Interstellar (Christopher Nolan) *SPOILERS FROM POST 458 ONWARDS*

the_monkey

Is it true that Mat Damon is in this one ?

perhaps as an alien they say ?? :S

sounds a bit mad tbh..

Looper007

Deleted User wrote: »

As I've said in the past, I have enjoyed all of Nolan's output but he's not without his faults.

Many great directors have their faults but Nolan has directed films that have changed Cinema, films that have won critical and commercial, the only films for me I would criticise in his canon would be Following, Knight Rises (it could have done with some editing) and Insomnia (just prefer the original version) both of them aren't bad films just not top notch. Everything else in his canon is perfection wouldn't criticise a single about them.

krudler

Looper007 wrote: »

Many great directors have their faults but Nolan has directed films that have changed Cinema, films that have won critical and commercial, the only films for me I would criticise in his canon would be Following, Knight Rises (it could have done with some editing) and Insomnia (just prefer the original version) both of them aren't bad films just not top notch. Everything else in his canon is perfection wouldn't criticise a single about them.

Changed cinema? c'mon now I'm a fan of Nolan but that's stretching it, he makes movies that don't treat the audience like idiots (mostly) and he\s very very good at what he does but none of his films are perfect. I do love how much he pushes the IMAX format over 3D though and favours practical stuntwork where possible instead of lazy cgi, for that he should be commended.

Looper007

krudler wrote: »

Changed cinema? c'mon now I'm a fan of Nolan but that's stretching it, he makes movies that don't treat the audience like idiots (mostly) and he\s very very good at what he does but none of his films are perfect. I do love how much he pushes the IMAX format over 3D though and favours practical stuntwork where possible instead of lazy cgi, for that he should be commended.

You telling me Dark Knight didn't change the way superhero films were seen, okay maybe after that I did go a little OTT on that.

Looper007

Looper007 wrote: »

Many great directors have their faults but Nolan has directed films that have changed Cinema, films that have won critical and commercial, the only films for me I would criticise in his canon would be Following, Knight Rises (it could have done with some editing) and Insomnia (just prefer the original version) both of them aren't bad films just not top notch. Everything else in his canon is perfection wouldn't criticise a single about them.

Nolan is a very competent director but he has changed nothing about cinema. All of his films have their faults, the editing is a huge problem in a number of his films, and while many will blame the editor for that there is no doubt that Nolan sits in on all edits and has the final say. I do believe that Nolan simply doesn't shoot enough coverage so as to allow his editor to craft the best possible scene, the training sequence in Batman Begins is woeful, as is the bat pod sequence in the follow up.

He has a habit of using thinly veiled dialogue to hammer home whatever theme he's playing with and it generally comes across heavy handed. I've always found his films to be rather emotionless. Inception is a film about a character desperate to get back to his kids yet there's never a sense that Cobb ever really gives a damn about them. There's a disconnect there that is evident in Batman Begins and Insomnia and pretty much his entire filmography.

There is no doubt that Nolan makes great films but if you were to make a list of the most consistently brilliant filmmakers working today he wouldn't make the top 20.

Soft Falling Rain

A man who has consistently claimed both critical acclaim and massive box office success not in the top 20 of directors today, you have to love the hipster contrarians.

In regards to Inception, I thought the emotional crux of the story was caught perfectly through the relationship of Cobb and Mal. He clearly cared about his children given that he's tormented by their memory and how they've been left parentless through his actions.

krudler

^ completely agree about the not enough footage thing, the truck/pod chase in TDK has some absolutely woeful editing and shot placement, the whole geography of where everything is meant to be is a total mess at times.

Snake Plisken

Soft Falling Rain wrote: »

A man who has consistently claimed both critical acclaim and massive box office success not in the top 20 of directors today, you have to love the hipster contrarians.

In regards to Inception, I thought the emotional crux of the story was caught perfectly through the relationship of Cobb and Mal. He clearly cared about his children given that he's tormented by their memory and how they've been left parentless through his actions.

