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
Drake, what are you rating The Odyssey?
I need to give it a second viewing, but I’d probably give it a MP. I didn’t see it in IMAX, just 70mm. Overwhelming, huge, sensory delight. Probably like getting stepped on an elephant if you were into feet. It’s been a long time since I’ve seen a Nolan film, and one in theaters at that. So for me, it was an *experience*.
Many of the interpretations of the film are wrong, I think. And the “woke” criticisms pretty laughable. Especially in the context of what the film is trying to say.
@Bullweather- Thanks for sharing – I’ll be watching it this week- I still haven’t seen it.
Im so curious what you think about it Drake, let us know when you are able
@oliver – I was lucky enough to catch it that big screen 70mm imax format- incredibly lucky. I was very impressed– I left a little less blown away than I was with Oppenheimer after a 1st viewing but I mean we’re talking about one of the best films of the decade there.
The Odyssey cast ranking
Morton – 4.5
Damon – 4.5
Pattinson – 4.25
Leguizamo – 4.25
Page – 4
Remar – 4
Patel – 3.75
Zendaya – 3.5
Safdie – 3.5
Nyong’o – 3,5
Hathaway – 3.5
Bernthal – 3.25
Holland – 3.25
Theron – 2.5
Scott – 2.5
@Harry- I’m surprised you have Anne Hathaway in the bottom 5 and out of the top 10 given she is getting strong Oscar buzz for her performance here in The Odyssey
@Malith – felt like too much of an exposition cargo carrier for the performance to be rated higher to be honest. I do like her in general though.
@Harry- She was the weak link in Brokeback Mountain
The Odyssey is fantastic. Highs are really high even if it is a little muddled in places. Solid MS after one viewing.
Intelligent film. A big win for Chris Nolan. His hot streak continues.
@AP- love this- thanks for sharing
agreed, will be catching another viewing in cinema, its been on my mind since friday.
any early thoughts on it drake?
will you be catching Odyssey in the theatres Drake? Perhaps in IMAX?
@Oliver- I will- just bought my ticket- pumped
@Drake – if you re-ranked Nolan today; would you have Oppenheimer above Inception?
@Harry- man- tough one- gun to my head yes I think that’s where I’d slot it. How about you?
@Drake – it’s not really a tough one for me despite really admiring Inception. I have Dunkirk firmly slotted at #1 then Oppenheimer at #2. This is more controversial but I would also have TDKR’s as the next below those three, the filmmaking is superb and underappreciated.
Christopher Nolan films I have seen ranked-:
1. Dunkirk (2017)
2. Oppenheimer (2023)
3. The Dark Knight Rises (2012)
4. The Dark Knight (2008)
5. Batman Begins (2005)
My ranking of Nolan`s films that I`ve seen:
1. Dunkirk MP
2. Oppenheimer MP
3. Inception MP
4. The Dark Knight MP
5. Memento MS
6. The Dark Knight Rises MS
7. Interstellar HR/MS
8. Tenet HR/MS
9. The Prestige HR/MS
10. Batman Begins R
11. Insomnia R
12. Following not recommend
10 Best Perfomances
1. Ledger- The Dark Knight 5
2. Murphy- Oppenheimer 5
3. Downey Jr.- Oppenheimer 5
4. Pearce- Memento 5
5. McConaughey- Interstellar 5
6. Williams- Insomnia 5
7. Bale- The Prestige 5
8. Cotillard- Inception 5
9. DiCaprio- Inception 5
10. Oldman- The Dark Knight trilogy 4.5
Bonus Oppenheimer cast ranking
1. Murphy 5
2. Downey Jr. 5
3. Clarke 4.5
4. Blunt 4.5
5. Damon 4.5
6. Affleck 4
7. Krumholtz 4
8. Oldman 4
9. Safdie 4
10. Conti 4
11. Ehrenreich 4
12. Hartnett 3.5
13. Branagh 3.5
14. Pugh 3
15. Malek 3
Homer’s Odyssey as his next film. Very exciting.
https://variety.com/2024/film/news/christopher-nolan-the-odyssey-imax-homer-1236258524/
2026 Will be a big year for epics with this and Villeneuve’s Dune conclusion.
@AP – Thanks for sharing- I saw this news yesterday. I think this is a good fit.
