Hooper Wins DGA. In Other News, The Fat Lady Sings
Sunday, January 30, 2011 at 7:36AM 
Who'da thunk it? I realize some people predicted that Tom Hopper would win the Directors Guild of America prize for The King's Speech but these predictions were surely made in panic, given the obvious Oscar love for the film on nomination morning. But I mean a week ago who would have suspected that his able direction of British actors in a light royalty drama would be heading into the Oscars looking like a sweeper, even for direction, even with an overdue genuine giant of the industry leading like David Fincher (The Social Network) leading up until now. Not me. I'll be the first to admit it.
I'll also come right out and say that I don't understand it. Fincher captured lightning in a bottle; Russell resuscitated a tired genre with humor, humanity and noisy originality; Nolan displayed skyscraper sized ambitions and vaulted technical obstacles; Aronofsky went for broke, chasing his ballerina's madness in his own inimitable way. What did the Director's Guild see in Hooper's work that surpassed these achievements? I'm genuinely curious.
The King's Speech is well directed so this isn't the travesty of a situation like Ron Howard beating four auteur legends for his own muddled work on A Beautiful Mind. But it's still... well... "people just love this film," one must admit, shrugging one's shoulders and calling it a year for a cute British triumph-over-personal-adversity film.
Next up: Winning SAG tonight (live blogging right here starting at 7 PM EST), BAFTA soon and then on to 8 or 9 Oscars apparently (sigh). The night we wait for all year just got super monotonous 28 whole days in advance.
DGA, Directors, Oscars (10), The King's Speech
Reader Comments (55)
Uh-oh....
Yeah. i'm thinking we might be looking at a situation where it only loses two or three of its nominations (the supporting categories and *maybe* one of the technicals).
bummer.
I have to disagree. I'm sorry but i thought Tom Hooper deserved it over Fincher. Not Nolan, but that was never going to happen. I feel like I'm going nuts today. Everyone (other than yourself) has handled this news very badly, like someone had just died or something. geez.
Yeah, I didn't see it coming too. I guess the British will take the ceremony after all. Maybe Fincher will lose director? I feel like his not-huggable persona might be the problem that causes the guilds not too follow the critics' awards. Oh well, it's one of those years.
Totally agreed, Nathaniel. This is very similar to A Beautiful Mind, in which the least offensive, most friendly of the films gets the trophy. Very frustrating. I enjoyed The King's Speech just fine but to award Hooper over Fincher, Aronofksy, Nolan, or even O. Russell is mind boggling. I hope I can handle the eventual Oscar takeover. :-/
Well, if The King's Speech hadn't managed this astounding turn-around week that it has, "the night we wait for all year" would have been super monotonous for 3 MONTHS in advance.
Esh -- true. But I'll take Monotonous which looks good in the history books than monotonous with shrugs 10 years from now any day! :)
Game, set, match.
THE KING'S SPEECH victory will make 2011 Oscars really boring and unimaginative :-(
Dull. Crash upset was at least unexpected and interesting, well, sort of. This is just dull.
This is some bullshit, let me tell you.
I literally gagged when I heard the news.
I was hoping we'd get a cool surprise like Aronofsky pulling an upset (even though Fincher is 100% deserving) but THIS? Oh... no.
Nic - you on yo own with this one, baby.
With this momentum I just thank god he wasn't nominated for the Film Bitch Awards.
ISn't Tom Hooper a well-respected TV director for John Adams, etc? I still think this is going to be one of those years that the DGA isn't the predictor, like Rob Marshall for Chicago. I can't imagine (don't want to imagine) the Academy going for him. And man, I just can't believe Tom Hooper beat Chris Nolan or Darren Aronofsky.
(One fun DGA thing - it provided me a fav picture moment: James Cameron chatting it up with Gale Anne Hurd and Kathryn Bigelow as Mark Boal looks on)
Well, people wanted a more interesting race, and this is what happens. Be careful what you wish for!!!! I love The King's Speech (it's my #6 of the year) but I was not at all impressed with its directing. At least not when you compare it to Aronofsky or Fincher. I still think The Social Network has a shot at winning the Oscar. Remember Apollo 13 got both the PGA and the DGA back in 1995, but didn't win either Oscar (thenagain, Ron Howard wasn't even nominated for Best Director that year at the Oscars, so maybe it's a bad example). Still, so many critics awards, plus the Golden Globe (which is the one place I thought The King's Speech would win if anywhere) should not be ignored.
Kesch, you're so right. The race was alredy signed, sealed, delivered for three months and things have been uber monotonous since. but everybody was happy about it because it was the IT, hyped, cool, darling film of the year. Now that things are actually less predictable, people are complaining!
