HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie
Notices

Let's talk about movies (and TV shows)... Part III

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-16-2013, 05:52 PM
  #226
WhiskeySeven
Expect the expected
 
WhiskeySeven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 24,120
vCash: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Nolan's also made Insomnia. Of his 7 movies, his median RT score is ~85%, and he has a ton of movies in the IMDB top 100 and 250, more than any other active director I think.

ETA: At the end of Inception, when the top is spinning and you don't low if it will keep spinning, the entire audience in my theatre was on edge, and apparently that was the case in most theatres. Can any other active director pull that off?
He makes movies that nearly universally appeal to the common denominator. If that's a good thing is up to you but I don't think he's quite as unique or groundbreaking as he's made out to be.

I feel similarly about another, albeit very different, director: Darren Aronofsky must be the most overrated, ham-fisted filmmaker I've had the displeasure of watching. I used to think that The Wrestler was his only film which I like, but then again I think it was Mickey Rourke's performance. Ugh that heartbeat line at the end...

As for Nolan - he's in a JJ Abrams/Michael Bay tier. I can find myself enjoying his films (except that mess which was TDKR, awful movie) but he's certainly no gift to filmmaking.

WhiskeySeven is offline  
Old
12-16-2013, 06:11 PM
  #227
overlords
#FakeBlous
 
overlords's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Planet Squanch
Posts: 26,890
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiskeySeven View Post
He makes movies that nearly universally appeal to the common denominator. If that's a good thing is up to you but I don't think he's quite as unique or groundbreaking as he's made out to be.

I feel similarly about another, albeit very different, director: Darren Aronofsky must be the most overrated, ham-fisted filmmaker I've had the displeasure of watching. I used to think that The Wrestler was his only film which I like, but then again I think it was Mickey Rourke's performance. Ugh that heartbeat line at the end...

As for Nolan - he's in a JJ Abrams/Michael Bay tier. I can find myself enjoying his films (except that mess which was TDKR, awful movie) but he's certainly no gift to filmmaking.
I wouldn't put him along with those guys. Well, I don't hate Abrams so much as to stick him with M. Bay, either. Wasn't a big fan of TDKR, either. Dude owes a lot of the hype leading up to that movie to Heath Ledger.

overlords is offline  
Old
12-16-2013, 07:57 PM
  #228
Lafleurs Guy
Global Moderator
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 43,550
vCash: 500
I think Nolan's great. Really enjoyed Inception, Momento the Batman movies... Genius? Don't know about that. That term gets used far too liberally these days (mostly by Kanye West talking about himself) and I don't think he qualifies. Really good filmmaker though. He kicks the **** out of Michael Bay. C'mon, show the man some respect here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by overlords View Post
I wouldn't put him along with those guys. Well, I don't hate Abrams so much as to stick him with M. Bay, either. Wasn't a big fan of TDKR, either. Dude owes a lot of the hype leading up to that movie to Heath Ledger.
Unlike most movies though, TDK delivered on the hype. Bruce Wayne not saving Rachel was like Superman not getting to the helicopter in time to save Lois Lane. Just not something you see in films and it broke the mold.

And the really cool thing was that he didn't drive his BatPod around the Equator fast enough to reverse the space time continuum. She actually stayed dead.

Lafleurs Guy is offline  
Old
12-16-2013, 09:21 PM
  #229
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Baltimore, Maryland
Country: United States
Posts: 16,155
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiskeySeven View Post
He makes movies that nearly universally appeal to the common denominator. If that's a good thing is up to you but I don't think he's quite as unique or groundbreaking as he's made out to be.

I feel similarly about another, albeit very different, director: Darren Aronofsky must be the most overrated, ham-fisted filmmaker I've had the displeasure of watching. I used to think that The Wrestler was his only film which I like, but then again I think it was Mickey Rourke's performance. Ugh that heartbeat line at the end...

As for Nolan - he's in a JJ Abrams/Michael Bay tier. I can find myself enjoying his films (except that mess which was TDKR, awful movie) but he's certainly no gift to filmmaking.
He's much better than Abrams. Abrams is a master at making really good "scenes", but the overall story doesn't flow at all. You'll rarely (never?) find the coherence in an Abrams film as you would in a Nolan film. Star Trek into Darkness is a movie a lot of people enjoyed because the individual scenes had good lighting and acting and tones, but there's no actual plot to the movie.

