Christopher Nolan's Career Crossroads
By Joe Boden
15th October 2009

If you’d have spoken to me around two years ago, I would have been the stoutest supporter of Christopher Nolan. That’s not to say that now, only twenty four months on, I’m a detractor, but a niggling doubt has begun to infiltrate my mind regarding Nolan’s direction (that is, where he’s going, not his talent behind the camera). And so, I figured that it was about time to offer a critical re-appraisal of Nolan’s career, from his little Brit Indy debut “Following”, to one of the most successful films ever made, both critically and financially.

It all started, ruling out his 1997 short film “Doodle bug” (which I haven’t seen), with “Following”, a film as low key and as low budget as you’re likely to find from a director who would go on to handle the budgets that Nolan has. It’s the story of a young man (billed simply as “the Young Man”, and played by Jeremy Theobald), who follows people in order to get material for his writing. However, when he meets a low level con man named Cobb (Alex Haw in his only screen credit), he finds himself embroiled in burglaries and double crosses. “Following”, given the latter films of the director, seems like the perfect start to his career, and gave away all of the major hallmarks that would riddle his résumé. It operates an un-chronological time frame, it has characters with dubious morals or misplaced loyalties, and it gives us a big twist ending. I’d certainly recommend “Following”, especially to hardcore Nolan fans, because it is both a great insight into Nolan’s mind pre-big budgets, and is a very good film in its own right. It has amateur performers performing above their level, and the blind-siding twist is possibly the most unpredictable of Nolan’s unpredictable career.

Nolan then moved to America to make, if you’ll believe IMDB, the twenty seventh best film of all time, “Memento”. It’s the story of Leonard (Guy Pearce), who has a rare memory disorder that renders him unable to make new thoughts, and thus very forgetful. He’s on a vendetta to kill the rapists that offed his ex-wife, and – with the help of Joe Pantoliano’s Teddy and Carrie Anne Moss’s Natalie – he’s about to finish what has long been started. “Memento” is remembered chiefly, besides from being a very good film, as the movie which goes backwards. Although this tag is a little restricting, and doesn’t quite attribute the film the prestige that it deserves, it’s true; “Memento”, scene by scene, operates a reverse time line. It’s a very inventive, partly original plot device that heightens tension and sets up Nolan’s twist endings. As you can probably see, two of the three key hallmarks of Nolan’s career have already been mentioned in this paragraph, and the third is here too in dubious morals and misplaced loyalties. Both Teddy and Natalie hop back and forth from – to be overly simplistic – the good side and the bad side, and you never really know whether they’re out for themselves or to help out Leonard.

Moving on from Nolan’s masterpiece, next came “Insomnia”. It’s strange that, with only the third film of his still young career, Christopher Nolan was given two of Hollywood’s biggest names to work with. They were Robin Williams, one of the biggest filmic comedians of the last twenty years, and Al Pacino, whose name speaks for itself. Gone is the un-chronological time frame (for the most part), morality and loyalty are still key aspects of the film. In deed, the mentality of the murderer is something that Nolan examines almost to breaking point, and that introduces some originality and intellect to an otherwise quite contrived and conventional film. But “Insomnia” features something else that marks Nolan out as a force to be reckoned with; mood and atmosphere. It’s a film that lives off the dark, murky feel that films involving the criminal world often utilize, and Nolan takes it a step further to create an atmosphere that is both imposing and claustrophobic.

Christian Bale as Bruce Wayne in "Batman Begins"

Nolan’s astronomic rise – in terms of the budget that he was handed – continued with his next film, “Batman Begins”, which starred Christian Bale as the titular superhero. It’s an origins story, but Nolan is never one to go for convention when it comes to chronology, and here he takes us back and forth in the world of the Bat, sometimes giving us flashbacks within flashbacks, to create a hero film that makes you think before knocking you out with its action. It also features Nolan’s brilliant trickery, particularly in his implementation of smoke and mirrors. The director doesn’t allow you to get a firm grip of who the good guys and who the bad guys are, and Ra’s al Ghul in particular is an unpredictable and mysterious presence. “Batman Begins”, made in 2004, is possibly the key example of Nolan’s skills as a filmmaker; inventive, entertaining, and original.

