History was made on Saturday night when Kathryn Bigelow became the first female director to win Best Direction in a Feature Film from the Directors' Guild of America. While not an upset or out-of-nowhere win -- every awards follower and pundit wondered about The Hurt Locker and Bigelow's chances -- it's a stunning victory, and one that has every eye looking towards the Oscars.

Bigelow will, most definitely, receive an Oscar nomination tomorrow morning, and she has a really good shot of taking home the Academy's top honor as well. In the last 61 years, over 90% of the DGA winners went on to receive that gold statue, the only upsets being Anthony Harvey in 1968, Francis Ford Coppola in 1972, Steven Spielberg in 1985, Ron Howard in 1995, Ang Lee in 2000, and Rob Marshall in 2002.

It's so close, but yet so far -- an almost-sure course to the Oscars, but one that could still go either way. So close, but so far ... really, that's been the theme of this year's awards circuit, especially when it comes to Bigelow and The Hurt Locker. The DGA Award is, at once, both a wonderful achievement and an emblem of how far we have to go.

In the news pieces that mention more than just the winners and losers, most make note of the comments that swam around Bigelow on Saturday night. As USAToday shares, director Lee Daniels said: "My sister sent me a text before the show. She just wanted to know if Kathryn Bigelow had won yet. Kathryn, your movie is as beautiful as your legs." Meanwhile, Steve Pond of The Wrap live-Tweeted the ceremony, commenting on the Daniels joke and adding: "Stage manager to Carl Reiner after seeing Bigelow: "That's the most beautiful director I've ever seen," and "Jeremy Renner said the only thing to rival Kathryn Bigelow in a bikini is 'Lee Daniels in a one-piece.'"*

It's no wonder that when she was asked how she felt to be the first woman to win the award, she said: "I suppose I like to think of myself as a filmmaker." The woman has had to deal with heaps of comments about her appearance for months. (You might remember my column from September 28 about the ridiculous comparisons between Bigelow and Jane Campion's looks.) We're talking about a woman who started her career with the short film The Set-Up about the seduction of cinema violence in 1978 before moving on to vampires, female cops, point-breaking surfers, futuristic Strange Days, historic murder mysteries, and war. Over 30 years and still, we're shocked that she doesn't shoot "women's films," that she is both talented and attractive.



I can't blame her for wanting to remove herself from the "female filmmaker" moniker in light of that, but it's also a shame. Winning for The Hurt Locker and making history is the perfect time for female directors -- especially Bigelow -- to speak up and celebrate the variety of women's interests and talents, not shying away because it qualifies your accomplishments. Because, even with the win, it's clear that Hollywood still needs to hear it -- a strong and clear mantra that can slowly teach everyone that it's not about the legs, the romcoms, and the stereotypical assumptions.

In her piece for the Guardian, Zoe Margolis writes:
Both directors [Bigelow and Antonia Bird] have frequently been accused of making "men's movies" because their directorial style focuses on provocative action and drama, rather than romance or comedy -- as if that makes them less female-oriented. One has to wonder if this has impacted their careers: many less skilled and less talented male directors have achieved a more prestigious -- and higher earning -- position than either Bigelow or Bird.
But taking a much more positive spin in the UK, Kate Muir writes for The Times:
How counter-intuitive that Bigelow's tense, minimalist Iraq war film should outdo James Cameron's maximalist 3-D blue aliens, especially when only seven female directors have even been nominated in the 62 years of the awards. Yet Bigelow's win, and Cameron's rethink of the entire business of film-making, are both first blasts in a revolution. (And possibly an explanation of their divorce -- just too much excitement for one household.) As one big British movie honcho said last week: "After Avatar, film will never be the same again." It's not merely that aliens pulled in a box office take of nearly $2 billion worldwide, submerging Titanic as biggest grossing film; it's that Avatar was so retina-ravishing (despite leaden dialogue) that viewers will expect that same excitement for their tenner every time. No longer will flaccid rom-coms or chipmunk squeakquels make the grade. The moviegoer wants not merely action, but interaction.
Could we really be in a revolution of Hollywood? Perhaps the inner workings, but not the audience at large. While a history-making achievement, The Hurt Locker cost $11 million, made only $12 million domestically, and $16 million worldwide. The moviegoing public simply doesn't really care about these awards, and her winning doesn't equal the box office success that's essential to continual financing and work.

Nevertheless, it's recognition that's been a long time coming. One that shouldn't be a battle between sexes or exes (since Cameron and Bigelow were once married). As Jeffrey M. Anderson wonderfully stated in his recent Scenes We Love for Strange Days:
We can break down this reaction [to Strange Days] another way. Cameron wrote an empty and conventional script, and Bigelow did the best she could with it, directing the hell out of it and giving it a life pulse, a palpable darkness and an astonishing visual atmosphere. Unfortunately, the usual thing happened. Bigelow took the blame for the movie's performance and did not work again for six years. Meanwhile, just two years later, Cameron was awarded $200 million to make Titanic. He was even allowed to write his own script. Cameron appears to be invulnerable to any kind of criticism against his work; ironically, Avatar received some of the same kind of reviews as Strange Days, claiming visual excellence and creative emptiness, yet -- even without Bigelow's life-pulse -- his film went on to earn dozens of times the amount of cash that Strange Days did.
I'd like to believe that this will bring in a new era, a re-thinking of the business as Muir muses, but it seems too idealistically rational. Idealistic and rational might not seem like words that go together, yet they work in this case. Critical praise and awards should, logically, go hand-in-hand with cashflow -- good movie, good money -- but we know there's often a divide between great cinema and financial success. Furthermore, linking a win to future revolutionary change is quite idealistic, especially in a world where the Oscars are often considered a curse.

Still, being the first female winner ever is a big deal, and if that can happen after the long and powerful boys' parade, maybe anything is possible.

The below collection of clips includes some of Bigelow's acceptance speech.



*On the better side of the commentary, Quentin Tarantino said that after he saw Near Dark, "I went home and wrote 'Kathryn Bigelow is the queen of directors,'" and Jason Reitman stated: "Kathryn, I knew you were a great director. After seeing The Hurt Locker, I consider you one of the greats."