They should have focused the heart of the movie on the friendship between Robert Pattinson and JD Washington. That last scene hit harder than any scenes with Elizabeth Debicki “worrying” about her child
@@davidhap11 This was the story with the entire movie. It felt under baked. Hard to specifically point out why the characters felt so flat considering how heavily some of Nolans previous movies leaned on plot, but this time it just did not work. Maybe the central premise just isn't as engaging. I don't know about you but I really couldn't care less about the "pincer movement".
@@vvvvgggg haha given that the story wasn't that compelling I focused on the visuals and production, and the temloral pincer movement is a pretty cool tactical idea 😅
@@davidhap11 Maybe the entire movie being a big disappointment sort of soured me on the final act to the point where I wasn't able to appreciate it's cleverness. This movie will go on a very exclusive list i think of movies that I really didn't like that I will end up re-watching.
I'd like to see Nolan make a stripped down suspense/crime thriller again, something along the lines of Memento or Insomnia (which are my favourite films of his after The Prestige).
Brent Ulstad odd bit of trivia re Following: sets, wardrobe, lighting were carefully made to reproduce or reference Robert Bresson’s ‘Pickpocket’, which is a classic forerunner of French New Wave from about 60 years ago. Not sure why. There’s a definite overlap in subject matter but the tone is not the same at all and Nolan doesn’t seem to have anything at all in common with Bresson. Fully agree with your Nolan picks. I like Following, Prestige and Memento very much... cannot remember Insomnia... do not care for the rest of the catalogue.
I really liked Tenet, but I agree. That's where he should go next. Or, how's this: a horror! I feel his directorial skills and sensibilities could lend themselves to a great horror, even if the source material isn't something he wrote (as was the case with Memento and Insomnia). And he showed with Dunkirk that he could do a genre outside what he had done before and do it really well. I think that'd be interesting.
@Cybernaut 2183 Even with its non-linear structure, Memento is a simple, yet emotionally devastating examination of memory and guilt that runs circles around Nolan's newer films in terms of its execution. It needs no grandiose philosophizing or explosive setpieces to be effective; it works entirely as a character study.
I feel like Nolan has got as far as he can with his string of big budget spectacles that it would be a welcome break for him to do something smaller next.
And yet, despite the Hollywood budget, they never explained what happens when you need to use the loo while inverted. Red Dwarf addresses this with, "Don't ask!"
@Chex LeMeneux You're right, they do wear masks for breathing. [thinks about it] ...so is that the reason The Protagonist walks funny when entering inverted time...?
Lifeofnate Well have you seen it again? I must admit I felt exactly the same as you on first viewing when I actually fell asleep many times. Partly because I kept on falling asleep I knew I would watch again plus my plan was always to watch it again with subtitles which I find are essential for Nolan films. I have now watched it 4 or 5 times with subtitles and plan to watch it 1 or 2 times again when I have the time. Nolan intrigued me enough over time plus some TH-cam explanations to change my view of the film.
Akshay Singh I think the point there was that many philosophical questions in other Nolan films can relate to our world outside their respective stories; the mechanical/technical questions he had in mind after watching Tenet were relevant only to that story and how it works. Ideally you’d at least want a bit of both anyway, not so many questions on how scenes work that you’re left with nothing philosophical to think about.
I think the point is that - mechanical questions are largely inconsequential to your life. It revolves entirely around the world of and mechanics of that specific film, whilst philosophical questions can be applied to the viewers life. Take inception's ending for example, sure you could debate the mechanics of the final shot of the spinner but it doesn't impact you as a human. However it also poses philosophical questions about our reality and if being in a world that isn't real actually matters if we can be happy. Mark's point which I agree with is that Tenet doesn't really give you any of these philosophical questions that could be applied to every viewer.
Yet you still left with questions. I know so many films that were like having fast food. By the time you left the theater and started your car, you already forgot anything that happened.
They went a bit too overkill with the audio authenticity in some scenes, like the train scene and the plane scene both of those almost hurt my ears and I actually saw another audience member covering their ears during those scenes.
@@VARMOT123 I watched it in a Thai movie theatre with thai subtitles. I can't read Thai though unfortunately. I suspect the local audience understood the movie a lot better than me
The problem with every line being importent is that it makes it so easy to guess where things are going. Also did it not weird anybody else out how much this film lacks shots of the "enemy" in shootouts? The whole thing felt like just looking at the good guys shooting someone somewhere off of camera.
Do you mean the end battle scene? The first time I saw it I didn’t even realise there were 3 sides in the battle. I didn’t have a clue what was going on.
@@thecanberean I don't understand that, there are multiple shots of bad guys in the background and one shot of like huge group of them getting out of a helicopter. Besides, the point of final battle was a chase sequence not a fight itself.
I live in China and watched it here in IMAX. I was jealous the Chiense had their subtitles. I caught about 65% of the dialogue. My Lithuanian friends were looking at me in even more bewilderment. I had no answers for them.
As a black dude, it is awesome to see a blockbuster film in which the protagonist is the lead and his race is never an issue. (Edit: just realised how many people pose as black online - eg ‘dean browning’ - can promise you that I am indeed what I say I am. And there’s *nothing* political implied in the comment either)
@@deliaproductions Watch any interview with Nolan and the unnamed protagonist was in the script long before casting began and was an deliberate reference to films like the dollars trilogy. You’re grasping straws.
Another movie with a great black lead is "His House." The movie terrified me and the refugee couple did an amazing job, especially the husband whose PTSD I could literally feel through the screen.
A lot of the film requires you to think about the elements of the story itself, not the precise words being said. At least that is my humble interpretation.
@@anthonymartensen3164 it was a poor sound mix though anyway. Like the bass was brick-walled and fatiguing. I thought there was an issue at my theatre.
Leigh Parsons problem is, I can actually hear and understand the dialogue in mumblecore films 😆 this is just poor sound mixing which really shouldn’t be the case in a film like this
@Your Comment Gets A Gold Star Apparently Nolan makes dialogue in his soundmix muffled because he thinks audiences working harder to understand will be more immersed in the film. Thats like a novelist insisting the dialogue text is in font point 2 to make the reader squint.
Tenet seems to be the sequel to a film not made. The mystery is not in how it ends, but how it began. Its enjoyable thinking about what & who the earlier part of this story involved.
@@streaky81 im holding my breath to see how this links to Inception. Although Sir Michael might be there to make sure that Tenet and Inception isn't in the same universe. :(
except thats literally the point. you realise that the events of the film have not been spontaneous but meticulously planned.. that's sorta what makes the ending good.
I didn't have an emotional investment in the characters but that's not the point of this film, the mechanics and plot are. I loved both of those and can't wait to see it two or three more times to dissect everything.
Or boycott his movies. I do. I'm not paying anymore to get my ears assaulted by his aggresive sound design (can we still call it a score?, it really has nothing in terms of melody and is so on the nose bandage to artificially create tension) . It's his established gimmick and it's the most unpleasant thing. It's a deliberate choice on his part. I find it the most annoying aspect. It takes you out of the movie. Anyone else would do this, he would be destroyed by critics....
worldapart90 I do think Nolan has more to his films than the sound design and I’m willing to overlook the sound design to get well fleshed our characters and imaginative storytelling.
@@rhodriwilliams2599 Where exactly are the well fleshed out characters in Dunkirk and Tenet? Both films are really unpleasant viewing experiences in part due to the sound design but not only. Complexifying simple things (different timeframes mixed in Dunkirk, rewinding in a Bond/Hunt movie in Tenet) just for the sake of it is quite pointless and creates pretentious and tedious movies.
@@rhodriwilliams2599 I wish I could say the same. It used to be the case but now his gimmicks or defaults outweight the positive for me unfortunately. Even on first viewing. I won't rewatch Interstellar or Inception because of the noisy last tier but I was ok with it during the first viewing when they were released.
Watching Tenet on second viewing was incredibly rewarding. I found that I understood more of the plot than I thought, this time I was able to just relax and enjoy knowing what was going to happen next. I never had a big issue with the sound except when the characters were wearing masks, in any case it didn't diminish my enjoyment of the film.
I was stunned the second time I saw it. The first time it was relentless and I struggled to keep up. The second time was a revelation because my mind was free to just “watch” it because I had, I guess, taken so much in subliminally the first time...
Really. I found it even worse the second time round. I’d forgotten how interminable those early conversation scenes were and just how wooden John David Washington was. All of its flaws were just highlighted to me.
Alex Hawkins sort of agree. I actually thought he was good in the second half. He is really good at the action stuff and emoting. Delivering the dialogue he comes short IMO. Almost like you can see the words on the script popping out.
I watched it in IMAX the second time and had a harder time hearing the dialog than standard. However, the first time watching was like unraveling a series of plot knots and the second time I could see the whole rope, almost felt like I had Neil's perspective. Loved both experiences
The key is to watch the film while time inverted yourself. You will have no questions at the end, though you may find the experience rather forgettable.
I don't think it's a failure of storytelling if people are saying they need to see it again because they didn't understand it. Perhaps it would be more telling if they just wrote it off as nonsense. Not everyone would've fully understood a Shakespeare play back in the day and they've been studied for centuries. Probably the same with some of Kubricks work. Replay value is a good thing in todays disposable film climate. I just watched it myself and also feel the need to see it again. It's almost like it needs to be watched middle to middle! With regards to sound issues, I experienced the same muffled dialogue, it felt like we were missing dolby tracks or side and rear speakers. The sound only came from the front of the auditorium and the dialogue was a little quiet in the mix at some points and also very heavy in the low mids. A lot of the important sibilants weren't there. It's not (as many people have said) because there is too much sound going on, too many tracks etc and the dialogue can't compete. It would be quite straightforward with some half decent mastering to have the same dialogue cut through the mix more so it's either intentional or cinemas aren't screening it correctly (which is feasible) or it's a technical error (which I think would be the least feasible but possible if it wasn't mixed and premiered in the correct environment under lockdown for example). In terms of crits I would say (on first watch) that the film was clever, but perhaps not clever enough. When I say that I don't mean more complex. The first half seemed quite vignetty, a bit like one of those perfume commercials at times and I wonder if the script could've somehow incorporated more traditional structure elements to make the first half more accessible. Aside from that the film felt a little cold overall, I didn't really get emotionally invested in the characters even though the performances were all great. Reminded me a bit of Memento/Irreversible/Primer. Action as always with Nolan was terrific. Overall thumbs up from me, fully enjoyed it and look forward to seeing it again. Oh and I'm definately thinking about physics at the moment. If the bullet holes disappear in the future, what happens when the glass first gets made? EDIT: Watched again at BFI Imax, probably the place it was made for. Sound was better but still tricky to catch everything. The film is so dense and requires a lot of concentration to catch important lines and theres very little down time which allows you to think. I'd like to remove my crit about it being vignetty and cold. I now see it as part of the spy thriller genre and pattinsons character adds a good dose of emotional resonance to the script. One additional crit I would add however is the film being a 12 rating. The scene at the beginning with the teeth pulling for example suffers from this. On the first watch I thought the jaw being rebuilt was from the pill he took. Still have many questions but really is quite a special film.
"Not everyone would've fully understood a Shakespeare play back in the day" --- NOT the point. As an audience any film with mystery elements NEEDS to be MAINLY understood on first viewing...a SMALL amount can remain mysterious....Oah ndyou are trying to equate Nolans writing with Shakespeare gtfo
@@atomiccritter6492 What rule book does that come from? A film is meant to be entertaining, Tenet did just that with visuals alone. If it can stay with you afterwards and make you interested in watching it again even better. I didn't equate Nolan with Shakespeare, that wasn't the point. Why can't a film be a complex puzzle which requires multiple viewings? I take it you didn't enjoy it then?
@@SonicTemples you clearly did equate Nolan with Shakespeare its in black and white. Yes a film CAN be a puzzle but expect non nerds to rip it to pieces
@@atomiccritter6492 My original point was that I don't believe that its a storytelling failure for a film if its not understood upon seeing for the first time. I used Shakespeare and Kubrick as an example of complex works which are considered great and yet may not have been fully understood by an audience when first seen. That was my point, not that Tenet is a great work. No idea about that yet. I'm not sure what your definition of a nerd is here but it's a bit of a shame to suggest only nerds like complicated movies.
