Oscar theorists all have their notions about the failure of ?Dreamgirls? to get a best picture nomination last week, despite eight other nominations for Academy Awards and an all-out drive by its backers for top honors.

Salma Hayek and the academy president, Sid Ganis, announcing the nominees for best picture last week.

Too few voters saw the musical at industry screenings, one argument goes. Performances by the newcomer Jennifer Hudson and by Eddie Murphy, each of whom received nominations, overshadowed the film, others say. Marketers were seduced by the movie?s admiring press.

Or, perhaps as Bill Condon, the ?Dreamgirls? director who wrote the script for the 2003 Oscar-winner ?Chicago,? said on Friday, ?I think academy members just liked the other movies better.?

Whatever its cause, the snub left Paramount Pictures and DreamWorks SKG, Viacom units that financed the film, scrambling to capitalize on prospects that were suddenly less dazzling. As well as prestige, a best picture nomination is a valuable asset and can give a film like this one ? a musical seeking mainstream credibility ? an added boost in theaters and on DVDs.

In the background too were two of Hollywood?s must substantial figures. Brad Grey, Paramount?s chairman, had been through a rough year and could have used the good news of a best picture ? something he may still get with ?Babel.? David Geffen, though not credited as the producer of ?Dreamgirls,? was nonetheless responsible for its birth, having waited 25 years to see a reinvention of the original play onscreen.

Nowhere is the line between selling and overselling more delicate than in an Oscar campaign. And ?Dreamgirls,? having stumbled in a dance of managed expectations, may well be remembered as the picture that showed how far a studio cannot go in seeking a prize.

/www.nytimes.com/2007/01/29/business/media/29dreamgirls.html"">Read more at NYTimes

javascript""> javascript"" src=""http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/show_ads.js""> "