Remarkable that Christopher Nolan readily admits that he's not even composing the IMAX frame—or even blocking.He's the anti-Spielberg/anti-Kubrick in that sense—though people compare them all the time. No right way to direct films—but lack of interest in mise-en-scène is unusual.

There is no lack of interest. Just a différent approach, closer to Malick, Visconti or Lean. It's all about capturing the feel, the scale and the reality of what is being filmed, almost like a stylized documentary. There's also a bit of that in Cameron, Greengrass or Aronofsky.

You think Visconti had no interest in mise en scene?

I'm stating the exact opposite.

He talks about blocking for almost the entire clip

He says nor admits no such thing. Do you even know what these terms you're using mean?

He's literally outlining his (quite precise) blocking philosophy and how the periphery is used with intention for larger formats. Is your post out of a lack of comprehension or just malice?

Wild take. He composes the frame, my guy. It's called preproduction. 🤣

This is absolutely not what I got from his comments.

wow has this guy even made a movie ever? surely everyone involved has no idea what they're doing

He uses a modified Pentax 67 to compose/scout some interesting shots for the IMAX, so yes he definitely considers how much of the scene will be inside the full frame.

I'm sorry to say but that's not what Nolan is saying here. Please rewatch and actually listen to that interview segment again. Pay particular attention to what he says about protecting the 2.40 scope image.

This post is very misleading of what Nolan's saying. He's actually talking about blocking and the feeling he's looking composing images. What's he's saying is that he's not thinking specifically on IMAX 1:90 composition, but on the center framing 2:35 one.

He’s largely just saying nonsense. He doesn’t put much thought into blocking or staging to communicate things in longer or more complicated shots and just shoots one thing at a time. Doesn’t make his films bad but he doesn’t need to act like it’s some complicated thing he’s doing

i remain firmly in the camp of this whole thing is ridiculous and an affront to the art of cinema. at the end of the day the truth is that 90% or more of moviegoers are basically seeing half of the image. it's messed up.

He cares about the Mise-en-scène. When he talks about framing he’s alluding to the majority of the IMAX frame is mostly meant for your peripherals and the actual frame is the 2.35:1 within it and the action guides your eyes.

Does anyone remember the Nolan naysayers. No. Does everyone remember the Christopher Nolan films. Yes.

He’s anti-form.

Exhibit A 🫴🏽

from one of the greatest cinematographers of all time, Roger Deakins: "It's less about how you frame or compose the image and more about considering the viewers point of view"

His mis-en-scene constitutes itself in the placement of his characters. He's a didactic storyteller who treats his characters as objects.

That's... literally not what he's saying, lol.

You just lack any understanding of words, mate you don’t have to be Einstein to figure out what he does and means. He knows that the IMAX camera can give you an unusual feel due to its advancement, he uses that instead of focusing on the frame itself. Not that hard to comprehend.

He… never says that?

figure it has to do, in part, with crafting an entire world around the actors so shot-by-shot mise-en-scene isn't much a requirement. documentary filmmaking type ish.

He thinks that he can bypass immersion through the usual artistic avenues (something that speaks to the heart and allows us to suspend disbelief) by just making the screen really damn big. He's a technician who will never make a great film.

Remarkable that he could not handle a big budget historic epic and except the woke ridiculous cast he was obviously forced to do, he gave poor image, lack of timing, no personal vision, lack of any style. He signed a AI film and probably he shall be replaced soon by AI.

That's not what he said at all what the fuck are you talking about

Because he is a generational director that’s why they compare them. To say he doesn’t compose shots is asinine. He is associated with Scale. That’s his differentiator. Spielberg’s grasp of storytelling and camera movement has almost nothing to do with Kubricks lack of camera movement and interest in the more psychological focus.

What is he saying in this clip? Can you tell what is he saying?

Nolan always sounds like the most boring midwit when he speaks. He never says anything inspiring or interesting. So strange.

Did you actually listen?

I think this is one of the worst statements a director has ever made. an enormous insult to the very grammar of cinema

Kubrick framed for multiple aspect ratios for his last three movies. 1.85 for US theaters 1.66 for UK cinemas 1.33 for home release

Watch the trailer. Virtually every shot is composed to be compatible with tik-tokian vertical viewing on a cellphone.

Not for a sloppy filmmaker like Nolan .

Probably why he shots so fast