I'll say 9/10, because I think he's a genius, but he picks really bad scripts. It's like, you want another Prestige, Inception, Memento, and you get Dunkirk and Oppenheimer.
4/10, his movies make want to watch something else
Nolan is a 10/10. Nolan is one of the GOATs.
Nolan is a writer and director unlike Spielberg who only directs.
Nolan isn't a fraud like Spielberg, Ridley Scott and Fincher who don't write screenplays and only direct.
Scott and Fincher have never written a screenplay.
Nolan could easily only direct and make billion dollar films and own Spielberg without breaking a sweat.
I don't want to give him 10/10 because I don't think his movies are equal; Some are great and the rest are good. I think he's able to make anything acceptable and that's why even his first movie (Following) is decent, despite the clearly low budget.
To be honest, I can barely remember what happens in that. I think it was a terrible mystery because they don't even hide who the killer is. I'll have to rewatch that to give a proper answer.
It was fine for me. same forgettable but I remember Pacino doing well.
4 months ago
Anonymous
I'm a Mystery movie enjoyer and that's why it really bothers me if you know the killer before the very end. I've seen so many that I can tell you that this movie, while good, actually ripped off an Argentinian movie called The Secret in their Eyes. However, this movie is still better than Insomnia, because it actually keeps you guessing until the end.
Once you know the killer in a mystery movie, what's left? There's just killing or capturing them, and you're just watching to see if the protagonist succeeds.
4 months ago
Anonymous
I have seen pic related It was decent the ending was well done.
4 months ago
Anonymous
>the ending was well done.
It was, but like I said, it's not original. I strongly suspect the writer has seen the movie I mentioned and that gave him the idea for the ending. It's made worse because there was an American remake and so now it's like they ripped it off twice.
4 months ago
Anonymous
I mean it kinda sucks >https://www.imdb.com/name/nm2530291/
Every director you mentioned there (maybe besides Fincher) is a Freemason propagandist whose profession is to sell satanic lies. It’s not art. 0 out of 10.
I listened to the audiobook and was impressed with the amount of fairly dry material he managed to make turn into something compelling.
So far it's the best film on the subject.
Maybe I rated it so highly because I'm comparing it to tenet which really was total shit imo.
man was unknown until Oppenheimer lmao. I say 5/10 on average 10/10 for Oppenheimer. man made a film that changed cinema as we know it and deserves respect despite being an unknown for the rest of his entire career lmao
He's the rare director that ranges from 0 to 10 depending on the project. He can give you great work like Prestige, Memento and Dark Knight that is 9-10, but also give you overrated garbage like Oppenheimer, Tenet and Dark Knight Rises that is 0-1. But he also gives you mediocre, passable stuff like Inception and Batman Begins that's like 5-6. That's what makes him so special, he transcends ratings. But he's still a hack.
he's possibly the most "solid" director working today in the sense that he hasn't made a single bad film and all his projects make ROI. he's uber-competent and his strengths as a director lie in his visual sensibilities and working well with actors, but his screenwriting is not as good as some think it is (the dreaded Nolan dialogue). i wonder how well he would do directing somebody else's material, e.g. f he had a strong, uncompromising screenwriter at his side who would whack him every time he tried to change a line
He is a writer and director. Calling him just a director is an insult. Guys like Spielberg and Ridley Scott are only directors because they don't have writing skills and are frauds.
Nolan is an artist.
although he is a competent writer with a stable of interesting themes he turns to, i think he directs better than he writes. i think he's indeed an artist, although not as great as some claim he is. that said, he is an incredibly important figure in modern cinema because he's keeping original filmmaking afloat (commercially speaking) basically by himself. he's also very important in keeping film alive as opposed to digital cameras
I think so too, and the proof of this is that he fucking plays music during dialogue, like the dialogue is so bad that it's not worth hearing. At least that shows self-awareness.
8/10
Techincal skill is there, aesthetic quality is there, stories are usually there. He loses points for being a little pretentious and also the occasional LOL moment like the opening to TDKR or the entirety of Tenet.
On the whole though, one of the best modern filmmakers, he's probably the most dignified and talented "entertainment first" director out there right now (as opposed to really arthouse type guys).
10 because he's such a clever boy >characters first initials in Inception spell DREAMS >arrange certain names and key concepts in Tenet and you get the heckin Sator Square >"John F Kennedy? Never heard of him ;)" >Dr. MANN in Interstellar
overrated tryhard
5.5
Tenet
I'll say 9/10, because I think he's a genius, but he picks really bad scripts. It's like, you want another Prestige, Inception, Memento, and you get Dunkirk and Oppenheimer.
Nolan is a 10/10. Nolan is one of the GOATs.
Nolan is a writer and director unlike Spielberg who only directs.
Nolan isn't a fraud like Spielberg, Ridley Scott and Fincher who don't write screenplays and only direct.
Scott and Fincher have never written a screenplay.
Nolan could easily only direct and make billion dollar films and own Spielberg without breaking a sweat.
I don't want to give him 10/10 because I don't think his movies are equal; Some are great and the rest are good. I think he's able to make anything acceptable and that's why even his first movie (Following) is decent, despite the clearly low budget.
did you like insomnia then?
To be honest, I can barely remember what happens in that. I think it was a terrible mystery because they don't even hide who the killer is. I'll have to rewatch that to give a proper answer.
