Because of Watergate and Vietnam, and possibly also because in so many respects he still can seem like a central casting villain, Nixon gets depicted in movies a lot more than presidents you’d think we’d like to see on screen more often.  Want to see a movie about George Washington? Well, there was David Gordon Green’s “George Washington,” but our nation’s first president wasn’t exactly a character. Nixon, on the other hand, has been depicted in starring roles in numerous theatrical and TV movies by, among other, Frank Langella, Anthony Hopkins, Philip Baker Hall, and even Beau Bridges. Nixon was even portrayed by comedian Chuck McCann as Oliver Hardy to Vice President Spiro Agnew’s Stan Laurel in a 1972 ultra-ultra-obscure comedy called “Another Nice Mess.” (You may know writer-director Bob Einstein as TV’s Marty Funkhouser and/or Super Dave Osborne. ) If I could find a clip, I’d definitely feature it here but the film has apparently been secreted somewhere, perhaps in Dick Cheney’s man-sized safe.

In any case, my favorite portrayal of Nixon is by the great Dan Hedaya in the title role of Andrew Fleming’s underrated little 1999 comedy, “Dick.” One thing the film gets right is the innate humor of Nixon’s situation — a man with almost no sense of humor whatsoever (always hilarious) who was also the least hip man in America, president at a time when hipness was at a kind of premium.

Nice supporting cast in this one, huh?

Anyhow, the clear winner over the next few days will almost certainly be yet another version of Charles Dicken’s constantly remade and revisited holiday perennial, this time from Disney, “A Christmas Carol.” Jim Carrey stars as Scrooge, who won’t hurt at the box office and Robert Zemeckis, in his “Polar Express” mode, is at the helm. Personally, while I found the earlier motion-capture movie a fun visceral thrill ride in Imax 3-D, despite a story that was the very definition of treacle, I personally find this style of animation extremely ugly; it’s as if it’s always stuck in the armpit of the Uncanny Valley. Moreover critics, including our own David Medsker, complain that Zemeckis gets carried away with the effects and makes things a bit too visceral and scary for the film’s own good. Still, if it worked even for Mr. Magoo, there’s no reason to think it won’t work well enough for some fiscal redemption. THR‘s Carl DiOrio, whose nearly as jolly as an way-too-early St. Nick, is guessing it’ll grab about $40 million in premature yuletide cheer. A split decision by critics is, I suppose, neither here nor there.

After that, we have four films that will be duking it out with two extant strong releases, Michael Jackson’s ghostly final bow, “This Is It,” which may benefit from better than expected word of mouth and, of course, the horrifyingly profitable “Paranormal Activity.” Intriguingly, all these new major releases have a slightly spooky and/or “paranormal” spin and trying to guess which will do best is probably about as wise as playing with a Ouija board at a demon-infested San Diego townhome.

However, if traditional values and star power still mean anything all, the most likely third or fourth placer is, “The Men Who Stare at Goats” which brings us George Clooney, Jeff Bridges, Ewan McGregor, and Kevin Spacey in an R-rated semi-Strangelovian semi-dark comedy from Overture about military guys messing about with supposed psychic powers (which may have actually happened once or twice in real history.) This is the kind of material I personally eat up with a spoon, and even researched for various terrible and/or unwritten screenplays in another life. Still, I ain’t audiences and the buzz on this one from the festival circuit was fairly muted and the critics are just on the positive side of “meh.” On the other hand, Variety reports that it’s “tracking” well and considering the lack of fresh comedy contenders in theaters right now and the presence of four very reliable performers, this would appear to be the one to bet on among the lower-profile new releases. What I wouldn’t bet on it for, however, is much in the way of awards.

Now, if you really are looking for Oscar contenders as we near the traditional period I call “good movie season,” you’re apparently looking a bit early. The only film with serious awards buzz this week is a limited release, the critically buzzed dark drama “Precious.” With an assist from Tyler Perry and Oprah Winfrey, who’ve lent their names and their dollars to the release, this adaptation of a popular novel, “Push” — about a sexually abused, dysfunctional teen with a non-traditionally cinematic weight problem — will be opening on eighteen screens in New York, L.A., Chicago, and Atlanta.

