Last week I was stunned to hear the news that successful actor and comedian Ben Stiller has been given the directorial reigns over the much-awaited DreamWorks passion project, The Trial of the Chicago 7. The move was made after Paul Greengrass and Steven Spielberg turned down the project. Stiller is best known for his acting in slapstick comedies including Zoolander and Dodgeball. The idea of Stiller directing a period political story revolving around the 1968 Democratic convention riots and their aftermath is not something I am very comfortable with. He has directed several films in the past, however, they have all been generally the same type of comedic films that he himself would act in. The Trial of the Chicago 7 shows great promise with a script by Aaron Sorkin and seasoned producers Walter Parkes and Laurie MacDonald attached. I am not going to say that Stiller would ruin the film, in actuality I think he would bring an interesting element to the film, my issue is that this is the perfect opportunity for an up and coming trained director to show his merit. There is tremendous risk when investing in a blockbuster film and Hollywood has traditionally aimed to mitigate that risk by attaching famous actors and proven personnel. I challenge the idea that a popular actor is a safer bet to put in charge of a film compared to a trained and educated director that has completed several smaller to mid-level budget films. There is no reason why Scarlett Johansson, Natalie Portman and Joshua Jackson can find top-level administrative jobs and Spike Jonze (Being John Malkovich) and Burr Steers (Igby Goes Down) cannot. At some point, studios are no longer mitigating risk by choosing a high-profile actor and actresses to direct instead they are creating risk by putting an uneducated and untrained overseer at the helm of their project.
There are of course exceptions to the idea that actors cannot and should not direct. Mel Gibson (Braveheart), Sean Penn (Mystic River), Ron Howard (A Beautiful Mind), George Clooney (Good Night, and Good Luck) and I believe the most talented of them all, Clint Eastwood (Million Dollar Baby) have all proven themselves to be extremely talented behind the camera as well as in front of it. While all of the above are talented, I believe that most of them really only succeed when they are directing films similar to those that they once starred in. Due to the fact that they were not traditionally trained as directors their pictures and directing style usually lack a learning curve seen in more seasoned directors. Clint Eastwood on the other hand appears to strive for a permanent learning curve. We all know that it is easy to fall into a routine; Eastwood on the other hand has spent the last half-century continually changing and for the better. He has gone from a hard-nosed cowboy who was a good guy but not very serious to a gracious man thoroughly dedicated to his craft. He is continuously searching for stories worth telling tacking serious topics in a serious manner. This year he has directed Gran Torino and Changeling both are receiving Oscar nods and the future looks bright for the 78-year-old director. What I admire most about Clint Eastwood is his ability to use his star stature to gain creative freedom for his films, which he makes the way that he wants to. This is what most actors turned directors lack; I do not believe they challenge themselves in how the convey a film, instead their style is limited to how they have seen it done so many times before.As Hollywood reacts to our recent economic downturn we as viewers can expect more sequels, more remakes and much less original work. Excellent projects such as Wolfman, Factor X, The Avengers and Halo are still in pre-production phases because Hollywood is under the impression that all of the marketable directors are attached to other projects. I’m not sure when the change occurred that a director of a film had to be a big name star, but I do believe that the quality of a film is not dependent on the audience recognizing the director’s name.
