Here, we’ll present 20 directors that have already proven their worth but have yet to be rewarded by the Academy for it. Considering it would take 20 years at a minimum for all of them to win the award, it’s safe to say most will not. So the question becomes, who will be so fortunate? Note, you have to have been actually nominated for a Best Director award to make this list (hence our honorable mention list with valuable filmmakers that may have brushed or already won Oscars, but have never been nominated as a Director for a feature-film).
*Dates listed next to titles are the year of the awards ceremony. The films were released the previous year.
THE VETERANS:
Ridley Scott
Nominated For: “Thelma & Louise” – 1992
“Gladiator” – 2001
“Black Hawk Down” – 2002
Why He’s a Contender: Ridley Scott has been around a long time, and began his career directing two films most people now consider ur-text sci-fi classics. “Alien” (’79) and “Blade Runner,” (’82) put the director on the map, but the Academy didn’t pay attention until the female empowerment saga, “Thelma and Louise,” was released in 1991. However, the following decade he would fail to impress, with the director helming “1492” (’92), “White Squall” (’96) and “G.I. Jane” (’97). Recognition from the Academy (or critics) would not come again until 2000 with the release of “Gladiator”, the most popular and commercial film of his career so far. It earned him another Oscar nomination, and served as his first collaboration with Russell Crowe, an actor he’s worked with on the last four films he’s made. Scott’s work ethic also increased drastically since 2000, as he’s made eight films in the past ten years, twice his output from the previous decade. In 2001, he directed two films, and while “Hannibal” was ill-conceived, “Black Hawk Down” is the director’s best work to date and earned him yet another Oscar nomination, one he should’ve won in our opinion. Scott’s past few years have been hit and miss, much like his entire career, and for every decent if not familiar film like “American Gangster” (’07), he has a lifeless one like “Kingdom of Heaven” (’05). Next up, Scott is reinterpreting the story of “Robin Hood” with, you guessed it, Russell Crowe as the hooded hero. If you’ll recall, the last Robin Hood film didn’t do well with the Academy Awards and only earned a nom for Best Song. Let’s hope Scott can do better.
Peter Weir
Nominated For: “Witness” – 1986
“Dead Poets Society” – 1990
“The Truman Show” – 1999
“Master and Commander” – 2004
Why He’s a Contender: Leading the list with the most nominations, Peter Weir is also one of the least known directors. Sure, people know some of the movies he’s made, but his name is nowhere near a household one, which is a shame considering he has one of the best track records around. The Australian director started his career auspiciously making films focused on his homeland, such as the engimatic “Picnic at Hanging Rock” (’75), the haunting, “The Last Wave” (’77), “Gallipoli” (’81) and “The Year of Living Dangerously” (’82), but it’s when he eventually made the move to America that he got credit for his work. “Witness” (’85) earned Weir his first Oscar nomination while the crowd pleasing “Dead Poets Society” (’89) earned him his second. But unlike Ridley Scott, Weir slowed down and after directing five films in the 80’s, he would only direct another five over the next twenty years. Two of those films, the overrated “The Truman Show” (’98) and the underrated “Master and Commander” (’03), would give Weir two additional Oscar noms, but still no win. His next film, “The Way Back,” comes out next year and features an interesting cast. Hopefully, if he is nominated for it, he’ll win; otherwise we might have another Robert Altman on our hands.
David Lynch
Nominated For: “The Elephant Man” – 1981
“Blue Velvet” – 1987
“Mulholland Dr.” – 2002
Why He’s a Contender: David Lynch is definitely a strange one and so is his career. Like his films, no straight line can be drawn as he jumps from features to TV to shorts, all sharing the same dreamlike qualities, and occasionally, even the same characters and plot points. Lynch gained noticed after making the cult hit, “Eraserhead” (’77), affording him the opportunity to go straight, kind of, with “The Elephant Man” (’80). It paid off and landed Lynch an Oscar nomination. Then it was back to the weird, and after “Dune” (’84), Lynch got another nomination for “Blue Velvet” (’86). A TV series, “Twin Peaks,” two polar opposite films, “Lost Highway” (’97) and “The Straight Story” (’99) and fifteen years later, Lynch would make his masterpiece, the mind-bending “Mulholland Dr.” (’01). Originally conceived as the third season of “Twin Peaks,” it was eventually shot as a pilot for a TV series of its own, and then later transformed into the feature film that earned Lynch his third Oscar nom. Trying to top it seemed futile, but nevertheless, Lynch attempted it with “Inland Empire” (’06) but to no avail. Today, his name is more connected to conversation about transcendental meditation and documentaries about gurus than it is with feature-filmmaking.
