109 replies to this topic

[Conlazmoodalbrocra]

It's okay to dislike INCEPTION.

Frankly, I wasn't in love with it the first time I saw it. Found it a bit of a mess. But a lot of my complaints faded when I saw it a second time and was able to get a better grasp on the overwhelming whole of Nolan's latest epic.

Well said. I liked it, although I think it certainly has its flaws.

[sharpshooter]

And if blueman disliked INCEPTION, then that's not just his choice, but his right. Nowhere is it written that audiences must love INCEPTION unconditionally.

Indeed, it's okay to dislike anything you want. We don't need permission.

[blueman]

Brosnan sucks!

(just checking )

Probably didn't help that the night before I saw it, I saw Three Days Of The Condor on the big screen, then watched Ghost In The Shell at home. What a contrast: Condor is a superlative political mind-game thriller with Redford, Dunaway, and Von Sydow all in top form, cracking good dialogue all the way through it, and one of the best denouements in modern cinema (the gasps all over the theatre attested that, 35 years on, Sydney Pollack made a damn good film). And no CGI, nothing explodes, not even a car chase.

Ghost is like Inception's older sibling, both films embrace amazing visuals while endlessly explaining to the audience what's going on to the point this movie-goer got hella bored with both. Just because a story is complex, doesn't mean the telling has to be so ham-fistedly expository-heavy (see Condor's effortless handling of layers and twists). I would probably prefer both Ghost, and all of Nolan's films, as graphic novels, where reading lots of word/thought bubbles are okay and part of the medium. In regards to the medium of film, I don't think Nolan is doing anything more than say a Michael Bay is, by that I mean he loves playing with certain things film allows you to do, but he doesn't have an innate sense or grasp of telling a story and all the visuals/ideas only bury whatever he's trying to say. I would have liked all the characters in Inception better had their conversation ratio of talking about the nuts and bolts of dream/idea-stealing whatever, and talking about things that truly matter to them been inverted, cuz it felt like about 80%-20% and that's a movie-killer IMO. When DiCaprio is explaining to Page about his wife towards the end, it felt less important than when he explained designing dreams to her earlier in the film - huh? I really wanted to care more about DiCaprio's character than I did, there was simply too much exposition in the way. Murphy's character faired better for me in that regard, he had a much more straight-forward story and his scenes were mostly about moving along that path, made me wish the film had been about him as I connected to him/his story readily enough.

There's a good story, a couple of them, somewhere in the mess that is Inception. Too bad Nolan didn't get them on up the screen, but that's par for him. IMHO.

[DominicGreene]

And if blueman disliked INCEPTION, then that's not just his choice, but his right. Nowhere is it written that audiences must love INCEPTION unconditionally.

Indeed, it's okay to dislike anything you want. We don't need permission.

I know, he can say he dislikes it. But he said it was bad, which is different than disliking it

[DamnCoffee]

I'm pretty sure it's the same thing? I think Avatar is a bad film, that's my opinion. It's basically just the same as saying you dislike it.

[blueman]

And if blueman disliked INCEPTION, then that's not just his choice, but his right. Nowhere is it written that audiences must love INCEPTION unconditionally.

Indeed, it's okay to dislike anything you want. We don't need permission.

I know, he can say he dislikes it. But he said it was bad, which is different than disliking it

I stand by my opinion: I don't like it, and I think it's a bad film (see above post for why I think it's bad). Agree that sometimes not liking a film doesn't equate to thinking it's bad, but in this case the shoe fits.

[DominicGreene]

I'm pretty sure it's the same thing? I think Avatar is a bad film, that's my opinion. It's basically just the same as saying you dislike it.

Let me give you an example. The Godfather may be a great film, but some people may not like it just because they may not be a fan of the genre, they hate drama, i dont know. But saying the Godfather is a bad film is absurd.

Superbaby: Boy Geniuses is a terrible movie, but some people still liked it. You can't say it's a good movie just because it isn't, but you can still enjoy watching it.

So therefore, saying the movie is bad is technical, saying you disliked it is personal

[Emma]

Anyone who has seen Inception, will know that Nolan deserves to direct a Bond film. I honestly hope Nolan gets a crack at Bond #24. But please keep his brother away from writing the script!

