Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
gregday
May 23, 2003


What if you’re inverted and you poop?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

gregday
May 23, 2003


I am 100% convinced the CIA call/response code phrase is a reference to Pattinson being in this movie.

gregday
May 23, 2003


Simone Magus posted:

He also uses "tenet" as a synonym for "tenant" lol

Where?

gregday
May 23, 2003


There’s no reason to think Sators army had time traveled in any way. The good guys were all Tenet people, half forward moving (red) and half inverted (blue).

gregday
May 23, 2003


What would it look like if a normal person hosed an inverted person?

gregday
May 23, 2003


It was fun, I enjoyed it, aside from the audio issues. But it kind of wants to do that sci-fi thing where they build this world of possibilities that's fun to imagine. This movie really, really wants you to contemplate the interaction between regular and inverted things, but as soon as you do that, the logic of it breaks down completely. I'm still hung up on how a couple of things work; driving cars, the whole fire/freezing thing, and I just can't get my head around how inverted bullets are already in the walls.

I'm also still confused about the opera house scene, where the inverted bullet reverses out of the seating and back into Neil's gun. What is supposed to have happened to the shoulder of swat guy who was hit? Did the bullet reverse from the seating, enter his shoulder from the front, exit wound through the back, then into the gun? If so, why would the non-inverted swat guy be any different than the seating? Shouldn't his shoulder "have already been wounded" and then the reversing bullet causes it to heal up, the way the Protagonist's arm wound was 'healed' when he was reverse-stabbed the second time we saw the Oslo freeport fight?. It's poo poo like that where I want to think deeply about the sci-fi implications of these rules and constraints, but it doesn't really hold up.

Someone on reddit made an infographic explaining the turnstiles, and it really helps understand the Tallinn and Oslo scenes: https://www.reddit.com/r/tenet/comments/exn7n7/infographic_on_how_the_machine_works_and_why/

gregday
May 23, 2003


mary had a little clam posted:

Finally saw this, thought it was just okay. I didn't care about any of the characters and it was way too long, but I am a sucker for high concept weird poo poo like this. Definitely bottom-tier Nolan for me though.

Major plot spoiler speculative question:
Okay so we're doing the palindrome cube thing with Sator starting a company called Rotas to make the turnstiles and Tenet being a palindrome like the plot, and Opera being the inciting incident. My question: does that mean that Arepo was part of Tenet because they needed to force the distrust with the wife? I think Beard Soldier says "The whole operation is a temporal pincer" so is his name being part of the square a hint that he was in on the whole thing?

Nope, it means nothing. Nolan just wanted to incorporate all the parts of the Sator Square.

gregday
May 23, 2003


Neil: “If Sator manages to succeed, it will be the end of the world and all life on it”

Kat: “Including my son!”


Come on.

gregday
May 23, 2003


Inception was also about repairing Fischer’s relationship with his father. What started as an illegal, unethical heist, turned out to be a legitimately good thing they did for him, even if it was a fabrication.

I’ve read some stuff about how Tenet is about self sacrifice for the greater collective good, but it just wasn’t that strongly communicated.

gregday
May 23, 2003


I keep remembering things I’m confused about :

So if the opera house scene and the Stalsk-12 battle are the same day, how is the “241” in both places? I get that it’s because of inversion creating duplicates kind of fuckery, but we don’t see it get inverted and I csnt figure out exactly what happened there.

gregday
May 23, 2003


Hand Knit posted:

Is the opera the 241 or is it another but of the algorithm?

Either way, the entire algorithm is present at the end.

gregday
May 23, 2003


space uncle posted:

I loved Interstellar, TDK, and Inception, but turned this one off halfway through.

The plot is baffling and from reading the synopsis I did not miss anything or lose out by ending early.

Good acting, some fun scenes, some snappy dialogue, cool effects, just absolutely impenetrable plot. Maybe I’m sleep deprived and stupid from having a new infant but I had zero problem with his other “head scratchers”.

If I have to go watch a YouTube video where some bearded man explains to me that I need to watch scenes A,J,K,X in reverse and scenes B,F,G,Z are the subplot in forward time but backwards and really the plot makes sense if you follow this graph showing a parallel universe and then if he says the word “paradox” I’m gonna poo poo my pants.