Completely agree, I think the there is always an emotional heart to Nolan's work, and it usually revolves around family, as a parent, I find the second trailer normally brings a tear to my eye when he is saying goodbye to Murph!
Nolan is his own man and makes the movies he wants to make, if purists are going to nitpick about some of the technical aspects of his filmmaking so be it, but it works for millions of moviegoers worldwide and that includes me!

Soft Falling Rain

Soft Falling Rain wrote: »

A man who has consistently claimed both critical acclaim and massive box office success not in the top 20 of directors today, you have to love the hipster contrarians.

In regards to Inception, I thought the emotional crux of the story was caught perfectly through the relationship of Cobb and Mal. He clearly cared about his children given that he's tormented by their memory and how they've been left parentless through his actions.

So if someone isn't bowing down before the majesty of Nolan they're a hipster who dislikes him simply for the sake of it. Hey, don't let the fact that I have repeatedly stated that I have enjoyed all his work get in the way of you petty insult.

If you were to make a list of the great filmmakers working today then the Coen Brothers, Terrence Malick, Hayao Miyazaki, Terence Davies, Wong Kar-wai, Paul Thomas Anderson, David Fincher, Darren Aronofsky, Joon-Ho Bong, Alexander Payne, Takeshi Kitano, Lars von Trier, Martin Scorsese, Spike Jonze, Michael Haneke, Wes Anderson, Takashi Miike, Gaspar Noé, Michael Winterbottom, Bela Tarr, Lukas Moodysson and at least a dozen more would feature ahead of Nolan. They are filmmakers with a unique visual style, who can tell interesting stories in a way no other can. Nolan is a very, very good film maker and he may even be a great one but he is not a visionary filmmaker or one who has a unique vision.

Inception was a great blockbuster but there was little heart to any of it and the relationship between Cobb and his kids was wafer thin. There was never a real sense of loss there and the final scene just felt rather flat. Nolan's films suffer from a coldness and his love scenes/romances are very poorly handled. There is no warmth tot he characters invovled and they more often than not just feel sterile. The love scene in Dark Knight Rises between Bruce and Miranda is contrived and seems there simply for the sake of having a love story. Nolan doesn't spend any time establishing a relationship between the two and it's something that we see in Inception also.

Looper007

Deleted User wrote: »

.If you were to make a list of the great filmmakers working today then the Coen Brothers, Terrence Malick, Hayao Miyazaki, Terence Davies, Wong Kar-wai, Paul Thomas Anderson, David Fincher, Darren Aronofsky, Joon-Ho Bong, Alexander Payne, Takeshi Kitano, Lars von Trier, Martin Scorsese, Spike Jonze, Michael Haneke, Wes Anderson, Takashi Miike, Gaspar Noé, Michael Winterbottom, Bela Tarr, Lukas Moodysson and at least a dozen more would feature ahead of Nolan. .

I have Nolan over Moodysson (love his work but he only returned to form after three below average films), Winterbottom is hit and miss, Jonze hasn't made as many classic's as Nolan imo, Anderson (Rushmore,, Royal Tenebaums and Grand Budapest Hotel but his other work for me is okay). Scorsese last film was his best in nearly twenty years. Kitano has been very hit and miss his peak years were mid 90's for me. Fincher, Thomas Anderson, Coen Brothers I won't argue about that. But Nolan be right behind them, his work stands the test of time. as much as you want to crap on him and his fan's the man's work is highly respected.

A director who I put ahead of Nolan who you don't have down is Jacques Audiard.

Snake Plisken

Deleted User wrote: »

Nolan is a very competent director but he has changed nothing about cinema. All of his films have their faults, the editing is a huge problem in a number of his films, and while many will blame the editor for that there is no doubt that Nolan sits in on all edits and has the final say. I do believe that Nolan simply doesn't shoot enough coverage so as to allow his editor to craft the best possible scene, the training sequence in Batman Begins is woeful, as is the bat pod sequence in the follow up.

He has a habit of using thinly veiled dialogue to hammer home whatever theme he's playing with and it generally comes across heavy handed. I've always found his films to be rather emotionless. Inception is a film about a character desperate to get back to his kids yet there's never a sense that Cobb ever really gives a damn about them. There's a disconnect there that is evident in Batman Begins and Insomnia and pretty much his entire filmography.

