Tenet

[Mister Six]

I'm giving myself less than five minutes to try and get this out, because I don't have the patience to REALLY sit and think about it -

I get the impression Christopher Nolan looks down upon 'normal' filmmaking, and that there exists no such thing as him making something that's just straightforward and good outside the realms of the superhero films he made (two of which were excellent). His reliance on gimmickry smacks so much of the Lee and Herring Jesus going 'aaaaaahhh'.

Nah, I just think that's what interests and motivates him in his writing. I don't think there's anything particularly obnoxious or showy about it, I think he's just interested in films that are (theoretically, if not actually) structurally complex and especially if they rely on uneven/opposing but interlocking time signatures (Inception, Dunkirk, this).

I'm by no means his biggest fan, but I think he's pretty honest in his ambitions, even if they don't always make for terribly compelling or human movies.

[Butchers Blind]

Is this only being shown at IMAX cinemas?  Checked my local and they're still closed.

[olliebean]

It's on at my local Vue from Wednesday.

[Butchers Blind]

Just saw a critic quote on a TV advert for this - "It's like Bond on acid".  Thought we put a stop to shit like this.

[PlanktonSideburns]

its like bond in an audi

[beanheadmcginty]

Somebody really should give him a Bond film to make before he bursts. It's clearly his ambition.

[PlanktonSideburns]

It's like Michael Mann's heat on Hovis

[Thomas]

I have watched many of Nolan's films, and enjoyed them for their concepts and visuals. But I find them very clinical.

He successfully shows off the (not that) complicated mechanics of spacetime travel/bureaucratic dreams/flying Spitfires at different times, but I'm never struck by the characters and their emotions. I can't actually name a single Nolan character besides the pre-established Batman crowd. I also find his colour palette quite clinical, which doesn't help. Cold. Very grey and white. (I read now that Nolan is himself red-green colourblind).

He'd probably be good at directing bespoke car adverts.

[Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth]

I watched Inception recently, for the first time in ages. Tom Hardy steals the entire film, simply by showing any personality at all.

[Uncle TechTip]

I'm going to go round calling it "Te-net" just to annoy people.

[beanheadmcginty]

"Tenet - the best Nolan can get". I bet they wish they thought of that as a tagline, even if it's likely inaccurate.

[Hand Solo]

Should have altered the name and had a promotional tie-in with a certain brand of Scottish lager, they could have put Pet Shop Boys on the soundtrack too. Missed a trick there, Nolon Nolan.

[Mister Six]

I watched Inception recently, for the first time in ages. Tom Hardy steals the entire film, simply by showing any personality at all.

Yep, he was the only Nolan character that jumped out at me when Thomas wrote about Nolan having shit characters.

It's certainly a very reasonable criticism of his films.

[thugler]

I don't think Nolan's films are all that overly complex, most of them are big stupid action films with some dopey concept that is executed with no imagination. Doubt this will change my mind. Did appreciate Dunkirk and Prestige though. This looks like Inception which was an abomination. All the possibilities of having scenes set in dreamscapes and all he can come up with is a series of call of duty levels.

[PlanktonSideburns]

"Tenet - the best Nolan can get". I bet they wish they thought of that as a tagline, even if it's likely inaccurate.

Fuck that's good

[Glebe]

Heh, yeah that's pretty funny!

[phantom_power]

I don't think Nolan's films are all that overly complex, most of them are big stupid action films with some dopey concept that is executed with no imagination. Doubt this will change my mind. Did appreciate Dunkirk and Prestige though. This looks like Inception which was an abomination. All the possibilities of having scenes set in dreamscapes and all he can come up with is a series of call of duty levels.

It isn't meant to be a film about crazy dreamscapes though. It is a taut espionage thriller with a look that reflects that, and the characters who are doing the dreaming. Most dreams are fairly mundane in terms of location, generally being places the dreamer has been before, or places like that

[dissolute ocelot]

Yep, he was the only Nolan character that jumped out at me when Thomas wrote about Nolan having shit characters.

It's certainly a very reasonable criticism of his films.

The Dark Knight has some reasonable characterisation but even Batman Begins, while entertaining, is strictly on a level of "oh it's Liam Neeson, it's Michael Caine". Much as Inception was, "oh, he's putting a team together, it's her from Juno, him from that teen movie that isn't Juno, it's Leo Fucking Caprio Again". His/Bale's Batman is fucking awful, obviously. And Memento while having a memorable central character was acting-as-stuntwork. While Dunkirk did stunt-casting with Him From One Direction.

I'm sure there are some film studies dudes saying that he brilliantly understands the nature of casting and how to use film star personas. Nah, he just can't tell the difference between actors and props.

[frajer]

It's Lee Smith's editing that always strangles Nolan's films for me. No room to breathe, very few pauses for emotional beats to land.

There's that scene in The Dark Knight where Bats dives out of the window to save Rachel, and they both end up crunching onto a car, which just ended so abruptly in the cinema that I felt sure there'd been some sort of reel change issue (if those things still exist).

Watched it again on DVD and nope, same abrupt cut, it's just edited to within an inch of its life. Save the girl, crunch down on a car roof, next scene please. Not even a quiet little "fuckin hell" or a glance between Bats and Rachel to suggest they are real people, let alone that she knows it's Bruce behind the mask and there's an unrequited romance there.

[Glebe]

'The Dark Knight Rises' Fails Because It's Not About Anything.

It really feels like The Dark Knight Rises was a film Nolan felt that he had to make rather than wanted to make.

[surreal]

Saw this yesterday - it's not for people who were confused by Inception.  Definitely not one of his best, again I thought it was a lot less clever than it thinks it is.  Some great set-piece action but the thing that really pissed me off a lot was that the sound mix just buried a lot of the dialogue. 

There is a key scene with dialogue between the pro- and antagonist which takes place on a fucking CATAMARAN - with the sea and the wind and the blarting of the score no chance of hearing what is going on there at all, and I'm sure it was for that reason that I couldn't really follow how the time-thing was supposed to affect things, so by the end of the movie I'm a bit lost.  I can see what's happening but no detail how or why. 

I am positive they do this and then claim the movie is deep so you have to see it again - no, the movie is not deep, if you watch it again you're not spotting some deeper meaning or something, you're just linking up plot points in the movie much earlier on as you know how it's going to end.  This is not the same as understanding something.

I'm just glad I didn't see it in IMAX or I'm sure it would have been even more deafening and I'd have missed more of it.

7/10 at a push.

EDIT:  I should say that John David Washington was terrific as usual, and I even think Pattinson is going to make a decent Bruce Wayne after seeing him in this.

[Puce Moment]

If you had been brought like Nolan you would be able to hear fine on catamarans and yachts. Maybe the problem is with you?

[surreal]

Probably... That or his no doubt absolute state-of-the-art screening room "yep, that sounds fine".

Same thing with TDKR, no-one could make out a word Bane was saying so I think they went back and re-mixed it soon after release.  I'm not the only one I've heard complaining about the same thing though.

[Lord Mandrake]

I thought it was a lot less clever than it thinks it is.

How clever does it think it is? How stupid are the people that think Nolans films are clever?

I suppose he is fair game for intellectual criticism. Precisely because he tackles concepts that most blockbuster fare wouldn't even dream about but I find it rather glib to attack him for even trying to elevate event cinema with original stories, innovative design and structure.

[surreal]

How clever does it think it is? How stupid are the people that think Nolans films are clever?

I suppose he is fair game for intellectual criticism. Precisely because he tackles concepts that most blockbuster fare wouldn't even dream about but I find it rather glib to attack him for even trying to elevate event cinema with original stories, innovative design and structure.

I don't have a problem with high concept - I do like most of Nolan's work (I love The Prestige and like Inception a lot), just that it could have been explained a lot more clearly, there's no need to obfuscate what is going on in this at all with the way it plays out - no spoilers but I think this was an interesting idea which does lead to some great set-pieces and ideas.  I just think the movie might be thought of as intriguing and "must see more than once" but for the wrong reasons this time.

[brat-sampson]

This is such a baffling global issue with god-awful sound mixing in films. It's why I have to be a fucking ninja on the remote control if I want to be able to actually confirm the characters aren't all lip-reading mutes for plot-related reasons while not bothering people trying to sleep in the neighbouring hemisphere 8 seconds later when a car backfires. Then explodes.

[surreal]

Probably... That or his no doubt absolute state-of-the-art screening room "yep, that sounds fine".

Same thing with TDKR, no-one could make out a word Bane was saying so I think they went back and re-mixed it soon after release.  I'm not the only one I've heard complaining about the same thing though.

Here's a link from Reddit saying the same thing - glad it's not just my old ears...
https://www.reddit.com/r/tenet/comments/ieusog/the_sound_mixing_in_tenet/?utm_medium=android_app&utm_source=share

[PlanktonSideburns]

I thought it was just that he hated people? And only includes them because they won't let him make a film without them

[Claude the Racecar Driving Rockstar Super Sleuth]

We saw this at the imax yesterday (I probably wouldn't have bothered, but it was my friend's birthday). Much like Dunkirk, The more I think about it, the less I think I like it (the extra 40 quid imax tax probably doesn't help).

Maybe I wasn't paying close enough attention, but the time shenanigans felt like little more than window dressing. Inception gets criticised for its unimaginative dream visuals, but I'd say it did a better job of using its big concept than this did. What is Tenet's equivalent of the folding city, or the rotating corridor? Daddy Washington did a car chase in the otherwise forgettable Deja Vu, that made much better use of its own time bending tech. Heck, this exact time reversal idea was done better in Doctor Strange (but, of course, that's bad CGI Marvel - not reeeeal cinema, like this).

By far the most impressive image in the entire film was a simple helicopter shot of a balcony over a massive cliff.

I, too, thought the dialogue mixing was terrible, but it probably made the plot easier to follow. It seems like half the dialogue in this and Inception is anti-exposition - deliberately muddying the waters to make the stories seem more complex than they really are.

The cast use their talent and charisma as much as they can, but the characterisation is predictably thin. Towards the end, the villain evinces a god complex, which seemed to come from nowhere.

I think Nolan needs to do a smaller film again. To rediscover actual film making - not just pointing big cameras at stunts, with a load of waffle in between.

[surreal]

I, too, thought the dialogue mixing was terrible, but it probably made the plot easier to follow. It seems like half the dialogue in this and Inception is anti-exposition - deliberately muddying the waters to make the stories seem more complex than they really are.

This is what I was trying to get at by saying it wasn't as clever as it thinks it is, you summed it up better than I did.  They could have explained the back/forward time thing a lot more simply and still had the effect they were after.  I was left scratching my head wondering just why you'd be physically going in the opposite direction to people in that time-slice, as it's not just jumping back to a point and going forward from there.