Absolutely agree with that after the first watch. But watching it through just once more, normally, cleared up nearly everything. I’m absolutely fascinated with the mechanics of the movie, but I’m still not sure if I think it’s a good movie yet.

gregday
May 23, 2003


AdmiralViscen posted:

Sorry if this has come up already, but Sator at the end was an inverted Sator right? Why was he walking around without wearing a mask?

There ought to be a FAQ about this.

Inverted does not mean the same thing as “in the past”. You’re only inverted when you are moving in reverse, I .e. The world rewinding around you while you appear to be moving backwards from their perspective. Once you re-vert, (use the machine again, in the past), you are now moving forward again. Just in the past.

gregday
May 23, 2003


JazzFlight posted:

This was such a dumb part of the logic, along with how heat was supposed to be backwards, too. It was practically Elaine from that Seinfeld episode when she asks Jerry if Bizarro Superman was black and lives underwater. I guess they also invert all the canisters of oxygen they need? I mean, because you can't breathe "normal" oxygen.

Yes, they do. They clearly showed a prep room on the inverted side with inverted air tanks. You even see Neil loading up a cooler with inverted water bottles they will need for the duration. They make a point of showing the preparatory steps they take.

gregday
May 23, 2003


I'm surely overthinking what is almost definitely just a "shut up and enjoy the movie" thing, but I think I have a satisfying explanation for why things struck by inverted bullets behave differently. And it has to do with the reverse entropy "radiation" and how long the inverted bullets come into contact with the objects they interact with.


For example, using the opera house bullet. In that scene, everything (Protagonist, Neil, Neil's gun, struck SWAT guy, seating step) are all in the same forward direction. Only the bullet is inverted. However, we can presume the bullet has prolonged contact with both the gun and the step it strikes. So going by the radiation contamination we were warned about, we could argue these 2 things were contaminated with inversion, and were able to participate in the bullet's reverse journey. This allows the step to 'heal' with dust aned wood splinters flying back into place, and the gun's mechanics to operate backwards, receiving the inverted bullet.

However, the SWAT guy's shoulder was only briefly involved in contact with the inverted bullet, so when the bullet passes through him, he doesn't "heal" up the way the seat does, instead his wound is created in the same direction of everything else in the opera house.

I've been thinking about this for a little while, and so far it seems consistent with both Kat in the interrogation scene and Neil's fatal wound at the end. So while being shot with an inverted bullet is very bad, the inversion radiation is enough to just kind of gently caress you up, but not enough prolonged contact to actually make your particles participate in the inversion, unless (as in Neil's case) your body is the bullet's endpoint.

gregday
May 23, 2003


pospysyl posted:

That's a scene where I thought the incomprehensibility worked to the movie's advantage. JDW doesn't really understand why he's fighting the reversed guy, so on the second time through it's a neat reveal.

I can’t decide if it’s clever or dumb that neither knows why they’re fighting. From both of their perspectives, the other guy started the fight. They fight because they fight.

gregday
May 23, 2003


JazzFlight posted:

Doesn't he also try to shoot himself? Real galaxy-brained stuff there.

I’ve seen some guessing that he’s trying to empty the clip so he won’t shoot himself. This might be true since he disassembles the slide right after.

gregday
May 23, 2003


A guy made some Youtube videos to explain some of the more confusing parts of the movie. I found the car chase video particularly helpful understanding what happened to Kat and the 241.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItL_kEXMtXM

gregday
May 23, 2003


Doesn’t the existence of an inverted person imply that at some point they would have to revert (“correct”) again? If we’re seeing them, they are on their way back to the turnstile that they, from their POV merged from. But from our POV, where would they have come from? If not for the turnstile that they (from their POV) would go into to revert.

I guess the “where did they come from?” Question is the same as the bullet holes and the pre-cracked side mirror.

gregday
May 23, 2003


I wonder if Priya was still looking down over the balcony edge when JDW released his bungee cord at the bottom of the jump off and got snapped in the face.

gregday
May 23, 2003


Chairman Capone posted:

It is weird that this track is called "Rainy Night in Tallinn" when the scene in set in Kyiv, and there is the later scene set in Tallinn where the music doesn't appear.

