Nolan's biggest problem?

[Andrew]

He's pretty direct and unsubtle, especially in trying to present his themes, which are not necessarily bad traits but when combined with him trying to have a Serious Realism approach and Serious Important Social Commentary the directness makes a lot feel more cartoony than realistic, even excessively cartoony, without even intending that result.

[thecolorsblend]

Batman Begins especially suffered from a lack of trust of the audience. Dialogue was sometimes overwritten ("He murdered my parents; I cannot let that pass" is awkward AF) and there were unnecessary reminders of set emotional context where none was really needed (Bruce picking up the charred stethoscope).

I'd argue Nolan grew considerably as he made more films. But TDK was the make or break moment, really. After Batman Begins, Nolan could've been less of a slave to his pseudo-realism and guided the franchise in a more stylized direction. That didn't happen... and obviously Warner Bros. isn't exactly poorer for that decision judging by the ginormous box office for TDK and TDKRises.

But the grounded, realistic thing had kind of worn out its welcome by the time credits rolled for TDKRises. I think one reason I like that movie is because it represents the end of the franchise. I'd probably be less charitable if the Nolanverse never ended.

Either way, I think there's overall more to enjoy with Nolan's Batman than there is to hate. If nothing else, the trilogy is a good reminder of how dynamic Batman can be.

[Edd Grayson]

I think Andrew's criticism is spot on.

There are certainly things I like about his films, but Nolan's Batman trilogy is probably my least favorite interpretation of the main character, especially in the sequels. That would be his biggest problem for me.

[Silver Nemesis]

Batman Begins especially suffered from a lack of trust of the audience. Dialogue was sometimes overwritten ("He murdered my parents; I cannot let that pass" is awkward AF) and there were unnecessary reminders of set emotional context where none was really needed (Bruce picking up the charred stethoscope).

I liked the touch with the stethoscope, but I agree about the dialogue. To me that signifies his lack of confidence as a director. It's almost as if he was writing a script for another filmmaker to helm and was concerned about their inability to convey the subtext visually. So he made sure it was spelled out in the dialogue. The problem with this approach is that when subtext is discussed openly it stops being subtext and becomes... text. Nolan is often praised for his writing skills, and I can see why. He's good at structure, character and theme, but his dialogue is often mannered, inorganic and too on-the-nose. That's always been his biggest weakness as a writer. It wasn't so much of a problem in his earlier R-rated films, but it's very apparent in his work from Batman Begins through to and including Interstellar.

He also struggled with action scenes for a while. Burton's never been good at action either, and I'd say this is one area where Schumacher and Snyder surpassed them both. But Batman Begins has some particularly badly shot and overedited action sequences. Nolan filmed most of the fight scenes in extreme close-up, shaking the camera and quick-cutting to create a sense of incoherent kineticism. He said he did this on purpose to make Batman appear mysterious and convey the disorientation of what it would feel like to battle multiple opponents. Ok, that explains the dock fight. But why is he still using this approach during the final one-on-one train fight between Batman and Ra's? We all know what Batman looks like at this point. It's a simple back-and-forth scrap in a narrow, well-lit environment. Why not just let us see what's happening? I suspect the answer is that he simply didn't know how to shoot and edit action at that stage in his career. He should have let a second unit director handle those sequences.

One of the things I admire about Nolan is that he generally learns from his mistakes and improves. Each of his films is more technically ambitious than the last, and you can see his evolution from one to the next. The action scenes in The Dark Knight were a big improvement over those in Batman Begins. However there were still problems with the editing during the fight and chase scenes: lack of spatial consistency, lack of left-to-right continuity between shots, inconsistent eye lines, etc. The first film of Nolan's where I think he really had a handle on the action scenes was probably Inception. The action scenes in The Dark Knight Rises displayed better photography and editing than BB or TDK, but some of the choreography was sloppy. Especially the mooks who randomly fall over without being touched.

So I'd say dialogue and action were his weakest points when he made his Batman trilogy. I also think TDKR suffered from having too much going on. The film was too ambitious and became needlessly cluttered. I also didn't like the plot twist in the final act, but I think I already wrote about that in another thread when the film first came out.

