
I’m certain that Gary Oldman’s remarks to Contact Music are not the first that have been published suggesting the ending to The Dark Knight Rises isn’t included in most (or any) published scripts for The Dark Knight Rises, and like the mob bosses of yore, he will only speak of it in person to people who must know. Just so we’re on the same page (pun intended), Oldman’s comments…
“The newer people on the film go to his office to read the script. They sent mine out, but it had to be hand delivered directly to me and nobody else. And the final few pages were missing… I went along and talked to Christopher and in person about the ending. Then I locked it away in my head.”
Again, I’m fairly certain Oldman or others have said something to the same effect, and we heard more than enough rumors on even Inception that principle actors were first reading the script in a locked room on the studio lot.
What fascinates me about these rumors, is how they are constantly adding to the Christopher Nolan mystique, fueling an image that is progressively making him the most well-known film director in the world. Nolan has long been compared to one of the other most iconic directors in film history, Stanley Kubrick, and there are ridiculous and logical points to that comparison to be sure. No matter what your thoughts on how Nolan stacks up to Kubrick though, it’s absolutely true that he is being built into a larger and larger icon with every film he makes. And it it is this kind of rumor, one feeding the idea that Nolan has so much clout that he could keep the ending of one of the biggest films of all time locked away in his head, and that he’s curator of a secret so many people want that this is the only way of keeping it under wraps– that is turning him into something larger than himself.
Nolan isn’t the first to be put into this position… think back to M. Night Shyamalan around the time of Unbreakable and Signs. In the way Nolan is now often held up to Kubrick, Shyamalan was as frequently compared to Hitchcock and Spielberg. This happens in sports, commerce, technology, art… we love the idea that we’re watching a new Titan forming, even as that kind of excited build up often results in a premature collapse of the figure being spotlighted (see: Shyamalan!). The difference between Nolan and Shyamalan though, is that Nolan’s beginnings and ascent to his current level of power and clout were much more modest and slow-burning. Memento was a big deal, but not at the phenomenon scale like The Sixth Sense.
That single difference is enough to end the comparison between the two but the reason Nolan is becoming, and will likely remain, a bigger figure than Shyamalan ever was is because his injection into the public consciousness was through an already established iconic character. Batman made Nolan a billion dollar filmmaker, while original works like Memento, The Prestige (an adaptation, but heavily reinterpreted) , and of course Inception have ensured he’s respected as something bigger than that. In fact, without getting hung up on Batman for too long, I think it’s safe to say that for better or worse, earned or a result of smoke and mirrors, Nolan has separated Batman from the idea of a “superhero” movie and made it something very different in the eyes of most audiences and critics. Somehow Nolan has made it possible to make a movie about a crime-fighter in a ridiculous rubber suit and be as respected for it as a prestige director making the latest heady race drama.
The real key to Nolan’s evolution into an iconoclast of cinema, is that he has built an oeuvre thickly wrapped up in the mystery of dreams, memory, magic, secret identities, and even storytelling itself. Unlike Shyamalan, whose (unfulfillable) promise was being an excellent storyteller that would always be able to getcha! at the end, Nolan has made mystery his core aesthetic but without any constraints or pressure of twist endings. Consider that while Memento may have a “twist ending,” it’s overshadowed entirely by the unique structure of the film. The Prestige certainly has a twist ending, but (and this is drawing a line in the sand that not everyone will get behind) it is a twist so built into the structure and meta-narrative of the film itself that it owns it in a very unique way, and is further overshadowed by the magic and storytelling (and David Bowie). But even if we consider The Prestige a twist-film, it’s obvious that The Dark Knight and Inception were not phenomenons because of their endings. And Inception, like Memento or The Matrix before it, is a film that is intriguing because it adds new layers of structure to the world we can already see around us, which pokes as at that reptilian part of our brains that is always hoping for another layer or a higher order to our visible world. It shouldn’t be too shocking to consider that Nolan is making films that manage to excite us in the very same subliminal, core manner that religion excites people, and he’s wrapping it all up in entertaining superhero and heist stories. Other throwaway periphery elements, like Zimmer’s increasing ability to score Nolan flicks in such a way that they sound like the most important stories ever told, are only icing on the public consciousness cake.*
So it would seem Nolan’s instincts are to make films that toy with the nature of storytelling itself and to weave that self-reflection into stories about dreams and memories and magic. Even when he’s serving a more commercial master though, he’s turning an iconic villain into a supernatural force that, by design, is able to accomplish impossible, illogical things to create grand spectacles. Does it not feel like the Joker is using Gotham, and the people and places he chooses to blow up, to tell some insane city-scale story? Batman may be an earnest hero in the Nolan universe, but his key villain is explicitly writing a mythos for the two and takes glee in explaining to the Dark Knight (and us) that he’s establishing a bedrock for a lifetime of struggling between chaos and order, as represented by himself and another wacko in a Halloween outfit.
