Yeah, but his films are all hermetic and self-contained, there’s nothing for me in them except the gimmick. I have no desire to rewatch ‘Tenet’ or ‘Inception’, because understanding the story better gives me absolutely bupkis. The stories aren’t in any way connected to the wider world and have zero impression on my life afterwards. Like, the mystery in ‘The Name of the Rose’ is a gimmick, but it remains interesting because it has layers and lots of connections to history and stuff.
If Nolan directed some kinda sci-fi ‘Robinson Crusoe’, I might’ve been left with an urge to build a hut and defensive walls and gather resources, like it happened with the book and some of Cory Doctorow’s novels. But his films don’t even give me that. It’s kind of an achievement in itself, really.
P.S. Actually, there are plenty of self-contained gimmicky films that I still want to revisit sometimes. E.g. ‘Man with a Movie Camera’ entirely consists of editing tricks, but it works. Lynch’s films are self-contained and often don’t even have a story. Idk what it is with Nolan’s films, but they’re dry as fuck.
yeah no, I can’t really disagree with that. I also don’t feel like re-watching any of his movies - in fact i was interrupted in the middle of Oppenheimer, and don’t even feel like finishing it
He’s a good director, but he keeps making gimmicky films. Someone should hire him with an actually good story.
I kind of find the gimmicks to be the most enjoyable parts of his movies. They’re also very pretty.
Yeah, but his films are all hermetic and self-contained, there’s nothing for me in them except the gimmick. I have no desire to rewatch ‘Tenet’ or ‘Inception’, because understanding the story better gives me absolutely bupkis. The stories aren’t in any way connected to the wider world and have zero impression on my life afterwards. Like, the mystery in ‘The Name of the Rose’ is a gimmick, but it remains interesting because it has layers and lots of connections to history and stuff.
If Nolan directed some kinda sci-fi ‘Robinson Crusoe’, I might’ve been left with an urge to build a hut and defensive walls and gather resources, like it happened with the book and some of Cory Doctorow’s novels. But his films don’t even give me that. It’s kind of an achievement in itself, really.
P.S. Actually, there are plenty of self-contained gimmicky films that I still want to revisit sometimes. E.g. ‘Man with a Movie Camera’ entirely consists of editing tricks, but it works. Lynch’s films are self-contained and often don’t even have a story. Idk what it is with Nolan’s films, but they’re dry as fuck.
yeah no, I can’t really disagree with that. I also don’t feel like re-watching any of his movies - in fact i was interrupted in the middle of Oppenheimer, and don’t even feel like finishing it