Where do you see David Mamet? I see Nolan as more of a half-assed Michael Mann.
Ladies and gents, the half-assed David Mamet, soon to be the half-assed Ridley Scott.
Compare Mamet's "House of Games," "Homicide" and "The Spanish Prisoner" to Nolan's pre-Batman films. I don't think the Mann influence really set in until he used it first for "The Dark Knight" and then "Inception." Not saying he is stealing, but his works are like unfolding a piece of paper compared to Mamet's films, thus the modifier of "half-assed."
People that make me wanna mutilate everyone of their fans, Part 1. Has contributed heavily to the artistic ruin of worldwide cinema and has led people to believe his stuffy little summer blockbusters are multi-layered works of art, so that they can defend him and his "vision". Fraud-o-meter peaking at ten!
He understands the expression 'psych!' much better than any other filmmaker of his time. He believes in feeding the audience with what they want." and then takes it all away. show them what they had." ;)
What fascinates me the most is to see how extremely aggressive both his fans and his haters are
Irony: Most loved the guy until "The Dark Knight" made him totally famous, even though it and "Rises" remain his two most accomplished films to date, and stand head-and-shoulders above anything else he's ever touched. The poor, contrived female characters, the lack of palpable emotionality, the all-too-calculated plots, set-ups and show-downs, and most of all, the unbearably cloying expository dialogue were issues that more frequently plagued cult-classics like "Memento," but nobody cared then. Now, he's a piñata for nearly everyone who thinks they know movies. Nolan is flawed, sometimes frustrating, and yes, I strongly dislike some of his films, but he's far from talentless, and even farther from the worst there is. There are butthurt trolls yelling often profane and substance-free insults from either side of the man, and as such he's becoming an increasingly difficult director to subjectively evaluate. That, by the way, is a little sad.
"You look at what Christopher Nolan did with Batman, that's like the meeting of the highest level of artistic skill & a kind of commerciality and appeal to a wide range of people which is what anybody would want. It's kind of unparalleled actually" – Paul Thomas Anderson
god I dislike his films, they try to be so clever and revolutionary but never are
While not expansive, this is my first completed filmography. Nolan dazzles while still giving you something to think about, and still retaining the human elements to keep you engaged. A particular theme I noticed in his work is the idea that time will not heal all wounds, it may in fact only intensify the hurt. He invests you in his films, and their characters, creating a realistic world for them to inhabit. He makes you believe in his worlds, so when the fantastical comes, you accept it as a natural part of that universe. His movies tend to share a wall with our reality, close but just off in places. His leads are tortured, generally by accidents or mistakes from their pasts.The results or outcomes of these issues is generally the thrust of his work. He has shown the versatility of the theme and the many direction you can go off one emotional element. I love Nolan's women. They are all so varied and realistic. I even like Rachel Dawes, she was the light in Bruce's night, and I thought both actresses did well with the material. He has depicted the light and dark side of femininity and I have to say, I prefer the dark. I would love to see his take on a female protagonist. Two of his staples, that I absolutely adore, are his use of the unreliable narrator, and playing with subjectivity. It's most notable in Inception, but plays a large part in The Prestige, and can be traced all the way back to Memento. Then there is the non linear element of Memento and Batman Begins, and I suppose The Prestige and Inception to lesser extents. He keeps you engaged, without letting you zone out, he makes you pay attention. The Batman franchise is an odd animal. He tackled one of my favorite subject matters, and set a high bar for not only Batman films, but all super hero films that would follow. None are without their flaws, but they dug dip into the the mythos while creating something new and exciting that was true to the spirit of such a beloved property. I love his Batman movies, but it is the movies that they allowed him to make that I truly enjoy. Without Begins we probably would never have gotten Prestige, and so on. Even if he would have been able to make them, without the financial success of the Batman films I doubt he would have had as much clout or freedom, both financially and artistically. I am excited for post nolan Batman, although a part of me will always hope for a Dar Knight Returns in 15/20 odd years. If I had to pick a favorite I would have to go with The Prestige, with Dark Knight and Inception trailing close behind. His weakest being Insomnia easily, it has merits but is just ok, which I suppose is high praise for a film makers weakest work. He is not above reproach, but I have greatly enjoyed nearly all his movies. He knows how to make an accessible, engaging story, with the wonder and fantastical that you want to see when you go into the theater, and I respect that immensely.
