He has directed some of the most popular movies known to the American public/around the world in the last decade; so what is it about his directing style that keeps raking in audiences by the millions?
Nolan's pretty strong on auteur theory, good choice! – m-cubed7 years ago
I think a key feature of his films is that he tends to focus on the psychology of the human mind; what are its extents and limitations, why and how it thinks certain ways. And to audiences, I think that many find it unique and refreshing that he is creating major Hollywood films that deal with something so cerebral ( which is not as common amongst the majority of big budget Hollywood pictures)
That could be an angle to take – Yanni7 years ago
JulieCMiliay, Hello again. As you pointed out, Christopher Nolan is without a doubt one of the most financially successful directors working today, and in my opinion, he deserves the praise. While this is a bit of a cheap way to make suggestions, I think it's best to simply write some pros and cons about him in order to be fair in critiquing his work while also appreciating it. First the negative: 1. He isn't all that original. While many say that his movies are different and break off from most movies, the bulk of his work isn't actually original material. He's made 10 movies thus far (I'm counting Dunkirk though it hasn't been released), and only 4 of them are original (Following, Inception, Interstellar, and Dunkirk). The others are as follows: Memento is an adaptation of his brother's short story Memento Mori; Insomnia is a remake of an Icelandic movie of the same name; The Dark Knight trilogy is, obviously, an adaptation of the Batman comics; and The Prestige is an adaptation of a novel of the same name by Christopher Priest. While he is definitely an exciting director, his material usually comes from someone else.
2. Sometimes he isn't much of a craftsman, especially when it comes to editing. I'd recommend watching some videos on Nolan's editing and see for yourself how it can get a bit confusing to tell what's going on, especially during action scenes. And that's about all I can think of, really. Now the positive: 1. He's a classy director. His movies don't rely on swearing, graphic depictions of sex or violence, or controversial subjects in order to get an audience.
2. He's a spectacular director. His movies are often grand in scope and, more importantly, they rarely involve CGI. The majority of the effects in his movies are practical and as such make the scenery all the more vivid.
3. His movies are, as Yanni said, interested in making the audience think. More often than not (at least in my case), I find myself thinking about his movies long after I've seen them because of the ideas presented and because of how they were presented. I hope these observations help. Thanks for your time,
August – August Merz7 years ago
It would be good to see 'Dunkirk' also included in this analysis. – Vishnu Unnithan7 years ago
They once asked Plautus how he so perfectly knew the culture and as an immigrant to Rome from southern Italay, read Jewish and Italian, how he has so many hits to a roman audience. Make Sure that the theatergoer is the same person at the epilogue as he is at the ovation, especially when writing for the upper crust, and He said 'Know thy audience'. a Latin line reechoed in Groucho at that machers funeral, give the people what they want. – Antonius8657 years ago
Look at the remakes of today and compare them with the originals and see if the changes that have been made for a contemporary audience improve the property or not.
The remake adds a greater dimension of perception (or misperception) that is not entirely there in the original, perhaps due to the state of the art or the creative force behind it. The issue then becomes the over-reliance on technology (or the performer) to carry the story, leaving thin the inspiration and vitality of imagination, I believe. If you write this article and I rewrite it a year later, what (and who) determines which is better, or worse? I am eager to find out. – lofreire7 years ago
My first thought on reading the heading and pitch was the broad strokes approach to condemning/questioning the legitimacy of remakes. Same as with any work which derives from another, superiority is subjective. I'd also stress the importance of audience - in the case of series like Star Trek, the audience is extremely important because the bulk of the original audience is still around and there are huge expectations. In the case of public domain, so Frankenstein or Dracula for instance, anybody can make a TV show or a movie or a derivative novel without buying rights, and the market is already saturated with retellings of high and low quality so expectation is not as much an issue. Finally, pop culture and social awareness change and morph over time, so content which was totally acceptable in the fifties or sixties would have to change to become palatable to a modern audience, and that isn't a bad thing - it's just a necessary alteration, like tying up a loose end or addressing a minor inconsistency. – Cat7 years ago
Also,examine the need for these remakes. Doesn't the minor alteration of the story render these remakes as a form of fanfiction themselves? – Vishnu Unnithan7 years ago
The 2016 American comedy-drama film, Swiss Army Man, starring Daniel Radcliff as a farting corpse, has been denoted by many as a film about gender transitioning. This article could explore the symbolism and themes of the film to highlight different interpretations the film may have. Although Swiss Army Man is a relatively straight forward story, its interesting and slightly fantastical plot could be relate to a number of different societal issues. What do you think the meaning behind the film is?
Such films often provide good fodder for thought. Would make for a nice read. – Vishnu Unnithan7 years ago
As a society, especially in the U.S., we love Christmas movies. Most of us grew up with "the classics," from Home Alone and Miracle on 34th Street to Rankin-Bass specials, A Christmas Story, and A Christmas Carol. Yet, the modern Christmas movie has positively exploded. Hallmark, for instance, has reams of them, which the public gobbles up every year.
Our enchantment with Christmas films has so influenced us that we even watch them in the middle of summer (see Hallmark’s Gold Crown Christmas preview week/Christmas in July for examples). The question is, why have these films, specials, and so forth gripped us so tightly? Is it simply nostalgia and the need for something warm and happy, or is something else going on here? Has Christmas-based entertainment lost its edge, or has its year-round accessibility given it a new one?
Analyze the relationship of Jess and Jane in Bend it Like Beckham, is this the true relationship of the film? Is the relationship between them heterosexual or homosexual? Is the character of Joe created to enforce normal roles?
