>one MacGuffin after another as nameless protaganist traveles from one le epic movie stunt to another and then the movie turns around and does all the MacGuffins again but in reverse.
First and only Nolan movie I've walked out of halfway through. The audio was horrible in the theater. The plot was both confusing and predictable at the same time which I think is a real cinematic achievement. The shallow characters gave me nothing to root for. The hollow plot wasn't convincing for driving the characters to their final conflict. This was the epitimy of style over substance. this was an excercise in creating an entire movie over a plot device with out properlly creating a story to support.
How does this building exist? In the past, it's a pile of rubble, and in the future it's a pile of rubble. Only during this split second is it standing upright.
did the workers who constructed the buildings seal bodies into the concrete walls?
I think tenet is deeply flawed and occasionally breaks its own rules, but these are really good, interesting questions.
Imagine you meet a version of yourself from the future, travelling the same direction in time as you.
He's used the turnstile to reverse himself, and then un reverse himself, so that he is now going forwards normally through his past (your present)
And let's say he gives you a Harry Potter book. This book was given to him by his future self and he's repeating the process by giving it to you.
This book is stuck in a loop but this doesn't mean you INVENTED Harry Potter. There is an ""implied timeline"", one that's basically theoretical only, that we never see, in which the book reaches your hands for the first time.
Eventually as it's passed around in the loop, this book will degrade and versions of yourself will just be passing to each other a handful of dust and paper, having no clue that it used to be a book.
There is an implied, theoretical timeline in which the building was built perfectly normally. the chances of you existing in this timeline are the same for you to exist in any other timeline - I guess it would be like rolling an infinite sided die.
You might be in a version where the book is in good condition. Or one where it is worn. Or one where it's long since turned to dust.
TLDR: in the movie the building is firmly trapped in a loop where for all of time before it got hit with the rocket, it was a pile of rubble. But there is a theoretical "implied first timeline" in which it was constructed normally. this is at least how I understand it to work.
>Eventually as it's passed around in the loop, this book will degrade and versions of yourself will just be passing to each other a handful of dust and paper, having no clue that it used to be a book.
False.
The way time travel works in this movie, it reverses entropy.
Once bullets hit a target, they are deformed, but inverted bullets (bullets that went through the turnstile) go back to normal once they are inversely fired and go back into the clip.
The Harry Potter book would restore itself when inverted and deteriorate only when returns to the normal flow of time.
We can also assume that people don't grow OLDER when inverted: they actually grow YOUNGER. So that when they return to the normal flow of time they won't be any older than they were when they first passed through the turnstile. Which is also why you need your own air when inverted: because your lungs probably breathe in reverse, so you need air with high concentration of CO2 in order to breathe. Normal air doesn't have enough CO2 to keep you alive while inverted.
>We can also assume that people don't grow OLDER when inverted: they actually grow YOUNGER.
I think this sentence demonstrates exactly what way in which you misunderstand the mechanic. Inverted people don't grow younger, they continue aging, even while inverted. I can't talk too much right now but I think you are mis understanding how inversion affects things
the bullets put the wall back together because the wall isn't inverted.
If I'm inverted and I push you, from my perspective, the energy I imparted on you acts normally- I shove you and you stumble back.
From your perspective, you are drawn, stumbling, towards my hands. The forces I applied on you are reversed.
But inverse radiation is just radiation when you, too, are reversed- From my perspective I don't grow any younger while inverted, I just continue to age. (I'm assuming when you say you age backwards, you mean to say that from the perspective of an inverted person, they age backwards. Thats incorrect. If you mean instead that everyone around you sees you aging backwards as you are the only Inverted person, then you are correct and I'm sorry for misunderstanding and pointing my autism beam at you)
>the bullets put the wall back together because the wall isn't inverted.
The bullets themselves have been inverted though, and they go back to their normal shape. They're not deformed when they go back into the clip. This proves you're full of shit.
When a bullet hits a wall, the impact deforms the bullet. If you were right, inverted bullets should still be deformed when going back into the clip.
