C. Nolan's Interstellar

[Snow Queen]

I'm interested to find out if this is going to be in the mold of 2001 as opposed to a more action based sci fi.

I'm hoping for something more like 2001 but with more of an entertainment value. A nice mix.

 

[Fenrir]

Other than killing clones of himself and taking Borden's daughter, Angiers wasn't that bad.

You forgot sentencing Borden's twin to death when the guy was only trying to save Angier. Sure, the professional rivalry between the two got quite ugly at times, but Borden was never out for blood.

 

[dark_b]

I'm interested to find out if this is going to be in the mold of 2001 as opposed to a more action based sci fi.

i hope it doesnt have any action. Nolan is now a big name. both TDK and TDKR made a lot money. practical effects combined with CGI is now cheaper for what Nolan would need it. he doesnt need a commercial 8-80 action scifi movie. lets hope its all story.

 

[georgec]

Agreed. I'd really like to see something closer to Solaris/2001. Not an imitation of those films, but similar in the general type of storytelling and exposition. Okay, maybe not as slow as those films, but something that isn't action-heavy.

 

[dark_b]

maybe a movie like Moon but a little bigger and more fast paced.

 

[Hunter Rider]

Interesting guys. Personally I'd like some action in Nolan's first fully fledged sci fi film, but I'm intrigued in general about how he approaches this genre.

 

[TheWallCrawler]

well isn't Inception kinda a fully fledged sci fi film? Imo it is

 

[Poeman]

maybe a movie like Moon but a little bigger and more fast paced.

Yeah a larger scale Moon would be awesome.

 

[Tequilla]

It's never fair when people compare upcoming projects with 2001. I know we mustn't be afraid to dream a little bigger...but that's the holy grail.

 

[terry78]

Everybody has tried to pull a 2001 at some point. Solaris, Event Horizon, Moon, Sunshine....good to an extent, but not quite 2001.

 

[Schlosser85]

You forgot sentencing Borden's twin to death when the guy was only trying to save Angier. Sure, the professional rivalry between the two got quite ugly at times, but Borden was never out for blood.

Agreed.

Angier was more vicious than Borden.

Though he had far more motivation to be, at least until he (indirectly) killed Borden's twin.

 

[Dr.]

i hope it doesnt have any action. Nolan is now a big name. both TDK and TDKR made a lot money. practical effects combined with CGI is now cheaper for what Nolan would need it. he doesnt need a commercial 8-80 action scifi movie. lets hope its all story.

Notwithstanding Memento or The Prestige, Nolan seems to have an affection for the action genre. And he’s “responsible” to the extent that, when entrusted with a big budget, he delivers on the mainstream expectations. So it comes down to what scale Interstellar will be. If it’s budgeted like Moon ($5M), it might be more story-driven and “arty”; if it’s a $200M epic, expect to see big action.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

I don't know if I agree with this.

The only extremely memorable Nolan villain for me is Ledger's Joker.

Robin Williams' character in Insomnia.

 

[redhawk23]

Everybody has tried to pull a 2001 at some point. Solaris, Event Horizon, Moon, Sunshine....good to an extent, but not quite 2001.

I don't think Moon was ever trying to tell a story on the scale of 2001.

 

[Hurm...]

i hope it doesnt have any action. Nolan is now a big name. both TDK and TDKR made a lot money. practical effects combined with CGI is now cheaper for what Nolan would need it. he doesnt need a commercial 8-80 action scifi movie. lets hope its all story.

As much as I'd love that, Nolan's got to deliver the action now, in order to develop a title, for himself, that will bring audiences to watch his smaller pictures.

For example, If Spielberg hadn't developed his name by delivering big budget films - no one would have seen something like War Horse. People saw that because it had the name Spielberg in front of it.

Nolan is still in the process of developing his name. Give him a few more years. That way, he'll be able to get a bigger budget for his smaller pictures (kinda like how Fincher got 100 million for Dragon Tattoo), audiences will recognize his name alone,go to see his films and those smaller films will make a profit.

