criterionforum.org

I'm a big fan of Nolan but always got the vibe he wasn't particularly liked all that much here.

For what it's worth, I actually don't actively dislike Nolan, but I do feel as though he is massively overrated. At the end of the day, Memento is still his best film, although I do still like the entertainment value of The Dark Knight.

As for Inception, there isn't really much for me to add to the excessive dialogue criticism that others haven't already. I personally, have no qualms with talky films (Before Midnight was one of my favorites last year, and that's essentially a movie of two people talking).

The problem with Inception is that all the dialogue is merely exposition spoon-fed to the audience at excessive lengths. Some might argue that this is necessary, given the complex nature of the plot, and in regards to that argument, I would say this makes evident the rather flawed nature of the story. Even Hitchcock would've objected to an instance like this, when he once claimed how exposition must be spoon-fed to the audience, or something along those lines.

Though this is probably an argument best saved for the Inception thread and after I have another viewing of the film, which I'd like to get around to before Interstellar.

domino harvey wrote:This board hates Nolan and loves Michael Mann so I don't know why anyone takes any of us seriously about anything

Heat, Collateral, and The Insider are all great movies. (I still need to see some of his other films.)

criterion10 wrote:The problem with Inception is that all the dialogue is merely exposition spoon-fed to the audience at excessive lengths. Some might argue that this is necessary, given the complex nature of the plot, and in regards to that argument, I would say this makes evident the rather flawed nature of the story. Even Hitchcock would've objected to an instance like this, when he once claimed how exposition must be spoon-fed to the audience, or something along those lines.

Completely lost me on that Hitchcock point. But such a reference alone says you never bothered to click on or read those Bordwell and Thompson links.

Regarding your reference to Before Midnight (a film I love too) -- didn't I sort of predict that above? "Here's a talky low-budget art film I like, therefore I'm for a talking cinema." So you're for a "talking cinema," but maybe just not one in which thrillers are permitted to be talky with their exposition. Unless that thriller is Memento and the exposition in question constitutes, I don't know, the existential heart of the film. Almost Rivette-like, the story of Memento is at every moment of the film concerned chiefly (and very much expositionally) with sussing out just what it is the story (and so the mystery, dilemma and life of the protagonist) is about. So good on you for liking it, if that's even part of the reason why. But how you can't see that dynamic playing out in so many of Nolan's other works is beyond me.

Anyway, as long as we're ranking Nolan films, here's my list: The Prestige, Following, Memento, Inception, The Dark Knight and then all the rest.

I would say I'm overall a Nolan fan, though I have reservations, but I've never even really heard 'too talky' as an objection to him- visually, thematically, and narratively incoherent, occasionally, but serious people in suits walking around talking to each other at great length tends to be one of the more likable aspects of his work- though I think the pleasures of that sort of thing also highlight how much his movies tend to appear to say a great deal without ever making much of a point, at least for me.

I'm not at all clear on why loving Michael Mann is a disqualifier for being taken seriously though, I should have thought Tony Scott fandom would leave one far more vulnerable.

I suppose, beyond Dom's general not love for Mann, it is because of the great similarities he has to Nolan which Scott simply doesn't.

The problem of Inception is not that there is too much talk, but that half of the dialogues are only there to explain the story, to explain what at the moment is happening, or, worse, even to describe what I see on the screen. Nolan does not trust the audience to understand what he wants to show.

After Following and Memento my expectations for new Nolan films were mostly disappointed. Still his films are far from bad, only not that great either. It's all entertaining stuff, but not fascinating.

But I'm not a great fan of Mann either. I never really liked Heat.

Matt Zoller Seitz asked on Twitter last week what films would be remembered now in later generations like Taxi Driver and Pulp Fiction are now. Someone responded "from both teaching and being a film student, it's ALL Chris Nolan, like, nearly as a quasi-religion". Maybe it says more about their one-mindedness about it than his effect on the culture and effectively film students, but this kind of bothered me. For me the best art grabs from all kind of sources and influences, and I at least hope they recognize the breadth of knowledge of film that Nolan has because he seems to apply it as best as he can every time out for me.

FWIW, My list would go The Dark Knight, The Prestige, Inception, Batman Begins and Insomnia.

criterion10 wrote:For what it's worth, I actually don't actively dislike Nolan, but I do feel as though he is massively overrated.

