Christopher Nolan - Appreciation Thread

1424345474851

Comments

  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,025
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    Genuinely surprised you guys never heard about the new rules.It’s not a joke.

    I already knew about it. It doesn’t seem to be a major concern for OPPENHEIMER.
  • edited August 2023 Posts: 12,274
    As did I already know. It was the provocative nature of the specific comments that I was responding to with the gif. Not sure why it was necessary to use quotes around the term nonbinary especially.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,025
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Not sure why it was necessary to use quotes around the term nonbinary especially.

    Oh, I think I know why.
  • Posts: 1,394
    FoxRox wrote: »
    As did I already know. It was the provocative nature of the specific comments that I was responding to with the gif. Not sure why it was necessary to use quotes around the term nonbinary especially.

    The new rules are by their very nature provocative.That’s why I posted Richard Dreyfuss reaction video to these ridiculous rules.

  • Posts: 2,954
    Seano wrote: »
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    According to the academy’s new “ inclusion “ standards,Oppenheimer doesn’t qualify.

    That's not clear. Oppenheimer has to qualify on 2 of 4 categories: 1.) On-Screen Representation, 2.) Creative Leadership and Project Team, 3.) Industry Access and Opportunities or 4.) Audience Development.

    While Oppenheimer would seem not to qualify on #1, it certainly could qualify on the other three categories. I would assume that the studio and Nolan himself would be scrupulous about ensuring that the film would be eligible for Best Picture. Full details at:

    https://www.oscars.org/news/academy-establishes-representation-and-inclusion-standards-oscarsr-eligibility

    Would Oppenheimer not technically qualify under the very broad (and questionably effective even if you agree with such enforcement/standards) guidelines? It's not strictly speaking an all-white cast (you of course have Rami Malek in a pretty notable albeit small supporting role, and there's scatterings of actors credited and uncredited in much smaller roles who aren't white). From what I can tell really that's all you need, and a film like Oppenheimer is such an 'insider' Hollywood film anyway that it'd be unlikely they'd not let it get a nomination.
  • SeanoSeano Minnesota. No, it's not always cold.
    Posts: 41
    The point I was making above is that Oppenheimer doesn't even need to qualify based on the cast to be eligible if it qualifies in at least two of the three other categories, which are for the people who worked behind the scenes on the film. Given these rules were announced before Oppenheimer went into production, I'd be shocked if they didn't make sure it was compliant.
  • Posts: 1,525
    Aside from the dollar value an Oscar adds to a film and the boost to careers, are the Oscars relevant to audiences?
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,025
    AstonLotus wrote: »
    FoxRox wrote: »
    As did I already know. It was the provocative nature of the specific comments that I was responding to with the gif. Not sure why it was necessary to use quotes around the term nonbinary especially.

    The new rules are by their very nature provocative.That’s why I posted Richard Dreyfuss reaction video to these ridiculous rules.

    Dreyfuss is just an old man shaking his fist at the clouds. When he started complaining about not being able to perform in black face he lost.
  • peterpeter Toronto
    Posts: 8,548
    CrabKey wrote: »
    Aside from the dollar value an Oscar adds to a film and the boost to careers, are the Oscars relevant to audiences?

    If the shrinking viewership is anything to go by, it lost its value decades ago…
  • edited August 2023 Posts: 1,394
    peter wrote: »
    CrabKey wrote: »
    Aside from the dollar value an Oscar adds to a film and the boost to careers, are the Oscars relevant to audiences?

    If the shrinking viewership is anything to go by, it lost its value decades ago…

    Yep,it was always cringe to a certain extent but now it’s just a big virtue signaling circle jerk.The idea of regulating art to the extent that it has to have x amount of these people or x amount of those people is absolutely preposterous.

    I’d say the only reason people tuned in this year was to see if any other celebrity lost their rag and assault a comedian on stage.

  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,025
    The Academy’s biggest issue is actually being run by decrepit actors/producers in a bubble who lost touch with audiences.

    They need a big shakeup in a similar way they got back in 1970 when MIDNIGHT COWBOY won best picture and changed everyone’s idea of what an Oscar winning film can be. I’m hoping EVERYTHING EVERYWHERE ALL AT ONCE is that film, but we won’t know that until we start seeing the other winners down the line and if they just revert back to cliche Oscar bait films like THE GREEN BOOK.
  • Posts: 6,677
    If Oppenheimer wins best film, Nolan best director, Van Hoytema best cinematography, Goransson best soundtrack, Lame best editing, Mirojnick best costume, best sound, best visual effects,… I’ll be a happy cinephile!
  • Posts: 12,274
    Oscars don’t mean squat ultimately for judging quality - just a nice little extra / bonus type of deal for more good exposure for a movie.
  • Posts: 6,677
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Oscars don’t mean squat ultimately for judging quality - just a nice little extra / bonus type of deal for more good exposure for a movie.
    That’s true.
  • Posts: 1,394
    FoxRox wrote: »
    Oscars don’t mean squat ultimately for judging quality - just a nice little extra / bonus type of deal for more good exposure for a movie.

