All-Encompassing Christopher Nolan Discussion Thread

[gwynplaine]

 

[batman1]

One thing all Nolan movies have in common is that they're cold and emotionally detached.

I felt nothing during the Waynes' murder in Batman Begins, or Rachel's death in The Dark Knight. I felt sorry for Sarah in The Prestige, but that was all.

The only moments in Nolan's movies that really have gotten me emotionally are in Inception with Mal's line about how they were supposed to grow old together and then we see their "old" selves in their dream city, and the moment with Fischer and the projection of his father.

Ok I'm confused. SO why is it that the masses come out and pay for his films consistently.

 

[Schlosser85]

Saying a movie is cold isn't the same as saying it's a bad movie.

Kubrick's movies were cold.

 

[Quasimod0]

Isn't every thread already a Nolan thread?

 

[Travesty]

-The Following is extremely boring. I'm not a fan of it at all.
-Memento is a perfectly paced and edited movie. I love it!
-Insomnia ironically puts me to sleep: boring.
-BB has a great pace to it, and I love the nonlinear structure. A great Batflick, but has its problems. I personally love it, but I can see its faults.
-the Prestige is another great movie. Just like Memento, I think it has a perfect pace and structure. I love that movie!
-TDK I find boring and highly overrated. I think the story is way too bloated and the structure and pace are horrendous, due to the bloated plot. It's not a horrible movie, and I don't mind watching it, but I don't think it's a great movie.
-Inception is a good movie. I loved it the first time I saw it, but I get kinda bored with it in repeat viewings, although, I still think it's a good movie. I like how time is relative to whatever level of dream they're in. I thought that was pretty cool.
-TDKR is embarrassingly bad at times, but then it has some cool things about it. Just like TDK, I think its way too bloated and suffers because of it. I find this and Following to be pretty bad movies, and I have no intentions of revisiting them anytime soon.


Overall, I find his movies to be VERY hit or miss for me. I either love them or hate them.

 

[Harley2004]

Ok I'm confused. SO why is it that the masses come out and pay for his films consistently.

Not a measure of quality and the "masses" did not come out for Memento.

 

[Kane52630]

Isn't every thread already a Nolan thread?

#truth

 

[slumcat]

But why do a separate group of fans consequently affect his rank or skill as a filmmaker? Sure, maybe the people that think he's the 'best filmmaker ever' might not ultimately watch too many movies made before the 2000's but, in all honesty, who the **** cares? Nolan has no control over who likes his movies or what they say about them, and likewise, the fans have no control over how his movies are executed. Seems like a petty thing to care about in the long run.

slumcat's argument seems to boil down to, ' a lot of people like this filmmaker, but I don't, so here's a list of film critics who don't mention him as one of the best film directors working today, so he must not be very good at all.' Why not just leave it at "I personally don't like his films" and not " I must prove those who like him are wrong" ?

Not even after the 2000's that's my point. Cinema is not English language blockbusters, English language blockbusters is a minuscule section of cinema and that's it - there's infinitely various kinds of cinema being made by various kinds of film-makers in NEARLY EVERY COUNTRY, IN EVERY LANGUAGE.

As the other poster eloquently summed up my point, fans who think "OMHZZ He's the greatest director ever" might be doing so out of lack of knowledge or exposure to a broad spectrum of cinema.

Calling J.K. Rowling the greatest writer ever might be a misinformed opinion if the only other thing you have read is Sidney Sheldon. But once you read Eliot, and Tolstoy and Proust, and the likes, your entire estimation of what constitutes greatness in writing might flip forever and you then might not even consider discussing Rowling in that discussion.

Something similar happened to me. At the beginning of the century, the very young green child that I was, I used to think that the LOTR movies are some of the greatest ever made. Now a decade later, I am past the point of even considering them in that kind of a conversation. What changed? I saw more movies, that's what changed.

 

[batman1]

Not a measure of quality and the "masses" did not come out for Memento.

It was his 1st movie.

 

[batman1]

And if it isn't lots of tickets sold it mostly isn't quality.

 

[slumcat]

Sure, I never said he wasn't the best blockbuster director. He's easily the best blockbuster director right now and only behind Spielberg in history in that category. However, I don't think because he makes blockbusters we should hold him to lower standards. Half the list you mentioned is awful. Most of the other half lost 'it' if they ever had 'it'. One should want to be compared to PTA and Arnofosky, not Michael Bay and Peter Berg.

I love Nolan, but slumcat has made some solid points. I'm not blinded by my Nolan love. There was a time when Nolan was my favorite director. Then I saw a lot more movies. He's still in my top ten, but I see his point. I also disagree that TDKT has hurt his 'credibility' among more cinephiles. Begins and Rises maybe not so much, but most cinephile directed sites show enormous respect for The Dark Knight and Nolan's non-Batman films.

I agree. The Hollywood summer blockbuster is a genre of cinema, distinguished by its extreme popularity amongst young males, there are no concessions to be made about quality just because something is popular.

Again, it is not like artfulness and the blockbuster are mutually exclusive. To illustrate my point, look at a very specific brand of Hollywood blockbusters which find wide spread purchase within the critical and cinephile community along with the enduring popularity - the Pixar films.

Wall-E, ironically of the same year as The Dark Knight, is widely hailed as a masterpiece, is ranked amongst the greatest films ever made, is consistently voted as the best film of 2008 in any language, and it is an English language Hollywood blockbuster, proving once and for all that there is nothing wrong with the genre itself.

Sight and Sound in their once in a decade poll voted Wall-E as the 202nd greatest film of all time, a high honor for a film that was just 4 years old at the time of the poll. The Dark Knight received ZERO votes, absolutely none of the 1000 critics polled for this list thought it fit to include it in their Top 10. Even They Shoot Pictures ranks Wall-E as the 18th most critically acclaimed film since 2000. The Dark Knight is 157th.

So no blockbusters is not a bad genre - E.T., Raiders, Wall-E, Toy Story are all some of the greatest films ever made, so blockbusters can be great too. It's just that Nolan's are not.

 

[Schlosser85]

I've seen a wide variety of movies, and I hold most of Nolan's in high regard, probably Inception as #1.

I don't consider myself a "Nolanite", and he's not my favorite director (I don't really have a favorite...I think Spielberg has directed more "classic" movies than any other director, but I also think his great days are behind him, mostly in the '80s and early '90s), I just enjoy his movies (in general).

He's definitely one of the current directors I pay particular attention to (one of various).

 

[Anita18]

I understand that many of us (myself included) are not particularly well-versed in film history, but I don't think that Nolan's work suddenly becomes bad once you've seen more movies. You can say that he's not as good as whoever, which is totally fair, but I don't think his movies suddenly become trash. I mean, sure, JK Rowling isn't the best novelist in human history, but I don't think anyone would put Harry Potter on par with 50 Shades of Grey after they've read more stuff.

I've seen movies that I don't want to re-watch and are not my taste, but I can say honestly that they are well-made and I don't begrudge them that. I cannot see how someone can honestly say Nolan makes film that are of horrible quality. Maybe they aren't your taste, but "trash?" That's ridiculous hyperbole and maybe you need to see more bad movies to be an honest judge of what "trash" is.

 

[Schlosser85]

I cannot see how someone can honestly say Nolan makes film that are of horrible quality. Maybe they aren't your taste, but "trash?" That's ridiculous hyperbole and maybe you need to see more bad movies to be an honest judge of what "trash" is.

This.

Also, just because someone greatly admires The Lord of the Rings and/or Nolan's films does not mean they haven't seen other movies.

I think highly of both and I'm pretty sure I'm fairly well-versed in film, considering I've reviewed hundreds of them.

 

[DA_Champion]

Isn't every thread already a Nolan thread?

#truth

That's actually part of the reason I've started this thread. Aside from liberating the rest of the forum, I think this might be a better conduit of informed discussion than:

1) Wally Pfister should run back to Nolan
2) Will Avengers 2 be as good as The Dark Knight?
3) Which has better furniture, Stark Mansion in the IM films or Wayne Manor TDKT?
4) Citizen Kane is good, but not as good as The Dark Knight.

etc.

