I really don't like it. He'd said everything he needed to say about Batman, Gotham, and the whole shebang in the The Dark Knight. This is the only film he's made that was completely unnecessary and greenlit solely because of the success of a previous film.
shareI think The Dark Knight itself was only greenlit based on Batman Begins' success. It wasn't needed to continue that narrative; Begins had a closed story.
But, yeah, TDKR was a rare misfire for Nolan. I wasn't a big fan of Interstellar, either.
Interstellar didn't make a big impression on me the first time. After seeing it again I liked it a lot more than on first viewing.
shareTDKR: F
Dunkirk: C-
Interstellar: D+
Tenet: D+
I like the rest of his stuff and even love a few.
I haven't seen Dunkirk, but everything he's done after TDK was bad.
shareDunkirk is by far the worst. Easily my worst theater experience. Even shelled out to see it on the recommend 70mm Imax.
Person I saw it with also said it was absolutely the most boring movie they've ever sat through.
I thought I was the only one who didn't 'get' Dunkirk. I thought it was really slow, almost purposefully, and almost impersonal. I didn't connect with it at all. I didn't like Tenet either, but I appreciate he was trying something different.
shareTrust me, you're not. My friends and I all were very perplexed by its overwhelmingly positive reception. It's artistry sure ,and that probably explains the critiques liking it, but the general moving going audience?
Even inceptions better. Not much made sense in this.
shareNot even close, to me this is Nolan's best followed by Interstellar. The only movie he's made that wasn't exceptional was Dunkirk. TDKR is iconic and one of the highest grossing films of all time.
01) The Dark Knight Rises
02) Interstellar
03) The Dark Knight
04) Memento
05) The Prestige
06) Inception
07) Batman Begins
08) Tenet
09) Insomnia
10) Dunkirk
In all fairness though I have not seen Following
TDKR is one of the worst endings to a trilogy ever. 3/10 and that's generous.
shareWould agree with this list save Batman Begins. I'd put BB up at 4. Haven't seen Tenet.
Tom Hardy alone in TDKR is better than most movies released.
Not only that but the deep themes they did with Bruce’s character also make TDKR the best. Batman Begins is also great but it has some stiff competition. Tenet was decent, it felt a lot like inception but the characters could have been better
shareNaw I agree it's bad but he also has other bad ones.
shareHe's never made a bad movie, he's made a couple that weren't masterpieces (Dunkirk, Tenet, Insomnia) but the rest are some of the greatest movies ever made.
shareThe man has a long list of duds and many of his films are visual captivating but dull plots.
shareStory wise Dunkirk was a dud but it makes up for it by being a technical masterpiece. Nolan easily has the most impressive resume of any director
shareMartin Scorsese, Woody Allen, Francis Ford Coppola, Akira Kurosawa, Billy Wilder, Ang Lee, Steven Spielberg, Wes Anderson, Paul Thomas Anderson, Terry Gilliam, Quentin Tarantino, Alfred Hitchcock...
...Joel & Ethan Coen
I’ve watched pretty much all of the big films from Scorsese, Allen, Coppola, Spielberg , Tarantino, Hitchcock and Coen and some of them may come close Nolan still owns all of them . All of those directors also have at least one legitimately bad movie, Nolan does not
shareI just flat-out disagree. Nolan has bad films and he doesn't own all of them.
The Coens? You think he's "owned" them? Fargo? You think he's "owned" Spielberg with ET and Saving Private Ryan and Minority Report? I really disagree. Owned implies that he hands-down skunked 'em, and I'm sorry, I don't see it that way. He didn't top The Godfather to that degree at all, nor Apocalypse Now.
Then, of course, there's Kurosawa...
I respect Nolan, I like his stuff, and I love a lot of his movies, but he doesn't own these guys and he doesn't "easily" beat them.
Does Nolan even have a best Director Academy Award?
I think not.
I'm not really a big fan of Spielberg but there is no denying his greatness. He has produced many paramount films. Including Schidler's list which could be the best movie of all-time. Nolan can't touch that.
Apocalypse Now is really good. A Classic. Nolan wishes he had such films under his belt.