When you watch it for a 2nd time you realize that Neil is the heart and soul of this film. His sacrifices are much more understood upon repeat viewings and it does have an emotional impact.
The problem there is you have to rely on repeat viewings in order to possibly get to some semblance of an emotional core to the film. That’s simply not good writing
Timey wimey is Doctor Who, but I guess the Austin Powers thing refers to when Basil Exposition tells Austin and the audience that they don't need to understand and just enjoy it
Also, they’re discussing Time travel and to get around all the complicated paradox stuff, Powers goes “oh no, I’ve gone cross eyed” when he’s trying to understand
The Tenth Doctor: People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually, from a nonlinear, non-subjective viewpoint, it's more like a big ball of wibbly-wobbly, timey-wimey... stuff.
Yes, I found it difficult to hear sometimes and, like Mark, I didn't get why the penultimate scene had the two teams coming at the thingy from two different directions. I'd like to see it again, but I think I'll choose a subtitled screening.
Mark, in Inception, the spinning top is MAL's totem, not Cob's. Cob's totem is his wedding ring. If he has it on *he* is dreaming. No ring = reality. It's a misdirection.
That makes no damn sense, just existing or not makes for a terrible totem. It would have to be a ring that spins a certain way or something, but merely appearing in a universe that can manifest grenade launchers is unreliable and follows none of the established rules. I personally think it's a plot hole and inception is shoddily over written and it IS meant to be his ring even if it doesn't actually make sense, along with a million other things in the movie.
In 'The Night Manager' Elizabeth Debicki played the partner of an evil arms dealer who the protagonist tries to take down and gains access to him by saving his life and ends up defeating the arms dealer with the collusion of Elizabeth Debicki's character, sound familiar? Maybe Nolan isnt so original after all.
Same here. I would have cared more if I had understood it, but beyond that I never really cared much about any of the characters. I didn’t know why the main character and the woman even liked each other. There was just no build up of any kind of emotion for anyone, perhaps because I was too busy trying to understand what the heck was going on with the science.
I'm glad I'm not alone in feeling absolutely unimpressed. I didn't think much of the New Mutants either, but TBH I wasn't really expected much from that film. Tenet - I was hoping for more.
Just Stuff I went in blind, but just from the tag line that it was an international espionage thriller I was hopeful. I didn’t know it was also sci-fi or that I wouldn’t know any of the characters and would feel nothing for them. The only actor I recognized was Robert Pattinson, and even he was so different looking I had to think on it for a moment. New actors wouldn’t bother me so much if I wasn’t trying so hard to figure out what was happening. I walked out feeling dumb.
I absolutely cared for Pattinson's character and I left with questions because the film was going 100mph. Is that bad? Not imo, it just asks for a second viewing because it enhances the experience. I think people ego get hurt when they can't figure it out all in the first view and they lash with a bad critic.
This film borders on being just an excuse for the reverse-time gimmick, IMO. It's mostly well thought out, but there were some parts where I could see the cracks and I had to actively suspend my disbelief. This film probably _has_ to be watched at least twice, and that's a mark _against_ it, for me.
'I could see the cracks and I had to actively suspend my disbelief.'' Yep. There were multiple sequences where there simply wasn't a satisfying answer for 'why is X character doing Y?'
Spellbinding action scenes, although I struggled to follow the plot at times (like others) and invest in the emotional core. However, the more I've let it sit with me, the more it's growing on me. Worth a re-watch at some point!
I think I agree with you. The first time is just incredibly overwhelming. But the more it stays with me it is growing on me. Especially the implications of the ending.
@@z-beeblebrox He jus won't be told, as in he jus won't budge on HIS definition of dialogue sound mixing. It's now a real problem. Dark Knight Returns is one of, if not THE worst sound mix i've ever heard.
@@georgepool2241 Agreed, there is a major scene in Interstellar where Michael Caine is revealing a dramatic revelation while dying and I couldn't hear a word
There is a video essay related to the idea that the diaries cannot be trusted in the film. It is called Dishonest Truths. Although it doesn't get into the idea that Angiers is basically lying about Tesla etc to sell his trick to the audience, it does question whether Angiers is to be believed in general. You will find a lively discussion in the comments about the idea though. Some of the discussion is the usual you tube back and forth, but some commenters make very valid points on the idea.
The biggest issue I had with Tenet was this: With great "fetch" movies (there's a plan to achieve a thing, we learn how they're going to go about achieving it, we find out what they gain by succeeding and we find out what they lose by failing), the information we need is presented before the plan is enacted so that the tension of success/failure is felt as things progress. Nolan seems to have reversed this in Tenet. I kept on thinking that I had little idea who these people were they were meeting, why they were going to a place, what they were trying to get etc for most of the movie and it only fell into place after the fact. It was only when I put it in that language that I realised that he used the cause/effect reversal concept on the structure of the movie itself. Now, that might be "clever" but it's not at all satisfying as a viewing experience.
Good point, but as you mentioned yourself, it is reversal concept of the movie, as you are following the protagonist moving forward in time, while learning about things that are moving backwards in time through Neil. A traditional movie would be from Neils perspective. Reversed, but logical in its foot steps towards solving the puzzle. However, Nolans approach enhances the whole reverse concept of an otherwise traditional forward moving plot and in extension of that, it makes the protagonist discover that he is the creator of Tenet through his unique observational ability - an ability sarcastically dubbed posterity at two key moments in the movie.
@@AidenIlkhani I think this film and it's concept presents quite an intriguing discussion when it comes to these epic Nolan (and others) high concept films. The concept-driven structure and narrative may be incredibly deemed intelligent and on reflection, a "deep" film. However, films are made to be enjoyed while viewing them also. A great concept does not necessarily make for a great film.
@@alexpettitt7337 Absolutely agree with that. Seen plenty of great concepts not translating well into a film, either by a directing that fails to weave the audience through its plot or technical challenges coming short of an otherwise noble attempt. My problems with Tenet is not related to the directing nor the technical level of its scope, but more to do with plot development especially in the third act with the Temporal Pincer strategy. While fitting to serve both as a tactical maneuver and directly connecting the movie's premise and title, I felt that Inception did far better at conveying the importance of actions on different layers of time having to depend on the success of each other, whilst Tenet's third act felt a bit "lazy" and quickly put together at a location where separate bombastic actions rarely had to connect with each other and served merely as showpieces of technical action. As a whole movie with a very technical premise of time manipulation, I would certainly say it qualifies as pure cinema despite its shortcomings in the plot and whilst one could critique its directing for not carrying every member of the audience through its narrative, I do think that perhaps we as audiences have also become quite lazy in our expectations of movies hand-feeding us all the information by the time the credits roll. This is not to excuse Nolan from his responsibility of taking care of the audience through a concept he himself set the bar for and there are certainly issues at many places in the movie where either pacing or explanatory scenes would have been much welcomed or better relayed to the audience, but then we would also have to be honest and say that we are upholding Nolan to a much higher degree of criticism than most other directors.
@@AidenIlkhani " it makes the protagonist discover that he is the creator of Tenet through his unique observational ability " i didn't pick up on that at all. Makes me intrigued to see it again.
Some people say that to understand Tenet you have to see it multiple times. But why would I watch this 2.5H movie again when I didn't care about any of the characters?
@@atomiccritter6492 the more I re-watch Nolans movies, the more they fall apart because of the weak scripts. Memento, The Prestige and Batman Begins are the only ones that hold up for multiple viewings. The rest fall apart as soon as you start to think critically. But I guess you won't because you probably gave The Dark Knight 10/10 to get in to the imdb top 250...
The film had no heart and very little to care about.. It was all plot and no story... A serious mistake from an experienced executive team. Might as well be Transformers for Mensa, for all it's worth.
The whole editing of the movie is off. Not only the sound editing as people have already mentioned, but the dialogue in various scenes is off. There were moments when a conversation just unnaturally moves to a different frame and it didn’t mesh well with the next scene. It happened several times in the movie that I thought to myself, “Nolan directed this movie?” I saw the movie at a 70mm IMAX theatre. This movie at the theatre I saw it at is the most annoying sound experience I’ve ever had. It displaces “Transformers 2” from the top of the list. Michael Bay was probably salivating at all the explosions and gunfire during the last act of the movie.
Agree 100%. It actually became comical to me the way exposition was delivered as they try and cut to different sets as the dialog is delivered so as not to bore the audience. Yet, all I'm thinking is, "so, they weren't talking at all between getting on the train and getting out of the station?" That whole "rolling exposition" bit is done like three separate times when in a regular film it'd be used once and never again.
I found that the music was loud; but it was never so bad that I couldn't make out what people were saying. On the second time round I did find it much easier to hear though; and it was in a considerably smaller cinema - so perhaps the issue is worse for larger theatres?
great shout. hasn't been mentioned enough how miserable the dialogue, exposition, storytelling was. enjoyable spectacle but really a bit of a naff film.
Boss Attack “So as not to bore to the audience.” I’m actually wondering how much was intentional on Nolan’s part because if this is the direction Nolan is going in, then Nolan’s next movie will be a no-go for me at the theater.
Top selling Xmas present this year will be the Tenet dvd/bluray. Everyone will be watching it again with subtitles That Nolan's pretty crafty isn't he?
I had to have the subtitles on - but I still need to see it again as I got confused in the final 15 minutes or so. Actually I've just seen myself moving backwards with a smile turning to a look of confusion so obviously I have seen it again.
Someone made the point in The guardian that a director will have lived with the script for years. Nolan will know every line in the film and he may well catch every word, because he knows what to listen for. Couple this with his reputation and I think sound mixers just don't have the nerve to tell him 'those voices cannot be heard!', or if they do, he simply says, 'I can hear it fine'.
@@davidlean1060 If that's the case, humility goes a long way. He needs to test the sound for his films on the worst available mono cinema sound system, or something like a 1970's clock radio. If the mix is working for someone who doesn't know the script through the terrible system, then he's golden
I've loved every Nolan film. Interstellar being one of my top 10 ever. However, he's asked too much of me this time. There is asking an audience to 'stay with me' but this is just telling a story so convoluted it loses the viewer, so now that are just watching set piece after set piece, backwards. Not hearing the dialogue of course didn't help but overall, he's over reached the acceptance of the audience, finally. Take a step back Mr Nolan. Please.
I’ve never been a big Nolan fan. I didn’t like Inception or Dunkirk, but I quite liked The Dark Night Rises and I could appreciate Nolan’s artistry even if it didn’t always work for me. But then I saw Tenet and it utterly killed my enthusiasm for any future Nolan projects. I might have just about tolerated the overly complex plot if the film didn’t have the worst sound design I have ever heard. There was some great visual stuff during the war sequence, but I was long past caring by then.
@@Deanhughes5707 I will most definitely see it again on the small screen. However, I don't think it will change my mind even if I 'get it' the 2nd time round. The sound mixing was atrocious and just the whole thing was not told well, poor scripting in a lot of places and one weird set piece after another does not make a good film. If you can't enjoy a film 1st time at the cinema, something has gone drastically wrong.
I had it the first time I watched it, but not the second time. Maybe it was re-released? But it was weirder the second time since the music had no impact but I could actually hear the dialogue. The film is weird from a technical level.
Yeah it was kind of annoying - I agree that the just about every line of the script is important, but the most important ones happen when there's a lot of background noise. At a key scene (where there was some muffled dialogue), I found myself trying to make sense of what was just said, while the next thing was happening, so by the time the final scene takes place, I wasn't sure how or why they were doing what they were doing, in the way that they were doing it. It was aesthetically stunning, and I really wanted to like it more than I did, but after the first time I got lost, I think I was lost for good.
4 ปีที่แล้ว
My problem was the timepoint, where the inversion should be starting. Is it randomly? Right at the exposition scene: Imagine he would have THROWN the bullet onto the table. It would not be on the table anymore. So, where does the inversion start and who decides that?
