Is Christopher Nolan Overrated?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 27 июл 2024
- Christopher Nolan is many things. He is one of the most popular directors working today. But is he overrated? Watch my breakdown of each of the common criticisms leveled against him.
Socials:
Patreon Page: / latarax
Instagram: / latarax5
Tik Tok: / latarax
Twitter: / latarax
Music Used:
Cold Dead Hands - Tigerblood Jewel
Car Songs - Epocha
Muita Calma - Martin Landstrom
The Orange Tree - Wendy Marcini
Bootlick - Heigh-Ho
Knockin on Whoever's Door - The Big Let Down
Top of the Top - Matt Large
Turtleneck - Martin Landstrom
Dismantle - Peter Sandberg
Dust Bunny - Ryan James Carr
#christophernolan #oppenheimer #videoessay
Chapters:
0:00 Christopher Nolan Is...
2:34 The Main Criticisms
4:00 Why Is Nolan Great?
9:22 Does Nolan Overexplain?
12:43 Plot Over Characters?
18:58 Are Nolan's Ideas Too Big?
No copyright infringement is intended, all materials are used for commentary purposes under fair use. 
Кино
![Cordae - Saturday Mornings (feat. Lil Wayne) [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/z2GYJua09F0/mqdefault.jpg)
I wish you good luck on your youtube journey bro
thanks! hope you stick around for it
Jesus Christ! Will you just get to the point?
Nolan's biggest issues:
* Paper thin soulless characters
* Over-explains everything
* Tired trope of mixing timelines
IMO the only movie with that trope that actually works is Inception
Short answer? Yes. Long answer? Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeees.
touche.
Most overrated and overhyped director in the history of cinema
After seeing Oppenheimer my advice to him would be "Go back to film school and learn how to write a GOOD script" Sorry Chris but 3 hours of guys talking at a desk does not qualify
It would have been improved with better characterization, but most of his films I've seen are severely lacking in that regard.
@@camdencoblentz3245 This movie is what I call ...trailer trash!!. Its all about the pop images to sell Murphy in the role. Theres really not much there otherwise
@@rolphylewis6196 With Oppenheimer (For me) he's starting to be the Emperor who has no pants. Shooting stuff on Imax doesn't turn you into a visionary. I thought Oppenheimer was a colossal bore. I was expecting so much more. Endless scenes of government men sitting around desks interrogating Oppie? 3 hours of it??
The best part of Christopher Nolan movies is Jonathan Nolan’s writing.
The two write together, Jonathan is good but he didn't write all of Chris's films. Inception is an excellent film and Chris wrote it himself. Oppenheimer is also another example.
I know I'm in the minority when I consider his best film to be "The Prestige," but I do believe his use of nonlinear story lines complimented "The Prestige" in the most appropriate capacity. By the nature of the story being a rivalry between two magicians, the shifting (and/or "misdirection" (a word magicians use)) of narratives turns the story into a guessing game until the secrets reveal themselves at the end - again, like a magic trick. Additionally, "The Prestige" probably compelled Nolan to withhold a lot of his notorious expository dialogue in order to simply not give much of the film away in the beginning and middle. Plus, on a personal note: when "The Prestige" came out in 2006, it came out after "The Illusionist," another movie about magicians in the late 19th Century. And IMO, "The Prestige" was leagues better than "The Illusionist," so that, rather artificially, inflates it for me.
I've seen a lot of love for The Prestige online, I can completely see that. it does feel like a more polished experience compared to some of his other movies.
The prestige is my favorite movie of all time.
Agree with you, as much as I like Edward Norton, The Prestige is superior to The Illusionist, but the later movie was more popular at that time, in fact, I didn't discover The Prestige until much later.
Somehow The Prestige was the one Nolan film I had not seen until just a couple weeks ago, but it quickly became one of my favorites as well. Watched it twice in 2 weeks lol
Same for me. Oppenheimer would be my second favorite of Nolan’s work. Christ is great, his craft of crosscut is top notch.
Is Christopher Nolan overrated? Is the sky blue?
