Support NeoGAF

[Gastone]

I came across this article on Sky News, and i thought i'd bring it to attention. I haven't found anything about this yet after a search, so apologies if already mentioned.

I personally think the writer is full of shit and has no clue about the importance of movie scores. You can basically apply his logic to any film and you'd have the same result, more or less.

From the article:

"Every great magic trick consists of three parts or acts," Michael Caine coyly whispers in The Prestige, explaining how the magician "takes the ordinary something and makes it into something extraordinary".

This is Christopher Nolan's ultimate goal: to trick the audience into believing something is happening when it isn't.

To do that, he uses Hans Zimmer's daunting score to keep us all on the edge of our seats, expensive IMAX cameras to draw us closer and timeline jumps to keep us going back and forth.

But why all the spectacle?

Mainly, to distract us from the fact that he can't write dialogue, direct actors or grasp the subtleties of modern film.

In Dunkirk, Nolan and Zimmer refer to a sound illusion called the Shepard Scale, to trick audiences into believing something is about to happen, simultaneously ascending and descending in tone to confuse its listener.

The technique is nothing new, and consists of superimposing sound waves to give the feel of growing tension leading to nothing.

This was used in all three Batman films, Inception, Interstellar and now Dunkirk.

While watching Dunkirk, I ignored the soundtrack, dismissed Wally Pfister's trademark cinematography - which is now being reproduced by Hoyte Van Hoytema - and focused on the characters, the dialogue, the acting and the storyline.

The conclusion I came to was not new. It had already hit me during the mind-numbing three hours of Interstellar: Christopher Nolan destroys great actors.

I recommend reading the entire article:
http://news.sky.com/story/dunkirk-is-christopher-nolans-biggest-trick-not-his-best-10968525

Remove my score if old and boring.

 

[TheFuzz]

Why couldn't this go in the existing thread?

 

[Disxo]

Great I just bought the tickets.

 

[Shao Kahn Brewing a Stew]

We all know his best is "The Prestige".

 

[Dead]

I mean this describes every movie he has made since The Dark Knight.

 

[Inferno313]

While watching Dunkirk, I ignored the soundtrack, dismissed Wally Pfister's trademark cinematography - which is now being reproduced by Hoyte Van Hoytema - and focused on the characters, the dialogue, the acting and the storyline.

The conclusion I came to was not new. It had already hit me during the mind-numbing three hours of Interstellar: Christopher Nolan destroys great actors.

What a lousy fucking critic, imo. You can't critique just individual components of a work. You engage with the work as a whole.

 

[Gastone]

Why couldn't this go in the existing thread?

I thought since it concerns Nolan and his films as a whole (although this article was written on the back of a Dunkirk viewing) i thought it deserved its own thread.

 

[Prologue]

Been day one for all his films except this, ill get around it.

Hopefully he gets back to sci fi

 

[RoboPlato]

While watching Dunkirk, I ignored the soundtrack, dismissed Wally Pfister's trademark cinematography - which is now being reproduced by Hoyte Van Hoytema - and focused on the characters, the dialogue, the acting and the storyline.

"I ignored key parts of the core experience of and goals of the film and it didn't hold up."

What a load of shit and a complete failure of intelligent criticism

 

[Sgt. Kabukiman]

While watching Dunkirk, I ignored the soundtrack, dismissed Wally Pfister's trademark cinematography

"When you remove the best parts of the film and try your best to miss the entire point, strangely enough, it's not that good anymore."

 

[RoKKeR]

This type of smug critique is insufferable to me.

*watched a movie on mute and ignored the wonderful cinematography, it was shit*

 

[Glass Rebel]

I agree.

Yesterday I put on 2001: A Space Odyssey and closed my eyes and came to the realization that this Kubrick guy just used pictures to distract from what's really happening. Hack.

 

[Bread]

But why all the spectacle?

Mainly, to distract us from the fact that he can't write dialogue, direct actors or grasp the subtleties of modern film.

 

[Catvoca]

I watched The Godfather blindfolded and with earmuffs on and it just made realise that Coppola was a hack the whole time, tricking me into thinking the film was good with "sounds" and "images"

 

[Vincent Alexander]

I did not care for Dunkirk...but this article is shit.

