Christopher Nolan Discussion
By David Mumpower
July 28, 2010
BoxOfficeProphets.com
I should start by making the same notation previously mentioned in a recent edition of Monday Morning Quarterback. I am not predisposed to love the work of Christopher Nolan. The auteur’s popularity in the 18-49 male demographic is one I fully understand. He is the creator of what many consider to be the perfect action blockbuster, The Dark Knight. He is also the man responsible for one of the most inventive cinematic eccentricities of the past quarter century, Memento. As a lifetime lover of film, I am in awe of what he accomplished in those two titles, yet neither one moves me the way it does many if not most people.
As I have previously stated, I enjoyed the straightforward storytelling of Iron Man, my favorite title of 2008, much more than I did the fractured, too-forced twists of The Dark Knight. The latter film’s final half hour undoes a lot of the majesty of the performances of Heath Ledger and Aaron Eckhart up until that moment. Whether Nolan was taking a page from the recent Brother Eye/OMAC story in the Batman comic or not, I find a lot of the special effects at the end of The Dark Knight needless and distracting. This frustrates me in that there is so much genius in the film prior to that point.
I am in awe of how well implemented The Joker is from his introduction in the opening sequence all the way up until his destruction of the hospital. The next time you watch the film, please take a moment to appreciate that he is still driving the same bus he used as a getaway vehicle during the opening bank heist. Of course a character as malevolent and nihilist as The Joker would enjoy this bus for its pragmatism and utility as well as his subversion of its intrinsic purpose as a cornerstone of the educational system. How many directors can you name that you believe would offer such tremendous character consistency in such subtle ways?
This is exactly why I have been so frustrated with Nolan in the past. His promise for me as a movie lover exceeds his works to date with one notable exception.Returning to Memento for a moment, I am lost in admiration for the conceit upon which this movie hinges, the reversal of events that reveal the history of a victim of memory loss. While I find innumerable moments of brilliance in the film, I am one of those people who is disappointed that the ultimate explanation of Memento’s suffering lead, Leonard, and his quest for vengeance is one of nihilism. The movie promises so much more before ultimately revealing itself to be almost a mocking laugh from its uber-talented director toward the viewer.
Someone mentioned the other day that they couldn't relate to the relationship of Leonardo DiCaprio and Marion Cotillard in Inception because it felt forced. I think that's the summation of every relationship I've seen Nolan create onscreen, which is why it doesn’t bother me in Inception. I am used to this by now when I watch his films. When Maggie Gyllenhaal is getting blown up in The Dark Knight, I'm not believing that Batman cannot go on because he has lost the love of his life. There isn't any heart in the moment. I am, however, blown away by the genius of having The Joker be so malevolent as to tell his nemesis that he can save the one he loves the best only to kill that person while Batman knows he's been duped. Nolan's ideas are the gold standard in the industry right now. I just wish that there was some soul to his work. This is how I ultimately view Nolan’s work prior to Inception save for his best feature, Batman Begins.
As someone who felt that Batman as a movie character would be better served as a part of a team such as in the oft-rumored Justice League or, better yet, placed somewhere in the future in Batman Beyond, I was caught offguard by the pristine quality of Batman Begins. As I recently stated in MMQB, I believe that the discussion for best comic book adaptation of all time centers upon three films, Spider-Man 2, Iron Man and Batman Begins, with Iron Man probably not in the class of the other two. Spider-Man 2 is a Shakespearean triumph as a struggling but talented teen in search of a father figure sees not one but two of them fail him on a fundamental level. Also, it kicks ass, something that produces of most gratuitous comic book movies forget. Iron Man is a star turn of epic proportions for Robert Downey Jr. and the rare title in its genre that wants to have fun. As much as I love both of those titles, however, I believe that Batman Begins has them beat.
Nolan’s decision to highlight the aspect of Batman that makes him one of the greatest fictional characters created, that anyone with the bank account and the motivation could become him, would work on its own. The implementation of the phantom immortal Ra’s Al Ghul, however, is the reason why I’m always going to admire Nolan’s work even when it doesn’t move me. Simply by casting an actor as established as Ken Watanabe, coming off of his sublime performance in The Last Samurai, he immediately gives the character the oomph required in order to perform the sleight of hand that has embodied Nolan’s career thus far well beyond his exploration of the subject in The Prestige.
