Wat? Why should he be catering to anyone at all and why then would he pick the bunch that has the highest rate of cynical assholes? He's doing it his way and it bloody works. People really enjoy themselves at the movies. It matters a whole lot more now than ever because this is a movie that I go to the cinema to see. Wes Anderson fits fine on my big screen TV and home theater system. You leave his films feeling good about what you've experienced (a small portion leaves angry and confused). What else could you want from a movie?
"Content": it's debatable, but if you feel that way, sure. 'Directorial quality': absolutely not, he hasn't been regressing at all.
Completely agree with this post. I loved Memento and The Prestige is likely in my top 20 movies of all time. But since then, Nolan has gone full Spielberg. Not neccesarily bad (I like Spielberg movies a lot) and still he's one of the best directors of his time (and I am very interested on his movies) but I just hink that he could have been so much more. Maybe not commercially, but he's very talented and could have been the modern Kubrick. He chose not, which is a shame!Well in a sense I can't disagree with what you say really. If his movies stir people or make them happy, what can I even say ?
But considering that, whether one would like accept it or not - his movies have steadily been regressing in directorial quality and content ever since he went Spielberg style super mainstream. And at the risk of sounding overly harsh, the average movie goer doesn't care very much for that as long as you fill a movie with cliches, indulge in fan service or bring up a subject that terrifies them, because they know so little of it.
I reckon a lot people who thought Interstellar was epic or brilliant would have no problem lapping up Catching Fire (which made almost a billion $ worldwide) or freaking Breaking Dawn which did the same. They made people happy too didn't they ? Broke multiple box office records ? But is that a testament to them being great pieces of artform ? Nah. I'm not directly comparing Interstellar to them mind, because it certainly was a far superior movie compared to those. That said, not remotely among Nolan's finest.
Sometimes an artist has to revisit his roots and the reason they became so highly considered in the first place. Nolan had a gift for film-making. Some of his earlier works didn't do very well commercially but they were exceptional in quality. And he's been diverting from that off late, in part because of WB's corporate greed and their insistence on catering to a much larger audience. It's a pity really, using him name to sell movies - like the shite Man of Steel.
That's no mountain
Rules be rules innit
I would've thought anyone with half a brain would've turned back when they hit the frozen cloud, really. "nope, nope, feck this shit, that's a frozen cloud, let's go to planet three."
Yeah also agree with what you said about taking one look at the planet and thinking something is up. Fair enough beggars cant be choosers but unless the world is only made up of eskimos then transferring to a solid ice planet is going to be problematic at best.
There were many indications throughout the film that it could be exactly that, a lot of dialogue about what you see just before you die, etc.
Nah, not buying it, Nolan would've been far more ambiguous if that was the case.
This reminds me of a theory on Final Fantasy VIII. Yeah, maybe it would have been nice if that was true (because it would me more interesting, what we really like) but I don't think that it was even hinted that it was really the case. He woke up, saw her and then went to Hathaway, with the scene changing to her waiting (for him, likely).
Plot twist. Tom is not Cooper's biological son.
