Capital New York

montiliana commented on 'Inception': As eye-catching, and as profound, as an Usher concert

Thanks, Stephen, for your insightful response as well. You don't know that you're actually preaching to the choir- I'm a film archivist, which means that I'm, by definition, a huge classic film fan/historian/aspiring dictionary (it would make my job easier if I could actually succeed in the dictionary department and identify all silent movie stars on sight, sheesh). I love the power of visual storytelling as well, and I hope I am not easily won over by a slick-looking sequence that doesn't really make any narrative sense from shot to shot. The amount of times I've said, "I literally don't understand what those last 4 (or 3, or 6, etc.) shots put together were trying to tell me" in the last year or so makes me die a little inside. But maybe I just shouldn't watch movies like Twilight out of morbid curiosity. Anyway, I probably just ask less from my summer blockbusters- but that's not to say that you shouldn't ask for more from someone like Nolan, who is surely capable of putting together something more powerful. I feel like you might be putting him on trial for the offenses of an entire generation of filmmakers, though. And I do think this movie carries a lot of outside influence along with it- studio people making sure it was understandable to the masses, pressure to make shinier and faster-cut action sequences, consequences of getting burned by previous efforts- so I chose to look past what didn't work and enjoy what did, and enjoy the fact that what I got was so much better than what I usually get from a movie in July. Maybe it's wrong to judge Nolan's movies against the other crap I'm given, and I should be judging him against what he's capable of. But if this is mostly the movie he wanted to make, and he's just not into normal sequencing, establishing shots, building of tension in a classically visual and understandable way- well. I don't know. If people can understand it, I'm not sure it's wrong. It may be inferior to us, but is it just evolution? Language changing to fit modern times? I'm going to stop before I open up some can of worms that will never get closed again. I'll go home and watch something stunning and intelligible in your honor- I'm feeling maybe a black-and-white John Ford coming my way tonight. Thanks for the grounded response.

Posted on July 20th, 2010 9:24am

montiliana commented on 'Inception': As eye-catching, and as profound, as an Usher concert

It just starts to make me wonder about the nature of film criticism. Do you review the film and its success at being what the filmmaker wanted it to be? Or do you review it in terms of the movie you wanted it to be vs. the movie that it is? Because the argument you seem to be making is that this didn't seem like a dream movie to you because it was too "arid and tidy," as you say. What are our alternatives here, though? This is what Nolan's movies look like. If he made a movie that looked differently and was about dream space, it would look like a David Lynch movie, or something infinitely worse. The "architecture" and look and feel of the dream space makes perfect sense in terms of what kind of movie this is: it's a slick heist/caper movie, but with more to chew on. I'll absolutely agree that deep emotion is not Nolan's strong suit. But I don't go to his movies for that. This one was fun to think about and fun to watch, visually stunning with enough behind it to make it more than mindless entertainment. It's not mind-bendingly intelligent because it can't be. I think Nolan got burned with The Prestige and learned his lesson and feels a need to explain things a bit more than maybe some of us would like (and I didn't think The Prestige was hard to understand either, but I had to explain it to a lot of my co-workers- film professionals- afterward). And judging from some overheard post-movie conversations, most of the audience in the theater with me still didn't understand this one. At all. So I do think it really is all about what movie you wanted to see. I knew what the visuals were going to be and I was really pleased with the way everything played out. I was entertained. But, for instance, I can't tell if "Glee" is even well made because it's not the show I want it to be- so I literally don't understand how it's working for other people because it's just. Not. Working. For me. I know that is an insane comparison to make and I don't mean to trivialize your problems with the film, but I understand where you're coming from. I just don't think it's an objective evaluation. But what film criticism is?

Posted on July 19th, 2010 4:49pm