Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Tenet (Christopher Nolan) *spoilers from post 475*

17810121315

Comments

  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    TRANQUILLO wrote: »
    I loved it but haven't a breeze . No idea where the time machine even came from.

    Over an hour of the film was spent on exposition of the inversion concept but then suddenly it's just forget about all that, "don't to try to understand it, feel it" and all you have to do it go through Bosco's revolving door!

    Sator obviously got the magic door from Bosco in the future but we don't know how he did or how it works.

    A cheap cop out tbh


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 514 ✭✭✭feelings


    ^^ Please don't tell me we have another "love transcends dimensions" :rolleyes:


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,259 ✭✭✭HalloweenJack


    Saw this last night and enjoyed it.

    As with other Nolan films, it was a visual feast. I'd love to see how they filmed the backwards scenes and prepares the choreography for them. The Oslo fight was mind-blowing.

    I particularly enjoyed the score, it especially got me worked up during the 'heist' scene in Tallinn. For what its worth, I didn't notice any problems with the sound.

    I found the plot both overly complicated and simplistic, if possible. I didn't feel satisfied about the explanation for why the inversion began.
    I think a desire to undo what the world had become was mentioned. It took the wife far too long to mention that Andrei had terminal cancer imo. The time travel concept was interesting but the death switch stuff seemed to be too much.

    I felt some of the explanations were too much, as if they were trying to spell it out for us when they had characters repeating the conversations over and over. This would be fine if it actually worked but I still don't think their explanations matched up with what was actually going on.

    Some of the dialogue was clunky, e.g. "I have a master's in physics" and then they don't even try to explain it.

    I wasn't convinced by Washington. He seemed very wooden and didn't seem to be comfortable in the role. Pattinson was good as was Debicki and Brannagh who seems to be getting younger.

    I enjoyed it but it's far from being his best film.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,862 ✭✭✭mikhail


    I liked it, but with reservations.
    Entertaining but simple ------------------------------------- Interesting but convoluted
                                           ^               ^
                                      Sweet spot         Tenet
    
    There were times when I was watching the action and trying to work out what was happening to the extent that it was ruining my immersion. I never had that with Inception, so I think he's misjudged this a little; it's more technically impressive than really fun. I may enjoy it more on a rewatch, but I'm not doing that in a cinema. I'd rate it comparably with Interstellar and Dunkirk, at worst a little less than them, but second rate Nolan is still a big spectacle.

    It has all of the usual Nolan weaknesses, which don't bother me much. I'm not really sure why the people who are annoyed by heavy exposition keep going to his movies and complaining about it. At this stage, it's like people complaining about swimming pools being damp.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,814 ✭✭✭micks_address


    Saw it swords Monday night. Enjoyed it and was thinking about it a lot afterwards so i suppose it succeeds even from that point of view.

    Id have preferred Inception or Interstellar. I think its one of those movies where you feel like you have to say you understood it in case someone else thinks you are dumb but in reality probably most people scratching their heads


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,065 ✭✭✭✭Tusky


    I'm a huge Nolan fan and have loved basically everything he has done (apart from Interstellar) but Tenet left me really, really cold. We are never given a reason to care about any of the characters. It's never clear why they are doing what they are doing, or why we should care about it. The characters themselves have almost no character traits, and show almost no emotion. A strange film.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,488 ✭✭✭Goodshape


    Tusky wrote: »
    We are never given a reason to care about any of the characters.
    The characters themselves have almost no character traits, and show almost no emotion. A strange film.

    No reason to care?? No emotions?!? Um, clearly you weren't paying attention.
    Her son! :(
    . Not that we ever really saw or got to know the guy, but she said it about 50 times. If that's not a character trait, emotion, and motivation all-in-one then I just doesn't know what is.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Goodshape wrote: »
    No reason to care?? No emotions?!? Um, clearly you weren't paying attention.
    Her son! :(
    . Not that we ever really saw or got to know the guy, but she said it about 50 times. If that's not a character trait, emotion, and motivation all-in-one then I just doesn't know what is.
    Why does the main guy care about her at all? Who is the main guy? Who is Patterson's character? Why does Kenneth Brannagh dying end the world? Why does she need to stall him at the end?

