So this is basically a really good 200 page plot outlay, typed into screenplay format by a sternographer, and then sound mixed by a Whale
Film TENET
- Thread starter Dan
- Start date
Too complicated
Really? I didn't know that!Who's his dad?
Edit: WFT It's Denzel Washington
Thing is, much like Inception, it’s actually not (unless you start examining all the world-building nonsense you're not supposed to think about - like how the inverted arms market would work if it was just a bunch of empty guns, or how much time Robert Pattinson would have to spend walking backwards on his jays for his timeline to make sense, and how did he eat?) the overall story is pretty understandable when you have more than 20 seconds to digest it... The film just gives you no time to do that. And not in some wanky fanboy "actually if you're really clever you'd understand it perfectly" kind of a way - they actually overexplain the most important and signposted parts - it's just such a technical exercise in plot mechanics over character, that you're never invested in anyone enough to care about why they're doing what they're doing... so the usual emotional throughline that invests you in a film, and helps distracts you from the inevitable plotholes that litter literally every movie, are removed to such a clinical extent that all that matters are the specific machinations of the plot... and so you're stuck listening to a man explaining his really clever plot synopsis by way of 3 or 4 poorly sketched out characters, to the extent where an actual line of dialogue is basically "It is the 14th of October, and we are in location X, and now we have to do the thing we're going to do..." said between two characters who already know all of those things! And you subsequently end up overthinking everything you can actually hear so much, you miss the next thing.. and then overthink that for a while, rather than actually care!... all of which distracts you from the essentially rather straightforward/backward Bond movie that’s actually happening.
It is a genuinely pretty cool plot.... made by a genuinely great director... only with both of those things turned up to 11, when it probably would've been better at a 9. In much the same way that the best works of, say, Tarantino or Charlie Kaufman, were done when someone a bit more discerning had enough power over them to go "You know what, maybe reign your most base tendencies in a litte bit, yeah?"
Last edited:
I'll watch it again. He is after all one of my favourite directors, Interstellar one of my favourite films.
It would probably have been a better film if it’d committed to the palindrome concept
more, and they properly went back though the film from the other perspective and tied up everything neatly - like it looked like it was going to do during the (literally) pivotal hallway bit - rather than have this random massive unconnected and confusing technical battle scene at the end that looked like a big drunken paintball away day in the Limbo land from Inception...
Maybe a bit too obvious I guess, but that’s where most the of the actual confusion stems from IMO..
I understood what was supposed to be happening, but it was so chaotic and technically convoluted that I tended to just zone out of all the stuff I was presumably supposed to be wowed by... I know it’ll pick up all sorts of shit if I watch it back again, but... meh...
more, and they properly went back though the film from the other perspective and tied up everything neatly - like it looked like it was going to do during the (literally) pivotal hallway bit - rather than have this random massive unconnected and confusing technical battle scene at the end that looked like a big drunken paintball away day in the Limbo land from Inception...
Maybe a bit too obvious I guess, but that’s where most the of the actual confusion stems from IMO..
I understood what was supposed to be happening, but it was so chaotic and technically convoluted that I tended to just zone out of all the stuff I was presumably supposed to be wowed by... I know it’ll pick up all sorts of shit if I watch it back again, but... meh...
Last edited:
I think that's exactly right. The conflict between the truly palindromic movie this was, I suspect, meant to be and the desire to end with a big bangy Hollywood conclusion clashed thereby turning parts of the movie into a howling cacophony of entirely unnecessary confusion.
Also, possibly unpopular opinion... I thought John David Washington was bad
Thought exactly that just after watching, but now this movie is more like techno babble exposition fest... still somewhat enjoyable when they're making things happen and not talking in few scenes.
For an action movie star, he looks like a midget next to most of the actors. And he always has this one, head slightly cocked expression when he is saying something witty or smart. All I can see when he’s talking is Ricky Jarred. He doesn’t appear to have any range at all. Classic case of an actor getting ahead because of his family name.
It's the only thing Nolan has to say.
The techno babble and clever action scenes are the heart and soul of his films, there's really nothing beyond. He's a extremely shallow director(I think thats part of his appeal tbh).
