Best Director: Ranking Every 96th Academy Award Nominee
Written by Andreas Babiolakis
This article is a part of the Academy Awards Project, where Andreas Babiolakis from Films Fatale ranks every Oscar nominee from worst to best, and goes through every category once a day five days a week.
We’re at the tail end of tackling every single category of the 96th Academy Awards! Before we get to Best Picture tomorrow, we have one group of nominees left: Best Director. This category is usually seen as one that is tethered to Best Picture because the winning filmmaker usually sees their film follow suit; of the ninety-five Best Picture winners thus far, sixty-eight have seen their nominated directors win alongside them (that’s almost seventy-two percent). While it isn’t guaranteed, the odds are usually quite high. This is because a director is seen as the visionary who compiles all of the previously discussed categories — from screenwriting and production (costume, acting, set design) to post (editing, sound, visual effects) — into one unified experience. Directors affect tone, aesthetic cohesion, purpose, and so much more. Bad acting is usually a sign of bad directing as well, and the same can be said for many other elements of filmmaking. Essentially, directors provide the blueprints and also sign off on the end results they approve (well, if there isn’t producer meddling, of course). I have zero complaints about the five nominees. They directed five of the best films of last year (they made my top six, excluding All of Us Strangers which unfortunately got snubbed by the Academy across the board). This is the most stacked category of the year, and definitely a tricky one to rank. I honestly couldn’t be happier with these nominees, so let’s get to analyzing them all.
Here are your nominees for Best Director ranked from worst to best (or, in this case, excellent to perfect).
Biggest Snub: Past Lives-Celine Song
I honestly wouldn’t change a thing about these nominees, but I try to find examples of who or what else could have been nominated. I know many have decried the omission of Greta Gerwig for Barbie, and I, too, think Gerwig did a great job, but I think the larger head-scratcher is regarding Celine Song and Past Lives, whose artistically poetic look at fate and love was instantly a favourite for many. I think that her film may have been too quiet, thus why it was severely overlooked in many ways (including for direction), but I think that the nuance and depth that Past Lives possesses will resonate for years to come. I don’t think that any of the nominees’ films will fade over time, but I also believe that Song’s work here will linger in our minds and hearts for years. She did a great job, and I think the film was critically underrepresented (outside of its two nominations, including Best Picture, I suppose) throughout (at least Barbie has eight nominations).
5. Anatomy of a Fall-Justine Triet
I’m not saying Justine Triet is the worst director of these five. Not even close. Someone has to be last, and it is sadly Triet by a hair. Anatomy of a Fall is a brilliant courtroom drama and approach to crime cinema to the point that I think it may go down as one of the former genre’s greatest examples. Its moral middle ground forces you to come up with your own suspicions and results. The fixation on the true crime elements makes for a riveting experience. Triet’s focus on the present with next-to-zero nostalgia or sensationalized memory helps Anatomy of a Fall stay grounded and neutral. The use of a son’s piano lessons to “score” the film, including the fumbling of wrong notes to create uncertainty? Brilliant. No question about it: Anatomy of a Fall is an expertly made film that will be cherished for a while. Why do I have it last, then? There’s virtually nothing wrong about this film or most of the other nominees, but my rationale is that the other four films possess slightly stronger authorial elements and risks. That’s it. Don’t think anything about Triet being last, because I may also feel quite differently tomorrow. The competition here is just too fierce.
4. Oppenheimer-Christopher Nolan
Again, these nominees are separated by mere molecules, so Christopher Nolan placing fourth isn’t any indication of him being a bad director by any means. If anything, I think Oppenheimer is one of the best films he’s ever made. There are maybe some minuscule deductions for the briefest of issues (occasional character coldness, as is typical for Nolan, and that one glimpse of Hollywood cheese when Matt Damon barks about the nuclear bomb being the biggest event in the history of the world), so you’d think I’d place Nolan last if I had nothing to complain about regarding Anatomy of a Fall. Where Oppenheimer gains points is from its insane risks, including the fragmented chronology, the intertwining of two different concepts (fission versus fusion) at once (and the immense parallels they draw), and the tension. My God, the tension. Nolan never dumbs down the political or scientific concepts of Oppenheimer, yet he still has a film where anyone can still follow along enough to understand what’s taking place. There’s a sense of dread throughout the film because Nolan made a film that’s not based on history that most of us already know; Oppenheimer is indicative of the cyclical nature of civilization, and how we both never learn from our mistakes and are destined to head towards our own demise by one wrong move (which, according to Oppenheimer, has already happened).
