Loading Flipbook...
The Exacting, Expansive Mind of
CHRISTOPHER
NOLAN
In an industry where status means
not having to care about the value of
other people’s time, Nolan never keeps
anybody waiting. At 10 a.m. sharp, he
was greeted at the Bow Tie Cinema on
23rd Street in Chelsea by Adam Cole,
who had flown over from Los Angeles with the film print, which had its
own ticket. Cole, who has been Nolan’s
postproduction coordinator for the
last two films, had been there since 7
in the morning. He was wearing a bow
tie, only slightly askew; this might have
been an understated homage to this
particular theater — one of only 240
or so nationwide that would be projecting the movie on actual film rather
than digitally — or might merely have
been an expression of the odd sartorial
discipline that all of Nolan’s collaborators seem to share, their shirts tucked
in like barracks bedsheets. (Brad Grey,
the chairman and C.E.O. of Paramount
Pictures, told me the set of “Interstellar”
was the best-dressed set he ever visited.
“Everyone was in suits and ties, and I
thought, Who are these folks, everyone
talking very nicely to each other, all civilized?”)
Nolwan’s own look accords with his
strict regimen of optimal resource allocation and flexibility: He long ago decided it was a waste of energy to choose
anew what to wear each day, and the
clubbable but muted uniform on which
he settled splits the difference between
the demands of an executive suite and
a tundra. The ensemble is smart with a
hint of frowzy, a dark, narrow-lapeled
jacket over a blue dress shirt with a
lightly fraying collar, plus durable black
trousers over scuffed, sensible shoes.
In colder weather, Nolan outfits himself with a fitted herringbone waistcoat,
the bottom button left open. A pair of
woven periwinkle cuff links and rather
garish striped socks represent his only
concessions to whimsy or sentimentality; they have about them the sweet,
gestural, last-minute air of Father’s Day
presents.
Despite the civilized and civilizing
exterior, Nolan was a little anxious that
morning. He is comfortable with the
fact that his filmmaking practice rests
on the expertise of his team — he calls
himself a jack-of-all-trades and emphasizes the “master of none” — but film
projection, the final gate before the audience, was a dying art, and there were
fewer and fewer people around he could
trust. Like most theaters, the Bow Tie
now shows most of its movies in digital projection, which Quentin Tarantino has called “TV in public.” Over the
last 10 years, Nolan has emerged, along
with Tarantino and Paul Thomas Anderson, as one of Hollywood’s most visible advocates for film, with its exacting
texture and granularity of hue, over the
Styrofoam flatness of digital. Nolan is
a gestalt thinker and entertainer, and
he thinks that it’s technical details like
these, even the ones we register only
unconsciously, that make the theatrical experience a vivid and continuous
dream: “At the movies, we’re going to
see someone else put on a show, and I
feel a responsibility to put on the best
show possible.” Nolan was at the Bow
Tie to optimize the show. The theater
hadn’t projected film in some time, so
Paramount had called in their New
York head of technical operations to get
everything in order. “They’ve only got
one rack of sub,” Cole said, indicating
that the sound system perhaps wasn’t
ideal for such low-end sounds as roars
and booms, of which this film has its
share.
Nolan wanted to screen Reels 2
and 3 (of an eight-reel movie) for the
rocket launch — “Interstellar” takes
place largely in space — whose rumble
might correspondingly suffer. “But you
can’t just start with the rocket launch or
you’ll blow everybody’s ears out.” You
have to start with Reel 2, he exposited,
which is full of the informative dialogue
that brings the audience up to speed.
We navigated in the descending
dark toward Nolan’s preferred seats,
third-row center, swinging briefly by
“
A
lthough many of Christopher Nolan’s movies happen simultaneously in the past, present and future,
he almost never works on weekends.
He made an exception, though, on a
Saturday early this fall, while he was in
New York on the sort of errand almost
no director takes up, or has to take up,
these days: He was visiting theaters to
make sure they were properly prepared
to project his new movie, “Interstellar.”
The final cut of the movie had been
delivered, as is characteristic for him,
ahead of schedule, back in June, and he
was rapidly running out of tasks within
his control before the premiere.
But you can’t just start with
the rocket launch or you’ll
blow everybody’s ears out.
Nolan’s assistant of four years, Andy
Thompson, to wordlessly exchange an
empty takeaway cup of tea for a fresh
thermos. (“Andy can get me tea on
a glacier,” Nolan said, with a sort of
puzzled appreciation.) Nolan seemed
comfortable as he settled in, if a little
apprehensive about the screen, which
was recently installed. “When I first
walked in, I worried that perhaps the
screen had been hung just a little too
high, but these headrests are very nice.”
