C. Nolan's Interstellar

[kvz5]

RE: Returning actors - Nolan has a huge ***** for Cillian Murphy. I can see him making Cillian the lead this time. Personally, I just want him to work again with Guy Pearce.

 

[rashad]

Kip Thorne - The Warped Side of the Universe
[YT]3WLAOzgEwTw[/YT]

 

[Gold Samurai]

He will go to space , and already has told wb that he will need to create a black hole in their lot t:

He'll ask for a meeting with Morgan freeman. Nolan will say this project is for NASA. Freeman will show him a rocket ship.

 

[DarkSovereignty]

He'll ask for a meeting with Morgan freeman. Nolan will say this project is for NASA. Freeman will show him a rocket ship.

I like to imagine that every time Nolan is making a new movie he goes to Morgan freeman for the props.
Nolan: I need a rotating hallway, not horizontal though, the axis must run through hallway itself. I'd like it if ms.watson didn't know about this.
Freeman: not a problem, mr.nolan. There was an abondned will friedkin project back in the 70's I still have the prototype for...

 

[747]

Saying I'm a Nolanite is tounge in cheek of course. Come on, peeps get upset by that word?

Personally I just think it's funny that people started to degrade Nolan fans with that word. It's like I wanna say "yeah you are right, I am a fan of Nolan!"

 

[The Guard]

At this point, shouldn't there just be a thread or a forum dedicated to all things Nolan?

 

[Tacit Ronin]

Definitely. Especially over Lord of the Rings and James Bond.

 

[Solidus]

No he does not need his own forum, thread maybe, forum no.

Bond does not it's own forum either. LOTR I could see.

BTW rashad cool video.

 

[Travesty]

At this point, shouldn't there just be a thread or a forum dedicated to all things Nolan?

I think its called "TDKR General Thread", or the "who's to direct the new Star Wars".

 

[James.B]

RE: Returning actors - Nolan has a huge ***** for Cillian Murphy. I can see him making Cillian the lead this time. Personally, I just want him to work again with Guy Pearce.

Nolan will still find an excuse to put his head in a bag again.

 

[Marvin]

I think its called "TDKR General Thread", or the "who's to direct the new Star Wars".

funny

 

[DACrowe]

I thought you meant something like that to be honest.

In those very years, was the Berg or his films nominated? If so than one can often assume the better picture or film won. For example in a year as stacked as this, one couldn't possible fault the academy not giving nolans ("weakest") bat picture the award. Point being, competition is a factor.

Secondly I'm not sure every one of those films mentioned was all that great when it comes to academy standards anyways. I mean I liked hook and et and JP as much as the next person but post 70's and into the Kubrick era(I think) I'm not too sure they measure up. War of the Worlds and Minority Report are seen as his lesser films I think, how much worse are they really...

The colour purple was a pretty lame compared to it's source material but I'll just chalk that snub up to the inherent racism in hollywood at the time.
He did Amistad as well right? Again there is better stuff out there.

Further more his most acclaimed work, the likes of Munich and Lincoln seem to get just the right amount of due if you ask me.

How you your paradigm explain the likes of James Cameron? Someone in a similar situation by definition.
If you ask me, I say his "better" work ends up getting it's praise.

You do realize half the movies you talked about came out after Schindler's List?

You may b too young to remember it, but it was always a running joke that the Academy disliked Spielberg. He didn't get a Best Director nod for Jaws. Close Encounters was completely overlooked. Are you going to sit there and say that Ordinary People is better than Raiders of the Lost Ark?

You're right his movies weren't Academy friendly because they were usually big budget spectacles that appealed to mass audiences AND had artistic merit. The Academy hates it when filmmakers can have artistic integrity but spend it on "lowbrow" projects. Or are you going to pretend Alfred Hitchcock also never deserved an Oscar? Because he never won one and in his day was considered a middlebrow showman by the Academy.

P.S. As you look down on Spielberg to praise Kubrick you should know...Kubrick never won an Oscar either. Another visionary artist who had too much popularity to be liked by his peers at the time.

 

[terry78]

Nolan already has his own forum. It's called Superherohype.

 

[Anita18]

What a director want's to do is not what was called into question. Michael Bay want's to make big money making action comedies(obviously). When it comes to what the academy is looking for, that choice hurts his chances. I'm sure nolan wants to be as interesting as he possibly can, moreover he wants to do things in a way he finds interesting. Again perhaps that's hurting his chances in the long run. Who knows.