Nolan films are good because they appeal both to the lowest common denominator and to smarter people. Inception and TDK are very well thought out, with a lot of themes that are explored and well-executed. That's very hard to pull off, Ridley Scott (for example) tried to pull it off in Prometheus, and he failed. Nolan's definitely a gift to filmmaking, he is raising standards among people who watch blockbusters. Without Nolan delivering quality after quality in the past fifteen years, very few people would be criticising JJ Abrams, Zach Snyder, Guy Ritchie, McG, Michael Bay, etc. for the crap they've put out recently.

This movie that's coming out from Nolan, Interstellar... that's probably a movie that nobody else could make. It will be both a blockbuster that appeals to the public, a well-crafted artsy movie, and it will have an actual theme about a serious subject: exploration, and how necessity is the mother of invention, and why we're not exploring right now. The story is from Kip Thorne, one of the greatest minds of the past fifty years. You think Michael Haneke or Woody Allen are capable of making that? Let's be honest: No.

As for Aronofsky, he made the excellent Black Swan. His style is distinct: his movies are not really happy and actually rather depressing and so a lot of people might not like his movies. He also made Requiem for a Dream, I didn't like that film (too depressing, even for me), but it seems everybody else did, so I'm overruled.


Last edited by DAChampion: 12-16-2013 at 09:48 PM.
DAChampion is offline  
Old
12-16-2013, 09:33 PM
  #230
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Baltimore, Maryland
Country: United States
Posts: 16,155
vCash: 500
For Whiskey Seven:


DAChampion is offline  
Old
12-16-2013, 09:41 PM
  #231
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Baltimore, Maryland
Country: United States
Posts: 16,155
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by overlords View Post
I wouldn't put him along with those guys. Well, I don't hate Abrams so much as to stick him with M. Bay, either. Wasn't a big fan of TDKR, either. Dude owes a lot of the hype leading up to that movie to Heath Ledger.
Aaron Eckhart gets no love.

DAChampion is offline  
Old
12-17-2013, 01:13 AM
  #232
Garo
Registered User
 
Garo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Montréal
Country: Italy
Posts: 10,579
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Aaron Eckhart gets no love.
So true. Both villains made that movie.

Garo is offline  
Old
12-17-2013, 01:58 AM
  #233
kassian
Registered User
 
kassian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Montreal
Country: Netherlands Antilles
Posts: 5,044
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiskeySeven View Post
Mickey Rourke's performance. Ugh that heartbeat line at the end...

As for Nolan - he's in a JJ Abrams/Michael Bay tier. I can find myself enjoying his films (except that mess which was TDKR, awful movie) but he's certainly no gift to filmmaking.
Inception, Prestige and Memento have some of the most innovative, interesting plots in modern movie history and you bring up freaking Michael Bay as a comparison to Nolan? Really?

kassian is offline  
Old
12-17-2013, 02:20 AM
  #234
76ftw
24
 
76ftw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Canada
Country: Yugoslavia
Posts: 10,955
vCash: 2307
Just watched Django for the first time (I know, I know way behind). Unreal movie. The music was perfect (I especially love the Anthony Hamilton, Rick Ross and John Legend songs) and of course the performances from Sam Jackson, Leo, Jamie Foxx and of course the GOAT Chris Waltz were amazing. The reactions the characters have to being shot are som of the most realistic I've ever seen as well.

Loved it can't believe I slept on it for so long. I also have yet to see Inglorious ******** but I'll have to now.

all in all a 10/10 movie loved it.

76ftw is offline  
Old
12-17-2013, 02:21 AM
  #235
WhiskeySeven
Expect the expected
 
WhiskeySeven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 24,120
vCash: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by Garo View Post
So true. Both villains made that movie.
Two-face was terrible in that movie, he was almost a cameo.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kassian View Post
Inception, Prestige and Memento have some of the most innovative, interesting plots in modern movie history and you bring up freaking Michael Bay as a comparison to Nolan? Really?
You're really overrating Nolan. Inception doesn't make sense, the plot is contrived for the sake of it, the characters hurriedly spout of some garbled expository information in lieu of a gripping story. I did a very big research project on post-modernism in film and built it around Memento, I think it's a really good film but the plot isn't innovative or interesting necessarily. The Prestige is a fine movie, I liked it a lot, but I don't see what's so special or unique about it.

