Attention Christopher Nolan

I went to see The Odyssey again. This time in the way that Christopher Nolan intended: on a 70mm IMAX screen. Thank god I watched it on a regular screen first. The 70mm version is loud as fuck. But I finally see what Nolan was trying to do. The Odyssey is like a spiritual sequel to Oppenheimer. The theme for both films is “man who sacrificed his soul and the future of humanity for temporary victory” or some shit like that. Presumably there will be a third installment to make a complete trilogy.

The question is what will the subject be of this hypothetical film. At this stage in Nolan’s career, he has carte blanche. There’s not a subject under the sun that he can’t make a film about. The only constraints are the ones that Nolan places on himself. So this third film will likely be about a historical or pseudo historical event. The theme has to be the same as the prior two films.

Oppenheimer was about the development of humanity’s most destructive weapon. The Odyssey was about placing the most important story in western literature within the context of the Bronze Age collapse. For the latter, Nolan clearly read Eric Cline’s 1177 BC: The Year Civilization Collapsed. Due to his research on this issue, Cline has reached the status of a celebrity scholar. Nolan knows all these pop scholars, whether they be in history or science. So the events of The Odyssey happened over 3000 years before Oppenheimer. Can anyone think of an event between 1177 BC and 1945 CE that would fit Nolan’s sensibilities?

If he doesn’t know him already, let me introduce the auteur to Bart D. Ehrman, the (retired) James A. Gray Distinguished Professor of Religious Studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Ehrman might be the most famous biblical scholar to have ever lived. He brought textual criticism of the Bible to the mainstream and no doubt every New Testament scholar granted a Ph.D in the last 25 years was influenced by him. But thanks to Ehrman, biblical studies is a hot HOT topic on YouTube, Reddit, etc. But as far as the New Testament goes, perhaps the biggest debate is the one regarding the “Synoptic Problem” which dissects how the first three gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) are related to one another. It a subject that riles the passion of many scholars where having the wrong opinion might get you killed in some universities. And in part due to teaching skills and charisma of Ehrman, even armchair scholars like myself can explain their position on the Synoptic Problem in pedantic detail.

Not to say that Nolan should make a movie about the Synoptic Problem. But the contradicting details described by all the Gospels does sort of fit the director’s propensity for exploring time and memory. While another Jesus movie might not be worthwhile, even if it is directed by Nolan, the most interesting details about the development of early Christianity are the moments immediately after Jesus’s death. The “Christ” didn’t create Christianity. His followers did. And what the Gospel of Mark, the earliest gospel, says is that none of Jesus’s followers understood his message.

This includes the apostle Peter, who many believe created the Church. Peter would be the main character in this hypothetical film. The story starts with him in hiding after the events of the crucifixion (which we only catch glimpses of through memory cuts). He wishes to live in obscurity before he’s dragged back into the mess by James, the brother of Jesus, who successfully kept “The Way” going in Jerusalem. We see the stoning of Stephen and the persecutions of Saul, played by Tom Hardy. Peter goes around “evangelizing” around Palestine before Saul reappears with a new “gospel” and the plot unfolds. Peter loses his way with James and the Jerusalem church and he finds himself in Rome with Saul where he experiences the great fire of 65 AD. Saul is mercifully beheaded. Peter is crucified in the garden of Nero. While on the cross, he remembers Jesus’s crucifixion and the “message” (whatever the fuck that is) becomes clear to him. The historical subtext is that even though “The Way” (Christianity) ultimately prevailed over Rome, it helped unleash religious hatred and persecution over the next 2000 years, which is (probably) antithetical to Jesus’s actual teachings.

Things like the resurrection and miracles of Jesus are handled with an air of indifference. Some people recall him performing them. Others like James say he was only doing good works. Only Saul (or Paul) believes in the total divinity of Jesus. During his “Road to Damascus” event (shown in quick memory cuts), Saul does seem to gain an inexplicable and mysterious insight into Peter which taps into his guilt over fleeing from Jerusalem during Jesus’s crucifixion. But unburdened by this guilt due to Saul’s “insights” and designation as an apostle, Peter feels “born anew” and is slowly torn from the Jerusalem church and towards Saul’s “gentile mission”.

Some say that this story would be too controversial for a studio to back. But I say if every one of your movies makes a billion dollars, then you have every right to make whatever the hell you want. And if Christopher Nolan wanted to make this story, he could. And should, goddamnit.

The odyssey

I had an existential crisis after watching The Odyssey. The film was good—if not great—don’t get me wrong. But I kept finding flaws: Tom Holland was boring; the story ends 20 minutes after its emotional climax; some of the back stories were difficult to follow; where the hell was Logan “Not Tom Hardy” Marshall-Green? Etc etc.