    I've actually got so many questions, I should probably just see it again with subtitles instead


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,242 ✭✭✭✭MisterAnarchy


    Why does the main guy care about her at all? Who is the main guy? Who is Patterson's character? Why does Kenneth Brannagh dying end the world? Why does she need to stall him at the end?

    I've actually got so many questions, I should probably just see it again with subtitles instead

    Spoiler alert


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Spoiler alert

    it has been out a week at this stage.

    most people who were going to see it would have seen it at this point I would say - thread title should probably be changed


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,814 ✭✭✭micks_address


    glasso wrote: »
    it has been out a week at this stage.

    most people who were going to see it would have seen it at this point I would say - thread title should probably be changed

    I'd agree but given covid situation probably many haven't..just update title to say spoilers


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,858 ✭✭✭Church on Tuesday


    It's a great film to look at but it is far too convoluted even for a Nolan flick. It simply doesn't tell its story very well.

    Very cold film.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 29,724 CMod ✭✭✭✭johnny_ultimate


    Mod note: No need for spoiler tags from here on out. Proceed with caution if you haven't seen the film!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,031 ✭✭✭✭bnt


    The usual practice here is for the thread title to be changed to include "spoilers after post #n". Until then, best to avoid spoilers pls.
    edit: talk about timing, eh? That was done as I was writing this post.

    I'm just back from seeing this at IFI in 70mm, and really enjoyed it. Not perfect, but I had no trouble following the overall arc of the plot, and only some minor problems hearing dialogue. There are some details that I didn't get the first time, but I expect to see it again on digital at some point.

    I wonder how an inverted Sator, in an inverted vehicle (going backwards), was able to hold a non-inverted Kat at gunpoint? Their timelines would be diverging at that point. He'd have to plan that out and set up an overlap in their timelines, knowing in advance what she would do.

    At one point Ives says something like "should you come in to contact with your non-inverted self, annihilation will ensue", which leads me to speculate that antimatter is involved somewhere. I presume that when the Protagonist fights his inverted self, the full Hazmat suit prevents that kind of contact.

    Death has this much to be said for it:
    You don’t have to get out of bed for it.
    Wherever you happen to be
    They bring it to you—free.

    — Kingsley Amis



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,814 ✭✭✭micks_address


    Ok so the only audio issues I had were when satar was threatening wife and trying to get information from Denzel junior...he was speaking backwards and forwards?


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 29,724 CMod ✭✭✭✭johnny_ultimate


    So I went to see this again, solely because there's a 70mm print knocking around. Gotta say it left me even more cold and frustrated second time around.

    The first half makes a rake more sense on a second viewing, which I'm not sure is a ringing endorsement though. There's obviously plenty of building up to what follows, and it's a whole lot more obvious what they're talking about for the most part once you know who is who and some of the eventual destinations (the first Pattinson / Washington meeting plays a lot better on a second watch). I'm not convinced a film requiring a rewatch to clear-up all the various basic plot pieces is a some clever puzzle though: just feels like there's a whole lot of info dumped whose relevance only becomes clear in the second half, when you actually *see* the things being alluded to. I do want to stress how iffy the editing is though: I think it's really haphazard, and has the consequence of downplaying key bits of info that needed clearer emphasis.

    But definitely felt little sense of stakes or urgency throughout the film, which is an absolute calamity for a film literally about averting World War 3 / the apocalypse. There's simply too much plot: we and the protagonist are rushed around so rapidly and frequently that the moment-to-moment motivations and goals shift and confuse almost by the minute. As said before, the plot here is immensely simple at its core - but there's a ****load of busywork and uninspired tangents and flat scenes in the mix. Very little pops - the best scene is the first, and that's the one that has barely anything to do with anything else that happens in the movie.

    My final thought is I think Nolan staked far too much on his central time travel gimmick, which is not as interesting as he thinks it is... or perhaps he simply doesn't do a good enough job of selling it. EVERYTHING in Inception is built around its dream-within-dream-within-dream conceit - the film goes to ridiculous lengths to explain it to us, but the rewards are plentiful, coherent and exciting. Interstellar I'm not the biggest fan of honestly, but I also think it has clear, escalating stakes - the idea of each delay in space advancing decades back on Earth in particular grounds everything in a human, relatable context. That's what this lacks - Nolan tries, but I personally feel he fails. It's a film where plot drowns out all else, and where in its lengthy climax simply feels like you're trying to wearily keep track of precisely what's happening rather than being thrilled or excited seeing two hours of build up pay-off. Even basic things like having all the characters in identical uniforms... logical within the world, but just adds to the chaotic and confused feeling of the big final action scene.

