Chris Nolan Saving Movie Theaters

ahalpert said:
Kubrick made classic scifi and was not a scifi director. (Actually clockwork orange can probably be considered scifi as well so 2 classics)
Click to expand...
Most of Kubricks films are now classics.

Few directors only do sci-fi. I can't think of any off the top of my head.

Nolan loves nonlinear storytelling. That's what he said he loved about pulp fiction.

And now his new one is scifi too. So....he's told a lot of scifi stories at this point.
Click to expand...
Three? 20%? And with 'Interstellar' and 'Inception' being below your expectations.... What is your point? What I meant is that Nolan's interests are Nolan's interest, and if it crosses over into sci-fi territory then it does, but he is not looking to appeal to sci-fi fans, imho. He seems more interested in concepts of time. He isn't out there dreaming up the future and making pithy commentary on the state of the world. He generally has very earthy emotional story line that deals more with personal circumstances and emotional challenges in some tie in with moral code, than situation of humanity at large. Also, he tends to enjoy some reality or mind bending aspect.

Personal struggle with some moral code and sense of duty despite personal desires or realities, and the lengths that character goes through to overcome it, usually involving intense dedication discipline and deception:
- Memento, believes someone wronged him, obsessively pursues him, and willingly avoids the truth. reality altering effects of memory loss
- Dark Knight, batman can fit nicely into the Nolan protagonist
- Prestige, the magician and the competitiveness and deception there, but also the insane dedication, reality altering effects of magic "tricks"
- Inception, stealing and influencing people, professionals doing the job and putting it all on the line, ultimately the protagonist may not even care if they are living a lie. reality altering dream sequences
- Interstellar, leaves family to save the world, sacrifices it all, and all his regrets for those sacrifices, reality altering black hole and time and space
- larceny, a story about a thief that gets chased by the people he steals from
- Dunkirk, war is the ultimate need for that obsessive dedication because it is life or death. themes of national duty and doing the right thing, and accepting that reality or illusion. the altering of time in the story telling
- insomnia, the obsession and sacrifice of the work, the duty. The reality altering effects of lack of sleep.

Vey loose associations, but seems the theme in Nolan's work. There is probably some more intelligent break down of his work on the Internet somewhere and maybe some ties to classical literature.


But again, maybe he would like to do other things, but can only get funded for things he is known for. John Ford late in life said he wanted to make other types of films, but could only get Westerns funded. Amazing to think of such an icon finding it difficult to get work funded unless he played by the rules.


I think prestige and memento succeeded in part by developing so much of the petty human stuff. The anger of guy pierce at his wife's killer and the overwhelming guilt that he killed her. The rivalry between the magicians and the troubled marriage of the 2 Christian bales with the wife. Believing the interpersonal dynamics/emotions really carried me along those plots[/QUOTE]
 
Last edited:
ahalpert said:
Trek is a beautiful philosophy of diversity, pluralism, peaceful coexistence, self-determination, egalitarian meritocracy. It's the future I wished I could live to see. And just the right amount of conflict to keep things interesting
Click to expand...
yes, a nice ideal. I find Next Generation interesting for this aspect.
 
Last edited:
I don't think I said that Nolan was a "scifi director" just that he was directing an increasing share of scifi films.

Yes, the overarching theme is self-destructive obsession (much like Kubrick). But you don't need mind control or space/time travel to explore that theme.

Yeah I don't think there are any strictly scifi directors nor need there be. James Cameron comes to mind with terminator and t2, aliens, abyss and ghosts of the abyss, and now the avatar trilogy.

And scifi viewers don't only watch scifi. But I want to believe, I want to imagine, I want the world to be bigger than it is.

So yeah I'm excited that he's got a cool new scifi film. I just haven't like any of his movies that I've seen since the Dark Knight.
 
Last edited:
James0b57 said:
yes, a nice ideal. I find Next Generation interesting for this aspect.
Click to expand...

Yeah TNG suits TV really well because no matter how messed up everything is 40 minutes into an episode, you know it will all go back to the way it was within 5 minutes. The future is orderly

But strangely there was actually less diversity among the bridge crew on TNG than TOS. And not until the 2 recent shows was there anywhere near enough Asian or Hispanic actors in the mix to represent humanity.

And the really troubling thing is the lack of openly gay characters. Basically none until the 2 recent shows. Do they all go back in the closet? But ST: Discovery had a gay showrunner to whom the issue was very important. So they have a love story between the ships doctor (wilson cruz) and engineer (the brilliant Anthony rapp, himself something of a queer icon from Rent). And the main character is a woman named Michael after her father because...why not
 
ahalpert said:
Yeah TNG suits TV really well because no matter how messed up everything is 40 minutes into an episode, you know it will all go back to the way it was within 5 minutes. The future is orderly

But strangely there was actually less diversity among the bridge crew on TNG than TOS. And not until the 2 recent shows was there anywhere near enough Asian or Hispanic actors in the mix to represent humanity.

