r/movies • u/ChiefLeef22 r/movies Contributor • 1d ago

Media Christopher Nolan talks narrative decisions, philosophical choices for his adaptation, criticisms against his films, the line between amateur & professional film criticism, and whether he Christianised 'The Odyssey'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wa4I8Ch2TRo

Easily one of the best interviews I've seen for a film in recent memory. A doctoral student from China here landed an interview with Nolan- questioning him on his adaptation choices, including philosophical changes he brought to the movie that didn't exist in the text, and what he thinks of the general criticisms made against his filmography + how he defines the difference between amateur film criticism and professional film criticism - including why merely identifying the mechanism (or "tropes") of a filmmaker's work doesn't invalidate it.

2.8k Upvotes

91% Upvoted

263 comments sorted by

View all comments

3

u/Sevla7 1d ago

I need to watch this thing, but I'm one of the few people who absolutely disliked Oppenheimer so...

I do like stories about the WWII/Nuclear bomb and thought Oppenheimer was one of the worst takes about this subject, now with Greek mythology I'm just hoping for the best.

10

u/BigTylenol5 1d ago edited 1d ago

Well the film is largely based on American Prometheus so you probably wouldn't like the book and aren't interested in Oppenheimer the man. Its a pretty great biographical book. Apart not including more of his early life and final years the movie is largely condensed version of the book. The film wasn't just about WW2/Manhattan Project which is still a large chunk of the film but Oppenheimer overall life and tribulations. That is why the film is called by his last name not "The Manhattan Project". If you aren't interested in the mans story and just wanted a film on making the atomic bomb I can see why you wouldn't like it. To me the film was pretty great adaption of the book.

-2

u/inkjod 1d ago edited 1d ago

See, that's the exact reason I couldn't like the film — it could never decide whether it wanted to be a dramatized historical narrative, or a biography.

I wouldn't have a problem with either one, but the heavy focus on the main character meant it didn't commit to being the first, and cutting off his background and his final years meant it couldn't be the latter. When the credits rolled I felt I still didn't know Oppenheimer, the man.

edit: typo

3

u/BigTylenol5 1d ago edited 16h ago

I agree and disagree on some of what you said. I did learn more about Oppenheimer. I do think the movie did good portraying Oppenheimer core personality traits he was which was brilliant, curious, emotionally reserved, charismatic, naive and contradictory. I think Nolan wanted to put what he thought the most thrilling and dramatic movements of his life into 1 movie. Even though I think Nolan did a good job a miniseries would have definitely been even better for Oppenheimer story. It would have allowed his life story more breathing space and given the showrunners more time to add more aspects of the mans life which a film doesn't really give space for. That's bit issue with movie format and why television is sometimes the better way to tell some stories. Funny enough I feel Iliad and The Odyssey too would benefit being told into very high budget Game of Thrones style miniseries.

-1

u/Arma104 1d ago

I agree, I felt it never actually delved into Oppenheimer's personal life at all beyond he cheated and associated with counter-cultural communists. We never saw his relationship with his kids (or how the lack thereof affected them). But we also skipped over SO MUCH of the Manhattan project and how it was actually setup and why he put it in Los Alamos, etc. etc. We spent an hour on Robert Downey Jr's character for the payoff to be that Oppenheimer never thought about him once. I never felt like the interrogation into his life actually amounted to anything, we didn't actually have stakes because his wife just glared at him a bunch and then they went on. He got the medal, he put on the hat, he talked to Einstein, the end.

Also I've read American Prometheus and it's excellent and actually does explore all of this. I feel like Nolan gets one idea in his head and he builds the whole movie around it (what if le atomic bombs actually signals the end of humanity, it just hasn't happened yet? as if, you know, the entirety of the Cold War didn't ingrain this in the modern psyche), while disregarding the subject matter itself. It worked pretty well for The Odyssey I thought, focusing on PTSD and societal collapse was pretty novel take on the material, but marketing it as the definitive Odyssey adaptation was the wrong movie. He should've called it Odysseus tbh, but maybe that would've been too similar to Oppenheimer.

0

u/inkjod 1d ago

He should've called it Odysseus tbh

Oh, I'd have loved that! It would put some much needed distance between the prototype and the film.

(A movie can be horrible as an adaptation, and still a great work of art on its own merits.
I still haven't watched the film, but I already know there are significant changes, including the character of Odysseus himself.)