|
Post by Pavan on Sept 16, 2021 20:05:12 GMT
He has become too commercial. I hope he goes back to his roots and makes a small/mid budget films for once. Why would he? Are other directions that command huge budgets deciding to work with small ones for no reason? I just want to see him do some mid budget movie again for a change. It's just wishful thinking on my part.
|
|
|
Post by futuretrunks on Sept 17, 2021 0:07:02 GMT
I don't really understand caring about the size of the movie. The Prestige is one of Nolan's best films, yes, but so are Interstellar and TDK, IMO. "Too commercial" isn't really descriptive of anything. E.T. is infinitely better than every Weerasethakul film IMO.
|
|
|
Post by The_Cake_of_Roth on Sept 17, 2021 1:44:11 GMT
It all comes down to every case and every director being different. Coppola had his opportunity to work with big budgets and used it but then had to pay for it by making paycheck movies for a while so it's understandable that he went to doing smaller maverick projects after that - he always wanted to make personal movies and his career situation itself kinda led him to doing that. But even he is now looking to do a huge piece with Megalopolis. I really don't know why it's infantile on Nolan's part to think and work bigger. I think it's infantile because his movies have become less human imo and more presentaional - I don't mean it to sound particularly venomous - I mean he's indulged his sense of childlike playfulness and sense of wonder at the expense of other sides of film-making that I like more and used to like in him While I agree his films have become less character-driven and have relied more on spectacle, I'm still not sure how that makes it "infantile," which seems more pejorative than simply describing them in terms of expressing a "child-like playfulness" or "wonder." If his increasing emphasis on spectacle came at the expense of thematic ambition and good ideas, then I could see the "infantile" argument, but I don't think that's the case. You seem to be linking "humanness" with "realism," and "infantilism" with "fantasy," which to me just suggests a genre bias and a somewhat elitist attitude towards sci-fi/fantasy/comic-book films, etc.... as if fantasy and "humanness" are somehow mutually exclusive. Having said that though, I totally understand preferring his early work and wanting him to change it up a bit with a smaller film every once in a while. I'm not sure why the money is something to be annoyed at in this particular case though since, as PG suggested, this project sounds unlike anything he's done in the last 15 years.
|
|
|
Post by quetee on Sept 17, 2021 2:06:06 GMT
Why would he? Are other directions that command huge budgets deciding to work with small ones for no reason? I just want to see him do some mid budget movie again for a change. It's just wishful thinking on my part. Can he even release one at this point? Did you see his demands? That doesn't scream mid budget movie.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Sept 17, 2021 8:13:22 GMT
I think it's infantile because his movies have become less human imo and more presentational - I don't mean it to sound particularly venomous - I mean he's indulged his sense of childlike playfulness and sense of wonder at the expense of other sides of film-making that I like more and used to like in him You seem to be linking "humanness" with "realism," and "infantilism" with "fantasy," which to me just suggests a genre bias and a somewhat elitist attitude towards sci-fi/fantasy/comic-book films, etc.... as if fantasy and "humanness" are somehow mutually exclusive. Guilty as charged - but we all have those - there's plenty of things I don't like - but that I can be swayed from against my biases too .......I will also say that's also a bit unfair towards yours truly: I mean I have much less of a bias against "sci-fi / fantasy" when it's Tarkovsky doing them! (um) .....or "Brazil" .....or "Blade Runner"........I mean that's unfair too sure - but I can also have a "holding Chris Nolan to the general level of his talent" bias in addition to a genre one ....... Fantasy and humanness are not mutually exclusive - they are just harder to make co-exist successfully imo ..........but like I said I can't imagine not wanting to see whatever he comes up with next .......and I have never disliked any of his films - so obviously on some level he made them co-exist enough for me to keep coming back to his work......
