. I know, crazy!