Nolan. Christopher Nolan is right there with Iñárritu as the best director to have his first archiveable film in the 21st century. As I said with Iñárritu my main guidance for this list is the list of the top 500 films and that list has a 10-year moratorium on all new films. So my guiding metric for this list doesn’t include films from 2009-present. Nolan may very well be the best auteur on the planet during that stretch so needless to say he’ll skyrocket up this list the next time I update it (if you’re the best of a decade in an artform that’s only been around for 100 years or so… well). For the purposes of this list the two best films on Nolan’s resume are 2000’s Memento and 2008’s The Dark Knight. Both films are excellent- but there’s not as much to tie them together as say Amores Perros, 21 Grams and Babel (which is why he’s behind Iñárritu even if the individual films may be slightly stronger). Anyways, Nolan’s resume is still strong. At age 49 he already have 6 films that landed in the top 100 of their respective decade. He’s prolific and ambitious which is certainly rare in recent post-Kubrick cinema. Quite a treat. He has 9 archiveable films in the 18 starting with Memento and in at least the last 5—it feels like he’s trying to make the best film of all-time—every time.
Best film: Dunkirk
- There’s a tangible impact of 70mm/IMAX cameras and no CGI
- It’s a walk-out-of-the-theater masterpiece (my 5th of the decade I believe) but you’re not aware of it in the first 20 minutes like birdman or la la land– it takes the entirety of the time and time the finale to fully appreciate
- Nolan is smart to fill many frames with extras—it not only helps add realism to the dire situation in the narrative but, more importantly, gives such an epic scope and multiple visual focal points to the large landscape, establishing shots, and 70mm/imax longer lens
- For the beauty of the aerial shots- which I’m not sure have been ever matched- my closest comparison might be the gorgeous work in out of Africa and the English patient (both of whom went on to win best picture and best cinematography in 1985 and 1996)- I kept thinking of the howard hughes line from leo in the aviator about how the plane battles needed clouds for context and scope but clearly clouds are no match for the horizon and gorgeous open sea shot here by Hoyte van Hoytema and Nolan
- The film’s straight narrative is really a series of deadlines and brilliant manipulation of space and time through editing—I think this may bother some diehard Nolan fans who fell in love with him because of his unique narratives and clever ideas on memory and perception— as a visceral experience though it’s hard to top and although it’s done differently (long takes and floating camera) Cuaron achieves much of the same effect in gravity (there’s more depth to both of these films than some critics will recognize)
- Brilliantly Nolan chooses to go at this film from land, sea and air- and manipulates the time beautifully—it’s such a calculate use of narrative structure (would you expect anything else from Nolan?)- very unlike other ingenious narrative restructuring efforts like rashoman, tarantino’s work or Iñárritu work
- It’s much closer to a pure style exercise then Nolan has ever been. There’s no set up here aside from the some tangent comments along the way and the opening title card preface—the entire film doesn’t really need a lot of words actually
- It could be Hans Zimmer’s greatest achievement with the musical score and he’s done some astonishing work before in dark knight, inception, gladiator, thin red line, rain man, lion king– he’s an all-timer now
- There’s so much depth there with the musical score and the narrative time construct mechanism
- Even the plane landing at the end with the wheels coming out isn’t done simply— there’s no wasted sequence in the entire film- this is a dazzling mini-film and exemplary use of film montage and editing
- I’ve said before that Nolan’s greatest strengths are his establishing shots and (mainly) his cross cutting (particularly with multi-narratives) and this film is basically this for the entire running time instead of an elaborate and complicated set-up with some of this in-between and a finale
- I think for many when deciding on whether this is his best work to date it will come down to if you prefer Nolan the director (master editor and montagist to beautiful imagery) or the screenwriter
- There are many films to compare it to- the work of Leone (another great all-time montagist) – the way we have 3 parts that are separate but connected and come together has to be compared to once upon a time in the west and the good, the bad, and the ugly—but perhaps the main film I think about is intolerance with how Griffith weaves his stories together slowly at first and then ramps up the pace—marvelous
- As a critic and devotee to cinema- I personally kind of love that we have a clear masterpiece here that’s not all about tracking shots- I was starting to feel like I was married to that kind of work (birdman, la la land, etc) and without it I wouldn’t be able to call a modern day film a big masterpiece- love to see that isn’t the case here and there are clearly many ways to create film art and moving the camera like cuaron does is just one such vehicle
- It goes without saying at this point but you are watching an auteur who is it absolute and total control—certainly the comparisons to a watchmaker or a chess strategist aren’t wrong
- I doubt if I’ll see a more beautifully photographed film all year and I’m positive I won’t see a better edited one
- The performances are not the headline here but they are all very good. Branagh would be my single favorite if forced to pick as his face and reaction is a the Kuleshov effect reaction shot more often than anyone else and he’s great at it
- What can you make of Hardy here? Yet another brilliant film where we don’t see his face for basically the entire thing (dark knight rises, mad max: fury road). I will say that his scene at the end with the plane on fire- being the face of the hero- is huge and not just any actor could pull that off- you need a big star and preferably a masculine one
- It is an all-time war film but as much a Nolan film as anything he’s done- it reminds me of the thin red line in that way where the canvass of the war is just a launching point for malick and nolan’s unique expression of cinematic style
- The best edited film in years
- Masterpiece
total archiveable films: 9
top 100 films: 0
top 500 films: 2 (The Dark Knight, Memento)
top 100 films of the decade: 6 (Memento, The Dark Knight, Inception, The Dark Knight Rises, Interstellar, Dunkirk)
most overrated: Not a thing. My two Nolan films already in the top 500 of all-time are the only two on the TSPDT list (Memento and The Dark Knight) and they’re at #605 and #611 all-time respectively so obviously both below where I have them. In the context of Nolan’s filmography I do think Memento is slightly overrated at this point. The TSPDT consensus has it as his #1 and I’m at #4. I’ll get to it in stylistic traits below but Nolan is much more than just an inventive screenwriter.
most underrated: Everything from Nolan is underrated so here it’s about picking the worst offense and I think it’s 2012’s The Dark Knight Rises. Following up The Dark Knight and Inception is no easy task but Rises is a triumph by any measurement. The TSPDT consensus has it at #43 of 2012 which is disgraceful.