I'm essentially complimenting Nolan's marketability and appeal. I think Michael Bay is a fine director as well, some of my all time favourite movies are Michael Bay movies, it's just that Nolan is so unbelievably overrated by teenagers worldwide that makes the comparison seem like an insult.

Chris Nolan is as "for the common-folk" as you can have, his movies don't really push any boundaries, within the craft or in general, or stimulate any sort of response. They're just highly polished, highly enjoyable flicks. Don't make him out to be the next David Lynch, he's clearly not.

WhiskeySeven is offline  
Old
12-17-2013, 05:13 AM
  #236
68*
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Mount Olympus
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,022
vCash: 500
The season finale of Homeland disappointed me.

68* is offline  
Old
12-17-2013, 07:06 AM
  #237
Agnostic
11 Stanley Cups
 
Agnostic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,410
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 68 View Post
The season finale of Homeland disappointed me.
No kidding. It had lots of promise at the end of episode 11, but the writers seemed to mail that episode in. And why oh why does every show eventually bring a pregnancy/baby into the series.

Agnostic is offline  
Old
12-17-2013, 07:54 AM
  #238
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Baltimore, Maryland
Country: United States
Posts: 16,155
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiskeySeven View Post
Two-face was terrible in that movie, he was almost a cameo.
Not really, I don't think you understand the movie well.

Without Harvey Dent, the movie hardly works. His coherent and relevant character arc is parallel to the entire narrative. Two Face isn't a "cameo" in the movie, he is the end point of the Harvey Dent character arc. It's Harvey Dent who is in the movie, not two-face, I'm not sure why you'd criticise the portrayal of two-face.

ETA: The question of the movie, the core theme: is whether Gotham needs a hero, and what kind of hero it needs. This theme shows up in the movie's title: "The Dark Knight", because that is the hero that Gotham needs, the dark knight and not the white knight (Dent), which mirrors the movie being a chessboard, as we discover throughout the movie. This is a brave and original choice as normally movies lecture us on needing the light, or whatever, but here the message is that some vigilante justice is needed. Dent's character arc is perfectly integrated, Batman goes to Hong Kong because of Dent which also builds up the character of the Joker who was alone in predicting that Batman would go to Hong Kong. Rachel Dawes chooses Harvey Dent over Bruce Wayne, which is again something we don't normally see. Even Bruce Wayne thinks that Dent is the answer, we see him lock up all the criminals, vindicating the system, implying that Gotham no longer needs Batman. It turns out it does, we get the car chase scene in the tunnel with the Joker going after Dent, which is the most exciting car chase I've ever seen, and we later deal with the trauma of seeing half of Dent's face wiped out, which is the end-failure of the White Knight arc. The scene in the hospital with Dent and the Joker is iconic, as are the lines, the movie ends with Batman being fully compromised as he has to take down Dent to save Gordon's kids.

The movie as a whole came very close to being nominated for best picture, which is something that does't happen for science fiction movies. The Academy was so embarrassed by not nominating TDK that they subsequently changed the rules. There used to be 5 movies nominated for best picture, now there are 10, it's because of how silly they looked when TDK was not nominated. I think that the poverty porn slum dog millionaire won that year.

The reason TDK didn't win is that the academy has a history of snubbing science fiction -- can you believe that a role as iconic as Sigourney Weaver's Alien was never even nominated for best actress? She lost out to roles that nobody even remembers.

Quote:
You're really overrating Nolan. Inception doesn't make sense, the plot is contrived for the sake of it, the characters hurriedly spout of some garbled expository information in lieu of a gripping story. I did a very big research project on post-modernism in film and built it around Memento, I think it's a really good film but the plot isn't innovative or interesting necessarily. The Prestige is a fine movie, I liked it a lot, but I don't see what's so special or unique about it.

I'm essentially complimenting Nolan's marketability and appeal. I think Michael Bay is a fine director as well, some of my all time favourite movies are Michael Bay movies, it's just that Nolan is so unbelievably overrated by teenagers worldwide that makes the comparison seem like an insult.