And the really troubling thing is the lack of openly gay characters. Basically none until the 2 recent shows. Do they all go back in the closet? But ST: Discovery had a gay showrunner to whom the issue was very important. So they have a love story between the ships doctor (wilson cruz) and engineer (the brilliant Anthony rapp, himself something of a queer icon from Rent). And the main character is a woman named Michael after her father because...why not
Click to expand...

Yeah, that is why TNG is only good in theory, but in execution they were a bit monoculture, which is part of the trappings of most versions of utopian society.

What I find interesting about The Next Generation series, is that the writers had to work around traditional writing staples of conflicts and extreme emotions. So, from a writing perspective, I think there is much to glean from the fails and successes of that show.

But to bring it back around to the point that started this whole conversation/debate between you and me: like all sci-fi, TNG will get justifiably criticized for not being the plausible future that someone else imagined, but the future that Gene Roddenberry and his cronies imagined. A period drama like 'Barry Lyndon' would not be disappointing for the same reasons, as it is reflecting the time and culture of something that actually existed. And while magic and fantasy might also fall under some of the same scrutiny, they tend to be recognized as complete fantasy and don't have any inherent requirement to be plausible to anyone but the target audience.

Perhaps the success of Star Wars was the departure from hard sci-fi into fantasy space opera territory that freed it from many of the trappings of sci-fi. Although the sequels and prequels had to live up to a different set of expectations for many middle aged North Americans, but that is a different sort of disappointment. One that few films or film makers will ever have to deal with, even building on our best successes.




AND to bring it back around to the subject of the thread, Walmart, yes frick'n Walmart, is turning 160 of their parking lots into drive in theaters across the US, at least. So, you can get those cheap concessions straight from the store, and people can go to the movies again... sort of.

If anything, it seems like an interesting approach and perhaps a return to cheap escape for some movie goers. Which seems like a nice option.
 
But think about how much more disappointing are all the movies that have no space travel or aliens at all...

That's cool re:walmart. Buy a Gatorade and you won't even have to leave your seat to go to the bathroom ;)
 
And in defense of Star Trek, DS9 and Voyager started just a few years after TNG and had casts with Asian, Black, and Hispanic actors. Voyager had an actor with indigenous Mexican ancestry playing a person with native-American ancestry. And, of course, DS9 was led by a Black captain. And voyager had a female captain. So, aside from the lack of queer representation, they were pretty inclusive shows
 
I can't stand interrupting ads. I was using a free Philo trial recently and it would be a tear-jerking moment interrupted by "DO YOU SUFFER FROM SEASONAL ALLERGIES???" I do not miss regular TV.
 
James0b57 said:
Except SNL. $5 would be too much for SNL.
Click to expand...

Back in March, 2003, I went on a gambling tour - yes, a six hour tour, a six hour tour - off Miami port. It was organized by a local Jewish community/temple, was free of charge, including transportation. And we got a crappy meal and a beer/drink coupon to boot. The contingent was Russian immigrants, averaging about 70 years of age. It was Wednesday and the tour company - long defunct - was hoping that some immigrants would legally gamble away their life savings. That was in vain.

Both sides had another think coming. The old Russians didn't gamble. And the seas were far too choppy for a leisurely boat ride. One of our friends was around 80 and really suffering from the motion sickness, even in the open air on the top deck. About four hours in, he looked at me and proclaimed, "Oh, when will this torture end?"

Now, why did this story come to mind at a mere mention of SNL?

PS. Unless someone won a bunch of dough at the roulette and/or card table, I must have been the only one who made out like a bandit. I asked a couple older folks if they were going to use that beer coupon, expecting a "hell, no" answer. Indeed, they gladly handed it over and I had 3-4 bottles of free Heineken. On top of a free ocean cruise.
 
Last edited:
ahalpert said:
I can't stand interrupting ads. I was using a free Philo trial recently and it would be a tear-jerking moment interrupted by "DO YOU SUFFER FROM SEASONAL ALLERGIES???" I do not miss regular TV.
Click to expand...

Very much. I pay extra for the advert free Hulu, and not even all of that is advert free.

JB
 
IMO, $5 is a lot closer to the "sweet spot", especially for people who will subscribe to several of these streamers without churning. I also think the monthly fees will begin to come down once the battle royal fully gets going.
 
