Jump to content

Nolan makes his Bond film: Tenet


Parliament

Recommended Posts

On 5/25/2019 at 11:37 AM, longhornmatt said:

Yeah, my reaction wasn’t “star-studded cast.”   It was “Michael Caine and Kenneth Branagh - that’s cool but how old are they now - and, ugh, Twilight guy, and ... other names that I’ll trust are real.”

I celebrate Clemence Poesy's entire catalog

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My favorite fan theory, which has no way in hell of happening, but would be amazing.

Spoiler

It's a Warner Brother's production.

So Michael Caine is in it, and he played Alfred.

Robert Pattinson is the new Batman.

 We will get a reveal at the end that Caine is still playing Alfred, Pattinson will suit up as Batman, and John David Washington was the Green Lantern, sent undercover to earth to investigate the Clock King fucking with time, all with a device provided to him by Maxwell Lord (who possibly fucks with time in Wonder Woman 1984 using said device).

It could be a backdoor soft reboot of Justice League.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/25/2019 at 1:18 PM, Dutchrudder said:

Man, fuck you and you regarded title. It's a SPY movie, nothing to do with James Bond.

I'll see it for sure, since I love Nolan, but there is no reason to sensationalize it.

and I don't remember any Bond movies based around reversing the flow of time. Not even Moonraker got that stupid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
  • 2 weeks later...

My smooth brain can't comprehend the movie fully.  It was frenetic and very tight for a 2.5hr runtime.  Superb acting and action. 

 

The plot loosely makes sense, but I suspect many people will want to watch it 2, 3 times.  I'll stick to reading the breakdowns online. 
 

Not sure if it was just my theater, or the production, or both, but the movie was fucking loud.  The bass reverberates everywhere, and even in "quiet" scenes the ambient background blurted and hung through the subwoofer like a fucking techno club.  Louder than that, actually.  I couldn't make out half the dialog.

 

The whole thing is like Inception turned up to 11

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, 52-80 said:

My smooth brain can't comprehend the movie fully.  It was frenetic and very tight for a 2.5hr runtime.  Superb acting and action. 

 

The plot loosely makes sense, but I suspect many people will want to watch it 2, 3 times.  I'll stick to reading the breakdowns online. 
 

Not sure if it was just my theater, or the production, or both, but the movie was fucking loud.  The bass reverberates everywhere, and even in "quiet" scenes the ambient background blurted and hung through the subwoofer like a fucking techno club.  Louder than that, actually.  I couldn't make out half the dialog.

 

The whole thing is like Inception turned up to 11

 

where’s your local theater?  thought it wasn’t out til next week. 

Edited by futureman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, futureman said:

where’s your local theater?  thought it wasn’t out til next week. 

Watched it in Oslo.  Some of the scenes were filmed here.  My friends building is actually in the shots.

 

Forgot to mention Robert Patterson the genderfluid vampire.  He actually did a great job in a confident action role.  Gives hope he might play the new Batman okay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just watched the final trailer posted above.  WTF?  If protagonist is moving backwards in time, eating and shitting are both going to be very, very unpleasant.  And how is he having a conversation with people who are presumably moving forward in time?  The whole premise seems really dumb to me, but maybe I shouldn't be watching the trailer after enjoying a few Belgian Ales.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bernorange said:

Just watched the final trailer posted above.  WTF?  If protagonist is moving backwards in time, eating and shitting are both going to be very, very unpleasant.  And how is he having a conversation with people who are presumably moving forward in time?  The whole premise seems really dumb to me, but maybe I shouldn't be watching the trailer after enjoying a few Belgian Ales.

Someone made this diagram months ago, based on watching the trailers and behind the scenes stuff.

 

It is not a spoiler.  It's the best explanation of the mechanics of the movie.