- Without ledger’s performance I think I’d grade rises as the slightly superior film to 2008’s the dark knight. This is really hard because I also think Tom Hardy as Bane is absolutely wonderful here and between his physical presence and vocal work (he’s the best in the business right now in this category)—it’s an accomplishment for him and his career
- It’s larger in scope and epic- Chris Nolan- size. There are more establishing shots, use of IMAX (the jaw-dropper of an opening is a set piece that rivals the best in Nolan’s career)
- Bale is also superb as the prisoner and the howard hughes-type billionaire recluse in the beginning of the film
- The lighting work here is superior to both the earlier batman films from Nolan- specifically at the charity ball it looks similar to eyes wide shut—but only for a second- it wasn’t sustained enough
- There is some bad writing here- the cat puns I could absolutely do without- the “cat got your tongue?” stuff is just awful
- Fantastic drum score with vocalizing/chanting
- Nolan- as is his trademark now- is masterful at juggling the multiple narratives
- The fatal flaw in the film is bane (hardy’s)’s death. He’s just a great character and he’s killed/defeated with a throwaway cheeseball boner of a line by catwoman. It lacks the gravitas of the situation/character and is really bad narrative form. It’s untrue to the film
- Michael Caine also does his best work of the series in a few great scenes with Bale
- Must-See top 5 of the year quality film
gem I want to spotlight: The Dark Knight
- I’ve heard many call it the empire strikes back of the trilogy and I like that- it’s the best film of the series (though close) and certainly very bleak
- The film begins with a trademark Nolan gorgeous establishing shot of the city
- I admire the terrorism post-9/11 element in the joker character and film. We have hostage videos and cell phone surveillance and certainly a blurry line of good and evil
- 2 wonderful 360 shots- unlike De Palma or other shots though Nolan chooses to do one revelation and pause at a choice time
- Absolutely has a gripping narrative and performances led by a virtuoso genius-level show by Heath Ledger- this and his performance in brokeback mountain put him on the fast track for greatest working actors until his tragic passing
- Leger’s walk is studied as are his facial tics
- There are multiple jaw-dropping sequences and set pieces. The tunnel chase scene is a jaw-dropper as is the impeccably timed hospital explosion set piece
- Unlike the bond films where it always feels like Bond is one step ahead here it always feels like joker is and it plays marvelously on the viewer
- The zimmer score is superb
- I feel like Dent/two-face/eckhart’s betrayal could’ve been built up better formally- I don’t want to go so far as to say it’s a flaw it’s just an unwelcomed suspension the viewer’s disbelief that he would turn that quickly
- The entire drama, almost like Shakespeare or the godfather in gravitas is impeccably executed
- I love seeing Gary Oldman playing a straightforward character. He’s such a brilliant character actor but after 20+ years it’s nice to see him do such a good job at a straight-laced character
- Masterpiece
stylistic innovations/traits: Nolan has a real fascination with complex narratives that often have to do with identity or meditations on memory. He’s also phenomenal at parallel editing sequences and increasingly massive (and gorgeous) set pieces. I think he’s also firmly established now (and many critics use this description as evaluation) as a cold and cerebral auteur but McConaughey, Ledger, Dicaprio, Bale and others have all done really good work in his films so clearly he can direct actors as well. He’s done great work with other auteurs but Hans Zimmer’s work feels like it’ll be largely tied to Nolan and the exceptional work they’ve done together. Nolan’s greatest strengths are his establishing shots (started with Insomnia giving us stunning overheads of Alaska) and (mainly) his cross cutting (particularly with multi-narratives)—Dunkirk is basically this for the entire running time instead of an elaborate and complicated narrative set-up with some of this in-between and a finale. It ranks the film and Nolan amongst the best achievements in film editing of the 21st century. There’s absolutely a Swiss watch-like Kubrickian and Hitchcockian precision and perfectionism in his work. It’s big muscular filmmaking. He’s borrowed from Michael Mann (especially Heat in The Dark Knight), Ridley Scott (Blade Runner and The Prestige borrows from The Duelists) and David Lean in his scope and size. From Interstellar we get Nolan speaking about himself with the “we’re explorers, not caretakers” as a mantra for Nolan himself as an inventive auteur—look at what he did with Batman—clearly not a caretaker- it’s auteur cinema.
top 10
- Dunkirk
- Inception
- The Dark Knight
- Memento
- The Dark Knight Rises
- Interstellar
- The Prestige
- Batman Begins
- Insomnia
By year and grades
| 2000 – Memento | MS/MP |
| 2002- Insomnia | R |
| 2005- Batman Begins | R |
| 2006- The Prestige | R/HR |
| 2008- The Dark Knight | MP |
| 2010- Inception | MP |
| 2012- The Dark Knight Rises | MS |
| 2014- Interstellar | HR/MS |
| 2017- Dunkirk | MP |
*MP is Masterpiece- top 1-3 quality of the year film
MS is Must-see- top 5-6 quality of the year film
HR is Highly Recommend- top 10 quality of the year film
R is Recommend- outside the top 10 of the year quality film but still in the archives
New Tenet trailer is out! The hype is on another level right now, what did you think? (The question is also directed towards the other readers to share their opinions).
When are cinemas going to open? Is the release date going to be pushed back?
It’s conceived of as the movie that will reopen theaters… but there’s tons of buzz that it too will ultimately be delayed. Warner’s cannot afford not to cash in on a Nolan film, so they won’t release it if we’re limited to 25% capacity checkerboard seating or whatever the latest notion is.
Thank you.
You said on another post that you are Canadian right?
I heard Trudeau is planning on a lockdown of some sort for 18-24 months(!). I dont know how theatres will open or what changes there will be. It seems like even the next 2 world cups (in Qatar and Canada/USA/Mexico) will be impacted…☹
https://nationalpost-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/nationalpost.com/news/canada/coronavirus-live-updates-covid-19-covid19/amp?amp_js_v=a3&_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQFKAGwASA%3D#aoh=15902573491872&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&_tf=From%20%251%24s&share=https%3A%2F%2Fnationalpost.com%2Fnews%2Fcanada%2Fcoronavirus-live-updates-covid-19-covid19
I am Canadian, yes. In those comments, Trudeau is indicating that we cannot return to “normal life” until there is a vaccine. But there’s a sizeable gap between “normal life” and “restrictive quarantine”. I don’t know where movie theaters fall along that continuum, but most of what I’ve heard (and this is all speculation) has been sometime in the fall. But if the predicted second wave spikes in the fall… then who knows what happens.
So I just finished watching the Dark Knight trilogy with my son for the first time, and I’m leaning back towards the opinion I espoused at the time but have subtly retreated from over the years, and that is that Rises is the best film. Certainly Ledger’s performance is transcendent, and as a work of storytelling economy The Dark Knight is singular. However, in ambition, mythic scope, and particularly in visual filmmaking… Rises is simply better.
@Matt Harris- I mean my first line of the Rises notes above is “Without ledger’s performance I think I’d grade rises as the slightly superior film to 2008’s the dark knight.”—- We should prepare for battle though. This is not a popular opinion. People hate Rises.
@Matt Harris– Do you have it as a MP? If you do, that means Nolan is 4 out of 4 with the MPs this decade, since you also consider Interstellar is also one.
Tenet reviews are out! When is it available there for you? Here, it’s the 26th.
@Cinephile- thanks- just checking out some reviews now. Very exciting. It could be awhile unfortunately where I’m at. I’ve seen every Christopher Nolan movie on the big screen since (and including) Memento (which I went back for and saw twice in theater)– I’m not sure I’ll get to this one on the big screen the way it looks now… frustrating
Can’t lie – just been to the cinema to check it out… And I’m not really sure it was worth it. Not that the film itself is bad – it’s just that, in my cinema, at least, the sound mixing was so bad that I couldn’t understand what was going on and got mild headaches. Don’t know if everyone else had the same problem – but, after about an hour, I got fed up and decided I’d just buy it when it comes out on digital or Blu-Ray and watch it, then. Sad – because it’s the first film to come back to cinemas, and a Nolan film at that.
@Jeff— damn- that’s awful. I’d be upset.
I am too a bit, but might go back to a subtitled viewing. I hear that it’s to do with the size of the cinema screening. So an IMAX screening would be better because it’s a bigger sound system – but, when it’s in a real poor quality cinema, like mine, it’ll be less good. I’ll let you know if I like it or not when I get round to it properly – I will give it that aesthetically it is a very pretty film.