    Tenet is, disappointingly, the moment Christopher Nolan definitively disappeared up his own high concept.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,795 ✭✭✭FortuneChip


    I'll give it a Sixis.

    The main concept is pretty easy to grab (very much like Inception) but it's visually confusing (very much unlike Inception), and that really takes away the enjoyment factor. We're not talking Michael Bay levels of confusion, but it is jarring.

    It's a tease and payoff movie from start to finish and back again, but almost none of them are more than sly wink moments.(bar maybe the implication of Neil and JDW's final scene together - which is funny when you consider it has the shortest time between tease and payoff).
    These sort of narrative elements in Inception carry far more emotional weight.

    It's got great set pieces and Pattinson is very enjoyable to watch.
    Didn't care much for Brannagh's performance, and neutral enough on "The Protagonist "

    I'd watch it again but wouldn't be in any great rush.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,031 ✭✭✭✭bnt


    I’ve seen reviews that claimed the use of the masks when inverted was inconsistent, but I didn’t see anything like that. When the characters are on their way “back”, they travel in a converted shipping container that has been “tented” with plastic, a bit like quarantine. The movie doesn’t explicitly mention that they’re getting extra air that way, but I think we can infer what’s happening from the way they have to put masks on to leave the container. Presumably they mask up to use the toilet, since like in a James Bond movie, no-one has any bodily functions ... but does a toilet work in inverted time? :o

    Death has this much to be said for it:
    You don’t have to get out of bed for it.
    Wherever you happen to be
    They bring it to you—free.

    — Kingsley Amis



  • Registered Users Posts: 18 Vulcan01


    Ya, you only need the mask when travelling back through time.

    But they were back in time as that was featured in the film earlier? Or did she travel from there from the future and then to the past and eventually aback to the present but the boat scene would still be in the past. I dunno.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 29,724 CMod ✭✭✭✭johnny_ultimate


    Vulcan01 wrote: »
    But they were back in time as that was featured in the film earlier? Or did she travel from there from the future and then to the past and eventually aback to the present but the boat scene would still be in the past. I dunno.

    They need a mask (or, as we often see, protective bubble tents) when they’re travelling backwards against the flow of time. Once they’re moving forward again they don’t, regardless of ‘where’ in time they are.

    So Kat travels backwards to a day or two before the events on the boat (the Protagonist mentions to her she needs to travel back another day or two while the others prepare for the simultaneous pincer movement). When she goes through the machine and starts moving forward again, she doesn’t need a mask... even though she’s technically ‘in the past’.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,000 ✭✭✭Stone Deaf 4evr


    bnt wrote: »
    I’ve seen reviews that claimed the use of the masks when inverted was inconsistent, but I didn’t see anything like that. When the characters are on their way “back”, they travel in a converted shipping container that has been “tented” with plastic, a bit like quarantine. The movie doesn’t explicitly mention that they’re getting extra air that way, but I think we can infer what’s happening from the way they have to put masks on to leave the container. Presumably they mask up to use the toilet, since like in a James Bond movie, no-one has any bodily functions ... but does a toilet work in inverted time? :o

    I'm cracking up at my desk here, imagining someone sitting down to take a dump, only to have the poo jump up out of the bowl into his rectum.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,435 ✭✭✭Josey Wales


    I'm cracking up at my desk here, imagining someone sitting down to take a dump, only to have the poo jump up out of the bowl into his rectum.

    Well that's enough internet for me today.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,190 ✭✭✭ThePott


    Did a review of Tenet in video form with my full thoughts.
    TLDR - Didn't like it. Summed it up at the end of the vid by saying; it feels like putting together a jigsaw puzzle with missing pieces to find that the picture it makes isn't that interesting.


