I don't think there was even a single part of the film where I actually understood what was going on. I can't be the only one who had this experience. Will anyone second my nomination?
shareYou didn't watch 2001: A Space Odyssey.
shareThat movie was just bad. People watched this because of this cool reverse footage. But the story was so bad. That abusive russian bad guy story and his wife was unbearable. How could someone came up with it I dont know. Its like someone told Nolan that he must have "woman character" or woketards would be offended so he inserted blond tall woman into that bad guy storyline.
Nolan is popcorn director. He can shoot action scenes. But cant write and shoot ordinary stories that should be between those scenes. I fasforward Murph, Cooper and brother story om earth in Interstellar every time i rewatch it. Because its so boring.
I fully believe Nolan found, then crossed the line of what audiences will accept.
First, the story does work, makes sense if you really work on following it - allowing suspension of disbelief on certain aspects... as every movie in existence should be allowed to do.
But, it crosses that line of brain bending complexity that the majority of viewers would rather not deal with for some fun movie entertainment. Line crossed. Now, everyone knows you can't go over the line that loses a majority of the audience, even if SOME get it and enjoy it.
It's almost that "ART FILM" mentality: "art films don't really have to mean anything, but you can make up whatever you like - in many cases". I don't like art films because they are more FEELING than DOING. I want a film to DO something, go somehwere, not just look pretty and let me make up whatever I want to about it. I call that very lazy.
Anyway, yes, its mostly complicated over the reverse time thing that our brains are not all that trained to embrace. And I found that to be brilliant. Let alone, being able to wrap an action story plot around it, get it filmed, and make it WORK! Bravo, I say, Bravo! The plot totally works in that universe and makes perfect sense once you accept the way time worked in that universe.
2001 gets closer to an ART film at the end: "open to interpretation" yeah, ok. But it worked being stuff beyond all comprehension and reason to us primitive humans. I find TENET to be more enjoyable.
I actually don't think "2001" goes beyond comprehension the way "Tenet" does
Whatever happens to Bowman, it's clearly the aliens at work, and it's established that they're interested in forcing humanity to evolve and advance. It's only incomprehensible to the extent that Bowman himself doesn't comprehend it
In other words, it's OK because the incomprehensibility is "diagetic," for want of a better word. It's acceptable because the character can't comprehend it either.
This film frustrates me because the characters seem to "get it," but I don't.
"Primer" was like this; repeated time travel resulting increasingly convoluted timelines, until we need a literal roadmap to understand it
https://unrealitymag.com/at-last-a-definitive-timeline-for-primer/
I never got that it was aliens in 2001. just the universe itself in action, doing stuff. causing something to happen. reincarnate bowman maybe? they never TELL us for sure, so we get to make it up, and that is okay. Its supposed to be above and beyond our comprehension.
yeah, I enojyed primer a lot too. it also is crossed past what regular audiences could enjoy. and that's okay. it's not for everyone.
That's a thing... I feel it is okay for people to disagree on what they like or dislike, get or dont get in films. Just proves we're all different and that makes life more interesting. :) Some people prefer grape, some prefer orange.
The inversion thing was just plain fucking stupid.
Tenet is the film equivalent of German engineering...making something way more complicated than it has to be to perform its intended function.
I dunno... I found the time inversion part of the fun. And integral to the entire plot. :) I mean, it's what the movie is about.
shareThe whole movie and the entire concept was stupid, and makes little sense at any level of examination. You can tell Nolan had a visual idea of "two people fight while one is traveling forwards and the other backwards in time", and tried to construct a movie around it.
shareIf it's too confusing for you, you might want to consider sticking to Michael Bay and Transformers movies!
shareGoddamned right.
shareAckbarsRevenge,
Can you honestly tell me that you actually understood every part of Tenet? If so, please explain the movie to me so I may understand it too.
Of course. Nolan skillfully weaves together elements of abstract storytelling, using evocative visuals and a non-linear narrative structure. He delves into the deeper layers of human emotions and philosophical themes, leaving room for personal interpretation and introspection.The movie employs an enigmatic and thought-provoking approach, inviting viewers to explore the richness of symbolism and contemplate the complexities of the human experience. The soundtrack complements the visuals, creating an atmospheric journey that lingers in the mind long after the credits roll. It might not appeal to the typical Tranformers viewer's taste, as it challenges traditional storytelling conventions, but for those seeking a unique cinematic experience, this film offers an immersive journey into the realm of artistic expression and emotional exploration.
shareAckbarsRevenge,
When I asked if you actually understood every part of Tenet I was asking if you actually understood the plot in every part of the movie. Can you please explain the entire plot to me?
