Tenet (2020)

[Danny]

Nolan uses sound better than almost any director going, the opening scene to this film is intense. A lot of Interstellar, but particularly the scene where the spaceship is spinning in circles and MC has to try and stop it...phenomenal. The only film I’ve really watched the last few years where a soundtrack has gone hand in hand with the storyline and completely gripped me is Us

[Mel81x+]

Correct me if I am wrong but sound direction in a movie has very little to do with the actual director and more to do with the person in charge of sound? Sure, the director has a yay or a nay but all that creativity/execution is really on the guy in charge of sound.

[Stan]

Seeing this at the weekend with the missus.

Keen.

[Danny]

3 hours ago, Mel81x said:

Correct me if I am wrong but sound direction in a movie has very little to do with the actual director and more to do with the person in charge of sound? Sure, the director has a yay or a nay but all that creativity/execution is really on the guy in charge of sound.

Of course but the director still decides what he’s after

[Stan]

On 20/12/2019 at 14:16, Danny said:

I’m glad no one knows the plot cos I watched that and thought what the fuck. Looks good though

 

On 22/05/2020 at 12:26, DeadLinesman said:

My head was fucked watching that.

 

On 27/08/2020 at 00:19, Spike said:

I haven’t seen this but I’ve always thought Nolan was a sloppy director. Big bangs, loud noise, quick cuts, and overwhelming action topped off a pinch of suspense. I’m not saying he is a bad director at all, but definitely a bloke that prefers action to subtlety. Excellent at drawing a person’s attention into being engrossed but I feel upon repeated viewing and a critical eye, his movies tend to not hold water. 

 

On 04/09/2020 at 08:25, Smiley Culture said:

Watched this last weekend. Don’t ask me what happened, I haven’t got a clue but it was worth a watch. 

 

On 13/09/2020 at 21:53, Danny said:

Lol yeah should have said, I really enjoyed it. Not his best film I dont think but with that said it was edge of the seat stuff for me.

Personally whilst there were moments where you get a bit lost I found it easy enough to follow, though the point of the film is to confuse so I wouldn’t worry about it too much

Thought I'd quote everyone as watched it today and my comments would be in response to all points raised.

@Danny this film is not easy to follow at all . While you're trying to think about the whole inversion concept and how it plays in to real life, you're also trying to keep up with the plot in general anyway. I found it quite confusing but if that was Nolan's aim, he's won!

The sound effects were way OTT. So much to the point that you can barely hear what the actors are saying. Every now and then you hear 'plutonium' or 'inverted reality' and then it's just trying to piece together what else they're saying. Maybe that's a small part as to why it's hard to follow. 

I felt lost during the middle of the movie. 

As @Danny said, the opening scene is decent and what you expect from a Nolan movie, or at least a movie that's hyped up as this one was. Something to get the juices flowing right from that start. Also, to explain the fire survival - I'm guessing it's because earlier on in the film, when Laura (Clemence Poesy) is explaining to The Protagonist about inverted reality and the feelings that come with it, she says if there's fire, you feel ice. So instead of getting burned, he gets stupidly cold hence the next scene is him in the back of a truck and being told he's the first to ever get hypothermia after being in a fire).

After that confusion in the middle, it was only after coming out of the cinema and explaining it to the missus that I realised myself what was going on at the end in that Stalsk12 place. 

Most of the dialogue with Priya confused the hell out of me but I think that was partly because I was trying to make sense of what previously happened in other scenes and if we were still in inverted reality or back in normal reality.

 

Overall, for action it was fine, no complaints with that. The audio of the dialogue lets it down though and makes it difficult to hear what they say. 7/10. 

[Danny]

39 minutes ago, Stan said:

 

 

 

 

Thought I'd quote everyone as watched it today and my comments would be in response to all points raised.

@Danny this film is not easy to follow at all . While you're trying to think about the whole inversion concept and how it plays in to real life, you're also trying to keep up with the plot in general anyway. I found it quite confusing but if that was Nolan's aim, he's won!

