PAPA NOL∀N'S TENƎꓕ | August 26 internationally. September 2 "in select US cities" | 75% on RT after 228 reviews

[JB33]

2 minutes ago, James said:

I actually take Interstellar over Inception but that might be because space opera is by far my fav subgenre.

Loved Interstellar as well. It's, for me, by far Nolan's most emotional film. Matthew McConaughey is tremendous in it.

[Alli]

6 minutes ago, CoolEric258 said:

Surprised nobody's offered Chris Pine yet. He seems like "Nolan lead" material, and both of his Patty Jenkins productions have wrapped up. It'd also make 2020 the Summer of Pine.

WW is too close to Nolan's movie. It would be a conflict of interest ....plus promo

[TLK]

I can't read all 16 pages but is there any real news about this project or any credible rumors ? Thanks.

Edited January 27, 2019 by TLK

[Nova]

Just now, TLK said:

I cna't read all 16 pages but is there any real news about this project or any credible rumors ? Thanks.

No. Just Nolan boot licking, fan castings and imaginary stories/ideas 

Edited January 27, 2019 by Nova

[SLAM!]

I want to prolong the discussion about a film we know almost nothing about, so I'll share an anecdote about the time I was with my family and The Prestige was being shown on HBO.

 

I had already known an idea of the mind-bending plot twist that the film has. And when my family was watching it, they thought that the plot twist was pretty interesting. I could tell that the film was really good.

 

But things felt a little awkward when I was trying to eat some sort of dessert and depressing Radiohead was playing during the film's credit sequence. Thanks a lot, Nolan.

[Plain Old Tele]

Are we talking about INTERSTELLAR?

[TMP]

rank the nolan joints

[BoxOfficeFangrl]

2 hours ago, CoolioD1 said:

no amy adams too. she's taken implicit shots at him a bunch of times in interviews post-american hustle. saying she won't ever work with "aggressive" directors again. saying she's worked with directors who are bullies. the lines are easy to read between.

When the Sony leak happened, there were emails revealed about David O acting like a lunatic (even by his standards) on the set of American Hustle, that he treated Amy Adams so badly that Christian Bale apparently stepped in to confront him about it. Christian Bale, who has his own Infamous onset meltdown, which really shows you how bad David O. Russell must have been.

 

 

I heard an interview once where Nolan was asked which actress he would cast to play his mother in a movie and his answer was Glenn Close (his mother's American). She's having a moment now, would love to see her in some sort of role in one of his movies.

 

But the Gosling speculation makes a lot of sense, another blondish actor who can play a Nolan avatar of sorts.

[shayhiri]

Nolan is dead to me.

 

OK, half-dead - because Dunkirk wasn't a complete howler.

 

So the Shay doesn't care about any movie Nolan might or might not make - until he proves he can make good movies again.

 

So I am only interested in the Nolan movie AFTER this one - and only in case this one is not a failure.

 

Edited January 27, 2019 by shayhiri

[Plain Old Tele]

Let's talk again about an all-too-familiar subject: Christopher Nolan and his semi-intelligible movies. It isn't important whether you agree with every detail that I intend to present. What matters is that you begin to realize that if there is any fixed star in Nolan's constellation of brusque deeds, it's that all of the foregoing information has been served up as a necessary prelude to understanding the motive and force behind the current mad rush by Nolan and his partisans to spit in the face of propriety. I say that because Nolan's ultimatums are worthy of a good flush down the toilet. The logical consequences of that are clear: When I'm through with Nolan he'll think twice before attempting to rob, steal, cheat, and murder. 

