The Films of Christopher Nolan: Following

         The first film in my comprehensive analysis of The Films of Christopher Nolan is the independent neo-noir (soon to be) classic Following.  Nolan's first film is the epitome of independent cinema. With a budget of less than $0, this film was shot around London (without permits) in the homes of the cast and crew. The principle photography took over a year to shoot because they could only shoot for several hours on the weekends. Despite the films modest beginnings, it is a wonderful window into Nolan's potential as a filmmaker and a storyteller. Even if he is, in this film at least, a little rough around the edges.
          Following's plot revolves around Bill (Jeremy Theobald), an impoverished, down on his luck writer with a penchant for stalking and voyeurism.  He is fascinated with people and decides to start following those that he sees in public.  He does not talk to them he just "wants to see where they go." This seemingly innocent, (albeit creepy) pastime satisfies Bill for a while; until he meets a burglar named Cobb (Alex Haw).  A person for whom Bill breaks his cardinal rule: never follow the same person twice.  If I describe any more of the plot it would do the film a disservice.  What follows though is a noir thriller with plot twists and reveals that upon multiple viewings, changes the film's plot and character motivations.
       If I could sum up this film in a single word, it would be potential.  Even in this, his first feature length film, Nolan proves that he is a master craftsman. We get a glimpse of a film style and structure that would become synonymous with the director's name.  One such stylistic "Nolan technique" used here is the non-linear story structure.  Not suitable for all films (I am looking at you Man of Steel), the non linear structure, when done right, enhances the experience of the film.  In Following,  the non-linear structure turns what would have been a predictable thriller into a complex web of deceit and double crosses.  Jumping forward and back effortlessly, the film keeps the audience guessing regarding character motivations and conversational context.  In the director's commentary for this film (one of the few Nolan has ever done) Nolan explains his affinity for this type of storytelling " I want to create films in which, upon repeat viewings, the audience gets a different experience.". This is especially true of Following, in which Nolan repeats a number of different images including similar shots of characters throughout the film. However, because he uses alternate takes, these same images still seem fresh. 
      While Nolan's more recent films have been epic in scale (not only in production size but in length: The Dark Knight Rises clocked in at whopping 165 min) Following is tight and economical.  With a run time of just over 70 min, the script and finished film has no wasted scenes, and the dialogue is meaningful and crisp (the blessing of a low budget independent film).  Because of the economical tone, a lot of the story takes place off camera.  We, as the audience, are only privy to the scenes of utmost importance and still we feel a connection to these characters.  This tone continued in the lighting with Nolan choosing to shoot in black and white (to maintain the Noir feel), and to only use natural lighting.  It was this type of Guerrilla-style filmmaking that made Nolan a hot up and comer among Hollywood's Indie elite.
    The film's inception came out of Nolan's sociological curiosity.  As he would watch people in crowds  he would wonder about their lives: where they were going, what they were doing etc. It is this conceptual framework (the basis of the script) that lends Following to be mined for rich sociological analysis.  The protagonist, Bill, at the beginning of the film has the type of social curiosity that sociologist Peter Berger said is a necessary requirement for a anyone studying Sociology.  Yet, that curiosity can not be easily satisfied, an individual must look deeper, and be critical of the information that they receive.  A drive that leads Bill into Cobb's web.
     In the film, Cobb's motivation for being a burglar is heavy with social commentary to the point of almost waxing poetic. Explaining this to Bill, Cobb mentions "that you can tell a lot about someone by the stuff they have." This comment echoes the work of  Classical Social Theorists Thorstein Veblen (Conspicuous Consumption) and Karl Marx (Commodity Fetishism). Veblen and Marx, (in two different approaches) identify the way an individual's social and self identity is wrapped up in material goods. These material goods become the a primary way we represent/present our power and status in society.  Through the acquisition of "stuff", we create and maintain a self image that we present to those around us.  As an example: a person who wears designer clothes to give off the impression that they are wealthy, even though they bought the clothes 1/2 off at a swap meet, or thrift store.  This commodified identity is exacerbated by marketing which manufactures emotional connections to physical objects among consumers resulting in the rapid increase of the storage industry and creating a culture of hoarders.   In Following, Cobb alludes to this idea. He states: "I take their stuff away, to show them what they had...All of a sudden, they have to go through all of the stuff they lost and REALLY think about what its worth, and whether or not they need it."  The film also drives home the point that everyone, has physical keepsakes that represent who we are, mementos that say something about us beyond any words can describe.  This is quintessential social theorizing of identity creation and maintenance, and I marvel at how seamlessly it fits into the narrative Nolan creates.
   This is by far Nolan's most underrated film to date.  It being his first film, it has no star power or directorial clout.  Irregardless, the film stands on its own, as a  gritty and complex thriller with a dash of social commentary.  While many look to Memento as the film that made Christopher Nolan a star on the rise, Following is the ladder that started the ascension, and should not be over looked.

