The Man is writting

DoubleD wrote: ↑

July 8th, 2021, 4:14 pm

Insomniac wrote: ↑

July 7th, 2021, 11:25 am

Writer's beard or retirement beard?

Or just a beard...beard.

Lol @Hustler.

But yeah, the man-God is DEFINITELY writing.

We have absolutely no idea what it will be but I already know it will be amazing.

We're getting to a point where Nolan is becoming more and more experimental, creative and meta, in a sense (Tenet is much closer to Dunkirk than Inception when you look at it), and he's always pushing his boundaries further and further, taking a genre and removing all of his usual conceptions, preconceived notions, and narrative modes, his films in a sense no longer have a story, and are reduced to the state of concept films, screen films. The genre is stripped in a sense with Nolan (especially from Dunkirk onwards that he is like that).

I have to see it again but Tenet is surely one of his greatest films, he radicalizes absolutely everything and pushes everything to the extreme(and you see how important the music is part of the essence of his cinema) (those who say that we don't understand anything in Tenet haven't understood the film, the film has to be read elsewhere, there is no story in Tenet, I don't know if I'm making myself understood), so yes it divides but it's a sign of a total bias and of a huge risk-taking, the mark of the great ones and the artistic/creative minds.

This man is so precious and brings so much to the cinema, sometimes I have the impression that people don't realize it.
One of the most creative filmmakers in Hollywood and cinema today, I'm not afraid to say.

Sorry for this long intervention and sorry for the english, I don't know if it's welcomed here but I wanted to reaffirm my admiration for this man.

Nolan62 wrote: ↑

July 14th, 2021, 5:17 pm

We have absolutely no idea what it will be but I already know it will be amazing.

We're getting to a point where Nolan is becoming more and more experimental, creative and meta, in a sense (Tenet is much closer to Dunkirk than Inception when you look at it), and he's always pushing his boundaries further and further, taking a genre and removing all of his usual conceptions, preconceived notions, and narrative modes, his films in a sense no longer have a story, and are reduced to the state of concept films, screen films. The genre is stripped in a sense with Nolan (especially from Dunkirk onwards that he is like that).

Sounds as if you're saying that Nolan is becoming like Jean-Luc Godard.

I will not dare to make a comparison with Jean-Luc Godard, here I am talking strictly about Nolan, his cinema, his craft.
Godard is one of the greatest filmmakers in the history of cinema, but if we were to allow ourselves this comparison (once again, I don't think it should be made), in the sense that Nolan now lets a little essayist side show through in his cinema.

But again I don't make any comparison, Godard is one of the greatest authors and artists and has brought a lot to the cinema (and humbly I still have a lot to discover about him), his art is completely opposite to a filmmaker who is immersed in Hollywood and in the field that is a bit more mainstream.

So I would not dare to make this kind of comparison, I remain without comparison to say that Nolan, in his field and in the cinematography that he represents (American cinema) is a great representative and one of the most valuable artists today, and one of the greateast filmmakers alive.

But yes, Nolan also questions and thwarts the narrative and cinematographic rules, asks himself questions about cinema (as Godard can do) but Nolan does it in his own way.

Godard is a filmmaker with a different history, representative of another cinema and we are talking about a filmmaker who has been working for much longer and who has left a much greater weight and legacy than Nolan (who is still a very young filmmaker).

We're talking about two great and different artists, in my opinion. Each artist has his essence, his specificities

But Godard has changed cinema so he remains an inspiration and an example for all these filmmakers today.

I understand what you're saying, but I don't want to compare Nolan to Godard.

I hope I'm not doing it by saying this, I'm just expressing how incredible I think Nolan is, but yes in a way Nolan's last two films are much less meanstream than Inception for example or even Interstellar recently, in a sense that it leans much more towards the exercise of style and towards lessons of cinematographic language.
So yes, if we try for a moment to make this comparison, Nolan has a little more of a Godard side to him, but once again, it's totally two different types of cinema, here we're only talking about the approach and the maneuver with which he approaches his cinema. They are two filmmakers with two completely different wills and intentions of cinema, and who do not work in the same period nor the same rhythm.

Sorry if this is too long, and I don't know if I can discuss of that in this thread in particular.

Nolan62 wrote: ↑

July 14th, 2021, 5:17 pm

We have absolutely no idea what it will be but I already know it will be amazing.

We're getting to a point where Nolan is becoming more and more experimental, creative and meta, in a sense (Tenet is much closer to Dunkirk than Inception when you look at it), and he's always pushing his boundaries further and further, taking a genre and removing all of his usual conceptions, preconceived notions, and narrative modes, his films in a sense no longer have a story, and are reduced to the state of concept films, screen films. The genre is stripped in a sense with Nolan (especially from Dunkirk onwards that he is like that).

