Best Director, 2003

What do you look for when it comes to “best” directing? I confess, for me it’s about consistency: all the performers, all the “crafts”, even the rhythm of the edit (not always under the aegis of the director, by the way), are on the same page, delivering the same tone. If it’s slow and meditative, you’re not bored, because everyone is doing their job to make that purposeful instead of plodding. If it’s broad and loud, no one is over-the-top but everyone is Stylized, Theatrical. You believe in the world of the film because the director has worked on every element to make it real.

I think that's what everyone was responding to in 2003 when Peter Jackson made his inevitable ascent to the Dolby stage, a consistency that spanned 438 days of shooting, three years of release (and reshoots), a cast and crew of thousands, and beaucoup box office. Everyone knew they were waiting for the third movie to give him his reward:

As you see, he wasn't the only nominee, and nobody turned in a bad movie. Ranking them is more a matter of who you love most than who you like least. Here they are, ranked from 5th to 1st. 

1998: Best Director

Of course, the big story in 1998 was the return of Terrence Malick.

I'm going by Oscar Wars (incredible work by Michael Schulman) and Inside Oscar 2 (incredibly bitchy work by Damien Bona) when I give these details. Malick was beloved by critics, artists, and cinephiles for his 1970s releases Badlands and Days of Heaven. Then he left for Paris, just dropped out, doing the odd uncredited rewrite here and there but otherwise kept out of the whole Hollywood thing. Producers Robert Michael Geisler and John Roberdeau coaxed him out after 19 years, and The Thin Red Line is the result. It would be another 13 before he would follow up with The Tree of Life, and now the man can't stop churning them out! By his standards, anyway.

Malick's return was a triumph critically and Oscarally - nominations-wise, at any rate. Because, at least in Best Director, there was no stopping the inevitable:

Was the inevitable the right choice, though?

Oscar '85: Steven Spielberg, Sydney Pollack, and Best Director

The nominees for Best Director this year do not include Steven Spielberg for The Color Purple. It's a significant point, for two reasons. Number one: The Color Purple led with eleven nominations, and while Picture and Director are rarely a five-for-five deal (even these days with the expanded lineup in the former, lone directors such as Thomas Vinterberg still pop up), one would think that the most-nominated film of the year would have the director who brought it all together lauded. Number two: not only was he nominated for the Directors Guild Award - against Huston, Pollack, Weir, and Cocoon's Ron Howard - he won the damn thing. In the 38 years of the DGA Awards, Spielberg was the first to win without even being nominated for the Oscar, a "feat" that's only been accomplished twice more: Howard for Apollo 13 in 1995 and Ben Affleck for Argo in 2012. Frankly, I think the Academy's directors branch got it right: I like The Color Purple, but I think some of Spielberg's choices are to its detriment. But even if he had been nominated at the Oscars, could he have forestalled the inevitable?:

Probably not. A sweep is a sweep is a sweep. What a tough choice to make, though! Look at the contenders: