Is Christopher Nolan among the alltime greats?

[4815162342]

To the question, my answer is "No way in hell". Let's wait and see in 20 years...

 

Pretty much. He's made a bunch of very good films but he has a ways to go.

[vc2002]

Is not yet. But is going to be.

[The Futurist]

Elitists.

If not Nolan, then who else ?

[The Panda]

Better young and modern filmmakers than Nolan

Cuaron, Linklater, Innaritu, Jonze, PTA and Wes Anderson, Docter, Coens, Del Torro, and the list goes on.

Memento and The Dark Knight are strong films, and the rest of he makes solid movies. But he isn't one of the greats as of right now. The Dark Knight Trilogy and Inception will go down as classics because of how big they were as hits, but a lot of that Dark Knight credit in box office comes from Ledger and the fact its about batman. Nolan wouldn't have the legion of Internet fanboys proclaiming him as the next coming if it weren't for the fact he made a serious portrayal of Batman.

[Goffe]

Cuaron, Linklater, Innaritu, Jonze, PTA and Wes Anderson, Docter, Coens, Del Torro, and the list goes on.

what are you smoking?

maybe Coens and PTA, but even then that's debatable. lol at  Innaritu, Del Toro and Linklater.

Edited April 25, 2015 by Goffe

[The Futurist]

Better young and modern filmmakers than Nolan

Cuaron, Linklater, Innaritu, Jonze, PTA and Wes Anderson, Docter, Coens, Del Torro, and the list goes on.

Memento and The Dark Knight are strong films, and the rest of he makes solid movies. But he isn't one of the greats as of right now. The Dark Knight Trilogy and Inception will go down as classics because of how big they were as hits, but a lot of that Dark Knight credit in box office comes from Ledger and the fact its about batman. Nolan wouldn't have the legion of Internet fanboys proclaiming him as the next coming if it weren't for the fact he made a serious portrayal of Batman.

Most of the filmmakers you list are only known from cinephiles.

Ask the average Joe and he d probably know the Coens because of True Grit or Del Toro if he s a bit geeky but that s it.

All the other never had a movie that broke out to mainstream audiences, except Gravity but people refer to it as the Bullock movie in space movie not the cuaron movie.

People don t know who direct Pixar movies either. Hell, some people might confuse Pixar with other animated brands anyway.

Those names are relevant but I am talking about being a mainstream beloved filmmaker which Nolan has become.

The two other mainstream filmmakers that have a big following are Tarantino and Fincher.

But from his generation, there is no filmmaker who has such a rabid fanbase and his fans love Memento, The Prestige, Inception and IS as much as the Dark Knight trilogy.

Edited April 25, 2015 by The Futurist

[The Panda]

what are you smoking?

maybe Coens and PTA, but even then that's debatable. lol at  Innaritu, Del Toro and Linklater.

 

Cuaron = Gravity, Children of Men, Prisoner of Azkaban, and Y Tu Mama Tambien.  All of those are stronger films than anthing Nolan has made.  Now, I wouldn't list Cuaron among one of the greats either.

 

Innaritu is a much better director than Nolan, he just doesn't do mainstream movies.

 

Del Torro's newer movies aren't as strong as his older ones but Pan's Labyrinth and Devil's Backbone are both much stronger than anything Nolan has made.  He's also not one of the greats, but I could see him in the future being considered one of the great Horror film makers.  

 

Linklater is fantastic, he has Boyhood, the Before trilogy, Dazed and Confused, School of Rock, etc.  He is very diverse and one of the strongest and most original filmmakers working today.

 

Most of the filmmakers you list are only known from cinephiles.

Ask the average Joe and he d probably know the Coens because of True Grit or Del Toro if he s a bit geeky but that s it.

All the other never had a movie that broke out to mainstream audiences, except Gravity but people refer to it as the Bullock movie in space movie not the cuaron movie.

People don t know who direct Pixar movies either. Hell, some people might confuse Pixar with other animated brands anyway.