Fast forward to Dunkirk, and all of these issues have been resolved. There's no excessive expositional dialogue (in fact there's very little dialogue at all) and the action scenes are superbly shot and edited. Dunkirk is the first Nolan film since Insomnia which I think truly deserves the level of praise it's receiving. Unlike Burton – who peaked in 1994 and has been in steady decline ever since – Nolan is continually improving. With his latest film, I feel like he's reached a new peak. But back when he made the Batman trilogy, he was still learning. And the pitfalls of that learning curve are evident in the finished product. Still a solid trilogy though.

[riddler]

I felt Inception and the Dark Knight rises were so overrated I still haven't seen Interstellar and Dunkirk.

My three biggest complaints
1) his actions scenes are awful. Awfully paced, and awfully shot.
2) some people call this the "Nolan brush", it's the constant dialogue concerning the epicness of the film and how everything has a monumental impact
3) People may categorize his films as intelligent but I'd argue the opposite is true- he treats his audience as stupid and spoon feeds the plot of the movie to them.

[Azrael]

He's pretty direct and unsubtle, especially in trying to present his themes, which are not necessarily bad traits but when combined with him trying to have a Serious Realism approach and Serious Important Social Commentary the directness makes a lot feel more cartoony than realistic, even excessively cartoony, without even intending that result.

QFT. For some, Nolan's name is synonymous with pretentiousness, but the immense success of his films means he certainly does something right.

Haven't seen Dunkirk yet - by all accounts, it's his best movie.

Unlike Burton – who peaked in 1994 and has been in steady decline ever since – Nolan is continually improving.

No, I think Mars Attacks (1996) and Sleepy Hollow (1999) were still Burton at the top of his game. The first true sign of decline was the Willy Wonka movie in 2004.

[The Laughing Fish]

I felt Inception and the Dark Knight rises were so overrated I still haven't seen Interstellar and Dunkirk.

My three biggest complaints
1) his actions scenes are awful. Awfully paced, and awfully shot.
2) some people call this the "Nolan brush", it's the constant dialogue concerning the epicness of the film and how everything has a monumental impact
3) People may categorize his films as intelligent but I'd argue the opposite is true- he treats his audience as stupid and spoon feeds the plot of the movie to them.

His fight scenes are pretty terrible for the most part. They're badly choreographed and edited. But I do think his action sequences involving car chases and airplane sequences are quite decent. I do like the final nuclear chase scene in the third film as a spectacle.

The biggest problem with Nolan's films is quite simple: the writing. The DCEU may not be perfect either and they're definitely not without their own plot contrivances, but the ideas are still a hell of a lot more coherent than people care to admit. Nolan's trilogy is filled with inconsistent and incoherent characters that do things for the sake of a heavily contrived plot, the moral messages are a muddled mess and lastly, the writers don't understand the unwritten law of "show, don't tell". If the characters and messages were consistent, I could've forgiven the unbalanced approach towards realism and the dour tone.

Which makes me laugh when people rake the coals of something like MOS and BvS are raked over the coals for these issues, but blatantly fail to apply the same criteria against the Nolan films, which are even worse in comparison. But I guess life isn't meant to be fair, is it?

[Silver Nemesis]

No, I think Mars Attacks (1996) and Sleepy Hollow (1999) were still Burton at the top of his game. The first true sign of decline was the Willy Wonka movie in 2004.

I like Mars Attacks and Sleepy Hollow, but neither of them is as good as Ed Wood IMO. Ed Wood was where Burton peaked. Every film of his after that was inferior to varying degrees. I'd argue the Golden Age of Burton ran from Pee-wee's Big Adventure up to and including Sleepy Hollow. But I maintain Ed Wood was the apex.

The first film of his that I'd say was actually poor – where I don't think he was emotionally or intellectually invested in the material – was the Planet of the Apes remake. He's made a few decent films since then, such as Big Fish and Big Eyes. But most of Burton's 21st century output has been stagnantly rooted in a never-expanding comfort zone of quirky fantasy films and little else besides. He hasn't really pushed himself in years.

[Azrael]

My bad for forgetting 2001's POTA. Yes, this was the first sign of decline but more like a misstep and maybe the wrong director for the wrong movie, as 2003's Big Fish was a step forward too.

Agreed that Ed Wood is one of his very best - and pretty unique in his filmography. I think the pedestal it sits, however, has a lot to do with its subject matter, the excellent cast and performances, the fact that it's black & white.

Mars Attacks and Sleepy Hollow have some of his hallmarks (50s B-movies, quirky comedy, Hammer-inspired gothic fantasy etc) honed and perfected.