The Best Directing Oscar has not gone to a director born in America for the past four consecutive years. That’s the longest running gap in Oscar history. Last year, the first Mexican director won, Alfonso Cuaron for Gravity. The year prior, the brilliant Taiwanese genius, Ang Lee (a naturalized American citizen) won his second Oscar (another record breaker), the year before that, Michel Hazanavicius directed the first French film to win Best Picture, and prior to that, the old mainstay, a Brit, Tom Hooper won for The King’s Speech. The last time an American director won was Kathryn Bigelow for the Hurt Locker in 2009.
This reflects both reflects the changing landscape of the Oscars and the film industry overall – more focus on international and less on domestic product.
Though many of the early directors who built the Hollywood empire by directing iconic films were immigrants from other countries, like Billy Wilder (The Apartment), like Alfred Hitchcock (Psycho, Rear Window, Vertigo), like Frank Capra (It Happened One Night, It’s a Wonderful Life), Michael Curtiz (Casablanca), David Lean (Bridge on the River Kwai, Lawrence of Arabia), Milos Forman (Amadeus, One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest), this has been the longest stretch at the Oscars without an native-born American director winning.
The irony of it is that one reason American directors haven’t been winning has more to do with the experimental, often divisive work many of them are doing, as opposed to the more traditional types of storytelling that wooing a larger consensus often requires.
This year, as is the norm lately, there are directors hailing from all over the world currently flooding the Oscar race, with three Americans at the head of the pack. Richard Linklater for Boyhood, David Fincher for Gone Girl and Bennett Miller for Foxcatcher. They join Mexico’s González Iñárritu for Birdman as the four strongest contenders for the category this year so far. Four wildly different films, of darkness and light, of realism and fantasy, of dreams and nightmares.
The Masters
Boyhood is the culmination of the meditative storytelling of Richard Linklater, a director who really has never fit inside any box. What his work has to offer in abundance is depth and heart. He is a good-hearted person and that shines through in the films he writes, alone or with his collaborators. He’s the guy who put the camera on Julie Delpy and Ethan Hawke as they tore each other apart in the third of the Before films. He’s the guy who finds nothing more interesting in life than the art of conversation — two people walking the streets of Vienna, diving into the human condition. But Linklater is more than just someone interested in conversation, he is also known to pull rabbits out of his hat unexpectedly with films like Fast Food Nation, Dazed and Confused, Waking Life, A Scanner Darkly. You’d be hard pressed to nail him down to any one style except raw authenticity. But it’s really with Boyhood that’s Linklater has taken his work to a different level, perhaps one he didn’t even see coming. It isn’t just a gimmick, this making a film over a 12-year period. This is careful storytelling, planning and filming pieced together as though it had been filmed in 12 months.
What Linklater does so well in Boyhood is tell this story seamlessly, literally having it move along in the blink of an eye. Never has a film captured life and preserved it behind glass like that. You’d think the result would be to marvel at people aging before your eyes — and whether you connect with the material or not that happens to you while watching the film. But it’s more than that. It’s about the delicate accidental pathways we carve for ourselves and others that amount to the totality of our lives. If you’re one of those people who fights off dark nights of the soul you’ll already have figured this out. But if you haven’t, Boyhood might just do it for you.
When the film ends you realize that Linklater has really been telling the story of the mother, played brilliantly by Patricia Arquette. This was a love letter to her, and all of the teachers whose paths he crossed along the way. But to pay homage to the woman who did all of the hard work raising you? That’s some kind of thing. Boyhood has much going for it heading into the race and as many have already said, and I myself have said, it’s going to be a hard one to top.
It’s one of those odd stories in American film history that David Fincher hasn’t yet won an Oscar. He is already overdue twice over, once for Benjamin Button and again for The Social Network. Could it be possible, when all is said and done, that Fincher might join Kubrick and Hitchcock in the ranks of directors who gave us some of the finest films ever made but never won over the consensus? The buzz right now for Gone Girl is deafening. It has not only captured that elusive zeitgeist (as Fincher’s films often do) but it’s making big money. Dizzying, beautiful, haunting, Gone Girl is a send up of the right now, a companion piece to Fight Club and the Social Network as a sharp elbow to the ribs and a good laugh at the end of the night over the absurdity of it all. Each of these three films ends with a punctuation mark at the end of an ellipses. Working with an ensemble of talented actors, under the pulse of Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross, Fincher has probably made the most provocative film of the year in a year of very provocative films.