Those names are relevant but I am talking about being a mainstream beloved filmmaker which Nolan has become.

The two other mainstream filmmakers that have a big following are Tarantino and Fincher.

But from his generation, there is no filmmaker who has such a rabid fanbase and his fans love Memento, The Prestige, Inception and IS as much as the Dark Knight trilogy.

 

Making popular films doesn't make a filmmaker one of the greats, it helps if its a massive hit.  But Nolan's rabid fanbase are mostly there because of the Dark Knight trilogy, and a rabid fanbase doesn't make a filmmaker great.  Twilight and 50 Shades of Grey have rabid fanbases, but it doesn't make them great.  Is Nolan a pop culture icon?  Sure.  Can he currently be considered one of the greats on par with Spielberg, Scorsese, and Kubrick?  Not in hell's chance right now.

 

Also, ask the average non-cinephile who Orson Welles, Hitchcock, or John Ford are and they probably won't be able to answer.  Doesn't mean theyre not part of the greats.

Edited April 25, 2015 by The Panda

[Squaremaster316]

Cuaron = Gravity, Children of Men, Prisoner of Azkaban, and Y Tu Mama Tambien.  All of those are stronger films than anthing Nolan has made.  Now, I wouldn't list Cuaron among one of the greats either.

 

Innaritu is a much better director than Nolan, he just doesn't do mainstream movies.

 

Del Torro's newer movies aren't as strong as his older ones but Pan's Labyrinth and Devil's Backbone are both much stronger than anything Nolan has made.  He's also not one of the greats, but I could see him in the future being considered one of the great Horror film makers.  

 

Linklater is fantastic, he has Boyhood, the Before trilogy, Dazed and Confused, School of Rock, etc.  He is very diverse and one of the strongest and most original filmmakers working today.

 

 

Memento, Inception, Interstellar and the Dark Knight are easily on par if not better than any of Cuaron's best films.

 

Innaritu is solid, but his pound per pound filmography falls below Nolan's

 

Del Toro Has Pan's Labyrinth, the only film of his I consider on par with TDK, Memento or Inception.  Films like Mimic and the drastically overrated Blade 2 (At least by casual fans) make his overall filmography slightly less impressive.

 

Linklater is the only one on the list that I would rank up there with Nolan, even with lackluster efforts like Bad News Bears and Newton Boys on his resume.

 

Pound per pound, PTA and Fincher are the only two living, active directors I would compare to Nolan.

[Goffe]

Cuaron = Gravity, Children of Men, Prisoner of Azkaban, and Y Tu Mama Tambien.  All of those are stronger films than anthing Nolan has made.  Now, I wouldn't list Cuaron among one of the greats either.

 

Innaritu is a much better director than Nolan, he just doesn't do mainstream movies.

 

Del Torro's newer movies aren't as strong as his older ones but Pan's Labyrinth and Devil's Backbone are both much stronger than anything Nolan has made.  He's also not one of the greats, but I could see him in the future being considered one of the great Horror film makers.  

 

Linklater is fantastic, he has Boyhood, the Before trilogy, Dazed and Confused, School of Rock, etc.  He is very diverse and one of the strongest and most original filmmakers working today.

Nolan's worst is better than A Little Princess, Great Expectations, Y Tu Mama Tambien

Innaritu has only Birdman that could be comparared to any of the Nolan films. And I never implied that he's not as good as Nolan because he doesn't do mainstream movies.

I can't comment on GDT filmography, I've seen only Hellboy and its sequel, Pan's Labyrinth and Pacific Rim. Nolan top 5 is better than all those films

Just because of Boyhood, people are acting like Linklater is a visionary director or something, he did 20 films before Boyhood and I never saw anyone putting him up there with the best recent movie directors. I admittedly have seen only Boyhood, but I've seen some parts of School of Rock, it looks nothing out of the ordinary.

