Dunkirk was a massive hit in theaters, on blu-ray, and on cable networks where I've watched it 5 times...
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Christopher Nolan requested total creative control, 100 day theatrical window, $100 million budget, 20% of first dollar gross + more for next film
- Thread starter jett
- Start date
Yeah, according to Box Office Mojo Inception did $837 million WW.
For a director of Nolan's status none of it is unreasonable at all.
Box Office Mojo agrees with you. I wonder if the order of movies (if not their box office gross) from the site I linked to is correct or not.
I really enjoyed Interstellar. It was a magical experience that literally transported me into his world. Dunkirk and Tenet, both, left me feeling completely flat. Is it just me or does he cut cameras/angles too much? I feel like I'm watching a montage of events sometimes. The audio mixing left me fatigued as well. I felt no emotions at all while watching either of them. What has the disconnect been? Am I just growing out his style of filmmaking? Has it always been this way? I can go back and watch something like Dark Knight now and see, yes, he does chop up his scenes erratically. The audio mix has always been big and boisterous. So why did I love those older movies so much...?
Imagine Wikipedia being the arbiter of truth!
On this list:
#14 -- Inception
#25 -- Interstellar
The movies in the top #40 that aren't based on existing IP:
#1 -- Avatar
#17 -- Independence Day
#18 -- E.T. The Extra Terrestrial
#19 -- Star Wars
#22 -- Gravity
#38 -- Armageddon
#39 -- The Day After Tomorrow
You might have noticed Hi, Mom isn't on the list anymore. I assume it's just tough to know when to label a movie sci-fi or not. Why isn't Harry Potter sci-fi? Or The Avengers? But whatever, my point still stands. Not many original movies can make bank like Nolan's offerings at the box office.
Regarding the subject matter being a biopic around this Oppenheimer dude, I think it could be a grounded visceral experience like the mini series Chernobyl but condensed into a movie. Especially with this rather conservative budget of $100 million.
My only concern is if Nolan will blow up a real A bomb as I know his distaste to special effects lol.
My only concern is if Nolan will blow up a real A bomb as I know his distaste to special effects lol.
Tenet made 363 million in a pandemic when the biggest theater markets in the US were all closed.
oh no! Would someone think of the poor studios?! Now they are gonna be this much rich…. Dude what's wrong with him getting that deal from an employer? Would you be fine if your employer was taking in all the profits and not sharing it with you? Is a pretty dumb take
Fuckin LMAOOOOOOOO at thinking grossing $363 million during a fucking pandemic means he's "losing box office power"
Can't wait for the threads calling him a murderer after he exposes his cast and crew to a real a bomb
Doesn't seem unreasonable considering his track record.
Same. There's a narrative that it's confusing or it sucks or something. Internet gonna internet.
$100m makes sense for sort of an autobiographical. But oof, those demands are big dick energy. Even James Cameron would shy away.
You think James Cameron doesn't have full creative control? He probably doesn't need to ask for the 3 week block though because the studios will do that willingly.
Even if a studio wants to bend over backwards for this guy the most they should give him is control over everything EXCEPT the audio mix
In terms of plot, Variety added this
variety.com
How Universal Beat Other Studios to Land Christopher Nolan’s New World War II Epic
Inside the terms of Christopher Nolan's deal to make his WWII epic at Universal.
variety.com
“Father of the Atomic Bomb” Was Blacklisted for Opposing H-Bomb
After creating the first one, J. Robert Oppenheimer called for international controls on nuclear weapons.
www.history.com
This could go places for a $100M film.
That Oppenheimer film sounds interesting but I'm not sure why it'd need to have a $100 million dollar budget? Unless they're planning on showing in detail what the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings were like, which, admittedly would be a pretty justifiable use of the budget for the story.
Honestly, I think you need to show it in a way to show why this was such a terrible project. No idea how you do it to shock and scare people, but I think based on that extra part of the plot I feel like they have a way to show how horrific an Atomic Bomb is without making it look "cool"
Does he even release movies anymore?
Also where's my true lies, abyss and proper t2 on 4k?
Some on here fancy themselves film critics. Whatever score they gave a movie is all that matters. Regardless of actual critic and fan scores.
Just look at the bombing sequence from "Barefoot Gen" as a touchstone and I think it's doable. That in live action + recreations of all the awful pictures and videos taken after the bombing (and drawings of survivors from the Peace Museum) could give audiences nightmares, assuming Nolan wants to. I'm not sure how much of it Oppenheimer was privy to, in terms of how to best get those things into the film, but it's likely worth it.
I didn't truly understand Tenet, but I definitely had a good time watching it.
This seems like a no-brainer for other studios considering his movies are of the non-superhero genre and seem to always make money.
Like others said, he's really good at staying on/below budget and $100mill is peanuts for a hollywood blockbuster.
This seems like a no-brainer for other studios considering his movies are of the non-superhero genre and seem to always make money.
Like others said, he's really good at staying on/below budget and $100mill is peanuts for a hollywood blockbuster.
Last edited:
He has 2 films in the can and another 2 that have already gone through pre-production. Who knew making 4 films simultaneously would take a long time?
Anyway, Cameron definitely has more pull than Nolan. He made Fox of all studios wait so long for a sequel to the highest grossing film of all time that they no longer exist.
Based on his quotes from receiving a gift from Robert Pattinson about Oppenheimer's quote, and the Variety plot extra description... this will be VERY against this project, and also look into the people (specifically Oppenheimer) when it was real.
Probably my theory is like WAY WRONG, but feels like The Prestige in terms of obsession over a project, until you see it was not right and realized "Oh no, I was wrong... no... no..."
OP
OP
Period pieces are usually not cheap. Drama pieces from top tier directors aren't, either. Look at some of Tarantino's and Scorsese's recent movies, they're all in that ballpark.
Exactly. $100m isn't excessive. Unless it all takes place in boardrooms and labs.
I said release. And Nolan has released 4 or 5 movies since avatar came out. Check mate.
Cameron in the last 20+ years likes to do long term projects while Nolan does 2-3 year long projects.
There's really no right or wrong way to do it, as long as it's the project they want to do in their way.
There's really no right or wrong way to do it, as long as it's the project they want to do in their way.
That's not really a barometer of industry pull.
In fact, I'd say having a studio pouring $1b+ into a production that hasn't released since the original film 12 years ago is probably a bigger example of throwing around your weight.
Still shocked that people want to see films that are edited by studios that are scared of anything that are out of their box just because "they financed it, they should remove and change things to make sure they get what they want, which is something that made money previously. We don't need new ideas"