This brings us back around to the real world part of Nolan’s image: the quiet, brooding genius who weaves amazing stories for the cinéastes, and legitimizes comic book characters for the geeks. By virtue of making one of the most anticipated sequels of all time, he holds the keys to secrets that millions of people want to know. Consider that this real-world fact sits directly adjacent to the subject matter of his last film, which is about the high-concept dream-based theft of individual ideas locked in people’s mind. Further compounding this is our ever changing media landscape that has turned simple anticipation for a film into a perpetual landslide of tweets, Facebook posts, blogs, etc. Nolan is now the center of rumor after rumor about his genius and his methods, including actors like Joseph Gordon-Levitt assuring us that we should “trust in Nolan just because ” (I’m paraphrasing), and Oldman telling us that the ending to the film simply does not exist outside of his mind until such time as he decides to make it corporeal. You’ll also hear people speak of his refusal to use a cell-phone, and that he communicates only through assistants that insulate him from distractions. And while he’s not a total publicity-refusing recluse like The Wachowskis, his interviews are usually pretty nebulous, and he can play coy with the best of them. All of this to say: he’s just accessible enough not to turn off those adverse to pretension, without losing his mysterious aura.
Just by the sheer numbers game, one expects Nolan’s name will eventually be attached to a piece of shit (Man of Steel?), but it’s quite possible he’s already gotten big enough to weather that kind of thing without losing his status in the cultural consciousness. But unlike Spielberg –who made a string of classics filled with unassailable filmmaking– or Kubrick –who made films that were so literary and logically structured that they hold up to insane scrutiny– it’s disingenuous to say Nolan has yet reached a mastery of filmmaking craft, certainly not to the degree that puts him on the level of those two. His “brand” and reputation have quickly become as powerful, but the classic, unimpeachable set of films have not yet manifested. Just recently a shit-storm erupted on the internet when Jim Emerson published an extensive video breakdown of how sloppy (from his perspective) Nolan’s filmmaking can often be, and filmmaker and music video director Joseph Kahn responded with an equally passionate rebuttal. I’m not going to comment on either side of the argument here, but it’s safe to say that only the work of a highly visible and idolized filmmaker typically begets such scrutiny and defense.
We’re still many months away from a key moment in Nolan’s career, at which point the populist franchise he’s overseen will culminate with a bang or a bust. “In Nolan We Trust” is the meme– a popular sentiment from people that are crossing their fingers for a spectacular conclusion to an imperfect, but truly unforgettable blockbuster franchise. I think it may very well make or break the Nolan myth, and either set him up as the “well, The Dark Knight was amazing, but man they fucked up the ending” guy or as “Christopher Nolan, enough said.” The parallel here is obvious… will the top continue spinning as he blows it and the whole dream of Nolan The Filmmaker collapses around us? Or will it spin itself out as the franchise sticks the landing, letting us know that Nolan truly is the real thing…
Respond on twitter here.
Discuss on the boards here.
Comment below.

*Apologies for not fitting Insomnia into the picture, but I’ve somehow still not managed to see it!
For more excellent discussion of Christopher Nolan’s filmography, look no further than this episode of the Director’s Club podcast, co-hosted by CHUD contributor Patrick Ripoll.
(Oldman quote via i09)









With this article, Renn has become the new Devin.
Shit. As soon as I hit submit I felt bad. Sorry, Renn.
Renn’s not a raging asshole. Big difference…
Renn seems like a decent guy, who doesn’t bait fanboys for negative responsses. He is not the new Devin….
No way. Renn’s take on this issue was exploratory. If Devin* had written this piece it would have been a barely veiled pre-emptive told-you-so with a begrudging admission that Nolan could be the ‘real deal’ tacked on solely to cover his ass.
Good article.
*whom I loved, full disclosure.
Huh? Is Renn looking for a publisher to write ‘Christopher Nolan: The Man, The Myth, The Enigma’??
The difference being that Devin didn’t like Batman Begins all that much for his own misguided reasons. I am however, surprised you haven’t seen Insomnia, easily my favorite Nolan film and the one that rewards the most on repeat viewings.
See, i love this. This is what i want more of. I could skip the daily updates of who is cast in what for more pieces like this. Of course i am the guy who spent his morning listening to the Refn/Del Toro filmmaking discussion and could leave it on repeat.
Great work, Renn.