The screen was silver, designed for 3-D
movies, and he worried his peak whites
would go gray. The face of Matthew
McConaughey, who stars in the film,
materialized on the screen in front of
us. “Those whites are O.K. Not bad.
This is encouraging.”
Nolan did not settle in for long.
Soon I was chasing him as he darted
around the dark theater with a swift
but moseying gait, moving from one
corner to the next, monitoring the
clarity of the sound from multiple
vantages. The most important thing,
he said, was the volume; he wanted
a lot of simple power, and all
of it coming right out of the
screen. He didn’t put a lot of
surround in the mix, because
he didn’t want a lot of distraction from the sides. (Outer
space, he pointed out dryly,
is not known for its ambient
murmurs.) He seemed content. This was not, he told
me later, a chore. It seemed
as if, had he enough time, he’d
be more than happy to check
out every seat in every theater in
the country.
An emotional McConaughey rocketed into the firmament, and the broad,
cascading rumble pleased Nolan, who
expects things to live up to his expectations and is nonetheless pleasantly surprised when they do. After the liftoff,
the film hovers in a long, gauzy silence,
of the kind he acknowledges having
learned from Stanley Kubrick, whose
“2001” has been a monument for him.
“There’s supposed to be a tense feeling
of having no air.” But, he went on, the
quality of silence would vary from theater to theater; here you’d hear the rumble of air-conditioning, there the rustle
of popcorn or coats.
The house lights came up, and Nolan found Cole in the back of the theater. “Did you get the dimensions of the
screen?” he asked. Cole had been able
to recite the number of seats in the theater off the top of his head but couldn’t
recall the dimensions. “When you get a
chance, before you leave,” Nolan said.
“Doesn’t have to be now. But I want it
as a frame of reference.”
“When you have planets and stars,
you never want to make people feel as
though the screen is too small,” Nolan told me. “Otherwise they’ll worry
there’s nothing off-screen.”
N
olan, whose eight movies over 14
years have together generated just
more than $3.5 billion in revenue, puts
an extraordinary amount of time and
effort into engineering believably ample worlds. He tries to build maps the
size of the territory, whole cities from
the ground up in disused airship hangars (as he’s done for four of his movies
at a former R.A.F. facility outside London), even if he’s going to shoot just a
few street-corner scenes. Sue Kroll, the
president of worldwide marketing for
Warner Bros., told me she once got actually lost in the ersatz rain falling on
an ersatz Gotham. Nolan learned the
value of such sweep from Ridley Scott.
The genius of “Blade Runner,” he told
me, is that “you never feel like you’ve
gotten close to the edge of the world.”
Nolan’s movies require this thick
quotient of reality to support his looping plots, which accelerate in shifting
time signatures, consume themselves
in recursive intrigue and advance formidable and enchanting problems of
interpretation. “Memento,” the Sundance favorite that brought him instant
acclaim at age 30, is a noir thriller with
the chronology of reverse-spliced helix.
“Insomnia,” the only one of his nine
films for which he did not receive at least
Memento - 2000
Interstellar Set
a share of the writing credit, was somewhat more straightforward — a moody,
tortured psychological thriller — but
its real trick was to gain him access to
studio work and studio budgets. “The
Prestige,” a Victorian dueling-magician
drama, is a clever bit of prestidigitation, as well as a canny commentary on
film and technology (Nolan on digital
filmmaking can sound a lot like Ricky
Jay on David Copperfield). “Inception”
was a heist movie that took place in a
series of nested dreamscapes. Nolan’s
Batman movies, though basically linear
in structure, resonated broadly as shadowy political allegories.
themselves to the limbo of Nolan’s expansive, febrile imagination. The IMDB
F.A.Q. about the meaning of the end of
“Inception” makes “Infinite Jest” look
like a pamphlet on proper toaster installation. The Internet has become
lousy with intersecting wormholes tunneled by warring pro-Nolan factions.
Part of the reason his work has
done so well at the box office is that his
audience members — and not just his
fans, but his critics — find themselves
watching his movies twice, or three
times, bleary-eyed and shivering in
their dusky light, hallucinating wheels
within wheels and stopping only to blog
about the finer points. These blogs pose
questions along the lines of “If the fact
that the white van is in free-fall off the
bridge in the first dream means that, in
the second dream, there’s zero gravity
in the hotel, then why is there still normal gravity in the third dream’s Alpine
fortress?????”
