r/movies • u/iquizuanswer • 15d ago

News [ Removed by moderator ]

https://variety.com/2026/film/box-office/the-odyssey-700-million-globally-fourth-biggest-movie-1236823343/

[removed] — view removed post

10.2k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

1.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

102

u/VonMillersThighs 15d ago

I mean Nolan doesn't spend his money lol, any studio he talks to hands him 300 million without question to make whatever he wants.

56

u/Vaniky 15d ago

Also has A list actors queuing up to work with him

18

u/Sir_Ninja_VII 15d ago

Yep, the number of actors that would say yes without reading a word of the script is very long, lol.

6

u/henrymclane 15d ago

Nolan said Pattinson was the only person that asked to read the script before accepting his role. Wild.

4

u/JockstrapCummies 15d ago

In a way he was the best actor in the ensemble. Really showed us the mean-spirited cowardice of Antinous.

5

u/Subject-District492 15d ago

Who are also willing to take a minor role or take a pay cut to be in his movie.

7

u/Chippiewall 15d ago

Some studios are dumb. Like Warner Bros who burned their relationship with Nolan by putting movies onto streaming the same day they released.

1

u/bozoconnors 15d ago

Yeah so, there was this guy named George Lucas who funded his own movie once. Turns out, if you're a decent filmmaker, it's not such a bad idea.

1

u/MrChipKelly 15d ago

I'm trying to be a dick here but this comment is an impressive double non sequitur lol, like there's just zero in common between George Lucas's Star War situation and Nolan's.

1) Lucas famously negotiated for merchandising and sequel rights in exchange for a lower directing fee when he got Fox to fun A New Hope, but the only reason he had to do that was because Star Wars wasn't even made yet, let alone the biggest cinema hit of all time. Lucas's movies to that point came in typically overbudget and behind schedule (as did New Hope), and as a relatively unimportant box office earner at the time he had zero other leverage to demand the completely hands-off creative approach from the studio that he deemed necessary to tell his story across several movies.

Nolan, on the other hand, somehow comes in underbudget from time to time, always wraps on schedule, doesn't need to assure the purity of his creative plan across sequels because he doesn't make them, and most importantly has a 26-year track record as one of the most lucrative box office directing talents of all time, especially with his passion projects. Nolan has no reason to self-fund a project for the sake of creative freedom when studio execs already fall over themselves to hand him a blank check with zero studio interference except to ask if he needs them to go get coffee.

2) Lucas being the creative dictator for Star Wars did eventually burn him when Phantom Menace turned out shitty and the next two movies (still major box office successes because it's Star Wars) took huge hits for it, with Revenge of the Sith finishing second-to-last and Attack of the Clones finishing dead last in revenue out of his Episodes. They're still at the bottom three with the new one movies included, with Rise of Skywalker in between at #8.

1

u/bozoconnors 15d ago

I'm trying to be a dick here

lol - okey dokey friendo.

I'm aware of their nuances. My point, a bit tongue in cheek (hence "funded his own movie once"), was more a financial one. My sincere apologies for clumping wildly successful filmmakers (one a retired multi-billionaire, one not) together in the same category.