The movie is all plot and no character. While objectively the stakes are high, I was never given a reason to care about the characters or the plot so it didn't feel like the stakes were actually that high. And the one character who did have some kind of arc had the most unoriginal tropey arc possible for thier character. They felt like plot devices rather than characters. It was technically good but some problems with the audio like muffled dialogue. I think the soundtrack was great, it makes creative uses of sounds such as breathing and playing things backwards and forwards. Great action scenes (I love the way that Nolan directs action) the written dialogue was okay, nothing stood out as particularly good or bad. I much prefer inception, which is far easier to understand and had more character work and emotion than tenet, if that even means anything to you. I still had an enjoyable experience but it definitely has its fair share of issues (I'm avoiding talking about the actual plot because I don't want to spoil it for people, obviously) After the first time I saw it (in 70mm) I gave it a 7.5/10 and then I saw it again (digital projection) and my current score for it is 6.5/10 You may love it, you may hate it, but that's for you to decide of course.
@@CreationK. totally with you there, everything is perfect in Inception, the score, the cinematography, the direction, the acting, the script, everything. Can you tell it's one of my favourite films? I really wanted Tenet to be as good, but it suffered by comparison. I still place it leagues ahead of standard Hollywood fodder, but it seemed more of a mess, with more wasted pointless scenes and dialogue that was thrown away.
The final act makes the most sense if you use the soundtrack as your cue. The temporal pincer is laid out scene by scene in not only the colours of the teams, but the soundtrack either being played forward or backwards. It makes the action really clear immediately if you are alert for it.
Yes! It had the same dodgy premise as Edge of Tomorrow, but, where that film squeezed through by not taking itself too seriously, Tenet took itself painfully, painfully seriously - just like The Counselor - which makes the plot holes difficult to ignore. And, like The Counselor, it was edited in a manner which was outright baffling, in an attempt, I suppose, to confuse the audience into not realising that the film makes **no sense**.
Bang on Mark, my exact sentiments after viewing the film too. I was no less than engrossed all the time, I had issues with the sound and really need to see it again...or have I already done so?
After Batman Begins, Inception, The Dark Knight, The Prestige and Interstellar, I wanted to go back and rewatch the movie again right away. Although I enjoyed Tenet, I have no desire to ever watch it again.
Haven't felt the need to rewatch Interstellar or Dunkirk, especially at home where his trademark scale and bass-heavy sounds are much less impactful. This seems like the worst one yet. I don't even think I want to watch this at the movies, as it seems like it won't have anything worthwhile outside a big room with loud speakers...
What if you aren't supposed to hear the dialogue? There are many scenes where the background noise dies out and the actors can be clearly heard. Throughout the film a lot of characters explain that they don't understand the world they are in, or don't know what will happen, and I think the we the audience are supposed to also feel a bit lost and helpless. I think we are too used to knowing everything that is going on in excruciating detail and sometimes you have to "feel, don't think" like the lady studying the reversed objects says.
Like most Nolan films, Tenet is a picture that quickly confronts you with a number of characters with vague impetus, throws them all into a big temporal salad spinner, gets wayyy ahead of itself, and then spends a number of scenes trying to catch up with itself as it explains itself to you through sapping, painful dialogue scenes between people you don't care about, and then rattles the premise off with an excellent atmospheric score and a crazy cinematic masterpiece scene of action...leaving you with the sense of "was this film necessary to make in the first place?" I will probably watch it again soon, but even if you've wrapped your head around the temporal bending and inverting, it's hard to not wonder why Nolan- who could pretty much make any film he wanted to at this point - decided to tell this story...
Actually I would argue the opposite, the first act of the film lays out what is happening pretty clearly, explicitly in fact: it is almost wholly devoted to exposition. I don’t think this is Nolan’s best work but I do think it shits over most of the dross other ‘blockbuster’ directors have been serving up over the past decade. A second viewing is rewarded with many of the subtexts of the film becoming clearer (Pattison being the son, Caine the soldier etc, ie. The Protagonist is being aided by folks from his own future), which compensate for the initial impression of this film being emotionally anaemic. I think Nolan made Tenet because he could and wanted to, and repeat viewing is mandatory for most if not all of his films and is where most of the pay offs lie. I loved Tenet, but still think The Prestige is his best. We are lucky to have Nolan, full stop, in as much as he never underestimates the intelligence of his audience like most of Hollywood does.
Having watched the movie twice at the cinema, I would have to say that the second time round was so much better, providing answers to all the questions raised by the first viewing, a puzzle the first time round, a solution the second time around. Every part of the final battle made sense and the mumbly dialogue was not at all so prominent the second time around because I was not grasping for every clue having already seen it once. I would go so far as to say that to properly review the plot aspects of the movie one would need to see the movie at least twice because the movie is not designed to be understood in the first setting. Amazing movie and story, very complicated in all the best ways. I think it would only help if the dialogue sounded clearer though and would hope that we might get a version with that cleared up at some point.
I’ve seen it twice and while I did understand a lot of things more the second time round at the end I was just a bit meh about it all and I still thought much of it just didn’t make sense and there was still no real emotional core to it.
@@skanda33333 I did wonder about it. I like to think he is because it could make a lot of sense if it were the case, but I didn't see enough to make it a definite proof, just an interesting implication. I did like how there is enough ingredients to extrapolate the events of the story into the past and the future and create your own version of he future and the past events of the movie. One idea I though was that the Algorithm was a just a distraction to distract the Tenet organisation as a huge number of people escaped the future and began their own society of people extending humanity back into the past from the troubled future, staying in the shadows of known events so they can hide and continue humanity's existence backwards until the beginning of time. Certainly not implied at all though, just thoughts that I had second time around.
@@thecanberean Yes, I agree that this was certainly more about plot over character development, and compared to, say, Inception, it seemed that there were a lot less opportunities to understand the character's personal motivations except from "saving the world", which I think could have helped. But I did get the feeling that Nolan had challenge himself to create a scenario where the Tenet operatives all worked to a strict policy of not getting to know any of the details about their fellow agents, so in some ways it helped me view things from their perspective better.
I saw this at the IMAX screen in Manchester Printworks. The sound was deafening in places, and I struggled to hear a good deal of the dialogue. I thoroughly enjoyed it though, and look forward to unpicking it thoroughly when it is available on BluRay
Can't wait to watch this film with the subtitles for a second and third viewing. It was a great film to go back to the cinema to watch, visually and audibly stunning, but I really get what Mark is saying about the mumbling. What it was also missing was the character that acts as an audience learner (if that makes sense). Someone that's explained what this world is so we can understand it just that bit better. There's one particular scene in the film where he's handed a gas mask and I'm like "why?" even though it's explained very very briefly.
I agree with the issues in the sound mix. The score was too loud and the dialogue was too low. I found myself having to work the volume control several times unfortunately.
@@WeatherVeinFilms Yeah just check on your theater's website if it says "Closed Caption" next to the movie title. The traditional device is like a little box (where the subtitles will show) on an adjustable gooseneck stand, that you stick in the cupholder. Some chains like Regal started using glasses that you wear, I've heard those are a little more difficult to adjust and find a sweet spot for the captions to show up
There is a scene at the beginning with the scientist when she says 'don't try to understand it, feel it. And the protagonist replies 'I get it... instinct' That covered all the technical issues for me. The best thing about this film is you feel stupid the first time you watch it and really smart on the 2nd watch.
I see, where the criticism of wondering only about mechanics and not philosophy, comes from. However, I feel that Tenet is more about the question "is it worth it to take action / does anything I can do matter at all, if it's all basically determined?" Hence "I am the protagonist" at the end and the omission of a name for his character. Plus the video of the protagonist catching a bullet with reverse playback and something like "you had to put your hand there for it to work". This goes along with the question "isn't Neil more important / I care more for him" taking the biggest sacrifice, and tenet probably states no it's the protagonist, by setting it all up.
So I saw the twists coming - at least as far as the woman jumping off the boat, the guys in the black gear at the freeport, etc. - but it felt like it was so tightly cut to fit as much in as possible and had no room to breathe with the ideas and characters
I havne't seen it yet, but I hears someone say the editing was so tight in almost every scene, probably for running time, that there's nowhere a moment for the audience to let things sink in and process all the information. With a few lingering moments between scenes that let the movie breathe, audiences would've had more chance to keep up with the story twists.
I disagree totally on this. It was easy to digest the concept that inverted things run backwards in time What twists? The biggest problem is that for an action movie its slow and uninspiring...absolutely NO wow factor
Certainly a film that should age better but not a fan the first time round at all unfortunately. I think the bombastic noises had something to do with it, although I did like Ludwig's experimental score in places
Yeh score really annoyed me. The main reason why I don't like Ludwig's score is cos I was trying to watch Fort Apache (the old Fonda movie) in the screen below Tenet. Got sooooooo annoying after a while that I disliked it before I went in to actually watch it.
@@ellbo2 Ouch. Tenet was louder than almost every film I've ever seen. But I promise the music does make sense when you're watching the film - it's just not a film I'd buy the soundtrack to. It's there to add to the intensity and scale of it all rather than the emotion.
Kermode wants to enjoy this more than he did. He's acting as a Nolan apologist here instead of simply stating facts: the audio quality is awful and the story itself is clunky and difficult to follow. "I'll go and see it again and hope that it makes more sense to me" is not good storytelling... Tenet is not an enjoyable film. Kermode admits himself he didn't understand the ending.
Exactly. We cut Nolan a lot of slack because he’s ... well... Nolan. I love most of his films but I thought this one just didn’t work and I didn’t really care.
If you make something this complicated then OF COURSE it won't be fully understood in one viewing, Nolan doesn't want that, and it doesn't mean it's bad storytelling. I'm still realising things about Inception, Dunkirk, Interstellar etc after several viewings that I just didn't pick up on the first time. Haven't seen The Prestige or Memento in ages and likewise they both require multiple viewings to fully get your head round it
I am slowly starting to think that a lot of critics are cutting Nolan way too much slack, simply because he is Christopher Nolan. I found that, as per usual for Nolan movies, Tenet looked and sounded incredible. However, in terms of its script, storytelling and characters, the movie just falls flat. It is needlessly complex, with unnecessary subplots (e.g. the painting) and laughably one-dimensional characters (damsel in distress Kat, cartoonishly evil Sator, and let's not even talk about Michael Caine...). I believe, the movie would have been a way more enjoyable experience had they cut out the subplot-clutter, given their main characters some depth and just focussing on its interesting concept of time-inversion.
@@thecanberean Couldn't agree more. How is Kermode not commenting on any of this? 90% of the lines in the film were exposition like the actors are on coke. Kermode says Nolan is a director who trusts his audience to keep up, but he is not (no longer?) a director who trusts his scenes to let them breathe, trusts simple ideas to be interesting enough without having to pile loads of subplots and narrative yarn balls on top, and for me, most crucially, no longer seems to trust a film to be interesting without a small army of extras with guns.
@@ps5stuffguy Honestly can't wait to see it again. I don't have a problem with people saying it's 'too complex', that's their opinion. But they shouldn't be saying it as a criticism - there are some of us who love that complexity and want to watch it multiple times to unpack every last detail. I'd much rather a Nolan film leave me guessing than have everything explained to me first time.
@@samcooke343 I don't understand it fully but still loved it. Many amazing scenes. Look forward to the 4K and learn more. The film is absolutely crazy lol
Near the beginning of the film, the woman who is 'training' the main fella, she says it's 'instinct' go with the 'flow'. All the reverse stuff. So the way I viewed the whole end section of the film was people moving forward had will and the people moving backwards were mainly going on instinct. Apart from Pattinsons character who breaks out of the that to save them while they're sorting out the bomb.
Exactly how I felt about this film. Seen it twice and my overall opinion echoes the same sentiments. It's bottom tier Nolan which means it's great but just not as good as his other films in my opinion. Enjoyed it a lot.
Where does it rank on his list of films? Personally I think Dark Knight Rises was his weakest along with Interstellar, so provided it's better than those two I'll be more than happy.
