|
it does also mean you need reliable control of the turnstile on your way back, so you have to be in communication with someone at your destination time
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2021 05:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 17:51 |
|
|
My favorite theory in the movie isn't "Neil is young Max" but "Ives is a young Crosby."
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2021 05:38
|
|
|
My favourite theory is that Nolan hates action movies and practical effects and is trying to destroy their profitability by filming the worst action climaxes possible and making practical explosions incredibly dull. "Clear action then reaction? No thanks" -christopher nolan
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2021 17:47
|
|
|
I sometimes feel like his ideal film is The Limits of Control and he's mad that Jarmusch already made it. Just a series of scenes where people wearing designer clothing have conversations about nothing in overpriced cafes.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2021 18:38
|
|
|
Terror Sweat posted:My favourite theory is that Nolan hates action movies and practical effects and is trying to destroy their profitability by filming the worst action climaxes possible and making practical explosions incredibly dull. Again, I would say the same about Michael Bay and he does it more blatantly and intentionally and yet audiences love it. Unfortunately most audiences don't seem to mind poor action scenes, hence so many of them in hollywood.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2021 21:58
|
|
|
Zaphod42 posted:Again, I would say the same about Michael Bay and he does it more blatantly and intentionally and yet audiences love it. He's gets a lot of leeway thanks to the rock and bad boys
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2021 22:34
|
|
|
I think it's preposterous that Bay's movies are incredibly successful in spite of his singular visual style. I absolutely hate it, but millions of people like it. Your guess is as good as mine.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2021 22:49
|
|
|
Terror Sweat posted:He's gets a lot of leeway thanks to the rock and bad boys
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2021 22:56
|
|
|
Payndz posted:It says something that Michael Bay's best movie is a quarter of a century old. Then his next movie kicked off with GET MY [different angle] PHONE BOOK and things kind of deteriorated from there. His best movie isn't even a decade old, friend.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2021 23:10
|
|
|
Bay has multiple best movies and no bad ones, though I admittedly haven’t tackled Pearl Harbor yet.Android Apocalypse posted:My favorite theory in the movie isn't "Neil is young Max" but "Ives is a young Crosby." Theory: Neil is 120 million years old thanks to a special technique where he stayed inside a turnstile without exiting, then they put the turnstile through a turnstile to send him back to the paleocene. Theory: Max is an agent from the future and was inverted the whole time. He’s gradually de-aging from an old man, like Benjamin Button, but appears normal from the perspective of his parents. The problem with these theories is: who gives a poo poo? In what way would even a direct revelation that the kid is R-Patt earn more than a shrug? SuperMechagodzilla fucked around with this message at 03:17 on Jun 7, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2021 01:42
|
|
|
Zaphod42 posted:Again, I would say the same about Michael Bay and he does it more blatantly and intentionally and yet audiences love it. Not really. His action scenes in Transformers get progressively better from film to film as he gets more comfortable with the technology and it gets easier to do. 13 Hours was way too loving long but the shootouts were outstanding. Halloween Jack posted:I sometimes feel like his ideal film is The Limits of Control and he's mad that Jarmusch already made it. Just a series of scenes where people wearing designer clothing have conversations about nothing in overpriced cafes. A bunch of people sitting around explaining the details and themes of a plot that never actually happens. I'd actually be...sort of onboard with that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2021 02:58
|
|
|
Snowman_McK posted:Not really. His action scenes in Transformers get progressively better from film to film as he gets more comfortable with the technology and it gets easier to do. Really? I thought the action in Transformers was well done but the big sequences in Dark of the Moon and Revenge of the Fallen became increasingly incoherent. Then Age of Extinction and Last Knight were hard to sit through but not because of the action specifically. I wondered what the deal was, if the production process became too complex or if Bay lost control or if he just didn't care.
|
|
#
?