SVG -hee. yeah, there wasn't much chance of that ;)
Richter -- please remind us of this next time a lot of great people and films are winning and we complain that it's boring :) be careful what you wish for indeed.
I'll be glad to, Nat!!!
AS someone who doesn't think that The Social Network is particularly great, I don't think this award is THAT surprising. IT's not in panic, Nathaniel, it's in retaliation. TSN is still winning best director at the oscars (whatever you say about Howard, he was a Hollywood icon), but there are those of us who are depressed this TSN's shallow screenplay, slick direction and just averageness is being praised as the next Citizen Kane or Great Gatsby. It'a a Polaroid at the best, masqurading as Proust, which is Aaron Sorkin's specialty.
Give Harvey credit. First he gets The Reader those nominations, and then proves his worth against a much bigger titan. It's totally Shakespeare in Love vs Saving Private Ryan all over again.
It just got monotonous ? It has been so for a long time. Firth and Best Actor. Portman and Best Actress. Boring. Boring. Boring.
I guess those people who didn't want the monotony of The Social Network reaping everything got their wish...now people should be careful what they wish for.
I wasn't a fan of The King's Speech to begin with, and considering how worthy I thought The Social Network was, I was SO happy with the prospect of it raping the competition. Now PGA and DGA down, and with the massive tide of support it's brought to The King's Speech, I'm extremely disappointed.
If The Social Network has any chance of winning Best Picture, it needs to win SAG tonight. Otherwise, we're looking at a King's Speech tidal wave come Oscar night.
I still think Fincher may win the Best Director Oscar, and Sorkin will certainly win Adapted Screenplay, but otherwise The King's Speech looks set to dominate, unfortunately.
My take on it is that the four auteurs all split their votes among them and Hooper sneaked in with the members of the branch that like their films a bit more 'traditional' or however you want to classify The King's Speech. That is the only possible explanation that will help my head from exploding at this news.
Arkaan -- except that Shakespeare in Love is actually better than Saving Private Ryan and in no way is The King's Speech better than The Social Network (not even in Best Actor) ;)
i don't care who win best picture.I don't care who win best actor(every one deserve it in my opinion) but even if The Social Network isn't my fav this year,Fincher or Aronofsky or even Nolan(i didn't see "the fighter") deserved more DGA than Hooper because Hooper's directing is almost generic next to the others
.I guess it why the comparison with Ron Howard is adequate
Arkan- I'm one of those people. Thank you for making me feel less lonely.
Come on Nate, hate the film as much as you want, but Firth was better than Eisenberg.
Don't say that Nathaniel, it hurts!!!
Don't tell me that the guy who directed the most boring of the 10 Best Picture nominees might just win the Oscar for Best Director.
2 weeks ago I wanted a more eventful Oscar race, but I asked for more than I could carry. 5 Oscars, 6 the most, for King's speech, but that's it.
Fincher is still up there! And Academy members all around the USA know that! :)
See, the thing is that I like Tom Hooper. His works like John Adams, The Damned United and Longford demonstrate that he is good with actors, and their production values are never subpar. The King's Speech, too, is a well-acted, handsomely made film. I like it quite a bit, and Hooper's direction isn't at all shabby.
However, when compared to his competition this year, it does feel like a let-down, doesn't it? The DGA had such an exciting line-up to choose from, and they chose him. That's where the bewilderment and disappointment set in.
The glory of opinions - I haven't seen The King's Speech, but I think it's ananalgous.
1. Both SPR and TSN would appeal more to males due to the world it depicts (remember the cries of sexism in TSN when it first came out).
2. SiL and TKS both appeal to the older crowd (that's all you hear about referring to TKS is how well it's playing).
3. The actors prefer TKS to TSN (again, much like the 1998 race; what does it tell you when the most sympathetic element of TSN can't sneak in for a nomination despite clearly being a star on the rise?)
4. Both SPR and TSN were the early frontrunners only to be usurped later in the race.
5. No, Shakespeare in Love is not better than Saving Private Ryan, but good try.
Uuurgh. Roll on next year...
I don't want to be that guy, but I just don't get The King's Speech. I was fighting to stay awake whenever the therapy sessions weren't going on. I also didn't care what happened until more than halfway through the film when there's finally something, other than pride, at stake for the film.
The acting is wonderful, and I love me a good period costume drama (even if it isn't the best period for period costuming), but I just don't get it. It's even more confusing for me as I'm absolutely fascinated by linguistics, the science of speech, and speech therapy. I took courses on that in college as electives that did nothing for my degree. What am I missing? I just don't get it.