I'm glad your video exists because it's not that recurring a question on RUclips. I enjoyed the earlier Nolan movies, that relied more on characters and personal conflicts, like The Prestige and Insomnia; to me the shift happened with Batman and Inception. Don't get me wrong, I really enjoyed these movies, but this Nolan pounding sound whenever something dramatic took place was just...Still, I thought I'd give Nolan another try this summer with Oppenheimer, because of Cilian Murphy and I thought the idea was extremely compelling. But these were the longest three hours of my life. When I left the theatre, I was unable to relate to Oppenheimer, let alone characterize this protagonist, I didn't know what he believed in, what his inner turmoils were. I thought the whole convincing to join the Manhattan Project was poorly executed, the secondary plot completely unnecessary and that Nolan got lost in the project. I don't understand why he felt he had to write the script himself. Why enumerate all the scientists and drown the audience, who is mostly non scholar in physics with useless information instead of just focus on few detailed and key relationships? I felt I was seeing an "avengers" reunion of physicist. And let's not talk about the pointlessness of Florence Pugh's scenes and Emily Blunt's character depiction - she drinks and she hangs laundry and she sulks. Anyway...except for the true spectacle that was the Trinity test, it felt like a completely missed opportunity.
I understand that, in this day and age, with the current state of cinema, Nolan now is considered among the very few bankable household names that can make billions on his own, but I feel like that power has gotten to its head and that he's let go of all the basic cautionary tales of screenwriting. (I mean, the deposition scenes were an insult to the Social Network, which I'm sure he must have watched...)
I'm not saying he is a bad director, I'm saying he should pass on the screenwriting baton to someone whose job it actually is.
I have a lot of issues with Christopher Nolan's style, and I found that Oppenheimer was another example of that. Maybe not as egregious as Tenet, Dunkirk, or Interstellar, but I'm so tired of his shallow characterization, overly complicated dialogue, and drawn out storytelling. While I realize it can be challenging for nonfiction films depending on information available, it was disappointing how I barely felt like I got to know Robert Oppenheimer as a character. The few moments where we caught a glimpse of it were among the few highlights for me, but there were far too few in an overly long film, and Emily Blunt felt so wasted.
This is the perfect comment to sum up Oppy
Nolan has ultimately failed to join the ranks of the cinema‘s greats. Instead he became thinking man’s Cameron. But his loyal fanbase will never accept this. Just borrowing from other directors like Kubrick, Tarkovsky, Scott or Kurosawa doesn't make you an innovator or visionary. The fact is that Nolan hasn't invent anything and actually he doesn't even have his own distinctive film language. Hollywood is in a terrible shape right now, or like Karl Kraus would say: "When the sun of culture is low, even dwarves will cast long shadows”. Cheers!
I think he still has time to carve out his legacy. He's probably halfway through his career at this point, and I think Oppenheimer has shown that he can approach familiar material with a unique angle. I would disagree that he doesn't have a visual style, some of his frame compositions are very uniquely Nolan. But I can see what you mean by him borrowing from others.
Thanks for your comment!
You are not wrong in comparing Nolan with Cameron, in fact, I think that Nolan is Cameron's successor, both have commercially and critically successful films (very few), they are great action and science fiction shows (and at least one historical drama ), both are very interested in scientific topics (being a fan, it's one of the reasons I'm attracted to their films).
Now, who is Nolan's succesor? this is open to debate, but I think is Dennis Villeneuve, he has also prove to be a master of sci-fi and other genres too, Dune 2 is going to be a great success.
@@latarax Give it some time, when the man hits it's 60s or 70s, there will probably be more people who praise him, that Nolan does not have a distinctive cinematographic language is a lie, the man has precisely built his "style", to the point where I can identify a film of his by its cinematography, give Wally Pfister and Hoyte van Hoytema some credit, the man has promoted IMAX like non else, just like Cameron did wih 3D (dead format now) back in 2009 with Avatar, saying that it was the future of cinema, same is happening with IMAX right now (sadly, I don't have IMAX in my country, I still managed to watch Oppenheimer in the biggest movie screen I could find).
@@jesustovar2549 Villeneuve and Nolan are actually contemporaries as they’ve started their careers in the same year, however I prefer the latest three Villeneuve movies to the latest three Nolan movies.
@@homelessathome Villeneuve is light years ahead of Nolan in storytelling. Nolan can never make a mature movie like Incendies. He heavily relies on technical stuff to cover for his immature screenplay.
If Christopher Nolan makes a film, I'll go see it because he does things that nobody else does. But I don't LOVE any of his movies and I have major issues with just about all of them. He's a talented unique director making movies that are very different from the mainstream Hollywood movies. But he also does dumb shit like blasting music during the dialogue so you have no idea what anyone is saying. If we lived in an alternate reality where every movie was an original concept and directors regularly experimented with new ideas, I expect that Christopher Nolan would probably be somewhere towards the middle of the pack. But since we don't live in that world, Christopher Nolan is the best we have at what he does. So is he overrated? Unfortunately... no.
well said! I can respect that perspective. there is no other Christopher Nolan.