Chris Nolan is as "for the common-folk" as you can have, his movies don't really push any boundaries, within the craft or in general, or stimulate any sort of response. They're just highly polished, highly enjoyable flicks. Don't make him out to be the next David Lynch, he's clearly not.
There's nothing original about Memento other than the characters, the plot, and the narrative structure :-)

Nobody's making him out to be the next David Lynch: Lynch is his own man as is Nolan. You can never compare great artists to one another. In any case, Nolan is much closer to Kubrick. He has a strong focus on ideas-based themes, with a science fiction focus, and he places a heavy importance on cinematography. Kubrick was a photographer prior to being a director.

Inception was not substituting for a gripping plot, it had a gripping plot. Once more, it did something I don't know of any movie having ever done, it had the entire audience on edge with its ending, in theatres across the world. People wanted to know if that top would keep spinning and were on the edge of their seats, which is impressive for two reasons. One, the audiences actually cared that much, I've never seen that audience reaction before nor since, and that exceptional reaction has been well-discussed in various media as not being unique to any theatre. Second, the audience was able to grasp some complex plot points, from an innovative plot they shouldn't understand so easily.

After seeing Inception, I was convinced I could not have understood such a sophisticated plot completely, so I saw it again a second time. It turned out I had actually followed the entire thing properly the first time, to my surprise. I don't know how many directors out there can communicate such a complex and innovative plot so effectively, to the extent that it's in actuality relatively streamlined.

Inception was also nominated for best picture, had an 86% on rotten tomatoes, and made 830 million worldwide. It wins on all counts. Your analysis only acknowledges the 830 million worldwide.

It's not just teenagers loving christopher nolan. His median rotten tomatoes score is ~90%, none of the thumbs ups come from teenagers. How many directors can you name who pull that off?

I think that you don't like his movies, which is fine as he has a very consistent approach: obsessive characters, constant tension, macroscopic approach to human nature, plots driven by consequences rather than coincidences, et cetera that won't appeal to everybody. He also rejects and ignores traditional rigid narrative structures, which is sure to irritate a lot of people. However, you are annoyed by the appeal since you can't buy into it and so you are overanalysing his appeal, you end up looking silly when you compare him to JJ Abrams (Star Trek into Darkness) and Michael Bay (Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen). Neither has made any movie as good as Inception, TDK, Memento, etc.

Finally, I'll point out that by now several directors have tried to emulate Nolan, and it's been a disaster or a passable mediocrity every time. If his success was superficial, emulating him would be easy. The fact people are trying to emulate him at all makes him influential.


Last edited by DAChampion: 12-17-2013 at 12:57 PM.
DAChampion is offline  
Old
12-17-2013, 08:41 AM
  #239
Agnostic
11 Stanley Cups
 
Agnostic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,410
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiskeySeven View Post
Two-face was terrible in that movie, he was almost a cameo.


You're really overrating Nolan. Inception doesn't make sense, the plot is contrived for the sake of it, the characters hurriedly spout of some garbled expository information in lieu of a gripping story. I did a very big research project on post-modernism in film and built it around Memento, I think it's a really good film but the plot isn't innovative or interesting necessarily. The Prestige is a fine movie, I liked it a lot, but I don't see what's so special or unique about it.

I'm essentially complimenting Nolan's marketability and appeal. I think Michael Bay is a fine director as well, some of my all time favourite movies are Michael Bay movies, it's just that Nolan is so unbelievably overrated by teenagers worldwide that makes the comparison seem like an insult.

Chris Nolan is as "for the common-folk" as you can have, his movies don't really push any boundaries, within the craft or in general, or stimulate any sort of response. They're just highly polished, highly enjoyable flicks. Don't make him out to be the next David Lynch, he's clearly not.
Hmmm. As the film turned into a puzzle for both the protagonist and the viewer I thought it had both of those qualities. One of my favourites of all time.

Agnostic is offline  
Old
12-17-2013, 08:48 AM
  #240
Mrb1p
PRICERSTOPDAPUCK
 
Mrb1p's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Citizen of the world
Country: Canada
Posts: 33,820
vCash: 500
I love seeing people argue about things that are totally subjective

''-He's not good because I don't like this one.

''-Heh, I do like it.''

-''Well, I don't''

I think were going too far and getting of the real path of what a movie is :Entertainment.

Mrb1p is offline  
Old
12-17-2013, 09:06 AM
  #241
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Baltimore, Maryland
Country: United States
Posts: 16,155
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrb1p View Post
I love seeing people argue about things that are totally subjective

''-He's not good because I don't like this one.