This is an example of the single most irritating and lazy trend in the discussion of movies (on this board and elsewhere). Criticizing an artist, their work, or just an individual film based on how over- or under-rated it is feels so pointless and stereotypically hipster-y. Overrated by whom? Compared to what? Who says that your perception of the public reception of a director, actor, or film is accurate? What difference does your perception of how other individuals feel or the culture at large feels about someone's work matter in your evaluation of that work? By overrated, do you mean on the level of "...thinks Adam Sandler is the comic genius of cinema of the last forty years" or more like "...thinks The Godfather Part I is better than Part II"?

If you're posting on a forum like this, just tell us what you think about somebody, and why, and then we can agree or disagree on the merits of your argument. This is more of a general bitchfest than directed specifically at criterion10, but he/she just happened to be standing there.

/gets off soapbox, apologizes if any spittle landed on anyone nearby

I'll be posting a lengthy response to some of the comments (hopefully) later tonight. I just have some work to finish up at the moment -- don't think I've run away from the conversation!

warren oates wrote:Completely lost me on that Hitchcock point. But such a reference alone says you never bothered to click on or read those Bordwell and Thompson links.

The Hitchcock quote was just a way of me trying to illustrate my point (his quote seemed relevant, and Hitchcock is a director that without hesitation I think most of us would agree is one of the greats) -- I understand that a film has to have expositional dialogue, and I'm not averse to this at all. It's just a manner of how it is used.

As for the links, which I've now skimmed through more thoroughly, they certainly provide an interesting counterpoint to some of the claims others and myself have made against the film. The quote that most stood out to me was in the first link:

Kristin Thompson wrote:At that turning point, it dawned on me that Nolan has elevated exposition of new premises to the main form of communication among characters

She's absolutely correct -- yet this technique simply did not increase my enjoyment of the film. Hearing endless expositional dialogue describing what's a totem or how limbo works simply doesn't work for me. I mean, someone like Ellen Page's character exists exists solely to ask questions that the audience needs to know the answer to (this leads to another issue of mostly uninteresting characters, though I'll digress from that for now).

warren oates wrote:Regarding your reference to Before Midnight (a film I love too) -- didn't I sort of predict that above? "Here's a talky low-budget art film I like, therefore I'm for a talking cinema." So you're for a "talking cinema," but maybe just not one in which thrillers are permitted to be talky with their exposition.

As you hint at, the "talkiness" of Before Midnight is completely different than that of Inception. In the former, characters discuss existential questions about the meaning of love, marriage, their past relationships, and so on. In Inception, characters discuss the purpose of a totem, or how the dream world works, what limbo is, etc. In other words, the dialogue of Before Midnight is used in a natural, realistic manner that helps the audience to connect with its characters. The dialogue of Inception is strictly used for exposition.

Now, I do have to object to your comment at the end. I have no problem with thrillers being talky with their exposition. I understand, especially given the nature of sci-fi, that there is going to have to be a scene in The Matrix when Morpheus is going to have to explain exactly how the system works, or a monologue in 2001: A Space Odyssey that explains to Bowman what his mission is about. But, Inception is just this type of dialogue to the extreme. The film needs more moments like the zero gravity sequence and less of Ellen Page asking questions.

Lighthouse wrote:The problem of Inception is not that there is too much talk, but that half of the dialogues are only there to explain the story, to explain what at the moment is happening, or, worse, even to describe what I see on the screen.

Correct. You articulated this much better than I could have. How much more interesting would it have been if Nolan could have found a way to incorporate these ideas through alternative methods, visually or otherwise? (And yes, I do understand that the complex nature of the plot would require at least some of the plot to be explained through dialogue. But, Nolan could have needed to found a way to communicate the ideas in a more visual manner, or simplify the general plot structure to give way to a more visceral experience.)

Here's an interesting video from Rob Ager on how Inception could have been better. I don't entirely agree with everything he says, but he poses some interesting points.

flyonthewall2983 wrote:Matt Zoller Seitz asked on Twitter last week what films would be remembered now in later generations like Taxi Driver and Pulp Fiction are now. Someone responded "from both teaching and being a film student, it's ALL Chris Nolan, like, nearly as a quasi-religion". Maybe it says more about their one-mindedness about it than his effect on the culture and effectively film students, but this kind of bothered me.

I find this rather interesting and also very true -- I say this as a current film student (just started college a month ago now), and I can certainly confirm that Nolan's name around here is considered sacred. Everyone is already gearing up to see Interstellar, and when I told a peer that I wasn't a huge fan of Nolan, I was labelled as being pretentious (certainly not the worst thing I've been called over the years!).

