[SPOILER] Discussion/Speculation Thread
For the car scene
yep and this is essentially why all the questionable plot turns in the film "make sense" in the context of what you're describing.
-Vader
I just love that Nolan toned down the exposition and told the story in a very kinetic way. I mean sure, those short dialogue scenes where they talk about what inverted is and how it reacts with its surroundings is imo enough. Would I have loved to see a lengthy discussion between characters about all its intricacies or even more dialogue about it? Sure, but I think it works just as well if not better for Nolan to show us how it works and tell his story than explaining everything in detail. I just really love the concept and I think the film has got some incredible set pieces. And yes, the second time I saw it the film was better because you look at it from two other characters POVs and I think as Nolan basically has been doing since the start of his career, that his films have multiple layers which not necessarily warrant another view but they enrich the film that way.
Tenet is Nolan's talkiest movie since Insomnia so I'm not sure that's true. Most of the movie is endless dialogue to set up set pieces ...then more endless dialogue to explain why the set pieces didn't go as expected. Take into consideration most set pieces only last a few minutes too.Nomis wrote: ↑December 1st, 2020, 7:38 amI just love that Nolan toned down the exposition and told the story in a very kinetic way. I mean sure, those short dialogue scenes where they talk about what inverted is and how it reacts with its surroundings is imo enough. Would I have loved to see a lengthy discussion between characters about all its intricacies or even more dialogue about it? Sure, but I think it works just as well if not better for Nolan to show us how it works and tell his story than explaining everything in detail. I just really love the concept and I think the film has got some incredible set pieces. And yes, the second time I saw it the film was better because you look at it from two other characters POVs and I think as Nolan basically has been doing since the start of his career, that his films have multiple layers which not necessarily warrant another view but they enrich the film that way.
The only major digression from Inception or Interstellar is that Nolan doesn't repeat himself. You don't get Ariadne in the third act re-explaining the rules for the 5th time. Part of the "ride" of the movie is that he constantly throws a ton at you and expects you to keep up, but it's still a movie with endless nets of exposition.
-Vader
I think its because things are not explained again in the third act that make me feel that way. I also meant the exposition when it comes to the concept of inverted objects, not insomuch as explaining what they're going to do and why said thing went wrong. You're right that there's quite a lot of dialogue but it always felt like it was steering the film forwards (for lack of a better word lol).
Posts: 1
Joined:
November 2020
Forgive me if this has already been covered in this thread, but I was hoping someone here might be able to help me out with it.
Has anyone been able to work out a consistent, coherent logic to the action scenes, like the car chase sequence? It's Nolan, so I want to believe there is a logic, but I haven't been able to piece it together yet.
I'm fearful that the established principle of being able to sort of "force pull" certain objects that are inverted kind of negates there needing to be a logic behind the interaction of forward time elements and inverse time elements.
Like, I was trying to figure out why it was so easy to make the exchanges of the orange container and the piece of the algorithm from car-to-car during the chase, and then I wondered if it was all just a matter of Sator holding up his hand and making it come to him once The Protagonist was willing to let it go.
If there is a more complex logic to those action sequences, though, it would help make the movie for me. Otherwise, I'm fearing it's just more like action eye candy than anything else.
I appreciate any help anyone can provide on this!
Has anyone been able to work out a consistent, coherent logic to the action scenes, like the car chase sequence? It's Nolan, so I want to believe there is a logic, but I haven't been able to piece it together yet.
I'm fearful that the established principle of being able to sort of "force pull" certain objects that are inverted kind of negates there needing to be a logic behind the interaction of forward time elements and inverse time elements.
Like, I was trying to figure out why it was so easy to make the exchanges of the orange container and the piece of the algorithm from car-to-car during the chase, and then I wondered if it was all just a matter of Sator holding up his hand and making it come to him once The Protagonist was willing to let it go.
If there is a more complex logic to those action sequences, though, it would help make the movie for me. Otherwise, I'm fearing it's just more like action eye candy than anything else.
I appreciate any help anyone can provide on this!