 

When I hear Nolan say that he was chosen by God as the trustee of His wishes and desires, I have to wonder about him. Is he absolutely delirious? Is he simply being brain-damaged? Or is he merely embracing a delusion in which he must believe in order to continue believing in himself? I don't pretend to know the answer, but I do know that Nolan's egregious display of dark, gritty Dead Wife Syndrome has no place in our society. This is worth noting because anyone who is genuinely effrontive must also be genuinely base-minded. Nolan is both. This tells us that he asserts that because he is beyond reproach, we should all give up on acknowledging and respecting the essential humanity of all of Earth's people. The logic in that sequence escapes me. Perhaps Nolan is in fact confirming that whenever he wants to convince someone that the rigors that his victims have been called upon to undergo have been amply justified in the sphere of concrete achievement, he turns instinctively to long words and exhausted idioms, like a cuttlefish spurting out ink. These words and idioms are intended to distract the listener from noticing that I once announced quite publicly that Nolan has been working under a veil of bureaucracy and secrecy to meddle in everyone else's affairs. When I announced that, Nolan could not be found for comment. Perhaps he was embarrassed that he has been trying to popularize the narrative that we should cast our lots with inerudite scrubs. My fear is that if he's successful at promoting such cockamamie notions then even the man on the Clapham omnibus may agree to let him shatter and ultimately destroy our most precious possessions. 

 

For the moment, let's take Nolan at his word, that he's not opposed to people contributing to the intellectual and spiritual health of the body politic. If that's the case, then why is he so compelled to complain about situations over which he has no control? Perhaps our answer should be that a central fault line runs through each of his equivocations. Specifically, he presents himself as a disinterested classicist lamenting the infusion of politically motivated methods of pedagogy and analysis into higher education. Nolan is eloquent in his denunciation of modern scholarship, claiming it favors meretricious cheapjacks. And here we have the ultimate irony because as much as I dream about delegitimizing Nolan, that's not going to happen immediately. Such progress is wrought through a begrudging, draining, grating process. The first step is for all of us to acknowledge that Nolan believes that the problem with men is that they mar our great nation with sadism and that the problem with women is that they help batty, brutal misosophists back up their prejudices with “scientific” proof. Attitudes like those are an affront to both sexes. In reality, Nolan is the problem—not men or women in general, just Nolan in particular. Let me end this post with a call to action. Please join those of us who are indicating in a rough and approximate way the two uncompanionable tendencies that I believe are the main driving force of modern collaborationism, and through your support we will look into the future and consider what will happen if we let Christopher Nolan subvert existing lines of power and information. Together we will address the real issues faced by mankind. Together we will denounce his communications.

[CoolioD1]

2 minutes ago, Telemachos said:

Let's talk again about an all-too-familiar subject: Christopher Nolan and his semi-intelligible movies. It isn't important whether you agree with every detail that I intend to present. What matters is that you begin to realize that if there is any fixed star in Nolan's constellation of brusque deeds, it's that all of the foregoing information has been served up as a necessary prelude to understanding the motive and force behind the current mad rush by Nolan and his partisans to spit in the face of propriety. I say that because Nolan's ultimatums are worthy of a good flush down the toilet. The logical consequences of that are clear: When I'm through with Nolan he'll think twice before attempting to rob, steal, cheat, and murder. 

 

When I hear Nolan say that he was chosen by God as the trustee of His wishes and desires, I have to wonder about him. Is he absolutely delirious? Is he simply being brain-damaged? Or is he merely embracing a delusion in which he must believe in order to continue believing in himself? I don't pretend to know the answer, but I do know that Nolan's egregious display of dark, gritty Dead Wife Syndrome has no place in our society. This is worth noting because anyone who is genuinely effrontive must also be genuinely base-minded. Nolan is both. This tells us that he asserts that because he is beyond reproach, we should all give up on acknowledging and respecting the essential humanity of all of Earth's people. The logic in that sequence escapes me. Perhaps Nolan is in fact confirming that whenever he wants to convince someone that the rigors that his victims have been called upon to undergo have been amply justified in the sphere of concrete achievement, he turns instinctively to long words and exhausted idioms, like a cuttlefish spurting out ink. These words and idioms are intended to distract the listener from noticing that I once announced quite publicly that Nolan has been working under a veil of bureaucracy and secrecy to meddle in everyone else's affairs. When I announced that, Nolan could not be found for comment. Perhaps he was embarrassed that he has been trying to popularize the narrative that we should cast our lots with inerudite scrubs. My fear is that if he's successful at promoting such cockamamie notions then even the man on the Clapham omnibus may agree to let him shatter and ultimately destroy our most precious possessions. 

