Christopher Nolan's Interstellar

Tools    





SPOILER ALERT!!!

How can you read three study books about Memento?
It's a film about a guy who has a very short term memory and forgets everything very fast and who gives himself a purpose to live for by sending himself on different quests by tatooing himself with some clues to find the supposed murderer of his wife. It's all shown backwards, so that it seems that we're experiencing everything the way the main character does.

What more can you say about the film? It's an inventive concept, but the film is certainly not flawless and isn't THAT deep if you think about it. It's very enjoyable, of course.

Same goes with The Prestige. Nolan actually had to use sci-fi to pull his trick, so he actually cheated as the "director-magician". The 'trick' with the twin brothers was pretty cool, though.

Don't understand me wrong. I like these films very much. They are very well made and are both clever concepts, but they are certainly not flawless or super intelligent and I could certainly not read three study books about them.



Correctly get butthurt, lol. Ok.

I haven't misinterpreted anything you've said. You've stated that you don't feel Nolan's films are intelligent and don't have any meaning beyond entertainment. I am disagreeing with you. I don't think that the themes and character's in Memento or The Prestige were presented poorly at all. The Prestige's metaphor of The filmmaker as The Magician was brilliantly conveyed, imo. If you look at how that film presents obsessed auteurs as sacrificing artists who cherish the secret behind the trick, you get an understanding for Nolan's commentary on the state of filmmaking today. If you find that boring or uninteresting or whatever, then I guess I can't help you.





Again, I understood his point fine, I just find it weak. You mean to tell me, hand on heart, you didn't find ANYTHING worth talking about with somebody after you saw Memento?? The entire deconstruction of time, space and memory escaped the both of you? You didn't feel it 'intelligent' enough to even discuss how noir conventions were turned on it's head in Memento andInsomnia??

I could go on, but then i'd just repeating myself. Again.

You don't like the bloke, I get it. But to suggested that his films don't spark thought provoking dicussions is, frankly, absurd. I've read at least 3 different film study books dedicated to Memento. Each one had something new to say. That alone negates what you've said about his films being superficial.
Nolan took the easy way out by introducing real "magic." He completely destroyed the whole point of there being a trick by introducing the cloning/teleportation. And the characters are portrayed as constantly trolling one another. Hugh Jackman is like hehe I got you. Then Christian Bale is like hehe now I got you. This happens the entire movie. Back and forth. It's absolute child's play. That would be like Scorsese and Kubrick constantly pulling silly little pranks to mess up each others filming progress because they don't want the other to succeed because they are so absurdly jealous of the other. Pretty **** metaphor if you ask me.

And no, the deconstruction of time and memory couldn't possibly escape anyone because it beats you over the head every 5 seconds. There is no deeper meaning to Memento, and if there is, I'd love to hear it. It's a decently interesting idea, and that's about it. There is no meaning to it at all. And it's extremely simple once you're at the root of it. Short term memory + notes + solving the crime = Memento. You can obviously hold a discussion about any film, but that's not what we're talking about. And the fact that there are 3 study books in existence on Memento is hilarious. It's also hilarious that you took the time to read them. Sounds like a bigger waste of time than reading a Dan Brown novel.

But seriously, I am interested in hearing what the deeper meanings and themes of Memento were. You told me the theme of The Prestige, and quite frankly, it wasn't that brilliant.



SPOILER ALERT!!!

How can you read three study books about Memento?
It's a film about a guy who has a very short term memory and forgets everything very fast and who gives himself a purpose to live for by sending himself on different quests by tattooing himself with some clues to find the supposed murderer of his wife. It's all shown backwards, so that it seems that we're experiencing everything the way the main character does.
All you've done is put the entire film into as tight a nutshell as you possibly could. A couple of the books attempt to expand on the theme of self-deception, which was one of the themes that really got to me from the . It's not a film about a couple of cliched themes, it's a film about almost everything to do with human nature.

It's a film about revenge, and how vengeance can be almost futile once the quest is completed, and that the most attractive thing about revenge is the journey itself.

It's a nightmare noir about the loss of control. In various flashbacks, we see Lenny, pre memory condition, as a very hands on, sure of himself investigator who seems to be in complete control. Throughout the film he longs for that control and can't regain it because of said condition. The closest he comes to regaining any control is when he deceives himself into doing despicable acts.

It's film about our (often over) reliance on memory, and how it shapes our perception of the world and people around us. The film forces us to ask many questions regarding memory. Is memory reliable? Is it possible for our memories to be misremembered or distorted? 'The world doesn't just disappear when you close your eyes, does it? My actions still have meaning, even if I can't remember them. My wife deserves vengeance, and it doesn't make any difference whether I know about it' This is complex stuff, Nolan's inviting us to wonder whether our actions have meaning if weren't for our memories. The world outside Leonard's head is still defined by his action, but this is not an easy question to answer, and that alone invites discussion.

You mention the reverse chronological order as if it's some weak gimmick. There have been many films that have used fractured narratives. However, given the context of the film, it reverse narrative structure is used to it's fullest potential because, as you say, the film forces us to experience his condition and dilemma first hand. That's another one of the genius of Memento, and I find it puzzling how you can dismiss that aspect so easily when it's absolutely essential to the film.

Personal identity is another major theme here, too. But i'll say no more because i'm probably boring the pants off everyone!

My point is, Memento's themes can be analysed into 20 books if someone chose to.


Same goes with The Prestige. Nolan actually had to use sci-fi to pull his trick, so he actually cheated as the "director-magician". The 'trick' with the twin brothers was pretty cool, though.
The sci-fi part of the film has been of contention for quite some time now on here. I still don't understand how it's a cheat or how the sci-fi aspect takes away from the film. It's not like there weren't hints throughout. Near the beginning, Cutter refers to the big box as 'real magic'. I honestly don't see how that's a cheat.


Nolan took the easy way out by introducing real "magic." He completely destroyed the whole point of there being a trick by introducing the cloning/teleportation.

The thing with Nolan's protagonists are they are always individuals who go to extreme and extroadinairy lengths in order to achieve a certain goal. Whether it be some meta dream espionage, a man who travels all of Asia to build up his mind, body and spirit or a man creating external memories in order to seek his wife's killer, they all do some pretty amazing ****. That goal is often selfish, and I took Angier's trick to reinforce the Nolan protagonist as well as one of the central themes in The Prestige. His trick seemed fairly remarkable until you knew the secret of it, and thus, the trick came across as disappointing. And I always thought that was Nolan's intention with Angier. We were never meant to be wowed by his reveal towards the end, and I think it really works on the director-magician metaphor.


And the fact that there are 3 study books in existence on Memento is hilarious. It's also hilarious that you took the time to read them. Sounds like a bigger waste of time than reading a Dan Brown novel.
Memento changed the way I viewed film. I studied film and have a career in video editing and general media because of Memento, so certainly not a waste of my time.



What themes do you think are worth talking about?
The one that entire essay is about? You don't have to read the whole thing, but, ya' know, maybe at least click on it and get the general idea.

What exactly are the underlying themes of Inception?
The word "underlying" is yours, not mine.

The fine line between constructive and destructive obsession. Which is largely done through contrast, not blatantly or on the surface.

Or how about the Batman movies?
The distinction between possessing power and being imbued with it, and the pitfalls of confusing the two. Among many other things.

I'm not taking the piss, I'm legitimately curious. I don't find anything worth discussing in any of his films because I don't find that there are any underlying meanings and themes. They are all right on the surface if anything, and convoluted to give the appearance of complication and deeper meaning.
Even if I agreed that there was nothing underneath these films (and I don't, for the record)...why does that matter? They're not themes if they're dealt with directly? They're only worthwhile if they're done in some with subtext or metaphor? I feel there are about a dozen unstated assumptions like these underlying your complaints that really need to be brought into the light before we can even begin to hope to talk about this.



Nolan took the easy way out by introducing real "magic." He completely destroyed the whole point of there being a trick by introducing the cloning/teleportation.
Maybe you'd better explain what you thought "the point" was, then. Because from where I'm sitting, it's clearly a film about obsession. So the fact that they end up going to insane ends to try to sate that obsession doesn't destroy the point, it enhances it. Whether or not the magic is real or constructed makes little difference.

And the characters are portrayed as constantly trolling one another. Hugh Jackman is like hehe I got you. Then Christian Bale is like hehe now I got you. This happens the entire movie. Back and forth. It's absolute child's play. That would be like Scorsese and Kubrick constantly pulling silly little pranks to mess up each others filming progress because they don't want the other to succeed because they are so absurdly jealous of the other. Pretty **** metaphor if you ask me.
Trying to call it childish by summarizing it in a childish way ("hehe I got you") is kind of like repeating what someone says in a dumb-sounding voice to make them sound dumb.

And no, the deconstruction of time and memory couldn't possibly escape anyone because it beats you over the head every 5 seconds. There is no deeper meaning to Memento, and if there is, I'd love to hear it. It's a decently interesting idea, and that's about it. There is no meaning to it at all.
Define "deeper meaning," please. Let's draw those unstated assumptions out into the light.

And it's extremely simple once you're at the root of it. Short term memory + notes + solving the crime = Memento.
Ugh. It's beyond lame when someone tries to dismiss a movie by boiling it down to its barest elements. You can do it with any masterpiece. Oooooo, murder + people remembering it differently = Rashomon. Sand + war = Lawrence of Arabia. It's not a serious argument.

You can obviously hold a discussion about any film, but that's not what we're talking about. And the fact that there are 3 study books in existence on Memento is hilarious. It's also hilarious that you took the time to read them. Sounds like a bigger waste of time than reading a Dan Brown novel.
I haven't read them, but this argumentation is getting pretty circular. You say there's no deeper meaning, hear that there are several books about it, and then say they must be terrible because there's no deeper meaning.



Let the countdown begin: 608 days remain until we get to see the follow-up to Christopher Nolan’s Dark Knight trilogy. Paramount Pictures and Warner Bros. announced today that they will release Nolan’s next directorial endeavor, Interstellar, on Nov. 7, 2014 in theaters and IMAX.
In a rare co-distribution plan for the two studios, Paramount will distribute the movie in the U.S. while Warner Bros. will handle the international release. WB-based company Syncopy, which is run by Nolan and his wife, Emma Thomas, will also produce.
Plot details on Interstellar are largely being kept under wraps, but here is what is known: Developed from a script by Nolan’s brother, Jonathan Nolan, the sci-fi movie is a time travel epic based on scientific theories developed by American physicist Kip Thorne, who will executive produce. The press release announcing the distribution news describes the film as “a heroic interstellar voyage to the furthest reaches of our scientific understanding.”
So maybe this will be the first time travel movie that actually makes some scientific sense? Hell, who cares? Chris Nolan is making a frakkin’ time travel movie!

http://insidemovies.ew.com/2013/03/0...-release-date/


Looks like my man is set. This could be Memento 2. I'm excited for this. No summer release date means this could very well be anything.



Sounds awesome, hopefully this will be Nolan's 2001: A Space Odyssey moment in his career where he pumps out a groundbreaking sci-fi space travel film that redefines the genre the way he did with the comic-book action genre!



Yes, any news about Interstellar makes for a good day and this is rather big. It looks like Nolan might have found his man and an interesting choice at that. Matthew McConaughy. It isn't signed sealed and delivered yet, just says that reports are that Nolan has offered him the male lead role. But what actor in their right mind would turn down a lead in a Nolan movie?

http://collider.com/matthew-mcconaughey-interstellar/

I was not expecting this. But Nolan has surprised before with pleasant results (Ledger, Hathaway). McConaughey has most definitely been trying to reshape his image as an actor by choosing meatier roles and projects, which is admirable (Mud, Dallas Buyers Club, Killer Joe). I have yet to see any of his newer stuff, but wouldn't mind. I was hoping for others but there is always a method to Nolan's madness. I was hoping to see him work with someone new and this is new.

What do you guys think about McConaughey. What does this mean for the movie?
__________________
I came here to do two things, drink some beer and kick some ass, looks like we are almost outta beer - Dazed and Confused

101 Favorite Movies (2019)



Was hoping for someone else in the female lead. I like seeing Nolan work with new talent. But I'm sure Anne will do fine, she is madly talented. Excited to see who else is going be cast, hopefully some new faces in Nolan's world.

Still holding out hope for JLaw and JGL movie with Nolan directing. That would be movie heaven for me ha.



"My name is Psycho but you can call me Stuart."
Yes, any news about Interstellar makes for a good day and this is rather big. It looks like Nolan might have found his man and an interesting choice at that. Matthew McConaughy. It isn't signed sealed and delivered yet, just says that reports are that Nolan has offered him the male lead role. But what actor in their right mind would turn down a lead in a Nolan movie?

What do you guys think about McConaughey. What does this mean for the movie?
Matthew McConaughey? No. Just no.
Obviously appeal is subjective, but to my mind I find him overrated and lacking in screen presence.

The thought of Christopher Nolan directing Interstellar does get the excitement atoms colliding. I don't have a directing God as such, however, I would lay a candle or two on Mr Nolan's alter.

After reading through this thread I wondered at people (generalising) accusing Christopher Nolan's films of having an air pretentiousness about them; Inception in particular. Inception being touted as an intellectual smorgasbord for the superior of mind seems to be a misconception that's taken root in the minds of some rather than a production projection.

Anyway, Nolan directing Interstellar...Bring it!
__________________
"Alexander, do you want to stay for tea? My favorite, convict curry. We used to make it in jail."




Hathaway is a good actress, so that's a good pick. I feel like this movie is going to be more about ideas than acting a la 2001: A Space Odyssey, so McConaughey (sp?) and Hathaway are good choices who can act adequately without demanding the center of attention. I imagine Matthew as a scientist or something aboard a spaceship and Anne is his wife or research partner.



Matthew McConaughey seems to be trying to make a decent attempt to have sort of a career revival right now, he's got a lot of stick before but he did really well last year. In Killer Joe he gave for me one of the best performances of the year and I have heard Magic Mike is good as well.

And he's already been cast in Martin Scorsese's next film The Wolf of Wall Street, I think he's a really good actor and this improvement in his career doesn't seem to have gone unnoticed by some of the biggest directors around today.
__________________



There are tons of actors that are kind of a joke until they're not. Tom Hanks was a goofball, Halle Barry was in BAPS, Mo'Nique was in Soul Plane. If there were a better actor inside of McConaughey (and I think films like Frailty show that there might be), we wouldn't necessarily know.



I even liked McConaughey's performances in romantic comedies like Ghosts of Girlfriends Past and How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days.

He has a certain charisma, in my opinion. I'm looking forward to seeing him in more serious roles.