Vader182 wrote: ↑

January 2nd, 2019, 2:10 am

i love Interstellar (I called it a masterpiece on first viewing), but it's undeniably a bullishly erratic movie in tone, pace and style so I can hardly fault critics, who tend to look for formal skill and control before anything else.

But if it makes you feel better, a bunch of major critics have warmed to Interstellar since release and it still has an 8.6 on IMDB.

i think dunkirk's going to be remembered as his magnum opus in the future though (barring any subsequent such films)


-Vader

dafox wrote: ↑

January 2nd, 2019, 1:16 am

I thought that Interstellar over Dunkirk would be controversial given the critical reactions to both films. Dunkirk was best picture worthy, its just not as good as most of Nolan's filmography and sadly I think critical opinion has had too much of an influence on all of us. According to the academy Spellbound was one of Hitchcock's best films, which is a laughable idea that can be best explained by the academy's desperate need to be seen as the true film connoisseurs. Only a true intellectual wannabe could be dazzled by the cringe inducing "intellectual" masturbation of that movie. They're too stuck up, insecure and shallow to give TDK, TDKR, and Interstellar the acclaim that they deserved.

dafox wrote: ↑

January 2nd, 2019, 2:26 am

Vader182 wrote: ↑

January 2nd, 2019, 2:10 am

i love Interstellar (I called it a masterpiece on first viewing), but it's undeniably a bullishly erratic movie in tone, pace and style so I can hardly fault critics, who tend to look for formal skill and control before anything else.

But if it makes you feel better, a bunch of major critics have warmed to Interstellar since release and it still has an 8.6 on IMDB.

i think dunkirk's going to be remembered as his magnum opus in the future though (barring any subsequent such films)


-Vader

It’s easily his most sentimental film so maybe that’s what he was going for in terms of tone. It worked for me and I think Nolan has demonstrated time and again that he can meet those standards of control, whatever that means, so he has earned the right and space to be unconventional. No current filmmaker comes close to Nolan when it comes to pushing boundaries and in order to do that he has to make some minor stretches like Gotham only having a few thousand police officers so that the finale can have a plausible looking battle rather than not having a battle at all. These little logical sacrifices are worth the payoff.

ArmandFancypants wrote: ↑

January 2nd, 2019, 4:11 am

dafox wrote: ↑

January 2nd, 2019, 1:16 am

I thought that Interstellar over Dunkirk would be controversial given the critical reactions to both films. Dunkirk was best picture worthy, its just not as good as most of Nolan's filmography and sadly I think critical opinion has had too much of an influence on all of us. According to the academy Spellbound was one of Hitchcock's best films, which is a laughable idea that can be best explained by the academy's desperate need to be seen as the true film connoisseurs. Only a true intellectual wannabe could be dazzled by the cringe inducing "intellectual" masturbation of that movie. They're too stuck up, insecure and shallow to give TDK, TDKR, and Interstellar the acclaim that they deserved.

The Academy is about how it wants to represent the industry, hence Spellbounds nomination haul (in a weak year) as Hitch's stateside capital had grown significantly, and it would be seen as a progressive film at the time.

dafox wrote: ↑

January 2nd, 2019, 5:09 am

Wanting to represent the industry a certain way isn't incompatible with the cultural preening that I've accused them of. They wanted to show that film has caught up with the cocktail party/parlor game fad that was the naive psychoanalysis portrayed in the film. Its a curious kind of progressivism since a bunch of well to do people trying to impress their peers with overly fancy but equally false/ridiculous interpretations of social events wasn't anything new even back then. Tolstoy makes fun of this aristocratic/connoisseur cliche in the opening ball of War and Peace. Rewarding social capital has nothing to do with/runs counter to merit and its the reason why filmmakers like Nolan and Kubrick are never rewarded for their trailblazing.