Luca Guadagnino's Challengers is Too Bold for The Academy
- Selin Bozer
- Feb 23
- 5 min read
Let’s talk about one of the most dynamic and compelling films of the year, a film the Academy failed to recognize but one that audiences won’t soon forget. Before diving into Challengers, a quick heads-up—this review contains spoilers. If you haven’t seen the film yet, I recommend watching it first.
We’ve talked and written about some Oscar nominees, but unlike the Academy, I would like to recognize another movie: Challengers. Every once in a while, a movie comes along that pulses with energy, style, and emotional depth, only to be completely ignored by the Academy. Luca Guadagnino’s latest work isn’t just a sports drama; it’s a whirlwind of passion, power, and control, wrapped beautifully in the colors and energy of tennis and fueled by a modern, electric score. It’s visually striking, emotionally charged, and technically brilliant. And yet, when the Oscar nominations rolled around, Challengers was left in the dust.
At its core, Challengers is about much more than tennis. The film follows a love triangle between Tashi (Zendaya), Art (Mike Faist), and Patrick (Josh O’Connor). These three characters are locked in a constant push-and-pull of competition, attraction, and resentment. It’s a movie about dominance, both on and off the court, about how love and rivalry can be indistinguishable, and how relationships can mirror the sport itself: aggressive, strategic, and sometimes painfully unforgiving (yes, I’m talking about the traumatic injury scene).
This theme of power dynamics might explain why Challengers struggled to connect with the Academy. It’s not an uplifting redemption story about families or a deeply tragic drama about an oppressed group. Instead, it thrives in moral complexity and bravely explores the ugly yet intoxicating side of ambition and manipulation. Tashi, in particular, is a fascinating character. She is ruthless both in how she plays and how she behaves in her relationships. Despite her harsh and hurtful nature, she is still undeniably magnetic because of how her demeanor creates a challenge for people close to her to earn her respect and approval. While Patrick had given up on the challenge when they were first dating, Art wasn’t hesitant to take his place and try to win her approval. However, Art ends up in a superficial marriage with Tashi without him having her approval or love. Tashi’s devotion to someone who hasn’t fully earned her respect led her back to Patrick, who had more potential in her eyes than her own husband. This sort of intertwined and chaotic dynamic leads to the kind of storytelling that thrives in contemporary cinema, but apparently, this doesn’t always align with the Academy’s tastes.
One of the most striking elements of Challengers is its visual design. Every scene is infused with the color palette of a tennis court with lush greens, rich blues, and stark whites. This gives the film a signature yet subtle aesthetic and ties in perfectly with the underlying concept of tennis. Guadagnino and cinematographer Sayombhu Mukdeeprom use contemporary techniques and kinetic camerawork to make every shot feel alive as if the audience is moving with the characters in a perpetual volley of emotions. The framing is meticulous, the editing sharp, and the overall visual experience both stylish and purposeful. A specific example of this is toward the end of the movie. You know how most shots in a movie are from the first or third perspective? A crazy shot from this movie was actually from the perspective of the tennis ball. I mean, this shot really shows how Challengers utilized modern resources and ideas and created what I dare call a contemporary masterpiece.
And then there’s the score. Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross deliver a pulsating, modern soundtrack that doesn’t just accompany the film but elevates it. The music is tense, unpredictable, and electric, much like tennis matches and the characters in the movie. The track “Compress/Repress” in particular encapsulates the suffocating intensity of the film’s emotional stakes. So why didn’t Challengers get a Best Original Score nomination?
Part of it may come down to the Academy’s resistance to contemporary, electronic scores. Traditional orchestral compositions often dominate this category, and while the Academy has warmed up to unconventional scores in recent years (Everything Everywhere All at Once, for instance), Challengers may have been too modern, too intense, and too unconventional for the Academy. Also, and this might just be me, but if Emilia Perez deserved the Best Original Score (among 12 other nominations, mind you), then I’m sure the Academy could’ve spared a reward to the beautiful works of Ross and Reznor.
Aside from thematic and aesthetic factors, there were logistical reasons for Challengers being overlooked. Its original premiere at the Venice Film Festival was scrapped due to the SAG-AFTRA strike, pushing its release to the following year. That delay meant it missed out on the kind of festival recognition that often secures nominations. Additionally, the film’s key players Zendaya, Faist, and O’Connor were busy with other projects, limiting the amount of press and awards campaigning they could do. Guadagnino himself too seemed to be more focused on his other film, Queer, dividing the attention of his creative team.
It upsets your humble editor to think that a film as well-made as Challengers might have missed its chance at an Oscar because of promotional reasons, rather than the actual quality of the movie. The Academy Awards, at their core, should be a celebration of cinematic excellence—of storytelling, direction, performances, and technical artistry—not a contest of who can mount the most aggressive campaign. Yet, time and time again, we see that visibility often outweighs merit. A film’s worth should not be measured by the number of screenings held for voters or the lavishness of its marketing budget, but by what it achieves as a piece of cinema. Challengers did a beautiful job of showing how modern films can use contemporary techniques, art styles, and discussions to create an alluring and smooth story. If the Oscars wish to maintain any integrity as a benchmark for artistic achievement, then the films themselves—not their promotional muscle or financial contributions to the Academy—must be what determines their place in the conversation.
At the end of the day, awards don’t define a film’s legacy. Challengers may not have an Oscar nomination, but it has something more valuable: a passionate, growing audience that sees it for the masterpiece it is. Guadagnino crafted a film that is exhilarating, provocative, and deeply layered. A film that, much like its characters, refuses to play by the rules. And if there’s one thing Challengers proves, it’s that the most daring stories will always find their audience, even if the Academy isn’t ready to keep up.
Comments