you judge a filmmaker on their ability to make a comedy? I know QT or PTA could never make an Interstellar, so why are you criticizing Nolan on not making a comedy as they have? There is far more to versatility than ones ability to make a serious movie and a comedy you know. Nolan has made a war film driven entirely by tension, high concept sci fis (one of which is quite meditative and self reflective and the other that is more popcorn blockbuster oriented), two murder mysteries, and superhero films. There is clear versatility in all of these films stylistically and tonally
I meant trying a drastically different genres than the one they are used to, like horror for example which QT showed that he's capable of doing too
Nolan's take on superheros is literally adapting them to his style not the opposite (again nothing wrong with that, just shows a lack of style versatility)
We don't know if Nolan is capable of doing an Inglorious Basterds or Boogie Nights type movie, so what's your point
Innaritu makes utter trash and all his films are just hacky iterations of far better european cinema (Biutiful )
I actually think The Revenant is okay, but that and Birdman are such pretentious exercises of telling worthless stories by making it about how "cool" the camera work is.
Guy is one of the worst filmmakers straight up.
Gravity's only real contribution was showing studios that films based on a simple story dictated only by action can be made at the blockbuster level. Dunkirk is far different from that film in every way. Dunkirk shares more in common with Battleship Potemkin than Gravity.
Bro I’m f***ing nutting
Wow I’m about to cry this trailer gave me the old vibes back
Nolan is the summer god
Innaritu makes utter trash and all his films are just hacky iterations of far better european cinema (Biutiful )
I actually think The Revenant is okay, but that and Birdman are such pretentious exercises of telling worthless stories by making it about how "cool" the camera work is.
Guy is one of the worst filmmakers straight up.
Gravity's only real contribution was showing studios that films based on a simple story dictated only by action can be made at the blockbuster level. Dunkirk is far different from that film in every way. Dunkirk shares more in common with Battleship Potemkin than Gravity.
that's funny cuz Nolan is literally one of most pretentious directors working today as evident by him not trying to change his style or tone
obviously gonna watch and enjoy this s***, but is anybody else unconvinced of John David Washington as an actor?
everything I've seen him in besides Ballers he seems stale and unnatural. this trailer is no different
I meant trying a drastically different genres than the one they are used to, like horror for example which QT showed that he's capable of doing too
Nolan's take on superheros is literally adapting them to his style not the opposite (again nothing wrong with that, just shows a lack of style versatility)
We don't know if Nolan is capable of doing an Inglorious Basterds or Boogie Nights type movie, so what's your point
my point is that you are saying Nolan isn't versatile because he can't make a QT-styled movie, which is dumb.
I just referred to 4 different genres Nolan has made films in. And Dunkirk certainly has elements of horror in it as well. Batman Begins even has a degree of horror to it with the Scarecrow visions. Nolan has literally done comedy in most of his films, he just doesn't look to make a full out comedy. Comedy has always been a huge element of all of QT's films, so its not that surprising to see him make a movie that is heavier on it or lighter.
What is surprising when someone like Scorsese can make Shutter Island and then make Wolf of Wall Street because they are polar opposites tonally.
nolan can make a war movie and a space movie and a movie ab a magician all work with his own style? thats dope
that's funny cuz Nolan is literally one of most pretentious directors working today as evident by him not trying to change his style or tone
what the f*** kind of take. Not changing your style as a filmmaker makes you pretentious now?
lmfao
I guess Quentin Tarantino is pretentious!
pretentious is just a easy thing to say ab someone u dont like tbh just like 'corny'
i mean yea all these directors probably would come off massively pretentious if a normie like one of us was talking to them.
i mean yea all these directors probably would come off massively pretentious if a normie like one of us was talking to them.
pretentious doesn't mean knowledgeable
I guess Quentin Tarantino is pretentious!
he kinda is lmao but in a different manner like with his foot fetish
pretentious doesn't mean knowledgeable
i'm talking on them being master class directors and that if one of us tried talking to them they would probably come off as rude, just as if i talked to kanye the conversation just would not be the same as me talking to a friend.
Literally listen to any Nolan interview, he sounds like a professor lecturing a bunch of illiterate students
QT at least sounds passionate and you can tell he really wants to get his ideas across
he kinda is lmao but in a different manner like with his foot fetish
that just makes him a weirdo.
Prententious is when you think you are saying something profound because of you swinging your camera around the hardest or trying to be as cryptic as possible in your filmmaking to make up for lazy writing, which is the definition of what Cosmatos, Innaritu or Refn do.
Nolan, QT, PTA, Cuaron, and all the other filmmakers we discussed don't even moderately apply to that term.
pretentious is just a easy thing to say ab someone u dont like tbh just like 'corny'
What a pretentious post rwina you’re so corny