With most Christian Nolan films, I appreciate them more the 2nd time.
Film TENET
- Thread starter Dan
- Start date
I mean... I can get hating Interstellar (I don't, I think it's probably my favourite by Nolan), but there's as many scientists who would defend it as there are scientists who would not. There's whole books about "The science of Interstallar", and it's certainly no more or less garbage than most sci-fi films (certainly less so I'd argue).
Don't listen to Wibble, he liked Insomnia which was total garbage.
Gimmicky gimmickers. I'll just stick with this one.
I liked it, sound in the first half was horrible and annoyingly affected the exposition meaning I didn't fully grasp everything that was going on. Felt quite unique though in terms of visual style and to make something experimental like that with blockbuster/popcorn flick appeal was risky but they got it just about right. Acting was good too, ending was a bit underwhelming but overall apart from standing up as a decent film in its own right I have no idea how people who like going to the cinema wouldn't enjoy it after prolonged lockdown.
Except it takes itself so seriously yet is so ludicrous that it makes it impossible to suspend your disbelief.
Probably the worst one Is that if wormholes were actually real they may be able to transport matter but only after ripping a person apart. They would not then magically reassemble a person at the other end. Communication through one would be equally impossible. And as for a blight increasing nitrogen and decreases oxygen on earth? Huh?
And some of the other planet's physic were silly. Planet around a black hole? Where was the light coming from. How could it possibly be in a stable orbit? Ice clouds on another? Clouds can't be made of ice as they would fall - hundreds of bits of lazy crap science just made it unwatchable. And that fecking bookcase.
Like might be too strong a phrase.
Plus the epilogue.Which was a steaming pile of cheesy shite. How the hell did those 15 minutes make the final cut?
You haven't seen Interstellar?
Absolute bilge. Could not get my head around it. I don’t go to the cinema to be confused, I go to to be entertained and enjoy myself.
For me it's the exact opposite. His dialogues are painful to listen to. That's why I consider Dunkirk to be one of his best movies.
Well bloody said mate! Thinking is for stupid people.
Thanks. I think we agree on 1.
We can also agree that I've misunderstood the fundamental aspect of how the inversion works...I'm even struggling to grasp your detailed explanation...
Still, a very enjoyable movie. The fact that 3 days after watching it, I'm still thinking about it, is a testament. Hopefully, with another viewing or two, I'll better understand it.
Because some of it was either accurate or at least possible that doesn't make the utter garbage go away. So much if it was lazy and/or impossible. Using some decent/possible science and setting itself up as being scientifically accurate made the rubbish stand out like dog balls.
And an advert for the film from the Discovery Channel does make that go away.
I'm going to watch TENET because I didn't hate Inception. I was actually sort of impressed that I got to the end and it sort of/more or less made sense.
Did it necessarily set itself up as being scientifically accurate though? Genuine question.
I think, as an earlier poster said, it’s no more outlandish than many other decent sci fi films.
I enjoyed it for the spectacle (and for it being the first time in months I was in the cinema) but I think he put too much weight in the concept and not enough in the actual story he was telling. I am sure there's layers of symbolism and deeper meaning that will be unearthed but for me its all cosmetic because the meat of the story just wasn't all that compelling
Questions:
Questions:
So are there now 2 Kats living in the world? 2 protagonists?
Why was time travelling Sator not a tiny bit suspicious of his wife suddenly being loving at the exact moment he planned to kill himself?
Why was time travelling Sator not a tiny bit suspicious of his wife suddenly being loving at the exact moment he planned to kill himself?
Yes, there are two Kats for a brief moment, until the 'old' Kat gets shot and is inverted, thus ending the loop.
The other question, I was wondering that too. Was constantly waiting for him to reveal he knew exactly what was going on. You have to remember, though, that Kat had said she'd be loving to him that entire trip so his guards were probably down.
The other question, I was wondering that too. Was constantly waiting for him to reveal he knew exactly what was going on. You have to remember, though, that Kat had said she'd be loving to him that entire trip so his guards were probably down.
Re Sator:
He shot her with an inverted bullet, which he believed she could not possibly survive at the time. So he probably thought there was no way he could be talking to the "future" Kat - at least initially. Then he did start to suspect as time went on
My question - we are all in agreement with this theory?
R Pats is Kat's son?
i didn't cop it during the film but read the theory afterwards and I suppose there's enough signs there. Having a think back, one thing that jumped out was at the end of the film The protagonist says he'll keep away from kat. R Pats says something like are you sure you wont keep an eye on her, even from afar. At the time I was wondering if he was hinting that they would actually have a relationship but taking it a step further, Neil knowing this could be due to him being Max and The protagonist becoming his step father. Would give him even more reason to give his life to save him.
I don’t think it did but it’s more of a general Christopher Nolan blockbuster movie flaw in that it gives the impression you should take this all very seriously. You’re watching an intelligent movie, for intelligent people. Which makes obvious plot holes and silly science harder to take than in, say, Thor Ragnarok.
Yes, in fact I am now 99.9% sure that this is the case. Nolan I think spoke out on it refusing to rule it out.
There's actually a lot of hints which when looking back on it make it pretty obvious. I fecking love the film now
Yes - very much so. It prided itself on it.
Other sci-fi films skim over flaws or explain them with non-specific things like warp drive or teleportation, that allow you to suspend your disbelief.
But give me bullshit pretend facts mixed in with real and maybe real physics and I'll hate it.
The Human Centipede claimed to be "100% anatomically accurate".
You're saying it wasn't?
Yes, in fact I am now 99.9% sure that this is the case. Nolan I think spoke out on it refusing to rule it out.
There's actually a lot of hints which when looking back on it make it pretty obvious. I fecking love the film now
I'm not sure about this at all. I thought the way that time travel works in this film was that you can reverse it by going through one of the turnstiles and travel back but there's no jumping to a point in the past.
With that it mind let's say Robert Pattinson is 30 years older than the kid, he'd have had to have gone through the turnstiles 15 years into the future of these events (assuming you age the same going backwards) and then waited another 15 years in an inverted timeline to get to this point. That's a bit mental.
Oh come on, the whole article is nonsense. “Absolutely under no circumstances should people seek out or plan to do surgical procedures in a basement.”
I mean, where am I supposed to do it instead?
Just imagining the reporter explaining the premise of the film to the doctor, if she hadn't heard of it.Still think there is more credence to the theory being true, even noting the above. He could have gone back and forwards a year at a time, or, perhaps your body can revert to a younger self in time travel.
- He can de-crypt Estonian even when it's backwards (from the car-chase) - so he can speak both English and Estonian (coincidently Kat and Saito's native languages).
- Nolan confirmed Neil is not his real name, which begs the question why he would need to hide it in the first place from a man who he was supposedly "great friends" with.
- He takes joint interest with the protagonist in safeguarding the life of Kat. In reality I'd expect him to probably say "feck her life, you're risking the rest of the world". But seems to be wanting to save her just as much.
- There are other hints scattered around the film. Like the random line in Mumbai where he asks "would you risk a boys life" and "would you risk a womans life". I don't think its a coincidence that the Protagonist is actually faced with this predicament later down the line and Neil wanted to gauge his actions.
Full video:
- Nolan confirmed Neil is not his real name, which begs the question why he would need to hide it in the first place from a man who he was supposedly "great friends" with.
- He takes joint interest with the protagonist in safeguarding the life of Kat. In reality I'd expect him to probably say "feck her life, you're risking the rest of the world". But seems to be wanting to save her just as much.
- There are other hints scattered around the film. Like the random line in Mumbai where he asks "would you risk a boys life" and "would you risk a womans life". I don't think its a coincidence that the Protagonist is actually faced with this predicament later down the line and Neil wanted to gauge his actions.
Full video:
I was thinking that's how he gets studios to bankroll his films.
"I'll make a movie so confusing, people would pay money to watch them 3-4 times to understand them."
I'm planning to watch it a second time. Enjoyable film. Though I feel the dialogue was overpowered by the music at times, although that might be an issue with the cinema I watched it in.
Think it's a consistent criticism, wonder if WB can fix it retrospectively.
Just watched this, didn't think it was very good at all.
I thought the plot was messy and confusing, and the time travel aspect was poorly explained, but most of all it just wasn't very entertaining. After an hour or so I just didn't find it exciting or interesting and I didn't get invested in any of the characters. Conceptually I think it was a good idea and I imagine that the timelines and temporal feckery would probably more or less hold up to scrutiny, it was just... dull. I was just waiting for it to end after 90 minutes. Stylistically I didn't really see anything that interesting, and that battle in the last 20-30 minutes was crap considering it was supposed to be the climax of the film and the climax of the time travel technology.
I liked Nolan's earlier films but I haven't really liked anything he's done since The Dark Knight. This felt a bit like Dunkirk, in the way that it presented something major and world changing but failed to actually make me connect with it on a personal level
I thought the plot was messy and confusing, and the time travel aspect was poorly explained, but most of all it just wasn't very entertaining. After an hour or so I just didn't find it exciting or interesting and I didn't get invested in any of the characters. Conceptually I think it was a good idea and I imagine that the timelines and temporal feckery would probably more or less hold up to scrutiny, it was just... dull. I was just waiting for it to end after 90 minutes. Stylistically I didn't really see anything that interesting, and that battle in the last 20-30 minutes was crap considering it was supposed to be the climax of the film and the climax of the time travel technology.