Jun 7, 2021 19:54
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Theory: Max is an agent from the future and was inverted the whole time. I am absolutely shocked that there was never a point in the movie where someone inverted had to pretend to be not inverted. Or someone do intentional backwards speech to give a threat or information to someone.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2021 16:14
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:I am absolutely shocked that there was never a point in the movie where someone inverted had to pretend to be not inverted. Or someone do intentional backwards speech to give a threat or information to someone.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2021 16:30
|
|
|
TychoCelchuuu posted:I love this movie, but there are like 78 things you can do with inversion that are more interesting than anything in the final act, and most of them are more interesting than anything that happens in the movie at all. And that's not even counting all the comedic stuff you could do, which I guess tonally wouldn't work with the film but which could be really fun to watch! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gooWdc6kb80
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2021 16:39
|
|
|
JazzFlight posted:The simple special effects shots in this YouTube video are more impressive than anything in TENET. Look that's a cool video but seeing a milk bottle get time-hosed isn't more impressive than seeing an actual building get time-hosed. Other than that yeah that's a cool vid, thanks for sharing!
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2021 17:03
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:I am absolutely shocked that there was never a point in the movie where someone inverted had to pretend to be not inverted. Or someone do intentional backwards speech to give a threat or information to someone. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPIUjGMPQDQ
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2021 17:51
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:Look that's a cool video but seeing a milk bottle get time-hosed isn't more impressive than seeing an actual building get time-hosed. Other than that yeah that's a cool vid, thanks for sharing! (also, wouldn't some goon here have a problem with the building never being built or something? Is the building either always destroyed in one time direction or another and only briefly intact?)
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2021 19:14
|
|
|
Yes, the time-hosed building is not technically possible without the "winds of entropy" explanation (that things hit by inverted objects eventually "push back" against the damage and reform themselves from an inverted perspective - from a regular perspective they start to fall apart/crack/shatter a couple hours before they're hit). Otherwise what the hell happened? The construction company brought piles of rubble to the town, which 30 years later turn into a building that blows up?
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2021 19:23
|
|
|
JazzFlight posted:The building thing was like "oh, okay, but I don't understand what that means in the context of the battle."
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2021 19:39
|
|
|
bawfuls posted:Yeah that struck me as dumb in the moment. They say "we need a distraction" so they don't get seen running into the tunnel. Then there's this carefully coordinated pair of explosion/inverted explosion on the building to create said distraction... but they don't break for the tunnel until after the distraction is over. The distraction isn't for some unseen enemy, it's for us, the audience who is witnessing the movie.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2021 03:00
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:The construction company brought piles of rubble to the town, which 30 years later turn into a building that blows up? lmao
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2021 03:13
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:Otherwise what the hell happened? The construction company brought piles of rubble to the town, which 30 years later turn into a building that blows up? Well, right; that makes much more sense than what we’re shown in the film. ...except how would the particles reorganize into that exact building-shape, ‘remembering’ what to be? If you were actually dealing with “reversed entropy”, and you had a pile of rubble getting unexploded by a magic unrocket, the rubble would theoretically just reform into an improbable abstract shape. The order in the rubble would increase, but it wouldn’t be organized into any recognizable building-shape because an unrocket is not a construction crew. Like, if you pulverized a statue of a penguin into a pile of sand, then fired an unrocket from it, you’d presumably just end up with a featureless lump of sandstone, or glass. Not a penguin.
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2021 05:43
|
|
|
Is there a way to watch the movie in reverse?
