Directing

I will restrict myself to one question, because it is the question this film lives or dies on: how do you photograph a man the whole world has already memorized, at the age before he was anyone? Anthony Bourdain has been mythologized without pause in the years since his death, and the field of posthumous product is exactly as lurid as you fear. Matt Johnson’s Tony, for A24, written by Todd Bartels and Lou Howe, answers the question with a scope decision so severe it amounts to a manifesto: one summer, 1975, Provincetown. A nineteen-year-old washes dishes badly, lies about everything, and gets, in the words of Kitchen Confidential that open the film, the good ass-kicking he badly needs. The show, the fame, the voice, none of it appears. The film ends before the man begins. ...

Nicolas Winding Refn was clinically dead for twenty-five minutes in 2023, on a table, mid-surgery, with two weeks’ warning that this might be how it ended. He has said plainly that the idea for Her Private Hell came when he was dead and came back. I begin there not for the drama but because the origin explains the method, and the method is the story. A director who believed his film career was over returned to features after a decade away and spent his second chance on the least commercial materials available: silence, stillness, a fog-bound artificial city, and a horror plot conducted like opera. Whatever you conclude about the result, nothing in it is an accident of laziness. It is all wagered. ...

Take one snowed-in summer camp, a reclusive final girl, an experimental filmmaker with a franchise pitch due, a bucket of fried chicken with assorted dipping sauces, and a killer who wears a box fan for a face, and you have, precisely, Jane Schoenbrun’s third feature. The title, Teenage Sex and Death at Camp Miasma, does the work of a mission statement: it names the two engines of the slasher form and promises to take them seriously as subjects rather than as fuel. Schoenbrun arrives at this after We’re All Going to the World’s Fair, the low-budget debut that earned praise from Scorsese among others, and I Saw the TV Glow, and the trajectory matters, because this is what happens when a filmmaker who grew up inside genre stops quoting it and starts interrogating it under studio lights of their own design. ...

There are two kinds of first-contact film. The first kind lands the hardware: saucers over cities, armies in the streets, a planet’s worth of extras looking up. Spielberg’s Disclosure Day is this year’s grand version of it, and Wells’s Martians were doing it on the page in the nineteenth century. The second kind never shows you the visitor at all. It gives you a signal, an instrument, and a person who has to decide what the data means; Contact is its cathedral, and Clara and Ad Astra keep smaller chapels. The Outer Threat, the directing debut of the Toronto writer William Woods, belongs entirely to the second kind, and the interesting thing about it is not that a low-budget Canadian production chose the cheaper church. It is how far the film commits to the choice once made. ...

Bref, they told me it was a film about a love triangle. They lied. It is a film about sweat, leverage, and the kinetic violence of an object moving at 130 miles per hour. Luca Guadagnino’s Challengers does not observe a tennis match; it forces you to duck. I browse the public forums and I see the audience arguing. Mon Dieu, it never stops. Half of them are swept away by what they call a “purely pleasurable film,” while the other half complain that they “don’t understand the positive reviews” at all. They argue endlessly about the characters’ morals. They argue about the plot. They miss the point entirely. The brilliance of this film is not found in its narrative; it is found in its physical execution. ...

Commercial cinema is terrified of aimlessness. It demands a rigid three-act structure and a clear protagonist to secure funding. Richard Linklater’s 1990 debut, Slacker, completely rejected this convention, opting instead for a non-linear, “baton-passing” narrative. The Drifting Observer The camera acts as a drifting observer across Austin, Texas. It picks up a conversation, follows it for a few minutes, and then seamlessly hands the narrative off to a new character who happens to cross their path. There is no central plot, only an endless relay race of philosophical ramblings, conspiracy theories, and existential ennui. ...

To capture the unfiltered, destructive reality of New York youth in his 1995 film Kids, photographer-turned-director Larry Clark knew that traditional Hollywood casting would fail. You cannot hire a casting director to find a Juilliard-trained 18-year-old and expect them to convincingly portray the hyper-specific, chaotic reality of a downtown skateboarder. The Participant-Observer Instead, Clark became a participant-observer. He spent three years embedding himself within the downtown NYC skateboarding community, gaining the trust of the teenagers before a camera ever rolled. He learned their language, observed their behavior, and mapped their social dynamics. He approached the narrative film as if it were a strict ethnographic documentary. ...

To depict a horrific school shooting is to invite the trap of Hollywood sensationalism. Melodrama, rapid editing, and theatrical pacing invariably cheapen the tragedy. To avoid this, director Gus Van Sant implemented a rigorous “one rule” constraint for his 2003 film Elephant: the camera must never stop moving, and the actors must never stop being themselves. The Drift of the Steadicam Cinematographer Harris Savides executed this through a series of long, languid, unbroken Steadicam tracking shots. The camera drifts through the high school hallways like a detached, “fly-on-the-wall” observer. By holding these tracking shots for extended, unbroken periods, Van Sant intentionally stretches time. ...

Traditional film production is an exercise in rigid geography. An actor is told exactly where to stand—their “mark”—so the lighting is perfect and the camera focus is sharp. But hitting a mark destroys spontaneity. To achieve a hyper-realistic, documentary-style intimacy on a tight $700,000 budget, Half Nelson director Ryan Fleck completely rejected the mark. Character-Driven Blocking Instead of forcing actors Ryan Gosling and Shareeka Epps to adapt to the camera, Fleck forced the camera to adapt to them. He utilized a highly mobile, handheld 16mm camera to follow the actors’ natural instincts. The actors were allowed to move organically through the real Brooklyn locations. This character-driven blocking prioritized emotional spontaneity over technical perfection, resulting in performances that feel radically unscripted and alive. ...

When directing actors, the primary goal is usually to elicit natural, emotional, “human” performances. In Dogtooth, Yorgos Lanthimos does the exact opposite. To construct a horrifying portrait of a family living in an isolated, artificially constructed reality, he systematically strips his actors of natural human behavior. The Trance of the Deadpan Lanthimos directs his actors to deliver their dialogue in a notoriously flat, monotone, and deadpan style. The characters do not inflect; they do not emote. This verbal strangeness forces the characters to appear as if they are in a trance, perfectly reflecting their status as infantilized subjects who have been brainwashed by their parents’ authoritarian social experiment. They are repeating words, not feeling them. ...