Topic: A Christopher Nolan Thread

[Something Awful]

Er..

He's currently making Avatar isn't he?

Yeah but there's no way these movies will be as good as the Terminators, Aliens, The Abyss and True Lies.

And...Titanic.

[Skidder.]

Yeah but there's no way these movies will be as good as the Terminators, Aliens, The Abyss and True Lies.

And...Titanic.

He's producing a Terminator series too though. Or at least, that's what was going around the internet a few months ago.

[Geormajesty]

Plus he set himself up for criticism in TDKR with lines like this  "the biggest (film) anyone's done since the silent era"

How? He didn't mean big in terms of popularity & importance, he was referring to the cast and crew size and them using 11,000 extras. It was a legitimate point.

[Mouth]

Nolan on CH4 news, bloody nice bloke.

[jooneyisdagod]

Anyone seen this at a preview or anything ?

How's it being received ? Most reviews suggest it's more Gravity (IMO Utter turd) than 2001, which is my gold standard for space films.

[Something Awful]

Gravity is ace, be lucky to be that good

[jooneyisdagod]

Gravity is ace, be lucky to be that good

We're going to have to agree to disagree on that one mate. I thought it was vapid.

[Redcap]

We're going to have to agree to disagree on that one mate. I thought it was vapid.

Gravity's aspirations as a movie are basically limited to the technical, which it achieves in flying colours.

Everything else is just "meh".

[Macphisto80]

We're going to have to agree to disagree on that one mate. I thought it was vapid.

Agreed. Looked nice, but was utter bollocks.

[Something Awful]

Agreed. Looked nice, but was utter bollocks.

Elaborate.

[johnsmithlfc]

I think Gravity at the cinema was a fantastic experience... I went with such low expectations and ended up really liking it.
The effects were incredible but in parts it was quite thoughtful and moving.
Maybe I was just in the right mood at the time to appreciate it - it's not an amazing movie but neither is it crap.
It's above average I'd say, a 6.5 - 7 out of 10.
Been meaning to watch again on Blu-Ray since...I've heard it holds up well watching at home so we'll see.

[martinsquirtle]

We're going to have to agree to disagree on that one mate. I thought it was vapid.

Exactly

[Kashinoda]

Anyone seen this at a preview or anything ?

How's it being received ? Most reviews suggest it's more Gravity (IMO Utter turd) than 2001, which is my gold standard for space films.

I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't agree with you.

Gravity was great, made me feel sick watching it. I don't understand the comparisons though, Gravity is more or less an experience in a movie theatre rather than a movie.

And it was never going to be like 2001, so both comparisons are bad.

[Macphisto80]

Elaborate.

It was a spectacle and more of a vehicle for 3d technology for a cinema going experience than an actual film. I tried watching it on TV for the first time since seeing it in the theatre, and without the 3d aspect, which was admittedly outstanding, it was just an extremely shallow film. It might sound odd, but I think that is down to the fact that I couldn't get past that it was just George Clooney being George Clooney, and Sandra Bullock being herself. I was never convinced by either one of them.  It felt like a vehicle for their star power. Had it been two unknowns, and maybe even from a different country, then I think it could have been more interesting.

[Something Awful]

It was a spectacle and more of a vehicle for 3d technology for a cinema going experience than an actual film. I tried watching it on TV for the first time since seeing it in the theatre, and without the 3d aspect, which was admittedly outstanding, it was just an extremely shallow film. It might sound odd, but I think that is down to the fact that I couldn't get past that it was just George Clooney being George Clooney, and Sandra Bullock being herself. I was never convinced by either one of them.  It felt like a vehicle for their star power. Had it been two unknowns, and maybe even from a different country, then I think it could have been more interesting.

I didn't get that feeling at all, it felt like they barely mattered at all and the focus was on the chaos. I don't think I've ever felt relief at a movie like I did when Sandra Bullock got to land. In fact i don't think I've ever had such a raw feeling at all watching a movie. Incredible experience, I doubt Interstellar is anything like as good as that.

[Malaysian Kopite]

http://www.theguardian.com/film/2014/nov/04/-sp-christopher-nolan-interstellar-rebooted-blockbuster

[ericthered10]

I'm more of a fan of space movies that .make you think rather than feel. 2001 of course being amazing, and I hope Interstellar falls somewhere between Gravity's lame story but great visuals and 2001's great story, great visuals.

[wampa1]

Gravity doesn't have a 'lame' story.  It's not breaking any new ground in its storytelling as it's comparatively simple to works such as 2001 but it is engaging and exciting albeit aided by the visuals (but aren't all movies?). 

I do agree that the movie loses something when viewed on a little CRT tele in a terraced house in Burnely though.

[Elzar]

Anyone see the Graham Norton show?

Mcounaghey and Hathaway were on and said they were blown away by this when they first got briefed. Said Noland has stepped it up from his other films... that sounds exciting.