The sound effects were way OTT. So much to the point that you can barely hear what the actors are saying. Every now and then you hear 'plutonium' or 'inverted reality' and then it's just trying to piece together what else they're saying. Maybe that's a small part as to why it's hard to follow. 

I felt lost during the middle of the movie. 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

As @Danny said, the opening scene is decent and what you expect from a Nolan movie, or at least a movie that's hyped up as this one was. Something to get the juices flowing right from that start. Also, to explain the fire survival - I'm guessing it's because earlier on in the film, when Laura (Clemence Poesy) is explaining to The Protagonist about inverted reality and the feelings that come with it, she says if there's fire, you feel ice. So instead of getting burned, he gets stupidly cold hence the next scene is him in the back of a truck and being told he's the first to ever get hypothermia after being in a fire).

After that confusion in the middle, it was only after coming out of the cinema and explaining it to the missus that I realised myself what was going on at the end in that Stalsk12 place. 

Most of the dialogue with Priya confused the hell out of me but I think that was partly because I was trying to make sense of what previously happened in other scenes and if we were still in inverted reality or back in normal reality.

 

 

Overall, for action it was fine, no complaints with that. The audio of the dialogue lets it down though and makes it difficult to hear what they say. 7/10. 

 

I wasn’t trying to say it was easy to follow, but largely I managed to keep pace. I thought the actual concept of the time travel was fairly straight forward and I liked how he explored a different type of time travel than has been explored before. How the inverted people are almost going in a form of reverse made sense to me and I could follow that throughout pretty much.  

In fact I think this is almost one of my favourite depictions of time travel and personally the complexity to following it makes the film more appealing. I would like to watch it again not just for the films sake, but to understand more how they’re exploring the theory of the arrow of time. 

[Viva la FCB+]

On 19/09/2020 at 13:58, Stan said:

 

 

 

 

Thought I'd quote everyone as watched it today and my comments would be in response to all points raised.

@Danny this film is not easy to follow at all . While you're trying to think about the whole inversion concept and how it plays in to real life, you're also trying to keep up with the plot in general anyway. I found it quite confusing but if that was Nolan's aim, he's won!

The sound effects were way OTT. So much to the point that you can barely hear what the actors are saying. Every now and then you hear 'plutonium' or 'inverted reality' and then it's just trying to piece together what else they're saying. Maybe that's a small part as to why it's hard to follow. 

I felt lost during the middle of the movie. 

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

As @Danny said, the opening scene is decent and what you expect from a Nolan movie, or at least a movie that's hyped up as this one was. Something to get the juices flowing right from that start. Also, to explain the fire survival - I'm guessing it's because earlier on in the film, when Laura (Clemence Poesy) is explaining to The Protagonist about inverted reality and the feelings that come with it, she says if there's fire, you feel ice. So instead of getting burned, he gets stupidly cold hence the next scene is him in the back of a truck and being told he's the first to ever get hypothermia after being in a fire).

After that confusion in the middle, it was only after coming out of the cinema and explaining it to the missus that I realised myself what was going on at the end in that Stalsk12 place. 

Most of the dialogue with Priya confused the hell out of me but I think that was partly because I was trying to make sense of what previously happened in other scenes and if we were still in inverted reality or back in normal reality.

 

 

Overall, for action it was fine, no complaints with that. The audio of the dialogue lets it down though and makes it difficult to hear what they say. 7/10. 

 

I actually came away with pretty much exactly the same opinion as you. The sound was so distracting for some reason and missing some of the dialogue definitely made it harder to follow then it should have been. 7/10 is a pretty fair rating. Worth watching but definitely far from Nolan's finest imo. 

[Tommy]

On 27/08/2020 at 01:19, Spike said:

I haven’t seen this but I’ve always thought Nolan was a sloppy director. Big bangs, loud noise, quick cuts, and overwhelming action topped off a pinch of suspense. I’m not saying he is a bad director at all, but definitely a bloke that prefers action to subtlety. 

