Interstellar (Christopher Nolan) *SPOILERS FROM POST 458 ONWARDS*

Bizarrely, the Guardian comment section underneath the middling review seems to be the 'everyone hates Christopher Nolan' club - reading the first page and you'd swear he's widely considered as a joke. The internet is a confusing place sometimes, and doubly so when it comes to this man's films.

quad_red wrote: »

A bit harsh on Edge of Tomorrow, I think. I'm not saying it's necessarily a brilliant film but it is a really good example of a modern blockbuster done right.

And from what I've read it was Liman who insisted on two aspects that were critical to it's success - the insistence on as much 'in camera' action as possible and the generous sprinkling of humour.

But I get your general point - allot of directors are brought in with the 'package' already well developed. They have to sell to the producers/studios that they can deliver on the package they're touting for. Even with Edge of Tomorrow, Cruise made clear in interviews that he was involved in hiring Liman for the film - he was already down to star in and produce it.

Very rare for directors to have the vision and clout to develop their films from the ground up the way Nolan and Cameron do.

I definitely wouldn't go as far as saying Doug Liman had no role in Edge of Tomorrow's success (although I thought it was a limited success: an inventive first half let down significantly by a lesser second, but that's an argument for another thread ). Those two aspects, especially the humour, are not insignificant in allowing Edge of Tomorrow become something better than average. But I also think that if you took the same script, the same cast etc... and handed it to another solid but ultimately unremarkable director (say someone like Neill Blomkamp or Matt Reeves, to pick two examples of the top of my head) you'd more than likely end up with a film that wouldn't be particularly better or worse or radically different to Liman's effort. If, purely hypothetically, you handed it to Christopher Nolan, James Cameron or even Michael Bay (we can say what we want, but the man is an 'auteur'), you would I'd expect end up with a very different film, and one that would be influenced more directly by the director. (I actually think I'm just agreeing with you there :P)

Put it this way: while Interstellar will likely give academics and critics more to consider and ponder on when looking at Christopher Nolan's wider filmography, Edge of Tomorrow doesn't really feed into our knowledge of Doug Liman's style and concerns. Sadly Hollywood is dominated by workmanlike directors (often through no fault of their own, but merely the machinations of the industry) - who might well do a very good job given the limitations they're working with, but will ultimately never transcend them. A handful of directors - I'm thinking Brad Bird and JJ Abrams - thrive within the blockbuster realm, as their aesthetics particularly suit a grand canvas. People like Christopher Nolan and Alfonso Cuaron, though, are operating on a different level altogether, which as the Little White Lies article articulates well, can be a bit disheartening, even if ultimately you're not a fan of the films themselves.