[Brian Blessed]

75% fresh on RT. Just glancing at the negative reviews it seems the big complaint is it's too long. I suspect that's down to the viewer rather than the film. I've never felt any of his films were too long.

[Skidder.]

75% fresh on RT. Just glancing at the negative reviews it seems the big complaint is it's too long. I suspect that's down to the viewer rather than the film. I've never felt any of his films were too long.

There is a consensus that headlining 'Blockbusters' shouldn't be over something like 132 minutes or something daft like that. Folly of course, but that daft little notion is ingrained into some people over whip and chain. 

[Macphisto80]

I didn't get that feeling at all, it felt like they barely mattered at all and the focus was on the chaos. I don't think I've ever felt relief at a movie like I did when Sandra Bullock got to land. In fact i don't think I've ever had such a raw feeling at all watching a movie. Incredible experience, I doubt Interstellar is anything like as good as that.

I just thought it got a bit silly in places. There's already been a film that does what Gravity does, only it does it right, or much better. Apollo 13. A far more convincing film, similar in context, although much more tense because it was plausible. The Wall-E fire extinquisher moment just completely pulled me out of the film to the extent I just wanted it to end there and then. You could argue things like that are for the sake of the film, but I'd have just preferred it if it were a little bit more realistic. There was too much "Hollywood" moments in there for my personal taste.

[Haemoglobin]

75% fresh on RT. Just glancing at the negative reviews it seems the big complaint is it's too long. I suspect that's down to the viewer rather than the film. I've never felt any of his films were too long.

There is a consensus that headlining 'Blockbusters' shouldn't be over something like 132 minutes or something daft like that. Folly of course, but that daft little notion is ingrained into some people over whip and chain.

Yeah, although long flicks can drag if poorly paced, I'd prefer we get to see as much of the creators' vision as is reasonably viable than to have the butchered entrails of an epic that neatly fits everyone's business schedule. Fuck that, you can buckle me in for 5 hours as long as it's a feast for the mind and senses.

They should bring back the concept of the Intermission in modern film. Then all the wimps can bail halfway through, leaving the soldiers of cinema to see it through to its satisfying conclusion.

[Macphisto80]

It's actually more difficult to make a shorter film than it is a longer one.

[Haemoglobin]

^ True enough, but some flicks should be epics. It's padding that's the problem.

[Macphisto80]

^ True enough, but some flicks should be epics. It's padding that's the problem.

Agreed. However, it's when directors and studios feel the need to make it mandatory that's the problem. That's when the "padding" comes in and a film can end up just feeling bloated. I feel that at least two of Nolan's Batman films suffer from this, and a good few of Marvel films do too. Once an origin story is put to the side, the following sequels should all be lean and condensed films. They'd be so much better for it.

[Redcap]

I'm pretty sure Nolan doesn't think any of his movies have padding. And I'm pretty sure of all directors, he has the most authority to tell studios to piss off if they ask him to pad a movie.

Anyway, don't studios normally err on the side of a shorter movie? Most stories are about long movies being cut down to size (Black Dahlia, Heaven's Gate, The Magnificent Ambersons etc.) and made incomprehensible rather than the other way round.

[jooneyisdagod]

Just back from this.  Certainly has its flaws but thoroughly engaging and entertaining. Solid 8/10 film. Like inception but probably just below the dark Knight. Still a way below 2001 but miles better than gravity.

[Something Awful]

Heading into this now. I hope it's at least..


...alright alright alright

[Latenight Surfer]

[Something Awful]

Pretty good. Lasts forever, and I'm not sure it's very rewatchable, but definitely worth seeing. In imax, if you can.

[Saint Kopite]

Just came back from watching it. The last half an hour or so left me in awe. The background music gave me proper chills.

['Mondzz']

Cant wait to see this now. 8PM Imax showing is sold out so debating going for the 11:45PM showing tonight.

Be getting home around 3am!

[Redman0151]

I've been very critical of Nolan lately but I loved every moment of this. Incredibly well done, beautiful music and visuals, gets the emotion spot on

[Geormajesty]

I absolutely loved it.

['Mondzz']

F*ck it just booked for the midnight IMAX showing tonight.

[Schmidt]

Just saw this today, I thought it was pretty awesome. The sound (and at times lack of) was really good, and some of the space scenes looked beautifully surreal. I had to suspend belief a little bit too much at times but other than that I enjoyed every second.

As a side note, I saw this at a VueXtreme screen and it really didn't seem as impressive as IMAX, although it's been a while since I saw an IMAX movie.

[John_P]

Just seen a 35mm print at Fact.

Really enjoyed it, visually spectacular, and a gripping story.

[End Product]

Go see it, won't be for everyone, Hans Zimmer is a shoe in for an oscar.   

[Bunter]

The problem this film has is that the expectations have been ramped up to epic proportions because of who the creator is and his previous body of work. Anything other than a complete masterpiece will not suffice for a lot of people and this has skewed opinion already I feel.