 

[DA_Champion]

A major problem with Inception in my opinion, which I don't think anybody noticed, is that Ellen Page's character becomes an expert in the dream machine technology in a matter of weeks. The world Nolan created indicates that the dream machine has had major sociological repercussions, where old people are giving up their lives to dream all the time, where rich people have extensive neurological defense training, et cetera. That would mean it's a sophisticated trade where a small number of people are experts, and where there's a wide literature on the practice ... well, if you've ever been an expert in anything, you'll know that it takes more than a few weeks.

 

[weezerspider]

This.

Also, just because someone greatly admires The Lord of the Rings and/or Nolan's films does not mean they haven't seen other movies.

I think highly of both and I'm pretty sure I'm fairly well-versed in film, considering I've reviewed hundreds of them.

I understand that many of us (myself included) are not particularly well-versed in film history, but I don't think that Nolan's work suddenly becomes bad once you've seen more movies. You can say that he's not as good as whoever, which is totally fair, but I don't think his movies suddenly become trash. I mean, sure, JK Rowling isn't the best novelist in human history, but I don't think anyone would put Harry Potter on par with 50 Shades of Grey after they've read more stuff.

I've seen movies that I don't want to re-watch and are not my taste, but I can say honestly that they are well-made and I don't begrudge them that. I cannot see how someone can honestly say Nolan makes film that are of horrible quality. Maybe they aren't your taste, but "trash?" That's ridiculous hyperbole and maybe you need to see more bad movies to be an honest judge of what "trash" is.

I can only speak for myself, but I am not saying that at all. Nolan's made some great films. There are just a lot of films out there that are even better. That said, The Dark Knight is (and probably will always be) in my top five favorite films of all time. I love Nolan. I just have to agree that the internet culture tends to over hype him a smidgen.

A major problem with Inception in my opinion, which I don't think anybody noticed, is that Ellen Page's character becomes an expert in the dream machine technology in a matter of weeks. The world Nolan created indicates that the dream machine has had major sociological repercussions, where old people are giving up their lives to dream all the time, where rich people have extensive neurological defense training, et cetera. That would mean it's a sophisticated trade where a small number of people are experts, and where there's a wide literature on the practice ... well, if you've ever been an expert in anything, you'll know that it takes more than a few weeks.

Yeah I thought about that. Ultimately though, IMO, Inception's biggest weakness is the amount of time it spends explaining itself. Yes, it's great the first viewing, but repeated viewings can get tedious. I'll always pick The Dark Knight over Inception because I don't have to sit through twenty minutes of explanation of a concept that is much easier to grasp then the film itself thinks.

 

[hammerhedd11]

Not even after the 2000's that's my point. Cinema is not English language blockbusters, English language blockbusters is a minuscule section of cinema and that's it - there's infinitely various kinds of cinema being made by various kinds of film-makers in NEARLY EVERY COUNTRY, IN EVERY LANGUAGE.

As the other poster eloquently summed up my point, fans who think "OMHZZ He's the greatest director ever" might be doing so out of lack of knowledge or exposure to a broad spectrum of cinema.

Calling J.K. Rowling the greatest writer ever might be a misinformed opinion if the only other thing you have read is Sidney Sheldon. But once you read Eliot, and Tolstoy and Proust, and the likes, your entire estimation of what constitutes greatness in writing might flip forever and you then might not even consider discussing Rowling in that discussion.

Something similar happened to me. At the beginning of the century, the very young green child that I was, I used to think that the LOTR movies are some of the greatest ever made. Now a decade later, I am past the point of even considering them in that kind of a conversation. What changed? I saw more movies, that's what changed.

Alright, but why do you care that so many people have a 'lack of knowledge' as you put it, in regards to film? What does any of that have to do with Nolan's films or his actual directing? And why do you think you need to tell people that they lack the knowledge? It's great that you are so very proud of your film knowledge. Why condescend to those who hold a different opinion than you? It's a little buffoonish of you to assert any sort of authority over 'knowledge' over a subjective art form.

 

[slumcat]

Alright, but why do you care that so many people have a 'lack of knowledge' as you put it, in regards to film? What does any of that have to do with Nolan's films or his actual directing? And why do you think you need to tell people that they lack the knowledge? It's great that you are so very proud of your film knowledge. Why condescend to those who hold a different opinion than you? It's a little buffoonish of you to assert any sort of authority over 'knowledge' over a subjective art form.

Wo ho ho! Somebody is touchy!