 

It'll also give you a massive headstart when watching the movie, otherwise it's a massive brainfuck

 

 

f97ykud0yhe41.jpg

 

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bernorange said:

Just watched the final trailer posted above.  WTF?  If protagonist is moving backwards in time, eating and shitting are both going to be very, very unpleasant.  And how is he having a conversation with people who are presumably moving forward in time?  The whole premise seems really dumb to me, but maybe I shouldn't be watching the trailer after enjoying a few Belgian Ales.

The time traveler is moving around in world where everything else is going backwards.  He's essentially aging, while the clock in that world is ticking counterclockwise. 

 

If he is walking northbound on a sidewalk, everyone else in that world, facing northbound, is walking backwards.

 

If you were a member of that world, living your life "normally" in your perspective, at some point the time traveler would brush past you, facing the same way, but stepping  backwards.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bought tickets to a Drafthouse showing next Friday afternoon. Wife was a bit hesitant but after she read all of their enhanced safety policies (temp screenings at the door, distanced seating, all food/bev purchased in advanced so limited contact w/ staff, etc) she came around to it. It's been odd seeing our Drafthouse sit empty all of these months. I can't imagine another theater I'd consider going to at this time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/28/2020 at 6:19 PM, bernorange said:

Just watched the final trailer posted above.  WTF?  If protagonist is moving backwards in time, eating and shitting are both going to be very, very unpleasant.  And how is he having a conversation with people who are presumably moving forward in time?  The whole premise seems really dumb to me, but maybe I shouldn't be watching the trailer after enjoying a few Belgian Ales.

image.png.50ab99c0517705201c945c567869c245.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In a good way?

Yes and no. It totally blew me away visually and mentally, all the actors were good/great. I would call it too complex though. Multiple scenes where the actors have to explain to each other (the audience) what’s going on.

It’s a movie that may be a masterpiece once I fully understand each scene, but after one viewing, feels like a brain attack. Also, plenty of British/Russian/Indian people in it, will watch with subtitles at home and that should help a bunch.

Also a good reminder that Nolan uses real gunshot noises. I remember jumping in my seat at the very first scene in Dunkirk when they start shooting, same thing here
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Saw it at Alamo last night.  So great to be back at a theater.

Badass movie, but confusing for the first watch. Quintessential Nolan film though.

Also echo an earlier poster's thoughts that I had trouble making out some dialogue, a lot of it muffled on radios or through a mask, or a hard to make out accent.

Edited by LonghornSean
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's very hard to get after first viewing.  It breaks all conventional time-travel paradigms.  It helps to under the principal going in:

1.  Time-travel doesn't mean the traveler jumps to a particular point in time, and then moving forward contemporaneous with everything else.  Here, time-travel means the traveler chooses to enter an environment that is perpetually in rewind, while the traveler himself advances forward.  Hence a time "inversion".

 

2.  The time traveler may move forward and reverse and forward and reverse again at different points in the timeline.  Hence confusing as fuck to follow.  If you were at Starbucks 5 days ago, and choose to invert yourself right now, you can go directly to Starbucks, wait around 5 days (while everything around you is happening in reverse), and eventually see yourself in the Starbucks putting a cup back on the counter, paying the cashier, making an order, and then walking backwards out the door...

 

Edited by 52-80
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's very hard to get after first viewing.  It breaks all conventional time-travel paradigms.  It helps to under the principal going in:
1.  Time-travel doesn't mean the traveler jumps to a particular point in time, and then moving forward contemporaneous with everything else.  Here, time-travel means the traveler chooses to enter an environment that is perpetually in rewind, while the traveler himself advances forward.  Hence a time "inversion".
 
2.  The time traveler may move forward and reverse and forward and reverse again at different points in the timeline.  Hence confusing as fuck to follow.  If you were at Starbucks 5 days ago, and choose to invert yourself right now, you can go directly to Starbucks, wait around 5 days (while everything around you is happening in reverse), and eventually see yourself in the Starbucks putting a cup back on the counter, paying the cashier, making an order, and then walking backwards out the door...
 

Yeah the basic concept is somewhat easy, it’s when put in movie format that it becomes insanity.