Gone Girl can be enjoyed on two different levels. For those hoping to get their money’s worth on date night, it delivers a thrill ride and something unexpected. But Gone Girl, like Fincher’s other films, will also appeal to viewers ready to take a deep to other layers, if they feel like going there. To do that you have to be willing to step back and look at the world around you and listen to what this film says about that world. You have to be willing to look at yourself and your place in that world. Gone Girl is at once about the striations of the institution of marriage as currently stands in American culture as it is about the way we choose to define ourselves outwardly, our avatar selves, our social networking disconnect between who we are and who we want people to think we are.
One of the reasons there is so much excitement for Gone Girl is that it’s the first big studio movie to come out in a long time that isn’t aimed at 13 year old boys — or the vast numbers of Americans of all ages and both sexes who sometimes seem to have the mentality of 13-year-old boys. Its presence in theaters, on social networks, and word of mouth is a stark reminder of how starving adult people are for movies about people rather than costumed or animated characters. Fincher makes films in hard R. How many directors are even allowed to do that anymore? Some of us remember how things used to be. Oscar season is the one time of year now where we get a chance to live it again. Summer used to be the only time for blockbusters aimed at tweens. Now it’s a year round event. It’s not surprising that the coverage for Gone Girl has been off the charts. Now that Oscar season is upon us there will be plenty of films coming to take up the slack, to become filler for a season that has way too many crows pecking at few crumbs of bread.
Either way you look at it, this is one of the year’s most talked about films, which can sometimes translate to an Oscar nomination.
Bennett Miller brings another pitch black comedy of sorts to the race with Foxcatcher, the true story of the murder of Dave Schultz at the hands of John Du Pont, heir to the Du Pont fortune. As the story of multimillionaire misfit, the film doesn’t try to be a documentary. Rather, it settles like a slimy layer left overnight on an otherwise serene American dream, rotten from the ground up. Both Gone Girl and Foxcatcher offer up that dream as a too-pretty facade that covers the absence of where real happiness can be found: in real human relationships. These films are about the buying and selling of that dream and how, in the end, it can’t be bought.
Foxcatcher is a slow burn, but ultimately one that leaves you groping around in the dark for the light switch. It’s not a film that is going to send you out of the theater skipping with childlike glee that all is right with the world. But oh, is it brilliant. As our country unwinds from the damage caused by two decades of a government going from a democracy to an oligarchy, here is a film that clearly shows how different these two worlds are. Though Foxcatcher works as a film based on a true story, it also works beautifully as a metaphor for the theft of the middle class at the hands of people who have no right to take such a thing.
Alejandro Gonzolez Inarritu’s Birdman is another pitch black comedy. That’s three, count ’em, three headed into the race. His camera trails a day in the life of a former superhero who is trying to fumble towards one last grab at respectability by making What We Talk About When We Talk About Love, the Raymond Carver short story, into a play (Adapted by, Directed by, and Starring!). It is another film about identity versus reality, illusion vs. delusion all pinned under what is made to look like a single take.
Like Gone Girl and Foxcatcher — and to a certain extent, Boyhood — here is another film that searches for the meaning of life, or the place where true happiness can be found. Birdman takes a merciless stab at criticism, fame, and even Twitter. There is a sense of artists fighting back at the strange way media has taken over the conversation. It is easy to make internet chatter and bloggers look stupid because when you look at it from real life’s point of view few things seem smaller than the silly shit we are all consumed by every second of every day online.
Though no one has yet gutted this modern phenom, Birdman comes pretty close to illuminating that modern-day feeling that there is just no THERE there anymore. The camera keeps us tied to the characters so that we can feel as suffocated as they do, so we can feel that there is no escape from the madness.
These are films that will define 2014, at least so far. The only one of them that can win the way the Academy votes now is Boyhood as it’s the only one that celebrates the goodness in us. In Boyhood, things turn out all right. There are no dramatic shifts in any direction to say that life is a sucky tragedy until we die, or that someone wins a million dollars and gets rich. There is just the heart-stopping beauty of the fleeting moments that fly by every second of every minute of every hour of the day.