So far this discussion has progressed on a higher plane of engagement and civility than most discussions about Nolan and let's keep it as such (discussions about Nolan almost inevitably dissolve into name calling and fights).

You are absolutely free to think Nolan is the greatest director of all time, what do I care indeed??

But I think you completely misunderstand what I am trying to say. I was trying to rationalize the seemingly massive difference between his popularity amongst fanboys and amongst the critical and cinephile community. It was an attempt to understand his boundless popularity and not an attempt to desecrate your taste. You might ultimately not be the audience for what I am trying to say.

 

[hammerhedd11]

Wo ho ho! Somebody is touchy!

So far this discussion has progressed on a higher plane of engagement and civility than most discussions about Nolan and let's keep it as such (discussions about Nolan almost inevitably dissolve into name calling and fights).

You are absolutely free to think Nolan is the greatest director of all time, what do I care indeed??

But I think you completely misunderstand what I am trying to say. I was trying to rationalize the seemingly massive difference between his popularity amongst fanboys and amongst the critical and cinephile community. It was an attempt to understand his boundless popularity and not an attempt to desecrate your taste. You might ultimately not be the audience for what I am trying to say.

I'm not being touchy, nor am I being anything but civil. If you weren't prepared to defend your incredibly condescending statements and recognize them as such, then you shouldn't have made them. I don't think Nolan is the greatest director of all time, nor do I believe he's even the greatest working currently, so you are not desecrating my taste nor offending me in anyway. I'm only offended by posters who feel they need to police other's opinions by attempting to devalue them. Since you seem to like to point out how well versed you are as regards to cinema, maybe you can open yourself up to the idea that someone can feel that way about Nolan without being a dum-dum. The only thing you're trying to rationalize is your own personal opinion that Nolan can't be considered a great director if you're a true 'cinephile' by citing other people who you deem important.

 

[slumcat]

It is mightily apparent that whatever I am saying is conjecture, a proposition, and not something factual. The only factual things I said is that I, personally, find his movies to be extremely inane and that his movies don't have the cinephile and critical credibility that they have amongst fans. Rest all is presented as theory.

I seemed to have touched a nerve with you is all I gather from your posts.

 

[DarkSovereignty]

And if it isn't lots of tickets sold it mostly isn't quality.

um...what?

 

[Dr.]

A major problem with Inception in my opinion, which I don't think anybody noticed, is that Ellen Page's character becomes an expert in the dream machine technology in a matter of weeks.

Well, it’s possible to interpret the entirety of Inception as Cobb’s dream. And by that reckoning, nobody in the film is a conventionally “logical” character - rather, they’re all symbolic/cathartic elements within Cobb’s unconscious.

 

[terry78]

Well, it’s possible to interpret the entirety of Inception as Cobb’s dream. And by that reckoning, nobody in the film is a conventionally “logical” character - rather, they’re all symbolic/cathartic elements within Cobb’s unconscious.

Great, another layer. Damn movie is like a ****ing wedding cake

 

[hammerhedd11]

It is mightily apparent that whatever I am saying is conjecture, a proposition, and not something factual. The only factual things I said is that I, personally, find his movies to be extremely inane and that his movies don't have the cinephile and critical credibility that they have amongst fans. Rest all is presented as theory.

I seemed to have touched a nerve with you is all I gather from your posts.

It's not 'mightily apparent' and I'm not the only one to comment on it in disagreement. Presenting two lists of directors and writing this "And I concur, within the larger discussion of cinema, I don't think Nolan belongs in a "best directors working today" discussion at all. He can make a place in that discussion in the future but presently he woefully misses the mark and his work cannot be compared to the work that these film-makers are doing." as your conclusion seems a little more than conjecture on your part.

I'll say it one more time and leave it at this, as I'm sure no one is enjoying our conversation; I don't care that you dislike Christopher Nolan. What irks is me is that you went beyond your own personal opinion and made an entire post presenting what you felt was evidence that your opinion was factual, and that those who felt differently aren't real 'cinephiles'. It's extremely condescending and elitist, and just plain obnoxious. If you can't see that claiming superiority of opinion is not extremely patronizing and snobbish, and that you've just "touched a nerve", you might want to step down and get some perspective.