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2021 20:38
|
|
|
ruddiger posted:Is there a way to watch the movie in reverse? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2U7Ii0D1Mw also https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LjfAkgZlhIo
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2021 21:57
|
|
|
Just got around to watching this, it's a good time. I think a potential corollary of Sator's IF I CANT HAVE YOU NO ONE CAN being applied to both his wife Kat and the universe/predominant timeline would be that Kat represents that very notion of the world? There's an early shot of Kat (right after Sir Michael's scene) where a single letter on the sign for Cannon Street is obscured by a lamppost, such that the word CANON is just kind of floating above her like a helpful label. So with Kat as a personification of the canon, the Protag's twin wishes to save Kat and save reality begin to resemble eachother, just as with Sator. I would guess mean Kat's work authenticating art bears some relation to the process by which the timeline/story decides what is true/canon? And everyone trying to trick time into doing what they want makes them comparable to Arepo, or something like that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2021 20:01
|
|
|
I see merit in a lot of the criticisms you guys have of the film, and yet I was thinking about it much longer than any other recent mainstream release after seeing it. Not thinking about the plot or time mechanics, but about the images and sounds and the thematic implications. It’s rare that I like a movie so much seemingly despite itself. I can’t put my finger on it but there was something hypnotic about it that caused it to linger.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2021 01:59
|
|
|
Yea how much you had to think about trying to make sense of the plot.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2021 02:09
|
|
|
I found myself thinking about this movie a lot, but mostly about all the other cool poo poo they could have done with a cold war between nations fighting over the first turnstiles instead of this. What is even the point of the temporal pincer movement? As far as I can tell the inverted guys don't really do anything special? Couldn't you send one dude back to just sit on a hill with binoculars to get all the info and execute a "pincer" without wasting a hundred people?
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2021 18:59
|
|
|
I watched this finally and like, it’s been over a year so maybe this exists. Is there anyone who has an explainer on what the gently caress is going on with the time stuff that doesn’t rely heavily on them inferring stuff to make it make sense? Like, is the time inversion stuff just a total mess that makes no sense or does the movie actually lay out what is going on and I missed it? I suspect the former but if there is a fairly terse explanation I am interested in hearing it. I try to just sit back and enjoy a movie but the minute I thought about what was going on at all, I was very confused and it really took me out of it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2021 01:37
|
|
|
The best way I can describe it is that there is an explanation that holds up if you don't think too hard about it. Search for Welbey Coffeespill on YouTube.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2021 02:25
|
|
|
The plot makes sense. You can really go out on cinemasins nitpicks on how time travel would “really work” but the plot of the movie is all generally understandable within what’s in the movie or with straightforward gap filling
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2021 02:37
|
|
|
Dren posted:I watched this finally and like, it’s been over a year so maybe this exists. Is there anyone who has an explainer on what the gently caress is going on with the time stuff that doesn’t rely heavily on them inferring stuff to make it make sense? The movie is telling you to just go with it alot of the time. It has its own logic which sometimes makes sense. I remember when I got the bluray I watched with subtitles, hopeng to understand more of the temporal pincer strategy, and it just says "inaudible dialogue" for most of it. They do a bad job explaining that both teams going into the final battle are supposed to fail their objectives, but they are kinda unclear on what that looks like. The issue is the movie is not totally sure if telling you about something happening in the past will lead to it changing, so why risk telling? Even though we feel like we do get proof you can't change things based off of the 3 setpieces we see.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2021 02:49
|
|
|
It all actually “works” you just have to like sit down and draw it out. Save for that Robert Pattinson’s character is a bit too young for the timeline to make sense. The only thing that isn’t clear or consistent is what exactly happens when inverted object impacts a non inverted object. Sometimes it seems like invertedness is “imparted” like with wounds and other times it’s not like with how explosions cause inverted people to be hypothermic but that’s extremely nitpicky imo. Everything else you could nitpick as far as “the rules” is more philosophical or like very niche biology or physics nitpicks that would ruin the whole thing anyway. There are a bunch of YouTube’s that explain the confusing scenes. It all “makes sense” and follows an internal logic it’s just impossible to follow without drawing out a whiteboard that looks like a slide from a US Army briefing on COIN.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2021 12:18
|
|
|