''-Heh, I do like it.''

-''Well, I don't''

I think were going too far and getting of the real path of what a movie is :Entertainment.
Questions like whether a work of art is iconic, original, who its target demographic is, what its themes are, etc are not really subjective.

DAChampion is offline  
Old
12-17-2013, 11:52 AM
  #242
LastChancePrice
Registered User
 
LastChancePrice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,174
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 68 View Post
The season finale of Homeland disappointed me.
I kinda...agree. After what we saw at the end of season 2, was hoping for something more spectacular to happen.

Well something spectacular happen, but after that, i wonder were the serie will go after.

LastChancePrice is offline  
Old
12-17-2013, 11:55 AM
  #243
LastChancePrice
Registered User
 
LastChancePrice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,174
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 76ftw View Post
Just watched Django for the first time (I know, I know way behind). Unreal movie. The music was perfect (I especially love the Anthony Hamilton, Rick Ross and John Legend songs) and of course the performances from Sam Jackson, Leo, Jamie Foxx and of course the GOAT Chris Waltz were amazing. The reactions the characters have to being shot are som of the most realistic I've ever seen as well.

Loved it can't believe I slept on it for so long. I also have yet to see Inglorious ******** but I'll have to now.

all in all a 10/10 movie loved it.
Chris Waltz in Inglorious is better imo. This is my favorite Tarantino movie. I just love it, watching it over and over without getting dissinterested in it.

LastChancePrice is offline  
Old
12-17-2013, 12:00 PM
  #244
Mrb1p
PRICERSTOPDAPUCK
 
Mrb1p's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Citizen of the world
Country: Canada
Posts: 33,820
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Questions like whether a work of art is iconic, original, who its target demographic is, what its themes are, etc are not really subjective.
For sure, but I don't see that debated here a lot.

My post wasn't directed towards you, DA. You and W7bring solid arguments to what/why/when a movie is good.

Mrb1p is offline  
Old
12-17-2013, 12:01 PM
  #245
Mrb1p
PRICERSTOPDAPUCK
 
Mrb1p's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Citizen of the world
Country: Canada
Posts: 33,820
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LastChancePrice View Post
Chris Waltz in Inglorious is better imo. This is my favorite Tarantino movie. I just love it, watching it over and over without getting dissinterested in it.
Waltz is hilarious and creepy in Inglorious.

I l.o.v.e that movie.

I'm a sucker for most things Tarantino and most things historic. (Well, that was not historic at all, but it had a certain taste)

Mrb1p is offline  
Old
12-17-2013, 12:52 PM
  #246
Adriatic
Registered User
 
Adriatic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 3,583
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrb1p View Post
Waltz is hilarious and creepy in Inglorious.

I l.o.v.e that movie.

I'm a sucker for most things Tarantino and most things historic. (Well, that was not historic at all, but it had a certain taste)
Definitely one of the greatest villains ever. Every time I watch it I notice or learn something about his character.

Adriatic is offline  
Old
12-17-2013, 02:29 PM
  #247
WhiskeySeven
Expect the expected
 
WhiskeySeven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 24,120
vCash: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Not really, I don't think you understand the movie well.

[Batman Talk]

The reason TDK didn't win is that the academy has a history of snubbing science fiction -- can you believe that a role as iconic as Sigourney Weaver's Alien was never even nominated for best actress? She lost out to roles that nobody even remembers.
To be honest nothing about the Academy appeals to me, sure I like it when movies I like win things but when a movie like Argo wins best picture you know that they're ultimately worthless.