That explains why I feel I don't really "need" Nolans films and he is, yeah, kinda overrated. Because there are so many great filmmakers in film history and also so many great lesser known filmmakers (more than I'll ever have the time to watch their movies in my life time). I don't care too much what mainstream Hollywood does at the current time. But for everybody for whom Nolan just scratches the right itch - I'm happy for you! You found something you like, yay!
I was just about to say the same thing. He stands out because he’s one of the only people trying to do original things. Though I do believe the subject matter of his movies makes them more interesting than other directors doing original things. He also sticks to the theme and the concepts advertised. For instance, imagine a Dr Strange directed Nolan movie. He’d actually give the different dimensions some type of rule set or meaning, tangible traction between the worlds that have positive and negative consequences based on character decisions. Also in Iron Man one, I wouldn’t have minded if the theme was a mixture between Tony becoming more self aware about what his inventions can do to innocent people, and him Mcgivering out of seemingly more or less difficult situations like he did in the cave. But the third second and third acts felt less focused on the two themes, or things that I thought would become themes. In short, a lot of writers out there don’t know how to stay on subject imo. And don’t know what the audience might be anticipating.
So yes and no. He stands out because of the lack of original content, but he also tries to stay on subject as much as he can. He delivers a more engrossing experience imo than most directors there. That doesn’t mean that he is perfect. I have to forgive a lot of his choices to enjoy the movies, and I have to buy into a lot of his concepts which isn’t always easy.
Loved this video, great job as usual!
Thanks for watching!
IDK who can challenge him at the top. I think he's up there with Tarantino, Fincher, Scorsese and the like. They all have positives and negatives, but I think what they do well is astronomically better than what others try to do well. They're all artistically distinct, and you cannot really compare them, but they have a gift of getting an idea through in their own ways.
For instance, I'm not going to watch Tarantino and expect to see elaborate concepts that put me into deep thought during or after seeing the film. With Nolan I don't expect to see compelling dialogue or the use of devices to hide exposition through conflict. They all have areas that may leave more to be desired if you think that anyone can make a perfect movie or filmography.
Instead I treat them and all writers and directors as individuals (outside of Disney directors since disney allows research groups and comittees to influence their scripts). I treat them as if they were standing in front of me telling a story. I'm not going say "wait, don't tell your story that way, tell it like this." because that goes against the principle of artistic expression in that it is an individual expressing something to you. What I find with Nolan and the others is that they can get an idea through without stuttering, they stay on subject and build a comprehensive story through their own strengths and weaknesses. Whereas most other directors don't understand the structures of story, and cinematic language enough to get their ideas through. A lot of directors don't even utilise the "theme, motif and symbol" web. Don't know the literary device of "emotional wound" and how it informs the "lie the character believes about themselves and or the world." And even if they introduce both, they fail to keep the traction alive. Those are basic structures in the architecture of storytelling that allow you to build skyscrapers and put your own artistic spin on them. You can't really build from the third floor up, since storytelling and cinematic language involve psychologically persuasive principles that work with or without a screen. But studios are hiring people that they can influence for the sake of wishlists fulfillment and research. Not caring about imparting an emotional and transformative experience onto audiences.
So I believe he's rated right where he should be rated, with all of his postivies and negatives taken into account. The positives of other lower tier directors aren't enough to outweigh the negatives.
Well said!
Amazing video ! Investing in this channel
Thanks! Hope you stick around
I'm a Nolan fan and definitely not have short term memory. My favorite Nolan film is INCEPTION. But being completely honest, TENET is what many people call "Style over substance". The "Inversion" concept is what makes the movie interesting, but comparing it to a similar movie/story from Nolan which is Inception, I can definitely say that TeneT is a very basic movie with not even a "complex" or thought provoking plot.
The story is literally about stopping a russing guy from destryoing the world. Is basically The Terminator but without Arnold. Too much exposition (and considering how much exposition Inception already has it tells you something about TeneT.)
I never felt connected with "The Protagonist" in any way but in the other hand in Inception, all the characters have something that makes them interesting.
I really dig the way you speak man. Sub'd
I don't understand the ongoing hype, when it comes to Mr Nolan. The same can be said, when it comes to Mr Oppenheimer. Still...I accept them both.
I like ur shirt
The amount of exposition i witnessed in Oppenheimer 😂
That's called quality content!
Nolan's current problem is his villains are not human. Making lifeless time the villain in every movie will give you flat performances because there is no emotion being felt or acted. Dunkirk themed the struggle of war but no big star to hate. Just planes. Interstellar doesn't have a villain, but the struggle of space and time. Oppenheimer makes the struggle of science and bomb creation the villain but where are the Nazis to show the race against time rather than tell us? And Tenet? Nobody knows what's going on. The Russian guy kinda shares Mat Damon's screen minutes in interstellar. Overall, the better the bad guy the better the film as Hitchcock says. That's why Dark Knight worked so well.
Inception was his last great film. Inception had amazing story, screenplay and technical stuff. His later movies heavily relied on technical stuff while the story and screenplay took backseat. Pretty much the case in TDKR, it is one of the silliest and dumbest superhero movies. While Interstellar was technically brilliant, it's story and screenplay were pretty average. I am yet to watch Oppenheimer, so I will refrain from commenting on it.
I can see where you're coming from, though I'd say Dunkirk is hard to argue against. And you should definitely check out Oppenheimer!
@@latarax Yes, Dunkirk is a really good movie. It is a different and refreshing movie making from Nolan. I will definitely check out Oppenheimer.
@@ramakrishnamitta7024if you haven’t, watch the making of inception. It’s my second favorite Nolan movie but I noticed it is more focused on the main character’s emotional wound than it is on any of his other films. In the making you see that Leo actually ghost wrote much of the script. He challenged Nolan’s original ideas for his characters and said that the character must continuously go through turmoil, and that emotional turmoil has to naturally bleed into his arc, or change of perspective, behavior, emotion. So I think what Nolan lacks is a second writer that’s really good with creating emotional traction for his characters. Not that they don’t, but a lot of times I see his characters more concerned with keeping the concept of the movie alive and fresh while sacrificing the emotional traction from their wounds or keeping the traction alive.
@@ramakrishnamitta7024 Let me tell you, when I saw Dunkirk (really regret not watching it in theatres), I thought that it was his most brilliant and mature film yet, and then I saw Oppenheimer which now I refer as his "GREATEST AND MOST MATURE FILM YET", I know that might be a stretch, but I think it's because is based on a true story and it isn't something totally inveted, in films like this, you're not worried for plot holes except historical mistakes, much of the hate from Dunkirk comes from certain historical inaccuracies, I think the movie gets really overhated, and most so because people believes Nolan wanted to achieve being nominated in every Oscar category (especially best director and best film), at least it's worth because of all the craftmanship and the period setting (I'm just a fan of vintage things and historical dramas).
@@VonJay Ok, what about Jonathan Nolan, I've seen many people believing that he was the real genius behind the scripts, will Chris ever work with his brother again?
the lines in his movies are very mediocre, he just blasts the score to make the scene more dramatic m. i think he’s overrated
you have to ask?
I’d say Nolan is hit or miss. I always appreciate that he always swings for the fences and there’s a few films of his I think are boss. And there’s a few of his movies that don’t do it for me
good video,
Thanks!
I think Christopher Nolan might seem overrated due to the fact that not many other great directors get enough recognition as he does.
Yes.....
fr
Gladiator is a masterpiece. Oppenheimer is not.
Doesn't mean either director isn't extraordinarilly talented.
They both are. But not all their works are masterworks/masterpieces.
Goat talk
Just ask yourself if you ever have a desire to rewatch any of his films over and over again. They are huge movies but I never feel anything after his films. Yes, they look cool and blah blah blah but they’re empty. Batman and Memento are excellent movies but for the twitter generation, they regard him as one of the greatest, ever. Style over substance
Empty is an accurate word to describe how I've felt about all or his more recent films starting with Interstellar. Even Oppenheimer, which had its moments, still failed to leave a lasting impression on me.
He gets too much hype just for using practical effects and shooting on IMAX. Is it something other filmmakers can't do?
yes.
Yes
Christopher Nolan has made some of the most "just okay" movies I've ever seen.
Are his highs high though?
@@latarax they only are if his brother's writing the screenplay
yes he is
yes
People just call him overrated because of Tenet, ignoring all his great movies.
nah, i think all his movies after batman are pretentious and focuses way to much on concepts, he is a good filmmaker, but his stories are so damn bland.
@@emptyforrest bland?
@@Duddy8822 yes, nolans movies tend to focus much less on characters and more on events or concepts. so his stories are not that great in my opinion, there is a difference between story and plot however, and the plots of his movies are often very interesting. and on a technical level he is also a great filmmaker.
honest question, how many memorable characters have you seen from his films? and in contrast how many of his film do you remember almost entirely what they are about?
dont know if that makes any sense but that is how i feel about him.
@@emptyforrest nah that does make sense. I’m a massive Nolan fan but I actually agree with you, he doesn’t really focus on characters too much. And yea, you’re right about him not really having many memorable characters.
Tbh I always just loved his movies due to the plot, they might be confusing at times but for me I find them really entertaining. But yeah, interesting point you brought up there because I genuinely never thought of it that way.
To be honest, as important as compelling characterization is to me, film characters that are not memorable don't automatically ruin a movie for me. For example, I really enjoyed Nope from 2022, but I found most of the characters very uncompelling. However, the execution and storytelling made up for that. Unfortunately for Christopher Nolan, not only are most of his characters lacking in quality to me, but his storytelling style really comes off as pretentious and overly-complicated, and combining that with shallow characterization is why his films continue to disappoint me most of the time.
I refer to Christopher Nolan as the master of the lullaby.
Booo
Yes.
Hmm, elaborate?
@@latarax no.
bruh bro trying to be riddler or smth
@@latarax He's someone that buy the newest thing because he think its better then the old thing even tho it has so many bugs and is barely cohesive.
short answer no lol
This guy is a Nolan apologist.🥱
Still this man saved cinema which is drowned in wokeness. But yes dark knight series was mess , Matt Reeves batman is better !
i think holywood is overrated
I can tell you exactly where the “Nolan is overrated” claim began- it was Red Letter Media.
I think this is the most objective analysis regarding Christopher Nolan being "overrated" (a word that sometimes I think is "overused"), about Nolan not having the filmography of Hitchcock, I think Nolan has risen to a status as a director comparable to Hitchcock in his time, both are masters at what they do, capable of mind-blowing thrillers with sometimes unexpected twists (David Fincher comes close to me), both came from Britain with their families and established themselves in Hollywood, both were very succesful critically and commercially, to the point where even the average moviegoer would've heard of them (in the case of Hitchcock, because of his cameos, trailers and even posters, the man knew how to sell himself), both filmmakers have succeded in being movie stars, just like the actors who starred in their films.
I don't know if I should be sorry to admit it, but I am what you would they call a "Nolan fan", except that I am one of the healthier fans out there and I try to defend myself as best as I can (life is worthless if there isn't anything to defend), I am a fan of his work as well as the work from Hitchcock, Kubrick, Coppola, Scorsese, Spielberg, Cameron, Burton, Mann, Fincher, Tarantino, PTA, etc... I love auteur cinema and I open myself to new approaches to the Art, especially today when Hollywood is bloated with "franchise exploitation", Nolan was right to describe himself as "an indie director working in the studio system", many directors have entered like that, he is a man who became successful and commercial thanks to his Batman trilogy (even with it's flaws, they are objectively better than most superheroe movies).
there's no shame in liking Nolan! it doesn't make you a lesser fan of movies, despite what some might suggest. thanks for watching, glad you enjoyed
Nolan is over rated not because of himself. But because of his normie fans who praise and put him on a pedestal every sane minded person would disagree with .
For example.
Nolan is a billionaire, rich and fluffy, new money guy . Who has adhd and everything about him is nerve racking.
Now Scorsese, Kubrick,PTA, quarantino , park chan wool , akira Kurosawa , Francis Ford Coppola. They are Old Money , calm and cautious with their money .
Like the Rothschild family .
Nolan has to learn to tame himself and get used to his money
Yeah man, interstellar has really bad writting. That shit about love transcending time and space? Made me fuckin sick
Ugh that stuff was so cheesy and rudiculous I was like "seriously?!". But worse was that many people thought this was deep and thougtful. There are many aspects where thinking about it makes the film worse. The soundtrack, plus the meme of the main character crying is timeless ;)
@@alpenjon Well it's not that far fetched actually, many of the things human beings have achieved have been through or because of love, for anything, love for a woman, or family, or a country, call it cheesy or whatever, but it's not far from the truth, it might fail on the deliverance of the line, I don't blame Anne Hathaway, she's excellent and one of my favorite actresses.
I'm glad I'm not the only one who thought this - it was just pure schmaltz. Mammalian group bonds are transitory, utterly irrelevant in the context of a 13-billion-year old, 93-billion-light-year-across universe.
No. People like to tear his movies to shreds because of the praise they get from others, and the fact that they don’t align with typical storytelling convention, I’m not talking about structure, but the interstellar love speech is an example of a sentiment that upsets Western/Modern sensibilities so ppl use that to denounce the work
Oppenheimer was a flop and I walked out at 2.5 hours. Shame on you for making such a crappy movie.
Just say u confused when u watched his movies broo hahaa..cause I confuse too LOL, but I still enjoyed it, watched it all manny times, he is not the Greatest, however... he is also Great
Yes. Wtf was interstellar? The most predictable and boring movie I’ve ever seen.
Easily one of the most boring films I've ever seen, not to mention dragged out to the extreme.
Yes
yes.