|
|
|
Post by The_Cake_of_Roth on Sept 18, 2021 0:25:51 GMT
You seem to be linking "humanness" with "realism," and "infantilism" with "fantasy," which to me just suggests a genre bias and a somewhat elitist attitude towards sci-fi/fantasy/comic-book films, etc.... as if fantasy and "humanness" are somehow mutually exclusive. Guilty as charged - but we all have those - there's plenty of things I don't like - but that I can be swayed from against my biases too .......I will also say that's also a bit unfair towards yours truly: I mean I have much less of a bias against "sci-fi / fantasy" when it's Tarkovsky doing them! (um) .....or "Brazil" .....or "Blade Runner"........I mean that's unfair too sure - but I can also have a "holding Chris Nolan to the general level of his talent" bias in addition to a genre one ....... Fantasy and humanness are not mutually exclusive - they are just harder to make co-exist successfully imo ..........but like I said I can't imagine not wanting to see whatever he comes up with next .......and I have never disliked any of his films - so obviously on some level he made them co-exist enough for me to keep coming back to his work...... Sure, we might all have certain genres that we don't naturally gravitate towards, but I don't really buy that humanness is harder to achieve in any particular genre than others.... it just depends on the filmmaker's approach and how well they pull it off in each case. I don't think films that are "realist" are inherently more conducive to creating that effect. In fantasy, you're dealing with a kind of stylized reality, a more stylized humanity, and thus more stylized emotions, so sometimes it can achieve a kind of resonance and impact that realist/more grounded stories can't imo. It sounds like it isn't Nolan's shift to being a fantasist that bothers you per se, but rather his particular brand of sci-fi/fantasy, which I can understand if Tarkovsky and Gilliam are more your thing.
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Sept 18, 2021 0:54:18 GMT
Guilty as charged - but we all have those - there's plenty of things I don't like - but that I can be swayed from against my biases too .......I will also say that's also a bit unfair towards yours truly: I mean I have much less of a bias against "sci-fi / fantasy" when it's Tarkovsky doing them! (um) .....or "Brazil" .....or "Blade Runner"........I mean that's unfair too sure - but I can also have a "holding Chris Nolan to the general level of his talent" bias in addition to a genre one ....... Fantasy and humanness are not mutually exclusive - they are just harder to make co-exist successfully imo ..........but like I said I can't imagine not wanting to see whatever he comes up with next .......and I have never disliked any of his films - so obviously on some level he made them co-exist enough for me to keep coming back to his work...... Sure, we might all have certain genres that we don't naturally gravitate towards, but I don't really buy that humanness is harder to achieve in any particular genre than others.... it just depends on the filmmaker's approach and how well they pull it off in each case. I don't think films that are "realist" are inherently more conducive to creating that effect. In fantasy, you're dealing with a kind of stylized reality, a more stylized humanity, and thus more stylized emotions, so sometimes it can achieve a kind of resonance and impact that realist/more grounded stories can't imo. It sounds like it isn't Nolan's shift to being a fantasist that bothers you per se, but rather his particular brand of sci-fi/fantasy, which I can understand if Tarkovsky and Gilliam are more your thing. I'll buy that - yes that seems right (last sentence particularly) - a followup question though - don't you think that genre - Sci-Fi / Fantasy - lends itself to requiring such a level of technical virtuosity that it encourages the auteur in a way to be removed from humans (generally) and more in service to the film-making tools themselves within the medium? Like I'll agree you can lose the humanness in any genre but any genre isn't as likely to pull you away from that quality as much because logistically none are as dependent on using tools in most cases - so for a filmmaker working in this genre he / she must guard against it in the work consciously or it can appear more easily "soulless" .........(?) I guess maybe you could argue the opposite - that since so much is required of those tools and craftspeople in the technical virtuosity that the human contact / relationships with a director's crew actually creates a family aspect that then negates the above and the "likelihood" of getting lost in an "out of touch" way and then adds a human warmth to the material rather than an abstract cold / clinical quality?........ Just a general question ........rambling a bit ..........not Nolan related .........would be interested in your POV (and some others too of course)
|
|
|
Post by countjohn on Sept 18, 2021 3:16:51 GMT
I don't really understand caring about the size of the movie. The Prestige is one of Nolan's best films, yes, but so are Interstellar and TDK, IMO. "Too commercial" isn't really descriptive of anything. E.T. is infinitely better than every Weerasethakul film IMO. I'ma let you finish, but Uncle Boonmee is one of the greatest films of all time. E.T. would have been better if there was a scene of ET going down on the mom. Maybe GDT can do a remake.