Last edited:
This was my biggest issue with the film. I avoided anything that might be a spoiler on this, even the trailers, and right from the first minute I'm wondering what the feck is going on.
It felt like every single second of every scene was advancing the plot, and sometimes thats a positive but not with this story
If anything the attempt to constantly explain everything made it harder to understand... I think people would’ve followed it fairly instinctively just by what was going on on the screen, with a little bit of info dumped here and there to help ... but instead it felt like the film had done a lot of coke in a kitchen in Hoxton and was aggressively intent on telling you everything that came into its head in as much rambling detail as possible, so viewers had to keep ingesting large dumps of flat information rather than just follow the story.
Yup. In Interstellar at least he tried to explain time dilation in more elegant way, but it was still a lot of talking. His problem feels like he wants to deliver his ideas to the widest audience possible and it just falls apart. He's like opposite of Kubrick's 2001 where everything just flows on the screen and music tells the story without rushing into anything.
Then again Memento had no budget and the idea behind was the engine of the movie, not other way around.
So did I. If he wasn't Denzel's son he would never get the part.
Disagree he's slightly unconventional in his delivery but his performance throughout was consistent. Him being Denzels son for me doesn't have much to do with him being credited with the role this isn't his first premier of a big film. He's a good actor.
Pretty much summed up Tom Cruise his whole career.
Volume too loud on the music in this film and too quiet on the dialogue.
I enjoyed it though. But silly with the reversing car scenes though.
I enjoyed it though. But silly with the reversing car scenes though.
Somewhat on-topic, but have you ever tried showing 2001 to somebody who hasn't seen the movie before or hasn't grown up with it? It's not very welcoming to new audiences. Personally, I love it.
I can understand why Nolan is heavy with his exposition. The amount of people who apparently didn't get Interstellar or Inception is staggering. I think we forget sometimes because this area of the internet can be a bubble, but the wider/average movie-goer...Some really need everything explained to them.
He's basically the hipster's version of Michael Bay.
Dunkirk didn't have any and is an amazing film, neither did Dark night which is probably the best Batman.
What's so amazing about Dunkirk? Thought it was boring and nothing special.
Its one of my favourite war films. I loved everything about it.
There's absolutely nothing wrong with explanations, but sci-fi movies rarely need one to a high extent and all it takes is interesting idea, especially in transcendental ones like 2001, but feels like with Tenet Nolan tries to write an action packed essay on exotic physics when he really showed in Memento he can just tell excellent stories without throwing spectacular flashes every five seconds for two hours and a half.
If the movie tries explaining something to wide audience, it is really of questionable value to anyone for that matter. At this point even simplified trilogy like Matrix explained the nature of matrix itself in more subtle way. I guess that's how you properly make movies for masses and I'm prefectly fine with it, if Nolan trying to throw as many inside movie informations he can at the cost of actually enjoying the movie as a whole.
Prestige really set that high standard for both Nolan brothers and to be honest every director and writer had it's overly complicated moments, from John Carpenter to Ridley Scott when he tried to extend the formula of Alien. Nolan is still doing quite fine in comparison despite some of his methods.
Could it be Tenet will become a much greater movie if someone will prove the so called 'time' is a both way thing and has actual impact on physics ? At least in Prestige many people knew Tesla's inventions based on wi-fi transfer of energy used in pretty much everything today, even if the movie is still a mystery thriller with decent characters.
I had no idea he was Denzel Washington's son in Blackkklansman and thought he was great in that. I think Nolan is an amazing director but not exactly the best "motivator" for actors since it always seems like his cast feel uncomfortable in his movies. The janky dialogue doesn't help either.
For me the issue is Nolan ideas are interesting concepts but nothing more. The opening scene Tenet would have been have great if I haven't already seen it over and over again in his other works. I saw the patterns a mile off, could tell where the soundtrack was going and how the opening was going to end. It didn't have any impact for me and while thats a criticism that could be labeled at any director(Everyone has their own schtick), most aren't carrying a whole film on the back of some clever ideas and smart action scenes. Once you seen the cogs moving the less impressive and interesting it becomes imo.