When films like this come along any Academy member worth his or her salt would be wise to take notice, whether it makes you feel good or not. But this is an unwinnable war. With the balloting such as it is voters only have five choices for Best Picture, even if they include those that almost made it in.
Other masters hovering just outside the race would include:
Paul Thomas Anderson for Inherent Vice
Wes Anderson for The Grand Budapest Hotel
New Kids on the Block
The other directors right now that are looking to make a slash with their films would include:
James Marsh for The Theory of Everything
Damien Chazelle for Whiplash
David Ayer for Fury
Xavier Dolan for Mommy
Tommy Lee Jones for The Homesman
Jean-Marc Valle for Wild
Master directors who could really change the game:
Clint Eastwood, American Sniper
Eastwood has won Best Director twice (along with Best Picture). To win a third time would put in an elite club of only three other directors in Academy history to win more than two. John Ford holds the record with four wins but only one of those (How Green was my Valley) also won Best Picture. William Wyler is next, with Mrs. Miniver an The Best Years of Our Lives, and finally, Frank Capra who won three Oscars but only once with Best Picture, so Eastwood would have to really make Academy history here.
Christopher Nolan, Interstellar
It seems inconceivable from where I sit that Nolan will be excluded from the race for Best Director for Interstellar. The only snag is that he doesn’t make “accessible” films but rather requires that the audience be active participants.
Women are a Force to be Reckoned With
Ava DuVernay and Angelina Jolie are headed squarely into the Oscar race with Selma and Unbroken, two films about American heroes. DuVernay’s film is about the march for civil rights and the Voters Rights Act. Jolie’s film is about Louis Zamperini’s incredible life as a prisoner of war. This hardly ever happens, to have women — and especially not a black female director like DuVernay to get this close to the Oscar race. Sure, these films have not been seen yet but how great that we’re talking about them at all.
Best Director right now looks like this:
1. Richard Linklater, Boyhood
2. David Fincher, Gone Girl
3. Alejandro G. Inarritu, Birdman
4. Bennett Miller, Foxcatcher
5. Morten Tyldum, Imitation Game or James Marsh for Theory of Everything
It really is a roll of the dice as to what will happen in the coming months with screenings ahead. It seems most likely that Christopher Nolan will get in but it is too soon to know about the rest.
Jonny, Jolie is a good-will ambassador for UNHCR (like many other stars before her who have undertaken similar roles for UN organizations, notably Roger Moore and Audrey Hepburn). She reads the speeches she is given and gets all her expenses paid to do so. Her humanitarian work consists in acting out a role and drawing attention to the work of UNHCR. She doesn’t actually work in the field, you know. She is indubitably valuable to UNHCR as she is a genius at self-promotion and much more famous than other celebrities carrying out similar roles (about whom so little is heard).
I think she made a decision to change her image to Princess Di’s (Act II) after an initial attempt at being Madonna (Act I) (blood vials, French-kissing her brother, etc.). There will, I suppose, be a 3rd act somewhere along the line.
AILIDH, you dislike Jolie so of course you are going to say that. Most people in the academy clearly like her. She has two oscars. She is a pretty amazing woman in my opinion. To compare her humanitarian promotion to Madonna’s self promotion is offensive. Anything Jolie does is to promote her work and she works for causes.
Director prediction: Linklater (for the win), Nolan (P.T. Anderson’s “fucking incredible” comment went well beyond professional courtesy), Innaritu, Miller and Mike Leigh (he’s getting old, the Academy likes him and this is a career best for him).
Why does everyone assume Jolie’s going to hit it big with Unbroken? She’s a modestly talented actress, the only film she directed rates 56 on metacritic. Granted, the woman has a genius for self-promotion not seen since Madonna’s heyday. Nobody else think her massive over-exposure is going to backfire? The media bombardment of Brangelina makes me personally feel like I’ve been married to the two of them for 10 years and… I want a divorce.
Unbroken itself is problematical: way too many “episodes” which end with the hero’s conversion by Billy Graham. Is Jolie going to gloss over that (to appeal to the Academy) or highlight it (to appeal to right-wing religious audiences)?
Everybody seems impressed by the fact the script is by the Coens, but it is also by William Nicholson.
My prediction: this year’s Monuments Men.
Im thinking, in this early stage:
Linklater
Nolan
Jolie
Innaritu
Miller
People seem to be very on board with a nom for Nolan. I’m still very sceptical. I couldn’t be a bigger Nolan fan if I tried, but I just have a gut feeling that the academy won’t buy into it. Maybe a dangerous statement to make having not seen the film, but as it stands, I have my reservations.
My five: Nolan (and I’m not normally a fan), Inarritu, Linklater, Miller, and Jolie (bc I think Unbroken will make a big splash). Sorry Fincher- there will be too many bigger genre efforts this year.
Here are some names not mentioned that all have a shot at the final 5:
Ridley Scott, Exodus
Rob Marshall, Into The Woods
Stephen Daldry, Trash (provided it gets released)
Mike Leigh, Mr. Turner
JC Chandor, A Most Violent Year
Dan Gilroy, Nightcrawler
Argh, Mike Leigh! I knew I was overlooking someone, thanks, Mr. Mulholland. Leigh is definitely a major possibility given how the Academy has recognized his films in the past. “Mr. Turner” is still an unknown quantity (though Sasha has been praising it for months) to most of us, though right now I’m penciling Leigh in for a screenplay nomination on reputation alone.
“Sasha – during the avatar-hurt locker race, you said several times that the director is the star of the Oscar race. Two years later, after wins by Hooper and Hazanavicius, you seemed to feel that was no longer true. Are you orbiting back to that position?”
I think Sasha’s position was that the director was is the star of the Oscar race when their reputation or “victory narrative” outweighs the cast. That was certainly the case in 2009 when the Hurt Locker cast was largely unknown and Bigelow’s story was so great. You’ll sometimes see a film carried to Best Picture due to admiration for its stars (Firth in King’s Speech, Hopkins/Foster in Silence of the Lambs, Hanks in Forrest Gump) or for just general Academy appreciation of the film (Shakespeare in Love, Chicago) moreso than the director. Occasionally you’ll get a situation like last year, when both Cuaron and McQueen were greatly admired yet only one could take Best Director, and the other took Best Picture.
I saw Gone Girl yesterday. As much as I hate to disappoint Sasha, I thought it was mediocre. Fincher films beautifully. Ben Affleck was better than Ben Affleck has ever been (OK, that may be damning with faint praise), but I thought Pike’s performance was inadequate and the story ludicrous. Wanted to love it, my husband (the actiion movie fan) really liked it! I was terribly disappointed.
Just got back from seeing gone girl. Wow I really feel it was one of the best book to movie adaptations ever. Pike killed it literally. That scene in the bed was so awesome. I loved everyone in it. To me it’s finchers best movie so I am totally on board for him on the best director list.
Ah, Paddy. Shame on me. How right you are. I cant believe I forgot Spall in Mr. Leigh. Big contender there. Cant believe I forgot him, as I am a pretty big fan of both Spall and Leigh. Thanks for my oversight! 🙂
I’ve only seen GONE GIRL so I can’t really comment. But if everything goes according to plan I’ll be rooting for the Brit.
In Nolan we trust.
Angelina Jolie deserves to be in the conversation because Unbroken is being primed as a major contender. Whether it’s any good or not, whether she’s a tested director or not, someone somewhere thinks it stands a chance. Universal wouldn’t be playing it the way they are if they didn’t have some faith in her.
John, you mention all those possible Best Actor contenders, but you fall afoul of a curious affliction among AD commenters: underestimating / forgetting about Mr. Turner. Mike Leigh is a big favourite with the Academy, and the critical reception to that film has been very strong. Timothy Spall stands a good chance at picking up his first Oscar nomination for it.
The Grand Budapest Hotel will probably be forgotten about, by and large. Sorry bout it.
Jamdental, while I think Miller himself is vulnerable I don’t think Foxcatcher has peaked one bit. it still has yet to release wide. Once that happens we will see more raves, more TV commercials focusing on the acting and the tension between the characters. Foxcatcher is in a “calm, brewing storm” at the moment. I’m waiting for the tidal wave to hit in the next month or two.
After seeing Gone Girl, I’m pretty sure Fincher won’t make the lineup. I think Nolan is more than likely going to get a nom and Linklater is not as irremovable as other people realize.
