Posts tagged Inception

The Day the Movies Died: Movies + TV: GQ

Judging by this article, 2011 is not going to be a vintage year for cinema:

For the studios, a good new idea has become just too scary a road to travel. Inception, they will tell you, is an exceptional movie. And movies that need to be exceptional to succeed are bad business. “The scab you’re picking at is called execution,” says legendary producer Scott Rudin (The Social Network, True Grit). “Studios are hardwired not to bet on execution, and the terrible thing is, they’re right. Because in terms of execution, most movies disappoint.”

With that in mind, let’s look ahead to what’s on the menu for this year: four adaptations of comic books. One prequel to an adaptation of a comic book. One sequel to a sequel to a movie based on a toy. One sequel to a sequel to a sequel to a movie based on an amusement-park ride. One prequel to a remake. Two sequels to cartoons. One sequel to a comedy. An adaptation of a children’s book. An adaptation of a Saturday-morning cartoon. One sequel with a 4 in the title. Two sequels with a 5 in the title. One sequel that, if it were inclined to use numbers, would have to have a 7 1/2 in the title.

My theory is that it’s all about balance - the paucity of imagination in the Summer season is swiftly countered by the sheer quality of films released in Autumn, Winter, Spring. In the past twelve months we’ve been spoiled for choice - The Social Network, The Kids Are Alright, Inception, Winter’s Bone, Catfish, Enter the Void, Toy Story 3, The King’s Speech, The Fighter, True Grit, Animal Kingdom - excellent films, one and all.

Before Inception there was… Calvin and Hobbes?

Before Inception there was… Calvin and Hobbes?

Grumpy old man still loves movies

I gave up on Philip French’s film reviews in The Observer a long time ago. There’s a tired formula to them - anecdote, plot summary, handful of observations, then another anecdote - refined over decades of seeing the same old shit and having to file 1000 words on it, week after week.

However, after watching Toy Story 3 and Inception in the same weekend, French decided to finish his reviews with something a little different.

Seeing Toy Story 3 and Christopher Nolan’s Inception within 48 hours of each other was to be made aware of two things. First, that there are good reasons for being alive in these dismal days of the second decade of the 21st century. Second, there are areas of popular culture where whatever is the diametric opposite of dumbing down is at work, and that those who respect the intelligence and tastes of the general public are being rewarded for their confidence. 

The significance of this is not inconsequential. Here is a 77 year old man who’s seen literally thousands of films. If he’s been moved to say that this is potentially another golden age of cinema and popular culture, then us young’uns have reasons to be cheerful.

Guardian

Christopher Nolan's dim view of a Hollywood craze: 'I'm not a huge fan of 3-D' | Hero Complex | Los Angeles Times

The director of The Dark Knight is complaining that 3-D films are too… dark. Quite literally:

Nodding to the movie screen behind him, Nolan told the audience of 500 that he, literally, had a dim view of the 3-D releases he’d watched: “The truth of it is when you watch a film in here, you’re looking at 16 foot-lamberts, When you watch through any of the conventional 3-D processes you’re giving up three foot-lamberts. A massive difference. You’re not that aware of it because once you’re ‘in that world,’ your eye compensates, but having struggled for years to get theaters get up to the proper brightness, we’re not sticking polarized filters in everything.”

Los Angeles Times