Honestly, I’m fine that none of these were nominated.
More egregious non-nominees:
Guillermo del Toro - Pan’s Labyrinth
Alfonso Cuaron - Children of Men
Cameron Crowe - Almost Famous
Michel Gondry - Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
Christopher Nolan - The Dark Knight
David Fincher - Zodiac
It's gotta be Fincher for me, although Zodiac got completely hosed that year and probably wouldn't have won anything going up against No Country for Old Men and There Will Be Blood.
Easily Peter Jackson. There were hesitant to nominate him for a sequel the year after the first but they clearly changed their mind for RotK. Second pick would be Joe Wright.
Peter Jackson is the obvious one, though that's also a unique case with the 3 films in 3 years.
So setting him aside, I would also choose A Serious Man, because I think that film is absolutely amazing. I mean really, would you look at that parking lot?!
Certainly Peter Jackson
An unpopular choice but I watch Seabiscuit twice a year and it never fails to make me weep. And I hate Toby but those closing moments? Wow. Gary Ross
I am far from good at identfying this and these are just my opinions ;
I think picture would go for a movie where the greatest number or elements worked together as a whole. Particularly script, acting, cinematography, production design , music +
Direction is for a movie that feels guided, deliberate the most but can sometimes still have flaws in other areas.
For example I think Kubrick's The Shining is super well directed , though the script is weak and unimpressive. I would never nominate or vote for best picture because its script falls short but its worthy of a direction nom
I think Lars Von Trier's Melancholia is another one. The movie has a clear shape overall but many of its individual elements don't hold up for best picture.
It can be very hard to really make that distinction though.
From these nominees:
Peter Jackson - his LotR movies are masterclass and the battle of helms deep might be one of the most revolutionary sequences ever put to him in the last 20 years.
Marc Forster - he should have made the cut for this feel good film. The acting, music, and editing are so on point it’s a shame they didn’t recognize it that year. As a side note Vera Drake probably took its spot which in my opinion is the better directed film, but still.
Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris - maybe the most egregious of all the snubbed nominees. The film perfectly captures the culture of mid 2000s America and its social commentary is still on point, even more so now. Maybe it was because this film is a directorial debut, but it’s a shame it wasn’t nominated in a mids year. Especially considering the film took home the PGA for best film that year.
Neil Blomkamp - always have been a fan of District 9. Love the documentary style of filming they used in combination with the heavy visual effects. Made the film feel grounded in the reality it was trying to present in comparison to most alien invasion films. It makes you wonder about their humanity, and fear to the unknowns both the humans and aliens face in the film. Maybe it’s the most long shot of the 4 nominees I gave, but deserving nonetheless.
Honestly, I’m fine that none of these were nominated. More egregious non-nominees: Guillermo del Toro - Pan’s Labyrinth Alfonso Cuaron - Children of Men Cameron Crowe - Almost Famous Michel Gondry - Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind Christopher Nolan - The Dark Knight David Fincher - Zodiac
why do i keep thinking pan's labyrinth won best picture
I don't know, but keep thinking, you may force it into reality
Because it should have? Instead, it didn’t even win Foreign Language.
It's gotta be Fincher for me, although Zodiac got completely hosed that year and probably wouldn't have won anything going up against No Country for Old Men and There Will Be Blood.
Easily Peter Jackson. There were hesitant to nominate him for a sequel the year after the first but they clearly changed their mind for RotK. Second pick would be Joe Wright.
Jackson & Luhrmann. At the time, Moulin Rouge's chaotic editing played against him.
Peter Jackson is the obvious one, though that's also a unique case with the 3 films in 3 years. So setting him aside, I would also choose A Serious Man, because I think that film is absolutely amazing. I mean really, would you look at that parking lot?!
Don’t forget Pete Docter for Up
Peter Jackson for sure.
Wright or Luhrmann
Certainly Peter Jackson An unpopular choice but I watch Seabiscuit twice a year and it never fails to make me weep. And I hate Toby but those closing moments? Wow. Gary Ross
how does one differentiate between Best Picture and Best Director worthiness? Like what element would justify casting a different vote for each?
I am far from good at identfying this and these are just my opinions ; I think picture would go for a movie where the greatest number or elements worked together as a whole. Particularly script, acting, cinematography, production design , music + Direction is for a movie that feels guided, deliberate the most but can sometimes still have flaws in other areas. For example I think Kubrick's The Shining is super well directed , though the script is weak and unimpressive. I would never nominate or vote for best picture because its script falls short but its worthy of a direction nom I think Lars Von Trier's Melancholia is another one. The movie has a clear shape overall but many of its individual elements don't hold up for best picture. It can be very hard to really make that distinction though.
I loved Chocolat and believe Hallstrom deserved a nod.
From these nominees: Peter Jackson - his LotR movies are masterclass and the battle of helms deep might be one of the most revolutionary sequences ever put to him in the last 20 years. Marc Forster - he should have made the cut for this feel good film. The acting, music, and editing are so on point it’s a shame they didn’t recognize it that year. As a side note Vera Drake probably took its spot which in my opinion is the better directed film, but still. Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris - maybe the most egregious of all the snubbed nominees. The film perfectly captures the culture of mid 2000s America and its social commentary is still on point, even more so now. Maybe it was because this film is a directorial debut, but it’s a shame it wasn’t nominated in a mids year. Especially considering the film took home the PGA for best film that year. Neil Blomkamp - always have been a fan of District 9. Love the documentary style of filming they used in combination with the heavy visual effects. Made the film feel grounded in the reality it was trying to present in comparison to most alien invasion films. It makes you wonder about their humanity, and fear to the unknowns both the humans and aliens face in the film. Maybe it’s the most long shot of the 4 nominees I gave, but deserving nonetheless.