Smilion wrote: ↑August 22nd, 2020, 7:44 am
So I've seen this yesterday. No major spoilers bellow, even in spoiler windows. I haven't seen it in IMAX unfortunately and the ratio was basically the same through whole film, therefore I can not say, how much of it was shot on IMAX.
To put this opinion in some context you should know that my favorite Nolan movies are Inception, The Prestige, and Memento. Though I appreciate what The Dark Knight achieved in the area of comic book adaptations, I personally still prefer a less realistic approach to material akin to Spider-Man 2 or Burton's Batman. I get when critics say Nolan movies are cold. It's because Nolan writes characters and dialogues to convey plot, which is always based around ideas like stealing secrets in dreams or showing rivalship between magicians. Nolan is extremely clinical in this, every character and dialogue line is there to serve the plot and move the plot of the movie forward, everything is there to convey the message (even names of the characters, etc.). Therefore, characters may talk unnaturally and due to complicated plot overexplain things (that was true with Inception, although it wasn't distracting) and are not that fleshed out (like some more character-based movies). All of this is also the case with Tenet.
As for other movies, I liked Dunkirk although it felt to me like the third act of Nolan movie stretched for 100 minutes, and though it is undeniable that its 5-star movie from a technical standpoint, it didn't give me the excitement I usually expect from Nolan movie. I loved Dark Knight Rises when I first saw it, although I must admit that it didn't age well through years, and as of today I think its the Nolan movie with most technical flaws and plot holes, though it's still great in scope. As for Interstellar, I think its most ambitious Nolans movie, beautifully made, although it kinda fell apart for me in the last act, as the love message kind of fell flat and was imo too on the nose, especially when taking into consideration the scientific approach to the scientific matter (and when the poem was recited the third time, I was like, yeah I get it, stop showing the message down my throat). It's a nice idea that only love can transcend dimensions of time and space, but in the context of the movie, I found it too cliched and on the nose.
So regarding Tenet. No doubt that this is a traditional Nolan, but on steroids. Loud, twisted, enormous in scale, dialogue-heavy and with great tempo, that makes it feel it's 1,5h movie. If you liked Inception I'm 90% sure you will like this too. It's more ambitious and maybe more flawed, in relation to Inception, it's imo what Dark Knight Rises was to Dark Knight. If TDKR was released in today's circumstances and the critics who don't like Nolan where so loud then, TDKR would probably get lower scores and RT rating around 50%.
And it's loud, really loud, whole theater and seats were shaking due to loud score. I must add that sound mix is a thing I especially like in Nolan movies, though in our country they show films with subtitles, so there was never an issue with following what characters are saying. The score is nice, a lot of synths, however, I felt it only served the movie and action, but nothing more. It wasn't as epic or memorable as Inception or Interstellar.
I get what critics are saying regarding the fact that the movie is hard to follow. The plot imo is much more straightforward than Inception,
(although I had absolutely no problems following Inception on the first view, it wasn't that complicated at all), although it is true that the concept of inversion is not explained in much detail, so a bit of good-will is required. If you stall and contemplate how things work, you are already missing further plot points, since, as I said, the tempo is relentless. And due to quite complicated concepts, action sequences with objects moving forward and backward are so rich, that it's hard not to miss some details. For me, Eagle Mountain was highlight action-wise, though I also loved car chance and plane sequence (though a little nitpick, both felt for me a bit empty (Spectre like, you kinda felt it's a movie set), it wasn't as crowdy as some Fallout sequences for example.) If you contemplate too much how is one thing moving forward and other backward, details, consequences, you will miss half the fun (in that way, sure more viewings will indeed help). In that way, emotionally it may feel a bit empty, but it's similar to early Bond movies with Connery. I have a feeling that repeated viewings may also show some awkward background character movements, due to actors moving backward/forward. But in the context of immersion, it definitely worked imo. Cinematography by Hoyte was great, although he didn't surpass those dogfight plane sequences from Dunkirk. I would also prefer more grey, blue tones, as whole movie was yellowish and brown. As for new editor, honestly I didn't even noticed that Smith was replaced.
Not a major spoiler, just to let you know how crazy action is
.
Due to that and high tempo, I agree with critics that the movie doesn't have a tangible emotional core, there is no inner personal motivation for the main character, as was the case with Cobb. Debicki's character is the closest to this, although I still think Hall's character in The Prestige was Nolan's best writing for female characters in his movies. Acting-wise, for me, Pattinson was the highlight, followed by Debicki and then Washington, who as I said is more of a traditional action spy without much characterization. Branagh on the other hand worked,
All in all I really enjoyed it, it will definetelly be one of the Nolan movies I will watch annually. It's bold, it takes risks and it's large in scale. It's the opposite of safe blockbuster, that tries to please all (looking at you Disney). I mean if you are a film fan and appreciate good films that need a bit of thinking and sparkle a good debate and spy genre overall (it's imo not a spoiler to say that whole film is constructed as a loop), you will enjoy this, most definitely. It may not be Nolan's magnum opus, but it's stil better than all MCU/DCU/SW movies and most blockbusters of last few years (best action movie since Fallout imo).
So it' still has the same characteristics of a Nolan movie (good and bad). If there was lack of dialogues and exposition in Dunkirk, and critics said that was a good thing, I kinda get it, why they reacted that way, as this is Inception all over, but on steroids. It may also be, that some weren't able to follow everything and felt too confused. This part of TotalFilm review said this:
Tenet can be a bewildering experience as a result – the polar opposite of the easily digestible comic book extravaganzas that have dominated cinemas for the last decade. In keeping several key characters enigmas throughout – especially Washington’s Protagonist, who doesn’t even get a name – it relies heavily on the charisma of its cast in lieu of backstory and character development.
My current Nolan ranking:
