Estás usando un navegador desactualizado. Es posible que no muestre este u otros sitios web correctamente. Deberías actualizar o usar un navegador alternativo.
Nolan's The Odyssey - Potentially could be epic or an epic flop.
Again, the entire point of the Odyssey is not the fuck with the gods. Odysseus's journey only happens and continues to get worse because he pissed off the gods (specifically Poseidon).
He is then saved by the gods who favor him (Athena) and grant him boons to survive the various trials and tribulations, ultimately receiving the same divine protection as the Phaeacians when he manages to make it to them and escaping Poseidon's curse.
I am still surprised that Nolan chose The Odyssey as the poem to adapt. The Iliad had warrior women and blacks in it. Wouldn't that be better to bring to screen if you want a woke adaptation without having fans complain?
It's a stealth work around for Nolan to finally make his Troy film he was denied early in hus career. Nolan was supposed to have directed the Brad Pitt Troy film, but the guy whi was supposed to make Batman Begins threw a tantrum over being made to work that film, so Nolan was forced off of Troy and made to make Capeshit while the other guy made Troy.
Maybe he didn't want a comparison to Brana's and Pitt's Troy movie.
Which was pretty solid all round movie that did well at the box office and got good reviews.
I mean, I liked Troy. Aside from Agamemnon being a bit too much of a cartoon style villain I thoight it was rather well done.
Also just because its a Christopher Nolan movie doesn't automatically mean box office success. Tenet bombed pretty hard after all. His built in audience isn't that large really. The movie still needs to appeal to the masses to get people in those seats.
Tenet flopped but everyone ignored it because of Covid and WB putting it out same day on streaming. As such, there is the idea that some people who think Nolan has gotten too big for his britches, will finally have his big wit Odessy
It's a stealth work around for Nolan to finally make his Troy film he was denied early in hus career. Nolan was supposed to have directed the Brad Pitt Troy film, but the guy whi was supposed to make Batman Begins threw a tantrum over being made to work that film, so Nolan was forced off of Troy and made to make Capeshit while the other guy made Troy.
Considering how well regarded the Dark Knight Trilogy is, that was not a tantrum worth having. I wonder if that guy suffers from CTE considering the success. I know I would hit my head on the wall if that were to happen with me. Also, JUST MAKE TROY FOR FUCKS SAKE! He has the good graces to do what he wants! WTF?
Considering how well regarded the Dark Knight Trilogy is, that was not a tantrum worth having. I wonder if that guy suffers from CTE considering the success. I know I would hit my head on the wall if that were to happen with me. Also, JUST MAKE TROY FOR FUCKS SAKE! He has the good graces to do what he wants! WTF?
I'm of the opinion that Nolan thinks capeshit is dumb and not high art. His Batman movies are movies that are embarrassed to be Batman movies which is why they're aggressively realistic and they fail to capture the campy weirdness of superhero media. His Joker is Victor Zsasz because a comical, over-the-top clown using gimmicks isn't realistic. His Bane is just a big dude with asthma instead of a roid-ed up Spanish wrestler. His Scarecrow doesn't always wear his mask. Ra's Al Ghul is Liam Neeson in black clothes, not an immortal going progressively more insane. The Batmobile is an armored car with no motif. All his movies are what a first year Philosophy student would think is interesting given $100 million to fulfill and their profundity only goes as far as that.
It's not just a Nolan problem. I read earlier that the new Hagrid actor said he's based his performance on Michael Clarke Duncan's for The Green Mile.
Like, why? Why would they do that? Why? I just don't get it. Why not just do what the og source says? "Oh, right, I'm gonna play the very much documented historical character Marie Antoinette... but my performance is inspired by Lizzo!" WHY?!
I'm of the opinion that Nolan thinks capeshit is dumb and not high art. His Batman movies are movies that are embarrassed to be Batman movies which is why they're aggressively realistic and they fail to capture the campy weirdness of superhero media. His Joker is Victor Zsasz because a comical, over-the-top clown using gimmicks isn't realistic. His Bane is just a big dude with asthma instead of a roid-ed up Spanish wrestler. His Scarecrow doesn't always wear his mask. Ra's Al Ghul is Liam Neeson in black clothes, not an immortal going progressively more insane. The Batmobile is an armored car with no motif. All his movies are what a first year Philosophy student would think is interesting given $100 million to fulfill and their profundity only goes as far as that.