That his films manage to be both
mainstream blockbusters and objects of
such cult appeal is what makes Nolan a
singular, and singularly admired, figure
in Hollywood. He is commonly found
sharing discriminating sentences of
praise with James Cameron on the one
hand and Paul Thomas Anderson on
the other; he has been anointed, without any apparent campaigning on his
own behalf, the successor of both Steven Spielberg and Stanley Kubrick. His
loyalists have consistently and strenuously defended him against critics who
claim that although he may be a masterful technician, he’s not a visionary or
true auteur. Regardless of the visionary
question, however, it’s pretty much impossible to think of a film that grossed
more than a billion dollars and is better
than “The Dark Knight” — or, to think
of it in the way that Nolan prefers, a
better film that was seen, so many times
over, by so many people.
Most people, of course, don’t take
their Nolaniana to such extremes. But
there are enthusiasts out there who lose
It’s also hard to see how “Interstellar” won’t make another billion-plus
dollars and thus deepen Nolan’s mys-
tique as the one studio director who’s
not a studio hack, as the solitary Hollywood icon who somehow does enormous, surprising, profitable things his
own way. The movie had its origins in
2006, as a collaboration between a theoretical physicist, Caltech’s Kip Thorne,
and an independent producer, Lynda
Obst. The project was at Paramount,
and Nolan’s brother Jonathan — who
goes by Jonah — was hired to write the
screenplay; Spielberg was attached as
director. But by 2011, the project became available, and Nolan signed on to
rewrite (he and his brother have been
collaborating on scripts since “Memento”) and direct, as long as the project
could be a joint venture with Warner
Bros., Nolan’s longtime studio home.
To hear Nolan tell it, however, the
film’s true origin story begins much
earlier, when Nolan was 7; his father,
a British advertising copywriter, took
him to see, within the span of about a
year, the initial release of “Star Wars”
and a theatrical rerelease of “2001.” The
age of 7, perhaps not coincidentally,
was also the year in which he started
to make his own movies, on a Super 8
he borrowed from his dad. Those two
movies — one that helped inaugurate
the auteur-driven New Hollywood,
and one that inadvertently ushered
in the era of the reinvigorated, blockbuster-based studio system — have remained his touchstones, and “Interstellar” represents his opportunity to repay
his debt to both of them at the same
time. Jonah, when he came to visit the
set and saw the spaceships, said to him,
“Of course we’re doing something like
this; this was our whole childhood.”
Nolan’s film is set roughly two generations hence, in a grim, shrunken, retrograde era. The plot revolves around
the relationship between an iconoclastic space pilot named Cooper, played
by McConaughey, and his bright, stubborn daughter, played in her youth by
Mackenzie Foy. (“That lovely little girl
is going to be a star,” Michael Caine told
me.) Armies and technology have been
NOLAN
“
...he’d be more
than happy to check
out every seat in
every theater in the
country.
That’s as much as you get from the
trailers, which feature McConaughey’s
exhortation to new greatness over stock
space-age footage and makes the movie
look like so much “Apollo 13” schmaltz.
But in fact that covers only the first
20 minutes of an almost three-hour
film, the balance of which resembles a
George Lucas interpretation of a Borges story. As far as sci-fi goes, it’s closer
to Soderbergh’s “Solaris” than to Tarkovsky’s. But even after everything goes
satisfyingly bananas, the movie remains
grounded in a basic humanism. “Someone, an adult,” Nolan told me, “once
told me that the meaning of ‘2001’ was
that going into outer space is like going
deep into yourself.” He smoothed the
folds of his waistcoat and considered
that for a second. “I don’t think that’s
what it’s about. In fact I have no idea
what ‘2001’ is really about. But I tried
to make a film now that would be like
that, a quest film like ‘The Treasure of
the Sierra Madre.’ ”
The depth and solidity of the relationship between Cooper and his
daughter, Murphy, and the swift, sure
strokes with which it is realized — she’s
the sidekick who makes sure he remembers his bolt-cutters — is what differentiates “Interstellar” from Nolan’s
other movies, where the human relationships can feel like an afterthought.
Nolan needed the Cooper-Murphy
relationship to coalesce because for
“Interstellar” to work as an exhortative, inspirational work, it had to make
sure that its monumental aspect (ad
astra per aspera!) functioned in concert with its sentimental one (we must
love one another or die). The stakes
feel high enough, in other words, that
only the most gnarled sort of cellar troll
wouldn’t feel ennobled by the movie’s
refrain, Caine’s recurring invocation
of Dylan Thomas’s “Do Not Go Gentle
Into That Good Night.”