It was fine for me. same forgettable but I remember Pacino doing well.
I'm a Mystery movie enjoyer and that's why it really bothers me if you know the killer before the very end. I've seen so many that I can tell you that this movie, while good, actually ripped off an Argentinian movie called The Secret in their Eyes. However, this movie is still better than Insomnia, because it actually keeps you guessing until the end.
Once you know the killer in a mystery movie, what's left? There's just killing or capturing them, and you're just watching to see if the protagonist succeeds.
I have seen pic related It was decent the ending was well done.
>the ending was well done.
It was, but like I said, it's not original. I strongly suspect the writer has seen the movie I mentioned and that gave him the idea for the ending. It's made worse because there was an American remake and so now it's like they ripped it off twice.
I mean it kinda sucks
>https://www.imdb.com/name/nm2530291/
Every director you mentioned there (maybe besides Fincher) is a Freemason propagandist whose profession is to sell satanic lies. It’s not art. 0 out of 10.
8/10. Above average but not masterpiece level. Genre pandering filmmaker overrated by plebs.
A propagandist hack. No score for non artists.
4/10, his movies make want to watch something else
7/10
His only great movie is Memento.
Prestige is good as well.
Rest is mediocrity with a huge budget.
>rate thread
oh boy hundreds of replies i won't be reading
It’s very manipulative, cheap, and unearned.
5/10
>"so yeah that oppenheimer movie kinda sucked huh"
a youtube video in about 3 months
9/10 one few directors who still cares about cinema
I find his movies unwatchable. 0/10
6/10 he's tryharder but knows how to entertain
Memento 7/10
Insomnia 6/10
Batman begins 6/10
The dark Knight 8/10
The dark Knight rises 6/10
Prestige 6/10
Inception 7/10
Interstellar 9/10
Dunkirk 6/10
Tenet 5/10
Oppenheimer 8/10
Ratings relate to how much I enjoyed each film. I found Interstellar his most moving film, retarded plot points aside.
My opinion. Politics and memes aside.
In fact tenet was a 4
>Oppenheimer 8/10
It's barely 5/10.
I listened to the audiobook and was impressed with the amount of fairly dry material he managed to make turn into something compelling.
So far it's the best film on the subject.
Maybe I rated it so highly because I'm comparing it to tenet which really was total shit imo.
Ignore the word 'make'
>comparing it to tenet
Yeah, look it in a vacuum. I did like the score.
man was unknown until Oppenheimer lmao. I say 5/10 on average 10/10 for Oppenheimer. man made a film that changed cinema as we know it and deserves respect despite being an unknown for the rest of his entire career lmao
He's the rare director that ranges from 0 to 10 depending on the project. He can give you great work like Prestige, Memento and Dark Knight that is 9-10, but also give you overrated garbage like Oppenheimer, Tenet and Dark Knight Rises that is 0-1. But he also gives you mediocre, passable stuff like Inception and Batman Begins that's like 5-6. That's what makes him so special, he transcends ratings. But he's still a hack.
7/10
hit or miss director
you get kino like Prestige or Dunkirk
then you get shit like Oppenheimer
Only good post ITT
I think Dunkirk is mediocre and Oppenheimer is solid.
I also think Prestige is kino, though
4/10
Memento and TDK were his only good films
He gave us baneposting so I like him for that, but he's not good.
he's a solid 6 in my book.
leagues above the normie directors but since he's basically responsible for capeshit I just can't like him
he's possibly the most "solid" director working today in the sense that he hasn't made a single bad film and all his projects make ROI. he's uber-competent and his strengths as a director lie in his visual sensibilities and working well with actors, but his screenwriting is not as good as some think it is (the dreaded Nolan dialogue). i wonder how well he would do directing somebody else's material, e.g. f he had a strong, uncompromising screenwriter at his side who would whack him every time he tried to change a line
He is a writer and director. Calling him just a director is an insult. Guys like Spielberg and Ridley Scott are only directors because they don't have writing skills and are frauds.
Nolan is an artist.
although he is a competent writer with a stable of interesting themes he turns to, i think he directs better than he writes. i think he's indeed an artist, although not as great as some claim he is. that said, he is an incredibly important figure in modern cinema because he's keeping original filmmaking afloat (commercially speaking) basically by himself. he's also very important in keeping film alive as opposed to digital cameras
>i think he directs better than he writes
I think so too, and the proof of this is that he fucking plays music during dialogue, like the dialogue is so bad that it's not worth hearing. At least that shows self-awareness.
8/10
Techincal skill is there, aesthetic quality is there, stories are usually there. He loses points for being a little pretentious and also the occasional LOL moment like the opening to TDKR or the entirety of Tenet.
On the whole though, one of the best modern filmmakers, he's probably the most dignified and talented "entertainment first" director out there right now (as opposed to really arthouse type guys).
5/10
Let's not forget about Tenet
>11 ranks
why not 1 to 10 or 0 to 9?
It's complicated, but it's the better way.
10 because he's such a clever boy
>characters first initials in Inception spell DREAMS
>arrange certain names and key concepts in Tenet and you get the heckin Sator Square
>"John F Kennedy? Never heard of him ;)"
>Dr. MANN in Interstellar
do you guys see how clever he is?
Boring films but masterly safe pair of hands
What movies aren't boring to you?