Previous
Articles

Christopher Nolan: Spreadsheet Dreams

Next
Christopher Nolan: Spreadsheet Dreams film still

As The Dark Knight Rises wends its way to our cinemas, we assess the filmmaking pros and cons of British maverick and master technician, Christopher Nolan.

It's something of a happy coincidence that London’s BFI Southbank are laying on a retrospective of Christopher Nolan's small but fastidiously sculpted cinematic oeuvre ahead of its party bus-sized celebration of Alfred Hitchcock. Both directors made their name in these blessed isles before being spirited away by voracious American studios and duly lavished with resources, respect and an unprecedented level of artistic independence.

Plus, Nolan's little-seen, micro budget debut feature, Following, is a cautionary, London-set examination of voyeurism as an extreme sport whose every monochrome frame worships at the altar of Hitch, specifically Vertigo.

Even though you could hardly see the guarded, taciturn Nolan taking on the role of rotund japester, as Hitch did so zealously with his popular branded TV spin-off Alfred Hitchcock Presents, there is a similar sense of mythology at play – self-made or otherwise – surrounding these two high-rolling mavericks.

Hitchcock seemingly had no scruples about manipulating self-image and would exploit his distinctive personal iconography almost as a promotional tool. Nolan achieves a similar feat by doing the exact opposite: his sets are intensely secretive; he rarely heads off on the the junket or festival circuit; he seldom discusses anything to do with his personal life; and according to a 2010 newspaper profile, he doesn't use a mobile phone, have an email address or look at the internet.

From his early TV appearances where he sensibly discusses work from his pre A-list era (Memento, Insomnia) Nolan is clearly a dangerously intelligent and precise guy who knows his craft inside out. That he is working within the Hollywood mainstream is truly a gift. Though would it be wrong to think that this hermetic lifestyle may be holding back his cinema from ataining true greatness? Would it be wrong to want more from him as an artist?

Where Nolan and Hitchcock part ways is that it's tougher to pin down themes, ideas or expressions that lend Nolan's work some kind of basic cohesion. Of course, it's hard to level charges of inconsistency at a director who graduated from making impressive, hard-nosed thrillers to personally ushering in a new era of the 'dark' blockbuster (‘blackbuster’?) with his box-office trouncing trilogy of Batman movies. But Nolan's most prominent interests appear to be of a technical and stylistic nature rather than anything relating to themes, ideas, emotions, concepts.

The throughline between his best film (Memento) and one of his most successful (Inception) is easily identifiable, as both films employ an intricate, layer cake narrative structure which playfully pummels at the the bounds of perception. They offer a suggestive and innovative dismantling of how the mind works that are packaged as easy-to-read and stylishly designed brain manuals. But where the former said something very specific and moving about what it means to have one of our most basic human functions irrevocably impaired, the latter jettisoned the humane baggage at the service of empty, ultra-svelte plot pyrotechnics.

And that is perhaps why – and this is by no means a bad thing – Nolan has yet to produce a completely satisfying piece of work. Constricted by his dexterous, though essentially schematic, storytelling instincts, he is a progenitor of spreadsheet dreams, of cerebral ballets that have been choreographed and calculated to a level that undeniably inspires awe while not quite managing to bear close scrutiny. Masters like Lynch, Buñuel and Svankmajer are still operating on another plateau when it comes to celluloid approximations of dreams, the inner workings of the mind and how they might affect our view of the world and those close to us.

In addition, more so than someone like Akira Kurosawa, Nolan has thus far displayed an almost myopic interest in male anxieties. Though his forthcoming The Dark Knight Rises may yet swing the gender balance with a meaty role given to Anne Hathaway as Cat Woman. The women that feature in Nolan's films are usually peripheral, or there as springboards for the male characters – Carrie-Anne Moss in Memento, Scarlett Johansson in The Prestige or Ellen Page in Inception – and have precious little bearing on the outcome of the stories.

