Nolan Fans

willyjoel wrote:

aTbagger wrote:I'm gonna say something here and I might get flamed for being a fanboy but seriously I do not understand how the social network is in any way better than Inception especially in directing. It is a decent movie but nothing too spectacular, it's basically only good because it's about Facebook and its creation, that's it, I don't think that movie would have been considered that good if it was about anything else than Facebook even with the same story. And this is not just about mainstream viewers I just don't understand why it's being considered as the best movie of the year when it had nothing new to offer, and being full of normal (didn't want to say mediocre since it's not bad). Can someone just explain to me how it can even compete with Inception in Directing or Best picture? Also what Sallygucha said is kind of part of my point here.

Well, to be fair, TSN got a fantastic script, full of memorable dialog and lines that could become part of movie history, seriously, but apart from that (and the fact that I really, really like Jesse Eisenberg), I don't see much, specially with Fincher, perhaps the fact that he is "due" somehow? or the way he directed his actors? but on that I'll put it in the same plane as Nolan and Aronofsky, not above them. But hey, it's just an awards show, its enterntainment, nothing else; this doesn't take anything from the magic of Inception and the immense, almost infinite talent and intellect of Mr. Nolan.

willyjoel wrote:But hey, it's just an awards show, its enterntainment, nothing else; this doesn't take anything from the magic of Inception and the immense, almost infinite talent and intellect of Mr. Nolan.

Dark enV wrote:

aTbagger wrote:I'm gonna say something here and I might get flamed for being a fanboy but seriously I do not understand how the social network is in any way better than Inception especially in directing. It is a decent movie but nothing too spectacular, it's basically only good because it's about Facebook and its creation, that's it, I don't think that movie would have been considered that good if it was about anything else than Facebook even with the same story. And this is not just about mainstream viewers I just don't understand why it's being considered as the best movie of the year when it had nothing new to offer, and being full of normal (didn't want to say mediocre since it's not bad). Can someone just explain to me how it can even compete with Inception in Directing or Best picture? Also what Sallygucha said is kind of part of my point here.

I disagree, most people didn't want to see the film because it was about Facebook, it was a fabulous and beautiful film, well written, acted, beautiful cinematography, and a great score. But as far as a director, Nolan is better, he did more than any of the other directors and pulled it off brilliantly. Notice his film is the one that made the most money out of all the others nominated because he can do something many directors can't do, he made a film that connects the bridge between filmmaking art and pure entertainment that critics and audiences all can enjoy, that's why he deserves to be known as best director.

sallygucha wrote:"Thank you to God... for making me an atheist." LOL! Ricky Gervais was the only reason to watch the Golden Globes.

sallygucha wrote:"Thank you to God... for making me an atheist." LOL! Ricky Gervais was the only reason to watch the Golden Globes.

movieman1005 wrote:

sallygucha wrote:"Thank you to God... for making me an atheist." LOL! Ricky Gervais was the only reason to watch the Golden Globes.

And notice how everyone was already leaving and no attention to him, too. Yet he was one of the more entertaining things of the night.