Getting back to the theater-count big time, we have a pair of kind of decidedly off-kilter PG-13 thrillers and my not-so paranormal hunch is that they’ll likely generate a shrug from audiences. First we have the latest from backlash-beset ex-whiz kid Richard Kelly of “Donnie Darko” fame, “The Box” from Warner Brothers. As befits a major release going to more than 2,600 theaters, this is not the same kind of weirdness which had some older critics flashing back to such sixties art-monstrosities as “Myra Breckenridge” with Kelly’s last film, “Southland Tales.” Indeed, the morally fraught premise — push a button, win $1,000,000 (in seventies cash!) but also killl some random schmoe — has a bit of “Twilight Zone” appeal to it. That makes sense; it’s based on a story by Richard Matheson (the novel I Am Legend), who wrote many of the best episodes of the show. Still, it appears that Kelly has done has Kelly extra-strange thing here to some degree, which might not help commercially and appears to have divided critics, again. On the other hand, having Cameron Diaz, James Marsden, and Frank Langella as the creepy gifter won’t hurt this one.

On the other hand, I’m not sure if even the hotness of Milla Jovovich can do very much for “The Fourth Kind,” a sci-fi thriller which, in tried and true grindhouse-derived fashion, is trying — pretty lamely from the sound of it — to pass itself off as somehow fact based. As the mighty Roger reminds us, the untrue “based on a true story” gimmick is something that even worked in one genuine classic, “Fargo.” Of course, Steven Spielberg’s “Close Encounters of the Third Kind” also traded on the then-trendy idea that UFO’s could actually be real alien spaceships in its ads, but mollified skeptics with a classy movie.

Especially in the wake of the intelligent marketing of “Paranormal Activity,” which stopped well short of trying to fool anyone into actually thinking it was real, I suspect the scent of cheese here will be overpowering. Indeed, my esteemed colleague Jason Zingale indicates it might be laughed off the screen. Finally, one guy’s opinion among the mostly awful reviews invoked the ghost of Edward D. Wood, Jr. and the Amazing Criswell.

Join me on Sunday for the box office results, when we’ll punish the guilty and reward the probably not-quite innocent.

* I’ve just barely finished my decades-long personal boycott of the original, and now there they’re talking about a remake of John Milius’s “Red Dawn”. The 1984 film may seem a bit quaint now that it’s old enough to be ready to finish grad school but at the time it seemed to me an irresponsible act of cultural provocation with potentially catastrophic impact if people took it too seriously. Fortunately, few did and most took its absurd plot about a Soviet land invasion as the balderdash that it was. Back then, Republicans and Democrats alike knew that World War III would last about 90 minutes and result in the destruction of most everyone and everything. (This was before the tinfoil hate hat era of Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin.)

As political propaganda, the prior year’s “War Games” proved far more effective and possibly even affected movie-bred President Reagan’s thinking on the topic as well. In any case, a film about a Chinese-Russian co-invasion (don’t they still hate each other?) seems just bizarre now and, again, pretty much impossible — assuming it doesn’t end with something very close to complete annihilation.

* Frank Langella, whose characters have ranged from Dracula to Richard Nixon (which of them would you buy a used car from?), is joining the cast of “Wall Street 2.” Makes sense.

* The slowish (but steady) build of “The Hurt Locker” has led to a round of the old cultural-degeneration meme from A.O. Scott and Roger Ebert, among others. (With a nod to H.G. Wells and George Pal, Jeffrey Wells gets going with Eloi and Morlocks.). I’m usually a complete skeptic on stuff like this and I truly believe the Internet and possibly even cable and long-form television (“The Daily Show,” “The Sopranos,” and “Mad Men” are not signs of cultural degeneration) and complex video games have to some degree saved us from the complete brain melt warned about by Paddy Chayefsky in “Network.” Say what you will about the ‘net and video games, they are not the passive mind suckers that the vast, vast majority of seventies and eighties TV was. I also think that we tend to look on the past with a rosier glow than it really rates. For example, good movies stay with us while the vast majority of bad movies are forgotten. Also, as my item above about “Red Dawn” may indicate, it’s not like stupidity or ignorance are new inventions, though we’re endlessly perfecting them.

Nevertheless, I do believe there is something to some of what Ebert said, at least as it relates in a very strict sense to movies in particular. Still, as the ever sane, and now thankfully fully returned, David Hudson points out, “The Hurt Locker” is doing well enough and Paramount is even reteaming director Kathryn Bigelow and writer Mark Boal for a new meaty action-adventure piece. That, by the way, is the kind of sequel that nearly always makes sense.

Wow. In one sense this is a shocker. Mickey Rourke seemed like a lock. If he didn’t get it, many thought Frank Langella also deserved to win.

Then again, given the subject matter of “Milk,” it’s not surprising that Sean Penn got the nod here. He acknowledged as much in his acceptance speech.