@@larssonk22 it really is up to your personal opinion and tastes. My favourite of his is probably The Prestige followed by Memento and then Inception. This is a very intelligent and ambitious film but there is something missing for me. Character development possibly or even an extra inversion-based set piece. Wish it was 30 minutes longer to flesh those elements out a little. To really feel the stakes. Mark is right about the sound mixing. It's really bad at times with the music and gunfire and people wearing masks and explaining key plot points. A little frustrating there. I still think it's a good film overall just for the ideas. I've seen it twice and understand the majority of what happened now. I may go again with other friends who haven't seen it. I highly recommend IMAX screens.
@@mazamonx Okay, your Nolan movies choices seem legit. Like Kermode, I also rank The Prestige as the very best Nolan movie. In fact, I would put pretty much all of his original IP movies above his Batman trilogy (great though those were.) Apart from perhaps Dunkirk, which, while a great first watch experience (especially in IMAX) does not quite rank up there with his other original movies imo.
I haven't seen this film, but watched several critics make valid points: i) I can't hear a lot of the dialogue ;ii) I don't know why things are going backwards mechanically in some scenes; iii) the plot doesn't work; iv) Nolan doesn't develop characters, they are ciphers there to merely explain the philosophy; v) everyone said, I'm going back to watch it again as I'm sure everything will fall into place; vi) they give way too much respect to Nolan, like he's the new Kubrick. Nolan made a few good films like Prestige, Insomnia, Memento, Batman Begins, where the films made human sense. Nolan suffers what I call gigantism: a mastodon of intellect, emotionally a boar- he just doesn't do humanity; he thinks that if he can show the conceptual wizardry of an astrophysicist whose main subject is time, he can make more and more preposterous films that do not make sense, but because they're 'profound' they can be 'watched again'. For him noise is the story or rather to look for the meaning he gives you the haystack rather than the needle. I'd rather have a quieter film with deeper characterization with clearer exposition: Nolan has contempt for words and dialogue, he prefers spectacle and sound and wants to keep you guessing ( 'feel it'),'are you keeping up' as if the audience is being taken into a magic cult whereby you have to seize on the paltry crumbs of clues he throws in your path amidst the fire & frenzy of hero worship he wants you to feel for his artistry. As mayo says why can't we just see it once and get it 1st time? I'm sure if you approach a course in film studies you will get bogged down in reams of conceptual nonsense, like deciphering The Waste Land from its notes, only here with imagery. Only Nolan is applying the principles of The Waste Land and Eliot's conception of poetry to film: you feel it before you understand it. If his films cannot breathe how can they even be compared to poetry? People free yourself from such false idols. Nolan cannot himself understand any more what his films are about: he has the keys to the magic box of cinema but can't make a real film with any heart or humanity: he just doesn't do people. There's no joy in clunkiness.
I saw it first time a day after release at the BFI IMAX in London. I saw it again that evening at the Vue Leicester Square venue (both because I wanted to - and because I felt I needed to because of the sound). The sound at the BFI IMAX was MUCH worse than at the Vue Leicester Square. In fact it was so bad at the BFI IMAX I actually wrote to the Chief Quality Officer - who offered his e-mail at the end of the screening - and have now negotiated a return trip! He told me it was because "Mr. Nolan wants you to hear the big sounds, as well as the quiet ones...) In that sense, I think it's probably down to whoever does the sound at these venues, but more generally there certainly are big problems with the sound in Tenet.
The main philosophical questions of TENET is the idea of free will and causality. The Protagonist throughout the film is simply performing his role for his future self, so the idea of free will is questioned as all his actions were predetermined.
My problem is not that a bullet can be shot and unshot depending on which way you are living it. My problem is a building having the bottom reformed after the perfect top rose back up to complete form and then blowing up the top of the building. Now we are either talking alternative futures, multi-verse realities, or a lack of logic. Which do you think it is?
In the scene where the scientist showing the Protagonist the mechanics of the inverted bullets, she says 'don't try to make sense of it' That line is probably meant for the audience too. Pretty much confirming that alot of it doesn't actually make sense when you think about.
@@thecanberean *in your opinion. It's fine if you didn't like it, but don't make out like it was a bad film just because you personally didn't enjoy or understand it.
I remembering hearing Mark's review of this on Radio 5. Some wag texted in, claiming that it was a bit like the episode of Red Dwarf, titled "Backwards"...
He literally sounds like he's just making excuses for the film here. Its like he wants to say that its not that good and it's over complicated but he just doesn't dare because its a Nolan film
Yes, Kermode like a lot of film critics are in a state of funk about simply saying that a BRAND name like Nolan is no good in this film, because he's a brand name, and because he's doing sci-fi in a James Bond style(a calling card perhaps?): if Kermode clearly stated the truth," it's rubbish", he'd lose lots of supporters and fans. Kermode's into sci-fi, so he wants to appear cool, saying he wants to go back and see it again to 'understand it'. Kermode has made a virtue of seeing a film many times, to appreciate it like a connoisseur. He also knows Nolan spends great amounts, does lots of planning on his major films , and because of this he gives him respect. The fact you have to suffer to see this film isn't enough..
@@johnsharman7930 I don't see why you have to turn it into a big conspiracy, he gives a nuanced criticism and says he likes it but it is flawed. That is the opinion of most intelligent people watching who don't feel the need to be edgy by expressing extreme opinions.
With a movie like Tenet it's not a failure of the storytelling for viewers to benefit from watching it again. What you get the second time around is some clarity due to having the benefit of hindsight. In a very real sense, you need to watch it again to perform you own "Temporal Pincer Movement".
I went into the film expecting to have problems understanding it due to some of the talk around the film. I can remember feeling slightly confused early on. But by the end of the film everything made sense. Possibly certain questions about it haven't occurred to me; I don't know. But it seemed reasonably clear cut to me in a general sense. I really enjoyed it.
They should have focused the heart of the movie on the friendship between Robert Pattinson and JD Washington. That last scene hit harder than any scenes with Elizabeth Debicki “worrying” about her child
I wish the ending scene had made me cry, but the relationship build up just wasn't strong enough 😔
@@davidhap11 This was the story with the entire movie. It felt under baked. Hard to specifically point out why the characters felt so flat considering how heavily some of Nolans previous movies leaned on plot, but this time it just did not work. Maybe the central premise just isn't as engaging. I don't know about you but I really couldn't care less about the "pincer movement".
@@vvvvgggg haha given that the story wasn't that compelling I focused on the visuals and production, and the temloral pincer movement is a pretty cool tactical idea 😅
@@davidhap11 Maybe the entire movie being a big disappointment sort of soured me on the final act to the point where I wasn't able to appreciate it's cleverness.
This movie will go on a very exclusive list i think of movies that I really didn't like that I will end up re-watching.
@@vvvvgggg yeah totally, it's a 200million dollar movie with state of the art tech and genius production, but it has no heart lmao
I'd like to see Nolan make a stripped down suspense/crime thriller again, something along the lines of Memento or Insomnia (which are my favourite films of his after The Prestige).
Brent Ulstad odd bit of trivia re Following: sets, wardrobe, lighting were carefully made to reproduce or reference Robert Bresson’s ‘Pickpocket’, which is a classic forerunner of French New Wave from about 60 years ago. Not sure why. There’s a definite overlap in subject matter but the tone is not the same at all and Nolan doesn’t seem to have anything at all in common with Bresson.
Fully agree with your Nolan picks. I like Following, Prestige and Memento very much... cannot remember Insomnia... do not care for the rest of the catalogue.
I really liked Tenet, but I agree. That's where he should go next. Or, how's this: a horror! I feel his directorial skills and sensibilities could lend themselves to a great horror, even if the source material isn't something he wrote (as was the case with Memento and Insomnia). And he showed with Dunkirk that he could do a genre outside what he had done before and do it really well. I think that'd be interesting.
@Cybernaut 2183 Even with its non-linear structure, Memento is a simple, yet emotionally devastating examination of memory and guilt that runs circles around Nolan's newer films in terms of its execution. It needs no grandiose philosophizing or explosive setpieces to be effective; it works entirely as a character study.
I feel like Nolan has got as far as he can with his string of big budget spectacles that it would be a welcome break for him to do something smaller next.
@@brentulstad3275
Thank you, that's very kind.
Some scenes were difficult to hear because the boom microphone operator was social distancing.
Hahaha
Hahaha 😄
Oh. Ha 😂 thanks for the laugh 😂 come to brazil
My word that brought a smile to my face.
With this comment, you have fully lived up to the expectations of your channel name
Isn't Tenet just Red Dwarf Backwards episode with a Hollywood budget but no Kryten to explain what happening.
And yet, despite the Hollywood budget, they never explained what happens when you need to use the loo while inverted. Red Dwarf addresses this with, "Don't ask!"
@Chex LeMeneux You're right, they do wear masks for breathing. [thinks about it] ...so is that the reason The Protagonist walks funny when entering inverted time...?
YES, this was exactly I was thinking when the first backwards fight started. It was comical
What's red dwarf? Sorry my stupid is showing
Yeah but no one takes a dump
It asks for multiple viewings probably more than any other movie I've seen, but offers probably the least incentives to do so of any movie I've seen
This is an excellent comment, if I may say so.
I wholeheartedly disagree, if I may say so.
Lifeofnate
Well have you seen it again?
I must admit I felt exactly the same as you on first viewing when I actually fell asleep many times. Partly because I kept on falling asleep I knew I would watch again plus my plan was always to watch it again with subtitles which I find are essential for Nolan films. I have now watched it 4 or 5 times with subtitles and plan to watch it 1 or 2 times again when I have the time. Nolan intrigued me enough over time plus some TH-cam explanations to change my view of the film.
@@just_joe.__1997 Hi Chris...
Great comment man 🤣
Great point - Tenet left me asking mechanical Q's rather than philosophical ones
But why is it necessary to ask only philosophical questions from a movie? Clearly both science and philosophy exist.
Akshay Singh I think the point there was that many philosophical questions in other Nolan films can relate to our world outside their respective stories; the mechanical/technical questions he had in mind after watching Tenet were relevant only to that story and how it works. Ideally you’d at least want a bit of both anyway, not so many questions on how scenes work that you’re left with nothing philosophical to think about.
@@d.c.beckendorff1323 it made me think about things beyond just the mechanics of the story
I think the point is that - mechanical questions are largely inconsequential to your life. It revolves entirely around the world of and mechanics of that specific film, whilst philosophical questions can be applied to the viewers life. Take inception's ending for example, sure you could debate the mechanics of the final shot of the spinner but it doesn't impact you as a human. However it also poses philosophical questions about our reality and if being in a world that isn't real actually matters if we can be happy.
Mark's point which I agree with is that Tenet doesn't really give you any of these philosophical questions that could be applied to every viewer.
Yet you still left with questions. I know so many films that were like having fast food. By the time you left the theater and started your car, you already forgot anything that happened.
Totally agree with everything especially the comment about the sound, you need to hear everything and you couldn't
They went a bit too overkill with the audio authenticity in some scenes, like the train scene and the plane scene both of those almost hurt my ears and I actually saw another audience member covering their ears during those scenes.
don't you guys have subtitles in the movie theatres ?
@@VARMOT123 I watched it in a Thai movie theatre with thai subtitles. I can't read Thai though unfortunately. I suspect the local audience understood the movie a lot better than me
Go watch my tenant video brah
I’m going to ask for a closed caption device for my next viewing
The problem with every line being importent is that it makes it so easy to guess where things are going.
Also did it not weird anybody else out how much this film lacks shots of the "enemy" in shootouts? The whole thing felt like just looking at the good guys shooting someone somewhere off of camera.
Exactly the same issue in Inception. Terrible action scenes.
Felt like there were 3 antagonists in that entire sequence
But did you guys get the real truth that Niel is Kate's son max.
Do you mean the end battle scene? The first time I saw it I didn’t even realise there were 3 sides in the battle. I didn’t have a clue what was going on.
@@thecanberean I don't understand that, there are multiple shots of bad guys in the background and one shot of like huge group of them getting out of a helicopter. Besides, the point of final battle was a chase sequence not a fight itself.