There is no doubt that Nolan makes great films but if you were to make a list of the most consistently brilliant filmmakers working today he wouldn't make the top 20.

Wow really not top 20 Darko, I like to see that list!
He is top 3 in my list along with Fincher and Jonatan Glazer!
His body of work is always full of emotion as I outlined above.
And he made the Batman trilogy, which are the greatest superhero movies ever made! Nothing in the Marvel universe can touch them!
Yeah maybe I'm a Nolan fan, but he makes movies that appeal to me, that don't really on massive amounts of CGI, and to me have an emotional heart to them!

Soft Falling Rain

[Deleted User] wrote: »

So if someone isn't bowing down before the majesty of Nolan they're a hipster who dislikes him simply for the sake of it. Hey, don't let the fact that I have repeatedly stated that I have enjoyed all his work get in the way of you petty insult.

If you were to make a list of the great filmmakers working today then the Coen Brothers, Terrence Malick, Hayao Miyazaki, Terence Davies, Wong Kar-wai, Paul Thomas Anderson, David Fincher, Darren Aronofsky, Joon-Ho Bong, Alexander Payne, Takeshi Kitano, Lars von Trier, Martin Scorsese, Spike Jonze, Michael Haneke, Wes Anderson, Takashi Miike, Gaspar Noé, Michael Winterbottom, Bela Tarr, Lukas Moodysson and at least a dozen more would feature ahead of Nolan. They are filmmakers with a unique visual style, who can tell interesting stories in a way no other can. Nolan is a very, very good film maker and he may even be a great one but he is not a visionary filmmaker or one who has a unique vision.

Inception was a great blockbuster but there was little heart to any of it and the relationship between Cobb and his kids was wafer thin. There was never a real sense of loss there and the final scene just felt rather flat. Nolan's films suffer from a coldness and his love scenes/romances are very poorly handled. There is no warmth tot he characters invovled and they more often than not just feel sterile. The love scene in Dark Knight Rises between Bruce and Miranda is contrived and seems there simply for the sake of having a love story. Nolan doesn't spend any time establishing a relationship between the two and it's something that we see in Inception also.

A lot of the directors you mentioned are either still raw or not half as consistent as Nolan. Jonze being an illustration of the former and Aronofsky being the latter.

The loss was clearly there in Inception, Cobb is a literal slave to his own mind and memory of his dead wife who he unknowingly manipulated into insanity basically.

In regards to the love scene between Miranda and Bruce, I thought it was well done. A man at his lowest ebb, broke both mentally and financially and abandoned by his only friend seeking refuge in the only woman who showed care (albeit false) towards him.

Nolan hadn't handled romance and emotion well initially but I think he's improved big time on it in his last two films. An example being Bale and Hathaway being hands down his best chemistry pairing to date.

He's a man at the top of his game, still improving and able to produce compelling stories that are commerically viable. He is quite simply one of the mvps of film and it's farcical to suggest he's not among the best.

Snake Plisken

PT Anderson (only good movie was Boogie Nights), Wes Anderson (makes twee, quirky movies) Malick (cure for insomnia) Coen Brothers are very hit and miss! Payne (nothing special in his movies, certainly no emotional punch), while I'll give you Fincher, Scorsese and Noe, the rest I can take it or leave it!

krudler

Snake Plisken wrote: »

Wow really not top 20 Darko, I like to see that list!
He is top 3 in my list along with Fincher and Jonatan Glazer!
His body of work is always full of emotion as I outlined above.
And he made the Batman trilogy, which are the greatest superhero movies ever made! Nothing in the Marvel universe can touch them!
Yeah maybe I'm a Nolan fan, but he makes movies that appeal to me, that don't really on massive amounts of CGI, and to me have an emotional heart to them!