    Been interesting seeing what other people have been saying on here over the last while, certainly seems a divisive one, I've noticed more negative takes than reviews suggest perosnally.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,434 ✭✭✭Homelander


    I really enjoyed this. Visually amazing, concept leaves you thinking and the soundtrack is really something else.

    The plot is very simple at its core but the film admittedly doesn't do a great job of imparting story beats. It's incredible how a film can be both unbelievably complicated and simple at the same time but Tenet accomplishes that to a tee.

    Main actor is fine, Robert Pattinson really steals it though.

    It was hard to hear what was being said a few times, specifically for me the scene on the catamaran, I couldn't make out the majority of the conversation - though there were a few others where I had some trouble as well.

    Anyone who likes the concept of this movie would like the excellent German TV show 'Dark' on Netflix which has a very, very similar plot.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,644 ✭✭✭Penfailed


    Gigs '24 - Ben Ottewell and Ian Ball (Gomez), The Jesus & Mary Chain, The Smashing Pumpkins/Weezer, Pearl Jam, Green Day, Stendhal Festival, Forest Fest, Electric Picnic, Pixies, Ride, Therapy?, Public Service Broadcasting, IDLES(x2), And So I Watch You From Afar



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,966 ✭✭✭cdgalwegian


    Homelander wrote: »
    Anyone who likes the concept of this movie would like the excellent German TV show 'Dark' on Netflix which has a very, very similar plot.

    I had come to a similar idea, from the opposite angle; having loved the 'Dark' series, which ended relatively recently, this was like a primer for Tenet. Being in that head-space probably made it easier to juggle with the time framing.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,323 ✭✭✭p to the e


    Washington's charisma and exaggerated swagger really suited the first section of the film when they were doing a James Bond-esque film but once it went balls to the wall sci-fi he looked as lost as the rest of us. And it took me nearly 30 minutes to realise that was Aaron Taylor Johnson doing his best (or worst) Tom Hardy impression.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,966 ✭✭✭cdgalwegian


    p to the e wrote: »
    Washington's charisma and exaggerated swagger really suited the first section of the film when they were doing a James Bond-esque film but once it went balls to the wall sci-fi he looked as lost as the rest of us.
    Yeah, that captures it. It seemed that instead of being shown gadgets by Q, we have the Protagonist been shown the inversion techniques by a Nameless, then learning on the job.

    p to the e wrote: »
    And it took me nearly 30 minutes to realise that was Aaron Taylor Johnson doing his best (or worst) Tom Hardy impression.

    Although I sussed it was Aaron Taylor Johnson, I was still :confused: :rolleyes:'ing at the Jamie Bell-style weird accent he was displaying. Maybe a 'been-all-around-the-world-with-international-mercenaries-mish-mash-of accents-was-inevitable' kind of thing he was trying to pull off.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,488 ✭✭✭Goodshape


    Penfailed wrote: »
    “He wants to grab the audience by the lapels and pull them toward the screen, and not allow the watching of his films to be a passive experience.”

    It’s hard to imagine that Nolan is unaware of the criticism. Price suspects the director wants to make the audience work harder to understand the dialogue; he thinks Nolan believes this will make the film a more immersive, engaging experience

    I'm slightly onboard with that. I didn't miss too much dialogue in Tenet but I definitely had to pay close attention to it at times. No bad thing.

    Not entirely sure the ends justify the means though. And it doesn't excuse any other shortcomings.


  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Couldn't be any less onboard with that


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,009 ✭✭✭✭titan18


    Just watched it. Felt it was nonsense tbh. It might work better as a TV show, as there was far too much plot to attempt to explain.

    Also action scenes looked silly I thought. Was far too much going on, and some of it didn't make much sense (why was his future self attempting to kill present self in Oslo for example).


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,933 ✭✭✭H8GHOTI


    Seem to think the opposite to most.
    Really enjoyed it, thought Washington was good but didn’t like Pattinson in it.

    Loved all the action scenes and the backwards stuff was great to watch. Enjoyed the dialogue as well. I get the criticisms others mentioned but was having too good a time to care.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,815 ✭✭✭SimonTemplar


    This is probably the Nolan film I enjoyed the least. I had very little emotional engagement with it. I have big problems with The Dark Knight Rises but at least it kept me riveted to the screen. Tenet left be fairly cold.

