Christopher Nolan's "Dunkirk" (July 21, 2017) - Part 3

[I Am The Knight]

No, he needs validation dammit!

 

[TheVileOne]

No, he needs validation dammit!

I mean, I can understand Nolan wanting the honor. No matter how anyone feels, it's nice to get recognition and awards because they feel good. It's nice to get recognized and awarded. That I understand.

But why do his fans need it so bad? Like they need for him to do less blockbusters who he can win the golden statue? It doesn't validate them. I mean if they want validation for that, it's already there. Nolan is one of the biggest games in town.

 

[jmc]

I'm kinda over wanting Nolan to get an Oscar because in all honesty he doesn't seem to care about it himself. He doesn't want to play the Oscar game trying to woo voters which is probably why they've ignored him for years. I kinda respect that now. He's an independent film maker with the luxury of big studio money. What more could a creative person ask for?

 

[KillerMcQueen]

Yeah, Nolan doesn't need any more validation than he already has. he's made numerous critically acclaimed and audience acclaimed films that have made a boatload of money, and has the freedom to make whatever he wants with whatever budget he feels he needs, he's in a position that some Oscar winning directors would probably gladly give up their awards to be in.

 

[TheVileOne]

Yeah I highly respect him for that. Nolan has taken the reins of his career. Everything he's doing is on his terms. He's making the films he wants to make. And he doesn't have executives compromising his vision.

Also, he's bound to win an Oscar eventually as long as he keeps making prominent films. Look how long it took for Martin Scorsese and Tarantino.

 

[FunkMiller]

I'm kinda over wanting Nolan to get an Oscar because in all honesty he doesn't seem to care about it himself. He doesn't want to play the Oscar game trying to woo voters which is probably why they've ignored him for years. I kinda respect that now. He's an independent film maker with the luxury of big studio money. What more could a creative person ask for?

I think he sees - like an increasing number of people - that the Oscars are becoming more and more redundant as the years go by. The influence it has over moviegoers wanes all the time. The ratings for the show are a prime indicator of that. It's one large exercise in *********ory excess, from an industry that becomes more bloated and self involved every day.

 

[BatLobster]

I mean, I can understand Nolan wanting the honor. No matter how anyone feels, it's nice to get recognition and awards because they feel good. It's nice to get recognized and awarded. That I understand.

But why do his fans need it so bad? Like they need for him to do less blockbusters who he can win the golden statue? It doesn't validate them. I mean if they want validation for that, it's already there. Nolan is one of the biggest games in town.

Yeah, some take it way too far.

Like, my thing is I would like to see him win because I think he makes great films that are for the masses, and I think it would be cool to see that type of film get recognized. It's more about wanting to see Hollywood become a bit less of a parody of itself and give some credit where its due.

But you guys are right, in the grand scheme it doesn't really matter and the Oscars don't determine which films will still be watched and discussed decades from now.

 

[jmc]

I think he sees - like an increasing number of people - that the Oscars are becoming more and more redundant as the years go by. The influence it has over moviegoers wanes all the time. The ratings for the show are a prime indicator of that. It's one large exercise in *********ory excess, from an industry that becomes more bloated and self involved every day.

The Academy has forgotten about the movies that people actually see. If you look back in history films like The Godfather, Ben Hur, Jaws, The Exorcist, etc, were big hits with the public. Dunkirk is really the only film on this years list that you can consider a massive world wide hit.

 

[Aximili86]

A lot of it's probably due to a lot of Oscar-winning films (best picture) seem to have that emotionally-moving core to them. Like that's the selling point rather than the technical aspects, they're either confronting or heartwarming or some mix of both.

Memento & The Prestige aside, arguably Nolan's movies aren't really all that affecting in that type of way. He's more sort of...very precise, and masterful at the framing and composition and exploring different non-linear ways to tell a story. But the "cold" criticism is probably a valid one on-balance.

But yeah, the whole "give TDKR a 5 star review or we'll threaten you with physical harm!" and this demanding of Oscar recognition among a segment of the Nolanits is pretty laughable. At a certain point it's like "chill guys, it's just a movie".

He'll probably get something eventually.