I
n California, his waistcoat retired,
Nolan peered across a glassed-in
conference room in a nondescript
postproduction facility, empty except
for the lucid, yellowless midmorning
Burbank sunlight, at a blank expanse
of laminate table, punctuated only by
two unopened, sweaty, almost botanical bottles of Perrier. With his cleft
chin, widow’s peak, graying blond spill
of wispy forelock and rinsed blue eyes,
Christopher Nolan is not without a
glint of the deranged engineer; he has
the affect of a Victorian barrister with
a sideline in flying contraptions. His
teeth are tanned a chestnut gradient,
not by cigarettes but by tea. Caine, who
has worked with Nolan on six movies,
told me: “He always has a flask of tea
in his pocket. No matter how hot it is,
he has a big overcoat with a pocket big
enough for his tea, and he quietly sips
it. At a certain point, I thought, There
must be something better than tea in
there. I asked him, ‘You’ve not got vodka in there, have you?’ He said no, just
tea.”
Nolan’s collected, tranquil mien has
about it something of an achievement,
because he spent his childhood shuttling around. He was born in London
in 1970, to an English
father — who spent
time shooting commercials in Los Angeles and returned
home with stories
about the Beverly
Hills Hotel — and an
American mother,
who had worked
as a flight attendant. His child-
hood was apportioned between London it over 25½ days on a budget of $4.5
and Chicago. Jonah, who is six years million.
younger, told me that his
very earliest memories were
The film went on to gross
of his older brother making
stop-motion space odysseys,
$113 million worldwide and
painstaking processes of
tweaking the gestures of ac- showed Warners he could
tion figures. They went to the
handle the demands of a
movies constantly, and Jonah
recalls that they brooked no studio movie
distinction between the arty
and the mainstream; they’d
After that, when he came across
go to Scala Cinema Club in London the script of “Insomnia,” a remake of a
to see “Akira” or a Werner Herzog film Norwegian psychological thriller, Warone month and then go to the Biograph ner Bros. had the option. Nolan was inin Chicago to see “The Commitments” terested but couldn’t get a meeting. His
the next. (When Jonah was 13 or 14, agent, Dan Aloni, called Steven SoderNolan gave him two Frank Miller vol- bergh, an early fan of “Memento.” Soumes, “Batman: Year One” and “The derbergh told me that he “just walked
Dark Knight Returns,” which the two across the lot and said to the head of
revered.) Nolan went to an English production, ‘You’re insane if you don’t
boarding school with a military inflec- meet with this guy.’ My sense even then
tion and then on to University College was that he didn’t need our help except
London, where he read English litera- to get in the door.” Everything happened
ture. He chose U.C.L. because of its film very quickly. Nolan made the film on a
facilities, which included a Steenbeck budget of $46 million, and Soderbergh
editing suite. He and Emma Thomas, and George Clooney signed on as exhis wife, began dating in their first year. ecutive producers. Soderbergh visited
Together they ran a film society, screen- the set in Alaska. “I got there and was
ing 35-millimeter films to make money having a conversation with Al Pacino:
so members could shoot 16-millimeter ‘How do you feel? How’s it going?’ Al
shorts.
said, ‘Well, I can tell you right now, at
Nolan made his first film, “Following,” on $6,000 over the course of
a year, shooting perhaps 15 minutes of
footage each Saturday. It’s a very clever con-man/murder drama that owes
more than a little to Hitchcock, with a
sliced-up, rearranged chronology that
prefigures “Memento.” Emma moved to
Los Angeles, for her job with the production company Working Title, and
Nolan, who was having trouble raising money in the
clubby world of English
filmmaking, soon followed. He and Jonah
discussed the idea for
“Memento” on their
road trip from ChiFollowing - 1998
cago to Hollywood.
They went on to film
some point in the very near future I’m
going to be very proud to say I was in a
Christopher Nolan movie.’ ”
The film went on to gross $113 million worldwide and showed Warners he
could handle the demands of a studio
movie. “Chris is legendary for being
prepared, being on time, on schedule,”
Soderbergh told me. “We both have
this attitude of approaching it with a
sense that you have a responsibility to
the people who pay for these things to
do what you say you’re going to do and
do it efficiently.” (Brad Grey, the president of Paramount, praised Nolan for
his “fiscal responsibility,” like a parent
proud of a child for not blowing all of
his allowance on comic books.)
NOLAN
rendered immaterial, and a delusional
“caretaker” generation is barely getting
by, for the moment, on subsistence agriculture. Cooper was trained as a pilot
and an engineer before the great regression, and the broader attenuation of our
human drive, forced him into farming.