I have to see it again but Tenet is surely one of his greatest films, he radicalizes absolutely everything and pushes everything to the extreme(and you see how important the music is part of the essence of his cinema) (those who say that we don't understand anything in Tenet haven't understood the film, the film has to be read elsewhere, there is no story in Tenet, I don't know if I'm making myself understood), so yes it divides but it's a sign of a total bias and of a huge risk-taking, the mark of the great ones and the artistic/creative minds.

This man is so precious and brings so much to the cinema, sometimes I have the impression that people don't realize it.
One of the most creative filmmakers in Hollywood and cinema today, I'm not afraid to say.

Sorry for this long intervention and sorry for the english, I don't know if it's welcomed here but I wanted to reaffirm my admiration for this man.

well said

Nolan62 wrote: ↑

July 14th, 2021, 5:17 pm

We're getting to a point where Nolan is becoming more and more experimental, creative and meta, in a sense (Tenet is much closer to Dunkirk than Inception when you look at it), and he's always pushing his boundaries further and further, taking a genre and removing all of his usual conceptions, preconceived notions, and narrative modes, his films in a sense no longer have a story, and are reduced to the state of concept films, screen films. The genre is stripped in a sense with Nolan (especially from Dunkirk onwards that he is like that).

Respect.

I agree on different parts with you; however, I don't with others because I think, for example, that his movies haven't become mainly "concept films". There is story and a personal touch in Tenet, if you ask me, just not in a conventional sense in terms of the mixture of genres for such a type of film. I mean, Protagonist and Neil's relationship isn’t very fleshed out throughout the movie but later we find out they have known each other for a very long time in a very short period of time as if this realization is trying to give their friendship a deeper ambiguos beginning and ending at the same time (even though it has already begun in a way) like happening in the background, which can make you wonder about it if you are willing that is. Neil meets Protagonist again and for the last time, and Protagonist meets Neil for the first time and last time even if it isn’t really the last time either. Their friendship is twisted and tragic in that regard but also perhaps kind of engaging, profound and meditative in the sense of what they might have gone through together due to inversion even if we can only imagine it.

I believe Tenet has a sort of philosophical approach throughout. Maybe it's not as emotionally impactful like Inception or Interstellar but I feel that's good since it can be its own piece of work with a certain essence instead of trying to be like inception or his other works all the way through.

Paradoxicalparabola wrote: ↑

July 16th, 2021, 11:33 pm

Nolan62 wrote: ↑

July 14th, 2021, 5:17 pm

We're getting to a point where Nolan is becoming more and more experimental, creative and meta, in a sense (Tenet is much closer to Dunkirk than Inception when you look at it), and he's always pushing his boundaries further and further, taking a genre and removing all of his usual conceptions, preconceived notions, and narrative modes, his films in a sense no longer have a story, and are reduced to the state of concept films, screen films. The genre is stripped in a sense with Nolan (especially from Dunkirk onwards that he is like that).

Respect.

I agree on different parts with you; however, I don't with others because I think, for example, that his movies haven't become mainly "concept films". There is story and a personal touch in Tenet, if you ask me, just not in a conventional sense in terms of the mixture of genres for such a type of film. I mean, Protagonist and Neil's relationship isn’t very fleshed out throughout the movie but later we find out they have known each other for a very long time in a very short period of time as if this realization is trying to give their friendship a deeper ambiguos beginning and ending at the same time (even though it has already begun in a way) like happening in the background, which can make you wonder about it if you are willing that is. Neil meets Protagonist again and for the last time, and Protagonist meets Neil for the first time and last time even if it isn’t really the last time either. Their friendship is twisted and tragic in that regard but also perhaps kind of engaging, profound and meditative in the sense of what they might have gone through together due to inversion even if we can only imagine it.

I believe Tenet has a sort of philosophical approach throughout. Maybe it's not as emotionally impactful like Inception or Interstellar but I feel that's good since it can be its own piece of work with a certain essence instead of trying to be like inception or his other works all the way through.

Thanks man!

And yes, in a way you're right too, because I think and I'm probably going to use strong words but I think they're true, Nolan is a bit of an "essayist of blockbusters" so he deconstructs, transgresses rules, narrative and aesthetic codes specific to a type of cinema, to a cinematography that is that of the "blockbuster", of the epic and adventurous big-budget film, or at least of the film "that has an impact because the whole essence of this type of cinema is embodied in gigantism, in the grandiose, in impact".