Nobody mentioned the Mexicans. The One who won back-to-back or Del Toro.
Mangehella, I dont like Kubrick but he's pretty good, Spike Lee is original, David Fischer, Clint is really good an amazing talent to being good at both ends, Burton, Elites:Del Palma/Stone, Darabont, Mel Gibson, the list goes on and on...
I mean, did Hitchcock? I don't recall him winning one. Not for nothing, it does mark something, but a Best Director Academy Award isn't the be-all-end-all. Kurosawa probably didn't have one either, right?
I know what you mean about Spielberg. He isn't my favourite director. I think he's too polished, too "safe". But I think he's still a master. He's almost like the blueprint you base everything else on. Want to do a war movie? Look at Saving Private Ryan first. How about sci-fi? Watch Minority Report, you'll get a good idea of how to construct that world. Horror? Jaws. Family film? E.T. I think some of his best stuff is also some of the stuff that's swept aside. Minority Report is underrated, I think, as is Bridge of Spies - which is a great Cold War thriller - but people usually just site Saving Private Ryan, Schindler's List, and Jurassic Park (which is a tad overrated, in my opinion).
Heck, yes. There are very exciting directors to come from the South - Mexico and South/Central America. Del Toro for *sure*. I'm also a big fan of Inarritu (Birdman is mesmerizingly good!) and Cuaron (Children of Men alone could get him onto the list).
See? Even with the list I did, I left off some greats! Kubrick! How could I not say Kubrick!? Spike Lee was great, and I loved BlackKklansman, but I'm not as familiar with some of his work, so I didn't mention him.
Clint and Fincher, yes! I'm a big Burton fan, too, but I get why somebody wouldn't think his filmography was bursting with the best, so I left him off.
Bottom line: there are no directors who "easily" are the best. As Roy Buchanan once said, "There's no such thing as number one...but thank you for thinking of it."
The Oscars are subjective, they are based on the subjective opinions of a small group of people and people actively petition for Oscars for certain individuals, also this is the same Academy that picked Forrest Gump over Pulp Fiction, Kramer vs Kramer over Apocalypse Now and Shakespeare In Love over Saving Private Ryan.
shareTotally disagree, while a couple of his recent movies were slightly underwhelming (Dunkirk especially) they are all legitimately competently made films. Yes Nolan owns the Coens and Spielberg. Now Spielberg is a great director in fact you might called me a "Steven Spielberg fanatic", but I can be honest and point out that Spielberg is far from perfect despite making some of my favorite films ever, Nolan however is about as perfect as one can get.
The Godfather and Apocalypse Now are amazing films and I actually ranked Apocalypse Now and The Godfather Part II above every Nolan film, however aside from GF I and II, and Apocalypse Now, Coppola doesn't have a whole lot on his resume. He still has some pretty good movies especially The Conversation and Dracula but he also has his fair share of crap and Nolan still owns him.
Nolan owns the Coens? I can tolerate you saying better but owns? We are not comparing Uwe Boll to Spielberg here.
shareNolan is comparable to Uwe Boll? You are not a serious poster, please don't waste my time.
shareWhere did I say Nolan was comparable to Uwe Boll? I said we are not comparing Uwe Boll to Spielberg here. In the opening I said I can tolerate you saying better but owns? I think the Coens are better but even though I think they are better I would not say they own Nolan. I would not say that because both have directed some terrific films. I was pointing out that the gap between them is not far whether you prefer either one over the other. Uwe Boll and Spielberg the gap is so far apart it is a joke to compare them. That's why when you say Nolan owns the Coens I can't help but scratch my head.
shareTotally disagree, while a couple of his recent movies were slightly underwhelming (Dunkirk especially) they are all legitimately competently made films. Yes Nolan owns the Coens and Spielberg. Now Spielberg is a great director in fact you might called me a "Steven Spielberg fanatic", but I can be honest and point out that Spielberg is far from perfect despite making some of my favorite films ever, Nolan however is about as perfect as one can get.
The Godfather and Apocalypse Now are amazing films and I actually ranked Apocalypse Now and The Godfather Part II above every Nolan film, however aside from GF I and II, and Apocalypse Now, Coppola doesn't have a whole lot on his resume. He still has some pretty good movies especially The Conversation and Dracula but he also has his fair share of crap and Nolan still owns him.
See, I really disagree on the Coens in-particular. Nolan's a great filmmaker, but the idea of him hands-down being better than the Coens is...I can't figure that one out at all.
Spielberg often feels a little "safe" to me, maybe makes his movies a little too "clean", but Nolan has flaws as a filmmaker, too.
Both filmmakers have very minor flaws that don't detract from their great output, but they are, neither of them, perfect.
I do not think there is a clear cut best director ever, just like how I do not think there is such thing as THE greatest movie ever made. I do think there are great film makers that truly will be mentioned among the greats but to say one is the end all be all is too difficult to determine. Nolan is a great film maker but there are other film makers that I think are just as talented as him. So to say he is hands down better than the Coens, Scorsese, Francis Ford Coppola or Spielberg? No I can't agree there. I could list many others that are could give him a run for his money.
I think what makes Spielberg so good is that he is so versatile. What I mean is he has tackled so many types of films and has great ones in every category. Want a kids movie E.T., want a swashbuckling adventure Raiders of the Lost Ark, want your horror movie Jaws, historical period piece of art that will be shown in film class Schindler's list, war movie Saving Private Ryan, Biopic Lincoln, gigantic monster movie Jurassic Park, coming of age drama The Color Purple, mind bending science fiction close encounters of the third kind, or I agree Minority Report is underrated. That is impressive! He literally has basically a slam dunk in every single category. Only thing he is missing is a western or a musical which he is directing the west side story remake so we will see how that goes. Spielberg being safe but I feel he has a certain magic charm most do not have. He is the blockbuster guy typically. He just knows how to have fun though and he appeals to a wide audience. I feel it is hard to stand out while appealing to a wide audience and he has done just that.
See take someone like Quentin Tarantino. He is no doubt one of the greats and can rival anybody. However I do not think he has the versatility Spielberg has. With a Tarantino flick it is going to be over the top violent and it will be for a mature audience. Anyway just food for thought.
Yes, he has delivered a blueprint for basically any genre. Age groups, too. Family? ET. Teens? Jurassic Park. Adults? Minority Report. Any level of taste. Schlock lovers? Jaws. (Not that Jaws is pure schlock, of course). Emotional drama? Schindler's list.
I think his ubiquity and mainstream appeal makes people shrug him off. He's a big talent, though, for sure.
There is no clear-cut winner of best director. It's like "Best Writer". Who? It's not a slam dunk. Who's the best writer? Can't be done. We can have our favourites, or even suspicions, but to say it's a no-contest winner is arrogant.
I wouldnt include Woody Allen, and maybe Tarantino but still Kill Bill is better than anything his ever done.
Among other type classics like Pulp, I do think Jackie Brown is underrated but still his techniques and storylines are much better than Nolan so I guess I would agree with Tarantino.
Nice list in any regard.
I'm a big Woody Allen fan. I've never seen a movie of his that I don't like, at least a little bit. His worst movies are on-par for entertainment, if nothing else, and his best movies are stratospheric. Annie Hall, Manhattan, Crimes & Misdemeanours, Midnight in Paris, and Match Point are masterpieces. Match Point is criminally underrated. There are others. Radio Days, Stardust Memories... on and on. Even his lesser-knowns are fun, and I think pretty much hidden gems (Manhattan Murder Mystery, Alice, or Small Time Crooks - the premise alone is gold!)
Sorry. I'm a Woody fan and his movies are all great to me. I get that people don't like a lot of his stuff, but he's so prolific that some unevenness or difference between films is expected; even just as he evolves or experiments as a filmmaker (Zelig, for instance), people with different tastes will like or dislike his work. So, I get that he's not a 100% track record guy, but if we're stacking filmographies, consider his best work, and I think he's got the same number of awesome films as Nolan.
Jackie Brown is underrated. Tarantino's best (for me) is Inglourious Basterds, though.
