Now, the man sure does make very well constructed movies, but does anyone else think that visually, his movies have a horribly clumsy feeling? I'm not talking about the lighting or the 'look' of the movie, but the intangible feel and flow that is made up of shot composition, camera movement and editing. Compare a Spielberg film to a Nolan film and you'll get the gist of what I'm saying. Any thoughts?

This post has been edited by BurgaFlippinMan: Apr 29 2008, 06:08 PM

Spielberg is seasoned while Nolan is not. Give him a few more years and I'm sure he'll do a better job. He's only in the business for about a decade.

As for me, I don't think his movies are visually clumsy. How can Memento for one possesses bad editing and cameraworks? Batman Begins, albeit was an intelligent action flick, could have been better in cinematography which I think is an integral part of the genre. Other than that, no complaints.

BTW, I thought this was one of your RIP threads again, scared the hell outta me.

This post has been edited by Makakeke: Apr 29 2008, 05:50 PM

What I thought LOL.

I have no complaints about him, The Prestige looked great. then again I'm not a pro in photography.

Not true. At about the same point in his career (and at around the same age, younger in fact), Spielberg had already made Jaws, Close Encounters, Raiders of the Lost Ark, E.T. and Temple of Doom. Not one of Nolan's films up till now come close to those. Not as films, and neither in terms of the aspect we are talking about here.



I'm not talking about individual shots and moments, its the overall feel of the film made up of those elements mentioned. Nolan's films have a laborious and clunky feel to them (in a not good way), Spielberg's (for the sake of this comparison) glide along with a distinctive silky smoothness.

This post has been edited by BurgaFlippinMan: Apr 29 2008, 06:09 PM

too abstract for me to comprehend. but I dont feel anything watching them.

changed the thread title

Well I guess there can only be one Spielberg then but Nolan does have the talent, i believe he'll do wonders in the future.

I also think it has gotta do with the technical team. Nolan so far has not assembled a strong team with him and that probably contributes to your question. I'm happy with Nolan's works so far, all of em', including Insomnia and Following.

It's weird now cz it's like a Spielberg vs Nolan thread

i think he is a splendid director, doesnt have his defining movie yet. but i do think he will one day

but hey, how can you argue against the things he do. those shows are like better then the norm

I think Nolan is a talented actors director, but a poor visual director. In a way, Nolan is something of the reverse of post-American Graffiti George Lucas. I doubt its got anything to do with the technical team, it does seem to be more of an innate thing. Its the command of the film language as a medium, the intangible quality which makes a film filmic. Sergio Leone was probably the greatest exponent of this quality. All the great directors possess this x-factor (but not all directors who have this x-factor are great) and its always clear to see no matter the circumstances.


I also think that Nolan is an average action director. Take Batman Begins for example. It is a fine film overall, a great acting showcase, a great exploration of the Bruce Wayne character but has rather poor action sequences. There was nothing wrong with the setup of the dynamics of the scene, but the execution was just rubbishly cackhanded

---

Added on April 29, 2008, 8:28 pmDuh, you study math and only math.

This post has been edited by BurgaFlippinMan: Apr 29 2008, 08:28 PM

I agree with the Leone comment. His films has a very clear, distinct visual feel to it, much like Stanley Kubrick.

Also agree with Nolan being an average action director, but what he did with Batman Begins I feel has done the superhero genre justice considering the craps like Spiderman, Hulk, etc...

This post has been edited by Makakeke: Apr 29 2008, 08:34 PM

Damn you.

I agree on the action scenes though. The action was never the strength of the film, maybe it will be remedied in the dark knight? he's never done an action movie before batman anyway, and strictly speaking begins wasnt action for the most part.

This post has been edited by QuickFire: Apr 29 2008, 08:32 PM

No i dun really agree with your point there BurgaFlippinMan.Cuz if u really see the budget of the movies between both directors theres a wide margin between them. Except for the Batman movies most of the films created by Chris Nolan is what can be term as a small budget flick which also include great movies such as Memento and The Prestige. As for the action sequences in Batman, i guess that is not where he wanted to go with the movie. Even in the The Dark Knight Year One, where Begins is mostly being based on lacks the action as there are more spy works for Batman. But i have to agree maybe on the cinematography as that is where i think he lacks.U can compare the prestige and the illusionist. Illusionist will definitely wins on visual beauty but as for story and editing, hands down Nolan is a master.