Not true anout the males thing. TSN defined my whole generation. TKS was good, but honestly what's all the stupid buzz about. There were atleast 10 more films this year better than- directing-wise, originality-wise...almost everything else wise as well. Yes, the performances were brilliant, but the film was so generic.
I thought Hooper did a good job of varying up how these sorts of films are typically shot, and I liked TKS better than TSN overall (though they're both very good), so I'm happy for him.
arkaan
"1 The glory of opinions - I haven't seen The King's Speech, but I think it's ananalgous."
--- oh you should see it before making analogies. I get where this is coming from BUT strangely, The King's Speech is the World War II moive in this equation so it's like a mashup of Shakespeare in Love and Saving Private Ryan. ;)
"1. Both SPR and TSN would appeal more to males due to the world it depicts (remember the cries of sexism in TSN when it first came out)."
-- i can't really see why females would be more drawn to The King's Speech which is ALSO about powerful men. There are so few movies that focus on women.
"2. SiL and TKS both appeal to the older crowd (that's all you hear about referring to TKS is how well it's playing)."
that's probably true.
"3. The actors prefer TKS to TSN (again, much like the 1998 race; what does it tell you when the most sympathetic element of TSN can't sneak in for a nomination despite clearly being a star on the rise?)"
agreed that actors probably like TKS more. But everyone knows actors are stupid :)
"4. Both SPR and TSN were the early frontrunners only to be usurped later in the race.
true enough
"5. No, Shakespeare in Love is not better than Saving Private Ryan, but good try."
i've never waivered on this issue. Saving Private Ryan had a stellar opening battle sequence that was gut wreching. But otherwise it was a generic WW II drama with manipulative framing and stereotypes in place of characters. Like roughly 80% of Spielberg's output it was grossly overregarded (Jaws, Raider, and a few others are truly masterpieces but not everything he does is groundshaking despite that critics and audiences are usually apt to pretend that each film is equally masterpiecey). Shakespeare in Love was light froth sure but light froth can be award worthy. See also those witty screwball comedies in hollywood's golden age. Shakespeare in Love was original, funny, well performed and hugely enjoyable. What's wrong with that? And why is that lesser that a generic heavy-themed WW II drama?
SC -- agreed that it was shot with more care and more individuality than usual. Like i said, i do think it's well directed. I just don't get why people could say it was "best" in a year of so many outstanding acehivements.
For those who don't get why so many people are so upset at the prospect of a KS sweep - my parents, two of the most aesthetically conservative people I know, both loved TKS, as did my sisters, who admit to not being able to handle unhappy, ambivalent or ambiguous endings. None of the ten nominated films takes fewer narrative or aesthetic risks than TKS, and that includes Toy Story 3 (forget the acceptance of imminent death the toys show - how about the moment when Andy unambiguously plays favourites, saving Woody and dumping Buzz, two toys we've been encouraged to think of as equals in his affection? How about Bo's acknowledged absence?) No two people I know have exactly the same take on TSN or its characters, whereas you couldn't split the difference between how people I know respond to TKS. If any film is a polaroid in this race, its TKS - flat, clear, instant, disposable. And I like it! I just don't want such an unambitious, safe film to claim the title for pinnacle of the year's film-making, particularly when its competitors are atypically interesting, difficult, ambivalent, in some cases just plain weird. It would be a real comedown after several years of more interesting, less complacent winners - Hurt Locker, No Country, The Departed, even Slumdog and Crash and Million Dollar Baby take big risks, whether or not you think they pay off. By contrast, TKS is just rote. Really well done, but still... I don't think its unreasonable that people want a more exciting, fresher winner. TKS could have been nominated at any point since Bertie was still on the throne.
And if TSN takes liberties with events to sometimes dubious ends - the erasure of female programmers, for instance - its nothing to TKS's pruning of the sticky issue of appeasement from royal history.
Do we still have to defend Shakespeare in Love? The movie is brilliant, folks, get over it.
1. If TKS is a Mashup of SiL and SPR, more the better for TKS.
2. Shakespeare in Love is not original, not funny, well performed, or hugely enjoyable. Those adjectives should be attached to Rushmore or The Truman Show or Out of Sight or The Butcher Boy for 1998 films. That best picture line-up made me sooooo grumpy. But hearing SPR criticized for cliches than SiL praised for being original is just balderdash. Yes, screwball comedies can be great, but this isn't one of them. It's trite, soulless and just paint-by-numbers dull.
