Nolan Film Quotes

You either die a hero or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain.

I always find myself gravitating to the analogy of a maze. Think of film noir and if you picture the story as a maze, you don't want to be hanging above the maze watching the characters make the wrong choices because it's frustrating. You actually want to be in the maze with them, making the turns at their side, that keeps it more exciting...I quite like to be in that maze.

You’re never going to learn something as profoundly as when it’s purely out of curiosity.

...I studied English Literature. I wasn't a very good student, but one thing I did get from it, while I was making films at the same time with the college film society, was that I started thinking about the narrative freedoms that authors had enjoyed for centuries and it seemed to me that filmmakers should enjoy those freedoms as well.

(On "Following") We've got a pretty serious claim on being the cheapest film ever made.

And that's something to recommend love: that is has clear rules like a game, and it has speeches and sayings you'll have heard in films and in songs. There are patterns and there are steps to be taken. If you lose the game that's one thing, and that has to be dealt with, but at least there is a game to be played at all.

the mind can always trace the genesis of an idea... provided it has enough time to do so...

Before you now it, you're in high school, wondering if you're the only one who actually read Brave New World, rather than it's summary on Wikipedia. Or you're sitting in the cafeteria, pondering the complexities of the latest Christopher Nolan film while the nearest table of cheerleaders discusses whatever reality TV show is popular that week, then argues over who gives the most efficient blow job. Surely, the real world would be different. But I'm beginning to wonder if the whole damn planet hasn't been Wikipedia'd

Death is like tiger Richard Parker in the film 'Life Of Pie', it keeps you alive, if you are awake, attentive and keep a watch on it. It kills you, if you ignore it

White men's stories continue to be considered Important and Universal. If the films of Quentin Tarantino, Stanley Kubrick, or Christopher Nolan don't "speak" to you, you are considered by other filmmakers and creatives to be a philistine of the highest order, one who is simply too ignorant to grasp the depth of their genius. But men can hardly be expected to sit through the films of those female filmmakers most radically plumbing the depths of the female experience—Karyn Kusama, Jane Campion, Tamara Jenkins. After all, they are telling "small" and "personal" stories.

Every film should have its own world, a logic and feel to it that expands beyond the exact image that the audience is seeing.

Here are just a few tastes of Dunkirk's messy paradox. Life is always complex, nuanced, and contradictory. We instinctively know this. But too many modern politicians and media sources would have us believe that it is straightforward and monochrome. If one thing alone is remembered about Dunkirk, then let it be this: There was no single story. And this is a theme reinforced by Chris Nolan's film, which takes place in three realms: land, sea, and air. In each of these realms, people were having very different experiences. And they are all equally valid.

But traveling faster than light would require infinite energy; it is possible on paper, not in practice. More recently, physicists have theorized other ways that physical travel into the past could be achieved, but they are still exotic and expensive. A technological civilization thousands or more years in advance of our own, one able to harness the energy of its whole galaxy, could create a wormhole linking different points in the fabric of spacetime and send a spaceship through it.8 It is an idea explored widely in science fiction and depicted vividly in Christopher Nolan’s 2014 film Interstellar. But all this is academic for our purposes. For Gleick, what we are really talking about with time travel is a thought experiment about the experiencer—the passenger—in a novel, disjointed relationship to the external world. We can readily perform feats of “mental time travel,” or at least simulate such feats, as well as experience a dissociation between our internal subjective sense of time and the flux of things around us and even our own bodies.9 According to Gleick, part of what suddenly facilitated four-dimensional thinking in both popular writing and the sciences was the changing experience of time in an accelerating society. The Victorian age, with its steam engines and bewildering pace of urban living, increased these experiences of dissociation, and they have only intensified since then. Time travel, Gleick argues, is basically just a metaphor for modernity, and a nifty premise upon which to base literary and cinematic fantasies that repair modernity’s traumas. It also shines a light on how confused we all are about time. The most commonly voiced objection to time travel—and with it, precognition—is that any interaction between the future and past would change the past, and thus create a different future. The familiar term is the grandfather paradox: You can’t go back in time and kill your grandfather because then you wouldn’t have been born to go back in time and kill your grandfather (leaving aside for the moment the assumed inevitability of wanting to kill your grandfather, which is an odd assumption). The technical term for meddling in the past this way is “bilking,” on the analogy of failing to pay a promised debt.10 Whatever you call it, it is the kind of thing that, in Star Trek, would make the Enterprise’s computer start to stutter and smoke and go haywire—the same reaction, in fact, that greets scientific claims of precognition. (As Dean Radin puts it, laboratory precognition results like those cited in the past two chapters “cause faces to turn red and sputtering noises to be issued from upset lips.”11) Information somehow sent backward in time from an event cannot lead to a future that no longer includes that event—and we naturally intuit that it would be very hard not to have such an effect if we meddled in the timeline. Our very presence in the past would change things.

Si tratta di passare da una metodologia lineare, scientifica, quasi dialettica, a quel tipo di pensiero laterale pseudo-infantile al quale si fa ricorso quando si tenta di capire la trama di un film di Nolan.

