Interstellar - Part 8

[redfirebird2008]

I enjoyed Nightcrawler on Regal's RPX screen very much and I'm sure I'll watch it again at some point, but I don't have a desire to see it on the big screen again. But these days I rarely go to see movies more than once in the theater.

 

[redhawk23]

Following up a previous post. Other movies that personally felt more impacting? Last month's Gone Girl and Nolan's own The Dark Knight. In both cases there was a certain weight in the room after the films ended. You could feel everyone kind of taking a moment to figure out what they had just taken in. With Interstellar it was more of a matter of "Hey what restaurants are still open at 11?"

 

[Marvolo]

What you seem to miss is that Interstellar is very much on the same end of the cinematic spectrum as the Transformers films.

Lol wut?

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I enjoyed Nightcrawler on Regal's RPX screen very much and I'm sure I'll watch it again at some point, but I don't have a desire to see it on the big screen again. But these days I rarely go to see movies more than once in the theater.

I watch so many different films nowadays, I am in the same position. That I saw GotG 4 times had as much to do with the film as with there being so little out in the theaters at the time.

I am hoping to catch Interstellar, Laggies and Big Hero 6 just next week.

 

[redhawk23]

Lol wut?

Both films try for pretty much the same thing. They have similar goals and audiences. Their differences lie in quality. Someone pushed me into an awkward car metaphor before. A better comparison would be with music. The great 80s Michael Jackson albums and Miley Cyrus's new music are still both mass market oriented pop music.

 

[DeadPresident]

No you're really not getting it. Calling a 64 buick and and the Cadillac both cars is like calling both Inception and Transformers "films." Its a matter of not are they both films, they are largely made for the same audience. Interstellar is many things but I'd hardly call it sophisticated. Both films are essentially minivans. One just has a motor that actually runs, a nicer interior and input from a fluid mechanics expert to make sure the cup-holders won't theoretically spill your coffee.

My point is that so many people want Interstellar and its ilk to be GREAT IMPORTANT FILMS when that's not even really what the people making them are going for.

I mean sophisticated in the GA sense, not Old Boy or Three Colors White sophisticated.

I'm not a partisan Nolan aficionado although I've enjoyed all his movies, but it's really, really obvious that Interstellar is aiming to say something quite different and more resonating from the general summer blockbusters. Technical cinematic execution aside, the soul and message of Inception and Interstellar are both supposed to be even slightly more mentally taxing than Transformers or F&F.

I agree with the bolded bit though.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Both films try for pretty much the same thing. They have similar goals and audiences. One is just more successful.

Yeah, that is where you lost me.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Nolan mirrors Spielberg, though arguably not as effective as Spielberg at his best. He makes blockbusters that resonate with the general public beyond the surface. It is the exact reason why I dismiss the idea that Nolan is a cold fish. His films wouldn't resonate with the public if that was the case.

 

[Marvolo]

Granted I havent seen Interstellar yet, but I just cant see how Interstellar can have similar goals as Transformers. The stories and plot couldnt be anynore different. And Michael Bay comes from an entieely different school of film.

 

[DeadPresident]

Both films try for pretty much the same thing. They have similar goals and audiences. Their differences lie in quality. Someone pushed me into an awkward car metaphor before. A better comparison would be with music. The great 80s Michael Jackson albums and Miley Cyrus's new music are still both mass market oriented pop music.

Agree with the audiences, but goals I have to disagree on, not so much as what the goals are but how they achieve them.

I mean what goals has Transformers got besides using a poorly written story as a vehicle to link 90 minutes of actions scenes?

That Nolan tries to say something more poignant or at least provoke some more thought than the average blockbuster in his films is almost not debatable.

 

[redhawk23]

Granted I havent seen Interstellar yet, but I just cant see how Interstellar can have similar goals as Transformers. The stories and plot couldnt be anynore different. And Michael Bay comes from an entieely different school of film.

Goals as in "Let's put asses in seats."

Nolan's last few films have very much been his attempt at playing with the kind of toys available to Michael Bay to paint on that kind of canvas and reach that size of an audience.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Nolan is the kind of director that makes Skyfall or Dr. No. Bay makes The World is Not Enough or Moonraker.

That being said, Bay is capable of more. Pain and Gain proved that.

 

[Agent Orange]

Yeah, I have friends who flock to the Transformers films but convincing some of those people to see Interstellar? Not gonna happen.