First Thoughts on Tenet:
A truly unique film. Featuring stunning set-pieces, Tenet is Nolan’s most inaccessible and confusing film to date. It doesn’t showcase pictorial mise-en-scene construction or the “Interstellar space sequences” type of beauty but it offers pure spectacle, with an awe-inspiring use of typical Nolan-ish parallel editing in the climax. Nolan is certainly a visionary and a pure artist, with Tenet making a strong case for being his most ambitious film. But here, I think his ambitions are so big, he has conceived a vision that I don’t really now if he himself understands it and after a point you really can’t understand what the hell is happening. We love films that challenge us, Inception and Interstellar did it too, but here it goes beyond challenging the audience and feels more like an unstoppable baffler. I don’t know if I can count that as a flaw, because I wish that it was a little more clear, but at the same time I admire the originality and innovation showcased on screen. Even if it is a flaw, it’s probably the only one. It features some incredible formal “touches” that I can’t go into detail right now and from start to finish, it is muscular, artistically potent filmmaking with sequences being up there with some of the best the genre has ever seen. What he does with the reverse use of time offers a feast for the eyes, and for the senses too. I’m somewhat convinced right now it isn’t on the level of Dunkirk or Inception but it represents another auteuristic extravaganza from the great filmmaker and offers a powerful expression of what has made his style so mindblowing all those years.
I don’t think I can rate it right now, maybe it isn’t a masterpiece (or maybe it is) but I don’t think it belongs in a lower tier than a MS.
@Cinephile — thank you— appreciate you sharing here. Sounds superb. Between this and reading through the reviews on rotten tomatoes and metacritic– certainly has me very excited to see it– I’m frustrated I can’t. I’m used to it though I guess when films typically debut at Cannes or Venice or wherever and take forever to get to where I am– even if this is obviously a little different.
Tenet sits at a 69 on Metacritic and I can think of no 69 in history that is less relevant. It goes without saying at this point that the critical establishment is simply not up to the task of assessing Nolan’s work, and we shouldn’t be fooled by the strong ratings they gave Dunkirk. Nolan had to deliver up a pristine picture in an established and well respected mode in order to garner such praise, and even still, you don’t need to do much reading between the lines to find that many of them still thought he messed up a perfectly good linear story with his trademark play with chronology… which is of course an utterly absurd view to hold. So as I said, it is well established that the critics writ large are not up to the task of assessing his work… the difference this time is that I’m not sure I’m up to that task either. At least after a single viewing. Indeed, anyone who claims to know whether or not Tenet holds together from start to finish and adheres to a consistent logic, after seeing it once, is simply not to be trusted.
Film philosophically, Tenet is a cousin to Inception, but its far more convoluted and deliberately opague cousin at that. It employs an in media res strategy that is borderline unprecedented, and in theory the folks who derided Inception for all of the exposition in its opening sections should be pleased, because in Tenet Nolan just drops us into it and dares us to keep up. Many people won’t be able to. Hell, I wasn’t able to at points, and I’ll have to see it again and again and again, sometimes probably with subtitles on before I’ll be able to fully decipher it… if in fact it is coherent enough to be deciphered at all. Which after one viewing, I can’t say.
What I can say, is that for fans of auteur cinema, Tenet is cinematic bliss. It is the most Nolany Nolan film Nolan has ever made. It is so audactious in concept, so ambitious in structure, so high minded in its ideas, that no other mainstream filmmaker on the planet could have ever even conceived of it, much less executed it. And whether or not it ultimately all holds together, there are lengthy stretches of such unmitigated filmmaking virtuosity, of such never before dreamed much less seen images, of such peerless setpiece construction and execution, that one simply must pull one’s jaw up off the floor and applaud. Tenet is confounding, frustrating, bewildering, and amazing. I hope folks are able to safely see it in theaters. They just don’t make ’em like this anymore. They never did.
Always nice to read your comments @Matt Harris, I’m pretty sure it was 71 when it came out.
Most seem to complain about the sound mix, that the dialogues were not well heard, do you think this is the case?
@Matt Harris– Great stuff! Maybe it’s not right to ask right now, but what rating you’d give it? A MS, maybe a MP? Also, how you’d compare to Nolan’s other works in terms of how good it is? Do you think it’s close to Inception and Dunkirk? If you can’t exactly answer given how you’ve seen it once or because it is hard to fully understand, I completely understand it.
@Matt Harris —- great work! That third paragraph has me salivating. haha. Keep us posted as you continue to process it.
Quick question– with the first paragraph. You talk about no 69 on metacritic in history is less “relevant”— is that the same as “wrong”? I started thinking of the Inglourious Bastards of the world (69 on mc), the best film of 2019 (Midsommar is 72), Shame is 72, Marie Antoinette is 65, Moulin Rouge a 66, New World a 68 I think, Requiem for a Dream a 68—-Ramsay’s We Need to Talk about Kevin was somewhere in the 60’s if I remember right— I think Assassination of Jesse James a 68 too. I’m not asking you to rank Tenet with these films– just wondering if you think the critics’ response is different?
I just checked Metacritic scores for all Nolan films and they are surprisingly very accurate in my opinion. It’s actually little hard to believe how accurate they are, considering it’s Metacritic. Yes, Dunkirk is rated the best because it’s easily his best film.
I think it’s bold generalizing like that and saying that critics are not up to task to asses his work (I would fall in that group too) just because they don’t share your opinion. To me it looks like you are rooting for Nolan, to put it lightly. Saying others can’t understand or are not up to task because they don’t share your opinion is never a good look, at least to me.
“so high minded in its ideas, that no other mainstream filmmaker on the planet could have ever even conceived of it, much less executed it”
If I saw this independent of other things you said, I would be sure it’s a parody. The reason Dunkirk is his best film is precisely because it didn’t have a narrative and he just used it as a canvas to showcase his visual style.
Hi @Chief Keef, I don’t remember where you mention that the narrative is subjective or something like that, but here it mentions that it is because it lacks narrative is better, could you be more specific? by the way, i like to read your comments, you argue very well and defend your position
@Aldo Thank you for nice words but I argued quite opposite haha I don’t think that narrative is subjective and just dependent on how viewer feels about it. I argued that I think that both narrative and visual are as objective and subjective as each other.
I think that films can work in different ways. Dunkirk aims to be a showcase of visual storytelling and it doesn’t need narrative to accomplish that.
You should check out the prequels (star wars) again. I personally believe attack of the clones and revenge of the sith to be the two greatest star wars films. I used to think the others were great but that was mostly nostalgia (I have especially come around on the sequels, which I liked before but now think they are soulless junk). Anyways the other movies are really good and I love them all but the world building in 2 and 3 is just unmatched. If you watched the first half hour of attack of the clones there are scenes remeniscient of the blade runner. Phantom menace is really good too and is kind of like a spielberg movie withthe child star and everything. Star wars 1977 I guess looks more like a student film and the acting is too wooden. All the actors in the prequels, especially Hayden Christensen, ewan McGregor, and natalie Portman, (Liam’s Neeson in phantom as well) give the story more emotional weight and then the john William’s score. Revenge of the sith is a masterpiece and you can see influence from German expressionism and shakespeare. The john William’s scores are better than ever and even without the music or anything there are just some stunning visuals.