    I like Elizabeth Debicki a lot, especially in The Man From Uncle and Widows; her character in Tenet reminded me a lot of a similar role she played in The Night Manager.

    I wonder is this the film where Nolan becomes the cinematic equivalent of Gatiss and Moffat who did excellent work in the past but have become preoccupied with pseudo-intellectual convolution at the detriment to coherent and satisfying storytelling. Inception required the audience to pay attention but it never scarified enjoyment and had an emotional core. I can't say the same about Tenet.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,434 ✭✭✭Homelander


    titan18 wrote: »
    Also action scenes looked silly I thought. Was far too much going on, and some of it didn't make much sense (why was his future self attempting to kill present self in Oslo for example).


    He wasn't trying to kill him, but he had to fight him and escape. If his past self unmasked his future self, it was game-over for the world.

    The whole point of the film is that from the very start he was orchestrating everything via his 'future' self.

    It seems to me it's most likely it's a closed infinite loop that we just see presented as "linear" because it's a movie, but it's a never-ending cycle that has no definitive beginning or end - it just exists.

    Most of the things in the movie appear to be bootstrap paradoxes as well that don't have any real explainable origin, and paradoxes are raised more than once during the movie.

    While the general plot is a little silly, the movie does make sense within its own established boundaries as far as I could see.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,027 ✭✭✭✭Snake Plisken


    Just seen it there and delighted to have seen it on the big dcreen, love all the action sequences, really liked the fight sequence in the kitchen. Thought Washington and Pattinson were great and had good chemistry . I agree about Debicki, having watched The Night Manager recently she is playing basically the same role.
    I was expecting to be disappointed with some of the lukewarm reviews but I really loved it and Nolan hasn't left me down. Look forward to watching it again when it's released on 4K Blu-Ray when released. 8/10


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,966 ✭✭✭cdgalwegian


    titan18 wrote: »
    Just watched it. Felt it was nonsense tbh. It might work better as a TV show, as there was far too much plot to attempt to explain.

    Even though I loved it, I did think the same that it might have been better as a series, which is not what Christopher does- that's his brother Jonathan's forte.
    As another possibility, it looked to me like it needed a sequel; there's a lot of background stuff only alluded to, which the ending left dangling for those of us who loved the film.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I highly doubt that there will any notion of making a sequel to Tenet


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,644 ✭✭✭Penfailed


    glasso wrote: »
    I highly doubt that there will any notion of making a sequel to Tenet

    I think it's extremely unlikely too.

    Gigs '24 - Ben Ottewell and Ian Ball (Gomez), The Jesus & Mary Chain, The Smashing Pumpkins/Weezer, Pearl Jam, Green Day, Stendhal Festival, Forest Fest, Electric Picnic, Pixies, Ride, Therapy?, Public Service Broadcasting, IDLES(x2), And So I Watch You From Afar



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,966 ✭✭✭cdgalwegian


    glasso wrote: »
    I highly doubt that there will any notion of making a sequel to Tenet
    Penfailed wrote: »
    I think it's extremely unlikely too.

    I think it's extremely unlikely too.
    Still love to see it though.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I think it's extremely unlikely too.
    Still love to see it though.

    Would have little interest of seeing any more of that inversion muck lol

    It couldn't carry one movie as a concept nevermind two.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,306 ✭✭✭✭gmisk


    p to the e wrote: »
    Washington's charisma and exaggerated swagger really suited the first section of the film when they were doing a James Bond-esque film but once it went balls to the wall sci-fi he looked as lost as the rest of us. And it took me nearly 30 minutes to realise that was Aaron Taylor Johnson doing his best (or worst) Tom Hardy impression.
    I thought it was more of a Jason Statham impression tbh


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,968 ✭✭✭ebbsy


    Just back from it, I enjoyed it a lot.

    And the action bits were really done as well.

    Well worth a look.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,666 ✭✭✭Muppet Man


    Just watched it. Very very hard to follow. No idea what was going on from the time he started to go back in time to save her. The whole red v blue thing.... I mean it looked fantastic, great stunts etc. but the whole story was stupidly complex in its setup. I think he could have made a simpler time travel story and it would have been far more watchable.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Muppet Man wrote: »
    Just watched it. Very very hard to follow. No idea what was going on from the time he started to go back in time to save her. The whole red v blue thing.... I mean it looked fantastic, great stunts etc. but the whole story was stupidly complex in its setup. I think he could have made a simpler time travel story and it would have been far more watchable.

