It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
You can say that again. Warner Bros must be bending over backwards to finance his projects. I can already tell Tenet be another huge hit like his other movies.
Just imagine what this man could do with Bond.
He’d bring back Hoyte van Hoytema so we can all satiate in that “piss yellow” color pallet. It’s inevitable!
Yes this I agree with. I atleast want one bond film from Nolan.
That is exactly what I first thought too!
I love Nolan.The Prestige is one of my favourite films ever.
That being said, I don't want him near a Bond film. I'd rather have Denis Villeneuve do it. I can't help but feel we've been there, regarding Nolan, with the Mendes films, which I like, but am a bit tired of. When I saw Inception, and that beginning in the Japanese castle, I immediately said Nolan should do Bond. Now, I don't think I'm opened to that as I used to be. Well, at least it would be an intelligent entry, I'm sure. Just keep Hoyte, Hans, and the usual Nolan golden cast out of it.
Technically impressive for sure, but beyond that....
Spot on.
Where does this "it's his take on Bond" come from?
I believe Nolan said in an interview that he based Inception's snowy dream sequence on OHMSS, which is his favorite Bond film.
Oh, that's great. But how does that make Tenet " a take on Bond done in Nolan style"?
+1
I remember melting in the cinema when I saw these two scenes in particular...
How so?
I'm sure that viewpoint depends on how intelligent you are.
If one thinks films like Memento, The Prestige, Insomnia, Inception, ..., are not Intelligent, then I suppose that person is just trying to make a point about its hatred for Nolan films, but that person can't really be serious. What's an intelligent film, then? They have conceptual ideias and smart ways to present them. Isn't that intelligent?
I love it when people challenge another's intelectual property. One thing is for certain, Nolan's films aren't banal or mediocre. And he thrives to do cinematic events, which I can, for one, get behind of.
I was not blown away by the latest trailer. And I do believe that the man has good and not so good films. But to say his films are not intelligent or well made is not even a matter of opinion, is a matter of delusion. If one doesn't like them, well fine, I understand that, but please don't come saying they're badly made dumb films.
And again, I wouldn't want Nolan near a Bond film. But I do love most of his films.
In another note, @Pierce2Daniel, SP had fantastic moments where the cinematography was stellar. The thing is, he used the same colouring scheme throughout the film. Wouldn't the film had benefited from some clarity and colours in the Mexico scenes? And if one could have seen the snow as white in Austria? And not yellowish - btw, never eat the yellow snow ;) In Rome and the desert, the yellowish hue worked brilliantly. Just not throughout the entire film, IMO.
Glad we fully agree @Thunderfinger and @Pierce2Daniel Those stills are excellent indeed, just beautiful.
@Univex I reckon it doesn't really work like that. In the end colour grading is a relative thing, within the spectrum used for the film. In a way I agree with you, but while watching Spectre I never once had the idea the snow was yellow. Enter relativity ;)
No yellow snow for me this year, sadly no snowboard vacation. Ha.
eheh, here's two examples
But I must say I did enjoy the yellow tint in Rome and in the desert scenes. And in the train. It was sort of oniric in a way. Those scenes posted by @Pierce2Daniel were beautifully shot and rendered.
I will say that I understand people's comment about the Mexico and Austria scenes. Variety in locations is a key component in Bond movies. You want to feel that in the film.
But obviously, Mendes and Hoyte decided they wanted to make a darker and smoggier espionage film. Something that was more Le Carre than Fleming.....but I'd level a similar accusation at Martin Campbell and Phil Mehuex in Goldeneye.
Also, I loved the cinematography on the bridge.
Love that silhouette and the smoke.
No, of course not. Cinematography is a lot more than hue. The composition on those scenes is brilliant. As it is on the whole film. As I said, and you agreed, I only complain about Mexico and Austria, and that because it didn't convey variation of tone, and it gets tiresome and frankly it cheapens the otherwise brilliant composition work by Hoyte.
@Univex, fair point, the first one. But I was in no way showing any hatred for Nolan or his films. I think he makes pretty good films and that he is massively overrated. That's all. His films are sold as highly intelligent blockbusters, but he usually gets away with very amateurish presentations of complex ideas. Time, dreams, psychology, you name it. Thise topics are sold as if the viewer would learn something deep from the films, and that is what I critisise.
Obviously the "re-grading" isn't going to look good, as it's using the final film as a base and not the original raw files.
I don't disagree with you entirely. I do hear Hitchcock in my head saying: It's just a movie. An eventful and smart one, at that. But I'm don't presume to go to the cinema and learn something from it. I can get inspired, though. I do think that complex ideas have to be presented in distilled ways, and that might come across as amateurish, as, in fact, Nolan is - an amateur connoisseur of things. He is an interested person, not an actual scientist/psychologist/neurologist/... Kubrick would get most things right, but he was an obsessive type. But if he had to bend reality to suit the film or his ideia, I'm sure he would. In the end, it's just a movie. I'm sure Nolan knows this too.
He's probably a bit overrated. Kubrick, for example, is far superior. But, again, Nolan knows it and has said it before while listing his favourite films. Nevertheless, I am a fan of Nolan's approach to film. It's interesting that I don't really like to talk about his films with his fans. Nolan fans don't come across as the smartest cookies in the box (generally speaking, of course). I can think of one irritating sob who used to roam these boards.
In the end, the thing I usually say about his pet actor - Tom Hardy - is probably true for Nolan himself. That he is overrated, yet a very good actor.