Before its release, just for the buzz, trailers and potencial, it was obvious for me that Cuaron was going to win for Gravity last year, no matter if the movie could win Best Picture or not. Only having watched Boyhood so far, this year the even more obvious choice would be Nolan. The rest of the nominees I think could be Linklater, Fincher, Iñárritu and Tyldum. I don’t believe at this moment in Jolie’s chances at all, trailer looks a little bit like a tv movie with big budget.
Even though he won at Cannes and probably SHOULD be in the final five, I actually think Bennett Miller is the most vulnerable nominee right now. Just because I’m not sure if Foxcatcher has peaked or not, and whether he might not get beaten out by Tyldum (Marsh ain’t happening).
I think Boyhood is interesting because it follows the same people over 12 years, but the narrative meandered in uninteresting ways and therefore simply did not captivate me. Honestly the film was pretty average in my eyes–I feel like Kenneth Turan right now.
Sasha – during the avatar-hurt locker race, you said several times that the director is the star of the Oscar race. Two years later, after wins by Hooper and Hazanavicius , you seemed to feel that was no longer true. Are you orbiting back to that position?
I wouldn’t if I were you. The next 2 years were split director-picture years, proving the Academy doesn’t feel a great directorial achievement has to mean Best Picture.
I wouldn’t defend Gone Girl on the basis of Fincher’s auteur signature. Defend it like you would if the film had been directed the same exact way by Casey Affleck.
I don’t see the Oscars so into auteurs, certainly not the fanboy auteurs that made most of the films in the imdb top 50. I’d bet anyone here $20 that Fincher isn’t nominated for BD this year. I won’t make the same bet about Nolan…until I see the film. Here’s hoping it’s great and Oscar-undeniable (like Gravity).
“Will David Fincher continue oscarless? Yes! Probably the same will happen to Bennett Miller! And Innaritu! And Spike Lee| And Paul Thomas Anderson! And Chris Nolan! And Aronofsky! And Jane Campion! And Michael Haneke! And Takeshi Kitano! And Alexander Payne! And Terrence Mallick!”
Payne and Campion have both won screenplay Oscars, so they’re not exactly hurting for Academy recognition.
Sorry, Gone Girl is a good movie but is not one of the 10 best films of the year. Neither the film of Fincher should be nominated.
get Angelina Jolie out of there. has anyone seen her movie yet? if not- she doesn’t deserve to be in the convo. she paid a ton of money to buy a great book, great screenwriters, and a great dp. smart? yes! great director? haha. i have my doubts.
Here are last year’s low-ball metacritic scores for Best Picture nominees: Captain Phillips 83, Philomena 76 and Wolf of Wall Street 75. None of them descended to the levels currently occupied by Theory of Everything and Imitation Game. Which could have a knock-on effect on the Best Actor race. Dallas Buyers Club scored 84 on metacritic and two wins.. that’s still pretty far from TofE and IG’s current low scores.
Nolan is in and winning. I remain unconvinced there is really anything else to say about this year’s Director race 😛
There still aren’t that many reviews in for Theory of Everything and Imitation Game, but judging from metacritic (which many are loathe to do), with few reviews (but from major reviewers), they only stand at 68 and 71, respectively, hardly Oscar slam-dunks however Oscar-baity they may be.
Linklater and Nolan have never even been nominated for Best Director. P.T. Anderson’s review of Interstellar “it’s fucking incredible” – I take to the bank.
I say the race will be between Linklater and Nolan.
The first rank of American directors that sprung from the nineties indie movement are Tarantino, PT Anderson, Linklater and Wes Anderson. The fact that none of these guys have won either of the big prizes (Picture, Director) is a crime.
“This reflects both reflects the changing landscape of the Oscars and the film industry overall – more focus on international and less on domestic product.”
Oh c’mon. Cuaron won for directing a Sandra Bullock blockbuster. Lee’s film lost to American propaganda. And Hazanavicius didn’t make a “French” film really, but rather a silent film about Hollywood.
Magnolia and The Insider stand out as masterpieces over the last 15-20 years. Those are two of my favorite movies of all time.
Hmm. I reckon Wes Anderson doesn’t stand a chance. I would love it, but it’s all wishful thinking. Nice to see his name mentioned though.