Then I realized something: am I the problem?

Christopher Nolan has done something that no other filmmaker has ever achieved. The Odyssey, if not many other titles in his filmography, is foolproof. You can find flaws until cows come home but none of it will matter. Even Nolan’s biggest hater — along with the right wing trolls pissed off over his casting choices — will have to admit that no matter its shortcomings, The Odyssey is a great movie.

And how he does it is no secret. It’s all right there in front of you: big ideas, big emotions, hire the best in the business. When Nolan introduces one big idea, seconds later he’ll introduce another big idea. If he doesn’t have an interesting plan on how to stage an action scene, fuck it! He’ll let the music and sound carry the weight. The only way he could have failed is if he had chosen uninteresting source material or ran with an original concept. And obviously that’s not what happened. Nolan made a film adaptation of the literal bedrock of the Western canon.

In short, there was no way that Christopher Nolan could have failed here. It was genius. I haven’t been the biggest Nolan fan, but he absolutely destroyed my every attempt to hate this movie. It nearly killed me.

So I’m gonna be real with you folks, The Odyssey is on par with Lawrence of Arabia, Ben-Hur, or any other great Hollywood epic. That’s just a fact. But then again, perhaps we’ve been fed CGI slop for so long that it’s refreshing to see real actors on real sets.

So just a tip for Hollywood execs, take a step outside the studio on occasion.

James Bond 2049

You know what, good for Amazon. Everyone rightfully shit on them for wrestling away the James Bond franchise from the Broccolis and they immediately turned the narrative around by landing the hottest director on the market right now. All that Denis Villeneuve does is hit balls out of the park, from Prisoners to Sicario to Blade Runner 2049 to Dune. If you want to shut your critics right the fuck up then you get this guy on your team.

With this announcement, the countdown is on. We’re only months, possibly weeks, away from the casting of a new James Bond actor and with Villeneuve on board and an infinite amount of money at his disposal, James Bond has entered A-list territory. Not that James Bond wasn’t A-list before. Academy Award winning director Sam Mendes already helmed two 007 pictures. But this time something feels different and I’m not sure what to think about it.

Villeneuve has a distinct style; a certain way his pictures move: visually rich, slow paced, big ideas, etc. In some ways, he’s not all that different from Christopher Nolan. But unlike Nolan, there’s nothing about Villeneuve’s filmography that screams James Bond 007. And given how big studios have fucked up big named properties in the last decade, I still think Amazon has to prove itself. Villeneuve doesn’t change that.

No one bats 1.000.

Maybe a part of me doesn’t want Bond to be “elevated” material. Mind you, even before Amazon, the Broccolis began this elevated process during the Daniel Craig era. But I think old school fans like myself are screaming for simpler times. Bond doesn’t need an emotional arc. Just make the movies episodic, ya know?

But the Villeneuve announcement has received an overwhelmingly positive reception on the internet and the only one who’s not excited is me. And I think I know why: for the first time, the next James Bond that will be cast will be younger than me. That’s not a big deal, it’s just an unusual experience. I’m beginning to feel my age. And that’s when you realize that they are no longer making movies with YOU in mind.

So this is very much a ME problem. I’ve told y’all time and time again: if I ever become one of those old guys who can’t roll with the changes then you have my expressed permission to find me in a dark alleyway and shoot me dead. But that doesn’t make things any easier so bear with me.

With all this said, the silver lining is that at least the James Bond franchise is in better hands than Star Trek 🤷‍♂️

Once Upon a Time in Montana (Part II)

“Christopher Nolan is a hack,” Mr. Ree said, “Oppenheimer looks nothing like Cillian Murphy.”

“Goddamnit Mr. Ree, I fucking hate the old west,” I replied as I spit out some chewing tobacco, “it’s nothing like the movies. Everyone is drunk all the time and reeks of cow shit!”

“How’s that any different from 21st Century LA?”

“I know we’ve been here awhile,” I said as I drank directly from the whiskey bottle, “but I just can’t get used to it. I miss Miriam. I miss Izzy. I miss my unborn son. Hell, I even miss Angelika!”

“Who?”

I took a few cocaine drops to help with a toothache. “Nevermind,” I replied, “I forgot what we were talking about. I could use some grub though. Where the hell is Maybelline?”

Maybelline, Oppenheimer’s wife, brought out a fully roasted turkey with all the fixins. Mr. Ree and I were joining her and her son Malachi for supper around the fireplace. “Sure looks delicious, Mrs. Oppenheimer,” I said, “will Mr. Oppenheimer be joining us this evening?”

“He’s in town tonight. There’s a public hanging,” she explained, “he probably won’t be back until the wee hours of the night.”