Caine’s Professor Brand, Cooper’s old
mentor and now the head of a much-reduced, fly-by-night NASA, persuades
him to fly off into the unknown. Future
NASA is led by six people around a
conference table, one more instance of
the professional tranquillity that acts as
a necessary prelude and backdrop to his
subsequent lunacy.
“
“
Insomnia - 2002
It was easy to understand Caine’s
suspicion that something more surreal
and mischievous had to be afoot. It felt
peculiar, after a week steeped in Nolan’s
filmic multiverse, to discover that our
conference-room surroundings — the
kind of functional, placid, slightly uncanny atrium that often appears in his
work as a veneer of normalcy — maintained their steady state around us,
rather than folding out of themselves
into a labyrinthine Mandelbrot sandwich. The paneled glass enclosing us
neither shattered with the gunfire of
psychical mercenaries nor slid away to
reveal a locked safe protecting a manila
envelope whose contents itemized the
dark heart of Nolan’s character. Nolan,
however, does not find himself electrifying and does not take his own life
as relevant to his work. He had taken
me along on technical errands in New
York and Burbank because he sees his
most important work in the details of
technique, in the decisions to shoot as
much as he can on IMAX (“David Lean
dragged 65-millimeter cameras into
the desert” while shooting “Lawrence
of Arabia,” he told me, “and I don’t
know why we shouldn’t have similar
aspirations”) and to record his score’s
piano on a beautiful instrument in an
airy room.
For Nolan, everything — the acting,
the plot, the effects, the film technology, the sound — has to contribute to
the weft of a film’s internal logic. “I have
a faith,” he said, “that any audience can
tell the difference between something
that’s consistent to
The success of “Insomnia” rules versus something
totally made up
was what gave Nolan a shot that’s
and anarchic.” Thus
at the resurrection of Warners’ the more reality he can
bring in to undergird
Batman franchise.
his unreality, the better
he feels. Even if a scene
the notes are not responsible for the fi- ends with buildings crashing to earth
nal product. You are. It’s not their job, like sand castles, it should start with a
it’s yours. When you’re taking notes, it’s broad foothold in the recognizable. In
possible that you’re having an interest- writing and shooting “Interstellar,” the
ing conversation with a very smart in- chief constraints that guided him were
dividual and everything they’re saying scientific; the film proposes some pois correct. But they’re wrong. So you tentially batty possibilities for gravity
have to go back and approach it from and space-time, but it felt essential to
a different angle.” He continues to treat Nolan that the physics behind the movexecutives as, essentially, representative ie be at least speculatively plausible.
filmgoers. At a development meeting — He and Kip Thorne, the Caltech sciat, in other words, a conference-room entist whose theories formed the germ
table — before “The Dark Knight,” he of the original project, met every few
had to explain the Joker’s motivations. weeks for about five months. Accord“Execs are very good at saying things ing to Thorne, Nolan told him that he
like, ‘What’s the bad guy’s plan?’ They “wanted a movie that did not violate
know those engines have to be very any well-established physical laws.”
powerful. I had to say: ‘The Joker rep- Even the graphics, Thorne told me, “are
resents chaos, anarchy. He has no logi- perfectly modeled — precisely what I
cal objective in mind.’ I had to explain it think you’d see if you went chasing light
to them, and that’s when I realized I had rays around wormholes. They fit with
to explain it to the audience.”
Chris’s desire to have the graphics done
“
in accord with the equations of general
relativity.”
As Nolan’s productions and their
budgets have grown — “Batman Begins” cost $150 million, “The Dark
Knight” $185 million and “The Dark
Knight Rises” $250 million — those,
too, have become another set of equations to optimize, and he has said that
he writes his scripts to fit the production methods he’ll use. Nolan is clearly
cautious about the way he describes his
own relationship with “the big-budget-movie machine.” He accepted almost every one of my questions with a
thoughtful, curious attitude, only occasionally interrupting to spare me the energy of finishing a question he’d understood three words in. But the one thing
that raised some hackles was a question
about the compromises he has made en
route from “Memento” to “Interstellar.”
“I never think of it as compromise,” he
said abruptly, “but rather as register —
like the register of language.”
Movies are different, he explained,
from books or theater, because movies
are invariably first experienced as a mass
medium. “We all find films through
Hollywood. Nobody watches Godard
when they’re 10 years old.” (Though, he
later admitted, he did show his 4-yearold “2001,” but that was unusual, and
T
he success of “Insomnia” was what
gave Nolan a shot at the resurrection of Warners’ Batman franchise.
He centered his 15-minute pitch on
creating a grittier engagement with reality, one in which the Batmobile and
the body armor have a clear relationship to the commercial conversations
in the Wayne Enterprises boardroom
upstairs. Greg Silverman, president of
creative development and worldwide
production, recalls that Nolan wanted
to base Batman’s technology on real
physics and that he wanted viewers
to see Bruce Wayne doing hung-over
push-ups and recovering from bruises.
The Dark Knight - 2008
Emma felt she had to qualify it. “It’s
not only those movies they see!”) He
went on: “With books, not everybody
goes through a Stephen King phase —
I didn’t — but with movies everybody
does. In your teenage years, maybe you
turn to more challenging filmmakers
— Terrence Malick, Nicolas Roeg. But I
always work within the register of what
I would want that particular movie to
be. ‘Batman Begins,’ I never saw that as
a compromise. I just went into it asking
what I would want and expect from it as
an avid moviegoer.”
Nolan knows, however, that the
natural target of the blockbuster is the
lowest common denominator, and he’s
had to build into his filmmaking practice personal safeguards against what he
calls “chasing an audience.” In preparation for each film, he spends a week or
two bashing out a little précis, on the
same typewriter his father gave him
when he was 21. (It appears as a prop in
“Following.”) Often that précis doesn’t
even talk much about the plot; it’s supposed to represent the feeling he wants
to elicit, the texture of the fable. He
keeps it in a file and returns to it from
The Large Set of Interstellar
time to time to make sure he hasn’t lost
touch with his original idea. He also
doesn’t do traditional scored research
screenings or focus groups, choosing
instead to show his films to a handful of
people at a time as he’s editing.
Nolan prefers not to talk about
his increasingly large films as a matter
of “production scale” or budget but of
“audience scale” — communicative
ambition. Though he was making his
first Super 8 films at 7, it wasn’t until
he’d made “Following,” in his late 20s,
that he really began to understand film
as a mode of mass communication. He
toured festivals with that movie, and
it was only when he saw 400 people in
a room in communion with his film
that he understood how dependent
he was, and the film was, on their response. There are, of course, plenty of
filmmakers in the world who would
have been content to continue making
films for audiences of 400. Soderbergh
told me he would be curious to know
if Nolan ever had any desire to go back
and make a film on the scale of “Memento.” I asked Nolan that, and he replied: “Hollywood, when it functions at
its best, has a scope that’s unmatched.
In the back of my mind, that scope was
always something to aim for — never
to the exclusion of other things, just a
larger and larger canvas. At the budget
level I’m able to work at, I really try to
give the audience the most technically
compelling experience I can give, with
picture and sounds, something they haven’t seen before.”
A
week after Nolan’s investigation
at the Bow Tie, Emma dropped
him off at his postproduction studio
in Burbank. He picked up a sheaf of
the morning’s printed-out emails from
Thompson — Nolan claims not to have
an email address — and joined a few
collaborators in the screening room.
The movie appeared on a split screen,
with the original film on the left and a
digital version — for the movie theaters
that could no longer handle film and
for which they’d be fine-tuning the color — on the right.
Nolan had immediate and specific reactions to the levels. “I think you
need a little more yellow here.” “We
NOLAN
“
“The single-most important thing
was the art of working in the studio
system,” Nolan told me of his experience with “Insomnia.” “It takes time to
learn how to take notes. In the corporate structure, the people giving you
added a point of magenta to this one,
yes?” “Two points?” “Let’s just split the
difference.”
But in general, though Nolan is
frequently called a perfectionist, he
seemed perfectly happy to leave well
enough alone. In one early scene, there
was an irreconcilable sky-ground issue:
If the sky was right, the ground wasn’t.
Nolan said they should live with a blue
sky and move on. If they kept futzing
with it now, “you just end up chasing
your own tail.” Nolan makes movies
about people who chase their own tails,
but in his own life he appreciates a plot
that marches forward. When he did ask
for improvements, he presented them
not as auteurial fiat but via suggestive
metaphors, as if allotting his deputies a
roominess in how they might respond.
He wanted a little more “grubbiness” in
one sky and didn’t like the “crunchy”
contrast of some ice.
Nolan goes out looking for technical challenges that help him establish
the sorts of rules that comfort and teth-
er an audience. He prefers, for example,
to work on location rather than on set.
He says he is inspired by “the claustrophobia, the restrictions involved in
trying to make your story work in a
real location, versus the anything-goes
mentality on sets.” He does as many of
his special effects as he can in camera,
rather than in postproduction, for the
same reason; his ideal special effect is
accomplished with the old-fashioned
winches-and-belts artifice that created the zero-gravity jogging illusion in
“2001.” (Cole, his postproduction coor-
Nolan can take this to both weatherly and technical extremes. Anne Hathaway remembered that while filming
in Iceland, the set was shut down by a
windstorm on a glacier. Nolan looked
outside and said, “I don’t think it’s so
bad,” as raw chunks of asphalt were being torn off the road in front of them.
(Lest I get the impression that his sets
are anything but safe and comfortable
spaces, Hathaway immediately followed
up with a second anecdote: On the set
of “The Dark Knight Rises,” she had to
stand on a scaffolding that was going
to fall nine or 10
stories. Nolan reassured her. “It looks
Nolan reassured her. “It looks
high,” he said, “but
it doesn’t get up to a
high,” he said, “but it doesn’t
really considerable
get up to a really considerable
speed.” Hathaway
asked how he knew.
speed.” Hathaway asked how
“Well,” Nolan said,
he knew. “Well,” Nolan said, “I
“I did it myself.”)
did it myself.”
dinator, says he has worked on romantic comedies that had more effects in
postproduction than “The Dark Knight
Rises.”) When Nolan accepted the Visual Effects Society’s inaugural Visionary Award in 2011, he said: “I know
visual-effects people pride themselves
on doing the impossible. I’d just like to
encourage you to say no to the unreasonable.”
The recursive
structure of his
movies, the way
they seem to be commenting on themselves, emerges from the relationship
between the part of Nolan that wants
the science to be at least speculatively
plausible (the realist) and the part of
him that wants the adventure to be expansive and novel and absorbing (the
fantasist). There is almost always one
character who feels he must call skep-
tical attention to the stray fabulism of
another character, and in that way the
movies comment on their own fictionality. Toward the end of “Batman Begins,” Liam Neeson’s Ra’s al Ghul looks
at Christian Bale in his cape and mask
and says, with a mixture of admiration
and contempt, “You took my advice
about theatricality a bit . . . literally.”
This resounds as a commentary on the
movie’s own pageantry. The spaceship
miniatures used in “Interstellar” look
both wonderfully real and wonderfully like the sorts of miniatures used by
Kubrick or Lucas; they appear both
as what they represent (real-looking
spaceships) and what they actually are
(real-looking miniatures). These are
his small bulwarks against overly literal
subscription to the fantasy.
Nolan’s movies are often about people doing their best to get back in touch
with consensus reality — against our
tendency to be swept away by delusion
(“Inception”) or demagogy (“The Dark
Knight Rises”) — so it feels organic,
rather than gimmicky, that they would
periodically gesture toward their own
stagy conceits. Where the villains of
Gotham often seek to introduce mass
hallucination, an involuntary susceptibility to somebody else’s powerful
fiction, Bruce Wayne creates a symbol
that campaigns for voluntary belief and
action — just as Nolan does.
Nolan is known for making movies
that hold themselves open to various
interpretations, but it’s an effect that
can be created only when the director
knows, in his own mind, exactly how
he sees it. For the director’s commentary on “Memento,” Nolan recorded
three different, equally plausible interpretations of the final scene that the
DVD serves at random to viewers. But
he insists he has a full, definitive interpretation that he keeps to himself.
“The only way to be productively ambiguous,” he told me, “is that you have
to know the answer for you — but also
know why, objectively speaking. If you
do something unknowable, there’s no
NOLAN
His insistent realism extends even
to the actors’ experiences. “Interstellar”
features scenes with “2001”-style video-Skype calls back to Earth, and the
videos for the Skype calls were themselves shot in 35 millimeter. His actors
and crew relentlessly praise his pragmatism and resourcefulness. Nolan is
“a magnificent problem solver,” McConaughey wrote me via email. “It can be
the biggest action sequence in the film,”
he continued, and “everyone can think
it’s going to take two days to shoot, and
before the smoke has cleared before
lunch on the first day, he’s marching off
to the next shot.”
answer for the audience, because you
didn’t have an answer. It becomes about
ambiguity for ambiguity’s sake. There
has to be a sense of reality in the film. If
you don’t have rules, then what I’m doing would be formless. I feel better with
consistent rules.”
He looked away, then looked back.
“But you try not to be pedantic about
it.”
A
s Nolan has grown older, his sense
of his audience has changed. As
Emma put it, “Where, in the past, he
never made movies for any reason other than the fact that he wanted to see
those movies himself, now he wants to
make films he can watch with his kids.”