As for the Batman talk, I know the narrative very well but you can't just pick and choose and ascribe convenient plot arcs: I'm specifically referring to the very short, very abrupt arc of Two-Face: Dent has not had any sort of character growth in the film until he gets captured and burnt... then he comes to face the Joker and is (in a very contrived manner) convinced that his crusade for justice is worthless and chaos reigns... then he goes around all vigilante-like and ends up with a gun on Gordon's kids. I dunno it didn't really work for me but the tension was so palpable with the Joker stuff that I didn't mind it.
Quote:
There's nothing original about Memento other than the characters, the plot, and the narrative structure :-)
The characters are quite ordinary and the plot is a twist on a very regular story the twist is in the presentation and structure which, as I said, I know very well. I like this movie as well.
Quote:
Nobody's making him out to be the next David Lynch: Lynch is his own man as is Nolan. You can never compare great artists to one another. In any case, Nolan is much closer to Kubrick. He has a strong focus on ideas-based themes, with a science fiction focus, and he places a heavy importance on cinematography. Kubrick was a photographer prior to being a director.
Absolutely disagree. Aside from a tendency to minimize CGI, Nolan has nothing on Kubrick. Kubrick's movies were subtle, whereas Nolan chews everything up and leaves it on the screen. The only way someone doesn't get the themes of a Nolan movie is if they were raised by an alcoholic chain-smoking mother under power-lines.

And what does "idea-based themes" even mean? Every theme is an idea. Nolan's film suffer from being wholly expository and, frankly, obvious. Not that it's a flaw at all, but you're favorably comparing him to a MASTER. Whereas Dr Strangelove is an allegory for sex and masculinity, and some would argue The Shining about anything from Indian genocide to the gold standard to the inherent unreliability of consciousness, no one has to think twice what the Prestige or Inception are about or have to say. Again: this isn't a bad thing but it's definitely shallower than Kubrick.

Quote:
Inception was not substituting for a gripping plot, it had a gripping plot. Once more, it did something I don't know of any movie having ever done, it had the entire audience on edge with its ending, in theatres across the world. People wanted to know if that top would keep spinning and were on the edge of their seats, which is impressive for two reasons. One, the audiences actually cared that much, I've never seen that audience reaction before nor since, and that exceptional reaction has been well-discussed in various media as not being unique to any theatre. Second, the audience was able to grasp some complex plot points, from an innovative plot they shouldn't understand so easily.

After seeing Inception, I was convinced I could not have understood such a sophisticated plot completely, so I saw it again a second time. It turned out I had actually followed the entire thing properly the first time, to my surprise. I don't know how many directors out there can communicate such a complex and innovative plot so effectively, to the extent that it's in actuality relatively streamlined.
You should watch it again.

And you're claiming that edge-of-your-seatiness is an adequate substitute for a proper story. What is Inception about? Cobb is a mind-criminal who has to pull off "one last job" in order to get to see his family again, along the way complications happen ("his mind is fighting us back, we have to go deeper!"). It's not very complex or innovative, it's a traditional heist story packaged into something else. WHICH IS FINE! But it's not Kubrick, and it's not original. The reason the audience "got" it was that the characters would literally yell the themes and plot points of the movie back and forth during during gun fights. As subtle as a shovel to the face.

As for the spinning top, it was so eye-rollingly obvious what it meant ("It doesn't matter to matter to Cobb if he's in a dream, he's finally home") that I'm surprised you're giving it so much credit.

Once again: I LIKED THE MOVIE. I'm just not going to pretend it was something else. It was very, very fun and cool (and yes, the structure was intriguing and original). He's a fine director but he's not a gift to movies.

Quote:
Inception was also nominated for best picture, had an 86% on rotten tomatoes, and made 830 million worldwide. It wins on all counts. Your analysis only acknowledges the 830 million worldwide.

It's not just teenagers loving christopher nolan. His median rotten tomatoes score is ~90%, none of the thumbs ups come from teenagers. How many directors can you name who pull that off?
His movies are like Big Macs. Most would argue that they're tasty and approachable and of consistent quality - but they're nothing more than that and what you see is often what you get.
Quote:
I think that you don't like his movies, which is fine as he has a very consistent approach: obsessive characters, constant tension, macroscopic approach to human nature, plots driven by consequences rather than coincidences, et cetera that won't appeal to everybody. He also rejects and ignores traditional rigid narrative structures, which is sure to irritate a lot of people. However, you are annoyed by the appeal since you can't buy into it and so you are overanalysing his appeal, you end up looking silly when you compare him to JJ Abrams (Star Trek into Darkness) and Michael Bay (Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen). Neither has made any movie as good as Inception, TDK, Memento, etc.

Finally, I'll point out that by now several directors have tried to emulate Nolan, and it's been a disaster or a passable mediocrity every time. If his success was superficial, emulating him would be easy. The fact people are trying to emulate him at all makes him influential.
I think The Rock, Armageddon, Bad Boys and Pain & Gain are really fun movies. Cloverfield, Star Trek 1 and MI:4 were very enjoyable as well. Nolan's movies are "smarter" yes but he often sacrifices story for plot (not to say that Bay or Abrams have good stories OR plot).