It’s named after a phone call during filming where Nolan called Ludwig and said it’s a rainy night in Tallinn. He liked the way that phrase sounded when it came time to name the tracks.

gregday
May 23, 2003


Shaocaholica posted:

Yeah its weird with people objects with opposite states interact with each other.

Also internet are saying the opera terries were inverted pincer team but you see them walking and shooting and throwing things forwards.

Just based on reading r/tenet, there are a shocking number of people who wildly get wrong the most basic facts about what is happening in this movie. Whether you pin that on Nolan is up to you, but I’ve seen so many explainers that are just incorrect.

gregday
May 23, 2003


I still saw it as prolonged exposure/contact with an inverted item causes things around to be poisoned and 'catch' the inversion. A normal gun will operate backwards to catch an inverted bullet. A normal wall will 'heal up' the hole left by an inverted bullet exiting it. A person, wounded by an inverted bullet passing through, will be affected by the radiation, but there's not enough contact time to cause the person's wound to 'heal up' the way the wall does.

gregday
May 23, 2003


So, the Protagonist stopping Sator’s inverted SUV by pressing his hand on the brake. That’s a legit plot hole right? The SUV us to have been inverted, since it unbroke the BMW’s mirror. But then from its perspective, how did it get started moving? It began moving down the highway when the protagonist took his hand off the brake?

gregday
May 23, 2003


Groovelord Neato posted:

I'd love Nolan to explain why the Algorithm being buried is an instant game over. I'm one of those weirdos that very much enjoyed the movie but that makes no sense.

It does seem to me that as soon as Tenet (the organization) knew where it would be buried, that’s doom for Sator’s plan. Why wouldnt they be able to just dig it up any time before the future evil people do?

gregday
May 23, 2003


People who read my posts in BSS may know I make and collect replica movie props. Despite this film’s issues, I really do think the central plot device is tremendous fun. So here’s what I’ve got:







Red room / blue room shot:

gregday
May 23, 2003


The silver car started out inverted. That’s why when the protagonist gets in and begins driving the dust the tires kick is going backwards. There’s a segment on the DVD BTS footage that explains how they did this effect to show the Saab was inverted the entire time.

gregday
May 23, 2003


Shaocaholica posted:

They also never show a machine big enough to fit a car unless they are doing it piecemeal and inverting a bunch of mechanics to put it back together.

The Tallinn turnstile is big enough to fit a car. You even see a car under a sheet in the blue room.

gregday
May 23, 2003


SuperMechagodzilla posted:

If the dust is going backwards from an inverted perspective, then it’s just going forwards. Protag is driving a normal car in reverse.

An inverted car seen from an inverted perspective would just appear normal, which ironically wouldn’t have required a special effect.

I don’t know why you think a normal car can just become inverted mid scene for the backwards crash. This movie has paradoxical plot holes but that ain’t one of them.

gregday
May 23, 2003


RCarr posted:

This is really cool. Did you make all these?

The backpack talisman is made from the correct original source materials: a 1943 British India 1 Pice coin on some sacred Hindu thread called Mauli Kalawa.

The inverted air tank I assembled from the correct oxygen mask and a modified avalanche safety airbag canister. I’m
Not 100% sure that’s what production made it from but it’s very close. The holster strap I made.

The Algorithm section was designed by someone on CGTrader. I had a machine shop carve the model using a 5lb chunk of solid aluminum. The result is heavy but very satisfying to hold.

gregday
May 23, 2003


I love how things like the “winds of entropy” and Neil not being absolutely certain about changing the past w/r/t the grandfather paradox and multiple realities gives the story an unsettling vibe. As with Inception it seems Nolan likes sci-fi stories involving ordinary people getting their hands on forbidden/future technology they do not fully understand and definitely should not be loving around with. The ambiguity creates this really uneasy atmosphere and opens the door for different audience interpretations.

gregday
May 23, 2003


Just before the Oslo fight scene (the first time we see it), you can see the cracks in the glass expanding. I took this to mean that right before it was inevitable the fight would happen, the bullet holes spontaneously appear so that they could be un shot.

gregday
May 23, 2003


https://twitter.com/buffetbreaker/status/1389059107542474752

gregday
May 23, 2003


gregday
May 23, 2003


Also, even though I do enjoy picking apart the inversion mechanic, no amount of analysis gets you any closer to the characters or motivations.