While watching Dunkirk, I ignored the soundtrack, dismissed Wally Pfister's trademark cinematography - which is now being reproduced by Hoyte Van Hoytema - and focused on the characters, the dialogue, the acting and the storyline.

He IGNORED a part of the movie? Yeah, that makes sense. I mean....I don't believe him either way. But still a dumb thing to say.

 

[samn]

"When you remove the best parts of the film and try your best to miss the entire point, strangely enough, it's not that good anymore."

Lots of noise and pretty pictures but empty of thought. sounds like a nolan movie

 

[Haloid1177]

I mean, I kinda hated Dunkirk but was still floored at what Nolan put on screen.

 

[Vincent Alexander]

Lots of noise and pretty pictures but empty of thought. sounds like a nolan movie

Agreed. Except for Memento. Inception. Batman Begins. The Dark Knight. Interstellar. Am I missing any?

The Prestige. Can't forget that.

 

[DecoReturns]

I don't know.

Nolan is actually capable to get great performances out of actors. Not everyone is a hit, but there's standouts.

Rather strange critique

 

[RipperGrim]

Mainly, to distract us from the fact that he can't write dialogue, direct actors or grasp the subtleties of modern film.

Give me a fucking break, Nolan has made some of the most recognised films around and arguably has had a part in making what modern movies are. I can understand people not liking his films but sometimes the shit he gets is ridiculous.

 

[Saucycarpdog]

What stupid article. Nolan has done great characters before Dunkirk.

This critic using this one film where character development isn't an essential part of the experience and say he's never made good characters.

 

[-Plasma Reus-]

We all know his best is "The Prestige".

The Prestige is indeed his single best movie.

Every single other film he's done has been relatively shit.

 

[Guzim]

Hoyte Van Hoytema is a better cinematographer than Wally Pfister though.

 

[michaelius]

He isn't that wrong music and camera work were best things about Dunkirk

 

[Inferno313]

Hoyte Van Hoytema is a better cinematographer than Wally Pfister though.

Yeah, that bit about Hoyte reproducing Pfister's work is some absolute bullshit. Visually, Nolan's films took a leap forward once Hoyte came on board.

 

[Hero_of_the_Day]

I love how angry some people are about Nolan's success. Ever since Dark Knight was so huge and universally praised, hipsters are just dying to tear him down.

 

[lobdale]

When you reduce a whole into its component parts, sometimes one or two of those parts isn't as good as the whole.

WOW

 

[Superimposer]

This writer guy and I have mutual friends on Facebook so I saw it on there this morning. It's some real BS.

"Strip away the things that make the movie good and it isn't good anymore"

 

[cackhyena]

"Mainly, to distract us from the fact that he can't write dialogue, direct actors or grasp the subtleties of modern film."

What is this utter horse shit?

 

[DecoReturns]

Wally Pfister Wasn't a bad Cinematographer himself either.

Got a couple nominations and a win with Nolan. His work on Inception and Dark Knight were great. But I think Interstellar and Dunkirk were better

 

[WordsintheWater]

He isn't that wrong music and camera work were best things about Dunkirk

Isn't the point to critique something as a whole? You can't just remove parts that make it good and then call the whole thing mediocre. Of course it's gonna be mediocre if you take that stuff out. I haven't even seen Dunkirk, but his line of thinking is incredibly dumb.

 

[Whompa02]

Loved the movie for being so different and telling a unique war story. I really liked the use of audio. Gave a heightened sense of something in the distance, even though there wasn't always something there.

 

[Tuck]

While watching Dunkirk, I ignored the soundtrack, dismissed Wally Pfister's trademark cinematography - which is now being reproduced by Hoyte Van Hoytema - and focused on the characters, the dialogue, the acting and the storyline.

Er... what?

"I ignored the all the reasons the movie is good and the rest didn't hold up."

Well, yeah.

I liked Dunkirk, but wasn't blown away. But the parts of the movie he is critiquing were like that for a reason. Dialogue? Nolan intentionally made a movie light on dialogue. Likewise with the storyline. Its light on purpose.

The movie is basically Nolan's Mad Max: Fury Road. its meant to be spectacle.