Imagine if you took all the complexity that needed to be given to the audience in the matrix and you started randomly cutting and flashing through time in a nolan manner. One might argue that it takes a genius to be able to still get all that stuff to the audience in a clear way. Someone else might argue that there are simply better ways to tell stories. And I suppose that's the point.

I'm reading a bit of David Foster Wallace to do a school project, and my idea is that both Nolan (and Wallace) are postmodernists. Meaning that structure is just as important as the actual plot points when telling a story. Wallace himself said in an interview, the reason why his most famous novel has 70 pages of footnotes (on top of the 1000 pages of novel) is because he WANTS the audience to work. He wants them to participate, instead of just sitting back and letting things be handed to them. He has faith in his readership to go on the journey with him.

It's meta, it calls to attention the very thing that the story is built of. That's the only place left to go really, when you've hit all the possible stories in all the possible ways.

Nolan makes actually much more mainstream decisions than Wallace ever did though. Reading the 1000-page novel Infinite Jest is an achievement, to say the least. He wrote it pretty unapologetically, but Nolan makes his meta easier to stomach. Memento was a simple story so he could play with the structure without the audience getting lost. The Prestige had a ton of voiceovers. Inception had a ton of exposition. And of course there's Batman, which are his most straightforward movies besides Insomnia, which was kinda just okay for me.

Nolan will still find an excuse to put his head in a bag again.

Hey, he didn't do it for TDKR! He's progressing!

You do realize half the movies you talked about came out after Schindler's List?

You may b too young to remember it, but it was always a running joke that the Academy disliked Spielberg. He didn't get a Best Director nod for Jaws. Close Encounters was completely overlooked. Are you going to sit there and say that Ordinary People is better than Raiders of the Lost Ark?

You're right his movies weren't Academy friendly because they were usually big budget spectacles that appealed to mass audiences AND had artistic merit. The Academy hates it when filmmakers can have artistic integrity but spend it on "lowbrow" projects. Or are you going to pretend Alfred Hitchcock also never deserved an Oscar? Because he never won one and in his day was considered a middlebrow showman by the Academy.

P.S. As you look down on Spielberg to praise Kubrick you should know...Kubrick never won an Oscar either. Another visionary artist who had too much popularity to be liked by his peers at the time.

Likewise, the Academy finally gave David Fincher an Oscar nom after he made Oscar bait, Benjamin Button.

We'll see if Nolan succumbs to the temptation.

Nolan already has his own forum. It's called Superherohype.

Well there's also NolanFans, but it's full of crazy angry troll-y people.

 

[kvz5]

Nolan just needs to direct a movie backed by Harvey Weinstein if he wants that Oscar. It's that simple.

 

[venus_ice]

I don't even know where to go for Nolan news. I just sit and hope someone brings him up somewhere.

Anyone had any Nolan dreams yet? I might have had one about this film so far

 

[SoNicRaDiATioN]

Well there's also NolanFans, but it's full of crazy angry troll-y people.

But also fun to poke a stick at. It doesn't take much.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

I don't even know where to go for Nolan news. I just sit and hope someone brings him up somewhere.

Anyone had any Nolan dreams yet? I might have had one about this film so far

I did. But halfway through I was attacked by militarized projections, and then the smooth editing of my dreams suddenly turned to sloppy editing, bullets rained around me but never once did it hit, guns were heard firing shots but the muzzle never flashed.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

Nolan just needs to direct a movie backed by Harvey Weinstein if he wants that Oscar. It's that simple.

Thank you! That's what I've been saying for years.

 

[Marvin]

You do realize half the movies you talked about came out after Schindler's List?

You may b too young to remember it, but it was always a running joke that the Academy disliked Spielberg. He didn't get a Best Director nod for Jaws. Close Encounters was completely overlooked. Are you going to sit there and say that Ordinary People is better than Raiders of the Lost Ark?

You're right his movies weren't Academy friendly because they were usually big budget spectacles that appealed to mass audiences AND had artistic merit. The Academy hates it when filmmakers can have artistic integrity but spend it on "lowbrow" projects. Or are you going to pretend Alfred Hitchcock also never deserved an Oscar? Because he never won one and in his day was considered a middlebrow showman by the Academy.

P.S. As you look down on Spielberg to praise Kubrick you should know...Kubrick never won an Oscar either. Another visionary artist who had too much popularity to be liked by his peers at the time.

I'm pretty bad with pre 90's movie release history off the top of my head.

