You need to dream bigger darling. I highly doubt this will be the extent of the film's drama. Plot kinda reminds me of Miyazaki's The Wind Rises, which was about a whole hell of a lot more than the development of the Zero fighter plane.
Printable View
It's not about me dreaming bigger. It's about the medium's inherent limits.
It's why biopics like "The Theory of Everything" and "The Imitation Game" focus on the personal lives of the people involved, and consciously avoid too many scenes of those same people standing around in front of blackboards. (It's also why they suck, bc they took something specific and interesting, ignored it, and turned everything else into generic domestic drama.)
"The Wind Rises" is an animated fantasy, and not limited in the ways historical biographies are.
I buy this, and lord knows I've steered clear of both of those movies. The difference is Nolan has a track record of making entertaining movies. In the false dichotomy you've created, I suppose I'd prefer a peek into the subject's personal life to 90 minutes of people engineering/science-ing, but we have so little to go on at the moment. Here's me dreaming big: what if it's a comedy?
Also, The Wind Rises has some dream sequences, but it's not fantasy.
???
My premise is that real life scientists do not make good subjects for movies, and that's mostly because their work and their lives don't lend themselves to visual drama. Anybody who lives in their head (engineers, writers, scientists) will be an awkward fit in a visual medium.
If scientists did make good subjects for movies, we'd have seen more and better examples in the decades of film before this one. But we really haven't.
So I dare you to name me one movie about a [real life] scientist that's not only a good movie, but great cinema.
(There are a couple of examples I can think of that are pretty good movies --- "The Life of Louis Pasteur", "Gorillas in the Mist" --- but they're memorable for other reasons, and not world bendingly great on the whole.)
I realize now you haven't understood what I've been talking about.Quote:
Here's me dreaming big: what if it's a comedy?
We saw that Dunkirk is one of the more creative approaches to a war movie in quite some time with its use of time.
I have no doubt that Nolan will take some type of creative approach to this as well. He's not going to do a straight-forward biopic.
There's an opera, Doctor Atomic (2005), which isn't good, even with John Adams' music and Gerald Finley's singing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AlUHKHLk_VU
Hmmmm. Clever, but you're pushing the submitted terms ("real life scientist," "great cinema") pretty hard.
True, but Nolan has relied heavily on genre convention and set pieces in his past work.
If this next is meant to be an adult drama, he won't have an action crutch to lean on. He also won't have the same audience.
Irish I can't conjure any examples to debate you, but it seems like you're saying its impossible so don't try. Why not try? Its no skin off my back what Nolan or anyone does. Who knows, maybe he has some angle that will change your mind.
Cosmos was very sciency and was a HUGE hit back in the day. There are ways to make science interesting in a visual format.
Margaret Nolan > Christopher Nolan
https://www.beatlesbible.com/wp/medi...01-960x575.jpg
Cillian Murphy will play Oppenheimer.
Haven't we known this from day one?
Not directed at you, Morris. Just meaning they made this big announcement today/yesterday, but they've been saying it since the project was first announced.
This is official confirmation of him as lead, since the project announcement news last month just mentioned about him being in talk/involved.
Ah, fair enough.
If the film turns out good, RDJ's role sounds very Supporting Actor bait.
Or the Judge.
Y'all left skipped over the "of interest" part.
Nolan: I want Cillian Murphy to star!
Studio: Um....let me look at those supporting roles. I may have some suggestions.....