No current filmmaker’s efforts are as highly anticipated as the films of Christopher Nolan. The London native is going through an unofficial yet noticeable reappraisal by some movie buffs and professional critics, but more so by the former mentioned. Many of us have read the articles by Jim Emerson that were featured on many websites; including filmschooljunkies.com, which analyzes supposed flaws in Mr. Nolan’s 2008 film The Dark Knight. Now, ever artist of any profession has room for improvement, when considering the anticipation that follows their work and subsequent study of their previous efforts.  

I have always been baffled why there aren’t any prominent and noticeable critiques of other brilliant present-day directors such as David Fincher, Rian Johnson, or Jeff Nichols. Furthermore, this does not apply to abhorred directors such as Michael Bay who is just bashed without the intricate breakdown of his scenes and shooting scripts. I hypothesize that Christopher Nolan is receiving the same sort-of attention that Steven Spielberg had during the 1980s; during this time he was awarded the Irving G. Thalberg award at the relatively young age of 41. Spielberg’s films experienced box office success, critical acclaim, and became a household name. Now Mr. Nolan is on a very similar career path, and the pressure is indirectly on him to maintain consistent stellar film releases. I previously mentioned The Dark Knight, yet The Dark Knight Rises is one of the most cherry and nit-picked films of all time, which brings me back to the term reappraisal.

I first saw reappraisal being assigned to Mr. Nolan on a Facebook comment I encountered. The comment took a negative stance against The Dark Knight Rises, and the commentor said that his confidence in Nolan is waning In lieu of defending Mr. Nolan’s penultimate film I will just say this: If his worst film is an 87% and 8.8/10 score on rottentomatoes.com and imdb.com respectively, then bring on Interstellar. To broaden this discussion, below is an article from one of Scified.com’s fans, but this gentleman is definitely more than a fan boy. The author of the article; Richard Knight, is a graduate of Rutgers University and is a highschool English teacher in New Jersey. Rich Knight has written for several publications, including Complex-mag.com, Cinemablend.com, and the Chicago Reader. He has a love of movies, video games, and comic books, and all three influences come through in his writing. He currently lives in Clifton, New Jersey with his lovely wife, Rona.

To Be Engaged

What does it take to get audiences engaged these days?  A few years ago, Hollywood had an easy answer to that question…or so they thought. “3D! 3D!” the studio execs proclaimed after the seismic success of James Cameron’s Avatar. But the truth is, people kind of hate 3D now. And by “kind of hate”, I mean really hate. 3D ticket sales are at record lows (Declining Popularity of 3D Movies), and they don’t look to ever regain the kind of prominence they had just three years ago. So, no, 3D is not the answer.

So what is then? Well, that’s an easier question to pose than it is to answer, but here’s what I think. In an age where you have multiple ways to get your entertainment, it seems the best way for a company to engage you is by throwing as much content as possible at you on every platform imaginable. Now, while this may be extremely risky for Hollywood studios, it’s really the only way to go with so many options these days. Why see the latest Tom Cruise movie in the theater when you could just binge-watch Orange is the New Black on Netflix instead? They’re both entertaining, and who’s to say one is more entertaining than the other? That’s why Edge of Tomorrow should also have released on my cell phone the same day it was released in the theater. Sure, it may have looked like crap on my phone, but who cares? At least I’d be watching it. In this day and age, you’re not stuck with the entertainment that Hollywood shoves down your throat. You, the consumer, have the power. And Hollywood knows this. That’s why it’s so important for them to understand that to engage us, they need to give us options. Not only with the kind of programs and movies we get, but also in the way we get them. Because the truth is, I can watch most of my favorite programs and movies on Netflix, Hulu, or HBO Go. If I want to be engaged with a new show or movie, I need to be able to watch it on my couch, in my car, or while I’m on the treadmill, and the connection has to be immaculate. I don’t want to sit through a movie that’s buffering on my phone for several minutes. That’s a way to get me unengaged.

So, there you have it. That’s how you engage viewers in the 21st Century. Give us options, and make them fun. Hopefully, Christopher Nolan’s new picture, Interstellar, will do just that, but I doubt it. Christopher Nolan is too much a purist for that. That’s more of a Steven Soderbergh kind of thing. Oh, well. Thankfully, Nolan is the kind of director who most of us will make the trip out of the house to see. He’s deserved the props.

• Tags: Interstellar, Audience Orientation, Christopher Nolan