Who likes my polls?

Umm?

2005 Oscars #6 - Best Director single choice
	Ang Lee, BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN
	Paul Haggis, CRASH
	George Clooney, GOOD NIGHT & GOOD LUCK
	Bennett Miller, CAPOTE
	Steven Spielberg, MUNICH
Votes accepted starting: 12/31/69 08:00 PM You must vote before you can view the results of this poll.

I think I'm catching Good Night, and Good Luck. over the weekend. By the trailers, it looks brilliant, a political thriller in the vain of All the President's Men; hopefully, it doesn't succumb to Ron Howard patriotism. Clooney is above that, though, I think.

I'm pulling for Ang Lee but I'm sure Senor Spielbergo will win it

Meh, either Gus Van Sant or Jim Jarmusch should win it, unfortunately they got the shaft.

Yeah, the trailer made it look like it would be a journalism thriller in the vain of 'Presidents', but it's just too slow and observant for it's own good.

I was disappointed when I saw it, probably because I went in with the same expectations that you feel now. Now that I know it's style, I might like it more upon another viewing.

I want Spielberg to win it but sadly, Ang Lee will get the trophy. IMO giving Clooney a nod was completely excessive and unnecessary. GNGL is simply not that great. It doesn't deserve those picture and director nods.

But Brokeback, Crash and Munich do?

Paul Haggis, CRASH

I was torn between Speilberg for "Munich" or Miller for "Capote". I bit the bullet and voted for Speilberg.

But Brokeback, Crash and Munich do? [/b][/quote]Yes, they do. I would say Munich might have been the best movie of 2005, with Crash and Brokeback close behind. I don't know what is it about GNGL but I can't bring myself to like it or enjoy it no matter what anyone says.

Of the three you mention, I'd probably have to say Brokeback, as a film, gives the most to shout about. I still think it could have been far more powerful, had it not gone down the accessible mainstream route (but then, no Oscars!); my thoughts on Brokeback: At times this looks like a ravishing epic. The same cannot be said, however, for the content; an exhaustively long film which, ultimately, makes a mountain out of a molehill. The problem is not in the subject matter or central relationship, but in the schematic way the narrative treats it.

My thoughts on Crash: A film not without its explosive moments of potential, but for a melodrama full of dramatic irony and overkill, the final impression is dubious: an ambitious directorial debut effort, and yet it seems to offer no further insight into racism than what we already know.

My thoughts on Munich: Accessible if not entirely authentic, watchable if not entirely worthy of its dumbfounding praise, Spielberg's revenge thriller is an overlong, tedious film with a message all about the complex implications of revenge itself. In this respect, it may be a fitting allegory to today's world, but struggles to convince for the most part.

As for purely directing, I don't know. All three films are ordinarily directed, I think. Spielberg feels the need to show the world he's a big boy now (twelve years after Schindler's List) by having, here and there, the odd knife going into someone's skull; Lee treats an interesting concept with a lot of potential in a way which doesn't push as many boundaries as it may have liked; and Haggis, writer of last year's ordinary Million Dollar Baby, directs so stereotypically it's almost Oscar-worthy.

So far, then, I'll choose Spielberg for Best Director; there are, in the film, some exciting, tense set-pieces. Pacing, on the whole, is another matter.

I agree with your thoughts on Brokeback but I disagree that Munich is tedious and overlong. To be honest, I like Crash but I'm nowhere as enthused about it as I am about Munich. It's been a month since the last time I saw it and I still think it's a great film. I can't articulate my reasons as well as you can but in my opinion, it is a brilliant film. And as for the "dumbfounding praise" Munich recieves, I happen to think that most reviews have underrated it, while blatantly overrating Brokeback.