Now, all this is not to say Nolan's not great. He deserves to be on a list of wonderful directors. I just don't think he handily, easily trumps every other director's filmography with no contest. Even if we think about hit:miss ratios, can we say he's easily superior to the Coen Brothers or Hitchcock? Not to my thinking.
I actually like anything else, a lot, and the other one he did around that time.
Though I used to love Scarlett around this era. I actually hate Match Point and think everything about it massively sucks.
From the directing, to the story, the atrocious acting.
I think his a major pedo and a total loser creep. Based on that all of his artistic value is trash.
I dont think I've seen Inglourious Bastards. I think I've seen a few scenes but based on it's premise and over the top humor I boycotted it. I did see some scenes and thought were okay but for me the overall film just didnt seem to work. But it's a notch to Quentin as it was massively successful and culturally significant and obviously unique in many ways.
I can see someone being a fan of Nolan which is acceptable since his films are modern adaptations but to say he his the best director of all-time without any bad films and easily trump all the other directors is laughable.
Anything Else is a rare one that I haven't seen. His 90s/2000s films are, generally, underrated.
Fascinating. Match Point is possibly my favourite of his films (tough to pick just one), so that you are so opposed is interesting, especially if you're normally a Scarlett fan. I bet we both dig Lost in Translation a lot, though.
I don't think he's a pedo. I believe Moses Farrow's account too much, and I read a bunch of stuff about brainwashing, and...I mean, there's a lot. I'm not really interested in getting into a "Woody's a perv/innocent fight," though, so if you're good leaving it at "We disagree," I'm good there, too. Although I do think his relationship with Soon-Yi started in a morally reprehensible way, it has lasted a long time and, well, the proof of the pudding is in the twenty-three year marriage, as they say.
I don't think artistic value and personal morality are intrinsically linked. I do understand where, if somebody's skeeved out by a person and so can no longer get lost in their art, that would stop them from enjoying their works. But I'm not going to stop listening to Help! or Revolution and John Lennon was abusive.
Inglourious Basterds is a great movie, my favourite of Tarantino's. I recommend it, especially if you like Tarantino's work. I think it's more respectful than the promos made it seem, and in particular on the subject of violence as entertainment or as amusement, he actually challenges that notion in the movie. It's interesting.
I like Nolan's work. I'm not sure I'm a "fan", although I do think he's really great and really talented and I do like watching his movies. But I 100% agree: nobody is a clear "best ever" director, and yeah, saying he's hands-down superior is myopic.
are you on crack?
I can probably name 10 directors that are better
and
a lot more without the humongous budgets, cast, and special effects.
Yeah, I didn't really like Interstellar, either. I haven't seen Tenet or Dunkirk, but I've heard mixed-bag about both.
shareInception sucks!
shareI thought it was a great sci-fi/action movie. Very creative visuals and environment, interesting plot hooks, and some neat characters. Maybe not as deep as it pretends, but deep enough to be fascinating, I thought. Plus the action scenes are some of Nolan's better work in the genre.
shareI thought it was so dull, pompous, and plotless I gave up on the initial.
Plus Dicaprio looked bad in it.
To each their own; I really enjoyed it.
shareit was also pretentious.
shareI found the ending pretentious, or at least cheap. I think the only thing I really dislike about Inception is that last shot - literally just the last shot - which I thought was such a bait-and-switch, "Ooh, aren't we clever," smug (yeah, pretentious) final shot. Other than that, I dig it.
shareI don't think I agree. Looking at the dark Knight Rises, I find the scenes without the joker to be a waste
Memento is fine, but a little thought destroys the narrative.
Noland is a good director. But, He's not perfect. That's just fine. Bad moments of direction don't mean talent doesn't exist. I know ID4 is flawed. It's still fun. Don't let perfection ruin a good time.
I thought Memento was trash and dont get the hype and I actually wanted to like it.
shareI've only watched it once. It was fine for me, but I didn't care to go back to it. So maybe you got a point.
I tend to define my good movies by rewatchability.
I'm the same. Whenever I watch a good movie I almost want to just hit rewind and start it all over again. But it mostly manifests itself in me showing the movie to someone else very soon after watching it, and I don't mind watching it again. And I agree with memento, I liked it but had no desire to watch it again.
share