Should EVERY movie be done in a Chris Nolan style?

Raiders90 · Jul 18, 2013

Since Nolan is the auteur of our times--both literally and in terms of film, he shapes our gritty, psychological, deep and dark perception of these gritty, dark times--I put forth that some genres are just too unrealistic. Like comedy movies. This is 2013. No one really laughs anymore, that's just way too over the top and fun. That's way too 1995.

Should all movie genres get the Nolan treatment--bring them up to date with 2013? This isn't the '90s anymore, you can't go in to the movies expecting to have fun. We need realism, damn it, because these are realistic, gritty times.

Montana Smith · Jul 18, 2013

Despite your sarcasm you obviously have a high opinion of Nolan and the power he wields over contemporary society.

Should EVERY movie be done in a Chris Nolan style?

Maybe that's something you should bring up with your psychologist?

Did the scary clown give you nightmares again?

Attila the Professor · Jul 18, 2013

Raiders112390 said:
Since Nolan is the auteur of our times--both literally and in terms of film, he shapes our gritty, psychological, deep and dark perception of these gritty, dark times--I put forth that some genres are just too unrealistic. Like comedy movies. This is 2013. No one really laughs anymore, that's just way too over the top and fun. That's way too 1995.

Should all movie genres get the Nolan treatment--bring them up to date with 2013? This isn't the '90s anymore, you can't go in to the movies expecting to have fun. We need realism, damn it, because these are realistic, gritty times.

I'm surprised you don't like Batman Begins, seeing as battling with scarecrows and other straw men seems to be your field.

Find me a serious - or, heck, halfway past frivolous - argument for Nolan's approach being appropriate to anything beyond superheroes, other established recurring characters, or neo-noir stories, and maybe there's something to be discussed here.

Raiders90 · Jul 18, 2013

Montana Smith said:
Despite your sarcasm you obviously have a high opinion of Nolan and the power he wields over contemporary society.

Should EVERY movie be done in a Chris Nolan style?

Maybe that's something you should bring up with your psychologist?

Did the scary clown give you nightmares again?

I'm sorry if I offended one of his cultists. And yes, Nolan's "fans" are a cult. On par with Juggalos in my book.

I just want to see if Nolan is capable of actually doing a fun movie that isn't depressing, overly dark and psychological and pretentious. I really don't think eh has it in him to be more then a depressed teenager.

Montana Smith · Jul 18, 2013

Raiders112390 said:
I'm sorry if I offended one of his cultists. And yes, Nolan's "fans" are a cult. On par with Juggalos in my book.

I'm not offended. And neither am I a "cultist" of Nolan any more than of Indiana Jones, Star Wars, Family Guy or many other series that come and go through my mind at any one time.

You don't think a large number of members here aren't Indy cultists?

You obviously have an issue deeper than simple Nolan hate. If you think his Batman films are "realistic" you really do need to see a shrink!

Raiders112390 said:
I really don't think eh has it in him to be more then a depressed teenager.

Looking through the list of 279 threads you've created I expect the two of you would get on just fine together.

Forbidden Eye · Jul 18, 2013

The fact one should ask if "EVERY movie" should be done in one particular way shows the sad state that film is currently in.

Montana Smith · Jul 18, 2013

Hmm, I wonder if Nolan would have been a better director for The Last Crusade.

Raiders112390 said:
LC--Better without the humor?

Do you think LC would've been better if it took the more serious route of ROTLA?Not saying it should've been more wordy or less action--I love the rollercoaster ride of ToD, it's my favorite in the series--But instead of going in the UTTERLY OPPOSITE direction of ToD, they should've taken the best elements from both films. The concept of the Grail is a really intriguing,fascinating one, and the Grail should've been handled with as much mystique and reverence as the Ark as. It's almost treated as a sideshow to the relationship between Indy and Henry--Whereas Raiders is structured all around this mysterious, almost all powerful, eerie sort of unearthly Ark.

I just look at Henry's character from the YIJC--A wise Victorian scholar who isn't TOO uptight--and feel for example that they should've gone in that direction with Henry's character. Connery plays him in some ways a little too comedic. A bit of humor is fine but I'd have loved a Richard Burton meets Sean Connery type of portrayal.