I live in China and watched it here in IMAX. I was jealous the Chiense had their subtitles. I caught about 65% of the dialogue. My Lithuanian friends were looking at me in even more bewilderment. I had no answers for them.
Tenet: A film about a woman wanting a divorce- the rest is just a McGuffin to enable this conclusion.
CPU UK thats too shallow
That's not at all the point? Did you miss everything about inverting the entropy of the world to destroy it?
@@CaptainTitforce I think the op is making fun of this films dopey pretensions
Accurate
i'd like to order 1 mcguffin please
As a black dude, it is awesome to see a blockbuster film in which the protagonist is the lead and his race is never an issue.
(Edit: just realised how many people pose as black online - eg ‘dean browning’ - can promise you that I am indeed what I say I am. And there’s *nothing* political implied in the comment either)
How many films with a black lead don’t even bother to name his character?
@Grant Kerr They actually do better but not giving him a stupid name like protagonist. Card access granted.
@@deliaproductions Watch any interview with Nolan and the unnamed protagonist was in the script long before casting began and was an deliberate reference to films like the dollars trilogy. You’re grasping straws.
👆🏾👆🏾👆🏾💯💯💯
Another movie with a great black lead is "His House." The movie terrified me and the refugee couple did an amazing job, especially the husband whose PTSD I could literally feel through the screen.
I couldn’t hear parts either all muffled even in imax
Agreed, especially when they were wearing oxygen masks.
I watched it for a second time today, this time on IMAX and had a more difficult time hearing the dialog on IMAX 🤔
A lot of the film requires you to think about the elements of the story itself, not the precise words being said. At least that is my humble interpretation.
@@anthonymartensen3164 it was a poor sound mix though anyway. Like the bass was brick-walled and fatiguing. I thought there was an issue at my theatre.
@@vincevirtua honestly that wasn't an issue I had upon my experience but a respect your thoughts on the matter
Mumblecore on a 200 million dollar budget
Leigh Parsons problem is, I can actually hear and understand the dialogue in mumblecore films 😆 this is just poor sound mixing which really shouldn’t be the case in a film like this
@Your Comment Gets A Gold Star Apparently Nolan makes dialogue in his soundmix muffled because he thinks audiences working harder to understand will be more immersed in the film. Thats like a novelist insisting the dialogue text is in font point 2 to make the reader squint.
Go watch my tenant video brah
It's not mumblecore. It's an epic spy thriller.
@@TheWelchProductions I don't know what the point of this comment is.
Tenet seems to be the sequel to a film not made. The mystery is not in how it ends, but how it began. Its enjoyable thinking about what & who the earlier part of this story involved.
I was trying to decide if a prequel set after the events of the movie would be amazing to have or just ruin everything.
@@streaky81 im holding my breath to see how this links to Inception. Although Sir Michael might be there to make sure that Tenet and Inception isn't in the same universe. :(
Exactly how I felt. Left me wanting more and to dig deeper.
except thats literally the point. you realise that the events of the film have not been spontaneous but meticulously planned.. that's sorta what makes the ending good.
@@streaky81 "a prequel set after the events of the movie". Obviously, you got it! So many here don't...
Being able to follow the story is just the first step. What you should be asking is "Do I care about the story and characters?"
Exactly. And for me the answer was no I don’t.
I didn't have an emotional investment in the characters but that's not the point of this film, the mechanics and plot are. I loved both of those and can't wait to see it two or three more times to dissect everything.
Nolan doesn't do story, he does spectacle, noise; his characters are all ciphers.
@@samcooke343 Very convenient that Nolan gets to decide he doesn't need to worry about characterisation or dialogue.
@@Ovenman940 So? That's like saying it's very convenient Scorcese doesn't need to worry about action sequences with incredibly complex plots.
I’m going to go see it subtitled on Monday. Really if he insists on keeping the sound mix he should include subtitles anyway.
Or boycott his movies. I do. I'm not paying anymore to get my ears assaulted by his aggresive sound design (can we still call it a score?, it really has nothing in terms of melody and is so on the nose bandage to artificially create tension) . It's his established gimmick and it's the most unpleasant thing. It's a deliberate choice on his part. I find it the most annoying aspect. It takes you out of the movie. Anyone else would do this, he would be destroyed by critics....
worldapart90 I do think Nolan has more to his films than the sound design and I’m willing to overlook the sound design to get well fleshed our characters and imaginative storytelling.
@@rhodriwilliams2599 Where exactly are the well fleshed out characters in Dunkirk and Tenet? Both films are really unpleasant viewing experiences in part due to the sound design but not only. Complexifying simple things (different timeframes mixed in Dunkirk, rewinding in a Bond/Hunt movie in Tenet) just for the sake of it is quite pointless and creates pretentious and tedious movies.
worldapart90 eh if that’s your opinion then fair enough, I really like his films despite the sound design.
@@rhodriwilliams2599 I wish I could say the same. It used to be the case but now his gimmicks or defaults outweight the positive for me unfortunately. Even on first viewing. I won't rewatch Interstellar or Inception because of the noisy last tier but I was ok with it during the first viewing when they were released.
Watching Tenet on second viewing was incredibly rewarding. I found that I understood more of the plot than I thought, this time I was able to just relax and enjoy knowing what was going to happen next. I never had a big issue with the sound except when the characters were wearing masks, in any case it didn't diminish my enjoyment of the film.
It’s pretentious nonsense
I was stunned the second time I saw it. The first time it was relentless and I struggled to keep up. The second time was a revelation because my mind was free to just “watch” it because I had, I guess, taken so much in subliminally the first time...
Really. I found it even worse the second time round. I’d forgotten how interminable those early conversation scenes were and just how wooden John David Washington was. All of its flaws were just highlighted to me.
@@thecanberean I'm glad I'm not the only one who thought that about JDW. Some of the dialogue was bad, but he made it even worse.
Alex Hawkins sort of agree. I actually thought he was good in the second half. He is really good at the action stuff and emoting. Delivering the dialogue he comes short IMO. Almost like you can see the words on the script popping out.
I'm tempted to watch it a second time but I'm not looking forward to it as I found it so loud, boring, and incomprehensible the first time.
I watched it in IMAX the second time and had a harder time hearing the dialog than standard. However, the first time watching was like unraveling a series of plot knots and the second time I could see the whole rope, almost felt like I had Neil's perspective. Loved both experiences
The key is to watch the film while time inverted yourself. You will have no questions at the end, though you may find the experience rather forgettable.
I don't think it's a failure of storytelling if people are saying they need to see it again because they didn't understand it. Perhaps it would be more telling if they just wrote it off as nonsense. Not everyone would've fully understood a Shakespeare play back in the day and they've been studied for centuries. Probably the same with some of Kubricks work. Replay value is a good thing in todays disposable film climate. I just watched it myself and also feel the need to see it again. It's almost like it needs to be watched middle to middle! With regards to sound issues, I experienced the same muffled dialogue, it felt like we were missing dolby tracks or side and rear speakers. The sound only came from the front of the auditorium and the dialogue was a little quiet in the mix at some points and also very heavy in the low mids. A lot of the important sibilants weren't there. It's not (as many people have said) because there is too much sound going on, too many tracks etc and the dialogue can't compete. It would be quite straightforward with some half decent mastering to have the same dialogue cut through the mix more so it's either intentional or cinemas aren't screening it correctly (which is feasible) or it's a technical error (which I think would be the least feasible but possible if it wasn't mixed and premiered in the correct environment under lockdown for example). In terms of crits I would say (on first watch) that the film was clever, but perhaps not clever enough. When I say that I don't mean more complex. The first half seemed quite vignetty, a bit like one of those perfume commercials at times and I wonder if the script could've somehow incorporated more traditional structure elements to make the first half more accessible. Aside from that the film felt a little cold overall, I didn't really get emotionally invested in the characters even though the performances were all great. Reminded me a bit of Memento/Irreversible/Primer. Action as always with Nolan was terrific. Overall thumbs up from me, fully enjoyed it and look forward to seeing it again. Oh and I'm definately thinking about physics at the moment. If the bullet holes disappear in the future, what happens when the glass first gets made? EDIT: Watched again at BFI Imax, probably the place it was made for. Sound was better but still tricky to catch everything. The film is so dense and requires a lot of concentration to catch important lines and theres very little down time which allows you to think. I'd like to remove my crit about it being vignetty and cold. I now see it as part of the spy thriller genre and pattinsons character adds a good dose of emotional resonance to the script. One additional crit I would add however is the film being a 12 rating. The scene at the beginning with the teeth pulling for example suffers from this. On the first watch I thought the jaw being rebuilt was from the pill he took. Still have many questions but really is quite a special film.
"Not everyone would've fully understood a Shakespeare play back in the day" --- NOT the point. As an audience any film with mystery elements NEEDS to be MAINLY understood on first viewing...a SMALL amount can remain mysterious....Oah ndyou are trying to equate Nolans writing with Shakespeare gtfo
@@atomiccritter6492 What rule book does that come from? A film is meant to be entertaining, Tenet did just that with visuals alone. If it can stay with you afterwards and make you interested in watching it again even better. I didn't equate Nolan with Shakespeare, that wasn't the point. Why can't a film be a complex puzzle which requires multiple viewings? I take it you didn't enjoy it then?
@@SonicTemples you clearly did equate Nolan with Shakespeare its in black and white.
Yes a film CAN be a puzzle but expect non nerds to rip it to pieces
@@atomiccritter6492 My original point was that I don't believe that its a storytelling failure for a film if its not understood upon seeing for the first time. I used Shakespeare and Kubrick as an example of complex works which are considered great and yet may not have been fully understood by an audience when first seen. That was my point, not that Tenet is a great work. No idea about that yet. I'm not sure what your definition of a nerd is here but it's a bit of a shame to suggest only nerds like complicated movies.
When you watch it for a 2nd time you realize that Neil is the heart and soul of this film. His sacrifices are much more understood upon repeat viewings and it does have an emotional impact.
Maybe that emotional impact is in my future, or it was in my past and I missed it.
The problem there is you have to rely on repeat viewings in order to possibly get to some semblance of an emotional core to the film. That’s simply not good writing
Stefen B. Echols The theory that he’s the son makes some sense to me.
@@killthomas8373 I disagree. It's writing that's so detailed that it warrants multiple viewings.
I can't wait to see it again. That ending was fantastic.
"timey wimey, austin powers thing"
I'm not a Brit and I haven't seen austin powers in ages...but isn't this Doctor Who?
Timey wimey is Doctor Who, but I guess the Austin Powers thing refers to when Basil Exposition tells Austin and the audience that they don't need to understand and just enjoy it
Also, they’re discussing Time travel and to get around all the complicated paradox stuff, Powers goes “oh no, I’ve gone cross eyed” when he’s trying to understand
The Tenth Doctor: People assume that time is a strict progression of cause to effect, but actually, from a nonlinear, non-subjective viewpoint, it's more like a big ball of wibbly-wobbly, timey-wimey... stuff.
Yeah bang on
I love this film, but pretty much every key point in it can be found in episodes of David Tennant era Dr Who. Apart from the reverse bungee jump
Yes, I found it difficult to hear sometimes and, like Mark, I didn't get why the penultimate scene had the two teams coming at the thingy from two different directions. I'd like to see it again, but I think I'll choose a subtitled screening.
Mark, in Inception, the spinning top is MAL's totem, not Cob's. Cob's totem is his wedding ring. If he has it on *he* is dreaming. No ring = reality. It's a misdirection.
That makes no damn sense, just existing or not makes for a terrible totem. It would have to be a ring that spins a certain way or something, but merely appearing in a universe that can manifest grenade launchers is unreliable and follows none of the established rules. I personally think it's a plot hole and inception is shoddily over written and it IS meant to be his ring even if it doesn't actually make sense, along with a million other things in the movie.
Didn't Brannah play a similar Russian-villain-dying-of-cancer in Chris Pine's 'Jack Ryan movie from a few years ago - LOL?!