It's almost as if women have no place in his implacable, glassy cinescapes. It's like Nolan is adopting the role of the demure English gentleman and would think it entirely out of bounds to be passing judgment on the better sex. It’s also an extension of the idea of someone doing such astounding work in one area that the bigger, fuller picture is lost on them.

Cinematically speaking, Nolan's films are highly reflexive and are much more concerned with the illusions, pressures and mysteries of filmmaking than they are with messy, unfathomable humanity. The Prestige – his most sorely underrated film – is an erudite study of the severe psychological burden of being number one in your professional field. As a Hollywood director whose daily undertaking involves taking simple illusions of light and shadow to strange and beguiling new levels, the film has more than a tinge of tragic autobiography.

Insomnia sees Al Pachino's grizzled detective on the trail of a murderer (an expertly counter-cast Robin Williams), the twist being that his entire investigation takes place under the piercing midnight sun of Nightmute, Alaska. Apart from being a terse detective yarn of the sort he has admitted in interviews to being influenced by in his formative years (authors like Jim Thompson, films like Tourneur's Out of the Past), this is a movie about what it's like to be denied the ability to dream.

He says that dreams are an important part of life, even though he has yet to satisfactorily introduce us to a dream world that doesn't lend itself to easy and full interpretation. The day when Nolan throws in a shot that's equivalent to a suppurating donkey corpse sandwiched into the workings of a grand piano will be a great day indeed.

Where Nolan is at his most enjoyable as a director – and whatever gripes you may have with him, he has more than earned his prized position within the mainstream filmmaking pantheon – is when his fixation with understanding process makes it onto the screen. The scene in The Dark Knight in which Christian Bale flips over an articulated lorry is all the more satisfying for pointedly showing us the complex knotting arrangement he makes with his souped-up motorbike.

As well, with Batman Begins he has given us arguably the definitive superhero origin story with Bruce Wayne's violent trials in a savage Bhutanese prison camp. It's the architecture of the dreams in Inception that is impressive, not the content of them.

You might think that criticising Nolan is counter intuitive considering how many paid-up hacks and bearded, gut-busting turds currently fug-up the Hollywood firmament. But this is a case of yearning for a top-tier director to make something that tips him over into greatness. Though he is very much a child of Hitchcock, you'd probably be inclined to see David Fincher as his older, wiser brother-in-arms. Both make films with an instantly discernible personal touch that, technically, are very difficult to fault.

But Nolan has never made a film like Zodiac, a work which speaks in profound metaphorical tones about the sombre universal tragedy of time passing. It’s a film that is perfectly imperfect, and it would be truly thrilling if Nolan were to allow some of that imperfection into his art. Yes, we are asking the world of this amazing director, but only because he has proven to us so often that he has the world to give.

View 8 comments

Johnny Messias

10 months ago
Very good article. I think in the case of Nolan, it is early days. I remember Memento as being profoundly emotional and touching, within its clever-clever structure. You are spot on that he seems to value structure and screenplay schematics over chaos and Lynchian dreams. The point about female protags of course also true of Oliver Stone (who I wouldn't compare to him) and Michael Mann (only a little bit after the Heat homage in Dark Knight). With these big stories, he, out of necessity, seems to anchor them around the trials and ambitions of powerful men, perhaps he will be able to portray the fairer sex in small stories when he returns to them?

The point about post 9-11 themes is also true. I think he laid it on a bit heavy towards the end of the Dark Knight, with Morgan Freeman's character, personally but at least it is in there. Contrast with Michael Bay who references the likes of Pearl Harbor (I forget which Transformer film) and Chernobyl (Transforms III) like random bits of flotsam to hang some explosions around.

mister_x

10 months ago
i loved following but the batman films were although challenging to mainstream blockbuster norms, just a bit too serious for their own good and humourless. i know hollywood has to please fan boys but really, they were just far too heavy handed and mostly fun-less really. inception was a smart movie for stupid people, all the hype about it being a smart blockbuster held some weight, but it was smart by the stupid terms of the summer blockbuster, so not actually that smart, just a film that thinks its smart. a bit like the lost series actually, creating the effect of profundity where there is actually very little. and if we think thats so challenging, then we have far too low standards.