And what happened to Marcus was horrid. Sallah it was tolerable because Sallah was a bit of a lovable oaf even in Raiders. But Marcus' character was needlessly reduced and really, what role did he play? His character got the same treatment Marion's got in KOTCS.

I'm not saying LC is a bad film. In it's own way, it's a classic. But it could've been even better IMO.

Stoo · Jul 19, 2013

Raiders112390 said:
I just want to see if Nolan is capable of actually doing a fun movie that isn't depressing, overly dark and psychological and pretentious. I really don't think eh has it in him to be more then a depressed teenager.

Honestly now, why do you care?

Attila the Professor said:
I'm surprised you don't like Batman Begins, seeing as battling with scarecrows and other straw men seems to be your field.

The Wit & Wisdom of Attila the Professor. (Now playing at a theatre near you.)

Montana Smiff said:
Looking through the list of 279 threads you've created I expect the two of you would get on just fine together.

Don't forget that the number is actually more than 279 because some of his threads have been merged into others (which were often his own pre-existing topics).

Montana Smiff said:
Hmm, I wonder if Nolan would have been a better director for The Last Crusade.

There are also these conflicting testaments from: Raiders vs. its sequels and prequel

Raiders112390 said:
I love ToD, LC and KOTCS--All for different reasons mind you--But I kind of miss the serious, mystical, mysterious tone in the sequels and prequel. I can't explain it, but the movie has a certain atmosphere to it that the others lack. I think it's that the sequels become increasingly humorous and in LC Indy becomes this larger than life figure rather than mysterious, dry humored and cynical guy...

I just think that there's a certain innate greatness in Raiders, an inexplainable atmosphere which makes it quite different from the others, especially LC and KOTCS. Temple has that similar sort of raw, mythical greatness about it, and had it not had so humorous a first half it'd probably equal with Raiders.
---
Sometimes Temple and Raider switch and Temple is number one--They are literally neck and neck in quality in my opinion, and in terms of Indy. Indy is at his most awesome, mysterious and most bada** in these two.
---
Yeah, I don't like the "kinder, gentler" Indy of LC and KOTCS as much as I do the Indy of ToD and Raiders. I understand part of Indy being a good guy in LC is that he's around his father, but still...Don't get me wrong, LC is great, but I just prefer the darker take on Indy's character of the first two. And I do think LC too often drifts into the area of comedy as does KOTCS. I like the serious tone of Raiders and the epic, almost horror feel of the second half of ToD.

I hope they return to the anti-hero Indy if there is an Indy V. We need to have that angry, mercenary anti-hero back.

It must be asked, Raiders112390: Do you like a "serious" & "darker take" in films...or not?

Finn · Jul 19, 2013

Hormonal mood swings. Prevalent in teenagers.

It'll get better.

LegendaryMan · Sep 19, 2013

No on all films being done Nolan style

Sorry to disappoint but not all movies are gonna keep going with Nolan's ways because that would spoil the fun and ruin the glory like it did to Iron Man 3

Pale Horse · Sep 19, 2013

You know I hate to add fuel to the fire, even when I play devil's advocate, but today is TLAPD, so I must offer up...

Attila the Professor said:
Find me a serious - or, heck, halfway past frivolous - argument for Nolan's approach being appropriate to anything beyond superheroes, other established recurring characters, or neo-noir stories, and maybe there's something to be discussed here.

...it worked well for Memento and Insomnia both of which were neither super-hero, nor noir styled films. But to fully flesh that out would something I'd suggest for this thread.

Attila the Professor · Sep 19, 2013

Pale Horse said:
You know I hate to add fuel to the fire, even when I play devil's advocate, but today is TLAPD, so I must offer up...

...it worked well for Memento and Insomnia both of which were neither super-hero, nor noir styled films. But to fully flesh that out would something I'd suggest for this thread.

I haven't seen <I>Insomnia</I> yet, but honestly, Memento is the movie that most clarified for me Nolan's preoccupations with film noir. You have shadowy black-and-white sequences, flashbacks, no less. You have a protagonist haunted by a past he can't make sense of, and which he narrates in voiceover. The protagonist doesn't know who to trust, being confronted with a classically manipulative femme fatale (originally positioned as an ally) and a crooked cop. Oh, and he was [SPOILER ALERT] inadvertently responsible for the death of his wife.

The Nolan films I've seen - the Batmans, Inception, Memento, and Following - treat the city (or its outskirts, as in Memento) as a literal or near-literal labyrinth to be traversed, a locale in which the lead character can play out his obsessions, be they twisted, noble, or both. Corruption is endemic in all levels of society and his "heroes" participate in it in order to achieve their goals. I also don't think it would wrong to read his films' relative lack of humor as aimed towards maintaining a certain grimly cynical tone about human nature that could have its roots in a reading of noir.

Montana Smith · Sep 19, 2013

Attila the Professor said:
The Nolan films I've seen - the Batmans, Inception, Memento, and Following - treat the city (or its outskirts, as in Memento) as a literal or near-literal labyrinth to be traversed, a locale in which the lead character can play out his obsessions, be they twisted, noble, or both. Corruption is endemic in all levels of society and his "heroes" participate in it in order to achieve their goals. I also don't think it would wrong to read his films' relative lack of humor as aimed towards maintaining a certain grimly cynical tone about human nature that could have its roots in a reading of noir.

I like this reading a lot.

Can see it working on a mythical level, especially through the Dark Knight trilogy.

The Minoan labyrinth contained the abomination that was the minotaur, to whom a proportion of youth of the city were regularly sacrificed. Without guidance (Ariadne and the thread) it would be easy to become lost and fall to the beast.

Nolan's Gotham is a labyrinth populated by insane monsters and ruthless criminals, threatening to corrupt the youth in a never-ending cycle. The Dark Knight, taking the law into his own hands with the guidance of Alfred, enters the maze, into which he might easily be lost, corrupted or killed. He's always a thread away from falling and becoming another of the monsters (whom others seek to emulate).

The fallen Batman would resemble Bane. The educated, well-spoken man with a noble cause, who's cynicism for human improvement has sunk to the level where the only hope is to wipe the whole slate clean.

If humour must be shed from this world, it's because Nolan is striking out the lampooned Batman of 1960s and 1990s television and film, and reaching back to the comics of the mid-1980s when the character became more serious. (Though the work to recover Batman from camp was begun in the comics in 1969).

The noir suits that character perfectly. Dark, brooding, hiding in the shadows until ready to strike. Anything less than this and the work of recovery is destroyed, and we're back to Adam West joyously playing the ham.

kongisking · Sep 20, 2013

Montana Smith said:
I like this reading a lot.

Can see it working on a mythical level, especially through the Dark Knight trilogy.

The Minoan labyrinth contained the abomination that was the minotaur, to whom a proportion of youth of the city were regularly sacrificed. Without guidance (Ariadne and the thread) it would be easy to become lost and fall to the beast.

Nolan's Gotham is a labyrinth populated by insane monsters and ruthless criminals, threatening to corrupt the youth in a never-ending cycle. The Dark Knight, taking the law into his own hands with the guidance of Alfred, enters the maze, into which he might easily be lost, corrupted or killed. He's always a thread away from falling and becoming another of the monsters (whom others seek to emulate).

The fallen Batman would resemble Bane. The educated, well-spoken man with a noble cause, who's cynicism for human improvement has sunk to the level where the only hope is to wipe the whole slate clean.

If humour must be shed from this world, it's because Nolan is striking out the lampooned Batman of 1960s and 1990s television and film, and reaching back to the comics of the mid-1980s when the character became more serious. (Though the work to recover Batman from camp was begun in the comics in 1969).

The noir suits that character perfectly. Dark, brooding, hiding in the shadows until ready to strike. Anything less than this and the work of recovery is destroyed, and we're back to Adam West joyously playing the ham.

Agree wholeheartedly. I've been saying for some time that the Dark Knight trilogy feels like Nolan's attempt to create a modern heroic myth. Here's a lovely article that goes into more detail about how well he succeeded at this:

http://www.ign.com/articles/2012/07/28/hero-worship-why-nolans-batman-is-the-king-of-movie-superheroes

Pale Horse · Sep 20, 2013

Attila the Professor said:
I haven't seen <I>Insomnia</I> yet, but honestly, Memento is the movie that most clarified for me Nolan's preoccupations with film noir. You have shadowy black-and-white sequences, flashbacks, no less. You have a protagonist haunted by a past he can't make sense of, and which he narrates in voiceover. The protagonist doesn't know who to trust, being confronted with a classically manipulative femme fatale (originally positioned as an ally) and a crooked cop. Oh, and he was [SPOILER ALERT] inadvertently responsible for the death of his wife.

