The Christopher Nolan Effect: Do We Take Streaming-Only Movies for Granted?

Last week, Christopher Nolan was still shilling for his most successful movie, Oppenheimer. Now that its triumphant theatrical run of nearly $1 billion and certain Oscar nominations in tow is wrapping up, it’s DVD time.

Upon encouraging fans to get the must-own DVD (see trailer below), Nolan errantly fired a buckshot at all streamers in the process, calling them “evil.”

The Dark Knight’ was one of the first films where we formatted it especially for Blu-ray release because it was a new form at the time.

And in the case of ‘Oppenheimer,’ we put a lot of care and attention into the Blu-ray version…and trying to translate the photography and the sound, putting that into the digital realm with a version you can buy and own at home and put on a shelf so no evil streaming service can come steal it from you.

Christopher Nolan, Variety, Nov. 2023

So that’s going to leave a mark. Streamers returned fire in the guise of “customer service,” “dedicated bandwidth,” and blah blah blah. This week, the time-bending auteur is explaining his comments and brings up a point for cinephiles to consider.

Christopher Nolan and the “Evil” Vanishing Act of Streamers

The Washington Post gave Christopher Nolan an opportunity to clarify his sinister sidebar and noted that “evil” was said in jest. However, he underscored a real problem that perhaps all directors are facing–the films created by streamers.

There is a danger these days that if things only exist in the streaming version, they do get taken down. They come and go — as do broadcast versions of films, so my films will play on HBO or whatever, they’ll come and go.

But the home video version is the thing that can always be there, so people can always access it. And since the 1980s, as filmmakers, we’ve taken that for granted, and now we have to make sure that there’s a way that that can continue to happen, if not the physical media

Christopher Nolan, The Washington Post, Nov. 2023

From Netflix to Prime, Disney+ to Paramount+, they’ve all been guilty of producing proprietary crap. And those films never disappear due to obligatory contract negotiations or mysterious bandwidth concerns. Yet, popular movies or TV series are cleared from their cloud-based bookshelves.

But now, the struggle isn’t as real because streamers are making supremely good content, such as:

• Apple+ — CODA, Causeway, and The Boy, The Mole, The Fox, The Horse
• Netflix — Everything Everywhere All at Once, The Power of the Dog, All Quiet on the Western Front
• Prime — Beautiful Boy, The Goldfinch, Sound of Metal
• Hulu — Nomadland and 27 Emmys for its series

The competition is getting stiff and the space is limited. Nolan is one of those few directors whose films–critically revered or rebuffed (we’re looking at you, Tenet) demand visibility. He knows it. We know it. But streamers are borderline fascist with who gets what and how what is placed on which lists.

Although Christopher Nolan isn’t calling it a “conspiracy,” something is afoot and it’s clear he would like to shove his foot somewhere the sun doesn’t shine.

The danger I’m talking about with a filmmaker’s film just sort of disappearing from streaming one day and then maybe not coming back or not coming back for a long period of time, that’s not an intentional conspiracy. That’s just a way that with the particular licensing agreements, the way things are evolving. So it’s something worth pointing out because it will need to be fixed, but I’m very confident that it will be.

What do you think? Is Hollywood threatened by the warm allure of streamers’ ultraviolet bug lights? Of course, they are. Is Nolan? Doubtful, but stranger things have happened. What’s next? Scorsese doing a streamer-only movie?

Oh wait…