“This turkey is delightful, Mrs. Oppenheimer,” Mr. Ree said, “too bad Bob couldn’t join us.”

“Thank you, Mr. Ree. I didn’t catch your first name, by the way.”

Ree looked up from his plate, mouth stuffed with turkey, and cocked his head. “What do you mean?” he asked.

I changed the subject. “I suppose you’re used to not having Bob around. Being a sheriff’s wife must be lonely,” I said.

“Yes,” Mrs. Oppenheimer lamented, “but I have my dear son Malachi to keep me company.” She smiled and looked over to her son. “Malachi Oppenheimer, how the lord has blessed us,” she continued. Then Maybelline looked at me with a wink and a suspicious, crooked smile. “I also have you two gentlemen to watch after me,” she said, “care for some pie?”

I thought for a moment.

“Well, I appreciate you offering,” I replied, “but because of poor diet and access to copious amounts of narcotics associated with the Old West, I haven’t experienced an erection since I’ve arrived and…”

“I think she means apple pie,” Mr. Ree interrupted.

“Oh yes, of course. I’d love some pie,” I said.

Maybelline got up from the table and departed for the kitchen. I quietly nudged Mr. Ree. “Hey, do you still have that opium pipe?” I asked him.

“What the hell is wrong with you? You are stoned as fuck!”

“I know! I think I have a problem!”

“If we ever make it back to the future,” Mr. Ree whispered, “you’re getting some help!”

Maybelline returned to the table all smiles carrying a piping hot trey of apple pie. Malachi was licking his chops with anticipation. “I want the biggest piece, Mom!” he declared. Mr. Ree and I chuckled.

“It sure is nice having a full house for a change,” Maybelline said, “it keeps my mind from worrying about Mr. Oppenheimer.”

“Why do you say that?” I asked.

“Elkhorn used to be a quiet town,” she explained, “but with Mr. Dickleburg from Helena coming down and bullying us townsfolk, Bob has become more worried. He’s just one man, you see. Mr. Dickleburg has a whole army.”

“I assure you ma’am, Mr. Ree and I will do everything we can to help Bob protect this town.”

“It’s not only that,” Maybelline paused, “but he’s also taken to the bottle a lot lately.” She began to weep as she grabbed ahold of my hand. “Oh, he’s just not the same man anymore!” she cried.

“There there,” I said.

Suddenly, J Robert Oppenheimer busted through the door and tossed Mr. Ree and me two Winchesters. “Grab a horse,” he ordered, “we gotta ride into town.”

“But Bob,” I said, “I told you: I’m a terrible shot without my .357!”

“Just point and shoot,” Oppenheimer replied, “I don’t have time to explain. Hurry! Elkhorn is about to have company!”

TO BE CONTINUED…

poop (and crap)

I’m glad that the films of Quentin Tarantino and Christopher Nolan are still considered events. Auteurism is dying in Hollywood but there are still remnants.

I’m not a fan of their films, but it’s still nice.

I know it’s heresy for film buffs to dislike Tarantino, but like Alabama in college football, his movies get evaluated by a different standard for better or worse. Even when it’s obvious that he didn’t put his best foot forward, like every movie he’s made in the last 15 years, Tarantino’s films get praised as if the film industry is about to go under. If you remove his name from most of his movies, you’d probably be wondering what the fuck you just watched.

Mind you, Pulp Fiction will stand the test of time. Jackie Brown should be better appreciated. Kill Bill Vol. I and II are what they are. But go back and watch Reservoir Dogs. It didn’t age well. Could this be the fate for all his retrospective reviews once when Tarantino retires from the biz (after he allegedly makes his “10th film”)?

Probably not, but I can hope.

I admit, Tarantino just isn’t my flavor. A perfect film, for me, transcends the medium. It’s gotta stick with me…reveal something about myself, about the universe, that I never realized. Tarantino the man, as reflected in his films, lacks that insight. He’s a film geek. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, but that’s all that he’s capable of being.

I expect more out of films, not constantly getting nudged throughout a viewing, being reminded of some shitty Italian film from 40 years ago. Now I love schlock as much as the next guy, but art and schlock do not…cannot…mix.

Tarantino however wants to have it both ways. And that is a pipe dream.

He made a cool film once 30 years ago, most directors will never achieve that. But that doesn’t mean everything he’s made since has been a home run.

Really the same thing is true for Nolan. I personally think his success rate is greater than Tarantino’s. But Nolan probably thinks of himself as the Stanley Kubrick of mainstream blockbusters. That also screams trying to have it both ways.

But whatever dude, at least Insomnia, The Prestige, and The Dark Knight…the only superhero film I’ve ever liked…were damn good.