Anderson, Anderson, Fincher, Nolan, and Linklater would be an incredibly strong field. It would also be a field of the Way Overdue.
But it’s Innaritu’s best effort since Amores Perros, the setting plays to his strengths, and he should get in.
If Morten Tyldum gets in over these guys for a British biopic, I’ll scream into my pillow for three days.
I do like Marsh. He directed Man on Wire. Can’t be all bad.
Rufus, I put The Insider as one of the best movies of the 90s and certainly the best of that year. I’d say Russell deserved a writing nomination for Three Kings, and if I’m not mistaken John Ridley was a cowriter for that. From what I’ve seen of Russell’s (Three Kings to present) I would say he deserved nominations for Three Kings (screenplay) and The Fighter (director). I have to revisit Silver Linings Playbook and American Hustle but I remember thinking he deserved writing nominations for both movies, not directing. There is a lot of Russell hate out there and while I’m not crazy about the hype train that makes him look like the clear front runner of the last 4 years, which in turn fuels the hate, I’ll say his writing nominations seem deserved.
A quick observasion about Gone Girl: I think (although I am not absolutely sure) that Margo Dunne in ‘Gone Girl’ and Gillian Flynn wear identical glasses.
Margo Dunne in ‘Gone Girl’: http://tinyurl.com/qg8wob5
‘Gone Girl’ writer Gillian Flynn: http://tinyurl.com/o9za5qu
Did they choose those glasses for Margo as an easter egg? Emphasizing that Margo Dunne is the voice of the author?
Ben, good catch! of all the thousands of eyeglass styles available, there are many variations on that shape, but this particular pair looks like a near-perfect match. Easier to compare side by side so I stole your observation for a tweet.
https://twitter.com/filmystic/status/519517751820693504
Margo Dunne surely does represent the character in Gone Girl with the best overall perspective and most clear-eyed attitude about everything that’s happening.
More fun with glasses in Gone Girl. The connection between Gone Girl and Leave Her to Heaven first clicked for me as soon as Amy Dunne put on dark glasses at that retreat in the Ozarks. No screenshot or still from Gone Girl to compare, but I think the sunglasses are similar to what Gene Tierney wore.
http://karencarpenterdiedforyoursins.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/leavehertoheaven01.jpg
That’s one of the things I love about Gone Girl. It’s maybe Fincher’s most playful movie, ever. He’s having fun with the lighter side of darkness.
In retrospect David O Russell got robbed for not getting nominated and maybe should have won in 1999 for Three Kings, a far better movie than anything he’s done recently. And a far better movie than American Beauty.
I’m hesitant to say he should have won because between Magnolia and The Insider and Three Kings I can’t decide which is most deserving. All three are better than the winners of most years.
I’m sorry but Fincher is not overdue for Benjamin Button one bit. Button was good. BUT…he should be overdue three times for losing to Hooper. Also, I wouldn’t put Jolie under the Master Directors section. After only having seen In the Land of Blood and Honey, do you truly believe she became a “master director” because of that movie? Or is she being labeled “master director” because Unbroken could have an impact in the Oscar race? Truthfully, acting Oscar win/nomination aside, she should be in the New Kids On the Block.
Otherwise this is a great analysis of who (and why and how) will be in the race.
“We are given one-percenters, wanna-be celebrities and wanna-be one-percenters as the people most deserving of our attention, not to mention outlandish plot devices….. murder and war are devices for artfully crafted instant drama. Hollywood is in the bullshit business and it will award the best bullshit….. and we will applaud.”
Well said, Bob Burns!
Wow.people.just.cant.stop.talking.GONE.GIRL. We are haunted by that furious dream of a digital afterworld soaked in metallic pastels and in which the primal reflexes are uncovered and set free in a sentimental vacuum.
I don’t think it’s about “modernity” though. It’s for all time.
Any of those directors, and/or their films, winning is a very good result for Oscar and the credibility of American film awards.
For me, the strength of Boyhood is that it says the real life of everyday people is worthy of our attention and rises gracefully into art….. a vast and important theme in art history, but seemingly forgotten in important cinema. We are given one-percenters, wanna-be celebrities and wanna-be one-percenters as the people most deserving of our attention, not to mention outlandish plot devices….. murder and war are devices for artfully crafted instant drama. Hollywood is in the bullshit business and it will award the best bullshit….. and we will applaud.
