Read on Twitter
Nolan& #39;s defence of his sound mixing is a bit much. He thinks audiences don& #39;t care about dialogue as long as they get the gist, and that& #39;d be fine if the dialogue wasn& #39;t framed as vitally important. The audience isn& #39;t going "I get the gist," they& #39;re going "Eh? Come again? WTF?"
Like, cool that that& #39;s your vision dude, but an actual audience that is not you is watching your movies
There is one (1) Christopher Nolan movie in which dialogue truly does not matter: the one with the least dialogue (Dunkirk). I love that movie, but cerebral sci-fi movies can& #39;t play by the same rules as a WWII thriller, where everyone understands the basic setup automatically
Correct! But it is FRAMED that way. Because the high-concept central conceit is introduced through a verbose exposition drop, the audience is trained to believe that more exposition will explain it further - and when they can& #39;t hear that exposition, it& #39;s intensely frustrating. https://twitter.com/LORDEMAXUS/status/1301122474994814976">https://twitter.com/LORDEMAXU...
To put it incredibly bluntly, Chris, if you think dialogue doesn& #39;t matter in your movie,
DON& #39;T SHOOT SO MUCH FUCKING DIALOGUE
DON& #39;T SHOOT SO MUCH FUCKING DIALOGUE
I agree with Nolan in that dialogue is overrated as a storytelling tool and audiences generally pick up more from visuals and sound/music than we give them credit for, but if you& #39;re gonna lean into that, just...cut the unnecessary dialogue? It& #39;s that fucking simple?
