The Way Nolan Intended
What we could all learn from being creatively high maintenance. By Saff Kelly, Creative Director
Christopher Nolan and I have something in common. You may be thinking that I’m on an insane ego trip but hear me out. We’re both what I would refer to as ‘creatively high maintenance’ - and I don’t think it’s a bad thing, in fact far from it.
This is a man that has spent millions of pounds and months of planning, just so he could crash a real Boeing 747 into a real building. This is not a man that opts for small scale models or CGI. He wants a full-size aircraft to destroy an airport hangar all for one scene in Tenet. This is, by any reasonable definition, insane. It is also, I’d argue, exactly the kind of insane we should all aspire to.
Why? Because through that, Christopher Nolan has created a brand for himself. You know what to expect when you’re sitting down to watch a Nolan film. Large format. Practical Effects. Non Linear Storytelling. Some sort of trauma dump around Nolan’s personal daddy issues. But beyond all that, you know that what you’re getting is something that has been deeply considered. The fact that “the way Nolan intended” has become a well established meme shows the power of that personal brand. Someone that has become so synonymous with particularity that it becomes humourous to watch something he makes on the screen of a 2009 iPod Nano?
You may be wondering what ‘creatively high maintenance’ actually means - well since I’ve completely made up the term, here is my definition:
Creatively High Maintenance
Adjective
Someone that has an attention to detail, high standards, and is very particular about bringing their creative ideas to life, regardless of difficulty (and sometimes rationale).
Take The Odyssey.
The Cyclops could have been built entirely in CGI. Instead, Nolan built a real 60-foot puppet and filmed it in a Greek cave. The “giants” who tower over Odysseus aren’t scaled up in post — they’re seven-foot stunt performers shot against body doubles under five feet tall, so the size difference is real in camera. Even the Charybdis is created by jet skis, used as the literal physical guide for actors to react to. Even the men turning into pigs was done in camera.
Would any of it have made a difference to us as viewers?
Most people would say no, but I’m actually going to argue yes.
The story structure wouldn’t have changed, but the integrity of the film would have. Odysseus still would have made it home but you’d have lost a level of craft and care and attention that you’ve come to expect from a Nolan film.
The Odyssey was immersive, it was impressive, and elements of that would have been lost if Nolan wasn’t insanely committed to being high maintenance in all aspects of his film making. I wouldn’t have looked up at the screen (yes IMAX, obviously) in the same way.
Beyond his commitment to the bit, there’s been a lot of discourse about Nolan’s creatively high maintenance decision to shoot on IMAX. There are limits to where you can see it, there are limits to the production process. But again, I admire it. All of it adds to the scale. The Odyssey is an epic - so it makes sense to do everything to make it feel as epic as possible.
And this is where Nolan and I are the same. Because I too commit to the bit. What feels like eons ago, I was working on a shoot for Ford, we were shooting the new Capri paying homage to all of the culturally iconic appearances of the original car - gangster movies, music videos, computer games - it had a rich history and I wanted to convey that in a more modern way.
As we moved into production, I said “I want to shoot this on film” - my producer rolled her eyes (Laura is very used to this from me). This was going to make production slightly more complex, the budget was going to increase, arguably was it even worth it - but I wanted to make it work, because it was worth it to me. Shooting on film felt more aligned to the concept, it was all about paying homage to the past. Shooting on film gave it a level of premium that separated it from other car brands being able to create a gaming asset just because. It became part of the story.
And for me it’s not just limited to a throwback shoot for Ford.
It’s everything I work on. And without sounding insanely egotistical - I’d like to think my brand as a Creative Director is just as solid. I often hear “this is very Saff’ or something is ‘Saff Coded’.
My brand often consists of provocative ideas, premium aesthetics, usually some sort of humour at play, and a lot of grain. But being this creatively high maintenance doesn’t mean I’m difficult to work with (Laura might disagree) but it does mean that it’s much easier to get on the same page with the team around you. One team, one my dream.
I was in a meeting this week where something was termed as my ‘hill to die on’, my response was to joke ‘I think every hill is one to die on’. Except, I wasn’t really joking. That’s not to say I don’t know how to compromise, but I do believe it’s our job as creatives to make decisions that protect the integrity of the work and take something from good to great.
Sometimes that means flying a real plane into a building, sometimes it means shooting a Ford Capri on film.