Gotta love the L.A. Times recycling their content and getting a two’fer out of their WonderCon “Inception” coverage — Christopher Nolan’s new “existential heist film” if you haven’t already heard about it somehow.
So the Times basically takes the same quotes and drops them over on their Hero Complex blog, but wisely adds new photos (which you can see here) to bring the added value.
The L.A. Times piece, which we parsed in full here, really pulled back the curtain and matter-of-factly gave up and confirmed several of the film’s secrets that had been rumored for months (and if you were afraid of spoilers in that piece, be afraid of spoilers here and do not read on): the $160-million-budgeted film is essentially about a group of corporate espionage thieves (led by Leonard DiCaprio) who essentially break into CEO tycoon types’ minds (one of them being Cillian Murphy) and sell their lucrative thoughts and secrets (presumably to the highest bidder or to rival conglomerates).
The best part of the article, besides Nolan’s salient, grown-up thoughts (finally a filmmaker who approaches science-fiction and fantasy from an intellectual and emotional point of view) and the neat looking photos is video of the entire Nolan WonderCon panel (below under the read more).
Even more impressive, is Nolan’s affinity for ’70s films (he name checks the awe of seeing “Star Wars” and Kubrick films) and attempting to do most, if not all the effects in camera instead of relying on CGI and computer trickery — the filmmaker wisely understands those elements keep the audience one step removed from the content because they realize, even subliminally, that much of it is fake. Personally, we feel this is why his sci-fi/fantasy/super-hero films are a significant cut above the rest.
“I’ve always been interested in trying to achieve as many of the effects in camera as possible. I feel that the audiences relationship with the material onscreen is greatly enhanced if the material has a tactile quality, if it’s something you can invest and believe in. I think that really comes, in a large part from the era in which I grew up. When the big movies of the ’70s were being made they didn’t have access to computer graphics and so forth so things had to be done either through extraordinary stunt work or building extraordinary sets, or through the enhancement of miniatures and the optical effects of the time. So I have a great fondness for the large scale films that really tried to create a world that you could get lost in, in a very credible manner and so I’ve tried to preserve that as a working methodology and we use new technologies where they are appropriate. But we tried to have to have everything based on something that we shot in camera.”
Amen, brother. Another photo and more after the jump.
It’s kind of impressive that after being so remarkably secretive about “Inception” that the filmmakers nonchalantly decided to let everything out of the bag all of a sudden. We wonder if they realized most of this info was out there and simply said, “Fuck it, might as well discuss it.”
The photos at the top reveal some of these real sets — a revolving room influenced by Stanley Kubrick’s “2001: A Space Odyssey,” and the mechanical buildings that flip on their side that you’ve seen on the trailers — the second ones show a very soaking wet Lukas Haas being held by Ken Watanabe and then a simple reflective moment of Nolan and his star DiCaprio who the director said was integral to bettering the story. “I’ve incorporated a huge number of his ideas,” Nolan said. “Leo’s very analytical, particularly from character point of view but also how the entire story is going to function and relate to his character.” (DiCaprio improved Chris Nolan’s “Inception”? Man, his stock just went up with us, big time).
Also to note, Nolan says he’s had the idea for this film since he’s been 16 years old, but if you think all the layers and secrets of “Inception” seem to have been uncovered, guess again. While Marion Cotillard’s role has been revealed — the Times says Dicaprio’s character, “is a wounded dreamer after the loss of his beloved wife” — meaning she dies or has died when the film began, we’re betting she has a much larger role to play in the greater construct here. Another hunch of ours: why has so much been revealed already? Because there’s a larger parallel story at play here which is the larger secret to the film. That’s just our guess. “Inception” arrives in theaters later this summer on July 16. It will probably be the most expensive arthouse blockbuster ever made and we’re glad Nolan used the good studio will he engendered after “The Dark Knight” to do something original, ambitious and out there.
Seems like only Nolan and Peter Weir are interested in creating as many effects possible in the camera. This needs to change.
It's actually largely due to DiCaprio that I'm as interested in the film as I am. I'm pretty lukewarm-at-best about Nolan ("Memento" and "The Dark Knight" are great, but far from perfect, "Batman Begins" is OK, and "The Prestige" is, in my opinion, one of the silliest and most juvenile movie messes from the last decade), but, while I'm not his biggest fan, he clearly has some talent. Where his films tend to fall short, for me, is in the depth of the characters and emotions–DiCaprio isn't the most accomplished actor in the world, but, seeing him in Scorsese's last several films, I feel like he's certainly one of the most committed and enthusiastic. What he lacks in sophistication he more than makes up for (in my opinion) in his extraordinary investment in his characters, and to doing projects he's genuinely passionate about (they're not all winners, but he seems to me to have pretty good taste in making his selections). In some ways, DiCaprio's rough-around-the-edges conviction is a wonderful compliment to Scorsese's generally very polished (if still remarkably expressive) style of the last decade; I think he could do the same for Nolan, who, for me, is a promising filmmaker, but one who ultimately takes himself too seriously.
(Also, anyone who goes out of the way to use in-camera effects must be doing something right.)
Which Nolan movies have you seen, Davey? What were you doing?
How did Guy Pierce's character lack depth and emotion in Memento? Same goes for Pacino in Insomnia. And the main character in Following and…I could go on.
when i see "clash of titans" or "gi joe",i also say myself "the prestige is one of the silliest and most juvenile movie messes from the last decade"
Speed Racer was an "arthouse blockbuster," whether you liked it or not.
Davey Morrison, you're a git. Spare your seed the shame and never reproduce.
Sorry for upsetting some of you so much.
I haven't seen "Insomnia" or "Following" yet. I'd like to see both. All of Nolan's other films, for me, feel a bit labored, as if he's trying to be Important more than he's trying to actually tell a great story. There's certainly much to admire in his work though, and all of his films I've seen (except "The Prestige") are entertaining, involving, and, at least to some degree, thought-provoking–but I feel like I can't immerse myself in any of these films the way I can with my favorites. I recognize that others feel differently, of course, and my opinion is no more or less valid than anyone else's (though I'll defend it).
"The Prestige", though, just reeks of high school kid angst to me. It's the most one-note bitter, angry movie I think I've ever seen. The movie has its defenders (I was surprised how many end-of-decade lists it appeared on), but I'm afraid I'll just never understand what people see in it.
"Speed Racer", on the other hand, is brilliant.
Davey Morrison, you're a faggot. Mutilate your genitals you queer.