In our conversations, Nolan always preferred to dwell on the familial dynamics
of “Interstellar” rather than its intergalactic ones. “The story spoke to me as
a father, more than anything,” he said.
Once he heard about it, Nolan couldn’t
get it out of his head — and not because
the hard science behind the movie was
so appealing, although it was, but because of the family separation at its center as well as the way it might be affected by the rewrapping of the space-time
continuum. “Having children,” Nolan
said, “absolutely fine-tunes your sense
of time and time passing. There’s a desperate desire to hang on to moments as
your kids grow up.”
Nolan’s work is crowded with
substitute and alternate fathers, reliable men of wry composure amid the
noise and unreality. “One day I was
at my house in the country, on a Sunday morning, and the doorbell went,”
Michael Caine told me. “There was a
man standing there with a script, and I
thought it must be a messenger, and he
said, ‘My name’s Chris Nolan.’ I knew
who he was from his earlier films. He
said, ‘I’ve got a script for you.’ I was expecting something like ‘Memento’ or
‘Insomnia,’ and he said, ‘It’s called “Batman Begins.” ‘ I said, ‘Oh, that’s fantastic, what role do you want me to play?’
He said, ‘The butler.’ I said, ‘What do I
say, “Dinner is served?” ‘ He said: ‘No.
The butler is much more important
than that. After the parents have died,
he’s the foster father.’ ”
Caine told him, “I’ll read it and
have my driver bring it over tomorrow.”
But Nolan, who is notoriously secretive
about his projects, said he’d stay and
wait. “He had a cup of tea with my wife
while I read it,” Caine told me. “I said I’d
do it. Then he took the script away, and
I never saw it again.” (Nolan defends his
predilection for secrecy with the good
sense of one of his paternal figures. “We
all want to unwrap our Christmas presents early,” he told me, with a tone as
sympathetic to childlike curiosity as it
was firm in its tut-tutting advocacy of
the greater pleasures of deferral. “But
we all know we’ll be disappointed if we
do.”)
Nolan’s last three movies count
among the 100 highest-grossing films of
all time. Almost all of the other entries
on that list from the last 15 years are
movies either for children or for adults
seeking childish diversion. Though two
of Nolan’s works on that list are ostensibly about a superhero, he makes highest-common-denominator movies for
adults. In fact, if you try to set forth a
series of propositions that might define
art for grown-ups, you find that you’ve
pretty well described the moral universe of Nolan’s work. Art for grownups acknowledges the constraints of
systems and structures, while preserving some narrow but meaningful field
of autonomy for the actors trying to get
by within them. It holds these actors to
account for the decisions they make. It
gently dissipates the wishful thinking
that some powerful authority is going
to sweep in and solve our problems. It
encourages us to be wary of delusion,
on the small scale, and demagogy, on
the large one. It presumes to tell us that
we have an obligation to others, especially the old and the young and the
weak. It posits the inevitability of conflict, the incompatibility of desires, and
asks for our forbearance and good will
in the midst of our frustrations. In sum,
it represents the reality principle.
Nolan may not be a visionary, and
I’m not sure he’d want to be. Visionaries
are temperamental and driven by inner
demons. It takes a lot of time for us to
get used to the vocabulary and scenery
of their dreams. Nolan is methodical
and strategic, and his inner necessity
has taken the form of public professionalism. He did not want to talk to me
much about his personal life. This was
in part because he protects the privacy
of his family. But it was also because he
seems to see his public role itself as the
greatest possible expression of his personal commitments. We equate the auteur with the expressionist, the revealer
of the self ’s private visions. Nolan just
wants to constrict the role his own self
plays in all of it. He’s a moralist, and his
moral artistry — in the way he makes
his films, in what his films are about
and in the response he seeks to inspire
— is one of grown-up and ambitious
compromise.
“Interstellar” regrets the diminished ambitions of the space age, but it
also regrets the diminished ambitions of
the same age in cinema — the art form
that, for the moment at least, reaches
the most disparate people in the most
far-flung places. “Interstellar” is about
the recovery, in the greatest mass medium, of hope and drive and intelligence,
about the very promise of a robust, elevating middlebrow. Perhaps all Nolan
does, as one of his critics has put it, is
“invest grandeur and novelty into conventional themes.” But at interstellar
scale, that’s good enough.
x
e
l
A
t
f
f
u
l
tz
r
e
M
“Nolan’s last three movies count
among the 100 highest-grossing
films of all time”