Interesting topic. Would help to clarify the proposed thesis: If the relationship is heterosexual, then does that suggest____? If homosexual, then ____? – Nate Océan7 years ago
Definitely a topic to be investigated, but perhaps be careful not to monopolize on this relationship as homosexual or heterosexual, but rather the reason Juliette's mother thought she was gay: the fact that she wasn't a girly girl and played soccer was a contributing factor. I think the underlining concern is not sexuality, but gender roles and expectations. While Juliette's mom tries helplessly to buy her daughter a pretty bra instead of a sports bra, Jess has to hide the fact that she is playing soccer because her family's Indian culture doesn't think it appropriate for a girl to be playing soccer. – Gaby7 years ago
Whoa-- mind blown. Never ever thought about it like this. This could be an outstanding topic to write about. – JulieCMillay7 years ago
A great soundtrack is so much more than just a collection of good songs. It can pull the story along while somehow effortlessly blending into the background. The right one often helps define a movie. Analyse the effect the much-recognised soundtracks had in such films as Forrest Gump, Drive, The Departed, Pulp Fiction, The Dark Knight and others.
Great topic! I would recommend choosing around three examples for clarity (one that works because of the score, one that doesn't work because of the score, one that is strengthened by the score). Also, score VS soundtrack, which did you mean? The score is in the film, the soundtrack is a supplementary collection, typically for advertising. – m-cubed7 years ago
Interesting topic...Would be great to do an analysis on animated movies vs live-action, and whether that plays a role in how important the soundtrack is??? – MikeySheff7 years ago
I buy soundtracks based on their content of music acquired by production. I have several soundtracks in my current Vinyl record collection. If you collect them always purchase VINYL RECORDINGS when available you will be glad you did. – WilliamBailey7 years ago
Amazing topic, I would look at live action and animated films, as well as the musical score and songs added into the movie because there can be a difference in the mood the two different types create -GingerSavvy – GingerSavvy7 years ago
As a musician, when the soundtrack is good I definitely have a bias towards the movie. I think the soundtrack definitely makes a difference. Of course, there are times where the acting and plot is not as good as the soundtrack as well. Because music is so important in films, it makes a big difference! – birdienumnum177 years ago
I would definitely agree on soundtracks making a great movie. Try focusing on the elements on why those soundtracks you listed are great. Just what is it about them that can resonate with a viewer and make a film truly memorable? – DanielMichael7 years ago
Sound production plays such a huge yet underappreciated role in film and TV, I would honestly love to see an article or essay written about it. Also possible use examples like the recent Lady Macbeth, or RAW, and other films which utilize extremely tight or sparing use of music. – Cat7 years ago
Have been waiting for someone to tackle this. Great, great topic. I personally believe film soundtracks can absolutely make or break films. There are so many avenues and arguments to explore about this idea. Hopefully someone writes about it. – JulieCMillay7 years ago
Analyse how representations of males and females differs through male gaze and female gaze. E.g. the comparison between male and female superheroes, and what is perceived to be the female gaze, e.g. perceptions of very muscular superheroes.
The very premise of these gendered cinematic gazes came from the landmark 1975 essay by Laura Mulvey, "Visual Pleasures and Narrative Cinema" (https://www.asu.edu/courses/fms504/total-readings/mulvey-visualpleasure.pdf). This would be necessary to cite in the final article for two reasons: 1) to ensure that the author has a thorough understanding of the theoretical concept/terminology in order to discuss it sufficiently; 2) to ensure that the final product not just be a rehash of her now forty-two year old argument. If there has been a noticeable shift in gaze in recent cinema, I recommend that be made the article's focus. – ProtoCanon7 years ago
This could be fascinating. It would be very important to note that the playing field isn't level in terms of the male/female gaze. What gets presented as "catering to the female gaze" is often just a male power fantasy which is assumed to appeal to women for superficial reasons (Superman, Wolverine, Sherlock, eg - not that these men do no appeal to women, but to draw a line between Superman and Harley Quinn would be a gross false equivalence). Additionally, films which are marketed squarely at women are often produced and directed by men (look at the directors of some of the most famous chick flicks of the last decade). – Cat7 years ago
Male dominance for long has suppressed the creative medium into an elaborate masculine fantasy. It is high time that the gender divide must end. Was wanting someone experienced to write about this for a long time. – Vishnu Unnithan7 years ago
As an introvert, I can’t help but think about my hidden talents and gifts. And as an advent comic book reader I couldn’t help to review old comics like Jean Grey from X-men, The Incredible Hulk, Spiderman, and Batman. I’m sure I’m missing quite a few other heroes, but the connections are there and could be analzyed a bit further. For instance, how introverted superheroes are extremely sensitive, intelleigent, powerful, and, potentially, deadly beings/mutants. These superheroes can also encourage people who don’t necessarily enjoy being social that they can explore and utilize their gifts and/or talents and should contribute these ‘powers’ to the greater society.
An extremely interesting topic. It's intriguing to wonder how a hero can be quite introverted, and have a greater effect on the surrounding world as well. It's a point to make that introverted characters may have extroverted personas, kind of like mask or 'another identity' that masks their inner one. Could make them ambiverts or really great actors. I'd want to explore the dynamics of lesser-known heroes as well. – HollyDavidson7 years ago
Essentially, most superheroes are introverts in their public lives in order for them to be able to maintain a balance between their multiple roles. A good topic which would make for an interesting read. – Vishnu Unnithan7 years ago