So, what does this mean?

. The streamer is loathe in giving up exact numbers, but I’m told the film turned in a viewing audience commensurate with a summer theatrical box office big hit ...
Click to expand...

https://deadline.com/2020/07/tom-hanks-greyhound-apple-tv-opening-weekend-record-breaker-1202985492/

Let's say, a "big hit" is a $100M opening. At $12/ticket, it's about 8 million tickets sold. Apple has (or had, as of this past February) ~ 33M paying subscribers but also tens of millions with free service due to the purchase of an iPhone/iPad/Mac, etc. And, basically, as of now, an Apple+ subscriber has already seen everything that Apple+ has to offer.

The point being is that we have to use different metrics for the streaming service popularity than for the theatrical rentals. The most important one will be the paying subscription base but that's measured over a long term, not one weekend.

PS. "Loathe" is in the article and is in error.
 
DLD said:
So, what does this mean?



https://deadline.com/2020/07/tom-hanks-greyhound-apple-tv-opening-weekend-record-breaker-1202985492/

Let's say, a "big hit" is a $100M opening. At $12/ticket, it's about 8 million tickets sold. Apple has (or had, as of this past February) ~ 33M paying subscribers but also tens of millions with free service due to the purchase of an iPhone/iPad/Mac, etc. And, basically, as of now, an Apple+ subscriber has already seen everything that Apple+ has to offer.

The point being is that we have to use different metrics for the streaming service popularity than for the theatrical rentals. The most important one will be the paying subscription base but that's measured over a long term, not one weekend.

PS. "Loathe" is in the article and is in error.
Click to expand...

The number I took from that article was that they added 30% to their subscription base over that weekend. That’s a huge bump. Will they churn ? Who knows. But they are now at the table. It’s up to Apple to make them something they want to stay for.

JB
 
John Brawley said:
The number I took from that article was that they added 30% to their subscription base over that weekend. That’s a huge bump ...
Click to expand...
I looked for their total subscriber count. In February, someone (including Google) quotes at at 33M. Then there's a Bloomberg article from May that says only "10+". Which, I assume, means paying customers, while the larger number was for everyone. So, I can see Apple adding 3M over the course of a week leading to the premiere (although, the time frame isn't given) but I can't see them adding 10M just like that.

That said, Apple is not playing around and is into it for the long haul. They have plenty of money and then some. "Greyhound" is a big get for them, as much in terms of prestige as in the subscriber totals. They're adding more titles too.

As to the financials, the expanded production is obviously a big boon to the actors, writers, directors, cinematographers, grips and so on. I think the only ones that might be forced into accepting lower fees are some A-listers on some projects. For everyone else, this is a typical economics equation - salaries depend on capital seeking labor. And there's a huge surge in capital chasing a fairly limited labor pool.
 
Remember this threat from AMC 2 1/2 months ago? I hope the popcorn isn't getting stale.

Streaming = No revenue sharing, no distribution hassles, lower staffing overhead. What's not to like. Maybe AMC should consider a new business plan.

“Therefore, effectively immediately AMC will no longer play any Universal movies in any of our theatres in the United States, Europe or the Middle East.”

https://www.theverge.com/2020/4/28/...rld-tour-disney-warnermedia-digital-streaming

Of course, if theaters ever open again, customers will come back and new releases will go back to theaters .... Well, I wouldn't place a bet on that.

“This policy affects any and all Universal movies per se, goes into effect today and as our theatres reopen, and is not some hollow or ill-considered threat.” Let's see how that holds up.
 
Last edited:
DLD said:
IMO, $5 is a lot closer to the "sweet spot", especially for people who will subscribe to several of these streamers without churning. I also think the monthly fees will begin to come down once the battle royal fully gets going.
Click to expand...

I mean, $1 is my sweet spot. Or they could just pay me to watch. Isn't there a limit to how low they can go? "Content" isn't free. Maybe the fees will come down in a race to the bottom, but after the losers exit the space, the fees will rise and stabilize.

The average cable TV bill is like $85. Is it crazy to think people might pay that for 7 different $12 services that come on demand and commercial-free?
 
ahalpert said:
I mean, $1 is my sweet spot. Or they could just pay me to watch. Isn't there a limit to how low they can go?
Click to expand...

Reminds me of this onion article at the end of the video store era--

https://www.theonion.com/struggling-blockbuster-eliminates-rental-fees-1819568710

I heard someone frame things in an interesting way. They said it's the nature of the internet that makes people want information to be free, and if entertainment is a form of information, then at some point they will expect entertainment to be free as well. It's basically a race to the bottom.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top