MovieChat Forums > Tenet (2020) Discussion > Why Nolan gets such a level of disdain?

Why Nolan gets such a level of disdain?

posted 4 years ago by kukuxu (5409)
39 replies | jump to latest

Nolan, while being a popular director, he's not everybody's cup of tea. I can't help but wonder why the people that dislike his style despise his movies so much.

In general, directors (or actors) with a very peculiar and distinctive style can gather some disdain. It happens to Tom Cruise, for example. However, I think the most obvious similitude is Hitchcock.

Hitchcock is similar to Nolan in many ways. Both are masters when it comes to use tricks and add thriller elements. The can manage well other elements, but it's not there where they add value. Hitchcock was not particularly great when it comes to characters, and neither is Nolan. The same way, Nolan is not particularly great directing action. He's not bad, but he's far from Greengrass or George Miller, for example. In both cases (Nolan and Hitchcock), it's the thriller elements that make their movies shine.

That's not the only similitude: the same as Nolan, Hitchcock used to get a lot of disdain back in the day:

It was not until 1982, for instance, that Vertigo first made Sight & Sound’s top ten. By then it had become commonplace to speak of Hitchcock as a great artist, though such talk had been rare in his own lifetime. [...] More common was the view of Dwight Macdonald, who wrote in 1960 that while Hitchcock’s early films had been full of “humor and romance,” these qualities had been “leached out by his years in Hollywood, and there now remains only the ingenuity and the meanness.”

https://www.commentarymagazine.com/articles/terry-teachout/the-trouble-with-alfred-hitchcock/

What do you think?

[–] MoviesSuck (964) 4 years ago

He’s just terribly ineffective at creating character, and therefore his films come across as a colder, more pretentious and better-shot version of Michael Bay’s.

[–] kukuxu (5409) 4 years ago

It's true that Nolan is ineffective at creating good characters. But the same can be said of 90+% of big budget movies. And you don't see this kind of resentment towards other directors. That doesn't explain it.

[–] uridon2 (184) 4 years ago

Its because his movies are overrated and his fanbase is pure cancer

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

I'm a fan of the films - they are better done than most I have seen... but I am not cancer, nor a rabid fan-boi. I just enjoy them. So what? Why get pissed at the "fans"?

[–] uridon2 (184) 4 years ago

U are a minority of his fanbase. The only nolan movies that belong in imdb top 250 are memento and dunkirk and of course nolans retard fans didnt overrate dunkirk and its already below 8.0 unlike the awful tdk and tdkr, the fun but stupid interstellar, and the highly overrated inception and prestige

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

see, TO ME, Dunkirk was not all that entertaining. It was VERY WELL MADE, but if not for the day - week - hour editing chop up, it just sort of did its thing. VERY VERY WELL, but not very interesting to me. Everyone is different. And TO ME, Dunkirk, is his least desirable.

Its cool you totally loved it - I have a friend that loves it also (and we remain friends) - but everyone has different tastes.

But I'm not running down people that LIKE things different than I.

[–] uridon2 (184) 4 years ago

Well i do

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

do we still ponder what is wrong in this world? There ya go.

[–] uridon2 (184) 4 years ago

Just saw tenet too, it kinda sucked

[–] enriquesingh (1811) 4 years ago

His movies have brains, but no heart.

[–] kukuxu (5409) 4 years ago

Fine, but, what you call a heart?

If you're talking about classic Pixar, or old Spielberg, yeap, those had a heart. Most of modern Hollywood, however, they just include some formula-emotion scenes. Is that what you miss?

[–] uridon2 (184) 4 years ago

other way around actually

[–] MoviesSuck (964) 4 years ago

*his movies THINK they have brains.

At least they think, I guess.

[–] uridon2 (184) 4 years ago

for sure. Interstellar was all this junk science bullshit motivated by "love transcends time and space" literally all heart and 0 brains

[–] MoviesSuck (964) 4 years ago

Cringe. Now I have to go watch a Herzog film.

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

and here I thought they are some of the smartest films I've seen compared to so many others. Weird.

[–] MoviesSuck (964) 4 years ago

They definitely want you to think that they’re smart. Superficial intelligence is Nolan’s entire brand.Vitamin Water wants you to think that it’s healthy too, though, but that doesn’t mean it is.

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

oh, they are well written and designed compared to most fodder movies out there. Just saw TENET and it was brilliant in so many ways. and very smartly written also.

[–] MoviesSuck (964) 4 years ago

It’s no Lorenzo’s Oil.