Michael Mann
Nominated For: “The Insider” – 2000
Why He’s a Contender: With an unparalleled knack for attention to detail evident in even his early films, “Thief” (’81) and “Manhunter” (’86), we’re surprised Michael Mann has only one Oscar nomination to his credit. His take on the exquisite looking “Last of the Mohicans” (’92), though not perfect, was commendable to say the least, but the gritty realism he brought to “The Insider” (’99) is what got the Academy to finally notice him. Howver, standing heads and tails above those films is Mann’s true masterpiece, the epic crime saga “Heat” (’95), which inexplicably earned no Oscar nominations. Lately, Mann has been experimenting with digital filmmaking, yielding mixed results. “Collateral” (’04) succeeded wonderfully because it didn’t pretend to be a bigger film than it was, while “Miami Vice” (’06) failed miserably thanks in part to an air of self importance. This year, Mann continued his digital ways despite shooting a historic time period with “Public Enemies.” The film suffered from mixed reviews, and we found it to be surprisingly average. He’ll just have to do better next time if he wants another shot at an Oscar.
Terrence Malick
Nominated For: “The Thin Red Line” – 1999
Why He’s a Contender: After a promising start making “Badlands” (’73) and “Days of Heaven” (’78), Terrence Malick disappeared from the film world for twenty years. It wasn’t until 1998 that he returned and brought with him one of the most beautiful and poetic films of all time. But “The Thin Red Line” wasn’t the only World War II movie released that year, and Malick had to compete against “Saving Private Ryan” and previous Oscar winner Steven Spielberg at the Academy Awards. Here’s where we are torn because while Malick’s film is clearly the better of the two, Spielberg did film some of the most realistic battle scenes ever for ‘Ryan’. Thankfully, it wasn’t another twenty years before Malick would make another film, and in 2005 he released “The New World,” his chronicle of John Smith and Pocahontas. Now while we were let down by the theatrical cut of the film, at least it was a sign Malick might be picking up his productivity. Sure enough, only five years later and he has finished filming “The Tree of Life.” Now, while nobody really knows what it is about, we do know it will feature an IMAX counterpart about the origin of the Earth or something like that. And with no firm release date, we can only hope talk of a fall release (and a Cannes world debut) turn out to be tenable.
Gus Van Sant
Nominated For: “Good Will Hunting” – 1998
“Milk” – 2009
Why He’s a Contender: You have to hand it to Gus Van Sant, the man is not a sell-out and obviously doesn’t let the prospect of Academy Awards run his career. After spending time in the independent underworld, he experienced first-hand what a mainstream movie can get you, and that is an Oscar nomination for Best Director. And although the success of “Good Will Hunting” (’97) may have lead to commercial missteps, “Psycho” (’98) and “Finding Forrester” (’00), it wasn’t long before he resorted back to his old indie ways and created a series of experimental films in “Gerry” (’02), “Elephant” (’03), “Last Days” (’05) and “Paranoid Park” (’07). However, these projects did him no favors with the Academy, and it wasn’t until the mainstream “Milk” in 2008 that he earned another Oscar nom. Van Sant is currently shooting his next film, “Restless” a tale of two young people that share a preoccupation with mortality, but with no well-known actors in its cast (other than up-and-comer Mia Wasikowska), it seems Van Sant is just moving on, with or without an Oscar.
