Why is 
so invested in that new Nolan movie? I know our boy 
has said the film is supposed to be somewhat of a metaphor for Nolan "making the superhero film popular." But that shit sounds like some big-brained egotistical bullshit because it was always going to be popular no matter what. So is it some sort of modern white man's burden film and a justification for 
to use the bomb. I just want to know why people are so invested in a film?
Probably just because it's Christopher Nolan and Reddit nerds love Nolan movies. I really doubt any of them know any more about Oppenheimer than his one quote
Also it stars the guy they make sigma grindset memes after so it's a double-whammy of
I've heard that dude actually helps the bolsheviks in that show.
Still not enough to get me to watch it, but its a fun little fact
I've heard that dude actually helps the bolsheviks in that show.
The show is very messy,
spoiler
Thomas Shelby is sympathetic to the communist cause at the start, even though he dissaproves of his communist childhood friend marrying his sister. Later on he ends up doing a job for the Romanovs in England, and gets caught up in a scheme to send weapons to Tsarist remnants in Georgia. In a surprise twist you find out that the IRA priest who Thomas holds a grudge against is working for the Soviets as a plant/informant among the Whites. By the end of the story arc Thomas double-crosses the tsarists while also getting the priest working for the soviets assassinated.
Later on Thomas Shelby becomes a member of parliament and tries to coopt Oswald Moseley's British Union of Fascists, I don't really remember what happens in that story arc but I remember it being very "wait, wtf?"
It's almost like gangs running bookmaking operations and blinding random people with razer blades aren't great guys
I would even go so far as to say that men who kill for fun and who parasitically feed off the misery of the working poor by running rigged gambling games make for natural anti-communists
natural anti-communists
Hence why he runs in the Labor party!
Keir Starmer is a lot of things he isn't a gangster running illegal crooked gambling
It looks good and is at least a movie about a historical event with some kind of narrative (not sure how they will portray the historical significance, obviously I'm hoping it's portrayed as a very bad thing to drop the bomb.). It's also not trying to sell you something afterwards or bait a sequel.
This is better than 99% of mainstream movies coming out. Prime example being the Barbie movie. While it looks really fun and cool and better than the superhero slop, it is, at the end of the day, a toy advertisement.
I haven't seen it, but the Barbie movie seems to be a deconstruction of what it means to be a symbol of both female empowerment but also repression. There are also apparently a bunch of scenes where multiple Barbies confront an evil Mattel CEO (explicitly Mattel) over what they're supposed to symbolize or teach children.
It still sounds like slop, but the director is Greta Gerwig, who was previously known for more artsy films. You're right though, it's still a vehicle for a toy company
The sawed off Mosin fits in her purse!
(I'm not joking, they actually made those. Inaccurate and loud as shit but small enough to conceal, get close, and cap an imperialist. Very ingenious
“It's also not trying to sell you something afterwards or bait a sequel.”
Turnerdad.jpg Insert text: … and this is where I would put my Oppenheimer funko pop. If I had one!
the vibe I get from people talking about it is mostly zoomers making light of "I will make mega bomb, for science. Oh no, mega bomb has kill, I am become dead"
people are fucking rabid for christopher nolan, the absolute pinnacle of accessible film that is draped in enough illusions & conventions of 'weight' that they get to pretend they're watching something Important and Transgressive while consuming the most pro-status quo right wing slop in existence. Nolan is Riefenstahl after the communists made unironic, direct propaganda gauche
oh man, it's like a dog whistle for Nolan fans. They just hear something in that sound other peoole don't
Nolan is the official
director since Memento, Inception, The Prestige and the Batman Trilogy are like 90% of whatever non-marvel cinema the average redditor consumes. The man makes fun, pretty movies with enough of an intellectual twist that the average redditor feels smart and not alienated by them.That, plus reddit's complete hardon for (I fuckin love) "science" and related STEMlord topics, and Oppenheimer being one of the last "man discovers thing on his own, no teamwork/institutional work required, just raw, individual genius" publicity cases makes this one a reddit triple whammy.
Memento would have been way better if he was trying to solve the murder and create a court case working around his disibility.
As it was he was just killing random men named john which is actually pretty unsympathetic behaviour
I don't get the fondness for Nolan in general. All of his movie I've seen were some of the most BORINGEST shit I've ever fucking seen. His Batman trilogy fucking sucked ass in particular. Part of the reason Heath Ledger was so beloved for his Joker performance was because he was the only non-boring shit in that entire fucking boring drizzle of a trilogy. They made Gotham City the fucking lame-ass boring dipshit deformed asshole-baby of Toronto and Chicago! A visual identity defined by a lack of visual identity!
I also have the same sentiment when it comes to Nolan. I personally don't understand his following as I see him as Kubrick-lite.