My argument here might be deviating from the subject of Nolan more to that of film school in general, so I apologize in advance if this is the case... However, the fundamental problem that I have with this is that it ultimately represents the level of disinterest that much of the current generation of film students have in regards to the medium as a whole. Everyone will line up to see the next Christopher Nolan film, but when it comes time to watching the Fritz Lang epics that he claims influenced The Dark Knight Rises, the odds of them viewing one of these titles on their own is slim to none.

This isn't an issue with Nolan at all -- he's someone who's clearly passionate about cinema and advancing the art form while simultaneously paying respects to its past. And I think this is one of the great assets, about him as an individual at least.

DarkImbecile wrote:

criterion10 wrote:For what it's worth, I actually don't actively dislike Nolan, but I do feel as though he is massively overrated.

This is an example of the single most irritating and lazy trend in the discussion of movies (on this board and elsewhere).

I only intended this to be a brief little aside, trying to make evident that despite my seemingly dismissive attitude towards Nolan in my initial comments, I don't dislike him, nor any of his films. While I do find some of his films overrated, my opinions of them are not results of nor influenced in any way by the opinions of others. If the majority thought Inception was terrible, my opinion of it being a bit of a mixed bag would still stand (and in that case, I would probably be calling the film underrated!). I was just trying to contextualize my opinion of the film (which I hope I've provided thoroughly above) against how other people feel.

DarkImbecile wrote:/gets off soapbox, apologizes if any spittle landed on anyone nearby

No worries, I had my umbrella ready to go.

And to close, might as well post my ranking of his films: Memento, The Dark Knight, Inception, The Prestige, The Dark Knight Rises, Batman Begins, Insomnia, and then Following.

I would like to, and hopefully will find the time to do so, give Inception another shot before seeing Interstellar though. Might go up or down in the ranking.

If you're intent on rewatching Inception, perhaps do so with a stopwatch so you can see that the "endless" expository dialog y'all won't stop bitching about amounts to far less screentime than claimed

flyonthewall2983 wrote:Matt Zoller Seitz asked on Twitter last week what films would be remembered now in later generations like Taxi Driver and Pulp Fiction are now. Someone responded "from both teaching and being a film student, it's ALL Chris Nolan, like, nearly as a quasi-religion".

Nothing new there. It's always been that way. Many film students and casual film buffs tend to focus on particular English language directors to a fault- like Malick, Kubrick, Scorsese. See the Tree of Life thread on this board.

Chris Nolan on BBC Radio 6 Music Special

It's about an hour long chat where he discusses how music works in his films everything from Doodlebug to Interstellar and picks out some tracks from his favorite scores (with mostly full tracks played as well).

Chris Nolan's next project is revealed and i don't think anyone saw this one coming.

Now if only he could use that fandom to produce a short of two from them. Still, hopefully this will raise their profile or garner interest for investors.

Just catching up on the conversation about Nolan film student worship, a couple years back I joined my university's film club; this was right after the release of Tree of Life. So, much to my surprise, it was Malick that was receiving the most praise from the majority of students. We watched an Almodovar film during one our screenings as he was another filmmaker placed in high regard by the group. Nolan was rarely ever mentioned.

Though I can understand the quasi-religion worship of Nolan, it can be seen in almost every film-related corner of the internet.

malpractice wrote:Chris Nolan's next project is revealed and i don't think anyone saw this one coming.

That makes sense since his company Syncopy with Zeitgeist is releasing a compilation of the Quay Brothers’ animated short films on blu-ray in the fall.

flyonthewall2983 wrote:Forbes thinks Akira might be his next project.

It would certainly appear to fit with Nolan's interest in philosophical films that also feature lots of action, ensemble casts and an extremely wide scope. Though if this is true, the big question would be whether it follows the template of the 1988 film or tries to re-adapt from the much more sprawling original manga.

Isn't the Scarlett Johansson live action version of Ghost In The Shell tentatively pencilled in for 2017 also? As an anime fan who sort of had their teenage years defined by those two films (and Battle Angel Alita, which I seem to remember hearing James Cameron hovering around making in live action a few years back. Elysium is a kinda-sorta adaptation of one of the basic plot strands of that anime, and it could be argued that Ex Machina got a little inspiration from it too), it sounds as if it could end up being a strange year indeed to see Hollywood adaptations of them arrive!

Did I hear... Nolan ranking?

The Dark Knight
Memento
Inception
The Prestige
Batman Begins
Insomnia
The Dark Knight Rises

Of all the bad ideas the remake industry has visited upon us, I can't think of one more unnecessary/dumb than this.

Maybe someone forgot it was made in the first place? I'll see myself out.

I hope that they'll finally fix that editing issue which jumbled all the scenes around. Every copy of the film I have has that same error on it.