Sounds like the author of this article missed the point.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

I haven't actually seen the film, but it sounds like the critic is boiling things down to "if you take away all the parts of the film that are done well, it's not very good." Which is kind of like... no shit? A critique that holds true for every film in history, it turns out. "Sure, Casablanca is a classic, but if you judge it on its color grading and the vibrancy of its palette, it really pales in comparison to every movie that's been filmed in color."

 

[QuantumZebra]

What a lousy fucking critic, imo. You can't critique just individual components of a work. You engage with the work as a whole.

Agreed.

Filmmaking has many parts and Nolan aces many of them.

 

[Eidan]

What a lousy fucking critic, imo. You can't critique just individual components of a work. You engage with the work as a whole.

Literally the first thing I thought.

 

[Sunster]

if the score was not there it would have been a worse movie. but the score is part of the movie sooooo how is having one a trick?

 

[MDSLKTR]

Review reads like something you'd find on gaf

 

[bud]

Why couldn't this go in the existing thread?

... do you feel in charge?

 

[CD'S BAR]

I'm not going to give the full article a click or a read, but I'd love to know what these "subtleties of modern filmmaking" are that some nobody critic is tapped into but Nolan isn't.

 

[NewDust]

Dismissing Hoyte van Hoytema as a Wally Pfister copycat... WTF?! HvH definitly didn't simply reproduce, obviously there are similarities due to Nolan being the director, but it's much different from his previous works. HvH is probably one of, if not the best DP's currently.

 

[Javier23]

He's right, you know.

 

[ClosingADoor]

Pretty obvious the film was not going to be about the characters, but the overall experience of the war. Guess this critic just wanted a different film. Then he should watch a different film.

 

[RustyNails]

Nolan hateboner is strong with this one.

 

[PBY]

Nolan hasn't made a good film since TDK, and that even had serious problems.

 

[old manatee]

I sort of wish that Nolan and Zimmer would go their separate ways for a minute. They've done incredible work together, but it feels like they've settled into a rut where the soundtrack just dominates everything else in the film. There are a lot of moments in his last few movies where the intensity of the score building to a climax 10 minutes from now drowns out what's currently happening on the screen.

 

[Dopus]

While watching Dunkirk, I ignored the showing and opted to see the Emoji Movie instead. The conclusion I came to was not new. Christopher Nolan has destroyed cinema.

 

[Inferno313]

Nolan hasn't made a good film since TDK, and that even had serious problems.

Nah. At the most, I'd say that Interstellar and TDKR are his two weakest films. However TDK is still the king of that genre in my eyes. Inception was a ton of fun. and Dunkirk, while not my personal favorite in his filmography, is quite possibly the best thing he's made. Easily his most elegant, mature, and tightly executed piece of filmmaking.

 

[SlimySnake]

I dont care much for Dunkirk, but this article is so silly. The soundtrack, cinematography and of course the tension building is a huge part of a suspense movie like Dunkirk. there are no fake outs either. When the soundtrack builds up, it usually delivers with a massive setpiece instead of 'leading to nothing'.

I will agree that he didnt give his actors much to work with in this film, but to say that Nolan always does this is ridiculous. Mathew Mcconaughey was given some incredibly poignant scenes with his daughter who was also given a lot of really great material to work with. His scene watching Casey Affleck's recorded messages is devastating and an actor's dream scene.

His decision to focus on Bruce Wayne instead of Batman in TKDR was derided by many, but again shows Nolan's focus on making a movie around characters and giving actors real work instead of hiding them behind a mask for 90% of the movie. Both Talia and Bane are given a great backstory which is more than what we can say about most comic book villains. This guy made Batman Begins and reinvented comic book movies ffs.

Even Inception, which would've been a straight up Sci Fi heist movie if made by any other director, was grounded by DiCaprio's relationship with his wife and children. Dunkirk is an exception, not the norm with Nolan. This writer is full of shit.

The ending didnt work for me but again, picking on Harry Styles is ridiculous. These are shell-shocked soldiers who barely survived a horrowing ordeal for a week and this guy is complaining about him not realizing a guy was blind.

 

[RustyNails]

Nolan hasn't made a good film since TDK, and that even had serious problems.

You're just insufferable in every thread aren't you.