I liked Nolan's earlier films but I haven't really liked anything he's done since The Dark Knight. This felt a bit like Dunkirk, in the way that it presented something major and world changing but failed to actually make me connect with it on a personal level
Oh yeah and the sound mixing was definitely shit. I'm in a foreign country and I was annoyed that everyone around me could read the subtitles for every line while I was wondering what the hell they'd just said.
I loved Tenet's story, the action and the way it was shot was amazing too, and I don't think it was nearly as confusing as everyone said. However,
Despite more nonsensical pseudo science I loved the film and it's one of my favourites by Nolan straight away. I love that he's not afraid to make complicated action films, I want more of that, action doesn't mean that we have to have a boring story to justify it, but sometimes I wish he'd only leave science in there that isn't obviously nonsense.
there were bits of science that made no sense, the main one being inverted bullet holes. A bullet shot by an inverted person goes into a window meaning it was there when the window was manufactured when going forwards in time? That window company needs better QA. Even if you could say they had a cleanup crew or something to make timelines consistent, which is unbelievable, what about the bullets in the stone near the beginning of the film where it was the bullets themselves that were inverted, how did they get there in the first place? Maybe that's why the scientist woman with the inverted bullets said not to think, because if you did you'd realise it makes no sense.
Despite more nonsensical pseudo science I loved the film and it's one of my favourites by Nolan straight away. I love that he's not afraid to make complicated action films, I want more of that, action doesn't mean that we have to have a boring story to justify it, but sometimes I wish he'd only leave science in there that isn't obviously nonsense.
Thanks for making me feel dumb as feck Nolan. Did not like this at all.
Form over content. At the end of the day the basic story was not very compelling (find the 'algorithm to save the world'). It was a high risk project that in my opinion did not fully pay off. An example of how timeline wizardry can enhance a story is his own masterpiece Dunkirk. That movie not only had me in its grip from start to finish, it also provided a deeper meaning of personal sacrifice for the greater good. Tenet felt like a tricked out high stakes heist movie, technically impressive but disjointed and emotionally uninvolving.
is this a must see in cinema, or can I wait for the streams which will soon flood into waves, which of course I will report the the authorities.?
This was awesome. No sound issues in the Cineworld I attended. Gutted to not see it in Imax.
Did anyone else think Aaron Taylor Johnson's character was obviously written for tom hardy but he couldn't do it for whatever reason?
Also, was there a subtle nod to this being Michael Caine's final nolan film? The last words Washington says to him are "Goodbye, Sir Michael". Nice touch if so.
Now to figure out where it fits in the ranking of Nolan flicks.
Did anyone else think Aaron Taylor Johnson's character was obviously written for tom hardy but he couldn't do it for whatever reason?
Also, was there a subtle nod to this being Michael Caine's final nolan film? The last words Washington says to him are "Goodbye, Sir Michael". Nice touch if so.
Now to figure out where it fits in the ranking of Nolan flicks.
Like others have said, the audio mixing pissed me off. Really isn't the kind of film you want to be guessing lines in. Feel like I've got a good grasp of what happened regardless, but have a few questions.
Planning on watching it again anyway, maybe at the cinema or maybe at home with subtitles.
@Salt Bailly 100% thought the same thing about Ives. Assumed it actually was him for a split second.
If Sator dies, how does he even exist in the future? Or is it that the Sator about to kill himself was actually the Sator that travelled from the future, but reinverted?
After reinverting themselves at the airport, how did Cat (and I think the other two) invert themselves again to travel further back? The airport surely wasn't an option as they'd have to relive the explosion alongside their current selves and the other turnstiles are in Siberia and Estonia. Did Tenet just take over Sator's Estonia base from that point onwards?
Unrelated to all that, but did anyone else think Washington was slightly too smug for someone that didn't really have a clue of what was happening for a while? Not to the point that it annoyed me, but still.
After reinverting themselves at the airport, how did Cat (and I think the other two) invert themselves again to travel further back? The airport surely wasn't an option as they'd have to relive the explosion alongside their current selves and the other turnstiles are in Siberia and Estonia. Did Tenet just take over Sator's Estonia base from that point onwards?
Unrelated to all that, but did anyone else think Washington was slightly too smug for someone that didn't really have a clue of what was happening for a while? Not to the point that it annoyed me, but still.
Planning on watching it again anyway, maybe at the cinema or maybe at home with subtitles.
@Salt Bailly 100% thought the same thing about Ives. Assumed it actually was him for a split second.
Last edited: