Tenet (2020) (1 Viewer)

[Tom-G]

That's hardly a spoiler.

 

[Tino]

That's hardly a spoiler.

To you maybe. To me who knew nothing about the film it is. And there is a review and discussion thread I linked for such comments.
Here it is again in case you missed it. Thanks.

Official Tenet (2020) Review & Discussion

https://www.themoviedb.org/movie/577922-tenet Here's my spoiler free (truly!) review (except for the one in the tag below). The movie almost consciously keeps stuff from the viewer for the first half: as though the movie was alive and has secrets to protect. Partway through something happens...

www.hometheaterforum.com

 

[Jeff Adkins]

I would strongly recommend asking for the closed captioned device when arriving at the theater. I'm so happy I did.

 

[Tom-G]

I have a question and I'm putting it in the spoiler format.


EDIT: It doesn't look like the spoiler tag is functioning.

 

[Winston T. Boogie]

Chris Nolan is the best of his generation as a filmmaker.

I disagree with you. Nolan is my least favourite film director. His DUNKIRK was woeful in my opinion.

I'm located somewhere between these two ideas. I like several filmmakers more than Nolan but I acknowledge he is in a league that includes very few players. Essentially, he is one of the few directors working that has access to a very large budget to make a picture that is not a franchise or comic book film.

In this regard he sits with Spielberg and maybe Villeneuve (who I like a lot more than Nolan and I am not sure he sits in this exclusive club yet as that will probably depend upon the performance of Dune) where the name of the director gets the film made and at a higher budget than would be offered to others. I'd probably put Sam Mendes in this club as well because he has proven he can do big blockbusters and more interesting original work and draw an audience with both...but I am not sure he has the clout of Steven and Chris. He should at this point. Then there is Scorsese, who has been getting access to bigger budgets but I think it is a much bigger fight for him to do so than it is for Nolan or Spielberg to do so.

I feel Paul Thomas Anderson is a better more interesting filmmaker but he works in the land of smaller budgets and according to him expects to stay there. It allows him the freedom to make the pictures he wants to make. So he qualifies as guy that is getting his own pictures made but he is doing so by intentionally sticking to smaller budgets.

Obviously James Cameron has access to big budget money but he has chosen, as of this moment, to essentially end his career doing nothing but a bunch of franchise films. Plus he spent a great deal of his career turning The Terminator into a long running franchise. I have never seen him as a "great" or even good filmmaker but just a guy more along the lines of a Michael Bay. He makes big schlock that makes money. He is not in the same league as a filmmaker as guys like Spielberg or Nolan.

Ridley Scott might be considered in the club as he has made big popular pictures and seems to have had access to big budgets to do so several times but he also spent most of his time avoiding making franchise films.

The great joy of having a filmmaker like Nolan working today is he is making non-franchise pictures with a lot of money and he truly loves making movies and has the power to get one of these films made. If Nolan's name was not on Tenet it would either never get made (too confusing, too complex, where are the super hero costumes?) or it would get made at a much lower budget and probably be a streaming service offering.

I think Nolan's fight to get this into theaters was directly tied to the idea he wants to be a guy that makes pictures that are shown on big screens in cinemas. He does not want to be a director that has his work streamed. I love the guy for these things.

I would not compare Nolan's Dunkirk to the picture from the 1950s as they are attempting very different things as they approach the story and were attempting to appeal to very different marketplaces.

I rate many directors above Nolan but I certainly recognize his skills and abilities as a filmmaker and appreciate greatly the idea he is working to use his clout to make "big" pictures that don't involve Skywalkers or super hero costumes.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Spoiler

Yes, it is.

 

[TravisR]

Obviously James Cameron has access to big budget money but he has chosen, as of this moment, to essentially end his career doing nothing but a bunch of franchise films. Plus he spent a great deal of his career turning The Terminator into a long running franchise. I have never seen him as a "great" or even good filmmaker but just a guy more along the lines of a Michael Bay.

That's the most depraved thing I've ever read on the internet. James Cameron can actually craft an action sequence where you can tell what's happening and it's well edited. Michael Bay has yet to do either of those things with any frequency.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Yeah, to place James Cameron in the same company of Michael Bay is bongers to me.

 

[Winston T. Boogie]

That's the most depraved thing I've ever read on the internet. James Cameron can actually craft an action sequence where you can tell what's happening and it's well edited. Michael Bay has yet to do either of those things with any frequency.

Ha, yes and Cameron has made some films I really liked (Aliens, The Terminator, The Abyss) plus I really like his documentaries and ocean obsession. I don't mean a direct comparison of their skill sets just more talking about the budgets they have access to and the films they end up making. I'd probably take an interest if Cameron made something new that had nothing to do with The Terminator or Avatar but looks at the moment like that won't happen. Dedicating himself to a bunch of Avatar sequels just seems to me like he has checked out.

 

[TravisR]

Ha, yes and Cameron has made some films I really liked (Aliens, The Terminator, The Abyss) plus I really like his documentaries and ocean obsession. I don't mean a direct comparison of their skill sets just more talking about the budgets they have access to and the films they end up making. I'd probably take an interest if Cameron made something new that had nothing to do with The Terminator or Avatar but looks at the moment like that won't happen. Dedicating himself to a bunch of Avatar sequels just seems to me like he has checked out.