Just re-discovered this topic after watching Tenet. And I still can't believe how fucking wrong Spike's statement about Nolan is.  

[Spike]

29 minutes ago, Tommy said:

Just re-discovered this topic after watching Tenet. And I still can't believe how fucking wrong Spike's statement about Nolan is.  

Other people have said it as well. Batman 3 was a mess of editing. He isn’t perfect nor is he subtle.

[Cicero]

Batman 3 felt as if Nolan didn’t even want to make it. 

[Tommy]

I agree about the Dark Knight Rises. It had it's moments, but there was a lot of stupid things. I'm not saying Nolan is perfect, but in times where we get re-make after re-make, and more and more sequels, I appreciate that he tries something new. Although, he really is obsessed with subject of time. I hope his next movie is a bit different. 

[Danny]

I think it’s fair enough to not like Nolan’s pieces of work, but to say he just uses loud noises and is sloppy about it is a sloppy judgement in itself.

He uses music and different sound effects to help tell the story of the film, to make you feel like you’re there alongside the characters on screen rather than just watching a story unfold. He done it brilliantly with Dunkirk and Interstellar. Dunkirk felt like a ticking time bomb.

He created one of the most iconic movie scenes there is imo in Interstellar when the spaceship was spinning out and MC’s character had to re attach it at speed, using the noise of inside the craft and the silence of space to bring the tension to a peak.

[Spike]

3 hours ago, Danny said:

I think it’s fair enough to not like Nolan’s pieces of work, but to say he just uses loud noises and is sloppy about it is a sloppy judgement in itself.

He uses music and different sound effects to help tell the story of the film, to make you feel like you’re there alongside the characters on screen rather than just watching a story unfold. He done it brilliantly with Dunkirk and Interstellar. Dunkirk felt like a ticking time bomb.

He created one of the most iconic movie scenes there is imo in Interstellar when the spaceship was spinning out and MC’s character had to re attach it at speed, using the noise of inside the craft and the silence of space to bring the tension to a peak.

I didn’t say that though. People are taking my post to the extreme, I didn’t say I didn’t like Nolan nor did say that is all he does. I just said the editing can be sloppy, the noise overwhelming (Inception was the worst for that), and he relies on huge action set pieces. I’m not really critiquing as much as observing trends. None of those suggest his films are bad.

 

 

[Batard]

17 hours ago, Cicero said:

Batman 3 felt as if Nolan didn’t even want to make it. 

I must be the only person who enjoyed the Dark Knight Rises 

That speech by Gordon was one of the best of the trilogy;

"There's a point, far out there when the structures fail you, and the rules aren't weapons anymore, they're... shackles letting the bad guy get ahead. One day... you may face such a moment of crisis. And in that moment, I hope you have a friend like I did, to plunge their hands into the filth so that you can keep yours clean!"

[Tommy]

On 01/05/2021 at 19:41, Batard said:

I must be the only person who enjoyed the Dark Knight Rises 

That speech by Gordon was one of the best of the trilogy;

"There's a point, far out there when the structures fail you, and the rules aren't weapons anymore, they're... shackles letting the bad guy get ahead. One day... you may face such a moment of crisis. And in that moment, I hope you have a friend like I did, to plunge their hands into the filth so that you can keep yours clean!"

I did enjoy it. It had a lot of epic moments. But it was a lot more sloppy than the first two. 

Anyway, I can't stop thinking about Tenet. The more you think about it, the more brilliant it gets. I guess it all makes even more sense if you re-watch it. 

[nudge+]

2 minutes ago, Tommy said:

I did enjoy it. It had a lot of epic moments. But it was a lot more sloppy than the first two. 

Anyway, I can't stop thinking about Tenet. The more you think about it, the more brilliant it gets. I guess it all makes even more sense if you re-watch it. 

Except the physics, you can rewatch as many times as you want, and the physics will still not make sense

I enjoyed the movie; a bit weird for sure. I liked that they chose to explore a different concept of "time travel", but I'll be honest, the whole reverse visuals were a bit ridiculous.