@Drake – Why don’t you have Interstellar as a MS film? It certainly has all the characteristics of one.
@Alex- I have a page for Interstellar here https://thecinemaarchives.com/2017/06/21/interstellar-2014-nolan/
@ Drake- That’s wonderful. I was able to catch it thrice as well. Great film.
This is really one of the all-time great runs now. Best director in the world since 2008 and he seems in no mood to let it go.
What is his ceiling? Top 30? 4 MP and 2 MS as of now.
@AP – haven’t run the math- but but hate to put a ceiling on it- he is prolific (at least for this generation) as well- so if he remains healthy- it looks like he should have plenty of opportunity
@ Drake- Is Dunkirk a lock for his best film still? Or is there a debate to be had here now with Oppenheimer.
Kinda like Blue Velvet vs Mulholland Drive
@AP – it is a fair question. I think a little time away and then revisiting both closer together will help give some clarity. I saw Oppenheimer 3 times in 2023.
@Drake – I think Inception is surely a top 100 film and Oppenheimer might be one too. Dunkirk is in my top 150 and The Dark Knight is close as well. I’d have him in the top 30 directors of all time for now. I think he’ll get even better in the future, I just don’t have an answer about the critical consensus question. What do you think?
@Drake – Where do you think Nolan would land in this list now? Do you think he has a top 100 film in Dunkirk or Oppenheimer? And lastly, why is the critical consensus generally so low on Nolan?
@Parmeet- Good questions- what do you think? I’d have to give it some more thought- hopefully, eventually update this and the other director’s pages.
This will probably get deleted soon when the updated director list gets rolling, but here’s my updated Nolan rankings:
MP
1. Dunkirk (2017)
2. Oppenheimer (2023)
3. Inception (2010)
4. The Dark Knight (2008)
MS
5. Memento (2000)
6. The Dark Knight Rises (2012)
HR
7. Interstellar (2014)
8 The Prestige (2006)
R
9. Batman Begins (2005)
10 Tenet (2020)
11. Insomnia (2002)
Unarchived
12. The Following (1998)
TOP 10 PERFORMANCES
1. Heath Ledger – The Dark Knight
2. Cillian Murphy – Oppenheimer
3. Leonardo DiCaprio – Inception
4. Robert Downey Jr. – Oppenheimer
5. Matthew McConaughey – Interstellar
6. Guy Pearce – Memento
7. Marion Cotillard – Inception
8. Christian Bale – The Dark Knight Rises
9. Tom Hardy – The Dark Knight Rises
10. Gary Oldman – The Dark Knight
@Matthew – My list of the films ranked is near identical to this. The performance list is great too. I love Insomnia (2002) but its clearly one of his weakest films cinematically if not the weakest. Even so, I would be tempted to add in Al Pacino and Robin Williams, perhaps as a single entry, on the performance list. Their scenes together are sooo good. Williams is best known for his comedies but he could play dark characters as well as anyone.
@James-Is The Palace working for you now? Did you try changing the format from .mp4 to .mkv? Maybe the issue is because there are multiple audio tracks and .mp4 doesn’t support that probably
@Malith – still no sorry, I tried that but I watched An Officer and a Spy and True Story on MP4 and both worked great. Don’t worry further, I appreciate the effort
@James Trapp-Here is a better version of The Palace. This one is fully working.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/17jiW77q-DYHIUQY5TarX3i2Uz3eeDzQ_/view?usp=sharing
There are like 5/6 languages spoken. So you’d need subtitles
https://drive.google.com/file/d/17jiW77q-DYHIUQY5TarX3i2Uz3eeDzQ_/view?usp=sharing
You’d need to download it to watch it in 1080P. Otherwise it’s low quality.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1N6929rVGtvZDB-FdUrgYUi-w_mrDFdA1/view?usp=drive_link
(Subs)
I hear you on Pacino. That is just at the absolute bottom of the barrel as far as Nolan’s filmography is concerned. Oldman was an instrumental part of a masterpiece (multiple key scenes throughout, but namely the big final monologue voice over) and I think I weight that more than Pacino’s great leading performance in a mere Recommended film
@Matthew – for sure, not saying you’re wrong. I just think its such a great two-hander, and an overlooked one at that. I actually think you could make a case for Williams over Pacino, although I prefer to view their performanes as equally great.
