|
Post by ArchdukeOfNaboo on Mar 20, 2024 21:31:08 GMT
Nolan gave his long time backer, Warner Bros., the middle finger after the treated him badly in 2020 with their silly rushed streaming service and lack of respect for cinema. He's not a hostage to any studio, hence why Oppenheimer was financed instead by Universal. One of the most eloquent speakers on the issues affecting the film industry today along with Scorsese.
Hostage to the studio system. And yes, quite eloquent; as is Scorsese. But I'd never confuse that with service to a greater good. It's okay to like more than one director. Nolan isn't hostage to anyone or thing except his imagination, the studio is there for financing just like a bank is for you or I in a mortgage for a house. They don't determine what he writes, nor how he directs. Like with Lucas after ANH, Nolan had a big hit of his own in The Dark Knight and that's earned him considerable leverage in the industry ever since. His films are expansive and expensive, he can't just turn any independent studio, unfortunately; money doesn't grow on trees. The window for setting up a new Lucasfilm is gone, that was the 70s, before the advent of our neoliberal world order of trillion dollar corporations and Saudi golf leagues.
I'm not Nolan nor Scorses's biographer. I don't follow their personal lives closely, I can't tell you what acts of benevolence they've done. What I do know however is that Nolan keeps a low profile, not having a smartphone nor using email. He's a humble, soft-spoken man who likes let his films do the talking.
|
|
Somny
Senator
Posts: 461
Member is Online
|
Post by Somny on Mar 20, 2024 22:11:56 GMT
Hostage to the studio system. And yes, quite eloquent; as is Scorsese. But I'd never confuse that with service to a greater good. It's okay to like more than one director. Nolan isn't hostage to anyone or thing except his imagination, the studio is there for financing just like a bank is for you or I in a mortgage for a house. They don't determine what he writes, nor how he directs. Like with Lucas after ANH, Nolan had a big hit of his own in The Dark Knight and that's earned him considerable leverage in the industry ever since. His films are expansive and expensive, he can't just turn any independent studio, unfortunately; money doesn't grow on trees. The window for setting up a new Lucasfilm is gone, that was the 70s, before the advent of our neoliberal world order of trillion dollar corporations and Saudi golf leagues.
I'm not Nolan nor Scorses's biographer. I don't follow their personal lives closely, I can't tell you what acts of benevolence they've done. What I do know however is that Nolan keeps a low profile, not having a smartphone nor using email. He's a humble, soft-spoken man who likes let his films do the talking.
For the record, I love Nolan and Scorsese! I just have a bit more goodwill toward Lucas for the reasons cited et al. I'm sure we all do. And I believe there's always room for radicals and their own support structure in any field, any time and any where. But as Spielberg once said (in essence), "George is a once-in-a-generation filmmaker."
|
|
Somny
Senator
Posts: 461
Member is Online
|
Post by Somny on Mar 21, 2024 15:46:33 GMT
I wonder what exactly constitutes preaching or lecturing in Nolan's opinion? I mean, one could easily accuse George's Star Wars movies as being preachy simply because they have a moral compass. At what point does one cross the line into preachiness? No, I don't think Lucas film's are preachy. They don't go out of their way to lecture the audience, nothing is forced, it's all natural. While themes are definitely present, it's not like everyone finds them either. Star Wars can be enjoyed by anyone. Nolan never specified any film or director in that interview. Perhaps something to press him on, should you ever get a chance to pop a question to him.
From 1999, Lucas' response to a concern that he may be "preaching a little bit" in his films: 13:12 - "Well, I'm not sure whether preaching is such a bad thing... And so - being a parent, being a dad - I can't help but lecture. It's in my nature."
|
|
|
Post by smittysgelato on Mar 21, 2024 21:20:22 GMT
I wonder what exactly constitutes preaching or lecturing in Nolan's opinion? I mean, one could easily accuse George's Star Wars movies as being preachy simply because they have a moral compass. At what point does one cross the line into preachiness?
No, I don't think Lucas film's are preachy. They don't go out of their way to lecture the audience, nothing is forced, it's all natural. While themes are definitely present, it's not like everyone finds them either. Star Wars can be enjoyed by anyone.
Nolan never specified any film or director in that interview. Perhaps something to press him on, should you ever get a chance to pop a question to him.
Which filmmakers or films do you think are preachy?
|
|
|
Post by Alexrd on Mar 22, 2024 10:13:19 GMT
From 1999, Lucas' response to a concern that he may be "preaching a little bit" in his films: 13:12 - "Well, I'm not sure whether preaching is such a bad thing... And so - being a parent, being a dad - I can't help but lecture. It's in my nature."Some people have an aversion to simple displays of basic morality, and would label anything like that "preachy". No, a story can have a strong moral message and not be preachy, just like it can be preachy with amorality or nonsense. Preachiness has to do with how a story is told, not necessarily what's being told.
|
|
|
Post by stampidhd280pro on Mar 22, 2024 10:28:31 GMT
Yeah exactly. Star Wars isn't preachy very often. Probably the preachiest one is Episode III "liberty dies". Most of the message is allegorical. Not deeply, of course. But easy enough to be understood on a conscious level by the typical 11 year old, or conscious six year old. THX 1138 kind of straddles the preachy/irreverent pole too. It has a message, even a hopeful one, but it's kind of abstract and the movie itself is not easy to immediately digest.
|
|
|
Post by Alexrd on Mar 22, 2024 11:13:51 GMT
I'd say THX 1138 is just not subtle about what it's trying to convey.
"Buy more. Buy more now." "Blessings of the state, blessings of the masses."