 

[Dr.]

Nolan tends to do plot-driven (idea based) movies. And the Academy tends to reward character-driven movies.

 

[Deck Rickard]

Anyone know what Nolan's next project will be?

 

[Brother Jack]

I think he sees - like an increasing number of people - that the Oscars are becoming more and more redundant as the years go by. The influence it has over moviegoers wanes all the time. The ratings for the show are a prime indicator of that. It's one large exercise in *********ory excess, from an industry that becomes more bloated and self involved every day.

Exactly. Speaking for myself, I've become precipitously less interested in watching famous people give each other golden statues as time has gone on. I'm not saying it's entirely devoid of meaning (I'm happy for Oldman, Deakins, and all those recognized) but it's significantly less than what people usually attribute.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Exactly. Speaking for myself, I've become precipitously less interested in watching famous people give each other golden statues as time has gone on. I'm not saying it's entirely devoid of meaning (I'm happy for Oldman, Deakins, and all those recognized) but it's significantly less than what people usually attribute.

Honestly, I like seeing films I love recognized, but that is not why I watch the Oscars. I like to see what is nominated so it will expose me to movies I wouldn't watch otherwise and to keep in tune with trends or films that may be influential going forward. The speeches and actual winners are secondary to me (I have my own opinions on things).

 

[BatLobster]

My favorite part about the Oscars is probably the movie montages. I like the aspect of celebrating the history of film and the magic of the movies and such. And of course, you can't help but root for the films and filmmakers you love to be etched into that pantheon.

But overall, it's a popularity contest. It's more about how Hollywood perceives itself and wants to be perceived than it is about the audience. Which is just the nature of what the Academy is- gotta work in the industry to vote.

 

[Hurm...]

I think he sees - like an increasing number of people - that the Oscars are becoming more and more redundant as the years go by. The influence it has over moviegoers wanes all the time. The ratings for the show are a prime indicator of that. It's one large exercise in *********ory excess, from an industry that becomes more bloated and self involved every day.

Spot on.

 

[Doctor Jones]

I think he sees - like an increasing number of people - that the Oscars are becoming more and more redundant as the years go by. The influence it has over moviegoers wanes all the time. The ratings for the show are a prime indicator of that. It's one large exercise in *********ory excess, from an industry that becomes more bloated and self involved every day.

 

[Pink Ranger]

At the same time, I don't know...with everything going on at in the industry at this point, he's in sort of the awkward position of being a straight white male who generally makes movies starring straight white males.

Interesting insight. If we revisit our analogy to Spielberg, it's ironic then that arguably the film that turned Spielberg from a blockbuster director to a serious artistic director is The Color Purple, which is the complete opposite of a straight white male movie.

Now, in today's climate, no way in heck would a white male director direct a film like The Color Purple, the outraged cries of appropriation and cultural experience would be deafening. Still, Nolan should continue to find projects that can show the world how much of an artist he is.

 

[TheVileOne]

Steven Spielberg's first theatrical feature. Ahem.

Christopher Nolan is a filmmaker. He's an artist. As an artist he can make films with any type of starring actor he wants.

 

[Aximili86]

*Should be*.

Should be able to. Different to "is able to in this climate". There'd be all sorts of outrage to Nolan doing The Color Purple now, or if he happened to direct 12 Years A Slave or whatever.

Maybe for good reason, maybe not. But there'd be outrage alright.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

Was there any outrage when Theodore Melfi, a white man, directed Hidden Figures, a film about black women in NASA? It didn't come out a long time ago, back when white males weren't oh so oppressed victims. It came out last year.

That said, of course Nolan is gonna get hate if he makes a film like that, not because he is an oppressed white man, but because he is Nolan. There is a portion of cinephiles who really, really hate him and will use anything to get to him. But it's not because of what you think. Nolan is gonna get hate if he makes any film. He got hate because he made Batman films. He got hate because he didn't make Batman films. He got hate for making Dunkirk.

 

[Aximili86]

Uhm.

Saying Nolan has any significant "hate" directed at him (at least any more than any other director) is pretty ridiculous. On balance he's a popular dude.