I’m not Drake, but I’ll give my opinion here @m, parts 1, 2, and 3 are overloaded with visual effects and not in a good way, world building is “unmatched” it is quite debatable, i would not say that it is at the level of Blade runner, your opinion is quite unpopular, i have never heard from any Star Wars fan that the 2 is among the best, usually they always mention that it is among the worst
@Aldo
During some of the louder moments it does become challenging picking out all of the dialogue. This felt like a deliberate choice to me, adding to the overall opacity of the work. It’ll be fascinating to return to this one (as I said, sometimes likely even with subtitles) in order to continue deciphering it.
@Cinephile
I would say not lower than an MS likely. It isn’t a cut and dry case of 100% certainty of its masterpiece status the instant I walk out of the theater like Dunkirk or Inception, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t one. Like I said, to call Tenet “challenging” is to have a penchant for understatement.
@Drake
Lacking relevance and being wrong are loosely synomous here, but not precisely. I wouldn’t compare it to the #notmyholocaust moral outrage nature to the critical failing with Inglourious Basterds. Of your list maybe the 66 for Moulin Rouge is the best example, because there as here there was a formal/stylistic pushing of the envelope that many critics simply weren’t able to keep up with. If anything, I’d look at the 52 for Lost Highway, and say that these are related cases of many critics simply being in over their heads and not being willing/able to put in the work necessary to have a good faith engagement with the film.
@Chief Keef
I just went to the current metacritic feature ranking Nolan’s films by critics consensus, and nah, I can’t with you on this one. I’ll say I think they have Insomnia properly rated… except they have it ranked 4th amongst his films, when it is close to his worst. The critics’ struggles with Nolan have been well documented over the past decade plus and I don’t feel compelled to rehash them here. I’ll just say that Tenet is basically a laboratory experiment in how to get mainstream critics most tripping over themselves.
As to the rest of what you wrote… I just want to be clear here, so that I’m not misrepresenting or strawmanning you. But are you intimating that you think Nolan’s storytelling chops… are a weakness? That’s the stance you’re going to go with?
@M
This post feels like a big non sequitor. Did I miss something that would trigger a prequels conversation on the Nolan page?
matt harris. sorry. i just saw everyone on the nolan page and thought it would be a fine place to express my opinions considering, you know, nolan also makes big blockbusters. i guess that is what it was.
I was aiming at the cumulative scores (Insomnia -78, Dunkirk -94 etc.), not necessarily how they compare to each other. My ranking of his films from worst to best would be different but the scores are in the ballpark of how I would rate them.
So you think that 78 is right for Insomnia but you consider that to be at the bottom of the list? I can’t agree with that. That would mean that he is possibly the best of all time and I don’t rate him nearly as high.
No, you are not misrepresenting me, that’s what I meant. As masterful as he is visually, his narratives are populist, lazy, explored on a surface level and rely on few mindfuck moments (felt it was necessary to use that word) to leave casual audiences in awe and thinking he is a genius. The thing is, he is a genius but when he makes films like Dunkirk where he can shine visually and if it’s up to me he should make exclusively that type of film. He is great at telling a story with pictures, but not with words.
@Matt Harris Wanted to reply, but left a separate comment on accident..
I’m really waiting on some more comments on Tenet. Hope everyone is doing fine
@Alejandro— hoping to get to it soon- within the next week or two
Are you going to update it? I feel Nolan’s too low compared to Soderbergh and Arofonosky.
Did you see Tenet?
@Jonathan- I’ll probably be some time before I update the page- a couple years- but Nolan will be going higher on the list.
I have seen Tenet http://thecinemaarchives.com/2020/12/20/tenet-2020-nolan/
Aight, but I would be interested to see where him and Bong John Hoo would rank overall.
I feel some compared to They shoot pictures are a bit too high or too low, like how does Darabont miss it but Eggers is here? :/
Shawshank and green mile are far stronger than witch and lighthouse..
Any idea when it can be up?
@Jonathan– Green Mile? I mean if you think Darabont should be ahead of Eggers that’s fine- I have Eggers at 245. Even through two films he has a more consistent visual approach– that’s why he’s ranked ahead of Darabont.
Oh, I understand then.
Two last questions: Sam Raimi, couldn’t you find a slot for him?
And also, will be Nolan in the 80s – 90s?
Your modus operandi seems quality over quantity, that’s why (a genius) like Francis Ford Coppola is rated very high.
@Jonathan– Yeah– just no room for Raimi. I’m not sure where Nolan will land yet.
No I wouldn’t agree on that- quantity OF the quality matters. Coppola has more there than most think. I wouldn’t say quantity is a strength of his (though his 10 archiveable films are more than many including Leone, Tarkovsky, Dreyer)– but his stretch of work in the 1980’s is really good.
I agree, Coppola’s filmography is stronger than Leone.
So Cameron, all great films would be better than someone with just one or two archiviable films that can be considered masterpieces? Looks around right.
What about Jordan Peele and Craven? Your thoughts on them?
@Jonathan– yeah both Peele and Craven would be 251-300.
Also, your thoughts on Doodlebug?
@Jonathan – I have not seen Doodlebug. I don’t so shorts for the most part
He’s going to be higher? i feel he’s too low compared to Arofonosky and Soderberg especially.
Are you updating it anytime?
Also, your thoughts on Doodlebug?
Nolan is one of the 50 best in history, ask me no more.
I want to point out that Drake makes it very clear that he doesn’t include films from 2009-present.
So not Inception, TDKR, interstellar, or Dunkirk.
Although the moratorium on Inception was lifted. Drake when you update your top 500 list will it include 2009, 2010 and 2011? or for 2011 should it be 2022?
I would certainly like to see where the tree of life lands.
Out of curiosity, when will you update your top 500?
@Aldo- right- my current top 500 list was done in 2019 with a 10 year moratorium so it includes no films from 2009-present. I used this for the baseline for my top 250 directors list but once I got to the #200 slot I started to loosen up a little (obviously 200-250 includes filmmakers like Ari Aster who have no work from 2009 or before).
I’m not sure where Nolan will land partly because I’m not sure when I’ll update my list. I’d say 2022 at the earliest. So that would include films from 2011 and before, etc. But I do rank the top directors of the 2010’s and Nolan is #1 http://thecinemaarchives.com/2020/01/21/the-10-best-directors-of-the-2010s/ — so when it is all said and done he will have a very favorable spot on the all-time list
@Drake-Your page on Tenet seem to have disappeared. I can’t find it. Did you remove it from the archives?
@Anderson- I’m rewatching it and updating the page
Why is Nolan ranked so low? He has at least three masterpieces, shouldn’t he be in the top 50-60 range?
Drake explains above that he isn’t counting films from the past 10 years, so once that time is up he will easily fly up the list with Inception, Dunkirk and Interstellar behind him.
@Declan- yes indeed- thank you for the assist
@John- thanks for the comment on the site and for visiting. So, by and large I used the top 500 films of all-time as my cheat sheet for this top 250 directors of all-time list. And since that list has a 10 year moratorium on all new films, and it is a couple years old, I really try not to factor in films made from 2009-now. That is the main reason Nolan is so low. He’ll fly up this list when I update it. See here http://thecinemaarchives.com/2020/01/21/the-10-best-directors-of-the-2010s/
@Drake – Okay I understand now, makes sense!