It fits Batman to have a take with a more grounded look. If he did that with a less grounded superhero, then that would be different. I think he bought his own hype as the "realistic guy" and is trying to work it in where it doesn't fit.
As I tend to bring out the dead horse at times like this, Ghostbusters 2016 flopped, I think, a lot because it seemed like the controversy around it was more, if not interesting, than investing than the movie itself. It's going to have been talked to death and by the time it comes out, no one will want to see it because they're already sick of it, and they won't have even cared about the story because all the meta surrounding it indicates that the story was never the important thing.
I'd ask why Hollywood refuses to learn, but I know I have the answer.
The Variety (and Deadline) article is fairly evasive but it looks like this is an attempt to cash in on the Nolan film as opposed to something directly linked to it. The corporation behind it is ElevenLabs. They licensed Caine's voice and likeness last year apparently generally (not just for this) and Caine is one of twenty from their "voice library" for this 13 hour abomination. Matthew McConaughey is one of the investors so expect it to be shite.
They pulled the same stunt last year using Judy Garland's AI voice to narrate the Wizard of Oz releasing it the day the second Wicked film released. Apparently no one noticed which might explain this little flurry of PR. The Variety and Deadline articles read like adverts.
I could not identify what text they are using. All else being equal, I'd expect the Emily Wilson travesty but with these fuckers, if an older translation has entered public domain and can be used without payment, I could see them doing that.
So it looks like it will be the sloppiest of slop but nothing to do with Nolan.
As I tend to bring out the dead horse at times like this, Ghostbusters 2016 flopped, I think, a lot because it seemed like the controversy around it was more, if not interesting, than investing than the movie itself. It's going to have been talked to death and by the time it comes out, no one will want to see it because they're already sick of it, and they won't have even cared about the story because all the meta surrounding it indicates that the story was never the important thing.
I'd ask why Hollywood refuses to learn, but I know I have the answer.
I think we are looking at a Last Jedi situation here where this movie will make money but it will be Nolan's next movie that pays the price at the box office as once people start watching this at home and away from the hype they will start to see how bad it is and Nolan will no longer be a review proof director.
They expect that the people defending movies like this will massively go to see them. Some people did, but it wasn't enough to make it a success. After some time, I watched the movie and, ridiculous as it was, it definitely ain't as bad as you could expect. I just think that they didn't take it seriously and tried to make a comedy without understanding the type of humor of the original film.
Something like this is gonna happen with Supergirl. You have the actress saying that the fans are to blame and they're toxic, without realizing that the majority of comic fans are men and they won't watch a movie with a main lead insulting them.
Something like this is gonna happen with Supergirl. You have the actress saying that the fans are to blame and they're toxic, without realizing that the majority of comic fans are men and they won't watch a movie with a main lead insulting them.
I think we are looking at a Last Jedi situation here where this movie will make money but it will be Nolan's next movie that pays the price at the box office as once people start watching this at home and away from the hype they will start to see how bad it is and Nolan will no longer be a review proof director.
Sheer cope. The movie will be great. No one outside of a very small circle of people give a shit about the source material or the wrong costumes or any of that gay shit
Sheer cope. The movie will be great. No one outside of a very small circle of people give a shit about the source material or the wrong costumes or any of that gay shit
Sheer cope. The movie will be great. No one outside of a very small circle of people give a shit about the source material or the wrong costumes or any of that gay shit
Are we sure? Snow White flopped and Disney LAs don't do bad. People all over the world memed the actress hard for being unattractive and annoyingly woke. And nobody liked her or the movie after all the shenanigans involved.
The same is happening with the Odyssey and this movie ain't even for kids. There is a chance people will watch it because it's a Nolan film (do normies even care for that kind of thing?), but it has equal chances to flop after people are mocking it for a black Helen and Ellen being Achilles.