Ironically, I think time has been kind with that lack of subtlety. Which is another similarity THX has with 1984.
|
|
|
Post by stampidhd280pro on Mar 22, 2024 11:23:01 GMT
The latter half of the movie, the way out, isn't as clear. The hologram in the void has to show you lol
|
|
|
Post by Alexrd on Mar 22, 2024 11:33:37 GMT
Right, I was mostly referring to the society/environment that's established than THX's personal journey of daring to leave.
|
|
|
Post by Subtext Mining on Mar 22, 2024 21:14:03 GMT
The movie deals with heavy issues and is incredibly prescient of our current society. Yeah, in a lot of ways I feel it's the most accurate of the dystopian novels/movies. At least in terms of trajectory - the one I can see most likely happening. And the funny or ironic thing about that, in a way, is everytime I see one of those memes with a Venn diagram, or ikigai, or some timetable with all the dytstopian tales, saying, "You are here", none of them ever have THX 1138 on them.
|
|
Somny
Senator
Posts: 461
Member is Online
|
Post by Somny on Mar 23, 2024 0:42:01 GMT
An apt metaphor is a meal. It's never just raw vitamins and minerals. That goes without saying. But a concern arises when a fundamental regard for nutrition goes by the board and we're inured to a diet of mostly empty calories. If we don't exercise and practice smart dining choices, we're just asking for illness and infirmity.
That's why GL matters. Culinary wizard that he was, he ran his kitchen with an ample regard for both flavor and heartiness.
|
|
|
Post by Seeker of the Whills on Mar 23, 2024 8:05:38 GMT
The movie deals with heavy issues and is incredibly prescient of our current society. Yeah, in a lot of ways I feel it's the most accurate of the dystopian novels/movies. At least in terms of trajectory - the one I can see most likely happening. And the funny or ironic thing about that, in a way, is everytime I see one of those memes with a Venn diagram, or ikigai, or some timetable with all the dytstopian tales, saying, "You are here", none of them ever have THX 1138 on them. Still haven't watched it fully (I will rectify that mistake, for I have incurred the wrath of Alexrd), but the prescience of the film is what made it difficult to sit through for me. I love dystopian sci-fi movies (my favorite movie outside of Star Wars is 12 Monkeys) that deal with social issues and work as mirrors for our current state in this world, but none have ever had the effect that THX 1138 has. In my country, medication is very commonplace, so that aspect of THX felt very familiar. It's a very well-made film, especially for Lucas' first feature film, and I agree it seems to be underrated. Even Lucas himself has downplayed its importance. I remember a pretty recent interview where the interviewer said she liked THX, and Lucas replied that "no one else did."
|
|
|
Post by Subtext Mining on Mar 23, 2024 15:52:13 GMT
It's not that I think it's bad or dislike it, it just fills me with a strange sensation of emptiness and anxiety. but the prescience of the film is what made it difficult to sit through for me. I love dystopian sci-fi movies (my favorite movie outside of Star Wars is 12 Monkeys) that deal with social issues and work as mirrors for our current state in this world, but none have ever had the effect that THX 1138 has. Well that's a good sign, it means Lucas did his job, that's the feeling he was trying to evoke. He says the movie is a depiction of what he felt society was like during those times. And THX is supposed to be an inspiration for those who want something more... human. I see the underground world in the movie as an allegory for the prison of the mind. Applicable to anyone in any era who is stuck conforming to the ills of society, and wants to get out. It is not a sign of good health to be well adjusted to a sick society, as Krishnamurti says.
|
|
|
Post by smittysgelato on Mar 23, 2024 20:23:01 GMT
The Krishnamurti influence on Lucas is real and not often talked about.
|
|
|
Post by ArchdukeOfNaboo on Mar 24, 2024 0:23:45 GMT
No, I don't think Lucas film's are preachy. They don't go out of their way to lecture the audience, nothing is forced, it's all natural. While themes are definitely present, it's not like everyone finds them either. Star Wars can be enjoyed by anyone. Nolan never specified any film or director in that interview. Perhaps something to press him on, should you ever get a chance to pop a question to him.
Which filmmakers or films do you think are preachy? I'll go looking for the Nolan interview where he mentions it. It'll take a while, I've watched many. Give me some time. In any case, I think Alex summed up the distinction well here:
I believe Nolan was referring to the fact that films don't necessarily need to be political discourses and they definitely don't need to throw it in one's face (ie making a secondary character a poorly disguised representation of an audience member and have them lectured to - how a story is told). In a simple film it is is okay to be apolitical, in fact shoehorning it in will only take away from the joy of it.
"aRt bY dEfiNiTioN iS pOliTicAl. yOu CaNnOt eScApE iT"
Saids Mr. Sophomore. No, relatively speaking, calling for elections every 4-5 years or due process is not political. These are acceptable democratic norms, things taken for granted in a modern society like constitutional rights and responsibilities. When we say "political" what we imply is being partisan on a highly charged political issue.
By the way, I'm okay with films exploring moral issues and there's many ways to do, subtle and blatant. Had Oppenheimer been truly political there would have been an outright condemnation of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki atomic bombings, or even making them in the first place, no matter who the enemy was. Instead, he weapons of mass destruction are treated as morally ambiguous and/or a necessary evil. This is a milk toast stance in the US, so far as I'm aware, nothing controversial. I like delving into grey areas too, it's fun to pit the contradictions against one another and understand how some issues aren't as clear-cut.
Barbie, on the other hand, so I'm told, was a polemic wrapped up as a seemingly innocuous adaption of a popular children's toy. This is what I'd call shoehorning, it's not some art house realism oscarbait where contemporary politics are par for the course.
|
|
|
Post by stampidhd280pro on Mar 24, 2024 0:44:51 GMT
You should watch Barbie too.
|
|