Christoper Nolan on 3D, Digital vs. Film, CGI and why he always wears vests
- Thread starter jett
- Start date
- Status
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
We love the Nolman.
I've never wanted film to die out. I'm really hoping film and digital can live side by side for a good, long while. I just know that is being very naive.
Most of GAF(and everywhere else) really likes Chris Nolan. The haters are a tiny minority.
This transcends Nolan-hate. Even if I didn't like Nolan's movies I'd fully support his "3d can eat my dick" stance.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
There is no Nolan hate club. There are posters that enjoy really enjoy his films and think he's a very talented filmmaker, but enjoy tearing down those that act like he's Kubrick. On GAF, 'hate' seems to mean a lack of unquestioning loyalty and verbal blowjobs.
I can't think of anybody on GAF that actually hates Nolan.
And that tiny minority is more vocal most of the time.
We're not talking about Cameron here.
That's always the case with everything. No matter the topic.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Of course we're not. Plenty of people show actual, ridiculous hate for Cameron. Why do you always gotta bring up Cameron? We're trying to talk about Nolan here. Every fucking time on GAF, I swear.
BlueTsunami
there is joy in sucking dick
Love his opinion on 3D and its pretty much the issue I had with Avatar
With Digital Photography I think its almost hit a point where they're equal. Thing is Film still has a very nice roll-off of highlights to shadows where digital can feel abrupt and clips. I believe Digital Sensors for Cine purposes are not as well developed as ones for stills. We're seeing a merging of the two though.
Then there's other aesthetic choices like color reproduction and grain. If you already have a film you prefer that provides you with most of what you need then I would think you're halfway there. Where with digital, as malleable as it is, you have to work with it more to get it where you want to be. This has been my experience with still photography though, not sure if its fully translatable to motion.
With Digital Photography I think its almost hit a point where they're equal. Thing is Film still has a very nice roll-off of highlights to shadows where digital can feel abrupt and clips. I believe Digital Sensors for Cine purposes are not as well developed as ones for stills. We're seeing a merging of the two though.
Then there's other aesthetic choices like color reproduction and grain. If you already have a film you prefer that provides you with most of what you need then I would think you're halfway there. Where with digital, as malleable as it is, you have to work with it more to get it where you want to be. This has been my experience with still photography though, not sure if its fully translatable to motion.
Escape Goat
Member
You dont know about the Nolan-hate club on GAF?
Incorrect use of gif. -50 points.
If there is a hate club for Cameron, there is one for Nolan.
Being oblivious -100 points.
WrenchNinja
Member
This guy is amazingly classy. I hope he sticks with his guns and studios continue letting him do what he's doing.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
But hate is so much more controversial! It's harder to have a Nolan defense force when nobody hates him.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Like King Kong is better than all of Nolan's movies, right?
Dead was certainly mad with that quote, yet that still doesn't suggest he hates Nolan. He might just really, really love King Kong. It baffles me, but it doesn't make him a Nolan hater.
How about this? Every successful person/thing will have their share of haters. You cant disagree with that ..
Haters gonna hate.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Whatever makes you feel like you've got a cause to fight for, bro.
I wouldn't go that far but yeah, TDK was Nolan's weakest film.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
You guys are mad. TDK is better than both Inception and Insomnia (& Following, but who is counting that?)
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
I remember the cringe worthy final line delivered by Jack Black.
Well then dint feel guilty when I call out the haters.
I really hope IMAX takes off over 3D.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
I'm hoping that in five years time we can have the best of both worlds. That is how far we are away from glassess-less 3D.
Inception wasn't brilliant, but it was complete, paced fairly well and had complete character arcs. The Dark Knight did not have any of that.
No way man, that article from WIRED said my newborn son won't be using glasses for 3D! Or a mouse for desktop computers! Or telephones!
Harvey Dent didn't have a character arc? The fuck am I reading.
Nope. He went from state one to state two. That was a linear descent (brought on for motherfucking stupid reasons, "oh, the Joker gave me a speech, now I'm going to be a murderer with a probability complex!"). It wasn't an arc.
And that would have been fine had it been given more breathing room and other characters (BRUCE WAYNE) the opportunity to have an arc of their own.
I've said it before, but the whole thing felt like a 5-part TV miniseries edited down into a single film.
At this point, I wouldn't say color reproduction is inferior. In terms of dynamic range, film is usually loved because of how it handles highlights (they roll off smoothly, instead of clip in digital), but even that advantage is slowly being whittled away. In terms of low-light performance, digital is far superior to film now. Overall, I still think film has a pleasing 'look' to it, but digital is so close now that I honestly don't have a preference anymore.
Regarding the Hobbit, that had to do with the way their 3D rig is setup (the glass elements they use to split the image was the reason they needed to compensate with the makeup IIRC), not something inherent to the RED Epic itself.
I love film and I'm glad to see Nolan making an effort to keep it an option with the big studios. He's absolutely correct that it's up to directors to make sure it sticks around.
I doubt the viability of glass-less 3D, doesn't that depend on the viewer position? If so, how would that work in a family of four?
Besides you can't recreate IMAX experience at home, so that's a good reason for people to still go to the theaters.
But that's not what he said at all.
His descent wasn't that simple. He always had a dark streak in him, but he was a good person deep down. The Joker was able to manipulate Dent when he was in a very vulnerable state after Rachel's death, thus Two Face.
I agree with Bruce not having an arc, though. Him being completely sidelined is one of the reasons I prefer Begins over TDK.
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
That is the only reason we haven't got it now. Glassesless 3D is possible on TV sets already, but what they're working on is filling the frame with enough pixels to support all viewing angles.
I don't think that's necessarily a problem though; the main point of TDK was watching two mostly uncompromising forces (Batman and Joker) colliding, and then seeing the fallout of their escalation on the rest of the characters and city at large.
Bruce, though seemingly infallible, did change over the course of the film. He thinks he can escape being Batman, in trying to set up Dent as the city's savior, but only ends up deeper in his crusade by the end of the film, vilified for crimes he hasn't even committed. His views on the Joker are even challenged, from at first dismissing his relevancy to realizing that he's more complicated than he gave him credit for. That said, for whatever stoicness his character arc had, there was a point to it: the film was all about challenging his limits... if those limits are constantly shifting, then we never see where they break.
Joker by his nature had be somewhat static, a sort of primordial evil, but I think even he slowly changes his motivations over the course of the film, from wanting to kill Batman and figure out who he is, to instead seeing him as some sort perverse soulmate. Not to mention, he changes his tune on killing Dent, to seeing him as a pawn in a game with Batman.
Hell, even Gordon, Alfred, and Fox make difficult decisions with their loyalties to Batman/Bruce; even if the status quo is maintained, it's an uneasy one. They all realize that an ideal result forces severe comrpomises.
Heck, even Rachel has something of a character arc (though it's probably the most poorly written in the film as well as its biggest 180).
- Status