At first I used to enter the debate who deserves achievement in directing, who deserves best picture and so forth. Today I have many doubts the debate is useful. It is so hard to place judgement on the qualities of a movie when the criteria depends on the person, the experience each time a picture is viewed, our maturity as life progresses, et cetera. There are movies I did not appreciate when I was in my twenties which I now consider a masterpiece (e.g. 2001 a Space Odyssey, Requiem for a Dream, Unforgiven, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, There Will be Blood, The Hurt Locker, The Eternal Sunshine of The Spotless Mind). Inversely, there are pictures that I lauded as greats and I now consider good (e.g. Forrest Gump, Kill Bill, The Artist, The Kings Speech, Skyfall, Tree of Life). I think Cuaron hits the spot when he says that box-office bonanza and oscar affection may speak favorably of a movie today, but ultimately time will tell if a picture will be remembered and cherished. Scorcese also said that he would trade his oscar if that was what had to be done in order to continue to make pictures.
Will David Fincher continue oscarless? Yes! Probably the same will happen to Bennett Miller! And Innaritu! And Spike Lee| And Paul Thomas Anderson! And Chris Nolan! And Aronofsky! And Jane Campion! And Michael Haneke! And Takeshi Kitano! And Alexander Payne! And Terrence Mallick! And Jean Luc Godard! Many of these grand auteurs haven’t even been NOMINATED! There is a reason that the expressions ‘groundbraking’ and avant garde exist. It’s because it is ahead of our time, our conceptual perspective, our cinematic zeitgeist. Only hundreds among millions are able to identify let alone appreciate the phenomenon of great storytelling. And there is also obvious claims of politics and discrimination, and money making, and so forth.
What I am trying t say is that If I can not even get my wife and mother in law to agree on the family sunday lunch menu, how am I going to get them to agree on the oscar best picture winner? :). That is why in my opinion we should be more interested in and concerned with the nominations than actually the wins. Although I haven´t seen my favourite pics get oscar nods in the past couple of years, I have at least had the last word on sunday lunch desert (for now at least..).
Few things:
-I LOVE Benjamin Button, but am totally fine with Boyle winning.
-Yes, Fincher should have won for TSN.
-I think Director is actually kind of fluid right now. I could easily see a Jolie or a Duvernay (a la Ben Zeitlin) fly in if their late-breaking films are excellent. I also could see PTA right in there. Remember Affleck and Bigelow … No one expected those two to miss Oscar morning. Its early still, and fun to think what might happen.
-Ditto Actor race. We THINK its Keaton, Carrell, Cumberbatch, Redmayne as 4 “solids”. But as the race grows and evolves … We dont know how the Academy will react/what theyll do with Channing Tatum, Joaquin Phoenix (the Actors branch in the Academy like him a lot), David Olewoyo (Selma could sweep in and blow people away), ditto Jack OConnell. And theres still Affleck, Feinnes, Murray, Corden, McConaughey (spill-over nom). Im just not convinced yet that the “4” are solid, yet. Brinnnnng on the critics awards. Brinnnnnng on the campaigns 🙂
^^^
On the contrary, the more time that passes, the more interesting Benjamin Button becomes. It stands as a more than worthwhile entry in Fincher’s filmography and whilst it wasn’t the best film of 2008 (and there were more deserving director noms – Nolan, McQueen, Aronofsky – that year), its a far superior work to Slumdog Millionaire, which now the novelty factor has worn off looks like one of the weakest Best Pic winners of the 2000s.
David Fincher’s adaptation of Gone Girl is a divisive piece of art. It’s not the standard like or dislike type of movie, it’s the like, unsure, dislike type of film. It’s a film that makes you want to take a second look, regardless of what spectrum you fall under. In film, as in other art forms, each individual bring their own environmental upbringing into the judgmental process of the work presented to them. I was on the like side because there were several aspects of the film that hit home to me spiritually, and realistically. Also, it reminded me that people who we perceive as good can do some bad things. No one is perfect, and we end up getting, through our personalities, what we deserve. It’s a masterful stroke.