Nolan defends, has always defended and will always carry his love for a type of cinema, that of the great cinema of escape (useless here to re-specify what are his cinematographic affinities, the filmmakers and the films that have inspired him), so yes, films with stories of great emotional scope, great canvases (and once again the essence of Nolan's cinema is seized and embodied through this great material surface that is the cinema screen, That's why I speak of screen films, the power of his cinema is to seize the immense scope of a cinema screen to be able to inscribe, to insufflate in it a fully immersive cinema and a material scope), I don't know if I'm expressing myself very clearly here, I don't think so but I hope to make myself understood^^. (That's why Nolan, it's never big camera movements, it's mostly to put the camera (IMAX most of the time) to take the cinema screen and put one and then, then it's the music and the editing that make its essence, its strength, but it's in no way to mask a weakness of direction or showmanship as I could read it on the right and on the left.
That's why Nolan likes film and IMAX so much, they are purely artistic choices, which fully illustrate what Nolan tends to do.

So it's escapist cinema, adventure cinema, they rehabilitate a genre that is lost today more and more in Hollywood (Villeneuve or Chazelle can still make, not without difficulties this kind of cinema, and again not for nothing that they feel an admiration for Nolan, it's a model Nolan, an inspiration for those who want to show a cinema both great and artistic, cinema such as it was done in Hollywood at the time).

So yes, there is still a core story, a story I agree with you.
But there is a difference in his cinema that is more and more visible and I'm not afraid to say that Nolan has, I think, fully found his form from Dunkirk (and that he continues now with Tenet).
It's that he experiments, plays and deconstructs the codes of this kind of cinema, when you look at Inception, the DK trilogy or even Interstellar recently, you still feel that there is a story, an emotional heart much more present (Cooper's or Cobb's story just that, or Bruce's story), mixed with the complexity, the conceptual character of his cinema, but I feel that Nolan mixed at the time both the purity of this kind of adventure film, of blockbusters with this meta character and this will to make concept films. But Nolan juggled between the two, a story, a certain linearity proper to this kind of cinema, with a penchant for script experimentation etc. ...
He didn't know on which foot to dance, and here I feel and have the firm conviction that Nolan has chosen his side, he has made a choice, he has decided to abandon the simpler and purer side of adventure films or big "blockbusters" in order to fully embrace his own style, to fully let stand out his meta, experimental side (as could be found in Memento for example), to bring out a cinema that precisely questions, puts into play the specificities of this kind of cinema, Nolan no longer hides in a sense, he fully assumes the conceptualizing, abstract character in a sense, of his cinema (in Tenet it is the complexity for the complexity, it is what makes the strength of this film, it is a game that he undertakes with us, must feel not understand says the character of Poesy, is to accept to lose himself and make the experience
of this film where you get lost).

Anyway, I could talk about it for hours if I don't stop^^, but yes you are right there is still a story at Nolan, because Nolan questions a genre, makes films that ask questions of cinema and on a specific genre, that of the great blockbuster, of the adventurous film and all the genres that he embodies, so the film of espionage with Tenet, but without being in the final one, the war movie but not one etc....)

So there's a real emotional core to it, and in a sense that's what makes his last two movies probably his most beautiful, and his most real, whether it's in the film message they're exhibiting or the themes they're occupying.

Now, I don't know if it's very clear, it's probably too long, but there's so much to say about this filmmaker. It's purely my opinion, I don't know if it's clearly expressed, it's always complicated to talk about something you love a lot, emotion takes over and it's sometimes imprecise, but that's how I see his cinema today.

And that's why it's amazing, the further he goes and the more he goes in this direction, one day we will have his "masterpiece", it hasn't happened yet, I think, because always comes a time when the work of an artist, of a filmmaker attains a wisdom, a grace and a form of maturity, and the day it arrives for Nolan, it will be strong.

And you're right, they're not fully concept films yet, but he's moving more and more towards that, he's getting closer and closer, I said, his masterpiece his great film doesn't yet exist, it's still a form, a style he's working on, he's looking for, so it's still fragile, but every film he tends and wants to get closer to a form, its form, he has found its form, for the moment it is a little in its embryonic stage and it will continue to question it, to work it, to deepen it.

Personally I am one of the rare fans on this forum who was really disappointed with Tenet. I think Chris has reached his limits with the Sci-fi genre. For his next I would love an other historical movie like Dunkirk (but maybe not taking place during WW1 or WW2, let's see some events not seen before on the big screen) or something entirely new