Probably served as inspiration for Nolan to create the character, it’s not unusual at all.
Always over the top Villian
@@marleneg7794 He's a Shakespearian actor, he tends to be over the top a lot. I'd say it works great in Tenet, but that's just my opinion.
In 'The Night Manager' Elizabeth Debicki played the partner of an evil arms dealer who the protagonist tries to take down and gains access to him by saving his life and ends up defeating the arms dealer with the collusion of Elizabeth Debicki's character, sound familiar? Maybe Nolan isnt so original after all.
@@stevefoster7529 Whoa, didn't know that! Interesting...hmmm.
On the poster, "I enjoyed it...a big spectacular well made movie...I saw it in a very nice cinema with good social distancing. " Mark Kermode.
I haven't seen it yet but I'm looking forward to Tenet: The Directors audible cut.
I would never go back there for 2 1/2 hours cause I left at the end not caring at all for the movie.
Same here. I would have cared more if I had understood it, but beyond that I never really cared much about any of the characters. I didn’t know why the main character and the woman even liked each other. There was just no build up of any kind of emotion for anyone, perhaps because I was too busy trying to understand what the heck was going on with the science.
@@dreamweaver1603 Typical Nolan, he creates concepts not humans
I'm glad I'm not alone in feeling absolutely unimpressed. I didn't think much of the New Mutants either, but TBH I wasn't really expected much from that film. Tenet - I was hoping for more.
Just Stuff I went in blind, but just from the tag line that it was an international espionage thriller I was hopeful. I didn’t know it was also sci-fi or that I wouldn’t know any of the characters and would feel nothing for them. The only actor I recognized was Robert Pattinson, and even he was so different looking I had to think on it for a moment.
New actors wouldn’t bother me so much if I wasn’t trying so hard to figure out what was happening. I walked out feeling dumb.
I absolutely cared for Pattinson's character and I left with questions because the film was going 100mph. Is that bad? Not imo, it just asks for a second viewing because it enhances the experience. I think people ego get hurt when they can't figure it out all in the first view and they lash with a bad critic.
This film borders on being just an excuse for the reverse-time gimmick, IMO. It's mostly well thought out, but there were some parts where I could see the cracks and I had to actively suspend my disbelief.
This film probably _has_ to be watched at least twice, and that's a mark _against_ it, for me.
You should only have to watch a film once to understand it.
@@johnsharman7930 I watched _Inception_ twice because I wanted to; I'll watch this again because I *have* to.
@@JMUDoc Nobody's stopping you.
@@johnsharman7930 The sound mixer is... I'm not watching this again until it comes out on Blu-ray :)
'I could see the cracks and I had to actively suspend my disbelief.''
Yep. There were multiple sequences where there simply wasn't a satisfying answer for 'why is X character doing Y?'
Spellbinding action scenes, although I struggled to follow the plot at times (like others) and invest in the emotional core. However, the more I've let it sit with me, the more it's growing on me. Worth a re-watch at some point!
I think I agree with you. The first time is just incredibly overwhelming. But the more it stays with me it is growing on me. Especially the implications of the ending.
The dialogue is always weird in his films, strange sound mixing
Why this is a consistent problem in all his movies is beyond me
@@z-beeblebrox He jus won't be told, as in he jus won't budge on HIS definition of dialogue sound mixing.
It's now a real problem.
Dark Knight Returns is one of, if not THE worst sound mix i've ever heard.
Thomas Carnacki apparently it’s because Nolan wants his audience to REALLY focus
I think is was by far the worst in this one than any other of his films even though it is still pretty awful in films like interstellar
@@georgepool2241 Agreed, there is a major scene in Interstellar where Michael Caine is revealing a dramatic revelation while dying and I couldn't hear a word
I hope Nolan hears all of this and remixes the sound for the blu-ray release. I feel like once that is done this will age like fine wine.
We need Tenet so we can tell Christopher Nolan to add subtitles to this movie because no one can hear the dialogue clear enough.
Does anyone know what essay on The Prestige Mark is talking about? I’d love to read it
Here’s a video that covers the theory in depth th-cam.com/video/q4xB7Qrprbk/w-d-xo.html
Anybody know what essay on The Prestige he talked about?
There is a video essay related to the idea that the diaries cannot be trusted in the film. It is called Dishonest Truths. Although it doesn't get into the idea that Angiers is basically lying about Tesla etc to sell his trick to the audience, it does question whether Angiers is to be believed in general. You will find a lively discussion in the comments about the idea though. Some of the discussion is the usual you tube back and forth, but some commenters make very valid points on the idea.
@@CreationK. top of the Nolan tree...
@@CreationK. yeh I think he considers it one of his best films
The biggest issue I had with Tenet was this:
With great "fetch" movies (there's a plan to achieve a thing, we learn how they're going to go about achieving it, we find out what they gain by succeeding and we find out what they lose by failing), the information we need is presented before the plan is enacted so that the tension of success/failure is felt as things progress. Nolan seems to have reversed this in Tenet. I kept on thinking that I had little idea who these people were they were meeting, why they were going to a place, what they were trying to get etc for most of the movie and it only fell into place after the fact. It was only when I put it in that language that I realised that he used the cause/effect reversal concept on the structure of the movie itself. Now, that might be "clever" but it's not at all satisfying as a viewing experience.
Good point, but as you mentioned yourself, it is reversal concept of the movie, as you are following the protagonist moving forward in time, while learning about things that are moving backwards in time through Neil. A traditional movie would be from Neils perspective. Reversed, but logical in its foot steps towards solving the puzzle. However, Nolans approach enhances the whole reverse concept of an otherwise traditional forward moving plot and in extension of that, it makes the protagonist discover that he is the creator of Tenet through his unique observational ability - an ability sarcastically dubbed posterity at two key moments in the movie.
@@AidenIlkhani I think this film and it's concept presents quite an intriguing discussion when it comes to these epic Nolan (and others) high concept films. The concept-driven structure and narrative may be incredibly deemed intelligent and on reflection, a "deep" film. However, films are made to be enjoyed while viewing them also. A great concept does not necessarily make for a great film.
@@alexpettitt7337 Absolutely agree with that. Seen plenty of great concepts not translating well into a film, either by a directing that fails to weave the audience through its plot or technical challenges coming short of an otherwise noble attempt.
My problems with Tenet is not related to the directing nor the technical level of its scope, but more to do with plot development especially in the third act with the Temporal Pincer strategy. While fitting to serve both as a tactical maneuver and directly connecting the movie's premise and title, I felt that Inception did far better at conveying the importance of actions on different layers of time having to depend on the success of each other, whilst Tenet's third act felt a bit "lazy" and quickly put together at a location where separate bombastic actions rarely had to connect with each other and served merely as showpieces of technical action.
As a whole movie with a very technical premise of time manipulation, I would certainly say it qualifies as pure cinema despite its shortcomings in the plot and whilst one could critique its directing for not carrying every member of the audience through its narrative, I do think that perhaps we as audiences have also become quite lazy in our expectations of movies hand-feeding us all the information by the time the credits roll. This is not to excuse Nolan from his responsibility of taking care of the audience through a concept he himself set the bar for and there are certainly issues at many places in the movie where either pacing or explanatory scenes would have been much welcomed or better relayed to the audience, but then we would also have to be honest and say that we are upholding Nolan to a much higher degree of criticism than most other directors.
@@AidenIlkhani " it makes the protagonist discover that he is the creator of Tenet through his unique observational ability " i didn't pick up on that at all. Makes me intrigued to see it again.
Some people say that to understand Tenet you have to see it multiple times. But why would I watch this 2.5H movie again when I didn't care about any of the characters?
because youre a dimwit and Mr Nolan is the cleverest director ever..and IF you rewatch his films 12 times you will see how clever he is! /s
@@atomiccritter6492 the more I re-watch Nolans movies, the more they fall apart because of the weak scripts. Memento, The Prestige and Batman Begins are the only ones that hold up for multiple viewings. The rest fall apart as soon as you start to think critically. But I guess you won't because you probably gave The Dark Knight 10/10 to get in to the imdb top 250...
@@Tomanista 2 of those were not written by Nolan..I think thats the core problem...hes not a great writer
@@Tomanista Inception gets better every time I watch it. Tenet may not be a masterpiece, but that is.
The film had no heart and very little to care about.. It was all plot and no story... A serious mistake from an experienced executive team. Might as well be Transformers for Mensa, for all it's worth.
Nailed it
Yup. So very try hard.
The whole editing of the movie is off. Not only the sound editing as people have already mentioned, but the dialogue in various scenes is off. There were moments when a conversation just unnaturally moves to a different frame and it didn’t mesh well with the next scene. It happened several times in the movie that I thought to myself, “Nolan directed this movie?”
I saw the movie at a 70mm IMAX theatre. This movie at the theatre I saw it at is the most annoying sound experience I’ve ever had. It displaces “Transformers 2” from the top of the list. Michael Bay was probably salivating at all the explosions and gunfire during the last act of the movie.
Agree 100%. It actually became comical to me the way exposition was delivered as they try and cut to different sets as the dialog is delivered so as not to bore the audience. Yet, all I'm thinking is, "so, they weren't talking at all between getting on the train and getting out of the station?" That whole "rolling exposition" bit is done like three separate times when in a regular film it'd be used once and never again.
It was so loud the music,I actually got a headache for a few minutes
I found that the music was loud; but it was never so bad that I couldn't make out what people were saying. On the second time round I did find it much easier to hear though; and it was in a considerably smaller cinema - so perhaps the issue is worse for larger theatres?
great shout. hasn't been mentioned enough how miserable the dialogue, exposition, storytelling was. enjoyable spectacle but really a bit of a naff film.
Boss Attack
“So as not to bore to the audience.” I’m actually wondering how much was intentional on Nolan’s part because if this is the direction Nolan is going in, then Nolan’s next movie will be a no-go for me at the theater.
Saw it last night, I couldn't hear dialogue in over 5 scenes. Very frustrating
Top selling Xmas present this year will be the Tenet dvd/bluray.
Everyone will be watching it again with subtitles
That Nolan's pretty crafty isn't he?
re: "Top selling Xman present ..." Was spelling out "C-H-R-I-S-T-M-A-S" too much trouble for you @chungster666 ??? Ehhh?
And the follow up DVD - Tenet for Dummies
@@warriormanmaxx8991 what is Maxx short for? 🤔
I had to have the subtitles on - but I still need to see it again as I got confused in the final 15 minutes or so.
Actually I've just seen myself moving backwards with a smile turning to a look of confusion so obviously I have seen it again.
How does he not mention exposition. Almost every line explains another bit of plot
1:53
@@Romanplaystation woops my bad
@@andrewbrowell3342 Very easily missed tbf, mate. Have a good 'un. 👍
Mark - Can you give a reference to the essay you namecheck about the Prestige/ McGuffin issue. Can't seem to find it. Thanks.
Couldn't understand most of Tom Hardy's Bane dialogue in Batman Rises either - perhaps dodgy sound is a Nolan trope?
Maybe Nolan needs his hearing checked. Or he's got hearing issues and is like, "I have to deal with it, now everyone else has to also."
It was in Inception. The dialogue in parts is little more than a whisper before an exploding sound that peels the paint off your walls.
@@dr.strangelove4450 That exploding sound in Inception is probably Hans Zimmer's score :)
Someone made the point in The guardian that a director will have lived with the script for years. Nolan will know every line in the film and he may well catch every word, because he knows what to listen for. Couple this with his reputation and I think sound mixers just don't have the nerve to tell him 'those voices cannot be heard!', or if they do, he simply says, 'I can hear it fine'.
@@davidlean1060 If that's the case, humility goes a long way. He needs to test the sound for his films on the worst available mono cinema sound system, or something like a 1970's clock radio. If the mix is working for someone who doesn't know the script through the terrible system, then he's golden
I've loved every Nolan film. Interstellar being one of my top 10 ever. However, he's asked too much of me this time. There is asking an audience to 'stay with me' but this is just telling a story so convoluted it loses the viewer, so now that are just watching set piece after set piece, backwards. Not hearing the dialogue of course didn't help but overall, he's over reached the acceptance of the audience, finally.