GoutPatrol posted:The movie is telling you to just go with it alot of the time. It has its own logic which sometimes makes sense. ok that’s fine then Stuff that bothered me included: * how does a temporal pincer movement make any sense at all. like you go forward through it but there is no “first time” you’ve gone forward through and the reverse people are always going backwards through it with the knowledge of what you did, and also you could have talked to them and know what they did. which… huh??? and what are the logistics of setting up the red team/blue team version, how do they get to their starting points in order to attack? why do we need a red and blue team, they were all coming from the future couldn’t they just watch what happened at stalsk-12 on their way to the past? just… huh??? * the progtagonist (inverted) gets in a car that looks too big to fit into an inverter and just drives it like normal? * I never quite wrapped my head around a forward time person using an inverted bullet * the “you have to breathe inverted air when you’re inverted” seems to create an enormous logistical challenge for anyone moving backwards for more than a couple of hours then there was standard movie poo poo like “where did they get all these troops” but w/e i am accustomed to turning my brain off for that sort of thing if the answer is “just go with it” that is fine but i do wish the movie had either gone more towards making it make sense or more explicitly said “hey it’s dumb whatever, just watch it.” oh and why didn’t we get to see an inverted guy suck poop into his butt and shoot food out his mouth? big failure
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2021 12:34
|
|
|
Dren posted:
They walk by a line of cars on the way to the inverter in the ready room under some tarps. That doesn't really 100% answer exactly how they get it through the inverter. Can the inverter open up, do they take the cars apart? do they tilt the car up and push it? It doesn't really answer to that depth, but it basically gives the answer where the car comes from: they process cars through the inverter and had some waiting to be done, implyinginverted cars are a thing they make sometimes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2021 15:51
|
|
|
Dren posted:ok that’s fine then Team Blue is the "original team" that goes in as in: they have no knowledge of what is going to happen. they are people who just hang out in a bunker until after the battle is over, then they get in an inverter, then they get in an inverted helicopter, then they do the battle according to their plan. At the end, they un-invert and tell Team Red what happened. Then Team Red goes in with some idea of what's going to happen. But they can't actually change what Team Blue saw. But that might be ok, because Team Blue might tell them "there was a minefield at this position and you avoided it". Big win there. Also technically you COULD be on Team Blue, un-invert, and go on Team Red. Wowzers.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2021 20:00
|
|
|
Megaman's Jockstrap posted:Team Blue is the "original team" that goes in as in: they have no knowledge of what is going to happen. they are people who just hang out in a bunker until after the battle is over, then they get in an inverter, then they get in an inverted helicopter, then they do the battle according to their plan. At the end, they un-invert and tell Team Red what happened. Then Team Red goes in with some idea of what's going to happen. But they can't actually change what Team Blue saw. But that might be ok, because Team Blue might tell them "there was a minefield at this position and you avoided it". Big win there. But if Team Blue tells Team Red something extremely actionable like "don't stand there or you die", Team Red guys have to say "What happened happened" then go stand there anyway? Am I getting it now?
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2021 20:26
|
|
|
Dren posted:But if Team Blue tells Team Red something extremely actionable like "don't stand there or you die", Team Red guys have to say "What happened happened" then go stand there anyway? Am I getting it now? This youtube channel has a bunch of good explainers/visualizations for the time inversion stuff if you are interested in the mechanics within the movie's own logic. bawfuls fucked around with this message at 20:47 on Oct 4, 2021 |
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2021 20:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 17:51 |
|
|
bawfuls posted:There is always something else that makes it happen anyway. Like you know not to stand there at that time but something distracts you or baits you into it and you end up there anyway. I've seen the "something always happens to make the events play out the way they are supposed to" thing in other movies like The Time Machine (2002). But, at least in this movie, whether or not the universe self corrects is never tested. Everyone just goes with it or seems ignorant of it. For example, at the end Neil very deliberately gets into the inverter, goes to unlock the gate, and dies. It'd be awfully hard to write a way for ~~the universe~~ to self-correct that if he had listened to TP's objections and decided to go grab some beers. I mean like, say he doesn't do it. Which thing does ~~the universe~~ want to self-correct towards more, Neil's death or the disassembly of the algorithm? If it's the latter, the universe will find a way to unlock the gate and save TP without Neil having to get shot. I watched a couple of those videos and they get into "entropic wind", the assumption that people have to do stuff to maintain the "world line" of objects, and that even the most outlandish explanations for the origin of inverted objects are possible and therefore valid. I don't think this stuff was in the movie, it's all fanfic.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2021 21:36
|
|