Yeah, the script sucked. But the direction was ham-fisted at best. Also hated the OHMSS ski scene recreations, just not necessary. The whole thing was like a live-action anime, flat characters saying 68 pages of exposition setting up big "drama" moments. Meh. Don't let this guy (and his hack brother) near Bond.

I was refering to Jonah Nolan's work on The Dark Knight. I actually thought that Inception was a fantastic film. The best I have seen in a very long time.

As far as I know Christopher Nolan is solely responsible for the script writing chores on Inception. And since I know that the script for Batman Begins was David Goyers' doing (with Chris cleaning it up). I am guessing that the travesty that was the Dark Knight was mostly due to Nolan's brother Jonah. I might be in the minority here. But I hated The Dark Knight I thought that it was a load of pretentious horse manure. I hated it.

I have no problem with Chris Nolan penning and directing a Bond film. Especially given the fact that he is a fan and understands and respects the character. Batman Begins is the real reason that Casino Royale turned out the way it did. Casino Royale actually remninded me of a stripped down version of Batman Begins.

What was pretentious about either of his Batman films?

The basic idea: that Wayne needed to go to Mongolia with a death wish to find himself, that he didn't know any hard sciences, that he had an unrequited love interest fueling his St. Elmo's Fire angst... that he was, in short, an emo-boy in a cape. That's Batman?? You can have him, I'll take Miller's version, thanks.

Going by that line of thought, Bond is "emo" in "QoS" and by the end of "CR". "Batman Begins" was very much influenced and informed by landmark Batman graphic novels including "Year One", "The Man Who Falls" and "The Long Halloween" as well as the fantastic animated film "Mask of the Phantasm", so to say this particular portrayal of Bruce Wayne/Batman is entirely of Nolan's creation is a bit shortsighted.

Well put!

By the way the whole premise of Bruce Wayne visiting Mongolia was taken from a Batman story called 'The Man Who Fell'.

Edited by Emma, 21 July 2010 - 05:53 PM.

[Quantumofsolace007]

my only problem with Nolan in terms of being director is his choice in villains post batman begins. there are a lot of dark twisted rogues Batman has fought and I can think of a good 7 that would make stronger story lines then the often rumored The riddler (Hush, black mask, Mad Hatter, Bane, Ventriloquist, the reaper, and Deadshot in case anyone was wondering).

why do I bring this up in a bond forum Simple I feel Nolan would just give the people what they want in a bond villain (another Graves or Carver or Blofeld) and I kinda like the more mundane looking yet still sinister villains we have been getting in Craig's bond films.


and mind you that is a small problem but for all of The Dark Knight's strengths I kept feeling like I had seen this film before. there were so many homages to Batman 1989 that i literally lost count I hot about 15 before i stopped counting.

[blueman]

Anyone who has seen Inception, will know that Nolan deserves to direct a Bond film. I honestly hope Nolan gets a crack at Bond #24. But please keep his brother away from writing the script!

Yeah, the script sucked. But the direction was ham-fisted at best. Also hated the OHMSS ski scene recreations, just not necessary. The whole thing was like a live-action anime, flat characters saying 68 pages of exposition setting up big "drama" moments. Meh. Don't let this guy (and his hack brother) near Bond.

I was refering to Jonah Nolan's work on The Dark Knight. I actually thought that Inception was a fantastic film. The best I have seen in a very long time.

As far as I know Christopher Nolan is solely responsible for the script writing chores on Inception. And since I know that the script for Batman Begins was David Goyers' doing (with Chris cleaning it up). I am guessing that the travesty that was the Dark Knight was mostly due to Nolan's brother Jonah. I might be in the minority here. But I hated The Dark Knight I thought that it was a load of pretentious horse manure. I hated it.

I have no problem with Chris Nolan penning and directing a Bond film. Especially given the fact that he is a fan and understands and respects the character. Batman Begins is the real reason that Casino Royale turned out the way it did. Casino Royale actually remninded me of a stripped down version of Batman Begins.

What was pretentious about either of his Batman films?