Take a step back Mr Nolan. Please.
Spot on. Agree about everything. Also big fan of interstellar.
It does feel like a self-serving vanity project for Nolan at this point. Being overly smart for the sake of it.
I’ve never been a big Nolan fan. I didn’t like Inception or Dunkirk, but I quite liked The Dark Night Rises and I could appreciate Nolan’s artistry even if it didn’t always work for me. But then I saw Tenet and it utterly killed my enthusiasm for any future Nolan projects. I might have just about tolerated the overly complex plot if the film didn’t have the worst sound design I have ever heard. There was some great visual stuff during the war sequence, but I was long past caring by then.
I felt the same, but I watched it a 2nd time and I loved it. Interstellar is also a favourite of mine.
@@Deanhughes5707 I will most definitely see it again on the small screen. However, I don't think it will change my mind even if I 'get it' the 2nd time round. The sound mixing was atrocious and just the whole thing was not told well, poor scripting in a lot of places and one weird set piece after another does not make a good film. If you can't enjoy a film 1st time at the cinema, something has gone drastically wrong.
Everyone has had the sound problem, trust me
I didn't
Not everyone
I didn't have it either.
I had it the first time I watched it, but not the second time. Maybe it was re-released? But it was weirder the second time since the music had no impact but I could actually hear the dialogue.
The film is weird from a technical level.
Is it just IMAX that had sound problems?
Does anyone have a link to the essay on the Prestige that Mark references?
Yeah it was kind of annoying - I agree that the just about every line of the script is important, but the most important ones happen when there's a lot of background noise. At a key scene (where there was some muffled dialogue), I found myself trying to make sense of what was just said, while the next thing was happening, so by the time the final scene takes place, I wasn't sure how or why they were doing what they were doing, in the way that they were doing it. It was aesthetically stunning, and I really wanted to like it more than I did, but after the first time I got lost, I think I was lost for good.
My problem was the timepoint, where the inversion should be starting. Is it randomly? Right at the exposition scene: Imagine he would have THROWN the bullet onto the table. It would not be on the table anymore. So, where does the inversion start and who decides that?
The movie is all plot and no character.
While objectively the stakes are high, I was never given a reason to care about the characters or the plot so it didn't feel like the stakes were actually that high. And the one character who did have some kind of arc had the most unoriginal tropey arc possible for thier character. They felt like plot devices rather than characters.
It was technically good but some problems with the audio like muffled dialogue. I think the soundtrack was great, it makes creative uses of sounds such as breathing and playing things backwards and forwards. Great action scenes (I love the way that Nolan directs action) the written dialogue was okay, nothing stood out as particularly good or bad. I much prefer inception, which is far easier to understand and had more character work and emotion than tenet, if that even means anything to you. I still had an enjoyable experience but it definitely has its fair share of issues (I'm avoiding talking about the actual plot because I don't want to spoil it for people, obviously)
After the first time I saw it (in 70mm) I gave it a 7.5/10 and then I saw it again (digital projection) and my current score for it is 6.5/10
You may love it, you may hate it, but that's for you to decide of course.
@@CreationK. did you not catch the 10th Anniversary edition the week before? Still amazing!
@@CreationK. totally with you there, everything is perfect in Inception, the score, the cinematography, the direction, the acting, the script, everything. Can you tell it's one of my favourite films?
I really wanted Tenet to be as good, but it suffered by comparison. I still place it leagues ahead of standard Hollywood fodder, but it seemed more of a mess, with more wasted pointless scenes and dialogue that was thrown away.
The final act makes the most sense if you use the soundtrack as your cue. The temporal pincer is laid out scene by scene in not only the colours of the teams, but the soundtrack either being played forward or backwards. It makes the action really clear immediately if you are alert for it.
This film was a bit like Edge of Tomorrow mixed with the editing of The Counselor.
Yes! It had the same dodgy premise as Edge of Tomorrow, but, where that film squeezed through by not taking itself too seriously, Tenet took itself painfully, painfully seriously - just like The Counselor - which makes the plot holes difficult to ignore. And, like The Counselor, it was edited in a manner which was outright baffling, in an attempt, I suppose, to confuse the audience into not realising that the film makes **no sense**.
I described it to a friend as James Bond mixed with Red Dwarf 'Backwards' episode :)
@@Sonofdonald2024 Interesting, not aware of that episode to be honest but I'm assuming that we've arrived at the same conclusion that it's a mess?
Though I can't claim to have fully grasped the goings on of the film, I seem to be in the minority of not thinking the sound mix was so terrible
Bang on Mark, my exact sentiments after viewing the film too. I was no less than engrossed all the time, I had issues with the sound and really need to see it again...or have I already done so?
Anybody know the essay he's talking about referring to the prestige?
google the_prestige_the_machine_does_not_work_movie
After Batman Begins, Inception, The Dark Knight, The Prestige and Interstellar, I wanted to go back and rewatch the movie again right away. Although I enjoyed Tenet, I have no desire to ever watch it again.
Agreed.
Haven't felt the need to rewatch Interstellar or Dunkirk, especially at home where his trademark scale and bass-heavy sounds are much less impactful. This seems like the worst one yet. I don't even think I want to watch this at the movies, as it seems like it won't have anything worthwhile outside a big room with loud speakers...
@@Christian_from_Copenhagen Try Interstellar again, it's pretty good a second time :)
@@Zaafsta Why bother when I didn't enjoy it the first time? Too much explaining and Kubrick-worship for my taste.
@@Christian_from_Copenhagen Hahah fair enough, some times people like things they didn't like when watching it the second time around
Anyone know what essay re the prestige he refers to? Would be keen to read. Cheers :)
What if you aren't supposed to hear the dialogue? There are many scenes where the background noise dies out and the actors can be clearly heard. Throughout the film a lot of characters explain that they don't understand the world they are in, or don't know what will happen, and I think the we the audience are supposed to also feel a bit lost and helpless. I think we are too used to knowing everything that is going on in excruciating detail and sometimes you have to "feel, don't think" like the lady studying the reversed objects says.
dude :/ im happy you liked it man but yeesh
Where can I find this Prestige essay that Mark was talking about?
Like most Nolan films, Tenet is a picture that quickly confronts you with a number of characters with vague impetus, throws them all into a big temporal salad spinner, gets wayyy ahead of itself, and then spends a number of scenes trying to catch up with itself as it explains itself to you through sapping, painful dialogue scenes between people you don't care about, and then rattles the premise off with an excellent atmospheric score and a crazy cinematic masterpiece scene of action...leaving you with the sense of "was this film necessary to make in the first place?"
I will probably watch it again soon, but even if you've wrapped your head around the temporal bending and inverting, it's hard to not wonder why Nolan- who could pretty much make any film he wanted to at this point - decided to tell this story...
Actually I would argue the opposite, the first act of the film lays out what is happening pretty clearly, explicitly in fact: it is almost wholly devoted to exposition. I don’t think this is Nolan’s best work but I do think it shits over most of the dross other ‘blockbuster’ directors have been serving up over the past decade. A second viewing is rewarded with many of the subtexts of the film becoming clearer (Pattison being the son, Caine the soldier etc, ie. The Protagonist is being aided by folks from his own future), which compensate for the initial impression of this film being emotionally anaemic. I think Nolan made Tenet because he could and wanted to, and repeat viewing is mandatory for most if not all of his films and is where most of the pay offs lie. I loved Tenet, but still think The Prestige is his best. We are lucky to have Nolan, full stop, in as much as he never underestimates the intelligence of his audience like most of Hollywood does.
Could you share the link to this article on the Prestige you're referencing? Would love to read it
Having watched the movie twice at the cinema, I would have to say that the second time round was so much better, providing answers to all the questions raised by the first viewing, a puzzle the first time round, a solution the second time around. Every part of the final battle made sense and the mumbly dialogue was not at all so prominent the second time around because I was not grasping for every clue having already seen it once. I would go so far as to say that to properly review the plot aspects of the movie one would need to see the movie at least twice because the movie is not designed to be understood in the first setting. Amazing movie and story, very complicated in all the best ways. I think it would only help if the dialogue sounded clearer though and would hope that we might get a version with that cleared up at some point.
Niel is max did you get that?
I’ve seen it twice and while I did understand a lot of things more the second time round at the end I was just a bit meh about it all and I still thought much of it just didn’t make sense and there was still no real emotional core to it.
@@skanda33333 I did wonder about it. I like to think he is because it could make a lot of sense if it were the case, but I didn't see enough to make it a definite proof, just an interesting implication. I did like how there is enough ingredients to extrapolate the events of the story into the past and the future and create your own version of he future and the past events of the movie. One idea I though was that the Algorithm was a just a distraction to distract the Tenet organisation as a huge number of people escaped the future and began their own society of people extending humanity back into the past from the troubled future, staying in the shadows of known events so they can hide and continue humanity's existence backwards until the beginning of time. Certainly not implied at all though, just thoughts that I had second time around.
@@thecanberean Yes, I agree that this was certainly more about plot over character development, and compared to, say, Inception, it seemed that there were a lot less opportunities to understand the character's personal motivations except from "saving the world", which I think could have helped. But I did get the feeling that Nolan had challenge himself to create a scenario where the Tenet operatives all worked to a strict policy of not getting to know any of the details about their fellow agents, so in some ways it helped me view things from their perspective better.
I saw this at the IMAX screen in Manchester Printworks. The sound was deafening in places, and I struggled to hear a good deal of the dialogue. I thoroughly enjoyed it though, and look forward to unpicking it thoroughly when it is available on BluRay
Can't wait to watch this film with the subtitles for a second and third viewing. It was a great film to go back to the cinema to watch, visually and audibly stunning, but I really get what Mark is saying about the mumbling.
What it was also missing was the character that acts as an audience learner (if that makes sense). Someone that's explained what this world is so we can understand it just that bit better. There's one particular scene in the film where he's handed a gas mask and I'm like "why?" even though it's explained very very briefly.
I agree with the issues in the sound mix. The score was too loud and the dialogue was too low. I found myself having to work the volume control several times unfortunately.
I would pay to see this again if there was a subtitles screening.
If not, I'll wait for a digital release.
Most theaters have standalone closed captioning devices, you just have to request it
@@hotsauce69247
Oh neat, I didn't know that.
Will look into it. Thanks.
@@WeatherVeinFilms Yeah just check on your theater's website if it says "Closed Caption" next to the movie title. The traditional device is like a little box (where the subtitles will show) on an adjustable gooseneck stand, that you stick in the cupholder.
Some chains like Regal started using glasses that you wear, I've heard those are a little more difficult to adjust and find a sweet spot for the captions to show up
Saw it subtitled, it didn't help the script or story
There is a scene at the beginning with the scientist when she says
'don't try to understand it, feel it.
And the protagonist replies
'I get it... instinct'
That covered all the technical issues for me.
The best thing about this film is you feel stupid the first time you watch it and really smart on the 2nd watch.
I see, where the criticism of wondering only about mechanics and not philosophy, comes from. However, I feel that Tenet is more about the question "is it worth it to take action / does anything I can do matter at all, if it's all basically determined?" Hence "I am the protagonist" at the end and the omission of a name for his character. Plus the video of the protagonist catching a bullet with reverse playback and something like "you had to put your hand there for it to work". This goes along with the question "isn't Neil more important / I care more for him" taking the biggest sacrifice, and tenet probably states no it's the protagonist, by setting it all up.
So I saw the twists coming - at least as far as the woman jumping off the boat, the guys in the black gear at the freeport, etc. - but it felt like it was so tightly cut to fit as much in as possible and had no room to breathe with the ideas and characters
The review I've been anticipating the most this year!
Same
Yeah and I was a bit disappointed tbh. I think Mark somehow feels he’s got to like it more than he does because it’s Nolan and...you know...clever.
Alex Hawkins surely no film critic ever panders to reputation and kudos.....
R S Never 😏
I havne't seen it yet, but I hears someone say the editing was so tight in almost every scene, probably for running time, that there's nowhere a moment for the audience to let things sink in and process all the information. With a few lingering moments between scenes that let the movie breathe, audiences would've had more chance to keep up with the story twists.
Yes. There is one scene early on (mercifully less mumbling) of exposition but then it is very parsimonious with re-enforcing the message.
I disagree totally on this. It was easy to digest the concept that inverted things run backwards in time
What twists?
The biggest problem is that for an action movie its slow and uninspiring...absolutely NO wow factor
Certainly a film that should age better but not a fan the first time round at all unfortunately. I think the bombastic noises had something to do with it, although I did like Ludwig's experimental score in places
Yeh score really annoyed me. The main reason why I don't like Ludwig's score is cos I was trying to watch Fort Apache (the old Fonda movie) in the screen below Tenet. Got sooooooo annoying after a while that I disliked it before I went in to actually watch it.
@@ellbo2 Ouch. Tenet was louder than almost every film I've ever seen. But I promise the music does make sense when you're watching the film - it's just not a film I'd buy the soundtrack to. It's there to add to the intensity and scale of it all rather than the emotion.
Anyone got a link to that Prestige essay Mark mentions?
Here’s a link to a video that explains the concept, made by an incredible film channel. th-cam.com/video/q4xB7Qrprbk/w-d-xo.html
Kermode wants to enjoy this more than he did. He's acting as a Nolan apologist here instead of simply stating facts: the audio quality is awful and the story itself is clunky and difficult to follow. "I'll go and see it again and hope that it makes more sense to me" is not good storytelling... Tenet is not an enjoyable film. Kermode admits himself he didn't understand the ending.
Exactly. We cut Nolan a lot of slack because he’s ... well... Nolan. I love most of his films but I thought this one just didn’t work and I didn’t really care.
If you make something this complicated then OF COURSE it won't be fully understood in one viewing, Nolan doesn't want that, and it doesn't mean it's bad storytelling. I'm still realising things about Inception, Dunkirk, Interstellar etc after several viewings that I just didn't pick up on the first time. Haven't seen The Prestige or Memento in ages and likewise they both require multiple viewings to fully get your head round it
@@whereami2477 I could keep watching Tenet and keep 'getting more things' about it but I will just end up caring less and less about it I'm afraid.
@@thecanberean How can you be sure until you try?
@@whereami2477 I've seen it twice. I may give it another watch at some point...maybe.
I thought the sound was off too. I've even looked up to see if a hard of hearing version with subtitles is available so I dont miss anything.
I am slowly starting to think that a lot of critics are cutting Nolan way too much slack, simply because he is Christopher Nolan.
I found that, as per usual for Nolan movies, Tenet looked and sounded incredible. However, in terms of its script, storytelling and characters, the movie just falls flat. It is needlessly complex, with unnecessary subplots (e.g. the painting) and laughably one-dimensional characters (damsel in distress Kat, cartoonishly evil Sator, and let's not even talk about Michael Caine...). I believe, the movie would have been a way more enjoyable experience had they cut out the subplot-clutter, given their main characters some depth and just focussing on its interesting concept of time-inversion.
Yep. Spot on.
@@thecanberean Couldn't agree more. How is Kermode not commenting on any of this? 90% of the lines in the film were exposition like the actors are on coke. Kermode says Nolan is a director who trusts his audience to keep up, but he is not (no longer?) a director who trusts his scenes to let them breathe, trusts simple ideas to be interesting enough without having to pile loads of subplots and narrative yarn balls on top, and for me, most crucially, no longer seems to trust a film to be interesting without a small army of extras with guns.
Amazing film. Better the 2nd time
@@ps5stuffguy Honestly can't wait to see it again. I don't have a problem with people saying it's 'too complex', that's their opinion. But they shouldn't be saying it as a criticism - there are some of us who love that complexity and want to watch it multiple times to unpack every last detail. I'd much rather a Nolan film leave me guessing than have everything explained to me first time.
@@samcooke343 I don't understand it fully but still loved it. Many amazing scenes. Look forward to the 4K and learn more. The film is absolutely crazy lol
Near the beginning of the film, the woman who is 'training' the main fella, she says it's 'instinct' go with the 'flow'. All the reverse stuff. So the way I viewed the whole end section of the film was people moving forward had will and the people moving backwards were mainly going on instinct. Apart from Pattinsons character who breaks out of the that to save them while they're sorting out the bomb.
Exactly how I felt about this film. Seen it twice and my overall opinion echoes the same sentiments. It's bottom tier Nolan which means it's great but just not as good as his other films in my opinion. Enjoyed it a lot.
Where does it rank on his list of films? Personally I think Dark Knight Rises was his weakest along with Interstellar, so provided it's better than those two I'll be more than happy.
@@larssonk22 it really is up to your personal opinion and tastes. My favourite of his is probably The Prestige followed by Memento and then Inception. This is a very intelligent and ambitious film but there is something missing for me. Character development possibly or even an extra inversion-based set piece. Wish it was 30 minutes longer to flesh those elements out a little. To really feel the stakes.
Mark is right about the sound mixing. It's really bad at times with the music and gunfire and people wearing masks and explaining key plot points. A little frustrating there. I still think it's a good film overall just for the ideas. I've seen it twice and understand the majority of what happened now. I may go again with other friends who haven't seen it. I highly recommend IMAX screens.
@@mazamonx Okay, your Nolan movies choices seem legit. Like Kermode, I also rank The Prestige as the very best Nolan movie. In fact, I would put pretty much all of his original IP movies above his Batman trilogy (great though those were.) Apart from perhaps Dunkirk, which, while a great first watch experience (especially in IMAX) does not quite rank up there with his other original movies imo.
@@mazamonx Those are my top 3 as well but Momento being #1
It wasn't great
All I care about is where did he get those Silent Running robot figures he has in the background...
I haven't seen this film, but watched several critics make valid points: i) I can't hear a lot of the dialogue ;ii) I don't know why things are going backwards mechanically in some scenes; iii) the plot doesn't work; iv) Nolan doesn't develop characters, they are ciphers there to merely explain the philosophy; v) everyone said, I'm going back to watch it again
as I'm sure everything will fall into place; vi) they give way too much respect to Nolan, like he's the new Kubrick.
Nolan made a few good films like Prestige, Insomnia, Memento, Batman Begins, where the films made human sense.
Nolan suffers what I call gigantism: a mastodon of intellect, emotionally a boar- he just doesn't do humanity; he thinks that if he can show the conceptual wizardry of an astrophysicist whose main subject is time, he can make more and more preposterous films that do not make sense, but because they're 'profound' they can be 'watched again'. For him noise is the story or rather to look for the meaning he gives you the haystack rather than the needle.
I'd rather have a quieter film with deeper characterization with clearer exposition: Nolan has contempt for words and dialogue, he prefers spectacle and sound and wants to keep you guessing ( 'feel it'),'are you keeping up' as if the audience is being taken into a magic cult whereby you have to seize on the paltry crumbs of clues he throws in your path amidst the fire & frenzy of hero worship he wants you to feel for his artistry. As mayo says why can't we just see it once and get it 1st time? I'm sure if you approach a course in film studies you will get bogged down in reams of conceptual nonsense, like deciphering The Waste Land from its notes, only here with imagery. Only Nolan is applying the principles of The Waste Land and Eliot's conception of poetry to film: you feel it before you understand it.
If his films cannot breathe how can they even be compared to poetry? People free yourself from such false idols. Nolan cannot himself understand any more what his films are about: he has the keys to the magic box of cinema but can't make a real film with any heart or humanity: he just doesn't do people. There's no joy in clunkiness.
I have seen this film, and everything you say is quite accurate.
Agree, his film is not about human. It's more like if we admire a machine or not.
Thank god for this comment.
@@ducreat So true.
The same problem as Bane in DKR. I remembered that they fixed the Bane’s voice after several complaints.
For the best review of Tenet look up "Austin Powers Cross eyed" on TH-cam.
I saw it first time a day after release at the BFI IMAX in London. I saw it again that evening at the Vue Leicester Square venue (both because I wanted to - and because I felt I needed to because of the sound). The sound at the BFI IMAX was MUCH worse than at the Vue Leicester Square. In fact it was so bad at the BFI IMAX I actually wrote to the Chief Quality Officer - who offered his e-mail at the end of the screening - and have now negotiated a return trip! He told me it was because "Mr. Nolan wants you to hear the big sounds, as well as the quiet ones...) In that sense, I think it's probably down to whoever does the sound at these venues, but more generally there certainly are big problems with the sound in Tenet.
Couldn’t understand a damn thing, completely spoilt the film for me
The main philosophical questions of TENET is the idea of free will and causality.
The Protagonist throughout the film is simply performing his role for his future self, so the idea of free will is questioned as all his actions were predetermined.
The climax was all simultaneous. The opera, yacht, Stalsk-12.
isn’t the sound purposefully louder than the dialogue?
Been waiting for this!
My problem is not that a bullet can be shot and unshot depending on which way you are living it. My problem is a building having the bottom reformed after the perfect top rose back up to complete form and then blowing up the top of the building.
Now we are either talking alternative futures, multi-verse realities, or a lack of logic. Which do you think it is?
I just watched it and I've read many people were walking out of the theater on this movie....I completely understand why.
So right.
In the scene where the scientist showing the Protagonist the mechanics of the inverted bullets, she says 'don't try to make sense of it' That line is probably meant for the audience too. Pretty much confirming that alot of it doesn't actually make sense when you think about.
i love how everyone is trying to make an excuse for this guys failure to make something good.
Yes, everyone who has a different opinion than you is just making excuses. Top notch reasoning. Bravo.
Or maybe people have a different opinion
Yes this is so true. Ok we all love Nolan I get that. But this one is a dud I’m afraid. Just a bit of a mess that we don’t really care about.
COMPLETELTY AGREE!!!!
@@thecanberean *in your opinion. It's fine if you didn't like it, but don't make out like it was a bad film just because you personally didn't enjoy or understand it.
I remembering hearing Mark's review of this on Radio 5. Some wag texted in, claiming that it was a bit like the episode of Red Dwarf, titled "Backwards"...
He literally sounds like he's just making excuses for the film here. Its like he wants to say that its not that good and it's over complicated but he just doesn't dare because its a Nolan film
This! I couldn't hear what the characters were saying the whole movie.
No, I know exactly what he means.
I would happily see the movie again, as I enjoyed 80% of it, but I agree with every one of these criticisms.
Yes, Kermode like a lot of film critics are in a state of funk about simply saying that a BRAND name like Nolan is no good in this film, because he's a brand name, and because he's doing
sci-fi in a James Bond style(a calling card perhaps?): if Kermode clearly stated the truth," it's rubbish", he'd lose lots of supporters and fans. Kermode's into sci-fi, so he wants to appear cool, saying he wants to go back and see it again to 'understand it'. Kermode has made a virtue of seeing a film many times, to appreciate it like a connoisseur. He also knows Nolan spends great amounts, does lots of planning on his major films , and because of this he gives him respect. The fact you have to suffer to see this film isn't enough..
@@johnsharman7930 I don't see why you have to turn it into a big conspiracy, he gives a nuanced criticism and says he likes it but it is flawed. That is the opinion of most intelligent people watching who don't feel the need to be edgy by expressing extreme opinions.
@@rustyk4645 I only expanded what Paul Allwood said. What conspiracy?
With a movie like Tenet it's not a failure of the storytelling for viewers to benefit from watching it again. What you get the second time around is some clarity due to having the benefit of hindsight. In a very real sense, you need to watch it again to perform you own "Temporal Pincer Movement".
The old 'requires multiple viewings' box office hustle. Could it be that the film's just a bit of a duffer?
I went into the film expecting to have problems understanding it due to some of the talk around the film. I can remember feeling slightly confused early on. But by the end of the film everything made sense. Possibly certain questions about it haven't occurred to me; I don't know. But it seemed reasonably clear cut to me in a general sense. I really enjoyed it.
I watched this Tuesday night. There were a maximum of 10 people watching and at least 4 left early.
Bring on Bond!
Great to have you back Mark!