 

For the moment, let's take Nolan at his word, that he's not opposed to people contributing to the intellectual and spiritual health of the body politic. If that's the case, then why is he so compelled to complain about situations over which he has no control? Perhaps our answer should be that a central fault line runs through each of his equivocations. Specifically, he presents himself as a disinterested classicist lamenting the infusion of politically motivated methods of pedagogy and analysis into higher education. Nolan is eloquent in his denunciation of modern scholarship, claiming it favors meretricious cheapjacks. And here we have the ultimate irony because as much as I dream about delegitimizing Nolan, that's not going to happen immediately. Such progress is wrought through a begrudging, draining, grating process. The first step is for all of us to acknowledge that Nolan believes that the problem with men is that they mar our great nation with sadism and that the problem with women is that they help batty, brutal misosophists back up their prejudices with “scientific” proof. Attitudes like those are an affront to both sexes. In reality, Nolan is the problem—not men or women in general, just Nolan in particular. Let me end this post with a call to action. Please join those of us who are indicating in a rough and approximate way the two uncompanionable tendencies that I believe are the main driving force of modern collaborationism, and through your support we will look into the future and consider what will happen if we let Christopher Nolan subvert existing lines of power and information. Together we will address the real issues faced by mankind. Together we will denounce his communications.

you just keep going back to this well huh. it's like your version of the dead wife thing.

[Plain Old Tele]

Just now, CoolioD1 said:

you just keep going back to this well huh. it's like your version of the dead wife thing.

 

We can’t all be lion tamers, Coolio. 

[elcaballero]

15 minutes ago, Telemachos said:

Let's talk again about an all-too-familiar subject: Christopher Nolan and his semi-intelligible movies. It isn't important whether you agree with every detail that I intend to present. What matters is that you begin to realize that if there is any fixed star in Nolan's constellation of brusque deeds, it's that all of the foregoing information has been served up as a necessary prelude to understanding the motive and force behind the current mad rush by Nolan and his partisans to spit in the face of propriety. I say that because Nolan's ultimatums are worthy of a good flush down the toilet. The logical consequences of that are clear: When I'm through with Nolan he'll think twice before attempting to rob, steal, cheat, and murder. 

 

When I hear Nolan say that he was chosen by God as the trustee of His wishes and desires, I have to wonder about him. Is he absolutely delirious? Is he simply being brain-damaged? Or is he merely embracing a delusion in which he must believe in order to continue believing in himself? I don't pretend to know the answer, but I do know that Nolan's egregious display of dark, gritty Dead Wife Syndrome has no place in our society. This is worth noting because anyone who is genuinely effrontive must also be genuinely base-minded. Nolan is both. This tells us that he asserts that because he is beyond reproach, we should all give up on acknowledging and respecting the essential humanity of all of Earth's people. The logic in that sequence escapes me. Perhaps Nolan is in fact confirming that whenever he wants to convince someone that the rigors that his victims have been called upon to undergo have been amply justified in the sphere of concrete achievement, he turns instinctively to long words and exhausted idioms, like a cuttlefish spurting out ink. These words and idioms are intended to distract the listener from noticing that I once announced quite publicly that Nolan has been working under a veil of bureaucracy and secrecy to meddle in everyone else's affairs. When I announced that, Nolan could not be found for comment. Perhaps he was embarrassed that he has been trying to popularize the narrative that we should cast our lots with inerudite scrubs. My fear is that if he's successful at promoting such cockamamie notions then even the man on the Clapham omnibus may agree to let him shatter and ultimately destroy our most precious possessions. 