Nolan is so interesting to me. I really enjoy his films and think he is a great filmmaker. And, I love Inception. But, there is just something there that is holding me back from putting him in the pantheon with Kubrick or Hitchcock.
And i just don’t believe the ending to The Dark Knight Rises isn’t written down somewhere. I am sure his 1st AD has it as does the Line Producer/UPM, otherwise you can’t schedule or budget for it. That is just practical filmmaking. But I can see why he would keep it from most and especially the actors (look at the scripts the Twilight cast have dropped or the Samuel L. Jackson Avengers’ script debacle).
Good article.
Since people love to pick internet writers apart for misspellings and bad grammar (deservedly so, imho) I would like to commend Renn for saying ‘ensure’ instead of ‘insure’. There should be a CHUD style sheet, that points out the diff. between ‘allusion’, ‘illusion’ and ‘elusion’ too.
The Newsweek cover was great for a chuckle, but is Fincher off the map? I know you couldn’t shoehorn in shout-outs to everybody’s particular, favorite directors, but aren’t Fincher and Nolan kind of in the same ballpark? Just a notion.
Don’t forget punctuation.
The dilemma is that we learn to write, spell, and punctuate for the most part by reading, and when much of this reading is of internet content that is poorly written it “rubs off” on the reader, whether he or she knows how to write properly in the first place. The problem is self-perpetuating.
Unfortunately I can see no solution to keep the written English language from degrading permanently other than correcting it on the spot, vocally, and with great conviction.
Luckily in Mr. Brown’s case the content almost always exceeds the characters.
Nolan is as talented a filmmaker as modern cinema has to offer. But his name shouldn’t be whispered in the same breath as Kubrick’s. Nolan is a master story-teller but has yet to create a film as visually arresting as almost any Kubrick film. Inception comes close but borrowed heavily from The Matrix. In terms of blending story and action, I don’t think he’s even in the same league as Tarantino. Compare any fight sequence in either Batman flick with any fight sequence in either Kill Bill and try to deny it. That said, I’ve plunked down my $ on opening weekend for just about all of his flicks.
Slaps at Renn’s crotch with a rolled up magazine – Down Boy!!
Kidding. Good work sir. Yeah, go check out Insomnia – would like to see a review in light of what you’re driving at here. Check out Following too if you can find it.
I caught FOLLOWING when it was (still is?) on Instant Watch and did enjoy it. You can definitely see the DNA of Nolan’s work flowing in it. Too small and patchwork of an early effort to bring up and extend an overly long piece though.
Speaking of Following (an interesting experiment), wasn’t Criterion supposed to be in Blu-Ray discussions with Nolan about it?
What happened there?
Personally I feel Nolan is overrated. Don’t get me wrong, I adore him…I loved Memento, but he hasn’t made anything on that level since and the Kubrick comparisons are laughable.
Batman gave him a deceptive image as this super filmmaker extraordinaire, launching him into the league of Kubrick/Lean, etc…notice how he only gained this mythic status after the billion dollar gross of The Dark Knight. I feel it’s mostly hype in his case and a dangerous precedent being set. Rises will likely not make a billion dollars and probably be seen as somewhat (or a huge) disappointing to those who felt TDK was the second coming of Christ (I’m not one of them). The press is what usually drives these spikes in popularity with filmmakers and it rarely has anything to do with any real world value. Nolan is like Kubrick to those who have maybe seen one or two Kubrick films (EW and other entertainment magazine readers) or none at all.
To me Nolan, while very talented, is too cerebral for his own good…Inception was good, but he can barely shoot a decent action sequence. The embarrassing snow level being the most glaring example. He’s a great ideas man, great at casting, his scripting is decent, but nothing amazing…he’s a bit clueless with the visuals. I think his DP has more to do with the beautiful imagery than Nolan…Nolan shot his first film “Following” himself and it looks almost nothing like his later films…it’s the concept and ideas that really made it stand out…same with Memento. And since films are a visual medium FIRST AND FOREMOST, you cannot be even remotely compared to someone like Kubrick without the virtuoso visual talent he displayed.
The Nolan hype really does bother me because I feel it’s unearned and a huge indicator of our short term memory instant gratification culture…Insomnia, The Prestige and Batman Begins are all decent enough films, but do they compare with Dr. Strangelove? Clockwork Orange? Lawrence of Arabia? Notorious? Psycho? Vertigo? Memento was a step in the right direction, but honestly, he hasn’t made anything on that level of genius since.
I hate arguments like these. You seem to have deliberately picked his three ‘lesser’ films in Insomnia, The Prestige and Batman Begins, ahead of his three most acclaimed: TDK, Memento and Inception – and then compared the ‘lesser’ three with a collection of some of the greatest films ever made, by a selection of great film-makers. Talk about weighting your argument.