Just my 2 cents

I think the Spiderman films are good examples of the genre. Even the much maligned third is still good as a summer popcorn flick. Hulk, is an admirable failure. Its also probably the most ambitious ever take on the genre.


Budget has nothing to do with what we are talking about here. Jaws was made on a shoe string budget, and Sergio Leone, who arguably possesses the best ever command of the film language, made many of his films on a tight budget. No, we are discussing Nolan's ability as a visual storyteller. Please note the difference between cinematography/editing/whatever. Its the overall visual vibe we are talking about. His movies (to me and some people I know at least) do not have what I can best term as a visual rhythm, a pulse.

And whatever you want to say about Batman Begins, you cannot deny its a summer blockbuster and it utterly fails to deliver in the action stakes thanks to inept direction. Look at it this way, The Godfather would not be the film it is had the execution of the climactic five assassinations been rubbish. It would still have been a fine film, but it would not be a great film. You can't use its 'not where he (Coppola) wanted to go with the movie' as an excuse for a poor execution just because The Godfather isn't an action heavy movie.

As for the Prestige and the Illusionist, I think the Illusionist is a superior film overall. I do not think highly at all of both films however, in fact I thought The Prestige was rather rubbish, though worth one viewing.

This post has been edited by BurgaFlippinMan: Apr 30 2008, 05:24 PM

i like Batman Begins but the action scenes were horrendous. Half the time i didn't know what was even going on!

I have watched Batman Begins and The Prestige, and I have to say, this guy is one person we should all look forward to for future movies (The Dark Knight!)... His movies do look a bit 'messy' but nevertheless, a very very good director...

I don't see what the big deal is about The Prestige. It suffers from the same thing The Usual Suspects does, there isn't much meat to the whole movie. Its hollow. Yes, like Usual Suspects, the male leads turn in magnetic performances and like Usual Suspects, it never gets boring. That alone makes it worth one viewing for entertainment. But beyond that, there's nothing more to it. The characters aren't really developed, and the actors are doing what they can with sparse material. It starts off interesting in the way that the whole movie is an illusion, but Ebert got it right with his critique, its a cheat. Its like going to a magic trick where "the whole woman produced on the stage were not the same one so unfortunately cut in two." This brings me to another chink in Nolan's armor, his seeming inability to give us characters we can empathize with. He always gives us interesting characters no doubt, but they are always distant and cold to the audience, making it difficult to connect emotionally with his films.

Now, this isn't a bash Nolan thread, I look forward to his films but there are just aspects of his films which always leave me slightly disappointed.

I think in a way you've nailed it partially right. The problem I find with Memento and The Prestige is that the 2nd viewing doesn't feel more superior than the 1st, which in my standards is not a great film, BUT the 1st time experience was truly magical (no one can deny that).

I've always been a believer that good movies grows in you, e.g The Godfather and even films like Fight Club, Mulholland Dr (of the mindf*ck genre). Nolan's films on the other hand, are less impressive on successive viewings. His only movie that'll continue to mesmerize is in fact his lesser known debut Following, which is an awesome flick with the most shoe string budget. It's original, tight and concise. You should watch it if you haven't.

I actually like The Prestige very much. The entire trickery/illusion/cheat whatever you may call, it was superb. You could see a twist coming but it still gets you. I think for a young man like Nolan to have produced films like The Prestige and Memento, already makes him one of the best directors TODAY. There're ain't many films that astound you with the first serving but Nolan's did, and very well too. Whatever the man may lack, I'm sure he'll get it right in the future.

Seriously, cut him some slack.

Actually, I think thats the movie's main problem. It simply disregards its own rules. Its a different case from the Illusionist, where the tricks are never really explained and therefore its twist (with that mystery potion) is plausible by its own internal logic. To set the film up with the pledge/turn/prestige structure was a cool idea, but to cheat/cop out at literally the namesake stage with a sudden sci-fi twist was seriously uncool.