The comparisons (serious or deriding or what have you) to Lean or Kubrick are understandable, but the one connection I notice nobody ever seeming to make is a similarity in the theme of revelation (which many will refer to as the twist device though I feel it is inimical to his films) through unfolding the convolutions within a story, as well as the preference for noirish stylings and settings, with the work of David Mamet.
It seems Nolan is the new Tarantino: the auteur people love to hate and love to love in equal measure.
anyone who claims he's a modern day Kubrick should be sterilized; if anything he's a modern day David Lean; pompous grandiose impersonal bullshit.
I understand all the comments look malicious, but no one is suggesting that he isn't entitled to his opinion. Yes he's entitled to his opinion but I don't know where this trend comes from where people assume because its an opinion nobody should challenge it (especially when he hasn't said anything to support it). If he had just said 'I love Nolan's movies' and still had backlash I'd agree with you but he didn't do that. He compared Nolan to a director with a really strong following so of course there will be backlash.
But perhaps that was part of how he was saying "I love Christopher Nolan." If he had formed his sentence differently would you have not jumped down his throat? Like if he or she had said "I love Christopher Nolan. I compare him to a modern day Stanley Kubrick" would you have liked that better? I think it's splitting hairs when you say that he should have backed up his opinion. It's the exact same thing as saying "I love Christopher Nolan" or "I love Stanley Kubrick" yet you're opinions just had to come in the way of what this person thought, just because you thought he was wrong.
As soon as you say 'but perhaps you ment' you're not dealing with what he wrote you're making assumptions. I disagree, I don't think anyone here is splitting hairs, stating he likes Nolan and that he compares him Kubrick are saying two very different things that goes beyond the issue sentence structure its that is blatanly not what he said, it's not 'the exact same thing' by any means. And to awnser your question, absolutley he would've gotten a different response. Maybe some of them were harsh, but every poster has on here has inquired about the comparison no one has told he shouldn't like Nolan. Lastly even if we did attack him, how are our opinions get in the way of him, did our comments delete his post? if anyone what you are saying is getting in the way of people's opinions because you're asking those who responded how to act not based on what the original poster said but what you think he said. I think it's little ridiculous that we're all debating without even hearing from the original poster. Asher if you want to talk about Christopher Nolan I'd be interested in what you have to say.
Gentlemen, I'm truly sorry if I offended. I didn't mean to sound harsh or bitter when saying "jump down his throat" and "come in the way of his opinions". I suppose you're all right, and this was an interesting debate. Honestly, my statements were more a backlash to all the general snobbery and self-righteousness that seems to be a theme almost for people of this sight. And that is not anything against you guys AT ALL. Don't take this offensively. It just seems to me that people all the time are just trying so hard to say something negative on this website. Yes, people do say what they think when they love a film or a director or an actor, most definitely. But, there's the same amount of "Oh, I hate this" kind of attitude to what people don't like. Nothing against you guys, but people love to be hateful against something they kinda don't like. Saying "I hate Despicable Me (or Ice Age, or fucking Toy Story) or anything along those lines" is just silly I think. It's a kids movie for christ's sake, do you really need to go on the internet and be a dick about it? And that's even besides the point. I suppose I just get defensive when people are just such unnecessary assholes about stuff that just... doesn't matter. Love what you love, and dislike what you don't like, but don't ever push that off on other people. Everyones a fucking critic. But no ones opinion really matters, because everyone has their own opinion. Thank you, and good day.
I don't quite understand the strange phenomena of cinephiles hating his films so nonchalantly. How could someone hate a film maker who's so tied to creating cinema at its purest form? It baffles me that people can't simply just let his films wash over you. Sure, he has yet to make his masterpiece and many of his films are flawed, but he's hardly a terrible film maker.
Actually, he's already made his masterpiece (Memento), and another near-masterpiece (The Prestige). Cinephiles hate on him because his only movies that have actually made money (the Batmans, Inception) are all good but flawed films, though they are universally adored by fanboys, and therefore tend to end up near the top of the IMDB top 250. People are idiots.