Taking a break from big Hollywood blockbusters, Nolan went on to make “the Prestige” in 2006. Although he didn’t quite have the budget that comes with a superhero, Nolan kept hold of his ability to draw in banner name stars. He kept his Batman in Christian Bale and his Alfred in Michael Caine, but also brought in Hugh Jackman and Scarlett Johansson. Although often dismissed as overly gimmicky, I’m personally a fan of “the Prestige”, partly for its gimmicks and partly in spite of it. What I mean is, the gimmicks did work will within the context of a first viewing, and the various twists and un-chronological plot points knocked me out as I took the film in originally. Since then, though, I’ve managed to almost wholly ignore them, and concentrate on the characterization and the brilliant dynamic between Jackman and Bale’s duelling magicians. Plus, it answers one of the key questions in everyone’s life; ‘who would be the better magician, Wolverine or Batman?’

Next came one of the most successful films in Hollywood history, “the Dark Knight”. Second now only to James Cameron’s immovable behemoth, “Titanic”, in the all-time box office charts, the Batman sequel merged blockbuster sensibilities and some degree of intelligence. Like “Insomnia”, it examines what it is to be a criminal. Like “Batman Begins”, it noted what it takes to be a hero. Like “the Prestige”, it asked questions about fate, particularly with the character Two Face. Overall, it’s an overwhelming filmic experience, and one of the few blockbusters that you’ve allowed to say you love. It may not be as smart as people say it is, but it’s certainly a step above the norm, and could possibly be the best blockbuster since its predecessor. Yes, I do prefer “Batman Begins”, and no, I’m not just saying that to be unconventional.

You may have noticed that my opinions on Nolan’s career are almost wholly positive, and you’d be correct to notice that. Where, then, does this complaint about Nolan’s career direction come from? Well, I’d like to introduce another director that I often find myself comparing Christopher Nolan to, Bryan Singer. Singer directed one of my favourite American films of the 1990s with his second film, “the Usual Suspects”, merging big money sensibilities and smarts to create a great viewing experience. But since then he’s moved into superhero films almost exclusively. His third film, “Apt Pupil”, a Stephen King adaptation, is good enough, and “X Men” and “X2” are critical darlings of the blockbuster world. God knows why, because I find them both quite dull, but the critics love them, so my comparison does indeed work. In this decade, all that Singer has gotten round to directing are three tepid superhero films and the average “Valkyrie”. It makes you wonder if so much blockbuster has melted his mind, and curbed his ability to make a thoughtful film outside of that subgenre. In truth, Singer’s main contribution to the media world this decade has been “House”, which he created.

You may argue that Nolan and Singer are apples and oranges. Whilst Singer made three superhero films on the trot, Nolan slipped a drama in between his two masked efforts. That’s true, and perhaps this has kept his ability to make non-blockbusters in tact, but there’s no denying that “the Prestige”, is one of Nolan’s worst films, even if it is very watchable. In fact, only “Following” is worse, and his other four films are leagues ahead of it. I’m not trying to extend my blockbuster hatred to the influence that it has over directors, but sometimes I feel that once a director gets caught up in the world of big money, big stars, and big pay packets, he will find it difficult to come away from it again. It happened to Singer, with “Valkyrie” being nothing but a cheese-filled blockbuster, and it could very well be happening to Christopher Nolan.

His next film could be the key to Nolan’s future. “Inception” is an action sci-fi film, and is due to be released in 2010. Obviously, sci-fi films can be very thoughtful and intelligent, and in some ways they must be thoughtful and intelligent to work, but the movie’s subheading kind of fills me with dread and doubt. Some places are advertising the film as “Inception: The IMAX Experience”, and the word experience is the source of this doubt. Although I have called several of Nolan’s films such in this article, they are so because of their ability to fuse thought and adrenaline, particularly in those early films. Here, “the IMAX experience” almost implies that Nolan’s journey into the blockbuster world is complete, and that he is now devoted to making films that are visual spectacles.

In some ways, then, I don’t want Nolan to make “Batman 3”. If he follows “Inception” up with yet another blockbuster, it’s hard to see him making another “Memento” or “Insomnia” again. If he does commit to a Batman threequel, it will doubtlessly be the event of the summer, and it’s perfectly possible that it will be even better than “Batman Begins” and “the Dark Knight”. However, its long term effect on Christopher Nolan – and my personal future film-viewing pleasure – remains unknown, but will probably be to the detriment.