This post has been edited by BurgaFlippinMan: Apr 30 2008, 05:16 PM

rules, i never get this. on imdb people rant for pages about this cheat, that it never followed the rules but i dont remember theres a set of written rules for it. it was a twist, he used sci-fi to bring forward his story thats all . are we forbidden to bend genres to make a better story, are we forbidden to use deus ex machina? cause as far as cheating goes there are tons of movies that use them but are considered classics in their respective areas

let me give a few examples. LOTR: Return of the king, the undead just came and like put a full stop to the whole battle of pelennor. theres not even enough time to grasp at the un dead and the battle finishes.

star wars. a moon sized battle station gets owned by two photon torpedo's? force or not if these things can be soo hard to shoot with the computer yet they can auto pilot down the long shaft to the core?

im not claiming that they are all bad shows, but just pointing out that cheating do happen in movies and its part of movie making. simply bad labeling one show cause they do it is kinda unfair

another thing i do agree on is that his movies normally rely on that twist soo much that once you know it the show loses its fun. but thats what he is great at, he makes great twists but would a director be considered below par when his midas touch is to make the shocking finale?

and be patient do give him time, comparing him to the likes of Spielberg further tells you what potential he has. he might have not made his spree of magnum opus just yet, he has just started his career and simply comparing one director to another on the basis of time frame would be unfair. who knows he might be a late bloomer, and shower us with tons of cinema magik in his later years.

He thinks the movie's twist is a cop-out because the movie seems to set out a strictly logic-based path and then resorts to sci-fi, but that's fine by me. It was cool to use a character like tesla, who had all his secret inventions taken away by the US after his death, so that added a cool allure to the all of it.

I love the twists. I had the same thoughts as hugh jackman's character, that no way Borden was using a body double. In the end that was pretty much the case, and it should have felt disappointing, but it was anything but. I should have guessed it when we see his twin magically appearing in Sarah's apartment, but the first thing that came to my mind naturally was there has to be something else, something so good we missed it all (which is impossible, just like there is no way someone can be cut in half and be alive)! The thought that he had a twin never in the slightest bit appeared in my head. Angier's twist was shocking because we see what he had become when he gave into his obsessions of revenge and his quest to be the best magician.

I see it as Borden's twin being the real twist all along, with borden sending angier to his adventures in colorado springs creating another twist. One twist was rooted in logic (the twin), the other was rooted in sci-fi fantasy (the duplication). It sounds clumsy as hell, but it worked for me.

The characters are meant to be cold and dark in the end anyway. I started out rooting for angier, and then borden, and by the end we realize they are both monsters. But there is an illusion here, because there are in fact 3 characters - the Angiers, one Borden, and the other Borden. One Borden was the monster - who tied the bad knot, who wanted revenge, who was locked up and hung in the end; the other was generally the 'good' guy - the one who loved sarah, the one who asked his twin not to pursue his obsession. Of course it is almost impossible to flesh out his/their characters 100%, as it would certainly give away the twist, you have to deduce this by paying clsoe attention to detail. In any case, you could always root for Cutter.

Bending or mixing genres is not a problem. In The Prestige's case, its the way it was executed. I'll explain later. Now, a better word for 'rules' is 'internal logic'. Lets use your examples for the following..

Its fantasy. Its a universe where there are trolls, goblins and magic. Pulling out the undead does not break its own internal logic neither does it stick out like a sore thumb from the other elements of the movie.

The targeting computer missed. But the Force has been established as this powerful mystic erm....force that can do wonders if used by a person attuned to it. Again, no internal logic (rules) broken.

Another example. The Good the Bad and the Ugly. Throughout the movie, its established that the characters can only see what the camera sees. This allows the movie to take on a myth-like feel, where characters can suddenly appear without the onscreen characters noticing them until they actually appear. Remember how the protagonists can stumble upon a huge Union army only when they are literally on top of it? Or how Blondie and Tuco, while digging for the chest do not notice Angel Eyes until he reaches them and throws in another spade?

So likewise, in The Prestige's case, the movie is set up as a magic trick in itself. Keeping with that analogy, using the sci-fi twist as its 'prestige' is akin to a magician sawing a woman into half and subsequently reproducing a different whole woman.




I personally do not think Nolan is even in Spielberg's league. Yes, he does seem to get pretty good scripts and he gets terrific performances out of his actors. However, there is just something simply average with his ability as a visual storyteller. That, is a fundamental disadvantage I'm not sure that can actually be 'learnt'. I think he is one of the decent new directors today, but thats pretty faint praise.



Precisely. In fact, you could even say its because the sci-fi is brought in in an absolutely sudden manner. Previously we got all the details on the tricks and suddenly we have this super machine which creates duplicates by zapping a lightning bolt at it? And the fact that the ending is a huge mess of twists sledgehammering away at you.

This post has been edited by BurgaFlippinMan: May 1 2008, 02:31 PM

Hey, you know what they always say - rules are meant to be broken The fact The Prestige broke its what you called "internal logic" wasn't uncool really, I felt it was the perfect ending.

On the contrary, I think it is possibly the one rule that when broken is 100% detrimental to the film. It never fails to come off as a cop out, always giving off the vibe that they've written themselves into a corner. Its a deus ex machina with the added 'bonus' of totally rendering the film's world useless, especially serious if done at a pivotal moment. Therefore I found The Prestige to be entertaining up till the sci-fi twist, where it simply went bad. I find it uncool, messy, desperate and annoyingly unsubtle. I tried to watch it the second time, after which I just thought (and still think) it was a rubbish film.

This post has been edited by BurgaFlippinMan: May 1 2008, 02:27 PM

Nolan is one of the most refreshing director that has appeared in a long time. Surely it will be unfair to compair him Spielberg, Coppola, Lucas (students of Kurosawa I might add, or rather John Ford since Kurosawa was inspired by John Ford and Spielberg, Coppola, Lucas, and even Scorcese were inspired by Kurosawa.

Nolan is not one to follow the conventional studio methods of making movies.

He is first and foremost postmodern. In his movies, he explores fragmentation of time, perception, explores how decisions made and how incidents can change someone, and features very real characters with very real (albeit dark) emotion in seemingly impossible situation.

To the casual viewers, his movies can be confusing and also at the same time looks badly edited.

To film students, his work is great for study and discussion and meant for repeated viewing.

I mean, when I first watched Memento, I could not quite get it. I understood the ending but still it feels like I am missing alot there. The second and third viewing it just gets better and better because you start to fill in the gaps.

With Prestige it is amazing how you will start off rooting for one person and by the time the movie ends, you would have switch sides for a few times because as you get into the movie, you start to see the characters for who they really are.

I mean, his movies aren't for everyone. The themes are dark, his characters are dark and not easy for everyone to relate. I mean we all have our dark side but how many are actually willing to explore that side in all of us? Most will just push it aside because we prefer to look at the world full of sunshine and happiness and all the sugar and spice and all things nice.

For those brave enough to explore that part of us, it is easy to relate to his characters because reality is, the world is not always sunshine and happiness and by the time we die, we will very likely have experience or witness more horrors and sadness than we would like to admit.

I think it is wrong to view batman as a superhero movie. The intention was never to make a traditional superhero movie. The approach is more akin to Casino Royale, taking a popular franchise that is running the risk of self parodying and bring it back to basics and Batman Begins did just that.

There is no place for flashy action scenes and big explosions. The action sequence in Batman Begins works for what it is, realistic and straight to the point.

Anything more would have spoilt the realistic approach they are going for.

I mean Spielberg is a great director but he is also a very safe director. He definitely has the ability to tackle of very dark and 'unsafe' subjects but most of the time, he rather take on the mantle of the family movie director and that's how most of his movies are, very family oriented. Flashy, happy, and very likeable and heroic protagonist.

I mean, he did make Schindler's List, Minority Report, and Munich.

My favourite work of his is Minority Report and even though most would say that is his darkest movie, the story is much tone down from the original source material.

So yes, Spielberg is definitely a great director and I will watch his movies but always with the knowledge that he will neatly wrap things up for me and the ending will never be too sad.

With Nolan, I can always expect the unexpected and the ending will make me want to walk into the cinema and watch the movie again and again.

I predict Nolan with change the industry soon, like how Orsan Welles changed the industry with Citizen Kane.

ps-it will be also be crazy to Nolan to Spielberg and Welles success relative to their age because the industry just doesn't work that way anymore today.

For the few movies (six so far) that Nolan has made so far, he is definitely showing tremendous improvement each time.

I think you've gone slightly offtangent here. I repeat, my main bone to pick with Nolan is his ability as a visual storyteller, the most fundamental element of the film language. I have zero complaints about his content, actor direction and choice of material. And no, Batman Begins has poor action (or more precisely, the execution of the action) no matter what you say. Its sequences were clunky, clumsy and workman-like. They had no rhythm, no 'beat'. Yes, its a reboot like Casino Royale, but the Bond movie had great action sequences, so it can't hide behind the 'realistic' excuse.

This post has been edited by BurgaFlippinMan: May 1 2008, 02:37 PM

One more thing to add, The Prestige was based on a novel and while the movie differs in some ways, the sci-fi element is still in the novel and I would actually say tone down greatly in the movie.

Also just to put the sci fi deus ex machina matrix ending issue to rest, one word, Tesla.

That is a man historically known for inventing stuff way ahead of his time. Hence, the fact that he actually invented a machine that teleports (or in this case duplicates (never his original intention)) should not be too far out from this movie internal logic. It still fits.

In the movie there was a part that says something along the lines of "Tesla does what magicians are pretending to be doing"

so somehow a sudden miracle is ok? just that they dont break the internal logic?

personally i dont see the problem with it, its a good twist to me. but i do get your point, the thing is prestige did it in a very very mellow sense. unless you look hard and pick at it you wont notice the logic issue, its not like suddenly aliens came down and gave him a duplicating gun. also if you do follow tesla, he was proclaiming about inventing death rays way before people knew what are they. we are talking about an inventor thats sooo ahead of this time that the americans went as far as to steal his work, so a break in internal logic is kinda blurred.

regardless of what you say, comparing norlan v Spielberg is kinda wrong. one cant expect all directors to follow a time frame of another, norlans career is well, just starting. and to expect him to churn out movies the exact time frame of another director would be kinda unfair. maybe after he has had a career for sometime until we have seen a lot of what he is capable of then we can come to some justification. simply put you are comparing a potential rookie to a legend.

This post has been edited by +3kk!: May 1 2008, 02:49 PM

Welles' debut is probably the best in cinematic history. Sadly, he didn't emulate what he did with Kane in his later years though. I hope it doesn't happen with Nolan, cz he's been improving, although slowly.


Comparing Nolan and Welles has now brought this thread from New York to the moon

This post has been edited by Makakeke: May 1 2008, 02:59 PM

Actually the sci-fi element was already introduced beforehand when we got to know Tesla and his teleportation device, so you can't say the 'sci-fi'ness of it was too sudden.

You cant say Borden's twist broke the film's 'internal logic', that twist was simple but terrific. I also disagree that Angier's twist breaks the logic entirely. The movie did tap into the eccentricities of Tesla's works way before the climax came didnt it? What you are saying is that every movie should lay it's foundation and rules at the very start of the film. The Prestige didn't.

But we have really gone off topic. I still dont get how nolan's visuals dont' flow' right.

me too, like batman. ok the fight scenes were off beat (wont that be due to the action choreographer?) but in a sense we did have quite a few good visual feasts, take for example

the training scene on the ice lake
the fight at raz al gul's palace,
the chase scene

also in prestige

- the light bulb garden
- the storage tanks at the end


they dont seem out of place to me

Welles is fully capable of bettering Kane but sadly, with the flop that Kane was back then, Welles never did get the same freedom he had from the studios while doing Kane again.

I don't see how the undead is really a sudden miracle, if thats what you meant. In any case however, I don't like to lay down hard rules as a I believe what ultimately makes a film work is not what it is about, but how it is about. Its just a fact that in any art form there are 'rules' that are hard to break without ruining it.

I don't like to overanalyze films, so when I b**** about something its usually something that really sticks out imo.

I only used Spielberg as a relative point to compare the visual storytelling of the films. It wasn't I who brought up the argument that Steven is a seasoned director. And its also fact that the 'legend' made a thriller, a drama, a family film and the definition of a popcorn adventure (all legendary) when he was just a relative rookie. But thats besides the point, since I do consider there to be generally Spielberg, Hitchcock, Kubrick, Scorsese and then everybody else in their dust.

My memory of the film is rather fuzzy, but the most notable thing I remember about pre-twist Tesla was his introduction of the AC thing at the fair. If I remember correctly, isn't the duplication machine actually the teleportation machine (which iirc was sort of a hoax by Bale to drive Jackman nuts) gone wrong?

Hmmm, try distilling the films down to the very basics of the film art form, the ability of its visuals to tell a story. Do that with a Nolan film, and then try it with a Spielberg, Leone, Lucas or heck a Shyamalan (since his movies are so silent generally) and maybe you'll understand what I'm trying to say. But then again, you study math all day. (sorry but I simply can't resist)


Its a bit complicated to explain. If you take a step back and look at whats being done, on paper the setup of the action and the dynamics between the characters involved should be fine. But it was the end result, the presentation of the action, that was pretty disastrous. Surely the fault clearly lies with the director? Likewise its not the individual shots or editing choices that are poor, but the overall result once you put it together as a whole. I'm sure you've felt and seen it before, in any field, some people just have it, some don't.

Again, I'm not saying Nolan is a piss poor director. I look forward to and enjoy his films (at least on first watch mostly). I do get the feeling however that its the other aspects of the production where he excels in which props up the poor visual storytelling. Its an awkwardness I've always felt watching his films and only recently have I managed to somehow put a finger on it. Having said that, does Nolan have any musical education background or inclination? Because that will bring me to my next point if he doesnt...

This post has been edited by BurgaFlippinMan: May 1 2008, 04:16 PM

well how you put it, the undead ended the battle very abruptly.

all the people you took into consideration have got a long career or like erm passed away d.

man you are one dude thats just hard to please music next? god. you might even come to the extent of arguing that norlan is not as good cause his actors look one direction a little too often.

Well surely you don't expect the living to stand a chance against the undead? In any case, the undead is a bit of a deus ex machina, which usually isn't a good thing, but it doesn't make it worse by breaking internal logic.

My point is that a good visual storytelling is apparent in any of their movies, whatever the material and regardless of whether its from the later years or from their early stages. Its an innate thing.

Actually, I'm pretty easily pleased. I love The Terminal, I enjoyed Fantastic Four: Silver Surfer (but hated the first) and Spiderman 3 entertained me.

But anyway, its an interesting fact if you read composer interviews that its often mentioned that a director with a musical education or a natural inclination tends to present them with film with a well felt rhythm. Its also interesting to note that all the great directors have a marvelous understanding of what music can do for a movie. You may argue that Nolan's films do not need much music, and thats true. But it doesnt mean it doesnt need good music. Shyamalan's films have lots of silence and not much music, but they are all pretty awesomely scored by JNH.

This post has been edited by BurgaFlippinMan: May 1 2008, 04:34 PM

easily pleased but have to find fault with norlan?

hahahaha................dude, tho most of us in this thread take our movies seriously. i have to say one thing

just watch the damn show

Yes, the teleportation device turned out, unintentionally, to be a duplication machine, but you didnt know Bale sent him on a wild goose chase. Or at least you couldn't really figure out whether Tesla really did invent some super machine, or whether it was just a grand hoax.

The movie may have started out strictly rooted in reality, but there is one scene which I think is pivotal in this discussion. The scene where Sarah takes Borden up to her apartment, says he cant come inside, and we see Borden walking down the stairs, and the next thing we see is Borden magically appearing inside the apartment. What went through your mind right after that scene? Because it was that scene that made me second guess the nature of the film... There couldn't be anything that could make him appear in there. It was impossible. Yet the thought of him having a twin never once flashed in my mind. The movie basically gives it to you right here, and we somehow dont take it.

The Pledge, Turn, Prestige setup of the whole film applies to the Borden twist. Angier in his quest to gain revenge and outdo Borden deviates from this unwritten 'rule' of stage magic when he chances upon the duplication machine. The 'cheat' you refer to is actually Angier cheating in the context of the film, and we see the horror he inflicted upon himself (killing a duplicate in every performance). Plus, the scene where he first duplicates himself and then shoots him is tragic stuff, because we know that the duplicate is just as much an Angier as the real Angier is. Of course, I still get it that this doesn't explain how tesla suddenly managed to come up with a device like that, but seeing that the guy's inventions are shrouded in mystery anyway, I'm not gonna pick at it.

I will have a better look when I next see any of nolan's film to try to get hold of what you mean by the damn 'flow'.

I don't mean to come across as purposely finding fault with Nolan. You could also say that I sometimes find Spielberg too sentimental, Lucas too self indulgent, Singer too bland, De Niro too lazy...but you get the idea.

Honestly I can't recall that scene, forgettable as the movie was.


Didn't Bale say so in his diary?



The 'cheat' I refer to is the story cheating the audience. Its gives the same bad vibe as the Keyser Soyze in the Usual Suspects, where the film manipulates the audience solely for the purpose of manipulation and then leaves the audience unsure of what is real and what is not. It makes the film feel like a waste of time. In any case, the further twists after the sci-fi one did nothing for the movie and I was just waiting for it to end, that tiresome it had gotten.


Burga - going off to watch AI and then to play GTAIV for the rest of the night.

This post has been edited by BurgaFlippinMan: May 1 2008, 06:11 PM

Cop out spotted.

j/k

you know, that is not being eaasy to please. its like everyone you have something ti go against

dude, relax and enjoy the movie

You guys are so sad, it's a public holiday and and you all are perpetually reloading this page at least I have a test tomorrow

This post has been edited by Makakeke: May 1 2008, 06:43 PM

dude, I have an exam tomorrow.

You'll understand when you get hold of the best thing till the Second Coming. Apparently, the name of the Achievement you get for having sex with your girlfriend in this game is called 'Warm Coffee'. ROFL

I do. I think Superman: The Movie is the best superhero movie even with the wtf turn back the time ending, I enjoy Far and Away despite its cliche-ness, I enjoy many of Michael Bay's movies...the list goes on.

I'm getting laid tomorrow.

Burga - who is pleased (but not surprised) that this thread is spamfree-est thread in the forum

This post has been edited by BurgaFlippinMan: May 1 2008, 08:47 PM

Damn sneaky bastards of rockstar lol! I saw a hooker-doing-her-stuff vid. Damn its actually pretty graphic even though you dont see anything.

you mean in the game.... right?

It'd be lame to brag about getting it on ingame right? And I'm not lame....hehe. Plus, its Friday!

This post has been edited by BurgaFlippinMan: May 1 2008, 11:44 PM

WTF? you had to drag your sex life into a chris nolan thread?

pix or it never happened

For me i thought that nolan did a great job for the action sequence in Batman Begins. There are few scenes i recalled was that the viewers get to be in the boots of the bad guys, u get to feel the mysterious and suspense in those situation where some creature is lurking at your back. There are only few scenes u get to see batman to make him more frigthening. Well that sums up what Batman really are. I wouldnt trade this just to see Batman kick those bad guys arse with his martial arts.

I'll give you that the fight at the docks (was it the docks?) was meant to be disorientating for the viewer. I do not believe that applies to the rest of the action sequences though.

This post has been edited by BurgaFlippinMan: May 4 2008, 12:03 AM

I just finished Batman Begins and I dont see any problems with its flow at all. It's just fine. I dont know what you're picking at here, and I think neither do the others here as well, nor do the guys I asked in another forum (one of whom was a photographer and he's picky when it comes to films). The movie is as good as ever. All it did was further whet my appetite for The Dark Knight.

Its very average for a guy who gets so much praise. Coincidentally, I just watched it a few days ago too (fourth time). Its not a movie (like many of Nolan's films) that grows on me admittedly. I was loved it the first time around, but it gets worse on repeated viewings (though not by much).

Burga - who now ranks it 4th behind Spider-Man 2 in his superhero movies list.

Burga 2 - who has watched Duel twice in two days and is astounded by the abundant apparent talent.

This post has been edited by BurgaFlippinMan: May 6 2008, 08:07 PM

I envy you who have so much time

When you finish your STPM in december and school starts in the fall season of the following year, you are bound to have that much time. Thank God for Saints Row, GTA IV and Oblivion.

When I had my STPM break, I WORKED!!!

back on topic - today was an exception, had a half day vacant and I managed to finish 2 lengthy films, Kurosawa's Ran and Fellini's 8 1/2 and since we're already in the topic of a good visual storyteller, i surely think Kurosawa especially, is one of the best virtuosos in this aspect. The way he mashes the grand settings, colors, and camera movement together puts many many pretentious artistic directors today to shame.

Its not that I don't want to work, I just have a few commitments which are annoyingly in the way.