"Tenet" is a sci-fi action thriller directed by Christopher Nolan. The film follows the protagonist, known as The Protagonist, a secret agent tasked with preventing World War III through the concept of "time inversion." He navigates a world where objects and people can move backward in time, leading to mind-bending action and complex puzzles. As The Protagonist delves deeper into the mission, he encounters The Watchmaker, a reclusive genius with a penchant for crafting timepieces. The Watchmaker has discovered a pocket dimension where time moves differently. Guided by The Watchmaker's cryptic clues, The Protagonist must navigate through corporate schemes masterminded by the enigmatic CEO, Mr. Pendulum. Alongside his ally, Agent Chrona, The Protagonist embarks on thrilling missions involving time inversion. In a breathtaking climax, The Protagonist confronts Mr. Pendulum in an abandoned clock tower where the gears and pendulums move independently of time. The fate of the world hangs in the balance. In the movie's twist, The Protagonist realizes that The Watchmaker is his future self, sending clues back in time to prevent a catastrophic event that transforms him.
shareI asked you to explain Tenet in the context that I've actually seen the movie and your explanation just makes me feel more confused. I don't remember there being anything in Tenet about a Watchmaker, Agent Chrona, Mr. Pendulum or an abandoned clock tower. I'm not sure that we're even talking about the same movie.
shareHe's showing all the symptoms of being a Nolanite. Best to ignore him.
shareThe title of the movie is "Tenet". Now look what Nolan did there. Constant consumption of Michael Bay movies might impact your comprehension skills, but solely the title of the film is pure genius. It's "TENET". Tenet... Get it? I have clue for you. Ever heard of the Swedish band "Abba"?
It's excellent. Tenet...TENET!
Yes it's a palindrome, like 'poop' or 'Was it Eliot's toilet I saw'
shareAckbarsRevenge,
The explanation of Tenet's plot you gave me is so bizarre that I can only conclude that you actually agree with me about it being extremely confusing and you were just tooling with me as a way to mock Tenet for being so complex and confusing.
You are truly a great conversationalist!
shareWhat an original comment
shareThis is such a 2009 answer. When has Michael Bay even been relevant?
shareIt was the only Nolan movie that I saw where I was disappointed. I just couldn’t make out what they were saying much of the time.
shareIt is the only Christopher Nolan movie I was disappointed with. I just couldn’t make out what they were saying most of the time and that dialogue was important because they were explaining what was going on. The only way I would watch it again is with closed captioning.
shareSadly, this is due to quite a few reasons which really need to be addressed by the industry.
Nolan and his team, at least as of late, seem to do pretty poor audio mixes. Tenet is the worst offender by far with this audio mix. I'm not sure if it was due to the release being during COVID so it was pushed to HBO without much extra effort by the studio? Possibly also because Nolan is a 'purist' and wants movies to be seen in the theater, which just so happen to have speaker size and decibels that help outweigh any clarity issue. Although I saw comments that this had poor dialogue even in theaters.
Also, most major releases are really poorly optimized for home release now anyways. Soundbars are by large the choice for most home audio and they will tend to have weaker output compared to a more dedicated speaker setup. Even with that said, a full speaker setup may not fix the poor mixing done on the film, even with a dialogue boost or great center channel. Most mixes I've seen on streaming still show 5.1 and I don't see a soundbar outputting that kind of power and still leaving room for heavy lifting a dedicated center channel could work.
The way audio is recorded for films now is different than previous decades where it was much clearer and could easily be heard on a stereo setup or even with TV speakers. Studios need to really consider a 'streaming' mix or soundbar mix that might muddy some of the intent of the film but makes the dialogue understand. I've met people who only watch things with CC due to poor audio on a lot of TV/movies now.
Worst offender of all was that apparently Nolan wanted this film to have some conversations/bits where it was intentionally obscure and to leave you wondering what was said. The problem is when a lion's share of the dialogue is already indecipherable, then how is anyone to know that one particular conversation was deliberately made to be unheard and the rest weren't? It was a poor choice on his part.
I haven't seen this yet , but sounds like he sunk lower than inception
shareI thought the plot was straight forward. Then backward. Then both at the same time.
share