Just my thoughts on the matter. I see Interstellar being as much of an action film as Inception.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

I don't see how Dragon Tattoo was "small". At least compared to the Social Network and Zodiac.

 

[Hurm...]

Okay, Social Network is a better example, but you get the idea.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

I still don't like the comparison. Fincher, amazing as he is, simply is not a household name like Spielberg and Tarantino or a big name like Nolan. I doubt anyone other than hardcore Fincher fanboys (like myself) went to see Dragon Tattoo, Benjamin Button or the social Network for David Fincher.

 

[antsman41]

This doesn't have to be a "big action in space" flick, now that it isn't getting a summer release.

 

[Tequilla]

I still don't like the comparison. Fincher, amazing as he is, simply is not a household name like Spielberg and Tarantino or a big name like Nolan. I doubt anyone other than hardcore Fincher fanboys (like myself) went to see Dragon Tattoo, Benjamin Button or the social Network for David Fincher.

I agree , and the proof is Fincher actually being involved in lesser projects like Dragon Tattoo.

He should be doing whatever the hell he wants...and that doesn't look like the case.

And even Tarantino , i don't know if they would give him 200 million for whatever project he wrote.

Nolan right now (until he flops) is in that sort of rare occasion where he can do almost anything. Like Spielberg or Cameron. That's why i think he should really continue to do these big projects , because one day that door might shut. Until then , let him go crazy.

 

[terry78]

Nolan managed to turn Batman into the biggest thing since Burton did the first one, and turn it around from the last two in that franchise. He got himself a license to print money basically.

 

[redhawk23]

I agree , and the proof is Fincher actually being involved in lesser projects like Dragon Tattoo.

He should be doing whatever the hell he wants...and that doesn't look like the case.

And even Tarantino , i don't know if they would give him 200 million for whatever project he wrote.

Nolan right now (until he flops) is in that sort of rare occasion where he can do almost anything. Like Spielberg or Cameron. That's why i think he should really continue to do these big projects , because one day that door might shut. Until then , let him go crazy.

The largest budget Tarantino has ever had was for Django at 80 million and even that was only after the financial success of Basterds. Django has made over 400 million dollars now though so for his next film he'll likely be able to ask for quite a lot.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

I agree , and the proof is Fincher actually being involved in lesser projects like Dragon Tattoo.

Fincher's obsession with perfection is his own worst enemy. He tends to run both way behind schedule and over budget, prompting studios to trust him less.

And even Tarantino , i don't know if they would give him 200 million for whatever project he wrote.

The reason I put Tarantino above is because he is one of the only directors who does his own talk shows to promote his films. The only other directors to do that are Scorsese, Cameron and Spielberg. Not even Nolan does that. You'd have to be a huge name for talk show hosts to consider you as program worthy as the actors themselves. Plus, who else in Hollywood could've made Django Unchained as it was? Absolutely no one. Not even Spielberg. He can go places mainstream directors can only dream of in relatively high budgets.

 

[redhawk23]

Fincher's obsession with perfection is his own worst enemy. He tends to run both way behind schedule and over budget, prompting studios to trust him less.

The reason I put Tarantino above is because he is one of the only directors who does his own talk shows to promote his films. The only other directors to do that are Scorsese, Cameron and Spielberg. Not even Nolan does that. You'd have to be a huge name for talk show hosts to consider you as program worthy as the actors themselves. Plus, who else in Hollywood could've made Django Unchained as it was? Absolutely no one. Not even Spielberg. He can go places mainstream directors can only dream of in relatively high budgets.

Tarantino is able to do what he does for basically two reasons:

1. He has built up certain expectations about what his work is and what the content of his films is likely to be. Essentially he has created a context in which he can do the things he wants and people know not to take it necessarily as sincere.

2. He has a close relationship with the Weinsteins, who are willing to bankroll what he does.


Spielberg certainly has more power than Tarantino. He doesn't just have a good relationship with his studio, he founded it.

The reason Spielberg can't follow up Lincoln with Django Unchained is because it would be completely out of context given what he has done in the past and the usual ways he impresses he messages upon the audience.

 

[Snow Queen]

I really hope Morgan Freeman will be in this.