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

What a great ACTION SPY THRILLER comparison. Well done. :D

[–] MoviesSuck (964) 4 years ago

Yeah, it’s definitely best work. I’d love to see him cast in the next Nolan film instead of Michael Caine. Imagine the poster...

“NOLTE/NOLAN“

[–] modica (4169) 4 years ago

The weakest thing with Nolan is his characters. They are all so hollow. Almost robotic in movement and personality. Also, his fanboys are super annoying. I like Nolan, but come on, he is not a God like some think he is.

[–] kukuxu (5409) 4 years ago

Yeap, I'm aware that Nolan's characters use to be shallow and flat. But again, that's the general rule in most Hollywood movies. Unless you are Clint Eastwood, or Woody Allen, or some other very few directors, characters are gonna be shallow.

Even if you consider good directors like Edgar Wright, for example, and he's an absolute genius when it comes to visual comedy. His characters, though, they're flat. You take away the comedic elements, and the story and characters are meh.

However, you don't see this kind of rancor in those cases. I'm sorry, but that reason doesn't quite fit. Whatever the real reason, it must be something specific to Nolan movies, not something that happens in the majority of modern movies.

[–] modica (4169) 4 years ago

Not sure what movies you are watching, but there are loads of movies with wonderful characters in them. Maybe it is just that people feel his movies are superior and for people with intelligence, while others feel that the ideas are more important than the people involved in the stories. I don't find Nolan movies difficult to understand at all, while there is a segment who feel that just because they understand what is going on in his movies, that makes them superior. Not sure when it happened, but certain fans began to give way too much credit to Nolan and the ideas in his movies. These fans claim that if you don't like his movies, it's because you don't understand what he is trying to say. That is preposterous. Those people should watch a David Lynch film and see if they feel the same way. Lynch is a much more confounding director than Nolan will ever be.

[–] kukuxu (5409) 4 years ago

Not sure what movies you are watching, but there are loads of movies with wonderful characters in them.

Lots of movies with wonderful characters in them? Which ones? Last year, for example, I can think Joker, Toy Story 4 (a sequel), How to Train your Dragon 3 (another sequel). Perhaps you could include Shazam or FvsF. It's a minority of the movies released.

people feel his movies are superior and for people with intelligence [...] there is a segment who feel that just because they understand what is going on in his movies, that makes them superior. [...] These fans claim that if you don't like his movies, it's because you don't understand what he is trying to say.

Could you provide some examples of these conversations and statements in this forum?

[–] modica (4169) 4 years ago

You obviously only watch blockbusters, because there are loads of smaller movies with fully drawn characters in them. There are also some bigger movies too, but you seem to be stuck on animated and superhero movies. You missed Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, but I have a feeling you might not count that one since you probably didn't like the movie. OUATIH had the best characterizations in any film last year.

[–] kukuxu (5409) 4 years ago

You obviously only watch blockbusters

You're obviously not very perceptive. Most of what I watch now are Asian movies and series.

there are loads of smaller movies with fully drawn characters in them.

Nope, there isn't loads of smaller movies with fully drawn characters in them. There's a few ones of them, that's true, but most low budget movies have poor writing and acting.

[–] modica (4169) 4 years ago

Poor writing and acting? Indie movies have some of the best acting around. You know nothing about film and it is a waste of time corresponding with you.

[–] kukuxu (5409) 4 years ago

With few exceptions, American indie movies are quite shallow and repetitive. The acting is often a simple repetition of a few standardized patterns. I'm sorry, but that's not good acting.

Of course, they can be some kind of intellectual-wannabe guilty pleasure. They have their public, the same horror movies are an adrenaline guilty pleasure, and they have their public too (like me). However... good story, characters and acting? Not really.

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

When you have two seated people, in a room blathering about their typical, boring, yet relatable life and world, for two hours, you get lots of character development time.

When you have to blast through a ton of concepts and actions, in an action film, there is not a lot of time to care about much backstory. Skip the blathering please. We can learn characters through their actions as we did here. No reason for movies to be 3 hours long, please.

[–] modica (4169) 4 years ago

Marriage Story is a good example of a movie with great characters who we learn a lot about. The upcoming movie I'm Thinking of Ending Things is another movie that has fully drawn characters who sit in a car and talk about things. You learn a lot about them. I just have a feeling that kukuxu just doesn't search out enough movies that have interesting characters that move the story along.