I would love to know what you think of Oppenheimer, if you feel confident to talk about. I’ve only seen it once, so you might have a better idea, but I wasn’t too impressed. The production design and special effects were nice, but the frantic editing (3 seconds per shot, 30 seconds per scene; jumpcuts, intercutting in the middle of scenes) was naseuating. Combined with Nolan’s “intensified continuity” excessive close up shot composition, awful sound design, excessively loud music, and the entire thing just felt like sensory overload, like a Youtube short more than a film.
Nolan, in this film at least, felt like a director good at logistics (coordinating production design, special effects, cast), but a very mediocore artist. He just pours on the special effects, sound effects, the blaring horns and flashing lights and jump cuts; he used his logistical skill to create a wide variety of impressive technicals, but then hurled it at the screen without any artistry or organization. The only interesting thing was the structure, and even that was really quite simple (two timelines, one in BW, one in color). It might be one of the best movies of the past few years, but for me that says more about the state of cinema than about Oppenheimer.
Sorry for rambling here. Many other people were blown away by Oppenheimer, and I just didn’t get it. I would love to hear someone else’s thoughts, maybe who liked the movie more.
@K- Thank you for sharing your thoughts here. I have some, but will probably wait to share them on the 2023 summation page (maybe February). I would encourage you to see it again. How do you feel about the rest of Nolan’s work aside from Oppenheimer?
I am dying to hear what you think, but I understand if you want to wait till February. My general feelings on Nolan (having not seen all his films), is roughly the same as Oppenheimer. He is not bad, though he has serious flaws: overediting, exposition, total lack of shot composition. He has basically built his entire career around a single trick, an experimental type of intercutting. It is not a bad trick, but it doesn’t make a genius (and experimental intercutting is extremely common in literature). He can be considered a great director only by the abyssmal standards of the 21st century.
I think his popularity is partially due to a tendency to equate the best works of today with the best works of the past, ignoring that the quality of cinema has declined dramatically. If Oppenheimer is the best movie of the 2020s so far (as it may well be), and will ultimately go down as one of the three or four best films of the decade, then it would have to face off against: Apocalpyse Now, Taxi Driver, and Chinatown (among others), in the 70s; Vertigo and The Searchers in the 50s; or Sunrise and City Lights in the late silent era. Is there anyone who would think Oppenheimer would come off remotely favorable in that comparison?
@K- I get it- and I’m sorry. I’m trying to spend the bulk of my time updating the top 500 list (and pushing it out to 1000) -it has been quite time consuming. I think there is some truth to what you say here. How Griffith’s Intolerance? The Dunkirk/Intolerance comparison feels like an apt one both in description and evaluation. Editing is an art form – from Eisenstein to Intolerance to the last hour of something like Requiem for a Dream from Aronofsky.
The 2020s have been rough (2023 has been the best year of the decade of already). But I’m not sure casting that shadow on the entire 21st century (2000, 2001, 2007, 2011, 2019 are are phenomenal years in cinema) can be backed up with evidence.
I must admit I’ve seen neither Dunkirk nor Intolerance. I plan to watch Battleship Potemkin tonight, so that should give me at least a bit of experiance with silent film editing. I definitely should watch Dunkirk, as people here say its Nolan’s best film. I while tell you what I think when I see Dunkirk. I agree with you that editing is an art form, but part of that art form is restraint: Nolan’s over editing does nothing but damage Oppenheimer.
.