Contrast that to Inception, where the nature of the nested dreams actually works to show Fischer’s broken relationship with his father and how they repair it.

gregday
May 23, 2003


David D. Davidson posted:

To me a big part of the problem is we're told "don't think, feel" but the writers didn't take their own advice and have fallen into the Zack Snyder trap of having thought about it too much and just pat themselves on the back for being so clever.

Like the fact that if you're inverted you can breath normal air or that inverted fire takes away body heat. They are just useless details that come up but sre never used or utilized in any sort of clever way. Like they are never show to be in danger of running out of inverted oxygen or have any need to say run into a burning building while they are inverted. And even then you don't need fire to do that when it's inverted to be dangerous because well it's still fire.

The inverted air tanks/masks are mainly just an easy way to signal who is inverted in a scene.

gregday
May 23, 2003


I think I broke my brain thinking about the Blue team member that gets sealed up inside the wall at Stalsk-12.

So from his perspective, he’s trapped inside the wall. But from the red (forward) perspective, they exploded a wall and a guy emerges inverted and returns backwards to the blue helicopters. So in the winds of entropy, is this guy hosed or does he get out OK?

This created a new paradoxical question: if inverted people never revert, then from the forward perspective, where do they “come from”? That’s probably a question that arises from linear thinking and as the movie suggests I should just not think about it.

gregday
May 23, 2003


I think there’s a few tiers of sensemaking in Tenet

1) Perfectly logical closed loop:
(Kat sees herself dive off the boat. Eventually becomes that person, while her past self sees her dive. That past self will eventually invert, disappear, leaving only reverted Kat to live her life)

2) Mostly makes sense given the movies rules, I suppose:
(Most of the Tallinn car chase)

3) “The winds of entropy”
(Bullet holes forming then un-breaking, damaged mirror un-breaking)

4) Don’t try to understand it. Feel it.
(The Protagonist being able to stop the inverted SUV as if it were not inverted.)

gregday
May 23, 2003


Megaman's Jockstrap posted:

By the way just for interest's sake there's a classic SF story that SORT of plays by Tenet's rules by Ian Watson called the Very Slow Time Machine, I would be surprised if Nolan hadn't read it at some point. It won some awards IIRC and it's interesting, although thematically very far away from Tenet. It does feature people becoming Time Cultists but in a very different way.

I have a feeling Tenet is mostly because Nolan saw Primer and thought what if they could leave the boxes while traveling backwards, and also James Bond.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

gregday
May 23, 2003


SuperMechagodzilla posted:

Nope, because Sator cannot take any gold out of the box. He can only put gold into the box.


Almost everything makes sense, if you accept that both inversion and uninversion are ‘contagious’ in ways that may as well be random. Like, just knowing about invertedness causes parts of Protag’s mind to invert.

What does not work at all are the instances of teleportation.

When the SUV “unhits” the car’s mirror, a chunk of glass flies up from the road and attaches itself. The logic is that the glass of the mirror ‘caught’ the invertedness of the SUV. But how did that particular chunk of glass end up on the road there if it initially, spontaneously, fell off miles away from that point? The mirror (and its components) may be going backwards in time, but it’s still moving forwards in space.

I think we have to just accept that for inverted events that require things to already be there (Neil's body in the hypocenter, the gun on the floor in the Oslo turnstile, the solider in the wall at Stalsk-12...) there is a point in the forward time perspective when objects just materialize where they will need to be in order to be (un-)moved there. This is why the film shows us the bullet holes in the Oslo proving window glass expanding right as they walk into the room. Those bullet holes are about to be unshot and disappear... but first they need to exist, so the universe creates them.



edit: Someone else pointed out it's kind of funny why TP is running so fast after he reverts in Oslo. Because the first time he was there and they fought the two "antagonists" the emerged from the turnstile, TP asked Neil what happened to the other guy, and Neil says "I took care of him." For all TP knows, Neil is about to loving kill him after he pops out of the vault.

gregday fucked around with this message at 20:14 on May 6, 2021

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply