Did Nolan worry about how much film he was using?

Another comment that keeps popping up from morons who think that they're equipped to give commentary on film formats that has to go away is that Nolan didn't have to worry about keeping track of how much film he was using.

This is the kind of dumb shit that I used to say when I was a freshman in college. "Hey, you can pay Leonardo DiCaprio $20 million. The film must be a drop in the bucket."

$100 million isn't a massive budget for this kind of a movie. The fact that Nolan is able to pull off what he's been pulling off is a testament to his efficiency.

There aren't many filmmakers still using 15/70 on set; but, when you look at the surge after The Dark Knight, you can get a sense of what Nolan is pulling off.

Interstellar had a budget $25 million lower than Star Trek - Into Darkness while being forty minutes longer and having more IMAX sequences.

There's no such thing as a competently run production that puts no financial stress on the filmmakers.

The moment a movie, even one with a pretty big budget, goes with 35mm film instead of digital, you go from "shoot first and ask questions later" to "measure twice and cut once." With IMAX, you're probably measuring about four times and cutting once.