For me Begins is the best of the trilogy, TDK has a stunning performance by Ledger, some really great scenes but it does get bogged down in it's own seriousness at times. TDKR hasn't held up at all I'm afraid, Hardy was excellent but I thought there were much more interesting ways to progress the story than how it went (it's such a shame we never got to see where it would have went had the Joker been a returning character).
But it buckles under how grandiose it's trying to be, it takes an age to get going then zips through months of time in a few scenes and it has some absolutely ludicrous plot holes. It tried to be something on so grand a scale that it lost something along the way. It says a lot that the two best scenes in the movie are a one on one fight between Batman and Bane that Batman loses and Bruce climbing out of the pit, no nuclear bombs and city sieges needed.

Adamantium

James Cameron does everything Nolan does, but his characters never feel like ciphers. There is a warmth/human element to Cameron's films despite the heavy themes, and he thinks he has the storytelling down better. His films feel like they exist in our real world

I feel the two are similar in ways, but if this were 90's Cameron Vs Current Nolan, Cameron would run ramshaw over him in every category.

The man never misplaces the camera ever, its always in a place where you could not imagine it, not being there.

That moment in T2, when Sarah Connor comes gunning for Miles Dyson and shoots him in the back in a frenzy is terrifying, and the struggle/conflict in her to finish the job is more striking than anything I've seen with Nolan. I prefer Cameron's themes or perhaps they're told with better clarity as stories.

A damn shame he takes a decade to make a movie and hell never see go back now to original movies after AVATAR and deep sea obession, nothing but that for years to come (though I do look forward to it). A pity he wouldn't go back to making a film every 2-3 years.

Nolan is more akin to Kubrick in how austere his films can be. I mean that in the best possible way, when the actors speak it can feel live theatre. I think that there is almost never a sense of a mood from the shots alone. Its always the score that keeps reminding you that the situation is serious and he's talking business right now. Audio is probably his strongest tool actually.

I did like the scale of Inception though, so I suspect it's what he likes himself and he's a take it or leave sort of guy.

Cameron mentioned in some extras (vaguely remember the following) that he has a trick/secret where he looks at the image backwards in the projector, so he can match up where the next cut will be so you never lose track of the geography of what's going on, and it becomes like "mercury" in his own words. It's completely unconventional. The last moving object in the frame is where the next moving object will be when the cut is made if it were already in the same frame and you could see it all in one single wide shot. You're always moving your eyes in a relaxed way with the action.

1:12 for where the grenade ends up.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLWrmlIWb_w

Then again the man self taught himself at night by studying film stock and projectors in a deserted college and had binders full of this while being a truck driver by day, so unconventional was not unusual to him

Average-Ro

Keep this up lads:)

Nice to read people who don't agree actually laying out proper arguments and debates rather than resorting to petty insults.

I'm quite enjoying this discussion.

Looper007

Looper007 wrote: »

I have Nolan over Moodysson (love his work but he only returned to form after three below average films), Winterbottom is hit and miss, Jonze hasn't made as many classic's as Nolan imo, Anderson (Rushmore,, Royal Tenebaums and Grand Budapest Hotel but his other work for me is okay). Scorsese last film was his best in nearly twenty years. Kitano has been very hit and miss his peak years were mid 90's for me. Fincher, Thomas Anderson, Coen Brothers I won't argue about that. But Nolan be right behind them, his work stands the test of time. as much as you want to crap on him and his fan's the man's work is highly respected.

A director who I put ahead of Nolan who you don't have down is Jacques Audiard.

As I said there's at least another dozen directors whom I would have in the list of working direcotrs better than Nolan.

Moodysson and Winterbottom may be hit and miss but there is a playfulness to their work that sets them apart from the pack. They try something new and there's a real sense that you never know what you are going to get from their latest work. With Nolan you generally have an idea of what you are getting, a good story told well but nothing that a dozen other film makers couldn't shoot. As already mentioned, Cameron does what Nolan does but does it better.

And to say that Kitano has been hit and miss since the 90s is a little odd, we've had Outrage and it's sequel, Dolls, Brother, Zatoichi, the wonderfully playful Takeshis' and a few other films have all be gleefully fun. He may not have made a Hana-Bi or Sonatine in recent years but his work is still amongst the best being produced.