I guess you're right, I should put him on a tier above Bay and Abrams but in terms of wanting to watch them again and how much I enjoy them, they're all the same to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agnostic View Post
Hmmm. As the film turned into a puzzle for both the protagonist and the viewer I thought it had both of those qualities. One of my favourites of all time.
It wasn't quite a puzzle though, it was a unique way to get a story across but the puzzle was only because you don't know where he came from 5 minutes ago.

As for Rotten Tomatoes: A movie as great as Prisoners gets 81%, The Dark Knight Rises gets 88% - Tells me all I need to know about review aggregators.

The Dark Knight Rises was one of the worst movies I've had to sit through, just brutal and overwrought from start to finish, it highlighted everything bad about Nolan: needlessly complicated plot structure, convenient plot points, references to themes in lieu of actually building on them, obvious dialogue, etc. Not to mention weapons in Nolan movies all sound like nerf guns.

WhiskeySeven is offline  
Old
12-17-2013, 02:36 PM
  #248
overlords
#FakeBlous
 
overlords's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Planet Squanch
Posts: 26,890
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Aaron Eckhart gets no love.
He played his part well, don't get me wrong, but I'm siding with w7 on this one. Dent had no progression to speak of. His character just turns the corner on Villain Avenue because his girlfriend dies. I might be simplifying a bit here, but there's no subtlety to any changes his character goes through.


One thing I find nobody brings up in the Nolan trilogy is just how god damn uninteresting Batman/Bruce Wayne is.

overlords is offline  
Old
12-17-2013, 02:41 PM
  #249
WhiskeySeven
Expect the expected
 
WhiskeySeven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 24,120
vCash: 300
Quote:
Originally Posted by overlords View Post
One thing I find nobody brings up in the Nolan trilogy is just how god damn uninteresting Batman/Bruce Wayne is.
I was going to touch on that but it would've been a cheapshot. Forget the "guy in a bat suit fighting crime" angle, it kinda worked in Begins because they really develop the whole "fear as a weapon" angle. In TDK it doesn't really matter because the chaos wrought by the Joker takes over. In TDKR it's obvious as hell, he doesn't even fight in the darkness at that point, instead choosing to duke it out in the street.

It's just that for the "world greatest detective" he relies on a friggin ton of unbelievable devices and does very little detective work.

The best part of the Batman trilogies were by far the bad guys, the Batman himself kinda just ruins things wherever he goes.

WhiskeySeven is offline  
Old
12-17-2013, 02:48 PM
  #250
Lafleurs Guy
Global Moderator
 
Lafleurs Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 43,550
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiskeySeven View Post
Absolutely disagree. Aside from a tendency to minimize CGI, Nolan has nothing on Kubrick. Kubrick's movies were subtle, whereas Nolan chews everything up and leaves it on the screen. The only way someone doesn't get the themes of a Nolan movie is if they were raised by an alcoholic chain-smoking mother under power-lines.

And what does "idea-based themes" even mean? Every theme is an idea. Nolan's film suffer from being wholly expository and, frankly, obvious. Not that it's a flaw at all, but you're favorably comparing him to a MASTER. Whereas Dr Strangelove is an allegory for sex and masculinity, and some would argue The Shining about anything from Indian genocide to the gold standard to the inherent unreliability of consciousness, no one has to think twice what the Prestige or Inception are about or have to say. Again: this isn't a bad thing but it's definitely shallower than Kubrick.
All comes down to the individual I guess.

Kubrick never did anything for me. 2001... just couldn't get into it. I know he's iconic and I'm supposed to really enjoy his movies but I find him overrated. Clockwork Orange was cool, I liked the Shining, the first 45 minutes of Full Metal Jacket was neat before I kind of lost interest... I think Inception was better than you're giving it credit for but, like I said... films are subjective.
Quote:
Originally Posted by overlords View Post
Dent had no progression to speak of. His character just turns the corner on Villain Avenue because his girlfriend dies.
This is pretty hilarious and I'm using it going forward.

Lafleurs Guy is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:15 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. @2017 All Rights Reserved.