A lot of people were complaining about sound design in Tenet and not being able to hear the dialogue. Many times in movies it can be hard to hear what an actor is saying because of his accent of if he is mumbling.
Do you prefer watching English movies and comedies with subtitles? Do you find any pros and maybe cons(reading before hearing maybe for example)?That way you’ll never miss a punchline or dialogue. I assume that you’d probably watch all films with subtitles since you watch so many foreign films haha. Do you watch foreign films dubbed or subbed?
Dubbing (unless it is purposeful by the director and part of the original production like with much of Italian cinema) is a horrible thing, and far inferior to subtitles for international films. I think the pros of using subtitles in native-language movies largely outweigh the cons.
@Graham I agree.
I use subtitles even when watching Canadian/American movies (eventhough I understand the accent perfectly).
Could you list the pros of using subtitles in movies which are in ones Native language? I’m trying to get my friend into watching foreign films, and he said he will start using subtitles in English movies first. If you can list the pros and how they outweigh the cons, I can convince him faster. He watches mostly comedies and suspenseful films.
You basically noted some of them yourself: “you’ll never miss a punchline or dialogue.” It can be beneficial to use subtitles so that dialogue can be completely understood without the need for turning the sound too high or rewinding a line. I suppose there are arguably some minor cons, such as staring at the bottom of the screen and thus tuning out some of the visuals and sounds from above, but I’ve never found those to be major issues. It’s easy to still admire what’s onscreen even if there are words at the bottom.
Regarding foreign movies, I love Bong Joon-ho’s quote, “Once you overcome the one-inch-tall barrier of subtitles, you will be introduced to so many more amazing films.”
@Azman- I always have subtitles on for every language when available. I’ll do dubbed only if that’s the intention (like Leone’s films- many italian films of that era).
@Drake and @Graham yup, that makes sense.
A lot of people say they don’t like subtitles in comedy films as it ruins a joke before it’s said (if you read it before it’s said), or it reveals a suspenseful moment before it’s said. Like I said, my friend mostly watches comedies or suspense films. How do you respond to that?
I think the pros far outweigh the cons (even for comedy). Well timed subtitles shouldn’t pose a problem at all and you often read simultaneously to the speech of the actor. Reading before seeing may make you appreciate the dialogue and then the delivery/cinematography. A joke will be funny even when written and for fast paced comedies like His Girl Friday, it’s a must to have subtitles so as not to miss dialogue.
Comedy actor Booth said he could see the issue of a subtitle interfering with the timing of a joke. But he also said a good comedy and subtitle writer is able to compensate for the issue. If the subtitles are written well, there won’t be a problem.
“We still laugh when we read funny things as much as we laugh when we watch funny things,” he said. “There’s no reason you would not laugh when you read something comedic just because you were reading it before you see it. If anything, it amplifies the impact and makes sure you don’t miss anything ” Booth
These are just my thoughts, it’ll be interesting to here yours.
I also really like listening to foreign films, as I’m exposed to new languages and there’s a mystery/charm to listening to a language that you don’t understand haha.
Sounds very promising. Murphy’s a great actor and it’ll be nice if he can land a bigger role in a Nolan film.
https://www.nme.com/news/film/christopher-nolans-next-film-wwii-drama-cillian-murphy-3042533
Memento MP
Insomnia R
Batman Begins R
The Prestige R
The Dark Knight MS
Inception HR
The Dark Knight Rises R
Interstellar HR
Dunkirk HR
Tenet —
How many viewings have you given Dunkirk and Inception?
Do you think Mann, Roeg and Lean are his three biggest influences?
@Harry- Good stuff- what are your thoughts on Roeg and that connection? I’d add Griffith with Nolan’s ability to orchestrate those masterful parallel editing sequences (on an epic scale).
Nolan has admitted Roeg is a big influence and that Memento wouldn’t be possible without Roeg’s influence. The fragmentation in the editing room, puzzle-box-like storytelling. I forgot about Griffith but him and Roeg would have to be the biggest influences on his editing (which is Nolan’s key strength)
@Harry- Very interesting- thanks for sharing. I see Roeg as sort of messier type of artist (not evaluation- just description- still a big admirer of his work) and rock & roll – just would equate Nolan’s precision more with a Hitchcock, Spielberg or Kubrick after Mann, Griffith and Lean.
This is probably the director me and Drake share the most parity with. The ranking is the exact same (Assuming these rankings haven’t changed much, but it has been 3 years)
__TIER 1__
1. Dunkirk (2017) *MP
2. Inception (2010) *MP
__TIER 2__
3. The Dark Knight (2008) *MP
4. Memento (2000) *MP
__TIER 3__
5. The Dark Knight Rises (2012)*MS
6. Interstellar (2014)*HR/MS
__TIER 4__
7. The Prestige (2006) *HR
8. Batman Begins (2005) *R (but it’s super close to a *R/HR)
__TIER 5__
9. Insomnia (2002) *R
10. The Following (1998) *R
@Mtthew- great breakdown. How about Tenet?
Yikes. I completely forgot about it. Not sure if that’s a worse look for me or the movie. I would probably grade it as a HR and put it in its own tier in between 3 and 4. I have several *major* problems with it but it’s way more cinematically ambitious than Begins or The Prestige to be honest, despite me preferring The Prestige (and probably Begins too) more. It’s a really polarizing movie and it’s very fresh on my (and everyone else’s) mind, I think we will have a better read on it as time goes on.
I also completely forgot to do a performance ranking. Definitely not as confident in that as the film ranking but I might give it a shot and post it back on this page later
Drake, I was able to catch a large portion of Memento and I unfortunately think I have to downgrade it. Few movies fascinate me as much when it comes to conceptual/story/structural elements but it’s just not interesting enough visually to be a full blown MP. I would like to atleast have it as a MS/MP, but I must remain objective and I think it’s probably a MS. I’ll still keep it at #4 for now, however (I would like to see Rises again (it’s been awhile), and I should probably see Memento in its entirety too before I make that change.)
If you were to redo this page would you move Rises over Memento?
@Matthew- I do have a page for Memento here- I think it was down for awhile- sorry http://thecinemaarchives.com/2020/09/04/memento-2000-nolan/ . I’d have to sit down and really think about it to redo a Nolan ranking and won’t be doing that until I update the director’s pages/rankings.
Oppenheimer (2023) really snuck up on me, its being released in about 10 days including IMAX. Even though I don’t love biopics I highly doubt Nolan has any interest of putting out a conventional biopic so I’m not worried there. I like this move from Nolan after Tenet (2020) which was so confusing to me it almost bordered on self-parody.
Can’t wait for Nolan to release his Tree of Life/In The Mood for Love level film next week!
@Harry- Haha- that would be lovely
@Harry – I know you were joking (or at least half-joking) with this comment, but I honestly don’t think this is that far off. I think Oppenheimer is the best film released since The Tree of Life in 2011. The 2020s finally has its massive masterpiece.
@Chase – I wasn’t joking I was just a lil too excited. I will say it’s at least the best film since 2019 and the 2020s first massive masterpiece.
@Chase and @Harry – Wow!
@Drake – when are you catching this one?