The basic idea: that Wayne needed to go to Mongolia with a death wish to find himself, that he didn't know any hard sciences, that he had an unrequited love interest fueling his St. Elmo's Fire angst... that he was, in short, an emo-boy in a cape. That's Batman?? You can have him, I'll take Miller's version, thanks.

Going by that line of thought, Bond is "emo" in "QoS" and by the end of "CR". "Batman Begins" was very much influenced and informed by landmark Batman graphic novels including "Year One", "The Man Who Falls" and "The Long Halloween" as well as the fantastic animated film "Mask of the Phantasm", so to say this particular portrayal of Bruce Wayne/Batman is entirely of Nolan's creation is a bit shortsighted.

Well put!

By the way the whole premise of Bruce Wayne visiting Mongolia was taken from a Batman story called 'The Man Who Fell'.

Got no problem with Wayne/Batman going to Mongolia, it's how he went in BB that was so anti-everything Batman stands for IMO.

I realize the character's been around for many decades now, and has had 100s if not 1000s of stories written about him. IMHO what makes Wayne/Batman stand out from the pulp-hero pack (or maybe exemplify it?) is that he never went through a poor-me phase, he was "created" for all intents and purposes in Crime Alley, then retreated into himself as children will do and applied himself to everything he possibly could (in hiding as it were). Found his calling as an adult one I'm-so-bored evening and that was that. Adding too much to the simple yet elegant creation destroys it IMO. Just not a fan of over-analyzed Batman.

[Zorin Industries]

Fine. Let him direct a Bond. But just don't let him write the thing.

[blueman]

Fine. Let him direct a Bond. But just don't let him write the thing.

Gaaah. I hated his direction of Inception the way some people hated Forster's direction of QOS. No no no.

But that's just one old dude's harmless opinion.

[TQB]

i think they should wait and let him introduce the next bond after Craig

[The Shark]

No. Craig still deserves something far better than CR and QOS.

[DominicGreene]

No. Craig still deserves something far better than CR and QOS.

Craig was lucky to get something as good as CR!

[blueman]

No. Craig still deserves something far better than CR and QOS.

Craig was lucky to get something as good as CR!

And even luckier to get an even better QOS!

[DamnCoffee]

my only problem with Nolan in terms of being director is his choice in villains post batman begins. there are a lot of dark twisted rogues Batman has fought and I can think of a good 7 that would make stronger story lines then the often rumored The riddler (Hush, black mask, Mad Hatter, Bane, Ventriloquist, the reaper, and Deadshot in case anyone was wondering).

why do I bring this up in a bond forum Simple I feel Nolan would just give the people what they want in a bond villain (another Graves or Carver or Blofeld) and I kinda like the more mundane looking yet still sinister villains we have been getting in Craig's bond films.

Well, maybe an outlandish villain is what Craigs Bond needs now. I'd have no problems with it, I would prefer that however outlandish they are, they were still grounded in reality, though.

[volante]

my only problem with Nolan in terms of being director is his choice in villains post batman begins. there are a lot of dark twisted rogues Batman has fought and I can think of a good 7 that would make stronger story lines then the often rumored The riddler (Hush, black mask, Mad Hatter, Bane, Ventriloquist, the reaper, and Deadshot in case anyone was wondering).

why do I bring this up in a bond forum Simple I feel Nolan would just give the people what they want in a bond villain (another Graves or Carver or Blofeld) and I kinda like the more mundane looking yet still sinister villains we have been getting in Craig's bond films.

Well, maybe an outlandish villain is what Craigs Bond needs now. I'd have no problems with it, I would prefer that however outlandish they are, they were still grounded in reality, though.

How about someone like FRANK BOOTH from Blue Velvet?

[Garth007]

So I went and seen Inception thursday and i must say that the movie is heavily bond influenced and i must say after watching the movie I most defenitly want him as director for bond movies espicially for OHMSS. any one who seen the movie might know what im talking about.

[DominicGreene]

So I went and seen Inception thursday and i must say that the movie is heavily bond influenced and i must say after watching the movie I most defenitly want him as director for bond movies espicially for OHMSS. any one who seen the movie might know what im talking about.

I didn't notice the OHMSS reference but now that i think about it, it was.

Edited by DominicGreene, 27 July 2010 - 12:01 AM.