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

Remember, everyone is allowed to enjoy different things.... my take on Marriage Story is that it was not entertaining for me. I could rattle off a million reasons relating to story and characters, but none of that matters if you liked it... and that is okay.

I literrally could NOT watch it to the end. But I really tried. I'm not divorced, but know people who are, didn't care to relate to people yelling at each other unrealistically like it was a stage play... and there I go starting to cite reasons.... sorry, trying to say, it didn't resonate to me in any way. So, it was more like a horror film to me.

anyway, I love MANY romcoms and dramas and other marriage related films like Parenthood, story of us, etc,, but to me, MArriage Story didnt work.

Now... I WILL be watching ENDING THINGS because the story/plot looks way more entertaining than Marriage Story did.... TO ME.

Everyone is different should be allowed to like and enjoy different things. :)

[–] modica (4169) 4 years ago

It isn't about enjoying different things, it's about whether the characters are hollow or not. Most of the characters in Marriage Story seemed very real to me. I could relate. I can't relate to anyone in most of Nolan's movies. That doesn't make them bad movies, but the problem I had with kukuxu wasn't about Nolan's characterizations since I agreed with him on that. My problem came when he said that most movies have flat characters. That is what we disagreed about and not about what kind of movies we liked or didn't like.

[–] linuxlad (996) 4 years ago

Different audiences have different preferences and dislikes about certain films and their directors.

For example some prefer emotional films with little or no 'complexity/mystery' for their entertainment, while others prefer complexity with little or no emotion to the characters and the overall tone of the film. You also have some that prefer all action, or simplicity with a complete self-explanatory narrative that requires little or no thinking about the story/plot of the film. You also have some that find most of their entertainment value in complex films that are considered memorable and have the viewers 'thinking/discussing' the film long after watching it, and then you have very few that have a balance of both. I personally enjoy them all especially when I know what tone, style, genre, and narrative to expect from any particular director. Whether it is about complexity vs emotion, it is pointless to find disdain or high-praise in any particular director.

[–] kukuxu (5409) 4 years ago

I get what you mean.

It's true that I prefer more "brainy" movies. In general, I dislike movies that rely heavily in emotional elements¹, even more when the movie is moralist, since that feels extremely manipulative.

However, that doesn't mean the director is bad. I can tell apart between my personal preferences and the quality of the movie.

Mmm... well, just thinking now... perhaps it's due to people who like more emotional movies, they're likely to be more emotional in their own reactions? In general, people who react in a more emotional way, they have more difficulties telling apart between between reality and their own emotions. Perhaps the disdain towards Nolan is a symptom of how people that need more emotional elements in movies, they're more emotional and tend to mix up their own emotions with the quality of the movie.

---
¹ unless they're masterfully done, like early Spielberg movies

[–] linuxlad (996) 4 years ago

Perhaps the disdain towards Nolan is a symptom of how people that need more emotional elements in movies, they're more emotional and tend to mix up their own emotions with the quality of the movie.

Exactly!

[–] breillneen (0) 4 years ago

[deleted]

[–] [deleted] 4 years ago

I dont get it. Why would anyone knock Nolan? He just directs movies. Either you enjoy them or you don't. Doesn't make him bad or evil in any way.

If I didn't enjoy chocolate milk, I don't drink it. BUT, I don't knock the place that made it or the cows. Other people enjoy.

F*****g lighten up, Earth! Enjoy the time you have left here.

[–] Ace_Spade (9573) 4 years ago

I think any time anybody gets to be a super-popular A-lister, there will be a certain number of people who don't get the hype and start ragging on him or her because they're popular and beloved. There's always a bit of backlash. Sometimes it's fun to be able to stand up in a crowd of fanboys and declare something like, "Nah, The Beatles ain't all *that*!" It's fun to be the guy who's going counter to everybody else sometimes. It feels punk rock. Maybe it's not great to be proud of disliking something, but some of it I think is just enjoying being different, weird, and whatnot.

Besides that, I think there's a lot of finger-flipping from people who are rankled by the Nolan fanclub. A lot of directors (like Hitchcock) have fanboys who think they're great, but the Nolan ones can get really off-putting. I've encountered a few.

Me personally, I love a lot of Nolan's work. I think he often makes overly-complicated third acts and sometimes goes for plot twists that make me cock an eyebrow, but he's usually doing that because he respects his audience's intelligence, so...as flaws go, that's not bad.

Most of his movies that I've seen I really like. I want to watch Insomnia, I think it looks cool. I didn't like The Dark Knight Rises or Interstellar, but everything else has been a treat.