3. Killers of the Flower Moon-Martin Scorsese
Martin Scorsese returned with one of his best films of the twenty-first century. Killers of the Flower Moon is an impeccable slow-burning Western that is heavily based on generational slaughter. The gradual pacing of the film makes you feel every single ounce of the grief and horror of what transpired in that Osage community, but the film never actually feels like three-and-a-half hours, either. The film wastes no time getting into the crux of its argument, and yet it never feels like it is dilly-dallying, either (I know that some have pointed out that the climactic courtroom sequences feel redundant, but I think it is necessary to have them as they are to prove the amount of barriers that were set up to protect predators). Everything builds up towards the clemency of a guilty soul, only for the final punch to the gut that even he cannot escape: awful hearts will never be cleansed, even if there is a smidgen of love and remorse in them. The decision to incorporate as much indigenous culture and influence as possible is crucial. The final extra points go towards the complete shift from the original purpose of the film (to document the start of the FBI in response to these murders) to what we get now (a character study of a toxic marriage built on the foundations of greed and sin). I know it isn’t the story that many where expecting, but it is an original, heavyweight story that came out of another exquisite source material.
2. Poor Things-Yorgos Lanthimos
All of the best things about Yorgos Lanthimos’ style come together in Poor Things. Firstly, this film is outright hilarious and quite possibly the funniest film of last year. I recall being in stitches for most of the film because of its deadpan delivery of offensive lines (typical Lanthimos). Of course, the Greek director’s signature affinity for cringe-comedy is only a part of this successful equation. The sense of fantasy and wonder is indebted to the styles of yesteryear, and yet they feel so fresh and spectacular given Lanthimos’ wide-eyed (or fish-eyed, I suppose) approach to the unknown; he’s not just satirizing the world, he’s reinventing it so we fall in love with it again like we’ve been reborn. Furthermore, the gradual growth of Bella Baxter was one of the biggest treats of 2023 cinema, and Lanthimos is serious exactly when he needs to be (with the evolution and treatment of his protagonist in a film that is meant to promote feminist equality and justice). There aren’t many adequate words to describe what Poor Things means because of how well its genres blend and how much Lanthimos cares about both its purpose and its fun. By the absurdly uncanny finale (which still rings in my mind months after seeing Poor Things), all you’ll know is that you’ve seen something unlike anything else (not even in Lanthimos’ filmography). I think that counts for something.
1. The Zone of Interest-Jonathan Glazer
Jonathan Glazer, like all of the above nominees, is one of the best working directors. What he accomplishes with The Zone of Interest is a masterwork that most filmmakers couldn’t even dream about pulling off; the ambitious audacity Glazer has here was a risk worth taking. The fact that we never once see any actual violence or torture relating to the Holocaust (despite us being right next to Auschwitz for most of the film) is one thing. The fact that we feel every single speck of nausea, dread, and fear with that in mind is an achievement all on its own. This voyeuristic approach to spying on this privileged Nazi family while generations and cultures die around them is haunting; it feels like we are omnipresent spirits judging them from beyond. There is so much going on, from the intricate sound design that tells two-thirds of the story (and the gorgeous cinematography that fills in the rest) to the discretely thorough plot (in a film that feels minimalist and empty). I cannot emphasize how exemplarily made The Zone of Interest is, but I can state that it results in a film that is impossible to ever shake off. Watching the film more than once only allows you to find even more hidden (and shocking) details that Glazer and company have stuffed into this harrowing experience that feels one or two iotas away from being a fully fledged psychological horror film. No question about it: The Zone of Interest is Glazer’s magnum opus.
Who I Want To Win: I’d be happy if any of the above filmmakers win. Honestly. I’m a huge fan of all of them and these affiliated films. Having said that, I like to still narrow down my favourites. Not only do I want Jonathan Glazer and The Zone of Interest to win this Oscar, but I feel like it’s potentially his only chance to ever pull this off (Glazer’s films have notoriously been underrepresented by the Oscars; only Sexy Beast has had one nomination [for Ben Kingsley’s terrific performance], and I feel like The Zone of Interest getting all of these honours this year feels like a miracle). Will the other nominees have a chance to be nominated? Possibly. More than Glazer does, anyway (and at least Marty has an Oscar for this category already, although he’s been due more by now). This could be Glazer’s lone shot at this.
Who I Think Will Win: No question about it, this is most likely going to Christopher Nolan and Oppenheimer (Nolan has also been heavily overlooked by the Academy, with one sole Best Director nomination for Dunkirk before this year). Having said that, there is an ever-so-slight chance that Jonathan Glazer and The Zone of Interest can pull off the surprise of the year. It all depends on which way the BAFTAs decide to swing with its favouritism of all things British. If Nolan wins, he’s got this in the bag (he also already has the DGA award for Best Film, which is usually a sign of promise for the Oscars). If the BAFTAs vote for team Glazer, The Zone of Interest’s late-game takeover is likely in full effect.
The Academy Awards Project reaches the final category tomorrow: Best Picture. We’ll be ranking all ten nominees and will go over other major snubs for the category and the Oscars as a whole.
Andreas Babiolakis has a Masters degree in Film and Photography Preservation and Collections Management from Ryerson University, as well as a Bachelors degree in Cinema Studies from York University. His favourite times of year are the Criterion Collection flash sales and the annual Toronto International Film Festival.