I don't dislike hus movies as much as you, but i also don't understand why him and his movies get so much adoration. I actually liked Dark Knight, but i found it weird that it become so well liked to where it got nominated for an academy award and shit. Its just batman movie. A good one, but damn.
People for some reason like Nolan's movies even though they're all shit
EDIT: Actually the Prestige was okay.
People like it because his modern movies are some of the only movies in the mainstream that try to actually be movies, instead of some superhero capeshit, product/toy advertisement, or a movie that should actually be a TV series with the amount of sequel baiting and unfinished business/loose story threads. Tarantino occupied a similar niche about a decade ago.
Interstellar was carried by spectacle, which means that ending suddenly being very character driven just didn't work for me.
I haven't seen Dunkirk because the subject matter is the most boomer shit imaginable and I do not care.
Dunkirk is a fun experiment in storytelling and cinematography, because the whole gimmick is that there are 3 scales of time along the film around the same moment, and they all tell a cohesive story. Like a WW2 Pulp Fiction, only not as good. The story is whatever, but as with most Nolan films he just uses the story to try whatever weird concept he wants to try. Not a bad watch, imo, but not a great film.
yeah interstellar's ending isn't the greatest - but I do think sometimes all you need for a 'good' film (at least, a good Nolan film) is spectacle. I kinda want to defend the rest of the film by saying that the entire plot is character driven but I will spare us both. Interstellar and Tenet are both prime examples of why/how Nolan films are popular though - even outside of
Michael Bay and Nolan can probably be considered opposite ends of the same spectrum of filmography when you look at it that way. Nolan films are more popular than the newest Transformers though because even if 75% of his films rely on spectacle, they at least have some sort of engaging plot and characters.
Both are very overrated IMO. Visually great but as movies they were just alright.
Honestly, I am stunned when a movie performs well as a purely visual medium these days. I think I need to start watching more foreign films, at least so then I don't understand what is bad about it.
Memento is good. The Batman movies are fun slop.
And I don't care what anyone here says, I find the premise of Tenet intriguing enough to ignore all the other stupid plot details. It's a novel take on time travel, and I'm still surprised it's written in a way where all the time travel stuff lines up correctly. Everything else about the story? Dogshit. Cool fights though.
seems like with a marketing budget of say $100 million, they are going to spend at least a few million botting social media and paying influencers
For real. I'm so sick of of seeing shit about this movie everywhere. But, some peoole aren't for some reason so money well spent from their perspective
Same reason why reddit loves rick and morty : it makes them look smart just by watching it.
are they cutting the part where he was a life long communist and spent the latter half of his life trying to stop the arms race he started, in his effort to beat the nazis? probably, would really hinder the epic science man killed the removed narrative.
why are y'all so mad about this movie besides Christopher Nolan's previous works. the film does not seem, from the trailers, to really glorify the bomb or the act of dropping it on an already essentially surrendered Japan twice-over.
i will be using one of my AMC free passes (did you know that if the fire alarm gets pulled, they'll give everyone free passes and the teenage employee will literally hand you a stack of like 10 despite the fact that your film wasn't scheduled to start for another 30 minutes anyways?) to see it. I will report back about how lib (unlikely?) or fascist (eh, given TDKR...) it is.
I'm not mad it's just got a weird vibe going on and I don't get it. Like I don't understand Nolan to be honest and I don't like his movies in general and I was never going to see it in theaters anyway. Than you for your service though o7.
Sorry - I shouldn't have worded it like that, was not trying to imply you were malding or anything when you made the post.
If you want to come with me I will give you a ticket comrade, as long as you respect my claim on the aisle seat!!!
From the trailers it looks like security hearing plays a big part so it'd be pretty hard to avoid but it is apolitical icon Christopher Nolan so who knows
why did I think Benedict Cumberbatch was playing Oppenheimer
I guess he's already played Turing in the Cold War Cinematic Universe
His work tends to have a lot of really reactionary themes and that gets difficult to stomach. The last batman movie he did was straight up empire apologia propaganda. I agree, it's better than most of the summer blockbuster slop like you said, but that is a very low bar.
Even so, The Prestige is still one of my favorite movies.
I propose that if we applied this logic to all filmmakers, there would only be like two good American directors.
Nolan is good compared to all of the hacks making superhero films
These are two very different things. I am with you on the second one, but not the first. I think all the big budget capeshit movies are reactionary now and it's a race to the bottom. It's not a big achievement for Nolan to be "good" compared to Michael Bay for example, though I'd agree it's very true that he is. But I think there are tons of good directors of American films in general that are easily better than Nolan and aren't making films that just drip with right wing themes.
There was actually a long thread about a lot of this a week ago with Boots Riley calling out The Dark Knight for being rewritten to be an anti-occupy movie, if you're interested.
I think @LaGG_3@hexbear.net said it pretty well:
Reactionary low brow to middle brow spectrum: Michael Bay -> Zach Snyder -> Christopher Nolan