mister_x

10 months ago
after reading the full article, i think this might be the best summary of nolan ive read. i wish he would take more risks too, and its nice to see someone else who feels his work is often lacking something in basic emotion and feeling. you cant help but feel that for all the apparent risk in his batman films, theyre always going to be straitjacketed by the genre/system in which theyre created, and nolan isnt daring enough, or rather, just doesnt have anything to say of his own, to really push them beyond that.

Anton Bitel

10 months ago
First of all, while there have been many Batman films over the decades, none of them has been remotely like Nolan's. His gravity is his personal stamp on (the cinematic version of) the genre. And why not so serious?

Second of all, with their close focus on the politics of fear and revenge, the dangers of escalataion (and of becoming like your enemy), and the own-goal of increasingly intrusive surveillance, to my thinking Nolan's first two Batman films represent the most thorough-going examination of the post-9/11 dispensation under Bush to be found in any mainstream features. They are of genre, but they are in no way straitjacketed by it - on the contrary, they use their generic form to dramatise what are (or were at the time of their making) the most pressing issues of the real world.

Will

10 months ago
That Inception isn't a visceral movie shouldn't necessarily hurt its reputation; the same was said about 2001.

It's a movie about a man trying to find his emotional center in a world of constructs, many of which revolve around stereotyped ideas of masculinity (particularly film noir). I found it very poignant, though that seed is by design hidden within a great many shells.

His best may be yet to come, but Inception was a masterpiece, a statement of our times. That it felt something like a video game, something hard to access emotionally, something disturbingly virtual, was its point, IMHO.

mister_x

10 months ago
ive nothing against seriousness, nor earnestness - im definitely not saying that he should go the batman and robin route. but with the last two batman films, ive felt the seriousness went a bit too far towards the side of simply being po-faced, too bogged down by its own sense of itself, and therefore a little bit silly at times. the political subtext of the second in the trilogy might give it another layer of political relevance, but what exactly that message is im not sure - at the time, it really seemed like the joker was Terror while Batman was approximating poor old Bush, torn down by everyone else for fighting the good fight. bearing in mind the response from the crew on the new film about the romney/bane allusions, that the films have some of the comic book world's most dedicated, long serving conservatives in the camp, this doesnt surprise me. and admittedly, that kind of subtext in the dark knight didnt really endear it to me any more.

the other thing that bugged me about the last two batman films is just how ORDINARY they look visually. i know hes got to make batman fit the times, so the look of gotham in general might be deliberately pedestrian, but compared to tim burtons gotham, nolan's version of the city just lacks anything that makes it look like a metropolis in any other hollywood movie. im hoping that when batman gets the hollywood treatment post-nolan, theres a little more room for more of a fantasy element in there, not campy - the darkness, somberness, and general clenched jaw-ness of nolans batman thats there to please the comic fans who need their hero to be treated worshipfully at all times - but just a little more fanciful in places.

also, the bat voice was just ridiculous in the last one.

i cant help but feel that a lot of the critical love nolan gets that other directors wouldnt get a pass on is simply cos hes british (also see: the bloody awful and hideously overrated emily blunt, though ok, i did like summer of love a lot)

mister_x

10 months ago
in short, this trilogy can be summed up as 'no fun'.

i know broody batman/bruce wayne is what makes the fanboys wet themselves - hes just so EXISTENTIAL! - but its also more than a bit turgid and humorless (and a bit bloated, lets be honest - if there was ever a time when i wouldnt mind studios taking final cut away from directors again, its the present era).

Omar

10 months ago
I find your comments too heavy handed and humourless for my own good. We get a refreshingly original work like Inception and call it a "smart movie for stupid people" ? I think your standards are imaginary.
Comments are closed.
interviews
Cult Film Club
Best New Films