‘Little Women’ didn’t direct itself. Why Greta Gerwig deserves an Oscar nomination
Greta Gerwig deserved better.
The Sacramento-raised movie powerhouse was snubbed Monday morning when she was not nominated for a best director Oscar for her luminous work on “Little Women.” In fact, no women were nominated in the best director category by the mostly old, mostly male, and mostly white voters at the Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences.
Having seen “Little Women” twice over the holiday break, I’m betting that Gerwig’s snub will be remembered years from now as one of many times that Oscar not only got it wrong, it was woefully out of touch with the times. Oscar has always loved old white dudes and old white dude stories above all else. It proved it again by failing to acknowledge the director behind what is – for my money – the best American film of 2019.
Yes, “Little Women” is really that good and deserves the best picture nomination. And I write this as someone who is the least “Little Women” person you will ever meet.
My favorite film of all time is “The Godfather.” My tastes in film have skewed toward big epic panoramas that – yes – were dominated by male sensibilities.
The last three films I’ve seen on Netflix: “The Two Popes,” “Once Upon a Time in the West,” and “The Cincinnati Kid.” I could watch Steve McQueen’s car chase in “Bullitt” all day long. Kenneth Branagh’s “Eve of Saint Crispin’s Day” speech in “Henry V” makes me cry every time. So does Tom Hanks’ death scene in “Saving Private Ryan.” I won’t mention the number of times I’ve seen “Dirty Harry.”
I initially saw “Little Women” on Christmas Day with my family because I wondered if Gerwig would have a setback after “Ladybird,” for which she was nominated for directing even though she didn’t win. All she did with “Little Women” is prove that she is no fluke. Gerwig is filmmaker of great skill and empathy.
“Little Women” is an achievement in cinematic storytelling because it is as surprising as it is familiar. It is powerful without a single gun shot being fired on screen. It is profound without being profane. And ultimately it tells the story of a strong woman who is fully formed, three dimensional.
Universal appeal for men and women
In “Little Women” as in “Ladybird,” Gerwig presents a heroine who does not depend on a man to feel whole. The path to fulfillment among Gerwig’s characters is not achieved by hating men, but by loving themselves. But again, you have to understand that this is not a protest film. It’s not a grievance film. It’s a film led by women whose appeal is universal.
It spoke to me because I was raised in a traditional Mexican family that was and is matriarchal. My mother, my grandmother, my aunts, my female cousins all make our family go. They are strong, vulnerable, joyful, fierce, loving and you mess with them at your peril.
It’s usually men who get to embody all these traits and many more on the screen. Gerwig flips the script on unwritten rule of cinema but “Little Women’” is so much more.
Without giving too much away, just know this: If you’ve seen previous versions of this film and loved them, you’ll be be blown away by what Gerwig does to distill this story down to its essence of self-realization.
Gerwig’s ability to portray joy, love, devotion and loss is really breathtaking. The audience clapped at the end of the Christmas Day show. And when my family and I wanted to go see a film that would end 2019 on a high note, we returned and the people clapped again.
Then came Monday and no best director nomination.
Yes, it’s also odious that only one actor of color was nominated on Monday – Cynthia Erivo, lead actress in the powerful “Harriet.” It stinks that Jennifer Lopez was snubbed for her head-turning role in “Hustlers.” I’m still mad that Lopez wasn’t nominated 20 years ago for “Selena.”
Oscar’s diversity problem
I’ve written often about the lack of diversity in Hollywood and it never seems to get better. Gerwig’s case is different, but insidious in its own way.
It’s about Hollywood taste makers stubbornly clinging to the themes they like and the storytellers they like – all familiar dudes who are great, no question. But they are tired too.
I haven’t seen all the work by the five men nominated but I do know this: Martin Scorsese’s “The Irishman” is a variation on the same tale that he has been telling for years. We’ve seen this movie before: Robert DeNiro. Al Pacino. Joe Pesci. Union guys. Crime families. Mafia hit men.
I’ve been watching this movie most of my adult life and I write this as someone who loved “Goodfellas.” I loved “Casino”. I love Quentin Tarantino, too. I love him so much I even sat through all of “Hateful Eight” and if that’s not love, I don’t know what is. But “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood?” Brad Pitt. Leo DiCaprio. A fetish for the underside of L.A. Cool white people being cool.
Uh, OK. Tarantino and Scorsese get best director nods for their legacy work. I get it. Pacino didn’t win his Oscar for “The Godfather,” “Serpico” or “Dog Day Afternoon. “ He won for “Scent of a Woman,” which is a notch above a Lifetime movie. Tarantino didn’t win best director for “Pulp Fiction,” his masterwork. Alfred Hitchcock never won best director. Scorsese didn’t win until late in his career.
All of this is true, but snubbing Gerwig in the director category continues a sorry history, one that only one woman – Kathryn Bigelow – winning best director.
Gerwig may get an Oscar for her “Little Women” screenplay, but her snub illustrates how backward Hollywood remains.