I’m admittedly biased about this topic since I’m not an American, but does anyone really care about the streak of foreign-born Best Directors? At worst it’s just a statistical quirk, and at best it’s actually wonderful that so many deserving international filmmakers are getting recognized. I’m still astounded that Hazanavicius was able to make such a unique, passion project into not just a film, but a Best Picture winner — what a story.
TCCOBenjamin Button was one of the worst movies to receive a Best Picture nomination in recent memory. Not even the hardest of the hardcore Fincher fans could possibly believe that Fincher deserved a directing Oscar over Danny Boyle that year; he deserved one for Social Network sure, but Benjamin Button? Come on now.
I just posted this the other day about the Best Actor race, but there’s still just so much uncertainty and so many films yet to be released that it’s hard to make any kind of firm prediction about this year’s Oscars. I’d say that Linklater is the only relative lock, as his fellow directors are sure to reward his 12-year-long commitment and imagination. Fincher, Miller, Inarritu could easily also get in….or all three could easily be snubbed. “Black comedy” is the toughest genre to work since it’s a razor’s edge as to whether audiences (or Academy voters) will buy in, so It’s just as likely that the final five could end up being, say, Linklater, Nolan, Jolie, Eastwood and Marsh. Or, who knows, maybe something like ‘Selma’ or ‘Wild’ really hits and DuVernay or Valle gets in.
Nice text and a good summation of the thematics concerned with this years’ leading crop of films.
Just one minor squabble: I don’t see what Gone Girl says about the state of modern marriage… that you shouldn’t marry crazy people? The film doesn’t even try to let us in on what Amy is about, who she is, and what the human core of her is (if there is a core?). The material is trashy (which is ok), but we need to see it for what it is then. A fucked-up story about crazy events and crazy people. Nothing more.
The film does say some interesting things about news coverage and the media etc., but they are hardly groundbreaking, we’ve been presented with variations on that theme in countless films.
I admire Fincher and his crack team of collaborators for their craftmanship, I just wish he would apply it to a more worthwhile material.
When’s the next Oscar poscast? I’m so interested to hear what everyone thought about ‘Gone Girl’ and its chances.
@Danny – You beat me to it with the Oscar trivia stuff. I love Oscar history.
I like how Best Picture and Best Director haven’t been corresponding in the past two years. The last time Picture and Director haven’t matched up in two consecutive years was 1951-1952 so it shows you how rare that is. The only time it happened in three consecutive years was 1935-1936-1937. Could it happen again?
“1. Richard Linklater, Boyhood
2. David Fincher, Gone Girl
3. Alejandro G. Inarritu, Birdman
4. Bennett Miller, Foxcatcher”
In a perfect world nr 5 goes to either PT Anderson or Wes Anderson and I pretty much don’t care who wins.
I’m not convinced that Tyldum or Marsh will make the cut, though I certainly can’t deny the possibility. I think the heavy-hitter lineup of Linklater-Inarritu-Miller-Fincher-Nolan may be too big to pass up, especially with many clamoring for Nolan to finally get his recognition.
OK, I read it back, sorry I was bitter and passive-aggressive. Also Russell has every right to campaign shamelessly if he wants to and it is all so subjective so clearly just because I happen to dislike his recent films, a lot of people seem to like them so he should be pleased. I just allow myself to get frustrated with his recent Oscar success (5 nominations in 4 years) when I think of all the greats who can’t get even half that recognition. There, I got it out of my system, sorry again.
For anyone else who got curious (as I did after reading the part on Eastwood), William Wyler’s 3rd Oscar was for Ben-Hur, Capra won for Mr. Deeds, You Can’t take It With You & It Happened One Night (the latter two both won Best Picture, so actually Capra won twice with Picture, not once); and Ford’s other three were for The Informer, Grapes of Wrath & The Quiet Man.
You know there is something seriously fucked up with the system when someone like Fincher not only doesn’t have an Oscar but also only has two nominations (just to put it in perspective, David O. Russell has five including three for directing) and someone like Nolan doesn’t even have ONE fucking nomination in Best Director although he is one of the most influential AND acclaimed modern directors with three (!) DGA nominations under his belt. I guess they have to direct a Weinstein crowdpleaser or take a page out of Russell’s hardcorecampaigntextbook if they want the Academy’s attention.