Snake Plisken wrote: »

Wow really not top 20 Darko, I like to see that list!
He is top 3 in my list along with Fincher and Jonatan Glazer!
His body of work is always full of emotion as I outlined above.
And he made the Batman trilogy, which are the greatest superhero movies ever made! Nothing in the Marvel universe can touch them!
Yeah maybe I'm a Nolan fan, but he makes movies that appeal to me, that don't really on massive amounts of CGI, and to me have an emotional heart to them!

It's not full of emotion though, and most who can look at his work subjectively will agree. And while nothing in the Marvel universe is as good as Nolan's trilogy, they still aren't half as good as the animated series from the 90s. That is the pinnacle of Batman on screen and the animated film Mask of Phantasm is still the best Batman film.

Soft Falling Rain wrote: »

A lot of the directors you mentioned are either still raw or not half as consistent as Nolan. Jonze being an illustration of the former and Aronofsky being the latter.

The loss was clearly there in Inception, Cobb is a literal slave to his own mind and memory of his dead wife who he unknowingly manipulated into insanity basically.

In regards to the love scene between Miranda and Bruce, I thought it was well done. A man at his lowest ebb, broke both mentally and financially and abandoned by his only friend seeking refuge in the only woman who showed care (albeit false) towards him.

Nolan hadn't handled romance and emotion well initially but I think he's improved big time on it in his last two films. An example being Bale and Hathaway being hands down his best chemistry pairing to date.

He's a man at the top of his game, still improving and able to produce compelling stories that are commerically viable. He is quite simply one of the mvps of film and it's farcical to suggest he's not among the best.

I'm not sure anyone could consider Jonze's work raw, he's been working longer than Nolan and takes far more risks that Nolan would ever dream of. I can understand why people don't warm to his work but at least Jonze knows to shoot enough coverage. A look through Aronofsky's filmography and while I have yet to see Noah, everything else he has touched has been winner. The Fountain is the best underrated film of the past decade. In fact looking at what he shot between 2000 and 2010 and you have four films that Nolan could never make.

And Nolan is not at the top of his game, he won't be until he can shoot a film and not have to resort to choppy editing to gloss over the fact that he didn't shoot enough coverage. You would expect that from a first timer but he was still commiting the sin after a decade working in the industry. No one is argueing that Nolan is a bad film maker merely saying that he is not one of the greats. He may well evolve into one of the greats but right now he justs a good film maker making entertaining films.

krudler

Adamantium wrote: »

Cameron mentioned in some extras (vaguely remember the following) that he has a trick/secret where he looks at the image backwards in the projector, so he can match up where the next cut will be so you never lose track of the geography of what's going on, and it becomes like "mercury" in his own words. It's completely unconventional. The last moving object in the frame is where the next moving object will be when the cut is made if it were already in the same frame and you could see it all in one single wide shot. You're always moving your eyes in a relaxed way with the action.

1:12 for where the grenade ends up.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLWrmlIWb_w

Then again the man self taught himself at night by studying film stock and projectors in a deserted college and had binders full of this while being a truck driver by day, so unconventional was not unusual to him

Cameron is a fantastic action director, Nolan has certainly had his action moments, and how Inception plays out during its more frenetic scenes is miles ahead of what's in TDK and that stupidly messy looking truck chase in the underpass. The geography of that sequence is all over the place, the camera flips from one side to the other of objects going in one direction, people move to opposite sides of the vehicles they're in etc. That stuff matters when putting together a sequence like that.
Look at the storm drain chase or the chopper/SWAT van freeway scene in T2, they flow much more organically because we the audience has an idea of where everything is in relation to whats going on.

Anyone who thinks that Inception is one of the smartest films ever made, which a lot seem to, or rate it as highly original should check out the superb Paprika which covers much of the same ground in a far more adult and intelligent manner.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJzEW_eE1G0

Snake Plisken

Lads I think this discussion has gone away from what it's supposed to be about which is the upcoming release of Intersteller, maybe the mods can move the "is Christopher Nolan in the top 10 Directors working today?" To a seperate thread.

Sad Professor

Snake Plisken wrote: »

Lads I think this discussion has gone away from what it's supposed to be about which is the upcoming release of Intersteller, maybe the mods can move the "is Christopher Nolan in the top 10 Directors working today?" To a seperate thread.