 

[Agent Orange]

Nolan mirrors Spielberg, though arguably not as effective as Spielberg at his best. He makes blockbusters that resonate with the general public beyond the surface. It is the exact reason why I dismiss the idea that Nolan is a cold fish. His films wouldn't resonate with the public if that was the case.

Like Spielberg and James Cameron, he taps into the cultural zeitgeist quite effectively.

 

[redhawk23]

Nolan is the kind of director that makes Skyfall or Dr. No. Bay makes The World is Not Enough or Moonraker.

That being said, Bay is capable of more. Pain and Gain proved that.

That's exactly my point. Looking within one series rather than just one genre really spells it out. The difference between those films is simply one of quality and execution. In the end though, those are all the same kind of film.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Goals as in "Let's put asses in seats."

You act like this is an uncommon goal.

I'd argue Nolan's goal is to make the films he wants and like Spielberg his box office success is a side effect, while Bay is far more commercially orientated.

If it was all about asses in the seats with Nolan, he'd still be making Batman films. The same way Bay is still making Transformers. Who thinks "asses in the seats" when pitching something that is gonna get compared to 2001?

 

[redhawk23]

You act like this is an uncommon goal.

I'd argue Nolan's goal is to make the films he wants and like Spielberg his box office success is a side effect, while Bay is far more commercially orientated.

If it was all about asses in the seats with Nolan, he'd still be making Batman films. The same way Bay is still making Transformers. Who thinks "asses in the seats" when pitching something that is gonna get compared to 2001?

No I'm not acting like that's an uncommon goal. That's very much my point, that Nolan's films aren't THAT different from the rest of the movies Hollywood makes.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

That's exactly my point. Looking within one series rather than just one genre really spells it out. The difference between those films is simply one of quality and execution. In the end though, those are all the same kind of film.

They are not the same kind of film. It is exactly why I don't watch most of those Bond films. Just because you label something doesn't make it so. Quality and execution makes a movie what it is.

This is like saying Nolan, Burton and Schumacher are all similar film makers because they made Batman films.

 

[redhawk23]

You act like this is an uncommon goal.

I'd argue Nolan's goal is to make the films he wants and like Spielberg his box office success is a side effect, while Bay is far more commercially orientated.

If it was all about asses in the seats with Nolan, he'd still be making Batman films. The same way Bay is still making Transformers. Who thinks "asses in the seats" when pitching something that is gonna get compared to 2001?

Studios traded around entire properties (Friday the 13th, South Park) in order to get in on what they expect to be a massive pay day.

 

[Jumpman]

Am I missing something with regards this thing about how Nolan treats females on film badly?

It has been argued by many that the females in Nolan's films are objects and that they are the weakest aspects of his film.

Personally, after INCEPTION and THE DARK KNIGHT RISES, I can't agree with the mantra at all because those films don't work with the women...even if said women's ultimate point in those films is in relation how they help the main protagonist.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Like Spielberg and James Cameron, he taps into the cultural zeitgeist quite effectively.

I definitely agree here.

Studios traded around entire properties (Friday the 13th, South Park) in order to get in on what they expect to be a massive pay day.

But that has directly to do with Nolan's name. Nolan's name is what is a success, not the idea here. This is why Inception is such a huge success, far outweighing TDKT. It shows people will go to the theater to see a Nolan film.

Bay's success with Transformers is directly tied to the brand of Transformers.

 

[redhawk23]

They are not the same kind of film. It is exactly why I don't watch most of those Bond films. Just because you label something doesn't make it so. Quality and execution makes a movie what it is.

This is like saying Nolan, Burton and Schumacher are all similar film makers because they made Batman films.

The movies certainly are.

Let me put more like this.

Interstellar has a lot more in common with Transformers than with Memento or Insomnia.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

The movies certainly are.

Let me put more like this.

Interstellar has a lot more in common with Transformers than with Memento or Insomnia.

I haven't seen it yet, so I do not know. But I see the same thread in Nolan's filmmaking from Memento to TDKR. The ideas, execution and tone are dead similar, the only thing changing being the budget. I know when I am watching Nolan, just like I know when I am watching Bay or Scorsese.

 

[redhawk23]

Ugh. Why the hell did this conversation even take place? See the movie.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Ugh. Why the hell did this conversation even take place? See the movie.

Because you decided to compare the vacant Transformers series to anything made by Nolan?

The Interstellar trailers shows more ambition then all the Transformers films combined. That being said, maybe the trailers, like the cake, are a lie.