|
|
|
Post by JangoB on Sept 18, 2021 11:51:48 GMT
I don't really understand caring about the size of the movie. The Prestige is one of Nolan's best films, yes, but so are Interstellar and TDK, IMO. "Too commercial" isn't really descriptive of anything. E.T. is infinitely better than every Weerasethakul film IMO. I'ma let you finish, but Uncle Boonmee is one of the greatest films of all time. E.T. would have been better if there was a scene of ET going down on the mom. Maybe GDT can do a remake. There's always the E.T. porno.
|
|
|
Post by The_Cake_of_Roth on Sept 18, 2021 21:24:18 GMT
Sure, we might all have certain genres that we don't naturally gravitate towards, but I don't really buy that humanness is harder to achieve in any particular genre than others.... it just depends on the filmmaker's approach and how well they pull it off in each case. I don't think films that are "realist" are inherently more conducive to creating that effect. In fantasy, you're dealing with a kind of stylized reality, a more stylized humanity, and thus more stylized emotions, so sometimes it can achieve a kind of resonance and impact that realist/more grounded stories can't imo. It sounds like it isn't Nolan's shift to being a fantasist that bothers you per se, but rather his particular brand of sci-fi/fantasy, which I can understand if Tarkovsky and Gilliam are more your thing. I'll buy that - yes that seems right (last sentence particularly) - a followup question though - don't you think that genre - Sci-Fi / Fantasy - lends itself to requiring such a level of technical virtuosity that it encourages the auteur in a way to be removed from humans (generally) and more in service to the film-making tools themselves within the medium? Like I'll agree you can lose the humanness in any genre but any genre isn't as likely to pull you away from that quality as much because logistically none are as dependent on using tools in most cases - so for a filmmaker working in this genre he / she must guard against it in the work consciously or it can appear more easily "soulless" .........(?) I guess maybe you could argue the opposite - that since so much is required of those tools and craftspeople in the technical virtuosity that the human contact / relationships with a director's crew actually creates a family aspect that then negates the above and the "likelihood" of getting lost in an "out of touch" way and then adds a human warmth to the material rather than an abstract cold / clinical quality?........ Just a general question ........rambling a bit ..........not Nolan related .........would be interested in your POV (and some others too of course) Well I'd say that any genre's connection to humans is as strong as the artists who engage with that genre. And genres like sci-fi or fantasy are diverse to the extent that I think it's hard to generalize about what it "encourages" or "lends itself to" in filmmaking, unless you're only focusing on a particular subset of that genre. I don't necessarily see it as filmmakers having to consciously "guard against" certain tendencies that the genre itself invites, but rather having a firm grasp and vision for what the genre is capable of and not simply doing what might be easy or popular among other practitioners of that genre.
|
|
|
Post by mikediastavrone96 on Sept 18, 2021 21:40:20 GMT
I'll buy that - yes that seems right (last sentence particularly) - a followup question though - don't you think that genre - Sci-Fi / Fantasy - lends itself to requiring such a level of technical virtuosity that it encourages the auteur in a way to be removed from humans (generally) and more in service to the film-making tools themselves within the medium? Like I'll agree you can lose the humanness in any genre but any genre isn't as likely to pull you away from that quality as much because logistically none are as dependent on using tools in most cases - so for a filmmaker working in this genre he / she must guard against it in the work consciously or it can appear more easily "soulless" .........(?) I guess maybe you could argue the opposite - that since so much is required of those tools and craftspeople in the technical virtuosity that the human contact / relationships with a director's crew actually creates a family aspect that then negates the above and the "likelihood" of getting lost in an "out of touch" way and then adds a human warmth to the material rather than an abstract cold / clinical quality?........ Just a general question ........rambling a bit ..........not Nolan related .........would be interested in your POV (and some others too of course) Well I'd say that any genre's connection to humans is as strong as the artists who engage with that genre. And genres like sci-fi or fantasy are diverse to the extent that I think it's hard to generalize about what it "encourages" or "lends itself to" in filmmaking, unless you're only focusing on a particular subset of that genre. I don't necessarily see it as filmmakers having to consciously "guard against" certain tendencies that the genre itself invites, but rather having a firm grasp and vision for what the genre is capable of and not simply doing what might be easy or popular among other practitioners of that genre. I do think there is something to genre filmmaking can feel less human because the requirements of the genre require a certain level of world-building and parameters. We the audience need to be introduced to or learn the world so the characters' interaction with it makes sense. In a straight drama or comedy, though, we already know the world, it's more or less the same as what we know, so the characters can then freely interact with it. That's not to say I think certain genres are inherently more or less human, just that certain genres might demand more table-setting before you get to the humanity within the story.