Dunno I think that might be harsh on Michael Bay. Bay is a pig(Tbh thats insulting to pigs)and his beliefs/idea are in the gutter but at least thats something. Nolan films for me anyways are like watching a movie made by a sky net a.i. system or watching a Apple press conferences.
There's a coldness to Nolan work which tbh no ones can match.
There's the more obovouis stuff in the Dark Knight such as the surveillance, capturing Lu and the all the lawyer shtick but Nolan tech babble goes beyond explaining blackholes and overloading the audience with information. Rather than use story teller mechanics and techniques to put forward a idea or emotion, the mechanics become the main drive(Thats a pun, right ?). The Dark Knight is full of this babble, Nolan will chuck in a ton plot twists as a way to get to more plot twists. The opening bank robbery when the robbers kill each other, Gary Oldman character pretending to have died in order to catch the joker but then the Joker planning to get caught later on by Oldman and so on. All which is fun and entertaining but purpose of these mechanics is to avoid saying anything of interest. There's no larger ideas, it's all just cogs reacting to other, I agree with you that Dark Knight is the best Batman(Although I have a soft spot for the Tim Burton Batman films)but it's a shallow and empty piece of art.
It's been ages since I've seen Dunkirk so I might be completely wrong on that film.
It definitely wasn't interesting as his previous productions and with TeneT Nolan couldn't even touch deeper aspect of scientific concept he chose as the concept itself so far are just theories that have no visible basis in reality. Everything came as a loud movie that doesn't even had time to develop any character.
Perhaps it would be refereshing for him to do what Alex Garland did after 28 Days Later, Sunshine and Dredd. Step back and make some half indie / half low budget movies in mood of Ex Machina or Annihilation. Just do something different, steady paced and without the tone of obnoxiously high budget spectacle.
This is actually a fairly well accepted fact in theoretical physics: there is almost nothing to stop time flowing in either direction, the only thing that directs time is entropy, so the whole 'inverted entropy' thing is 'kind of true'.
In terms of the movie, its possible I was trying to overthink it. The way it jumped from one direction to another and back again just made it almost incomprehensible to me. The final battle was just a big blur/mess of nothing, it reminded me of the robot battles in the Transformers films. The shame is, I really wanted to like this film. I love Nolan, I love sci-fi, I love time travel films. But for me it just didn't work.
Spoilers but as usual Pitch Meeting nails it.
Hipsters do not watch (or admit to watching) Chris Nolan blockbusters.
See? @Sweet Square thinks Bay is better. QED.
Last edited:
Glad it wasn't just me. Had the subtitles on as it would have woken the kids upstairs and the sound effects and music were already blaring.
Thought the film was too confusing aswell as a complete load of bollocks plot line. Why must people constantly be trying to find more and more obscure plot lines like this.
Not a good film. His worst in years.
You are spot on about the audio mixing. Seems a schoolboy error for me.
It is a trend with Nolan, but things got increasingly worse with his last 2 movies. I was not that bothered by the mixing before that. I read somewhere that he actually got a lot of calls by other directors about the sound levels.
He’s a very accomplished actor. Great in BlankKKlansman. You’re wrong.
Im certain I’ll Fcuk up multiple quoting as per usual.
But the Audio really is terrible. Everyone has said it. One watch and it’s obvious. No idea how it’s been released like this. Is Nolan going deaf but remaining militant.
Look's like I'm in the minority, I thought it was brilliant! It was confusing with people on multiple timelines but that's what makes it brilliant.
The worst thing was his response to the whole thing. Basically said people are being too pissy and don't understand him or something. Either way, it's our faults apparently.
I'm sorry, but it's a totally pompous way to respond to it
Aye. I can tolerate a pretentious “The dialogue is quiet to draw you in”. That’s a film making tool.
Having key essential dialogue inaudible because you decided that someone in an oxygen mask would be hard to understand?... It’s wrong headed.
The film makes more sense with subtitles on. So I have to add a reading element because his audio is so bad. It was ruined in theatres because there was no way to rewind to check what A character had said.
He’s wrong. But thinks the whole world is wrong. I’ve not heard a single person advocate for it being that bad.