    This

  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,025
    Univex wrote: »
    If Oppenheimer wins best film, Nolan best director, Van Hoytema best cinematography, Goransson best soundtrack, Lame best editing, Mirojnick best costume, best sound, best visual effects,… I’ll be a happy cinephile!

    I’ll wait out the rest of the year for other flicks. Still got plenty coming down the line like KILLERS OF THE FLOWER MOON.
  • Posts: 6,677
    Univex wrote: »
    If Oppenheimer wins best film, Nolan best director, Van Hoytema best cinematography, Goransson best soundtrack, Lame best editing, Mirojnick best costume, best sound, best visual effects,… I’ll be a happy cinephile!

    I’ll wait out the rest of the year for other flicks. Still got plenty coming down the line like KILLERS OF THE FLOWER MOON.

    Oh, that’s right. Forgot about that one :)
  • FeyadorFeyador Montreal, Canada
    edited August 2023 Posts: 735
    Ah, yes ... the DWM (Dead White Men) problem.

    Gotta say I watched Oppenheimer with half an eye on how Nolan would handle this and I think he acquits himself well. It looks like he stuck pretty close to the historical record. And he didn't invent anyone of any great importance. But instead seems to have made an extra effort to populate many scenes featuring students, workers at Los Alamos, citizens in the streets of Berkeley (I think), etc. with women and visible minorities, even where such an effort does not necessarily reflect the social reality of the time.
  • Posts: 6,677
    I did notice that. Well done Mr. Nolan, I’d say. Netflix won’t hire him, though ;)
  • M_BaljeM_Balje Amsterdam, Netherlands
    Posts: 4,449
    Dutch Boxoffice: After 3 weaks Opperheimer did 11,5 million that be close to NTTD who did almoost 12,1 million. But after 4 weaks the movie did $14,459,741 and NTTD did $15,903,044. Barbie numbers for 4th weak not be confird yet, but with 12,326,318 movie did a litle bit better then NTTD did in 3 weaks.

    We wil see or movies wil cros around 24 million what NTTD did. Both Opperheimer be and NTTD be Universal movie's and there are known there give movie's time.
  • Posts: 727
    Imagine a bond movie scored by Ludwig Göransson.
  • LucknFateLucknFate 007 In New York
    edited August 2023 Posts: 1,434
    Imagine a bond movie scored by Ludwig Göransson.

    I'll be controversial and say that I don't want to. Bond has an established sound, and I don't trust most modern composers to understand that, as they clearly haven't since most of Skyfall on. Michael Giacchino or David Arnold are much more promising to my ears, doing new things WITH the Bond/genre sound, not new things in SPITE OF that sound, which I feel Goransson might just to be different.
  • CraigMooreOHMSSCraigMooreOHMSS Dublin, Ireland
    Posts: 8,040
    LucknFate wrote: »
    Imagine a bond movie scored by Ludwig Göransson.

    I'll be controversial and say that I don't want to. Bond has an established sound, and I don't trust most modern composers to understand that, as they clearly haven't since most of Skyfall on. Michael Giacchino or David Arnold are much more promising to my ears, doing new things WITH the Bond/genre sound, not new things in SPITE OF that sound, which I feel Goransson might just to be different.

    I'd agree based on his works with Nolan, however he did fantastic work on the Creed films; bridging the gap between Conti and the more hip-hop focus of those films. He absolutely could do it, if he had the same respect for Bond.
  • LucknFateLucknFate 007 In New York
    Posts: 1,434
    LucknFate wrote: »
    Imagine a bond movie scored by Ludwig Göransson.

    I'll be controversial and say that I don't want to. Bond has an established sound, and I don't trust most modern composers to understand that, as they clearly haven't since most of Skyfall on. Michael Giacchino or David Arnold are much more promising to my ears, doing new things WITH the Bond/genre sound, not new things in SPITE OF that sound, which I feel Goransson might just to be different.

    I'd agree based on his works with Nolan, however he did fantastic work on the Creed films; bridging the gap between Conti and the more hip-hop focus of those films. He absolutely could do it, if he had the same respect for Bond.

    I will admit the Rocky/Creed saga is a huge blind spot in my filmography I plan to remedy on a series of long-distance flights one day.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,025
    David Arnold already did five scores. Let’s keep looking for new blood. No reason to look backwards. I’d love to hear Ludwig Göransson‘s take on a Bond score.
  • LucknFateLucknFate 007 In New York
    edited August 2023 Posts: 1,434
    David Arnold already did five scores. Let’s keep looking for new blood. No reason to look backwards. I’d love to hear Ludwig Göransson‘s take on a Bond score.

    There's very good reason to look back at what works for an action film and what does not. Bond is built on many people's legacies, it (used to) rarely only offer a person one gig: it often finds a talented craftsperson and keeps them. It is what it is and shouldn't change too much. The Skyfall, Spectre, NTTD scores just simply are not effective in any way. We tried the "new" approach and it sucks for action.

    Look at Zimmer. We got a rehashed, low-key version of his typical schtick with a touch of the age-old Bond theme. Nothing even "new" there. You know who is more capable of reinventing themselves? Someone tasked in the same role challenged to offer something different each time, where they can grow with the franchise.

    Bonds in trouble! It should sound exciting! Not like a biopic.

    For reference: I just saw CR in a full theater. Unforgettable sound, and it's Arnold challenging himself with reinvention. Just excellent all around. Something interesting that adds inherent value to the full picture, not a simple supplement like we've been getting.
  • MakeshiftPythonMakeshiftPython “Baja?!”
    Posts: 8,025
    Nah, Arnold’s score is what kept CR from being better. He should have been left behind like Vic Armstrong and other Brosnan era elements. My least favorite part of his score is when Bond realizes Vesper’s treachery and Arnold decides to score Bond’s search for her with pounding music. It’s so goddamn over the top and ridiculous that it takes me out of the moment. That said, Arnold adapted better with QOS. In fact, that really ought to be the high note he leaves this franchise.

    But I’ve already spoken about how I thought Newman was a big step up. I remember the feeling of escalation in the music with the pre-titles of SF that felt reinvigorating for the series. It really enhanced the film in a way no score had since a long time.

    And I do think they should keep a revolving door of composers because theres so much talent out there that shouldn't be neglected in favor of one guy. Alberto Iglesias would actually be my pick.
  • LucknFateLucknFate 007 In New York
    edited August 2023 Posts: 1,434
    Nah, Arnold’s score is what kept CR from being better. He should have been left behind like Vic Armstrong and other Brosnan era elements. My least favorite part of his score is when Bond realizes Vesper’s treachery and Arnold decides to score Bond’s search for her with pounding music. It’s so goddamn over the top and ridiculous that it takes me out of the moment. That said, Arnold adapted better with QOS. In fact, that really ought to be the high note he leaves this franchise.

    But I’ve already spoken about how I thought Newman was a big step up. I remember the feeling of escalation in the music with the pre-titles of SF that felt reinvigorating for the series. It really enhanced the film in a way no score had since a long time.

    And I do think they should keep a revolving door of composers because theres so much talent out there that shouldn't be neglected in favor of one guy. Alberto Iglesias would actually be my pick.

    I agree the PTS of Skyfall is its score's highlight (for me) but it isn't revolutionary (to me). Agree to disagree on CR. At this point, I'm not necessarily saying we have to go back to Arnold, or rip from the genre's competition (Giacchino), but I do want them to be sure-footed for the next choice and offer something cohesive and invigorating for a least a couple of movies.

    Edit:



    I really enjoyed this! Iglesias would be welcome.
  • MaxCasinoMaxCasino United States
    Posts: 4,121
    David Arnold already did five scores. Let’s keep looking for new blood. No reason to look backwards. I’d love to hear Ludwig Göransson‘s take on a Bond score.

    Ditto with the writing. Give Purvis and Wade and Oscar, artsy writers a break.
  • Posts: 3,279
    Nah, Arnold’s score is what kept CR from being better. He should have been left behind like Vic Armstrong and other Brosnan era elements. My least favorite part of his score is when Bond realizes Vesper’s treachery and Arnold decides to score Bond’s search for her with pounding music. It’s so goddamn over the top and ridiculous that it takes me out of the moment. That said, Arnold adapted better with QOS. In fact, that really ought to be the high note he leaves this franchise.

    But I’ve already spoken about how I thought Newman was a big step up. I remember the feeling of escalation in the music with the pre-titles of SF that felt reinvigorating for the series. It really enhanced the film in a way no score had since a long time.

    And I do think they should keep a revolving door of composers because theres so much talent out there that shouldn't be neglected in favor of one guy. Alberto Iglesias would actually be my pick.

    To me Arnold was one of the best things about CR and QoS, and Newman one of the worst things about SF and SP.

    If Arnold didn't return, I'd be happy with Justin Hurwitz. His score on First Man was superb, and evoked a 60's John Barry sound without sounding too obvious like Arnold does.
Sign In or Register to comment.