[Tommy]

1 minute ago, nudge said:

Except the physics, you can rewatch as many times as you want, and the physics will still not make sense

Please elaborate. I mean admittedly I am Nolan fanboy. And might have picked up on a few things that you are talking about. Was it the bullets? 

[nudge+]

Just now, Tommy said:

Please elaborate. I mean admittedly I am Nolan fanboy. And might have picked up on a few things that you are talking about. Was it the bullets? 

What I meant was that the movie uses completely invented laws of physics, so even if you watch it numerous times, the physics will still not make sense, because they go against everything we know  The biggest one is the main concept that inversion of entropy also implies inversion of time. However, I realise that we're dealing with fictional laws of physics in a fictional universe here, so it was not really a criticism of the movie... That said, I thought that even within movies suggested laws of physics, there were still things that didn't make much sense or had logical consistency, especially when it comes to interactions between regular and inverted objects. I honestly would have to rewatch it again to be able to give precise examples of specific scenes, I know I had several issues with it, but the biggest for me was that car chase explosion turning into ice instead of fire, that was just complete nonsense.

[Devil-Dick Willie]

8 hours ago, nudge said:

What I meant was that the movie uses completely invented laws of physics, so even if you watch it numerous times, the physics will still not make sense, because they go against everything we know  The biggest one is the main concept that inversion of entropy also implies inversion of time. However, I realise that we're dealing with fictional laws of physics in a fictional universe here, so it was not really a criticism of the movie... That said, I thought that even within movies suggested laws of physics, there were still things that didn't make much sense or had logical consistency, especially when it comes to interactions between regular and inverted objects. I honestly would have to rewatch it again to be able to give precise examples of specific scenes, I know I had several issues with it, but the biggest for me was that car chase explosion turning into ice instead of fire, that was just complete nonsense.

No the opposite of fire is ice everyone knows that u just dumb

[Batard]

15 hours ago, Tommy said:

I did enjoy it. It had a lot of epic moments. But it was a lot more sloppy than the first two. 

Anyway, I can't stop thinking about Tenet. The more you think about it, the more brilliant it gets. I guess it all makes even more sense if you re-watch it. 

I intend to re-watch Tenet, I thought Robert Pattinson was superb. I feel like I harshly judged him as I did Di Caprio for his earlier work, the former like the latter is clearly a bloody good actor! 

[Tommy]

40 minutes ago, Batard said:

I intend to re-watch Tenet, I thought Robert Pattinson has superb. I feel like I harshly judged him as I did Di Caprio for his earlier work, the former like the latter is clearly a bloody good actor! 

Robert Pattinson is quality. He's got that negative stigma mostly because of Twilight, which he himself even hated. 

He was awesome in Good Time and The Lighthouse too. Although the latter one was very weird. 

Edit: Forgot about "The Devil All the Time". He played a bit of a lunatic in that and maybe that's the movie where one can see most of his range so far. 

[Cicero]

I think we've all learned to take Robert Pattinson seriously after he's redeemed himself in several roles such as Lost City of Z, The King, The Devil All the Time, Lighthouse, and Tenet. All different roles and characters he portrayed brilliantly. 

[Viva la FCB+]

2 hours ago, Tommy said:

Robert Pattinson is quality. He's got that negative stigma mostly because of Twilight, which he himself even hated. 

He was awesome in Good Time and The Lighthouse too. Although the latter one was very weird. 

Edit: Forgot about "The Devil All the Time". He played a bit of a lunatic in that and maybe that's the movie where one can see most of his range so far. 

Lighthouse was one of the strangest things I think Ive ever seen. Ive seen some weird shit but I still dont know what to make of that one.

My critical analysis was Tenet was good. Good, not great. More at 11. 

[Tommy]

1 hour ago, Cicero said:

The King

Oh yea. I enjoyed that one a lot too. 

[Tommy]