Kurosawa eh? FINAS had/is having a screening of his movies or something right for free? Damn...

this topic still going on eh?

well, like i mentioned before, i think Nolan is a very good director after watching only 2 of his movies, The Prestige and Batman Begins... And both movies are in my fav's list of movies...

In some way or another, tho not necessarily within topic...but it is free of idiots so far at least.



Then you must have missed out on why I think Batman is good but not great, and The Prestige is ultimately rubbish.

GTA IV as a commitment?

Yes, I was there.

no they are both great!!

With batman begins, even though the action scenes were mostly average, the film does not suffer from it. It builds up the character of batman impeccably, and the whole semi-fantasy world of gotham city is just set up so perfectly, as movie about batman's origins everything just clicks. The action is almost entirely a side aspect, the story and characters are always the focus. So while it could have been better with great action scenes, it certainly does not suffer from it, something I cant say applies 100% to Iron Man. The template is all set for an epic sequel, and the dark knight looks every inch to be exactly that. Ledger's Joker even from the trailers looks absolutely immense. Plus it has some of the best posters I've ever seen!

I do think nolan needs better explosions though.

This post has been edited by QuickFire: May 6 2008, 11:19 PM

GTAIV is what I do between the commitments.



I beg to differ. Because of them the movie never reaches a satisfying high. It prevents it from reaching greatness and thus is relegated to a 'mere' good movie. Superman: The Movie didn't have much action either, but what action it had was done superbly.

I like Nolan's Bruce Wayne character (or more likely Bale's take on the character) and I enjoyed the origin story. However, I do not like the reinvention of Batman as some ninja warrior (its lame), his rubbish looking Bat-Tank and I'm not too fond of the generic looking Gotham, though to be fair it was always going to be nigh impossible to match Tim Burton's awe inspiring vision. Nolan's Batman is objectively a better movie than Burton's, but I admittedly enjoy watching the Burton films more (which also have two awesome Elfman scores compared to the shit Zimmer cooked up for Nolan's). I'd call it a 7/10 (genre relative), down from 8.5/10 on my first viewing.

Burga - who didn't find the Dark Knight trailer to be terribly exciting honestly, but then again also thought the same about Batman Begins' ad.

This post has been edited by BurgaFlippinMan: May 7 2008, 12:10 AM

It's a brilliant movie as it is. What stops it from achieving the utterly, stunningly awesome status is kickass action scenes. Burton's Gotham is great, but I prefer Nolan's. The characters of Scarecrow and Falcone just infuse gotham. The atmosphere is is there. It's rooted in reality yet still pseudo-fantasy.

I never really enjoyed the Superman movies. Aside from his powers, Superman is one of those 'happy' superheroes. Everything about it is happy happy happy.

And a good score.

Obviously you don't remember much about Superman: The Movie, or even Superman II for that matter. Heck, Superman Returns wasn't 'happy' either, and got way too heavy in the end. And regarding the bolded portion of the quote, how are his powers not 'happy'? lol.

Burga - who watched Lost in Translation, Fantasia and Fantasia 2000 in the last 24 hours.

This post has been edited by BurgaFlippinMan: May 7 2008, 02:09 PM

I mean I dont like his limitless superpowers. Thank god for kryptonite. I just do not like the superman character (I dont mean just his characters in the movies) and the superman universe. There's just too much love going on. Lex Luthor isn't a real hardcore villain, and his girlfriend just makes him look worse. Fraternizing with the enemy... come on! Dump her already!

Luthor is pure evil dude...don't judge the character on just the Hackman take. . But even if you do that, in the Reeve universe, there is the hardcore-st supehero film baddie ever, General Zod!!! Played to perfection by Terence Stamp no less

This post has been edited by BurgaFlippinMan: May 7 2008, 02:27 PM

Which is why I liked Superman II more than the first.

dude, Cillian Murphy's Scarecrow is more terrifying than the Luthors of hackman and spacey! Damn he was underused in Begins. Anyway, come on, you dont find Heath's Joker scary??

Its still the only superhero movie anywhere close to the first one.

He looks great fun to watch, not exactly scary or disturbing though..at least from the trailers. There will always be some morbid fascination to his performance, and I predict that the performance however good it might be will be overrated by the general public simply because he is dead.

This post has been edited by BurgaFlippinMan: May 7 2008, 11:42 PM