 

[Mandon Knight]

Was there any outrage when Theodore Melfi, a white man, directed Hidden Figures, a film about black women in NASA? It didn't come out a long time ago, back when white males weren't oh so oppressed victims. It came out last year.

That said, of course Nolan is gonna get hate if he makes a film like that, not because he is an oppressed white man, but because he is Nolan. There is a portion of cinephiles who really, really hate him and will use anything to get to him. But it's not because of what you think. Nolan is gonna get hate if he makes any film. He got hate because he made Batman films. He got hate because he didn't make Batman films. He got hate for making Dunkirk.

Is it hate for 'the man himself' or as the film maker. Work v Identity as such, very often one influences the other.

 

[Grootster]

I just watched Dunkirk and sadly I wasn't very impressed at all. In general I'm not hugely into historical movies, but I do enjoy some World War II stuff. The trailers for this didn't thrill me (they just seemed very generic), but I was hoping the movie would deliver a bit more.

There was almost no story structure whatsoever. The movie felt like one continuous action finale, in some ways I'd argue it just felt like one long scene (I realize there were different scenes, but something about the transitioning felt odd). This isn't necessarily a bad thing though, I feel like this style could have worked fine for the subject matter if the movie had very interesting characters. As it is the characters are boring and not developed at all. I didn't care about any of them. Without story and without characters I'm not really sure why I was supposed to be engaged.

The soundtrack was horrid. I'm not quite as familiar with Hans Zimmer's work as some people, I know he's done some great stuff, but this was just atrocious. It was mostly screeching sounds and random blaring of instruments that go on long enough to get really grating. There was one scene (when a boat was sinking) in which they just play the same techo/dubstep sounding horn over and over. They even "reprise" the exact same piece later on (it felt like they just kept cycling the same 3 pieces of music). Even the music during the end credits was grating. I don't think I heard a single melody in the entire movie. I'm sure I'll take flak for saying so, but the score felt kind of amateur, like it was something pulled from a royalty-free website.

The visuals and action were fine, but I didn't think they were quite as spectacular as some people have made them out to be (maybe it's better in the Imax version). There were some good suspenseful moments, but eventually I got kind of numb to it all and didn't really care anymore. Overall the movie felt like it was trying to be artsy and experimental. I don't think this story needed that. This movie is probably great for people who are really into history, but it didn't really work for me.

 

[Schlosser85]

I'm really into history and it didn't do anything for me either.

 

[lime]

I just watched Dunkirk and sadly I wasn't very impressed at all. In general I'm not hugely into historical movies, but I do enjoy some World War II stuff. The trailers for this didn't thrill me (they just seemed very generic), but I was hoping the movie would deliver a bit more.

There was almost no story structure whatsoever. The movie felt like one continuous action finale, in some ways I'd argue it just felt like one long scene (I realize there were different scenes, but something about the transitioning felt odd). This isn't necessarily a bad thing though, I feel like this style could have worked fine for the subject matter if the movie had very interesting characters. As it is the characters are boring and not developed at all. I didn't care about any of them. Without story and without characters I'm not really sure why I was supposed to be engaged.

The soundtrack was horrid. I'm not quite as familiar with Hans Zimmer's work as some people, I know he's done some great stuff, but this was just atrocious. It was mostly screeching sounds and random blaring of instruments that go on long enough to get really grating. There was one scene (when a boat was sinking) in which they just play the same techo/dubstep sounding horn over and over. They even "reprise" the exact same piece later on (it felt like they just kept cycling the same 3 pieces of music). Even the music during the end credits was grating. I don't think I heard a single melody in the entire movie. I'm sure I'll take flak for saying so, but the score felt kind of amateur, like it was something pulled from a royalty-free website.

The visuals and action were fine, but I didn't think they were quite as spectacular as some people have made them out to be (maybe it's better in the Imax version). There were some good suspenseful moments, but eventually I got kind of numb to it all and didn't really care anymore. Overall the movie felt like it was trying to be artsy and experimental. I don't think this story needed that. This movie is probably great for people who are really into history, but it didn't really work for me.

Haha, the music was the best part of the movie for me.