I do think the 21st Century has been very rough. Take your to top 100 of the 2010s. Looking at only American movies, you have The Tree of Life, The Master, Dunkirk, and La La Land. An equivalent list for the 70s would have (in some order) Apocalpyse Now, The Godfather, The Godfather II, A Clockwork Orange, Barry Lyndon, Taxi Driver; a list for the 50s would have The Searchers, Vertigo, and Singin’ in the Rain.
With Singin’ in the Rain and La La Land on roughly the same level, no one, either general public or critic, would say La La Land is nearly on the level of Singin’ in the Rain. You would agree, even being much higher than the consensus on La La Land and much lower on Singin’ in the Rain. While we can debate the extent, I think it is indisputable the quality of cinema has declined significantly.
I love your site, and can’t wait for the Top 1000!
@K- Thank you for the share and the praise regarding the site!
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.
Aronofsky’s The Whale doesn’t seem that ambitious to me.
@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.
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.
@Harry-Claire Foy is my pick. If she can succeed in playing Neil Armstrong’s wife (First Man), there is no reason she won’t knock this Emily Blunt role in Oppenheimer out of the park.
@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.
@Malith – I watched again two nights in a row, which is rare but this film is so fascinating. I am almost embarrassed how wrong I was regarding Emily Blunt, not sure why I was impressed the 1st time. You are right none of her scenes worked here. I basically stand by everything else though regarding the performances. Cillian Murphy really is tremendous.
@James-Great. You agree. This is shaping up to be one of the worst Oscar nominated(most likely) performances of all-time. I think Claire Foy would have been great here. I love her performance in a similar kind of role in First Man
@James @Malith – read American Prometheus and you will appreciate the performance more.
@Harry-I don’t think reading a book will make this performance better. It was off. I mean if people think having a decent chunk of screentime and some big moments equate to a good performance it’s a sad state. I was actually surprised how brutal this performance was. I kept hoping it will come good. But nothing worked.
I would like to read a book on DiCaprio’s performance of Killers or some others. Because my main problem was his motivation/sudden changes of mood
@Malith – ” if people think having a decent chunk of screentime and some big moments equate to a good performance it’s a sad state.” really solid observation, good work.
Blunt’s performance has held up to me over four viewings. Now I am much more familiar with the real Kitty Oppenheimer I think she does well overall. In terms of ranking supporting performances I might put Downey Jr, Damon, Affleck, Clarke, Safdie, Pugh above.
@Harry-I simply wouldn’t rank Blunt’s performance. The film is better with another actor in this role in every Blunt scene. I liked Tom Conti’s performance the most in Oppenheimer, after RDJ and Murphy. He is great. Pugh is given little to do. And a side plot that could easily be cut out. Damon could have played his role in his sleep. It’s just too common and ordinary. Safdie is very good. His weird eyes certainly made an impression on me. And Oldman was so good in the scene he was in.
@Harry – thank you for the recommendation, I really should read books more consistently. Can more background on a person dramatically alter evaluating a performance? It’s a fair question to ask, not sure I have an answer.
I think she overacts, just doesn’t feel natural. In Blunt’s defense I think it should be said that she is given a stock role, the angry/disapproving wife. Its often a thankless role.
@James – for example, the scene at the end where she scowls at Teller while he is shaking hands with Oppenheimer at the Fermi awards, the book includes a photography of that handshake along with Kitty’s real expression.
The hearing scenes in the film are extremely accurate to the real life transcripts and her performance also captures how I imagine the real Kitty would have composed herself as described by witnesses.
@Harry-It’s not the expression/looks that is wrong with the Emily Blunt character. It’s she just seems off with the way she behaves and acts. What do you think about Claire Foy here? I think she would be superb.
@Malith – I haven’t seen any Claire Foy roles yet, I should see First Man at some point though and I’m sure that performance would be a good comparison with Emily Blunt here.
It’s crazy to me Chazelle’s previous film before Babylon was First Man. They couldn’t be more different. One is like the perfect snoozefest film while the other is this ambitious, flawed film where he throws it 200MPh at the viewer.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.