Zhengyang Du is an independent and innovative director and cinematographer. His portfolio includes both documentary and narrative films, characterized by a serene and subtle visual style that conveys understated emotional tension. Du's work has gained significant recognition within the film industry. His short films, such as “Waiting For A Separation” (2023), “In the Light” (2022), and “Leave Me” (2021), have been featured in esteemed international festivals, including the Cannes Short Film Corner and the FIRST International Film Festival, among others. He has also earned accolades, including a nomination for Best Experimental Short at the 2021 HiShorts! Xiamen Short Film Week and an Honorable Mention at the 2023 Atlanta Film Festival. Most recently, his directing and cinematography project “Beings” received an Honorable Mention at the 45th Thomas Edison Film Festival (Oscar-qualifying) in November 2025. This prestigious festival, established in 1981, is renowned for honoring innovative films across various genres. “Beings” stood out among 948 submissions, earning one of just 25 Honorable Mentions. “Beings” is an experimental documentary expressed through four symbolic forms—the iron fish, the captive horse, the abandoned vehicle, and the disabled martial artist. This film reflects on how “beings” uphold dignity and significance in the face of control, decay, and physical limitations. Transitioning between stillness and resistance, each vignette captures a distinct state of being constrained yet persistently alive. The Essence of “Beings” After establishing a strong reputation with festival-acclaimed works in both documentary and narrative formats, Zhengyang Du approached “Beings” from a deeply personal perspective. Upon his arrival in Orange County, the unfamiliar surroundings evoked a quiet sense of wonder; he wandered with his camera, observing the world with a restrained, introspective gaze. Cinematography became a means of calmly witnessing the existence of people and objects, with seemingly random encounters unveiling unexpected beauty. However, the act of capturing images raised a profound question: does filming itself hold meaning, and if so, what does it mean to simply exist? Through this ongoing exploration, Zhengyang gradually recognized that existence itself might serve as the purpose, rather than merely as a means to an end. To exist requires enduring pain; transcending pain is what imbues life with emotional significance. “Beings” examines how living entities maintain dignity amid control, decay, and physical limitations. Flowing seamlessly between stillness and resistance, each vignette illustrates a state of being restrained yet vibrantly alive, suggesting that persistence may constitute the most essential gesture of existence. Visual Approach In “Beings,” Zhengyang expands the visual language found in his award-winning short films and well-known commercials for reputable brands such as Nike and Tilta. However, he refines it into an even more subdued cinematic grammar. The film's aesthetic is grounded in tranquility and minimal intervention: the camera shares the same space as its subjects, observing them with quiet patience rather than heightening movement. The editing prioritizes gentle rhythms over speed, allowing imagery and emotions to develop organically. A subtle chromatic shift—from color to monochrome and back—mirrors the film’s emotional journey, hinting at a complex cycle of vitality, suppression, and renewal. This visual evolution holds conceptual importance. Severed branches illustrate a life taken away; when reshaped into fish forms by human hands, they imitate living entities, yet their restored appearance comes with the loss of their original freedom. Similarly, horses confined in dark stables, blindfolded and restrained, represent another facet of captivity. The imagery remains devoid of color until a white horse begins to thrash and gallop; its forceful hooves and intensifying cries gradually reintroduce color into the frame, symbolically restoring vitality, agency, and a fragile sense of freedom. Production and Collaboration “Beings” was filmed entirely in Orange County, facing challenges more conceptual than technical. Instead of elaborate setups, Zhengyang aimed to uncover the invisible connections among these fragments of existence, allowing each moment to resonate softly with the next. This approach necessitated patience and a commitment to observation without imposing narrative direction—a challenging discipline that ultimately shaped the film’s contemplative tone. The production was also heavily collaborative. Zhengyang expresses heartfelt appreciation for filmmaker Ruoyu Wang, who was closely involved during the filming period, and to Master David and the martial artists of Pakua OC, whose kindness provided access to their martial arts studio. Their trust, patience, and presence were vital to the film's realization, contributing both logistical support and a spiritual dimension to the creation of “Beings.” Interpretation and Experience In contrast to works that attempt to dictate interpretation, “Beings” resists prescriptive meanings. Du highlights that he does not aim to instruct audiences on how to engage with the film; instead, he hopes viewers might temporarily set aside analytical impulses. Like

      On June 8, 1972, the South Vietnamese Air Force, backed by the U.S., dropped napalm on the village of Trang Bang, resulting in severe burns to innocent victims, one of whom was 9-year-old Phan Thị Kim Phuc. Since then, she has been recognized as the girl in the picture, which is famously known as The Terror of War or more commonly, Napalm Girl. This iconic image was attributed to young Associated Press photographer Nick Ut, who won a Pulitzer Prize for capturing it.

