"In-depth analysis of Chris Nolan's techniques by David Bordwell" Tue Aug-21-12 02:51 PM by The Analyst
This fucking thing is a really long read, but I found it extremely interesting - an incredibly detailed breakdown of Christopher Nolan's strengths and weaknesses as a filmmaker. Very sober analysis. (Ebert calls Bordwell the best film critic in America.)
I think it's too long to actually swipe, but this excerpt kind of sums up the piece:
"Nolan’s work deserves attention even though some of it lacks elegance and cohesion at the shot-to-shot level. The stylistic faults I pointed to above and that echo other writers’ critiques are offset by his innovative approach to overarching form. And sometimes he does exercise a stylistic control that suits his broader ambitions. When he mobilizes visual technique to sharpen and nuance his architectural ambitions, we find a solid integration of texture and structure, fine grain and large pattern."
Frank Longo Member since Nov 18th 2003 86673 posts
Tue Aug-21-12 03:10 PM
1. "Great piece. I agree with basically all of it." In response to Reply # 0
I admire the scope and reach of Nolan's work and his desire to try to flesh out some neat gimmickry, and certainly if imperfect the Dark Knight trilogy is definitely trying something new (even if, like the article suggests, it's easy to poke holes in Nolan's buckshot approach to sociopolitical relevance).
I think Bordwell finds that Inception holds together slightly better than I find it to on multiple viewings. His "is a fifth layer the breaking point?" hypothetical seems to suggest his opinion is that Nolan pulls it off, and while I think Nolan does pull it off, he certainly sacrifices things like character and visual storytelling in spots to make it work, whereas The Prestige seems far more balanced to me-- I'm taken into the parallel stories without noting "wow, look at how many balls Nolan is keeping in the air!"
6. "RE: Great piece. I agree with basically all of it." In response to Reply # 1 Tue Aug-21-12 06:18 PM by The Analyst
>I admire the scope and reach of Nolan's work and his desire >to try to flesh out some neat gimmickry, and certainly if >imperfect the Dark Knight trilogy is definitely trying >something new (even if, like the article suggests, it's easy >to poke holes in Nolan's buckshot approach to sociopolitical >relevance). > >I think Bordwell finds that Inception holds together slightly >better than I find it to on multiple viewings. His "is a fifth >layer the breaking point?" hypothetical seems to suggest his >opinion is that Nolan pulls it off, and while I think Nolan >does pull it off, he certainly sacrifices things like >character and visual storytelling in spots to make it work, >whereas The Prestige seems far more balanced to me-- I'm taken >into the parallel stories without noting "wow, look at how >many balls Nolan is keeping in the air!"
I agree with you. When you watch Inception, the whole time you're cognizant of the fact that you're watching what amounts to a big tricky gimmick. (But I like how Bordwell points out how each of the four dream levels are each "built on classic Hollywood plot arcs.")
This article actually lessened my (already fairly low) opinion Nolan's technical acumen but increased my appreciation of the way he structures his films.
3. "again, all praise due for Inception" In response to Reply # 0
which is basically The Prestige + Memento on crack. he spent the entire movie explaining his magic trick, showing the magic trick work on other people, and at the end, the audience was *still* fooled.
11. "Then for me it was a nightmare." In response to Reply # 10
I am not anti-Nolan by any means, I think Memento gets a bad rap (so what if it's a gimmick, the movie works) and while I don't think Dark Knight is the greatest trilogy ever I understand why some it is for some people.
But Inception... man do I hate Inception. 50 viewings of a movie like that will do it to a man.
5. "Nolan's visuals *look* smooth and glossy cuz Wally is a good DP..." In response to Reply # 4
But, as the Bordwell post points out, his uneconomical and illogical editing strategies and unimaginative compositions makes his shit feel clunky.
As for the M. Night comparison, I don't have a dog in that fight, but I can at least say that you'd probably love one of Bordwell's old pieces where he talks about some plot holes Marty left in Shutter Island - he basically says they were things Shyamalan would have cleaned up if it was him directing.
13. "that's a Hella long read" In response to Reply # 0
i honestly skimmed through 45% of it, BUT...
i never really thought of the effect (or technique) fast cuts/edits and how it plays a role in the narrative and the way characters and stories develop. that was new and interesting food for thought to me.
the best part IMO was him speaking on how Hollywood really doesn't make political films or politically poignant films, even when they attempt to
Frank Longo Member since Nov 18th 2003 86673 posts
Thu Aug-23-12 11:35 AM
17. "He might be *the* best." In response to Reply # 16
He's great at making ideas which are very "film school" extremely accessible and rarely intimidating. Like, you could show that Nolan article to someone who just likes Nolan films, and while they may disagree, they should be able to understand what he's saying about style and structure.
He's just a really good teacher when he writes. Which more writers should aspire to.
Printer-friendly copy 
Email this topic to a friend
Pass The Popcorn