|
|
Lubezki
Based
the social distancing
Posts: 4,332
Likes: 6,554
|
Post by Lubezki on Oct 8, 2021 18:03:38 GMT
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Oct 8, 2021 18:12:42 GMT
Bullshit, we're calling it Trinity.
|
|
|
Post by Pavan on Oct 8, 2021 18:29:40 GMT
Ludwig to compose the score. Was hoping for Hans Zimmer to return. Looks like he and Nolan are done at least for now.
Not liking the title too.
|
|
sirchuck23
Based
Bad news dawg...you don't mind if I have some of your 300 dollar a glass shit there would ya?
Posts: 2,751
Likes: 4,868
|
Post by sirchuck23 on Oct 8, 2021 18:35:08 GMT
|
|
|
Post by JangoB on Oct 8, 2021 20:29:02 GMT
Ludwig to compose the score. Was hoping for Hans Zimmer to return. Looks like he and Nolan are done at least for now. Not liking the title too. I'm actually very happy that Ludwig will be returning - I love the scores Zimmer has provided for Nolan but the music in "Tenet" has become not only my favorite Nolan score but also a bit of an all-timer for me. There's a freshness to it that imo not even Zimmer's best recent work has. So I'm extremely happy to see Ludwig back. Nolan's bringing more of his "Tenet" team back as well - not only Ludwig and Hoyte Van Hoytema but also Jennifer Lame will be returning as the editor too. Very glad about all that.
|
|
|
Post by franklin on Oct 8, 2021 20:33:06 GMT
Cillian Murphy finally getting his deserved big leading role.
The only issue, yeah Trinity (the code name of the test) as the title would have been much cooler.
|
|
|
Post by The_Cake_of_Roth on Oct 9, 2021 1:22:40 GMT
So fucking pumped for Cillian Murphy.
That title is underwhelming though. Since so many other biopics just use the name of the person, I was hoping for something more creative and evocative.
That July release actually surprises me a bit. I know that’s Nolan’s favorite date, but this doesn’t sound like a summer type film to me and I was expecting maybe a fall release instead (like Interstellar). On the other hand, the project is described as an “epic thriller” so I guess it might be closer to the tone of Dunkirk than I initially thought…
|
|
|
Post by jakesully on Oct 9, 2021 14:31:02 GMT
So happy for Cillian MUrphy! Bring this shit on!
|
|
|
Post by therealcomicman117 on Oct 9, 2021 14:36:25 GMT
"Down with Warner Brothers" - Nolan - Basically!
|
|
sirchuck23
Based
Bad news dawg...you don't mind if I have some of your 300 dollar a glass shit there would ya?
Posts: 2,751
Likes: 4,868
|
Post by sirchuck23 on Oct 9, 2021 16:17:21 GMT
"Down with Warner Brothers" - Nolan - Basically! By exile…
|
|
|
Post by therealcomicman117 on Oct 9, 2021 18:22:55 GMT
"Down with Warner Brothers" - Nolan - Basically! By exile… With no prisoners taken.
|
|
|
Post by The_Cake_of_Roth on Oct 10, 2021 6:36:17 GMT
Apparently this will be based on the book American Prometheus: The Triumph and Tragedy of J. Robert Oppenheimer, which makes this Nolan's first book adaptation since The Prestige. But since this is being described as an "epic thriller," I'm wondering if Nolan will only be adapting a tiny portion of it, focusing on just a short, but crucial time period in the man's life.
Though last month, there was a Variety article mentioning that the film will also follow Oppenheimer’s later decision to call for more international control of nuclear weapons and his eventual opposition to the development of the hydrogen bomb. I could see most of the film playing out like a taut thriller, with the ending being a melancholic flashforward featuring Oppenheimer living in regret....
Also, American Prometheus would have made a good title.... or even just Prometheus (if only we didn't have that Ridley Scott film).
|
|
|
Post by ibbi on Oct 15, 2021 22:03:00 GMT
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Oct 15, 2021 22:47:54 GMT
Who do you think is playing Little Boy?
|
|