I agree, but it’s a waste of time. The film is still 3 months away so there’s not much else to discuss. One Chris Nolan thread at a time is enough. We can start a new thread for discussing the film when it's released.

Snake Plisken

Sad Professor wrote: »

I agree, but it’s a waste of time. The film is still 3 months away so there’s not much else to discuss. One Chris Nolan thread at a time is enough. We can start a new thread for discussing the film when it's released.

well let's not make it about Nolan rather a thread/poll of who boardies think are the the top 10/20 directors actively working at present and argue the virtues on each if them.

johnny_ultimate

I would happily state Christopher Nolan is at the top of his game. But while that is in large part a comment on his talent, it's also a comment on the low quality of competition in the aforementioned game. In terms of Hollywood blockbuster cinema, Nolan is almost alone in making serious, thoughtful and elegant pieces of work, but those traits are maybe amplified somewhat by the very limited standards being set by others. I also feel that there are likely directors who would be able to match or even surpass aspects of his work given half a chance - look at Gravity, which had aesthetic ambitions and success far beyond anything Mr. Nolan has achieved (although he certainly still has the edge in terms of story . I don't want to undermine Nolan too much, as I think his films are far more often than not great films, but definitely lack of competition is a significant factor in his continued commercial and critical success.

Definitely if I was surveying working filmmakers on a global scale for some random reason, I'd imagine Nolan would rank lower than a significant amount of others. Directors like Jafar Panahi and Jia Zhangke who are bravely challenge establishment and the status quo through brilliant cinema (and many more great protest filmmakers who are nowhere near as well known). There's the absolute mastery and continued advancement of cinematic form you see in films from Kiarostami, Haneke, Koreeda, Tarr, the Dardennes, Malick - people who can express so much through even the placement or tiniest nudge of the camera. The 'one-of-a-kinds' like Wes / Paul Thomas Anderson, Werner Herzog, Apichatpong Weerasethakul, Shane Carruth, Winding Refn, Spike Jonze, Steve Mc Queen, David Lynch, Roy Andersson, Wong Kar-wai, Claire Denis, Jane Campion, Leos Carax, Jean Luc Godard, Guy Maddin, Hong Sang-soo, Gasper Noe and so on. Then you have the sheer range of directors like the Coens or Bong Joon-ho. Many of these challenge, amaze and provoke audiences in ways Christopher Nolan never will. Without a doubt Nolan would certainly herald a mention somewhere given his continued dominance of commercial cinema and his achievements therein, but I'm not entirely convinced he's working on anywhere the same level as some of the ones mentioned above and others besides.

I'm sure we all have our own preferences and favourites, of course - I'm not all that fond of some of the names mentioned above :pac:

Soft Falling Rain

Snake Plisken wrote: »

Lads I think this discussion has gone away from what it's supposed to be about which is the upcoming release of Intersteller, maybe the mods can move the "is Christopher Nolan in the top 10 Directors working today?" To a seperate thread.

It's been the same since TDK, every time a film of his is released the thread on here has to turn into a downplaying of his talents.

krudler

Soft Falling Rain wrote: »

It's been the same since TDK, every time a film of his is released the thread on here has to turn into a downplaying of his talents.

I'm a Nolan fan, he's not without his flaws though. But I can say that about any director I love, Spielberg, Michael Mann, David Fincher etc. to name but a few. That's pretty healthy to be able to criticise with a level head something you enjoy. Is Nolan talented? damn right. Are his films perfect? No but they're surpremely entertaining blockbuster cinema and he's one of the best at what he does in that sense.
His insistance on using practical effects and stuntment over CGI where possible is really commendable in an age of supremely lazy CGI everything. He hates 3D, horray. Loves IMAX, even more horray. He films his movies in a way that they belong on the big screen and should be seen as such. Cinema spectacle should be treasured in an age of downloads and on demand streaming and he's all about spectacle.