The Pull of 'Gravity': a Movie Review

         I love the fall; cooler temps, seasonal changes (leaves, migration etc.), pumpkin...everything.  But most of all, in the fall we start to get well crafted, thought provoking cinema again.  This is the time when the bipolar nature of Hollywood transitions from its manic phase of the current Hollywood blockbuster (The Wolverine not withstanding), in which it attempts to tirelessly chase after box office gold (the current benchmark of box office success is now a billion dollars). Hollywood's depressive phase is often cynically referred to as "Oscar bait"(due to the majority of  award winning films being released towards the end of the year, right before awards season). Alfanso Cuaron's Gravity will, I'm sure, win its fair share of awards this season.  But it will be for the film's tense and gripping story line, marvelous technical proficiency, brilliant direction, performances, the philosophical themes, and homages to Stanley Kubrick.
        Gravity is the story of an ill-fated mission to repair the Hubble telescope.  This is not a spoiler considering the marketing for the film shows you the tragic event.  One question that I had going into this film is where this sequence took place.  It was so dramatic that one may assume that this was the climax of the film, and that the resolution would be the remaining crew finding a way back to earth. It isn't. That is how the film opens.  For the next 90 min, the audience is treated to one the most tense, emotionally gripping and arresting cinematic experiences in recent decades.  Once the film takes hold it doesn't let go.  The intensity mounts as the film progresses, never really letting the audience breathe.
        This film makes me want to be a film student; in only that I wish I could have the language and expertise to accurately and effectively communicate just how technically brilliant, and beautifully shot this film is.  Cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki and visual effects supervisor Tim Webber recreate space with terrifying accuracy.  I would recommend that anyone who is even remotely interested in this film, to check out the trivia section on Gravity's IMDB page (link above) for just how technically difficult this film was to shoot and some of the solutions to near impossible problems that the filmmakers came up with.  One thing that struck me the most was the difficulty in matching the lighting to the actors (considering that in space the light you are getting is either from the earth or the sun).  I can not wait to learn more about this film and, in turn, learn how much this film changed how films are made.
       I became aware of Alfonso Cuaron as a director with his intricate sci-fi dystopia Children of Men.    But, Gravity has made him a writer/director of another class. At a time when film audiences have been desensitized by epic space battles, space exploration and colonization with little or no consequences; Gravity, in its opening crawl, reminds us of drastic temperature changes in space, its silence, and no air pressure.  The film very directly states: "life in space is impossible".  In that one sentence, Cuaron makes space scary again.  His storytelling in this film pushes the audience's limits of tension and suspense.  Just when you think you can't take any more, Cuaron pushes us just a little bit further (the last tense sequence was almost too much, even for me).  This smartly makes the audience cling to the minimal relief the film gives, just as the characters cling to life.
      Sandra Bullock needs at least an Oscar Nomination for her performance in this film.  While I have yet to make up my mind on whether or not she deserves to win, the way her portrayal of Dr. Ryan Stone connects with the audience (at times we are literally seeing space through her eyes) is one of the most important aspects of the film.  Without this essential humanizing, the film does not work on an emotional level.  In preparation for doing most, if not all, of the emotional "heavy lifting" Sandra Bullock trained for 6 months while the film's pre-production was in its final stages and even had a conversation with current astronauts about life in space. If she does end up winning, I believe it will be far more deserved than her win for her role in The Blind Side. A film and role that recreates tired racial stereotypes and operates under the "white savior trope."
     Director Christopher Nolan has stated that "in a film, when you leave earth, the parallels to Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey are unavoidable." Gravity is a love letter to Kubrick. From slow rotating fetal positions, spinning pens, and evolution sequences there are many tasteful homages to the space classic.  In fact, the themes of survival, death and rebirth are very heavy with each shot composition, but woven seamlessly that we, as the audience don't think about them until well after the movie ends. While, Gravity pays close tribute to Kubrick, and his themes, piecing them together in sublime sequence; Gravity falls short of reinventing them.  In those moments, I was thinking about Kubrick, not about Cuaron, or his film. That being said, I really enjoyed this film, and it deserves all of the praise/accolades it gets.  It is, so far the greatest space film since 2001: A Space Odyssey (even if it doesn't surpass it)....that is, until Nolan's Interstellar.