There are three scenes that I couldn’t even begin to explain what exactly is happening. Generally big picture plot I understood it, but who is going where and when and how is basically a giant mystery
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, HoustonFrog said:


Yeah the basic concept is somewhat easy, it’s when put in movie format that it becomes insanity.

There are three scenes that I couldn’t even begin to explain what exactly is happening. Generally big picture plot I understood it, but who is going where and when and how is basically a giant mystery

Saw it last night.  Three reasonably intelligent people came away somewhat entertained and fairly confused.

I would describe the movie this way:  Take the movie Inception.  Then add time travel.  Then make it a little more confusing. = Tenet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Saw it last night.  Three reasonably intelligent people came away somewhat entertained and fairly confused.
I would describe the movie this way:  Take the movie Inception.  Then add time travel.  Then make it a little more confusing. = Tenet.

I described it to someone as Inception + James Bond + time travel and inversion
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/1/2020 at 8:49 AM, HoustonFrog said:


Yes and no. It totally blew me away visually and mentally, all the actors were good/great. I would call it too complex though. Multiple scenes where the actors have to explain to each other (the audience) what’s going on.

It’s a movie that may be a masterpiece once I fully understand each scene, but after one viewing, feels like a brain attack. Also, plenty of British/Russian/Indian people in it, will watch with subtitles at home and that should help a bunch.

Also a good reminder that Nolan uses real gunshot noises. I remember jumping in my seat at the very first scene in Dunkirk when they start shooting, same thing here

This is pretty much spot on how my wife & I felt about Tenet. It's almost mentally fatiguing by late in the 2nd act to try & keep track of when/where the Protagonist (Nolan not giving the character a name is quirky but also gives him a timeless/ageless quality) is in the film. Nolan does a decent job tying things together in the final act but you've got to work for it. Multiple viewings are required to get what's going on. For the first viewing you're probably best off following the advice the Protagonist is given when a scientist explains inversion to him: "don't try to understand it, just feel it."

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The muffled sound seems to be a main source of debate/criticism in the reviews. As a guy who’s kinda lost the top end of his hearing over the years, I will definitely have to wait until I can watch at home and subtitles are available. But I didn’t realize time bending was a driver of the plot, that has always fascinated me, so I’m sure I’ll check it out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nolan outsmarted himself with this one.  Lotsa great actors, characters, set pieces and action.  Cut out the time inversion thing and replace it with a bland plot, and you'd have a better movie. 

Back to the Future 2 did time travel better.

OP's thread title holds up; this was meant as Nolan's Bond film.  It's also why he'll never get the chance to make one.  Nolan's non-Batman films have plots that are WAY to complex for Bond films.

Like any time travel movie, you can pick at plot holes all you want.  You gotta turn all that off if you wanna enjoy one.  But there is one hole I can't abide, and if I understand it right, it wrecks the whole thing:

Spoiler

If he had terminal pancreatic cancer, why did she try so hard to get out of her marriage?  Just wait for him to die.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would describe the movie this way:  Take the movie Inception.  Then add time travel.  Then make it a little more confusing. = Tenet.


I would say make it significantly more non-sensical while also removing any level of character depth (not that Inception had a ton, but there at least the shit with Leo and his wife).
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Saw it and was blown away.  Bond movie but with better  and more imaginative storytelling.  And the filmmaking and editing ridiculous.

I don’t understand people that say they don’t get it.  It’s a Nolan film, and it is great.  To me, a tighter movie than Inception.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Parliament said:

I thought he did well with what he had. Pattinson was very good. In all seriousness, he could play the real 007.

he exudes much more cool than joseph gordon levitt did - and the internet went gaga over him even tho he looks like a teenage boy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Movie was interesting but I'm not sure why it's being compared to Bond.  What do these movies have in common other than both main characters being a spy?

Like most Nolan movies, it's a great concept with tons of cool moments and great special effects that ends up being a bit convoluted, a bit too long, and drags at points.

3/5

Edited by Tom
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...