3. I can't think of a reason to see TKS other than to tick it off the oscar box. It looks too bland and bait for me. I'll eventually check it out to
4. TKS may be about powerful men, but I haven't heard people claim it's sexist either. And TSN implicitly endorses a degree of the battle with it's (a) completely ignoring the women in the film at the SAGs (like it didn't even cross the producers mind to include Rooney Mara et al) and that atrocious ending ("You aren't an asshole, you just try to be one." The sound you heard was every female who's been through a bad break-up rolling their eyes at the justification).
5. You know how you felt about Slumdog Millionaire? How annoyed you were by it's sweep? That's how I felt about TSN, and I even think our complaints are rather similar (if not our praise). My favourites (Winter's Bone, Black Swan, Toy Story 3, 127 Hours) aren't getting in, it looks like Bening will win (which pisses me off because she, along with the screnplay, is the worst element of TKAAR), so transforming this into a race is the best I can hope for.
To answer your question: Hooper showed royalty being capable of bromance, but then again there's probably countless of movies like that.
a) I'm kind of gratified that Toronto got something right.
b) Fincher and Aronofsky's versions of humanity make me too pessimistic, but that might just say something about me.
c) I'm starting to dislike The King's Speech and that's because I'm hearing from people who hate it so much. I didn't wanna leave the uplifting emotions I had when I walked out of the theatre seeing it for the first time. Not blaming you or any blogger, and I'm not sure if I'm articulating this bullet correctly, but all this Oscar talk is warping my brain.
In terms of why women might prefer TKS to TSN, while TKS is also mostly about two guys, you've got a handsome, sympathetic male lead with an attractive, witty wife and two adorable children.
There is an interesting interview with Fincher in the February 2011 "W" magazine (print) in which he seems to belittle TSN in artistic terms, comparing it unfavorably to his Zodiac. He says TSN is a "movie," commercial and designed for an audience while Zodiac is a "film" more audacious and daring and designed foe the public and filmmakers. Fincher says TSN is "too glib" to be a "film." It is not "earth-shattering", while Zodiac was a film about "murders that changed America."
4 directors doing career-peak level work, and of course they loose to the blandest vanilla of the lineup. It truly is 2001 all over again. It's as disgusting then as it is now. And now expect "The King's Speech" to win both best picture and best director.
Paul D- That interview sounds really interesting. I loooove Zodiac and even though I really like The Social Network "glib" is one of the words I did use to describe the ending! I blame that on Sorkin though.
I hate the argument that women prefer The King's Speech because the characters are more sympathetic and attractive. It's slightly insulting.
zzzzz...
I think The Social Network > The King's Speech, but people are blowing things way out of proportion, saying the race is over and that TKS winning would be a travesty.
I think it would just be sad. If TKS wins it would seem like a choice the Academy would have made ten years ago, and I thought we were over that.
"TSN defined my whole generation."
This would be great if our generation had a say in who wins an Academy Award, so this kind of means nothing. Especially since not everyone also agrees on this point, even Fincher and Sorkin.
Anyway, I like TSN over TKS, but neither film would be my pick to win Best Picture so I've mostly stayed out of the wars going on. I'm in the camp of "well the Oscars was going to be boring already, so now it'll be boring in a different way" which is weird to think because again I like both of these films.
"The King's Speech" is classically plotted and exquisitely made. Oh, and its characters are richly human. "The Social Network" is very well made but THOROUGHLY superficial.
If King's Speech love can get Helena Bonham Carter an Oscar, I'm all for it.
Hey all, check out the SAG awards post at my new blog if you'd like:
http://adamckeller.wordpress.com/
Thanks!
I'm not predicting King's Speech to continue the guild sweep, but maybe I should be. Meh.
Damn, if there really is all this backlash, then I say just give 'em to The King's Speech. The Academy will remain a laughingstock and in some ways, I think it will be better for the legacy of TSN if it DOESN'T win best picture.
"If King's Speech love can get Helena Bonham Carter an Oscar, I'm all for it."
Yes!
But I can't imagine Hooper winning the Best Director Oscar, I still think it's Fincher's to loose. And "The night we wait for all year just got super monotonous 28 whole days in advance."-- Seriously? Because if The Social Network had won PGA+DGA, the night we wait for all your would have been super monotonous like 100 days in advance, starting with the first critics awards. And I have to repeat myself, I still don't think TKS will sweep at the Oscars.
I am almost glad that there is some suspense added to the race. I am sick of the boring races we had the last years. Slumdog was a terrible winner and Hurt Locker was a great winner, but both were sooooo predictable. I hope SAG will give some suspense to the acting races (Bening over Portman? Rush over Bale? Someone over Leo?) so that there'll be finally an exciting race again.