He seems to be rolling his passion for oceanography and teaching people about saving the planet into those Avatar sequels so I think that's a driving force behind his interest in those movies (and I commend him using his 'art' to try to make a difference). That being said, I sure wish he was trying something new since he's the rare guy that can get a new idea made.

 

[Winston T. Boogie]

That being said, I sure wish he was trying something new since he's the rare guy that can get a new idea made.

Yes, I think this is one of the things that really bothers me about Cameron. He has the clout to do a film outside of the franchise box and have a big budget making it BUT he seems to lack any interest in doing so. If he developed some new piece of science fiction material and was given the budget to create a huge spectacular with it...I'd buy a ticket.

I know if I said to him "Hey Jim, what's with all these Avatar pictures?" his response would probably be to look at me like I was a moron and say "It's the money, Lebowski!"

My feeling is he does not have a great deal of interest in fictional filmmaking outside of playing with effects and technology and really he is doing it to fund his interests in the environment and his continued ocean research. I agree as well that Avatar is essentially a film about how we are carelessly destroying our environment and he makes it clear where he stands on who he feels are the bad guys. That message is hard to miss and so he is injecting things into the story that are commendable and which probably are seen as political messaging by some people. I'm sure in this regard he probably sees these films as important because of the messaging he can get out there through them. So, I'm sure he'd say to me that these pictures are a great platform for this environmental message.

I think he would be correct when it comes to the people that grasp that message but I also think a lot of people don't care about that message and just watch it for the sci-fi fun and big effects.

 

[Worth]

...I know if I said to him "Hey Jim, what's with all these Avatar pictures?" his response would probably be to look at me like I was a moron and say "It's the money, Lebowski!"

I don't think it is about the money. And even though Avatar is the most successful film ever made, I don't think a sequel - especially a series of sequels - is a sure thing. At this point, only a fool would bet against Cameron, but the first film came out over a decade ago and hasn't left much of a footprint in popular culture.

 

[TravisR]

I don't think it is about the money.

Yeah, I'm sure he enjoys the paycheck but I don't think he's spending a significant portion of his creative life (hell, his life in general) on making those movies just for the money.

 

[George_W_K]

Spoiler

Yes, it is.

I clicked on this and saw exactly what I expected.

 

[cinemiracle]

Yeah, I've never understood why someone who writes their own screenplays seems to never want the audience to hear any of it.

I had the same problem with parts of APOCALYPSE NOW when I saw it in Paris.Luckily the 70mm print had sub-titles

 

[cinemiracle]

I don't think it is about the money. And even though Avatar is the most successful film ever made, I don't think a sequel - especially a series of sequels - is a sure thing. At this point, only a fool would bet against Cameron, but the first film came out over a decade ago and hasn't left much of a footprint in popular culture.

I always thought that GONE WITH THE WIND was and still is,the most successful film of all time.It made more money and more people saw the film than they did AVATAR.SOUND OF MUSIC must be near the top of the list as well.

 

[cinemiracle]

Yeah, to place James Cameron in the same company of Michael Bay is bongers to me.

Does anyone still remember Michael Bay?

 

[cinemiracle]

That's the most depraved thing I've ever read on the internet. James Cameron can actually craft an action sequence where you can tell what's happening and it's well edited. Michael Bay has yet to do either of those things with any frequency.

Big budget films do not always make big money at the box office and it is often the low budget films that enter cinema history as being classics.

 

[ptb2017fr]

I was incredibly disappointed, and thought the sound mix particularly bad. For the first half an hour I could hardly understand a word, so maybe it isn't surprising I came out wondering what the hell the film was about! I also found the sexual violence between Branagh and his wife distasteful, and the lead actress uncharismatic and uninteresting. For me the best thing in it was Robert Pattinson who has grown in my estimation as an actor the past couple of years, superb as the Dauphin in The King, and for me stealing the movie here. Perhaps it is a movie one needs to see many times to get ones head around what is going on, but in what is billed an action movie I don't like spending so much time trying to understand the plot. Intelligence is what one expects from a Nolan movie, but this takes it way too far. Confusing, loud, and too clever for its own good. IMO of course!

 

[ptb2017fr]

It's doing great box-office in Noway. Despite theatres only allowed to fill to half capacity, Tenet is performing as well as blockbusters did before the Covid-19 crisis. The 70 mm showings have been sold out. I plan on seeing it again this weekend, to see if I enjoy it more the second time round, knowing the storyline in advance. I wrote in the other thread that I didn't enjoy it as much as the other Nolan films (too much exposition, confusing plot, dour and humourless leads, incomprehensible dialogue, interminable third act). I might do better this time round with subtitles and finding the clues that I know are there, but that I missed first time.

I saw it in France and even with the French subtitles I was still none the wiser as to what was going on. I also saw it on the Imax which did not actually look very good, just bigger! Not shot on 70mm but Imax and 35mm it shows. I wish I hadn't wasted the extra money paying for the Imax.