The Kubrick issue, I believe is a greater one. I personally think it serves your argument very little due to how little the audience(itself) really connected with his films at that time time(or so I've heard). Kubrick, like many progressive artists has had his work celebrated much more after it's time. That's the risk and magic of art. Thus why it's folly that we form consensus and begrudge many artists doing things outside the boundaries of what is accepted in our school books. But that's another discussion.

Don't recall looking down on Spielberg, I just feel he wasn't making the oscar bait he is now at the quality his is now but during those times. Never been a fan of Indy but it's no Munich. Not by academy standards anyways, but I guess that's the point. There are some who think Shakespeare in love winning over Private Ryan was a snub. I just think the academy likes costumed dramas. There's something to be said for Oscar bait. It's hard to really set a gauge to the issue seeing as how I wasn't there. I am now and I feel I have my gauge but lack the history...
Looking at the majority of nolan's filmography, I wouldn't think they had turned on him quite yet.

To be honest, I really don't care for the academy or really critics in general. Being an artist it somewhat rubs me the wrong way and I almost fully side with mr. Phoenix. At the end of the day it's the Academy's opinion that's celebrated more than any works, half a season of people talking about them. Plus, I know they hate Michael Bay, with all those obvious snubs so there's that.

 

[chamber-music]

Nolan already has his own forum. It's called Superherohype.

Christopher Nolan sure is popular for a guy who wears a waistcoat and drinks tea from a flask

 

[DACrowe]

I'm pretty bad with pre 90's movie release history off the top of my head.

The Kubrick issue, I believe is a greater one. I personally think it serves your argument very little due to how little the audience(itself) really connected with his films at that time time(or so I've heard). Kubrick, like many progressive artists has had his work celebrated much more after it's time. That's the risk and magic of art. Thus why it's folly that we form consensus and begrudge many artists doing things outside the boundaries of what is accepted in our school books. But that's another discussion.

Don't recall looking down on Spielberg, I just feel he wasn't making the oscar bait he is now at the quality his is now but during those times. Never been a fan of Indy but it's no Munich. Not by academy standards anyways, but I guess that's the point. There are some who think Shakespeare in love winning over Private Ryan was a snub. I just think the academy likes costumed dramas. There's something to be said for Oscar bait. It's hard to really set a gauge to the issue seeing as how I wasn't there. I am now and I feel I have my gauge but lack the history...
Looking at the majority of nolan's filmography, I wouldn't think they had turned on him quite yet.

To be honest, I really don't care for the academy or really critics in general. Being an artist it somewhat rubs me the wrong way and I almost fully side with mr. Phoenix. At the end of the day it's the Academy's opinion that's celebrated more than any works, half a season of people talking about them. Plus, I know they hate Michael Bay, with all those obvious snubs so there's that.

I'm not sure if you're serious or sarcastic by throwing Bay's name out there. Yes, they probably do hate him, but that's because he makes **** movies.

As for Spielberg, I enjoyed Munich, but it's not one of his masterpieces the way Jaws, Close Encounters or Raiders of the Lost Ark are. You are right, he wasn't rewarded until he made Oscar bait (though I'd call quality pictures like Schindler's List or even Lincoln more than that). Which is kind of what this whole discussion is about.

The Academy does not like filmmakers who are indisputably great making movies that both have artistic merit and general audience appeal. They hated on Hitchcock for that. They used to hate on Spielberg for that. You could make a case that they hated on Scorsese for that. And yes, now Nolan joins that list. Kubrick is like Scorsese in that they both made high minded art films...but they also were genre pictures that were adored by critics and certain sections of the mainstream audience (2001=science-fiction; Dr. Strangelove=comedy; A Clockwork Orange=youth/sci-fi movie; The Shining=horror/Taxi Driver=crime/noir; Mean Streets, Goodfellas=crime). Indeed, the only one that really strikes me as truly odd was why they ignored Raging Bull other than the fact that it was popular and Marty was a critical darling at that point.

This all gets back round to there are filmmakers that the Academy resents for being popular. While I do not think TDKR not getting a BP nod is a good indicator, overall I'd say Nolan's track record with movies like Memento and especially The Dark Knight and Inception can add him to that list. He will not be off until he makes a baity movie. Which is too bad, because there are plenty of baity movies that are terrible every year and few that are as memorable as his best work. Hence, the original point.

 

[Doctor Jones]

If Nolan can get Bale and Leo to be in this then I will be doing back flips for this movie.

 

[HighFivingMF]

Nolan will still find an excuse to put his head in a bag again.

Everyone will have astronaut helmets. Murphy will have a bag and a straw.

 

[BlueLightning]

Fun fact, Nolan didn't want the Scarecrow to have a mask in the beginning.