The Nolan films I've seen - the Batmans, Inception, Memento, and Following - treat the city (or its outskirts, as in Memento) as a literal or near-literal labyrinth to be traversed, a locale in which the lead character can play out his obsessions, be they twisted, noble, or both. Corruption is endemic in all levels of society and his "heroes" participate in it in order to achieve their goals. I also don't think it would wrong to read his films' relative lack of humor as aimed towards maintaining a certain grimly cynical tone about human nature that could have its roots in a reading of noir.

Well, when you put it that way. :hat:

kongisking · Sep 26, 2013

LegendaryMan said:
Sorry to disappoint but not all movies are gonna keep going with Nolan's ways because that would spoil the fun and ruin the glory like it did to Iron Man 3

What? I thought one of the big criticisms of IM3 was the supposed non-stop tongue-in-cheek attitude (which, by the way, I think is a ludicrous accusation).

Has it really come to this, where even the slightest presence of seriousness or high stakes is considered melodramatic and pretentious? What do you people want out of superhero movies, then? Endless comedy with not an ounce of legitimate drama?

I bet if Raiders came out nowadays, the Internet roaches would pan it for "taking pulp serial adventure tales too seriously" because that genre isn't meant to strive for believability or real drama--"they're just Saturday matinee time-wasters, after all!"

Gekkos Big Baws · Oct 1, 2013

Nolan

Why...

...so serious?

Spurlock · Oct 1, 2013

I like his style, giving the heroes something to truly fight for and believe in. If you want humor, see a comedy instead. But if you really want to care about a character's struggles and conflicts, Nolan has you covered. His next film Interstellar will be test where he's willing to go; going into a science fiction setting with Matthew Macconaughey as a lead, we'll get to see his style grow even more.

I think humor isn't necessary for all films, but it does add a nice break among bleak consequences. I wouldn't say Nolan's style is the best, but it does provide some more adult issues among movies like IM3, which I felt was near campy and IMO didn't like it.

I think you can see a good balance between Nolanesque films and regular films in this years Star Trek Into Darkness, where it had very serious issues of terrorism and ethics, but managed to not take them too seriously with the characters adding light to it.

kongisking · Oct 1, 2013

Spurlock said:
I like his style, giving the heroes something to truly fight for and believe in. If you want humor, see a comedy instead. But if you really want to care about a character's struggles and conflicts, Nolan has you covered. His next film Interstellar will be test where he's willing to go; going into a science fiction setting with Matthew Macconaughey as a lead, we'll get to see his style grow even more.

I think humor isn't necessary for all films, but it does add a nice break among bleak consequences. I wouldn't say Nolan's style is the best, but it does provide some more adult issues among movies like IM3, which I felt was near campy and IMO didn't like it.

I think you can see a good balance between Nolanesque films and regular films in this years Star Trek Into Darkness, where it had very serious issues of terrorism and ethics, but managed to not take them too seriously with the characters adding light to it.

Careful, Spurlock. It's taboo in fandom to like Abrams' Trek films.

I kid. I agree with you.

Spurlock · Oct 1, 2013

Oh come on, Abrams has, in my opinion, done a great job at modernizing the franchise. And nothing can be worse than anything after and including A Voyage Home.

But back on topic, if Star Trek isn't your thing, I'd consider Skyfall. With almost no humor and well done characters, it could be considered the Nolanesque version of Bond. Not to mention that the movie was a huge success, critically and financially, bringing in over a billion dollars and an Oscar or two (I think?). With a well acted, intriguing and devious villain, it could be argued that Silva was Bond's Ledger's Joker. Showing that a franchise that used be not be taken very seriously can, through "Nolan, can reinvent itself.

Should EVERY movie be done in a Chris Nolan style?

Well-known member

Active member

Moderator

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

Moderator

New member

Moderator

Moderator

Active member

Active member

Moderator

Active member

Guest

New member

Active member

New member