It’s also unfair, not to mention impossible to put these films into the context of film history as they are simply too recent. Hitchcock, Lean, Kubrick et al have made films that still stand up today and can be judged accordingly. I for one believe Nolan has too (particularly with Inception & Memento) but only time will tell.
Another point is that his DOP is almost certainly responsible for a lot of his beautiful imagery. That being the DOP’s job and all. Another important part of being a great Director – bringing in people who will make your work better. The cast & crew are essential ingredients and the great Directors work with these people, not alone, in creating their finest works.
One thing is for sure. Most Directors working today would give their right arm to have Nolan’s back-catalogue. I should clarify in particular that the ‘lesser’ films are only referred to as such in the context of his own body of work; that is, I don’t believe these three hit the heights of Memento, TDK or Inception, well crafted though they are.
“You seem to have deliberately picked his three ‘lesser’ films in Insomnia, The Prestige and Batman Begins, ahead of his three most acclaimed: TDK, Memento and Inception – and then compared the ‘lesser’ three with a collection of some of the greatest films ever made, by a selection of great film-makers. ”
I wouldn’t even compare Nolan’s better films with the greatest films ever made.
“It’s also unfair, not to mention impossible to put these films into the context of film history as they are simply too recent. Hitchcock, Lean, Kubrick et al have made films that still stand up today and can be judged accordingly. I for one believe Nolan has too (particularly with Inception & Memento) but only time will tell.”
Of course it’s unfair, but I made the comparison because that’s what fanboys and the press have been doing. In their minds he’s alread a “Kubrick”.
“Another point is that his DOP is almost certainly responsible for a lot of his beautiful imagery. That being the DOP’s job and all. ”
Well that’s my point. Kubrick for the most part was his own DP. Even though he hired DPs, he basically shot all of his films, showing him to be a master visualist. I think Nolan relies heavily on Wally Pfister and I used his first film as a contrast to this reliance. To me this is just another point that removes him from “Kubrick” status as so many have given him.
Maybe I’ve missed it, but who is setting Nolan up as the next Kubrick? I have to admit I haven’t seen that anywhere, nor would I agree with it.
With this article Renn really comes into his own. A great commentary on Nolan’s image to date.
Yeah Renn, way to go. This is some damn good writing and a good examination of something that’s really simmering in the film fandom consciousness right now. Nice one. More like this!
Re-watching Jean Cocteau’s ORPHEUS on Blu brings into sharp focus the “mastery” of Nolan. Nothing against the guy – I enjoyed INCEPTION quite a bit – but if one wants to see what a true master can do with the concepts of dreams, magic and the creative process a dip into history (Murneau, Feuillade, Bunuel) raises the bar to “mastery” high enough that our Batman friend can merely glimpse it.
MEMENTO was good, goofy fun but let’s not get hoodwinked by pundits. There is no profundity there – merely a hodgepodge of Jungian theory and concepts strung together to fuel a revenge picture.
It’s not that the man doesn’t know how to articulate (THE DARK KNIGHT is damming evidence that the man can expertly obfuscate even the most idiotic plot holes from a lot of people who really aught to know better.) It’s that he doesn’t have anything of real substance to say . . . which is precisely why he needs all the clever artifice he can conjure. And a screenwriter.
There is no such thing as “more commercial” and “less commercial” Nolan. It’s all the same bag of magic tricks with, at the end, a pile of discarted top hats.
It’s funny that Itsjasonatrent complimented Renn for his writing skills.
Me, I kept wondering if Renn knows the difference between “iconoclast” and “iconic”
One word refers to him breaking down the stigma of superhero films to the point that his was widely hailed as an easy Best Picture nominee, the exclusion of which is widely credited for (at least briefly) inciting the Academy to change its rules. It refers to him being another example of the brooding genius type being credited (fairly or not) for merging prestige cinema with genre cinema again in a way Hitchcock and Kubrick did.
The other refers to every other point made.
A genuine “thanks” for reading. Hope the other 1699 words contained something you enjoyed.
I know the difference – one’s a noun and one’s an adjective. What do I win?
Nah, I thoroughly enjoyed the full 1700 words. Very interesting article.
Really fantastic article, Renn. I love longer pieces like this.
That’s a genius way of looking at the Joker’s role in The Dark Knight, as well. I enjoyed the movie well enough back when it came out, but haven’t revisited it since. Think I will now.
Renn, I’ve been going to this site for a while now. Years. Quite a few articles and reviews I enjoy here on CHUD are mostly written by you. One in particular was an interview with an (ape?) scientist that I really appreciated. This Nolan article got me off my ass to create an account to say thanks. It was a great read. Keep up the good writing.