Soft Falling Rain

He does have his flaws, but I'm sick of the hipster contrarian garbage that has rared its head for TDK, Inception, TDKR and now Interstellar. The lengths people go to to find "holes" in his filmmaking is embarrassing and either come up with the most irrelevant complaints or complain about something that went over their head.

No other director is held under such scrutiny and I think it's time this is said. It's almost a race with his detractors to see who can explain why each of his films are "overrated".

johnny_ultimate

Soft Falling Rain wrote: »

He does have his flaws, but I'm sick of the hipster contrarian garbage that has rared its head for TDK, Inception, TDKR and now Interstellar. The lengths people go to to find "holes" in his filmmaking is embarrassing and either come up with the most irrelevant complaints or complain about something that went over their head.

This discussion will be much better if we can resist the temptation for these kind of angry digs against anyone who disagrees. So please discuss the points being raised rather than these sort of personal attacks. Thanks.

No other director is held under such scrutiny and I think it's time this is said. It's almost a race with his detractors to see who can explain why each of his films are "overrated".

I would say most filmmakers are held up to such scrutiny - I know I do it. Have a look at the Only God Forgives thread for a truly divisive response to one director's filmmaking. Read any decent film publication and you'll find people disputing and arguing against acclaimed works and directors, or other writers passionately defending widely dismissed efforts.

We all look for different things from film, as goes without saying. If I said 'Christopher Nolan would struggle to make my own top twenty list of favourite directors', that's less a contrary dismissal of his abilities (heck, I've highly praised and defended all his recent films on here over the years) and more a result of what I believe is such a rich and exciting global cinematic landscape and the presence of many directors who appeal more directly to my own personal tastes and interests.

Soft Falling Rain

Apologies, I did lose my head. What I said wasn't directed at anyone specifically.

Soft Falling Rain

Soft Falling Rain wrote: »

He does have his flaws, but I'm sick of the hipster contrarian garbage that has rared its head for TDK, Inception, TDKR and now Interstellar. The lengths people go to to find "holes" in his filmmaking is embarrassing and either come up with the most irrelevant complaints or complain about something that went over their head.

No other director is held under such scrutiny and I think it's time this is said. It's almost a race with his detractors to see who can explain why each of his films are "overrated".

The fact that you can't discuss this without repeatedly resorting to insults says it all. No one here is saying that they are not a fan of Nolan, all we are saying is that he is not the visionary director that many are claiming he his. There are faults to be found in all his films, that anyone could excuse the editing in many of his films tells me that they are blinded by their love of him. No director working with hundreds of millions of dollars should find themselves in an esditing suite and find themselves without enough coverage from which to construct a scene. It's amateurish as hell and the kind of thing you might expect from something made for a few thousand dollars.

Every filmmaker working today has their work scrutineised just as much, it's what makes film debate and discussion so interesting. If people just nodded their head and said "yeah he's the best" and left it at that then this forum would be quite boring. Read through any discussion of a major film and you will see people engaging in discussion, only it seems that people refuse to accept any discussion regarding Nolan if it isn't in agreement that he's just great. Each of Nolan's films has been either very good to excellent and I'm eagerly anticipating Interstellar. I've watched his Batman films too many times to count and love Memento but I can still look at his work subjectively and therea are faults to be found. You may not want to acknowledge those faults but that does not mean they go away.

If you go back and look at the list of filmmakers I posted earlier, I can equally find fault and discuss their work as I am Nolan's here. It's nothing to do with going against the grain but rather a love of cinema means that I can look at it and find faults where they exist.

e_e

Soft Falling Rain wrote: »

No other director is held under such scrutiny and I think it's time this is said. It's almost a race with his detractors to see who can explain why each of his films are "overrated".

The world of film making would be a far duller and safer place if we didn't hold our best and brightest under scrutiny tbh. Some skepticism is more than healthy and I'm very weary of this defensiveness of Nolan just because he's arguably the best of a disappointing bunch (just look at the overpraise of James Gunn and Guardians of the Galaxy when it's just another Marvel movie in a new hat, anyone could have directed it). There's still a lot that can be questioned in his movies, namely his treatment of women characters, his editing and the over-reliance of score to get across the emotional crux of a scene. I say this while adoring some of his films too.