[Jake Gittes]

Linklater had something of a creative decline there roughly between 2006 (A Scanner Darkly) and the back-to-back-to-back punch of Bernie, Before Midnight and Boyhood, but that doesn't mean anyone's "acting" now, it just means they either forgot or didn't know how good he can be. I'll take the Before trilogy over all of Nolan's films combined. 

[CoolioD1]

Linklater basically defined the 90s indie aesthetic w/ slacker (along with soderbergh who really should be brought up in the discussion of modern greats as well as someone with awesome cinematic range). I think he deserves a bit more credit than being the boyhood guy.

 

btw Inarritu? INARRITU?!?!? can we not?

[The Panda]

Memento, Inception, Interstellar and the Dark Knight are easily on par if not better than any of Cuaron's best films.

 

Innaritu is solid, but his pound per pound filmography falls below Nolan's

 

Del Toro Has Pan's Labyrinth, the only film of his I consider on par with TDK, Memento or Inception.  Films like Mimic and the drastically overrated Blade 2 (At least by casual fans) make his overall filmography slightly less impressive.

 

Linklater is the only one on the list that I would rank up there with Nolan, even with lackluster efforts like Bad News Bears and Newton Boys on his resume.

 

Pound per pound, PTA and Fincher are the only two living, active directors I would compare to Nolan.

 

I'd disagree with what you said about those films.  Only Memento and The Dark Knight are on par with Children of Men, Azkaban, and Gravity.

 

Inarritu is probably a bad example, he isn't very comparable and is a very different kind of director.  I shouldn't have brought him up.

 

Del Torro's early works are better than anything Nolan made besides Memento and the Dark Knight (Although I'd say Pan's Labyrinth and Devil's Backbone are both of them fairly easily), when he went Hollywood I'll agree he's worse than Nolan.

 

PTA and Fincher are both easily better filmmakers than Nolan, I forgot to mention Fincher (there were quite a few I did forget to mention that were around Nolan's level, I was just giving a summation).  Nolan is a really good (and consistent) director, don't get me wrong, but he's not the second coming that everyone makes him out to be, far from it actually.  Also, just because Nolan has had fairly good consistency lately, it doesn't make him one of the greats, it doesn't mean he'll never be one of the greats, but he has to truly earn it first and he hasn't, none of these directors that we are talking about truly have (Linklater and Fincher are worth discussing if they're some of the greats or not.  They're directors that this thread should be about, not Nolan).  This thread will be much more interesting in ten years or so when Nolan has more to show for than a couple of high concept thrillers, a batman trilogy, and a space epic that received polarizing reception.

 

 

Nolan's worst is better than A Little Princess, Great Expectations, Y Tu Mama Tambien

Innaritu has only Birdman that could be comparared to any of the Nolan films. And I never implied that he's not as good as Nolan because he doesn't do mainstream movies.

I can't comment on GDT filmography, I've seen only Hellboy and its sequel, Pan's Labyrinth and Pacific Rim. Nolan top 5 is better than all those films

Just because of Boyhood, people are acting like Linklater is a visionary director or something, he did 20 films before Boyhood and I never saw anyone putting him up there with the best recent movie directors. I admittedly have seen only Boyhood, but I've seen some parts of School of Rock, it looks nothing out of the ordinary.

 

I'll give you Great Expectations, but Y Tu Mama Tambien and Little Princess are solid films and easily better than The Dark Knight Rises, and I'd say better than Insomnia and The Prestige (I have no idea how people are so in love with this) as well.  I'd also say they're nearly on par with Inception.  Besides, Nolan's worst is probably better than Spielberg's for example, but Nolan isn't close to being on the level Spielberg is yet (one of the greats), and neither is Cuaron.