    "but man if you were smart enough to understand it you would love it"

    seems to be sanctimonious refrain from many die-hard Nolanites going around

    it was too messy / convoluted to be a satisfying movie imo

    the nature of the inversion stuff also meant that some parts of the "amazing man" set pieces just looked like something filmed and played in reverse


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 18,217 Mod ✭✭✭✭CatFromHue


    glasso wrote: »
    I highly doubt that there will any notion of making a sequel to Tenet

    a sequel, no chance

    a prequel set in the future, now you're talking :pac:


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 29,724 CMod ✭✭✭✭johnny_ultimate


    Not that there’s going to be a sequel, but I’m not sure there’s even any open-ended ending here? It all wraps up pretty conclusively, like all Nolan’s films really. Of course there’s always a theoretical expansion of the ideas, but this is a pretty self-contained beast that draws a clear line under all the core plot and character beats (unsatisfying as they may be).


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,966 ✭✭✭cdgalwegian


    Not that there’s going to be a sequel, but I’m not sure there’s even any open-ended ending here? It all wraps up pretty conclusively, like all Nolan’s films really. Of course there’s always a theoretical expansion of the ideas, but this is a pretty self-contained beast that draws a clear line under all the core plot and character beats (unsatisfying as they may be).
    The Protagonist at the end of Tenet is finally a man in control, a key player; how that would be played out in the future I'd certainly like to see, but I don't think Nolan would be into future-world-building (though maybe he might like to toy with a future/present Westworld-type scenario). Being self-contained doesn't preclude a sequel.
    Like most postmodern writer/directors though, Nolan uses the modernist mantra Make it New; he will always try to bring something innovative to the table, so a sequel would be highly unlikely simply for that reason; I think he shot his load with the conceptual innovation here.
    However... a sequel could be an extension of the 'time wars', which instead of having the time element as an innovative core, he could revert to his other postmodern toolkit item; identity. This is perhaps why he has done a trilogy, never mind a sequel; much of his Batman (and others' superhero worlds) revolves around the whole notion of identity.
    I'm just riffing here. It'll never happen. But I can dream.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6 ThePeeledSpud


    Just back from the omniplex in Mahon Point after trying to watch it in IMax. The sound was so bad about 75% of the way through the movie that it was unwatchable the staff tried to restart the system twice but it didn't work and everyone was given refunds. Found it hard enough to follow so I'm back home now gonna stream the ending cos I couldn't be arsed going back to the cinema to watch tbh.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,435 ✭✭✭TiGeR KiNgS


    Saw the movie yesterday.

    Felt like the movie was just an excuse for set pieces with plot and exposition shoe-horned to meet it's needs ....

    ... almost like it was a few different scripts/ideas brought together with reckless abandon.

    The acting/casting (except for Robert Pattinson) was either bad or totalling out of place. With the casting set to appease the mood in Hollywood.

    A big fan of Christopher Nolan, but this was a real turkey.

    3/5 stars - don't bother unless your a film student.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,644 ✭✭✭Penfailed


    Saw the movie yesterday.

    Felt like the movie was just an excuse for set pieces with plot and exposition shoe-horned to meet it's needs ....

    ... almost like it was a few different scripts/ideas brought together with reckless abandon.

    The acting/casting (except for Robert Pattinson) was either bad or totalling out of place. With the casting set to appease the mood in Hollywood.

    A big fan of Christopher Nolan, but this was a real turkey.

    3/5 stars - don't bother unless your a film student.

    A 'turkey'...yet you give it 3/5? That's 60%. That's above average.

    Gigs '24 - Ben Ottewell and Ian Ball (Gomez), The Jesus & Mary Chain, The Smashing Pumpkins/Weezer, Pearl Jam, Green Day, Stendhal Festival, Forest Fest, Electric Picnic, Pixies, Ride, Therapy?, Public Service Broadcasting, IDLES(x2), And So I Watch You From Afar



  • Advertisement
Advertisement