On the other hand, you have people like me, who aren’t quite sure what they’re going to be when they grow up, only—as the twelve-year-old recommended—a list of things they’d like to learn about this year. I recently came across a quote from Christopher Nolan—writer and director of films like Inception, Interstellar, and The Dark Knight—on finding a next project. “For me, it’s all about trying new things,” he said. “If you’re going to write, you want to read a lot before you write, without any purpose.” Of course, the purpose is to find something that stimulates you but that you couldn’t have known to look for—an interest you didn’t know you had. I think I’ll take that advice.

and with a more than adequate cast, with the ubiquitous Lloyd Nolan, Carole Landis, Cornel Wilde (not yet of star status), James Gleason, Ralph Byrd, Martin Kosleck (not a Nazi villain for a welcome change), Elisha Cook Jr. and Harold Huber. It faced the situation squarely, as did most of the Pacific-localed films of that bleak time, and did not sugar-coat its patriotic message. It told of a band of guerrillas waging a hit-and-run offensive against the enemy, gradually decimated until only three are left by the unrelenting conclusion. Herbert I. Leeds kept the heroics believable with his direction. Chetniks—the Fighting Guerrillas (1943) paid tribute

Summer, this isn’t a Christopher Nolan film. I don’t deserve to be this confused after giving you the best kiss of your—

The 68-page first issue of Calling All Girls contained four comic stories—an 8-pager on Queen Elizabeth (the mother of the current queen); a 9-pager on famed author Osa Johnson, “the famed jungle adventuress,” as the story so quaintly dubbed her; a fictional 7-pager on Judy Wing, Air Hostess No. 1 (aviation themes were huge in the early years of comics, just as they were in all of popular culture); and a fictional 8-pager on the teenage adventures of the Yorktown Younger Set, which “lives in a town like yours. The other half of the first issue contained text stories of a wide variety, with an astonishing amount of reading material for the teen girl’s dime. There was a 4-page story devoted to Connie Martin, a Nancy Drew knockoff; a 4-pager devoted to circus girls; a 3-pager on Gloria Jean herself; a 3-pager by publisher George Hecht on “13 ways girls can help in the national defense”; a 2-pager on manners; a 3-pager by best-selling sports novelist John R. Tunis on women in sports; a 2-pager on grooming; a 4-pager on a fictional female boater; a 2-pager on films; a 2-pager on fashion, with delightful drawings; a page on fashion accessories; and a 2-pager on cooking, by the famed food writer Cecily Brownstone. This issue gave girls an awful lot of reading, some of it inspirational and showing they could be more than “just a girl,” as the boys in Tubby’s clubhouse used to call Little Lulu and her friends a decade later in their Dell Comics adventures. The most intriguing aspect of Calling All Girls is that it approached schoolgirls not as boy-crazy or male-dependent, but as interesting individuals in their own right. The ensuing issues of Calling All Girls expanded on this theme. This was definitely a mini “feminist manifesto” for teens!

Films that make you feel are one kind, films that make you think are superior, but films that make you experience are the ultimate because they include former two as well.

If you feel like having a beer, watch a Martin Scorsese's film; If you want to be an innocent child again watch a Spielberg movie. If you feel like reading a suspense thriller, watch a Hitchcock's movie. And if you want some enlightenment, watch a Nolan's movie.

In Hollywood today, the simple truth is that there are two types of movie studios: Disney, and those that wish they were Disney. Understanding why studios have turned so aggressively toward franchises, sequels, and superheroes and away from originality, risks, and mid-budget dramas takes more than an appreciation for the financial pressures faced by executives like Michael Lynton and Amy Pascal. Just as Olympic swimmers can’t help but pace themselves against Michael Phelps, Sony and its competitors have for years been jealous of and frustrated by Disney. Hollywood is a herd industry. Its executives are constantly looking out the side window or at the rearview mirror and asking, “Why aren’t we doing that?” For those peering at Disney, that means slashing the number of movies made per year by two-thirds. It also means largely abandoning any type of film that costs less than $100 million, is based on an original idea, or appeals to any group smaller than all the moviegoers around the globe. Disney doesn’t make dramas for adults. It doesn’t make thrillers. It doesn’t make romantic comedies. It doesn’t make bawdy comedies. It doesn’t make horror movies. It doesn’t make star vehicles. It doesn’t adapt novels. It doesn’t buy original scripts. It doesn’t buy anything at film festivals. It doesn’t make anything political or controversial. It doesn’t make anything with an R-rating. It doesn’t give award-winning directors like Alfonso Cuarón or Christopher Nolan wide latitude to pursue their visions.

There used to be well over a dozen A-list directors working in Hollywood at any given time who could get most any movie they wanted greenlit at any studio where they chose to work. Today there are only three: Steven Spielberg, James Cameron, and Christopher Nolan. In the franchise age, directors increasingly resemble hired hands who are brought in to helm a single sequel or spinoff but aren’t integral to the brand. The fourteen Marvel Studios films released through 2016, for instance, had eleven different directors. The model is similar to that of a television series. Directors come and go for different episodes and are valued largely for their ability to maintain the tone of the series and bring their installment in on time and on budget. In TV, the power has traditionally lain with writers and producers—many of whom serve both roles—who work on every episode, maintaining long-running story arcs and the consistency and coherence of story lines and characters.

Fans say they prefer the 'realism' of Nolan's films compared to Burton's. (..) If these films were realistic, they would consist of crowds of people pointing at Batman and saying 'It's one of those Fathers4Justice morons! What a DICK.' Also, take it from a reformed fashion writer: no man can wear a full-length cape in the real world without sparking serious mockery. Who comes looking for realism when they watch a movie about some dude who flies through the air dressed as a freaking bat?