Jim Sheridan
Nominated For: “My Left Foot” – 1990
“In the Name of the Father” – 1994
Why He’s a Contender: Jim Sheridan and Daniel Day-Lewis had a Martin Scorsese/Robert De Niro collaboration going for awhile, even to the point of the actor winning his Oscar while leaving the director without his. After his trio of Day-Lewis films, including the two he was nominated for as well as “The Boxer” (’97), Sheridan took a little break only to return with his most personal film yet. “In America” (’02) was written by the director and his daughter, and even featured a character based on Sheridan’s late brother, whom the film was dedicated to. After that, Sheridan did a completely puzzling 180 and made “Get Rich or Die Tryin’” (’05) starring 50 Cent. We don’t know if he saw “8 Mile” (’02) and thought, “Hey, I can do that too” or if he was just strapped for cash, but whatever the case, it is a pretty big black eye. Fortunately, this year he released the better “Brothers” although that film is far from great itself, and it’s unlikely he’ll receive another Oscar nomination for it.
Stephen Frears
Nominated For: “The Grifters” – 1991
“The Queen” – 2007
Why He’s a Contender: After making some very British classics, like “Prick Up Your Ears” (’87) starring Gary Oldman, Stephen Frears directed “Dangerous Liaisons” (’88) which earned seven Oscar nominations, though not one for him. He made up for that with his next film though, and was nominated for “The Grifters” in 1991. There would be a sixteen year gap between that nomination and his next one despite decent films like “High Fidelity” (’00) and “Dirty Pretty Things” (’02), as Frears didn’t receive his second nomitation until 2007 for “The Queen” (‘06). According to IMDB, his next film, “Tamara Drewe” is already in post-production, but for some reason won’t be released until 2011. We hope it’s not a bad sign for the film because, judging from Frears’ age (68), he can’t really afford to wait another sixteen years.
Mike Leigh
Nominated For: “Secrets & Lies” – 1997
“Vera Drake” – 2005
Why He’s a Contender: Not unlike Stephen Frears, Mike Leigh started out making British indies like “Meantime” (’84) starring Gary Oldman, it’s just that Leigh never stopped. It wasn’t until his depressing satire “Naked” (’93) that he seemed to get noticed outside the U.K. on a larger international scale. While that film is still his best, he earned his first Oscar nomination for his next one, “Secrets & Lies” (’96). Since then, Leigh has been going back in forth with the tones of his films, from the whimsical “Topsy-Turvy” (’99), to more heavy fare in “Vera Drake” (’04) and back to effervescent again with last year’s “Happy-Go-Lucky.” Leigh is currently filming an untitled project that will again star Jim Broadbent.
Jane Campion
Nominated For: “The Piano” – 1994
Why She’s a Contender: One of New Zealand’s most prominent directors before Peter Jackson came along with high-concept, populist tentpoles, Campion was making some incredibly illuminating and memorable dramas like, “Sweetie” and “Angel At My Table” — two films that the Criterion Collection have recognized as contemporary classics. But it wasn’t until 1993’s beautifully expressive, “The Piano”— it won three of eight nominations including a original writing award for Campion and gave Anna Paquin the bragging rights to having the youngest Best Supporting actress nomination ever — that she broke out on the global stage.The ensuing years were not kind to her and “In The Cut” with Meg Ryan was a particularly egregious misfire, but 2009 should have been her year. The wonderfully beguiling “Bright Star” should have been a multiple Oscar nominee, but somehow, the film has been criminally overlooked during this awards season.
Quentin Tarantino
Nominated For: “Pulp Fiction” – 1995
Why He’s a Contender: Barely making the cut for the Veterans list, Quentin Tarantino has been trying to top his sophomore effort, “Pulp Fiction” (’94), ever since it landed him an Oscar nom and the success he’s been living off of ever since. Before that film though, Tarantino had to sell his script for “True Romance” (’93) just in order to fund his brilliant debut, “Reservoir Dogs” (’92). Those two films along with the underrated and oft forgotten, “Jackie Brown” (’97), make up Tarantino’s “prime,” and made his name the definition of indie-cool for cinema. Unfortunately, it would be six years before he’d make another film, and if you thought he was cribbing from his favorite films before, it would only get worse. The “Kill Bills” were essentially an old kung fu movie, while “Death Proof” was a ‘70s grindhouse picture. And just when it seemed like Tarantino was becoming a parody of himself with nothing more to offer us, he announced he was finally going to make “Inglourious Basterds,” a WWII project he had talked about doing his whole career. Thankfully, it didn’t disappoint and has already proved to be a hit with critics and audiences alike, making many best of the year lists and earning $120 million at the domestic box office. Another thing is for sure, and that is that Tarantino is certainly in the running for Best Director in this weak mainstream film year.