 

You're acting like all Nolan films are masterpieces, they're not, that's fanboyism talking (the only director that I listed that I think is at the stage to discuss if he's one of the greats or not is Linklater)

 

I'll disagree with you heavily on Pan's Labyrinth.  It's a masterpiece.  But I'll give you modern Del Torro that directs Pacific Rim, Blade 2, and Hellboy is not better than Nolan, old Del Torro that directed spanish masterpieces like Pan's Labyrinth and Devil's Backbone definitely is.

 

I was talking about Linklater being one of the greats before Boyhood was released, before I had seen it, and before I had even known about it.  His Before Trilogy ranks within my top 25 movies of all time, and I'd definitely say Boyhood will end up there too.  Sure he had a bit of a slump after Before Sunset, but all directors do.

[Goffe]

TDKR worse than a Little Princess, like seriously

[Goffe]

You're acting like all Nolan films are masterpieces, they're not, that's fanboyism talking (the only director that I listed that I think is at the stage to discuss if he's one of the greats or not is Linklater)

5 of his movies get a 100/100 from me, so I think you would classify me as a fanboy.

[The Futurist]

Well there s no doubt to me that Nolan will be the kind of director that will define his era whether you think there were better directors than him or not won t change that fact.

Saying who s better than x or y isn t really relevant.

Hey, there s a big studio just right now who wants to create a cinematic universe based on Nolan s footprint and tone. They are literally betting billions on this.

Nolanized is already an adjective.

Edited April 26, 2015 by The Futurist

[Chriss]

A good example of one of the all time greats is Steven Spielberg. That man is so much more diverse than Nolan. Spielberg is able to tackle popcorn blockbuster (Jaws, Jurassic Park) as well as character drama (Lincoln), family entertainment (E.T.) and dark war movies (Shindler's List, Saving Private Ryan).

 

Nolan is very good but he's clearly specialized in darkness.

 

What I find really interesting in Nolan's filmography is that his films are like a timeline/representation of the film industry;

Doodlebug - 1900s - Short black and white films

Following - 1920s - Cheap, shot on film, black/white, crappy audio

Memento - 1930/1940s - Transition between color/black-white, intriguing dramatic investigation story, with a plot twist

Batman Begins - 1960s/1970s - Adaptation of a literary work, practical effects heavy blockbuster

The Prestige - 1980s - Dark sci-fi story

The Dark Knight - 1980/1990s - Crime drama, practical effects heavy blockbuster with CGI, high quality

Inception - 1990s/2000s - Original blockbuster heavily based on effects to tell its story

The Dark Knight Rises - 2000s/2010s - The dark and gritty sequel to an acclaimed movie

Interstellar - 2010s/future(?) - Original feature film reaching the masses through online word-of-mouth

 

This isn't waterproof but that's been on my mind, whether it's on purpose or not.

 

I do think that especially his first features have given him so much insight on how filmmaking works when you're stuck with a lot of limitations. Something that Spielberg and Lucas have not really experienced.

[dashrendar44]

 

I do think that especially his first features have given him so much insight on how filmmaking works when you're stuck with a lot of limitations. Something that Spielberg and Lucas have not really experienced.

 

What do you mean?

[Jake Gittes]

Spielberg had a ton of limitations on Duel and Jaws. 

[dashrendar44]

Spielberg had a ton of limitations on Duel and Jaws. 

 

Spielberg is mostly a self taught filmmaker. He literally learnt his craft through limitations as an autodidact as he didn't go to any film school or attend USC. Spielberg is a guy who knows what limitations are like to be experienced and working around his frustrations. See Bruce's constant dysfunction that became the reason why he went for "less is more" suggestion to build audience's anxiety rather than showing everything for a greater effect.

Edited April 26, 2015 by MADash Rendar

[Chriss]

What do you mean?

I said something wrong. I horribly mis-intepreted Spielberg's pre-Jaws filmography. But what I meant mostly that Nolan didn't just get the big budgets like he's getting nowadays.

 

Recently I watched an interview where he explained that a lot of the creative choices that make Following so great were only chosen because they didn't have much money for the production. Nolan build up nicely from cheap movies to big budgets.