      However, the new documentary The Stringer raises the question of whether Ut truly took the photograph or if an AP photo editor, possibly out of guilt, misattributed it to him. The film details how editor Horst Faas had previously assigned a photo job to Ut’s older brother, which led to his death, suggesting that Faas may have thought this photo could aid their family.

      The image elevated Ut’s career significantly, eventually leading him to work at The Associated Press in Los Angeles, where I spent three years collaborating with him. He was well-liked both in the bureau and among his peers, recognized as a seasoned veteran with a strong news sense, a keen eye, and a modest demeanor. If the documentary’s claims are correct, it challenges the widely accepted narrative of his story.

      The Stringer also features another photographer, Nguyen Thanh Nghe, who asserts that he was the one who actually took the photograph. He came forward after journalist Gary Knight, who appears in The Stringer, began investigating accusations from former AP editor Carl Robinson that Ut was not the true photographer.

      The film, now available for streaming on Netflix, had its premiere at the Sundance Film Festival this past January.

      In response to the misattribution allegations, The Associated Press conducted an investigation into the photograph's authorship that lasted approximately a year and concluded in May that there was "no definitive evidence" to suggest anyone other than Ut took it. However, World Press Photo undertook a separate investigation and chose to suspend attribution of authorship, indicating that two other photographers, Nghệ or Huỳnh Công Phúc, might have been more likely to have captured the image.

      Ut stated in a Facebook post in February: “I took the photo of Kim Phuc, I captured the other images from that day that depict her family and the destruction the war inflicted. No one else can claim that I did not take that specific or any other photo attributed to me because I am the creator of all my work since the very beginning. My career spans over 50 years and, despite my retirement from the AP, I still create impactful images for the world to witness.”

      Phuc informed The AP that while she has no memories of the attack, her uncle, who witnessed the events that day, confirmed that Ut was the photographer. She credits Ut with saving her life by taking her to a hospital after the incident. She later became a global advocate for child victims of war.

      I posed several questions regarding the film to Bao Nguyen, director of The Stringer, and received the following insights from him and producer Fiona Turner.

      The Stringer Team on Nick Ut, Nguyen Thanh Nghe, and The Terror of War

      Tim Molloy: I must mention that I worked for the AP for 11 years, from 1997 to 2008, including three years alongside Nick Ut in the Los Angeles office. I appreciated him and had no reason to doubt his integrity. Reflectively, I found no reason to question anyone’s professional integrity at AP, as they upheld rigorous ethical standards. Thus, this film brings a sense of sadness for me. Do you view Ut and the AP as sympathetic in this narrative? It appears Nick Ut never sought credit for the photo, and that the present AP leadership inherited this situation from Horst Faas, a photo chief who covered Vietnam years ago and passed away in 2012.

      Fiona Turner: As in any investigation, the direction of the story was uncertain. Our team worked diligently to listen to everyone we could find who was either present on the ground or in the AP office that day to thoroughly investigate the claims from Carl Robinson, the former AP photo editor. Nick Ut was a relatively inexperienced photographer in 1972, having just turned 21. The film asserts that we consider Nick to be a "victim" in this story.

      The Stringer team was highly aware of the media culture of fifty years ago, and none of the current AP staff or senior management were involved in these events; hence, the film makes no claims to the contrary.

