|
It's out here in Oz and I saw it this morning. I was one of about seven people in the theatre and we were all so spread out, not sure how this is going to do financially. As a warning I've seen interviews which say this is not a time travel film. These are lies, it absolutely is a time travel story, that it has some individual quirks to it's mechanics doesn't change that. My impression...eh, it's fine? Visually its' great and there is some good use of the time inversion gimmick, a few times you see an action scene with some weird backwards elements and then you come back to it later to see it from the "inverted" POV so all the forwards stuff is now inverted and you're seeing the previous backwards stuff play out forwards now and it's fine, but it feels like a gimmick in search of a better story. The explanation for the time weirdness is not very convincing, but as I said, it's an excuse for action scenes so even though I didn't really understand it, it does its job I guess. I would advise not trying to figure it out exactly and just go with "some objects and people have their entropy reversed so they seem to travel backwards in time" and don't think about it anymore. Part of the reason I didn't get it is the loving sound mixing. The opening scene at the opera has dialogue but I couldn't tell you what was said if you put a gun to my head. I've heard Nolan is going deaf and that's why his movies sound like they do, but jesus, it's all foleyed LOUD NOISES and the dialogue is just lost. So the explanations might have been clearer if I heard all of them. The movie is just really an excuse for a bunch of big action set pieces, like there is the opera attack, the Indian penthouse intrusion, the airport terminal heist, the highway robbery (and you go through some twice, see above) and the final assault. The plot seems like a big excuse to just run through these. The movie is at it's best when it's just Kenny B being The Worst Person in the Universe, or Washington and Pattinson buddy copping their way through time. When it stops to talk about changing the past or explaining the Grandfather Paradox, it just lost me. I was also wondering where our heroes kept finding all these goons, but I supposed this is explained by Aaron Taylor Johnson and pals showing up out of nowhere to provide aid and show our heroes have more allies than they thought. On a related note I forgot ATJ was english and so I didn't recognize him at first what with the beard and using his normal accent. I also feel Nolan saw The Night Manager miniseries with Loki and Dr House and that's why he cast Elizabeth Debicki. She is playing the exact same character in the exact same situation, only thing that has changed is her name. It's not a terrible movie, it doesn't feel as long as Interstellar did, but it does drag and I don't see how a more conventional spy flick wouldn't have been just as good. The movies good graces don't come from Nolan's more cerebral ideas, but the more human touches. Washington feels like a more lively main character than Nolan has had in the past, Pattinson rules, Branagh as the villain is great, just a man with zero redeeming qualities and the little touches like that goon who five finger discounts the gold bar and Washington styling on some stuffy british jerks. Big lol to the bad guys who show how evil they are by stomping on cellos and knocking sheet music over, such heels! Nonsense about a war from the future on the past is just a snooze frankly. And about the motivation for the plot so the future is trying to kill the past, because the movie seems to say they are just CR-AAAZY and don't seem to consider the aforementioned grandfather paradox or don't care or think they will be fine, and their agent in the past is a massive rear end in a top hat who just wants to die and take the whole world with him...and then they reveal at the end the future is doing it to stop climate change and save themselves. So the villains are maniacs who want to kill everyone, are some people concerned about the environment? Jesus. . No wonder people think Nolan is a conservative. But the movie does have one great death and body disposal Branagh just banging his head on that railing made all seven of us crack the gently caress up, I'll remember that one for ages. Can't wait for the gif to hit the net.
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2020 05:04
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 23, 2024 13:32 |
|
|
banned from Starbucks posted:I've read 3 spoiler filled reviews of this movie and still have no clue what its about. Well, this is an explanation of the movie, I don't really know how the time reversal thing worked or what the exact nature of the end of the world threat is (I get the general gist, but the details were lost in me not being able to hear all the dialogue). The movie actually takes the shape on a palindrome. By which I mean, the word TENET right, no matter which end you start at you go through T to E to N... and so on. Put another way if you start at T, you go through E, to N and then REVERSE COURSE, you will go through the same journey you just took, but backwards and the end is the beginning is the end. I know that sounds like some Johnny Five Aces "time works the same way" crap and it kinda is, but that is how the movie is structured. Just go with it I guess, the movie isn't as clever as it would like to be. It's at its best when it's just a Bond film, you know, evil madman with a destroy the world plot, he's got a lady who the hero spy gets involved with, a main henchman who's huge (and in my head I was calling him Mr Stamper or Jaws because I couldn't tell you the characters actual name) and action set pieces. As for specifics (MASSIVE SPOILERS, LITERALLY THE ENTIRE MOVIE DO NOT MOUSE OVER) we have irreversibly hosed the worlds climate and the future people (who are never seen, only talked about in hard to hear dialogue) are mad at us. They have invented tech that can reverse the entropy of things and so they can send messages/tech back through time. It's very terminator. They sent a message to Kenneth Branagh (if they know who you are and where you will be at certain times, i.e. you wrote emails detailing this poo poo they can read in the future, they will be able to send objects back so they know you will be there to get them with messages like "Hey man, loved you Shakespeare stuff, wanna blow up the world? Here's some future gold to fund it"), he is dying of cancer and wants to take everyone with him so he says OK. A scientist lady in the future developed THE ALGORITHM, which, uh, reverses the entropy of everything and will make it so the whole world not only ends, but will have never existed? Like I said, unclear dialogue. Anyway, she tried to hide it by splitting it up and sending it to the past so her fellow future people can't use it to kill us. They get Branagh to find all the bits of THE ALGORITHM, and bury it again they so can use it in the future to kill us. Won't that kill them you ask? Uh, maybe? Grandfather paradox, they think maybe not? Our hero Protagonist and R. Patz + others team up to do action movie stuff at them and save the world. They succeed and Lizzy Debicki gets to live happily ever after with her son. The movie is basically just a loop and it's implied (although not certain) that you can't change the past, so once something has happened, that's it, but maybe not? Basically, they should give Nolan a bond film so he gets it out of his system and whenever he tries to insert non-linear storytelling in it they should smack him on the hands with a ruler and make him sit in the naughty corner. If you've seen the way Inception and Interstellar are structured, you've seen the better version of this movie already. But hey, cool stunts and Pattinson is a goddamn star, there will be think pieces demanding he be the next Bond in the wake of this for sure.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 23, 2020 22:54
|
|
|
uXs posted:Just saw it, trying to come to grips with it. Also massive ending spoilers It is "future" Sator who is killed at the end, this is why Kat shows him the bullet wound, to show it's "future" her, with "past" her being on the speedboat with her son. What happens is "past" Sator leaves the boat and goes on to do the events of the movie like meeting Protagonist and shooting his wife. "Future" Sator, after assembling the Algorithm inverses himself like the heroes do and goes to that boat at that time, knowing his past self isn't there, planning to time his suicide with the explosion. Because it was a truly happy time for him or whatever Kat says. Kat shoots him and we get the hilarious body disposal. The whole movie is a loop, Kat always kills her husband at that time and always sees herself dive off the boat, like Protagonist always fights himself in Oslo and always tells Priya to change the plan and she will always refuse and so on. It's like Terminator 1 or Timecrimes if you've seen those.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 30, 2020 00:24
|
|
|
I thought this only released in the US this coming weekend? Maybe the thread will pick up then?  Pierson posted:There's 100% an emotional message of the film that the main characters demonstrate and talk about at several points and it's about people who care about other people and watch out for them versus people who only care about themselves. This is a good point, but the movie has the unfortunate message in the opposite direction as well because we are still going to gently caress the climate and ruin the future peoples world, which is also selfish. So our heroes aren't actually that much better. Of course in theory Protagonist might try to use his time powers to halt climate change, but we are given no indication he will or even if it's possible, as my read of the film is it's a loop and you can't change the past, what has happened has happened, so because the climate is hosed up in the "past" for the future, it always will be. No going back. Bit sad really Aidan_702 posted:I agree on one hand that Nolan's films are cold and emotionless but there is usually always a grander scale moral or 'love' at surrounding them - I do like this about his films but he is not really any good at creating bonds or investment from the audience, between his characters, naturally. This film I think does it better than his others - the Neil twist at the end is very bittersweet, although given the internal logic of the film it does sort of mean that we're still going to destroy the world through climate change which is a bit grim. My only hope is that by saving Kat from Priya he does in, in fact, actually change the future, but that's just a hunch I'd like this theory to be right but I think in the logic of the film it can't be.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 2, 2020 22:49
|
|
|
Generally I find arguments that say "the film was only good because it had X in it" pointless, because even if 100% true, the film DID have X in it, so it's good. Saying a movie would be bad if you removed the good bits doesn't really say much.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 27, 2020 23:06
|
|