@Harry- Monday – very excited
I concur with @Chase and @Harry. I think it’s a massive masterpiece and the first of the decade. It’s also a film I believe will improve with subsequent viewings. I can’t wait to see it again.
After one viewing, it’s a masterpiece and the best movie I’ve seen in the 2020s. (With maybe Babylon, needs rewatch).
Haha. Maybe if you only consider the first half an hour of Babylon and ignore the rest of the film.
Apologies if I missed it but has anyone seen this in IMAX? I am planning on IMAX asap, hopefully Tuesday or Wednesday. I usually try to tame my expectations to avoid disappointment but between the rave reviews and levels of praise on this page that is easier said than done.
Drake we need to know your thoughts on Oppenheimer?! Also Barbie for that matter too.
Maybe it was personal expectations/hype but Oppenheimer didn’t completely work on the first watch. Happy to say that it “clicked” on a rewatch and I’m happy to give it a MS and the best movie of 2023, so far… Still a bit messy but the ambition is undeniable!
As for Barbie, I was expecting the worst after the marketing onslaught. The humour worked for the most part though as it slots in as an R
@Joel- Thank you for sharing. Very excited for both- I have tickets for Oppenheimer tomorrow.
@Drake – How was it? Do you share many of our masterpiece claims?
@Harry haha – it is brilliant – going again here right away so I can catch it twice in the larger format
@Drake – That’s awesome you think it’s brilliant. I had a second viewing last night and walked out blown away again. What did you think of Murphy’s performance?
@Ian- Certainly deserves all the praise he is getting. He does not squander the opportunity here.
I’m not the biggest fan of Nolan and I find some of his films quite annoying at times, but Oppenheimer has kind of reconciled me with him in a lot of ways. I would say it’s a HR after one viewing, but I understand why some people would rank it higher. Right now I would say:
1. Memento MS
2. The dark knight MS
3. Inception HR
4. Oppenheimer HR
5. Dunkirk HR (I have to watch this one again, I think I could bump it to MS)
6. The prestige HR
7. Batman begins R/HR
8. Insomnia R
9. Following R
10. Interstellar R
Neither The dark knight rises nor Tenet are archiveable in my book. I’m pretty sure the latter is not for me, but maybe I should give the former a second chance after all these years.
I got to watch Dunkirk again. There are still a couple of things that I don’t particularly enjoy, but I liked it slightly more than the first time. I upgraded it from a HR to a HR/MS.
@David – what are in particular did you not like about it?
It mostly has to do with pacing and narrative choices. I appreciate the ambition, but I think his obsession with playing with time is close to a fetish by now, and while it can be a very useful tool, I don’t think it benefits the story he’s trying to tell here. I think it’s sometimes distracting and counterproductive. The film does have very well edited sequences that build a lot of tension, but he could have achieved the same effect without all the “wow but this is in a different time frame” bullshit that he insists on operating in. I also think the character work could’ve been better, but that’s not a huge problem for me given the structure of the story. It’s more about the event than it is about the characters themselves, so to speak, which is perfectly valid. It does prevent the cast from giving more noteworthy performances though.
Don’t give me wrong, I like the film a lot. I mean, a HR/MS is a very sizable grade. It’s in my top 10 of 2017 (bottom half, but still). Dunkirk is a muscular piece of filmmaking with a very robust visual apparatus. It’s certainly ambitious and it has a lot going for it, I don’t have any problem with anyone calling it a MP. I just don’t think it is.
@David – “I appreciate the ambition, but I think his obsession with playing with time is close to a fetish by now, ”
That is funny because that is kind of how I felt about Tenet (2020) which I felt was almost like a parody of a Christopher Nolan film. Basically many of the aspects that make his films interesting but taken to ridiculous extremes.
For Dunkirk, as far as the lack of character development that was intentional and not just because the film is an exercise in style. You (the viewer) are part of the film, and thus in a state of constant fear and confusion. Nolan spot the film on site and thousands up thousands of extras rather than relying on CGI.
But more than anything Dunkirk is visual storytelling with little expository dialogue. By moving away from a linear story the converging timelines create an atmosphere that is not only terrifying but extremely disorienting. Unlike many traditional War films, most of the individual characters have very limited knowledge of what is happening around them. Nolan aligns the characters fears with the audience in a way where lack of character backstory does not prevent the audience from forming an emotional connection to the characters.
@James Trapp- Really well said- good work here
@James Trapp I hear you point, and most of the time I would agree with you, but every so often it comes off as Nolan using time tricks to say “hey, you thought the guys jumping off the boat were those ones, but they actually are these ones, aren’t I clever?”. Occasionally, he turns a visceral story into an overly cerebral one. It’s a risk that may work for a lot of people, but that’s when Nolan takes me out of the movie instead of pulling me in. Most of the time I do think it works well, and I appreciate that it’s ambitious and original. I just don’t think it sticks the landing 100%.
Like I said, the lack of character development doesn’t bother me because I understand why he did it and I think he pulls it off quite nicely, although I gotta admit that my emotional connection to the characters wasn’t too strong beyond the fact that they’re human beings stuck in a horrible situation, so I’m gonna feel empathy towards them unless the filmmaker screws up big time.
I would agree that, out of all his films, this is probably the one that follows the “show, don’t tell” rule the most, but that’s not saying much. And yeah, the ludicrousness of Tenet’s storytelling is the reason why I don’t think it’s archiveable, even though it does have its visual merits. And even worse, in that film he doesn’t have any excuse for underwriting his characters the way he does.
Also, a film being called an “exercise in style” always triggers some distrust in me, to be honest. You can be visually stylish and also have a great script and great performances, and those are the films I usually call masterpieces. The cook, the thief, his wife and her lover or Columbus (which I would say is the big MP of 2017) are great examples.
Again, I may not be as head over heels for Dunkirk as you guys are, but I really like the film nonetheless. The fact that I might quibble with some of Nolan’s choices and that those quibbles keep me from calling it a masterpiece doesn’t mean I don’t appreciate the film as a whole. There are very few films that I call full-blow masterpieces.
@Drake – thank you
@David – “Also, a film being called an “exercise in style” always triggers some distrust in me, to be honest. You can be visually stylish and also have a great script and great performances, and those are the films I usually call masterpieces”
Okay, but by that definition 2001: A Space Odyssey would probably not qualify as a Masterpiece given that it would be difficult to rave about the performances and script. I am not saying Dunkirk is necessary as good as 2001 (although it is amazing) but I think there are MP level films that you would not necessarily rave about the script and performances. Don’t get me wrong, they are rare but they exist. Herzog’s Aguirre (1972) and Fitzcarraldo (1982) as well as Ridley Scott’s Aliens (1979) and Blade Runner (1982). Scott’s 2 big MP do have some great performances but I don’t think that is really the main reason why they are so highly thought of. Again I realize these are all timers I am using for examples but my point is simply that a great script and performances are not absolute necessities for a film to be a MP.
@James Trapp- Had the same and similar discussion for years and you’re handing yourself so well- I’ll stay out of it. I’ll just quickly add that the list of non performance and script masterpieces is much more extensive and wider ranging than you may think. Battleship Potekmin, Barry Lyndon, The Turin Horse, Roma, Intolerance, Nostalghia, Dunkirk (seems like an obvious one) I mean there are many more – so many so that it makes you think…
@James Trapp @Drake Maybe I didn’t explain myself too well. What I meant is that, for me, screenplay and performances matter a great deal (especially the former) and I can’t just call a film a masterpiece when both of those things are lacking. Blade Runner is one of the most visually striking films of all time but it also has one of the greatest screenplays ever, so it doesn’t need a great leading performance to be a MP (if it had, it would probably be my favourite film of all time). Same thing applies to 2001 and Intolerance, which I do think have great screenplays, especially 2001. Those two are definitely MPs. Most of the other films that Drake has mentioned are close to being a MP for me (Roma is so damn close that we can just call it a MP and end the discussion). Dunkirk, in my eyes, has ok performances, a good script and a visual apparatus that is great but nowhere near as spectacular as the ones in the other films we’ve mentioned, so for me it belongs closer to the MS range than to the MP range. That’s covers it, I think.
But I’ve said this a bunch of times on this website (it seems like I say it every time I engage in a discussion hahaha) and I’ll say this again: I’m not trying to be “right”, I’m just sharing my thoughts here, which are unapologetically tainted by subjectivity. And also, this is just how I grade films. I’m so used to people throwing the word “masterpiece” to every film that they like that I tend to be very wary when using it. I’ve watched thousands of films and only have around 75 films graded as full-blown masterpieces.
@David- The opposite is true here as far as explaining yourself well. You have done an excellent job explaining yourself – you are articulate – and clearly intelligent. And we’re not breaking any new ground here so feel free to ignore. I just think you’re wrong overall… full stop…putting your eggs in the wrong basket so to speak with writing and acting and keeping that scope narrow and limited visually and artistically.
@Drake – great examples with Barry Lyndon and Roma, the others I still need to watch.
I would throw in Suspiria (1977) which actually goes beyond simply not having great performances as it has straight up awful acting for much of the film. Further more, the screenplay for Suspiria consists of things like “15 minutes of character walking through hallway” haha
I am non as big on it as some Lynch fans but I know many love Eraserhead (1977) which has little dialogue and mediocre acting yet some call it a MP even if I do not. I don’t think the acting is terrible but Contempt (1963) is a film where little happens plot wise, yet it as a MP for me because of the way Godard uses CinemaScope, color, and Antonioni like framing showing a troubled marriage, all of this assisted by a magnificent score; these are why the film is MP.
@David – the word Masterpiece does get casually thrown around way too often, I agree with you there. I like to think Cinephiles are a little more cautious in throwing out the Masterpiece label for a film. I am curious, do you have an official rubric for grading films?
@Drake Thanks, Drake. English is not my first language and sometimes I doubt my ability to speak it properly, so I really appreciate the compliment.
“I just think you’re wrong overall… full stop…putting your eggs in the wrong basket so to speak with writing and acting and keeping that scope narrow and limited visually and artistically”.
So much to say about this statement. First of all, I don’t think I keep my scope narrow and limited. Quite the opposite, to be honest. I do value visual prowess in a film. It’s the thing I value the most, actually. The lack of visual merit is what keeps All about Eve (one of the best written and acted films of all time) from that MP status. I just try to take everything into account. You say I keep my scope limited artistically as if where were no art in writing, which I find staggering. I’m sorry, but I can’t fully enjoy a film like Babylon when it has such a messy screenplay, regardless of how well it looks.
But you are probably right: we are running in circles. And I don’t mean in this conversation, but in general. In virtually every single conversation that we’ve had over the past few months. We disagree on a lot of things, which I think is good, but the fact that you would consider my point of view flat out “wrong” makes me realize that we’re gonna keep hitting the same wall every time we talk. To me, “wrong” is a very ugly word to employ, especially when talking about how someone appreciates art. Art can be perceived and experienced in a myriad of different ways (that’s what makes it beautiful, I think), and to truly believe that only one of them is the “correct” one, as if films were math problems, goes against everything I love about any art form. If we differ on this, it’s gonna be hard for both of us to reach any common ground, I’m sure you’ll agree. So I’ll probably abstain from having these types of discussions with you from now on, not because I don’t appreciate your takes, but because we’d probably end up having the same conversation over and over again hahaha.
@James Trapp I do have a formula for grading films, actually, and an admittedly overcomplicated one at that, hahahaha. For me, the split is usually 40% technical style (this encompasses cinematography, mise-en-scéne, editing, use of sound, etc.), 35% narrative aspect (basically the screenplay: plot, story progression, dialogue, thematic depth, etc.), 20% acting, and then a 5% for the musical score, which I keep as a separate aspect. These numbers may vary depending on the genre (for example, I value the music more when I watch a musical, for obvious reasons), but they are the ones I work with most of the time. I give every aspect a grade of 1-10. If a film gets over an 8.7, it’s a MP. Of course, it’s quite hard to get an 8.7 when using these metrics, and that’s why the number of films I call masterpieces is quite low. And yeah, Suspiria is nowhere near a R for me. The visuals are beautiful, but they’re not even close to being enough for me to forgive the terrible acting and the dumb screenplay. But I definitely get how, if you don’t value those aspects as much as I do, you would consider it a great film.
@David – Again, very well articulated – more eloquent in your second language than I can often be in my first. And I am happy we could keep it cordial even though there is disagreement here. The comments on Dunkirk (and other films) that are highly (and I mean highly) ambitious and flat out staggering in their aesthetics – but do not (purposefully) lean on the screenplay and acting – is like preventing a black and white film from being called a masterpiece because it does not succeed in its brilliant use of color.
I held a similar view for a long time on writing and acting- roughly a decade- and I was wrong- so I don’t mind throwing out the word here while still trying to be polite and civil about it. I think it would be doing you a disservice to just say this is simply a difference of opinion. I’d rather challenge on you something like Dunkirk or Oppenheimer even at the risk of upsetting you- then for you to keep on going without fully appreciating it.
@David – good for you I can only speak English ha. I took French in High School but could not get the hang of it. I am always impressed with people who can speak multiple languages.
I asked about a rubric as I have tried to write out an official one a couple years ago but never could settle on one. I have been posting on this site for the past 3 years and in the last 5 or 6 years watched over 1,000 films. I do document what I have watched and a grade them even if I do not have an actual written out rubric.
It is funny I was actually going to bring up All About Eve (1950) as a sort of inverse Suspiria (1977) All About Eve has as good as a combination of acting and writing that you will see but visually as bland as you can get. Suspiria (1977) of course has unbelievable visuals especially in the way it uses color but it also has a an incredible score, from Italian band Goblin. In fact it is the magnificently haunting score that combines with the stunning visuals that results in an atmospheric Masterpiece. The bad acting is partially mitigated by the limited dialogue. The setting is key to the film as well, you could even call it location as character. The pacing is masterful as well.
Not quite a masterpiece. Even though it has sequences which belong in a masterpiece. Zabriskie Point really is let down by its weak acting by the two leads. “The bad acting is partially mitigated by the limited dialogue. The setting is key to the film as well, you could even call it location as character.”
This statement cannot be more true for Zabriskie Point.
My ranking :
1/ Inception – MS/MP
2/ Oppenheimer – MS/MP
3/ The Dark Knight – MS
4/ Dunkirk – MS
5/ Interstellar – MS
6/ The Prestige – R/HR
7/ Insomnia – R
8/ Memento – R
9/ The Dark Knight Rises – R
10/ Batman Begins – R
11/ Tenet – R
Not a big fan of Nolan.
@KidCharlemagne- Quite a few MS and MS/MP for someone you are not a fan of. Not trying to pick a fight- just an observation
Because he’s still a great director haha
I really love Inception and now Oppenheimer.
Man, what an utterly spellbinding watch Oppenheimer was. I was so excited based on the impressions of others (people here, my friends, online discourse) and was not let down in the slightest.
Notes:
– The first 50 or so minutes were a barnstorming display of editing magic. I saw negative comments that it was “too much buildup” and too trailer-esque, the latter of which I think is a huge compliment when we are looking over a 50 minute span. Overall it was an excellent feat of pacing and the building of tension.
– There are some Nolan films I have not yet seen (Tenet, Batman Begins, Insomnia) and a few I haven’t rewatched since properly becoming a movie person, but I’d be hard-pressed to identify a realistic challenger to this one in terms of raw photographic beauty. Big highlights were some of the black and white RDJ scenes, the colour saturation in Oppenheimer’s “trial”, and also some of the grand Los Alamos shots.
– Lots of talking but relatively rarely did it feel like dry narrative advancement
– Great quiet and loud contrast, for example the “deafening silence” of the Trinity test was directly at odds with the tapping of feet or applause during comparatively mundane scenes… shows Oppenheimer’s changing mental state in a very smart way actually.
– Like the other best Nolan films (Memento, Inception, Dunkirk), this could absolutely only have succeeded as a work of cinema. Harnesses all of the different possibilities of the medium like few modern directors do.
Very excited for more viewings!
@ga- Really good share here- thank you put posting here
Just caught my first viewing of Oppenheimer (2023) and it was an IMAX. Wow!!!
The pacing is staggering given its considerable runtime, 3 hours, and the weight of the subject matter. I definitely see similarities to Oliver Stone’s Magnum Opus, JFK (1991) I went into Oppenheimer cold, did not read a single review or article and I did not know much about Oppenheimer himself. Stone’s JFK was controversial although I do not think it is supposed to be a factual account of what happened. None the less many similarities between these films with the shifting time lines and perspectives, the focus on a significant 20th Century Historical “Event” for lack of a better word, and the last hour focusing largely on a trial.
cont…
There is so much to absorb so going to try to collect my thoughts a bit more later and certainly want to see again soon. Even so, I think this has to be the best film of the decade so far, at least amongst those I’ve seen. Decision to Leave is really great as well though.
1. Oppenheimer
2. Decision to Leave
3. I’m Thinking of Ending Things
4. Mank
5. The Banshees of Inisherin
Still need to see Dune, The French Dispatch, and a few others with strong reviews
@James-How would you rank the performances in Oppenheimer?
@Malith –
1. Cillian Murphy – I have always like Murphy, he’s solid in all his previous collaborations with Nolan, obviously those were much smaller roles, and I liked him in some solid films where he played the lead role; 28 Days Later, Sunshine, and Red Eye. But this is something else, its the role of a lifetime and he delivers. His face and eyes convey so much in several of his non verbal scenes. Its such a complex role as J. Robert Oppenheimer was a Theoretical physics, academic, professor, (philandering) husband, and a patriotic American.
2. Robert Downey Jr – Apparently Downey Jr is a history buff, particularly American history and he was familiar with Admiral Lewis Strauss before Nolan asked him about the role. It is also a complex performance with a fascinating character arc
3. Matt Damon as Leslie “Dick” Groves again I read nothing about this ahead of time so I did not really know Damon had such a significant role, early on he provides some comic relief but is a powerful presence whenever on screen even if his role is not nearly as complex as Murphy or Downey Jr
4. Emily Blunt as Kitty Oppenheimer, the interrogation scene is the key one for her and she absolutely delivers, she’s been a favorite of mine ever since her lead role in Sicario (2015)
5. Florence Pugh as Jean Tatlock, I have to admit I did recognize her until I read about the movie after leaving the theatre. I have seen Midsommar (2019) many times, she made the most of every minute she had including the sex scene which I think is the only time I can recall a sex scene in a Nolan film.
Beyond those 5 I need another viewing
I liked Tom Conti as Albert Einstein in the few minutes of screentime he had
Jason Clarke is an actor I am always impressed by, he is great during the interrogation scene
I was surprised to hear both Gary Oldman and Casey Affleck are in this film. Do they have cameos or bit parts?
@Malith – both have small roles with minimal screentime also Gary Oldman is really good in his scene playing President Harry S. Truman. He has one line in particular that is both funny and frightening.
@James-Sorry to disappoint you. But I saw Oppenheimer today and I thought Emily Blunt’s acting was brutal. None of the scenes with her worked for me. Florence Pugh was superb in limited screen time. Other supporting cast members did well too mainly Downey Jr. But it is the Cillian Murphy show though. His mannerisms, eyes. He never blinks. It’s the performance of the decade so far.
@drake sorry if you mentioned it before but I am curious if you have seen Oppenheimer and if yes what you think of it. I saw it in cinemas and was really impressed.
The non linear narrative, great screenplay and great acting as well as great visuals and music were very impressive , I think.
@Azman – I have seen Oppenheimer – and it is brilliant
If one would make a 2023 list of the most powerful screenshots of the year, so many would come from Oppenheimer! The bomb scene(the trial), the close ups of Oppenheimer, the big cinematic Malickan shots of the stars, the wide landscape shots , the bedroom ones, dr strange love war room shot, the list goes on. I am really looking forward to your 2023 list of best films.
I think the sound editing needs praise as well
Some of the picture editing from black and white to colour… wow.
The pacing was wonderful as well as was the screenplay and dialogue.
I am mentioning all this so other website viewers can also see all of these technical aspects if they watch or rewatch the movie
I don’t mean to write too much and take up too much space any more, it’s just that watching this movie was really such an experience for me.
@Azman-Not sure about the screenshots part. Nolan doesn’t let this film breathe a little bit. He relentlessly edits this thing. So no one screenshot or beautiful photograph stuck with me. The best scene of this movie is the shallow focus scene when Cillian was giving a speech. I’m not sure why they included some Downey Jr. scenes in colour either after mostly shooting him in black and white. I thought the Emily Blunt performance was quite brutal too. But these are nitpicks. The film is wonderful. And Cillian never blinks.
I don’t want to overdo it but has any auteur since Kubrick had a run like this in terms of ambition?
Nolan’s last 7 films:
The Dark Knight (2008)
Inception (2010)
The Dark Knight Rises (2012)
Interstellar (2014)
Dunkirk (2017)
Tenet (2020)
Oppenheimer (2023)
Even Tenet (2020) which I thought was a miss was still an incredibly ambitious miss. I need to rewatch Rises again, only saw it once and that was in theatres so about 11 years ago. But the key word here is ambition, I am not saying he is the best auteur post Kubrick (though certainly one of them) but each of his last 7 films he seems out to make a MP
Malick and Cuaron would be two I’d say are clear contenders to challenge Nolan for that title, maybe some others too that aren’t coming to mind but either way it’d be a pretty elite club containing some of the best directors working. Oppenheimer’s greatness only confirmed his status among the best.
Malick for sure. I’d add PTA, Iñárritu, and—not in the same echelon, but for raw ambition—Aronofsky.