93rd Academy Awards: A contrarian take on the Best Director field
Thursday, April 15, 2021 at 7:59PM Editor's note. The Supporting Actress Smackdown is running late and will arrive tomorrow. Apologies! Meanwhile we continue our rundown of Oscar categories with Best Director.
Five directors. One European filmmaker. one Asian-American director. One woman of color. Another woman nominated for her directorial debut. One old sport named David Fincher. This year's director ballot does not lack variety! Ten days from the Oscar night and this competition is nearly over. All of these movies are clearly personal achievements, but will any prove a cornerstone in the career of its director? Every nominated director is at a different stage of their life and career, each movie a fascinating chrysalis. Every nomination here is like a gentle pat on the shoulder, a "this movie was really good, we are really curious to see what you will do next time!" kind of nomination.
From least likely to win to the one who will probably take the Oscar home, let's investigate a little...
a star and director reunited
Thomas Vinterberg, Another Round aka 'We really love Mads Mikkelsen!'
The recipient of my most surprised "Wait, what?" reaction during the nomination announcement. Another Round is not a bad movie for sure but is it that good? The answer is: yes, relatively. Vinterberg should thank the global pandemic for making Another Round the most loved European movie of 2020. With many titles opted to wait for the return of Cannes and Venice showcased tiny and often bleak movies, having a well-loved familiar star like Mads Mikkelsen headlining an accessible drama was a stroke of pure luck. European Film Awards glory and an Oscar nomination followed.
I am not trying to imply that the second most famous of Dogme 95's founders is unworthy of a nomination, just that it might not have happened in a more robust year. I quite liked this movie. That scene in the restaurant when Martin's wife sips her glass of white wine to shield herself from her own emotional weakness is so subtle, so natural in switching the alcohol problem from a personal perspective to a national cultural trait that I was in awe. Also, slightly drunken Mads trying to be an entertaining teacher, quite drunk Mads shedding a single (drunken?) tear while losing the love of his life, and almost wasted Mads dancing!!! But if Oscar wanted to celebrate this film, why didn't they give Mads a well-earned nomination instead? (Vinterberg work on The Hunt, his previous collaboration with Mads that Oscar voters also liked, was stronger)
Emerald Fennel, Promising Young Woman aka the out of (film) school nomination
I don't mean that to sound brutal but the movie is a mess... a beautiful mess. It feels like a debut, albeit one from a very promising student. The genre elements have disguised some of its flaws as audaciousness. I personally think Fennell is far more worthy for her challenging screenplay than in this category. There were equally worthy directors but momentum is everything in awards season and Fennell's movie had it.
I admire how she made a virtue out of neccessity. She shot her debut in only 23 days (!) while being "very pregnant" and while her producer Margot Robbie was busy multitasking with other big projects like Birds of Prey. Fennell ended up using almost every minute she shot. She had only one or two takes for every scene, so she had to make it work in the editing room. In other words, Promising Young Woman is what David Fincher's nightmares are made of!
Speaking of...
David Fincher, Mank aka the least fincherish of Fincher's movies
There is a very long list of things that I would have considered absurd or unrealistic before 2020. A movie in which David Fincher shows his emotions would have been high on that list! As a director he had very little left to prove so perhaps it was the right time to make a film from the heart. He worked from a screenplay written by his father, "one of my favourite witers" he has said.
It's shot in such a way to (partially) mimic Citizen Kane era filmmaking which is maybe way Mank carries Fincher's filmmaking charisma if not as much of his usual personality. Mank has been divisive, it's like a conversation with an intimate friend who has an in-depth insight so it appeals to Golden-Age related nerdiiness but has been described as alienating or boring by those who aren't into that.
Lee Isaac Chung, Minari aka the movie directed as a novel
I felt so guilty for not being more moved by Lee Isaac Chung's semi-autobiographical tale of a Korean-American family in 1980s Arkansas. When such an emotiona movie does not entirely click for you, who takes the blame: you or the movie? I am still trying to find an answer but I admire the direction and the production design (Production designer Yong Ok Lee was not nominated).
Minari has two timelines. There's the more dreamlike one of in a rural Eden, soaked in sunlight and indifferent to Jacob's attempt to transform it into a source of income. The creek where the minari grows so effortlessly in contrast with Jacob's field that lacks water and success. Both the 'garden' and the forest are infused with a quality of childhood memory (and not just due to Alan S Kim playing a version of the director as a child). The flow of time is more explicit inside that 'house on wheels', slowly filled by family objects and cultural identity. The precise way in which Lee Isaac Chung describes the Yi family's dynamics by changing how the space in every room is shared is impressive.
Another aspect I really liked is how Minari evokes themes and topoi from the literary world. It is not a secret that the director wanted to adapt Willa Cather's 1918 novel My Ántonia into a movie, but ended up creating a script based on his own childhood memories as the son of a Korean couple trying to live the American (rural) dream. It's difficult to pinpoint how, but every so often, Minari seems almost out of time. It is infused in an atmosphere easily found in classical literary works like the ones of Fyodor Dostoevsky and Willa Cather herself (both referred to as a source of inspiration by Lee Isaac Chung).
But despite some fondness for it I'm still unconvinced by the equilibrium between the two parts, as well as the small portion of the movie devoted to Monica's (Yeri Han) and Anne's (Noe Cho) point of view and the ending. However, Minari is an immersive, sensory experience, guided by the sober touch of his director. Zhao will most likely win, but I can't rule out the long shot possibility of the 93th Academy Awards becoming Minari's night.
Nomadland, Chloé Zhao aka the one on which I have an unpopular opinion
I have seen Nomadland twice: once at Venice Film Festival and once at home. Every time I've drawn the same conclusion: yes, Chloé Zhao is a great director, but Nomadland feels more polished than genuine. I understand that's a strong position about a movie that chooses real van dwellers like Linda May and Bob Wells to present their own story to the audience. Afterwards I read Jessica Bruder's non-fiction book due to my doubts about the film. The book is - as expected - a raw, powerful source of human experiences that the movie carefully waters down into a result as mediated as possible.
As a director, Chloé Zhao is extremely talented. She makes Nomadland emotionally charged while avoiding being cornered by any particulars of the story. She switches so carefully from the general to the particular, from harsh necessity to personal inclinations that Nomadland has been a cathartic viewing experience for many. However, I am still troubled by the lack of clarity in Fern's story. I am skeptical of her natural inclination of being a nomad rather than something she was forced into becoming by the death or her husband and the closure of her home. For me Nomadland was an inconclusive meditation.
I don't know if I would be this disappointed had I not seen The Rider back in 2017 (which I cannot recommend highly enough).
Who will win? Chloé Zhao
Who should have been nominated? I loved Florian Zeller's work on The Father. It's like seeing Haneke directing if Haneke had faith in human nature.
Who should win? Make a case in the comments!
Reader Comments (24)
Zhao is the best among the nominees, she really knows how to create emotions without many words.
Chung is very good, he got fantastic performances without being too melodramatic.
Vinterberg is quite good, he knows how to control everything and gives unforgettable moments: Mads is fantastic
Fincher is good, but nothing special, he's very predictable, but the images are impressive.
Fannell is just ok, the first part of the movie is great, but the last 30 minutes are a mess, only Mulligan saves the picture.
I kinda want Chloé Zhao to win for her overall career so far, but I probably liked MINARI better.
Of this group, I would say Lee Isaac Chung. for the win.
I would swap out Vinterberg with Jayro Bustamante (La Llorana).
I am glad I am not alone with thinking PYW direction is not good (I do like the production/costume design).
Though I don't agree, I respect your take
This is a great analysis, Elisa.
I agree with your comments about MINARI - I too admired it but wasn't emotionally moved. But I will revisit in future. When a film like this is so beloved, it's hard not to think 'Wait, is it me, or the film?!'.
And I also think NOMADLAND waters down the book's impact a little. I can see why the filmmakers made certain choices - particularly those that gave the character of Fern more agency in the story - but I think it makes it easier for viewers to see Fern's lifestyle as more of a personal choice than an economic necessity.
But even Bruder herself states in the book it can be difficult to separate the nomads' various motivations because many of them have such an optimistic, can-do spirit that they are consciously turning their economic adversity into opportunity.
Minari is such a pleasant, but thin and forgettable film. At least until the last act when it jumps the shark and negates whatever good will it had built up.
1. Chung
2. Zhao
3. Fincher
4. Fennell
5. Vinterberg
Not a bad lineup overall. I wish Kelly Reichardt had made it for FIRST COW.
The funny thing about Mank is its subversive/progressive political themes seem to have gone over everyone's heads. All anyone talks about is the Golden Age pastiche/Citizen Kane stuff. It's not an old fogey movie by any means, but that seems to be the slot it's occupying in a lot of people's minds.
Vinterberg takes a rather standard tale, and with his expressive use of the camera, really elevates the entire thing. As great as Mikkelson is (he should have Oldman's nom), Vinterberg's direction is the real star, without being showy. His framing and how he moves the camera is just extraordinary.
I do think these are five major feats of direction, and one of our best Best Director lineups ever. All unique, intelligent, provocative, complex films that came expressly from those filmmakers.
I think you're rather underestimating both Emerald Fennell and Thomas Vinterberg's mastery of tone - both are adapting snappy, often funny screenplays, but the direction is absolutely key to the edge and tension of some of both movies' most memorable scenes.
I feel the same way about a lot of these! I am dispassionate about... well, all of these films. I think I like ANOTHER ROUND the best, but I would vote for Zhao of the lineup. I think a lot of my indifference to NOMADLAND is lately because of how much I love THE RIDER and wish it had gotten the attention her new film is getting.
Sorely missed for me is Kelly Reichardt. FIRST COW walking away with zero nominations is embarrassing.
@Tony I agree. Politically Mank is a bold film with its commentary of Hollywood and politics (unlike Nomandland at least it makes a statement).
I think the style overwhelms what Fincher is trying to say and Mank is just not an interesting character. I sort of wanted to follow a bunch of different characters rather than him.
On Nomandland:
I know after the year the US has had, we may not want any politics in film but there is something about the almost complete absence in this film that flattens the characters.
In Mank, the politics was the main interesting part for me and while I disagree with Fenell philosophy/politics in PYW (the silencing of Nina, that fact that neither counseling nor activity are presented as options); I respect that she has a bold philosophy/politics).
Something people keep failing to mention is Thomas Vinterberg’s narrative - he conceived the story first as a play about society’s relationship with alcohol, then was encouraged by his daughter to turn the play into a movie (she also provided him guidance about Denmark’s youth drinking culture). Then, shortly after beginning production, Vinterberg’s daughter died in a car accident, only 19 years old. Production was suspended, and with the cast already on board, Vinterberg reconstructed the film to be a celebration of life and making the most of every moment, dedicating the film to his late daughter.
It’s not enough to win, but I would imagine that played a huge role in his nomination.
Chloe Zhao will win because she was overdue after The Rider. David Fincher will probably be back if he can make another Zodiac or he will join Stanley Kubrick and Sidney Lumet in never winning. Fennel and Chung are just starting out so people need to see what else they can do. It is extremely rare to win Best Director without a Best Picture nom so Vinterberg won't. His nomination was expected since the directors didn't want to vote for Sorkin and there wasn't another Best Picture director with the kind of experience they were looking for. But after seeing The Father, Florian Zeller should have taken the Sorkin non-nomination.
Zhao for the win!
Vinterberg is so HOT that the handsomeness is the reward. Like damn he can be a movie star
@Duncan: thanks so much for that background on Another Round. Terrible to hear of the tragedy but now the conclusion feels even more poignant.
I agree that Nomadland watered down the politics of the book to its detriment. It's a good film but I was disappointed in a lot of ways. I def plan on rewatching after a few more months.
I couldn't agree with you more regarding Nomadland. It seems every year there is a small, "personal" film that everyone falls all over themselves praising and I am left with a big "meh". Yes, it's gorgeous. Yes, McDormand gives a subtle performance distinctly realized (semi-yawn) but where are we at the end? She's getting what she claims she wants and without much pain, it seems to me. There may well be complexities in film making I'm not appreciating enough but - damn, ultimately a "best" movie needs to move me - not just intrigue me. I honestly found ONE NIGHT IN MIAMI and much more visceral, surprising and impactful film!
I am skeptical of her natural inclination of being a nomad rather than something she was forced into becoming by the death or her husband and the closure of her home. For me Nomadland was an inconclusive meditation.
Isn't it clear in the film that it's all of the above? She was forced to leave her house, but there is a pride in her that keeps her from feeling obligated to friends and family.
Nomadland was so beautiful and heartbreakingly human. Chloe Zhao sails to victory here.
@Lenard Weinstein - if anyone is overdue, it's Fincher. But this award is definitely Zhao's to lose.
I agree with everything you said about Promising Young Woman and Emerald Fennel. I still adore the film, but it definitely feels like a first time genre film. That's not a bad thing by metrics at all. I said for months that I would not believe that film would breakthrough in anything but Actress and Original Screenplay until the nominations were announced. I appreciate the film for being so outrageous. Fennel swings in every direction and I enjoyed the ride.
I think Chloe Zhao will win and I'm fine with that. Nomadland is very well put together and her direction shines in how balanced the performances are. She's also my favorite of the directors nominated.
Now, if Darius Marder made it in for Sound of Metal, then we'd be having a very different conversation.
Fennell should win this in a landslide - what a film!
@Tony Ruggio I felt so dumb when I read your comment because *of course*, I missed an important point there. It's a good lineup, so much so that summarising the most relevant points about each title (and director!) in a couple of paragraphs was especially difficult. I agree with you on Mank 100%.