 

For the moment, let's take Nolan at his word, that he's not opposed to people contributing to the intellectual and spiritual health of the body politic. If that's the case, then why is he so compelled to complain about situations over which he has no control? Perhaps our answer should be that a central fault line runs through each of his equivocations. Specifically, he presents himself as a disinterested classicist lamenting the infusion of politically motivated methods of pedagogy and analysis into higher education. Nolan is eloquent in his denunciation of modern scholarship, claiming it favors meretricious cheapjacks. And here we have the ultimate irony because as much as I dream about delegitimizing Nolan, that's not going to happen immediately. Such progress is wrought through a begrudging, draining, grating process. The first step is for all of us to acknowledge that Nolan believes that the problem with men is that they mar our great nation with sadism and that the problem with women is that they help batty, brutal misosophists back up their prejudices with “scientific” proof. Attitudes like those are an affront to both sexes. In reality, Nolan is the problem—not men or women in general, just Nolan in particular. Let me end this post with a call to action. Please join those of us who are indicating in a rough and approximate way the two uncompanionable tendencies that I believe are the main driving force of modern collaborationism, and through your support we will look into the future and consider what will happen if we let Christopher Nolan subvert existing lines of power and information. Together we will address the real issues faced by mankind. Together we will denounce his communications.

I blame Jonathon Nolan.

[filmlover]

3 hours ago, CoolEric258 said:

Surprised nobody's offered Chris Pine yet. He seems like "Nolan lead" material, and both of his Patty Jenkins productions have wrapped up. It'd also make 2020 the Summer of Pine.

Ben Foster also seems like obvious Nolan Lead material but I feel like he's still not high-profile enough yet.

[redfirebird2008]

10 minutes ago, filmlover said:

Ben Foster also seems like obvious Nolan Lead material but I feel like he's still not high-profile enough yet.

 

Ben Foster is a badass. Would be cool to see him in a Nolan flick. 

[The Futurist]

I remember Dunkirk's announcement  "leaked" because the major couldn't keep his mouth shut.

[The Futurist]

There are so many hot takes on/against Nolan that he has now become

under-rated.

[The Panda]

Christopher Nolans and the Dead Wives

By The Panda (and an AI Bot)

 

Christopher Nolan had always loved euphoric heavenly realms with its delightful, decomposing dead wives. It was a place where he felt deadpan.  He was a dead-serious tea drinker with charming fingers and stoic abs. His friends saw him as a Savior. Once, he had even rescued a dead wife from a burning building, even though she was already dead. That's the sort of man he was.

 

Christopher walked over to the window and reflected on the sausage fest surrounding him. The rain hammered like singing foxes.  Then he saw something in the distance, or rather someone. It was the figure of God . God was a stoic being with beautiful fingers and blonde abs.  Christopher gulped. He was not prepared for God.

 

As Christopher stepped outside and God came closer, he could see the warm smile on his face.  God gazed with the affection of 3226 brass dripping dolphins. He said, in a hushed tone, "I love you and I want you to make movies."

 

Christopher looked back, even more stoic, he was speechless and could only think of his dead wife.

 

"Christopher, you are the future of Hollywood," God boomed.

 

Christopher stood in awe and looked into the eyes of God.  They looked at each other with deadpan feelings, like two obnoxious, ordinary owls skipping at a very stoic funeral, which had Zimmer music playing in the background and two stoic uncles boating to the beat.

 

Christopher regarded God's beautiful fingers and blonde abs. "I feel the same way!" revealed Christopher with a delighted grin.  God looked Serious, his emotions blushing like a fresh, fierce Fifth Dimension.  Then God came inside for a nice cup of tea, to provide more details of the exposition he required Christopher to place in his movies.

THE END 

[Kvikk Lunsj]

Can’t wait. Most anticipated movie for 2019-2020

[Valonqar]

Actors I would like to see over already super known:

 

Winston Duke, Adam Driver, Steven Yeun, Danai Gurira, Rebecca Ferguson, Gemma Chan EDIT: Margot Robbie

 

 

Edited January 27, 2019 by Valonqar