Neil Jordan
Nominated For: “The Crying Game” – 1993
Why He’s A Contender: At 59 years of age and with 16 feature films under his belt, Irish filmmaker Neil Jordan is certainly a veteran director, but aside from one nomination for his 1992 gender-bender (plus a writing nom for the same picture), he’s been overlooked by the Academy on every other effort. And perhaps its not a complete surprise, Jordan’s films seem to vary in quality, are never quite in touch with popular taste or relevant cultural topics and or are just obscure esoteric subjects (transgressive sexuality is a current that runs throughout, but that’s not exactly mainstream). It doesn’t help that as a brand, Jordan isn’t very well-known and his style as a director is subtle, varied and without a strong signature that cineastes can cling to. His most well-known work, “Interview with the Vampire: The Vampire Chronicles” with Tom Cruise and Brad Pitt is also one of his worst. Next up for him is the mermaid fairytale, “Ondine” which is one of our personal favorites, but it’s surely not going to entice Oscar. It might just be that Jordan amasses a commendable and eclectic body of work (not that he already hasn’t) and may never get to the Academy podium. But it’s never seemed to be his ambition regardless.
HONORABLE MENTIONS: Never Actually Nominated For A Feature Film Best Director Oscar
We didn’t do this for the actors or actresses (there’ll hopefully be an entire separate piece for them) but we’d thought we’d mention a few directors who have never even received an Oscar nomination, yet we think are worthy.
Spike Lee – Lee broke onto the scene with “Do the Right Thing” in ’89 and received a writing nomination for it. His 1997 documentary, “4 Little Girls” also received a Best Documentary nomination — a field that’s been his strength in his later years — but a proper Best Director nomination has still eluded him. Since then he’s made some films that worked (“Malcolm X” ’92) and some that haven’t (“Son of Sam ’99), but his best chance at a nom for directing came with “25th Hour” (’02) which has been included on several critics best of the decade lists, but didn’t connect with voters that year. Last year, some thought he had another shot with “Miracle at St. Anna” but the film seemed to divide audiences and financially it was a bomb. Next up, Lee plans to make a sequel to his most commercial film yet, “Inside Man” (’06) and plans to go back to New Orleans for a sequel to his, “When the Levees Broke” documentary.
Tim Burton – Whether you like him or not, Burton is a veteran director with a style all his own. “Pee-Wee’s Big Adventure” (’85) is a cult classic while “Edward Scissorhands” (’89) is still one of his finest works. His best film however, and the one he should have been nominated for, the delightful and hilarious “Ed Wood” (’94) was overlooked, and unfortunately the last truly good movie he’s made (don’t even try to mention “Big Fish”). Some critics thought he deserved credit for “Sweeney Todd” (’07), but he was rightfully overlooked. Next up, Burton will present us with his version of “Alice in Wonderland” and let’s just hope it’s better than his “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory” dud.
Cameron Crowe – We only really include Crowe because he honestly should have already been nominated. “Jerry Maguire” (’97) is still a fabulous film, yet somehow Crowe was not recognized for it. In fact, he was the only director out of the five films nominated for Best Picture that year not to be nominated (Milos Forman took his spot). Even Scott Hicks, the director of “Shine” was nominated for Chrissake. His next film, “Almost Famous” (’00), was just as good (and he won his first Academy Award for its original screenplay), but his last one, “Elizabethtown” (’05) really left more to be desired. Crowe is reportedly pulling a Martin Scorsese and is currently filming a Pearl Jam documentary, so who knows when he’ll return with a feature film — his last feature “Deep Tiki,” set to star Ben Stiller and Reese Witherspoon, seems to have been indefinitely delayed.
— Jonathan Helm, RP