      Tim Molloy: The film presents a convincing argument that photo chief Horst Faas awarded Nick Ut the photo credit out of guilt for having sent Nick’s brother, Huynh Thanh My, on a deadly assignment. Do you think he intended to ensure their family was supported by giving Nick Ut the credit? Or was he merely seeking accolades for the AP? Could he

Zhengyang Du is an independent and innovative director and cinematographer. His portfolio includes both documentary and narrative films, characterized by a serene and subtle visual style that conveys understated emotional tension. Du's work has gained significant recognition within the film industry. His short films, such as “Waiting For A Separation” (2023), “In the Light” (2022), and “Leave Me” (2021), have been featured in esteemed international festivals, including the Cannes Short Film Corner and the FIRST International Film Festival, among others. He has also earned accolades, including a nomination for Best Experimental Short at the 2021 HiShorts! Xiamen Short Film Week and an Honorable Mention at the 2023 Atlanta Film Festival. Most recently, his directing and cinematography project “Beings” received an Honorable Mention at the 45th Thomas Edison Film Festival (Oscar-qualifying) in November 2025. This prestigious festival, established in 1981, is renowned for honoring innovative films across various genres. “Beings” stood out among 948 submissions, earning one of just 25 Honorable Mentions. “Beings” is an experimental documentary expressed through four symbolic forms—the iron fish, the captive horse, the abandoned vehicle, and the disabled martial artist. This film reflects on how “beings” uphold dignity and significance in the face of control, decay, and physical limitations. Transitioning between stillness and resistance, each vignette captures a distinct state of being constrained yet persistently alive. The Essence of “Beings” After establishing a strong reputation with festival-acclaimed works in both documentary and narrative formats, Zhengyang Du approached “Beings” from a deeply personal perspective. Upon his arrival in Orange County, the unfamiliar surroundings evoked a quiet sense of wonder; he wandered with his camera, observing the world with a restrained, introspective gaze. Cinematography became a means of calmly witnessing the existence of people and objects, with seemingly random encounters unveiling unexpected beauty. However, the act of capturing images raised a profound question: does filming itself hold meaning, and if so, what does it mean to simply exist? Through this ongoing exploration, Zhengyang gradually recognized that existence itself might serve as the purpose, rather than merely as a means to an end. To exist requires enduring pain; transcending pain is what imbues life with emotional significance. “Beings” examines how living entities maintain dignity amid control, decay, and physical limitations. Flowing seamlessly between stillness and resistance, each vignette illustrates a state of being restrained yet vibrantly alive, suggesting that persistence may constitute the most essential gesture of existence. Visual Approach In “Beings,” Zhengyang expands the visual language found in his award-winning short films and well-known commercials for reputable brands such as Nike and Tilta. However, he refines it into an even more subdued cinematic grammar. The film's aesthetic is grounded in tranquility and minimal intervention: the camera shares the same space as its subjects, observing them with quiet patience rather than heightening movement. The editing prioritizes gentle rhythms over speed, allowing imagery and emotions to develop organically. A subtle chromatic shift—from color to monochrome and back—mirrors the film’s emotional journey, hinting at a complex cycle of vitality, suppression, and renewal. This visual evolution holds conceptual importance. Severed branches illustrate a life taken away; when reshaped into fish forms by human hands, they imitate living entities, yet their restored appearance comes with the loss of their original freedom. Similarly, horses confined in dark stables, blindfolded and restrained, represent another facet of captivity. The imagery remains devoid of color until a white horse begins to thrash and gallop; its forceful hooves and intensifying cries gradually reintroduce color into the frame, symbolically restoring vitality, agency, and a fragile sense of freedom. Production and Collaboration “Beings” was filmed entirely in Orange County, facing challenges more conceptual than technical. Instead of elaborate setups, Zhengyang aimed to uncover the invisible connections among these fragments of existence, allowing each moment to resonate softly with the next. This approach necessitated patience and a commitment to observation without imposing narrative direction—a challenging discipline that ultimately shaped the film’s contemplative tone. The production was also heavily collaborative. Zhengyang expresses heartfelt appreciation for filmmaker Ruoyu Wang, who was closely involved during the filming period, and to Master David and the martial artists of Pakua OC, whose kindness provided access to their martial arts studio. Their trust, patience, and presence were vital to the film's realization, contributing both logistical support and a spiritual dimension to the creation of “Beings.” Interpretation and Experience In contrast to works that attempt to dictate interpretation, “Beings” resists prescriptive meanings. Du highlights that he does not aim to instruct audiences on how to engage with the film; instead, he hopes viewers might temporarily set aside analytical impulses. Like

The new documentary The Stringer questions whether the iconic photograph of the Vietnam War, attributed to Associated Press photographer Nick Ut, was actually misattributed to him.

Other articles