By hiding in plain sight that the star of Taken is too good an actor to be the first lieutenant, the random henchman, Nolan was able to entice viewers into believing something that common sense would have told them to be false. It is one my favorite cinematic reveals as well as an excellent representation of what Nolan wants to accomplish as a director. Whereas the Michael Bays of the world have dogs and robots hump legs in order to appeal to the lowest common denominator, Nolan wants to challenge the most passionate and intelligent of movie goers, forcing them to evaluate their own preconceptions about cinema. Was I more willing to believe Ken Watanabe as Ra’s Al Ghul because he’s Asian? I think so. Did The Prestige lose me because I knew it to be pointless prestidigitation? Am I willing to forgive Inception for sharing the same behavior as The Prestige in this regard? Apparently so.
Inception is the Hollywood blockbuster implementation of Primer, the Shane Carruth masterpiece whose unconventional, cerebral approach to time travel left our staff scratching our collective head for months. Eventually, BOP’s Dan Krovich created a Primer flowchart that allowed us to understand the moving parts, at least mostly. We once jokingly debated making a How Well Do You Know quiz for Primer wherein the correct answer for each question would be “It depends.” That sort of open-ended ambiguity is borderline unprecedented for films with $100+ million budgets. The reason why is simple. The term popcorn cinema exists for a reason. Most consumers leave their homes and head to the movie theater in order to engage in escapist fantasy for a while. They want to fall in love with the lead actor and they want to experience the fantasy of rescuing someone or being resued while doling out a heapin’ helpin’ of whupass along the way. Inception borders on being a theological exercise. Do you know how many of those have earned $200 million domestically? Exactly. Inception obviously will be the first.
Why do I like Inception on a personal level when Nolan mostly hasn’t been my cup of the tea in the past? A lot of that has to do with the meticulous crafting of this story. As I have said before, Inception is a computer programmer’s movie, a series of nested loops wherein each lower progression requires more work. In this day and age, entertainment rarely offers new ideas such as this one and I firmly believe it will become an imitated format in the future. The careful planning required to layer the car chase on top of the hotel rumble on top of the Halo 3 Snowbound map shootout is ingenious. Nolan is a puppeteer manipulating three puppets simultaneously. Independent of the success or failure of his artistry, I would be impressed by his daring in attempting to pull off such an unprecedented feat. A person must be chock full of self-confidence to endeavor something so ambitious. And I believe that the end result is successful.
Without debating spoilers (some of my friends likely to read this have yet to see the film), I will state that Marion Cotillard offers one of the most nuanced performances in cinematic history. At various moments in the film, she is a femme fatale, a murderous stalker, a romantic lead, Trinity from The Matrix, a tortured What Dreams May Come-r, and a Misery-esque victim. Assuming you are someone who has seen the movie and will watch it again, please take note of this the next time you watch it. Consider what Nolan asks of Cotillard during each of her appearances. Such range is ordinarily reserved for one woman plays, not mega-blockbusters. Similarly, think about what is asked of Tom Hardy throughout the film. He not only plays himself but also other people imbued with vestiges of himself. These are new and different ideas during a movie era where almost every greenlight is a run to the middle, an exercise in cash-grabbing conformity. I mentioned Primer before for a very simple reason. Inception is a low budget arthouse film disguised as a de facto sequel to The Matrix/The Dark Knight.
The question then becomes “Is Inception boring because it is more talkative than those films?” And I readily acknowledge that for a lot of mainstream consumers, probably most, the answer is absolutely yes. Even some of the smartest people I know, a few of them even established screenwriters, have complained about the degree of exposition in the film. Inception could be accurately described as a book on tape with visual accompaniment. There are a couple of moments in the film where the viewer wonders if they should be taking notes. This is the natural issue that stems from creating a world so complex that the applicable laws of physics must be stated then constantly adapted to fit changing circumstances. Without this solution, that kid from Third Rock from the Sun winds up fighting in a zero gravity hotel hallway and nobody knows why.
Does such a scenario alienate a significant percentage of the viewing audience? Of course. Is this problematic? Hell no. Look, if Michael Bay can spend the last 45 minutes of a $400 million blockbuster randomly blowing things up in order to entertain those who like loud noises and shiny things, Christopher Nolan is more than welcome to retrofit a theoretical physics lecture with the latest in special effects CGI and sell it as a major blockbuster. I think it’s nice that he lets the rest of us play for a change. Otherwise, we get stuck with stuff like Adam Sandler and Friends in Grown Ups and Shrek V: Not Even Trying.
Inception is not for everyone and if you ever ask anyone from Warner Bros. about this, they’d have to answer honestly on the point. The people who are targeted are the ones who are generally reduced to arthouse theaters, only they get the serendipitous bonus of splashy, street-merging special effects for a change. This is what makes its box office triumph all the more remarkable. Primer earned $424,760. Inception has made that much an hour in its first 12 days. Even A-Rod isn't paid that well. Independent of what you think of the movie, you have to be deeply impressed with Nolan for pulling off such a majestic box office feat.