9 months ago
Anonymous
>When a bullet hits a wall, the impact deforms the bullet. If you were right, inverted bullets should still be deformed when going back into the clip.
the more i think about it, the more i realize that its me thats misunderstanding, not you. because you are right... the bullet should be deformed as it goes back into the gun, and it isn't. either the rules are extremely inconsistent or i have a fundamental misunderstanding
Because the bullet imparts inverse radiation onto the target. to us normal people it looks like the target comes together and repairs itself and a nice undent bullet flies back into the gun.
But... the wall should ALSO impart some NORMAL radiation onto the bullet, denting it. it should fly back into the gun dented, and it doesnt. u are definitely right i think.
[...] >2 Smartass WoT Comments >Both wrong
Just your typical /tv posters
>There is an implied, theoretical timeline
There aint shit like that, its called Loop for a reason. Time loops are the prime example of Predetermination, no choices that haven't been already made.
That Book would simply be a Paradoxon and a shit one at that, as an example for a good one watch "Predestination". The paradox in it works perfectly and is pretty much caused due to the invention of time travel itself.
>We can also assume that people don't grow OLDER when inverted
How moronic can you be, it's called inversion, yet people dont get fkn inverted.
In your example people still age normally in real time, they just life backwards.
So by definition, they arent inverted, not to mention the implication would be immortality.
Just turn yourself once a year, you never age and there can be infinite versions of you.
Whenever I think Nolan is getting stupid with his writing these days, I see Comments like these that remind the viewers are still to stupid to understand it.
>There aint shit like that, its called Loop for a reason
Why do you receive a book though, and not a blob a purple matter that youve never seen before? i think this implies that even if you could never "reach" a "first timeline", there is some kind of origin for every Paradoxon.
If you follow every Paradoxan to it's inception then there must be some kind of origin. and if there is no origin, a normal object would quickly be ground into dust from being handled quadrillions of times.
9 months ago
Anonymous
>But... the wall should ALSO impart some NORMAL radiation onto the bullet, denting it. it should fly back into the gun dented, and it doesnt. u are definitely right i think.
Inverted objects affect entropy in a limited space around them.
It's why the Protagonist gets frostbite when his car burns.
The entropy of the wall is affected by the bullet when the bullet hits the wall. Which is why both the bullet and the wall go back to normal once the bullet goes back into the clip.
9 months ago
Anonymous
>Inverted objects affect entropy in a limited space around them.
is it just me or is this 1000x less interesting than your matter being inverted
9 months ago
Anonymous
Forgot to quote you
for
>Then explain...
I just did that, how dense are you?
They get inverted, from our view they become younger until the point of their inversion.
Breathing CO2 in and O2 out, taking in shit' piss and vomiting out food.
>Why do you receive a book though
It's has been a while since I watched this Movie, but I cant think of anything that matches your example. So its still all just your hypothetical nonsense stacked on top of Nolans nonsense script.
But yes, a Book would go to shit in this case.
I cannot blame anyone for being confused though as the movie itself is inconsistent about how the inversion mechanic works which is frustrating because there's certainly a right way to do it.
An example is PT stepping into a puddle while inverted. The movie breaks its own rules here, as while inverted, he sees the splash before he steps but that is INCORRECT !!!! the energy he imparts is inverted and thus, the splash should act normally for him! As cool as that shot is I am thoroughly bothered by its inaccuracies.
>Eventually as it's passed around in the loop, this book will degrade and versions of yourself will just be passing to each other a handful of dust and paper, having no clue that it used to be a book.
False.
The way time travel works in this movie, it reverses entropy.
Once bullets hit a target, they are deformed, but inverted bullets (bullets that went through the turnstile) go back to normal once they are inversely fired and go back into the clip.
The Harry Potter book would restore itself when inverted and deteriorate only when returns to the normal flow of time.
We can also assume that people don't grow OLDER when inverted: they actually grow YOUNGER. So that when they return to the normal flow of time they won't be any older than they were when they first passed through the turnstile. Which is also why you need your own air when inverted: because your lungs probably breathe in reverse, so you need air with high concentration of CO2 in order to breathe. Normal air doesn't have enough CO2 to keep you alive while inverted.
>2 Smartass WoT Comments >Both wrong
Just your typical /tv posters
>There is an implied, theoretical timeline
There aint shit like that, its called Loop for a reason. Time loops are the prime example of Predetermination, no choices that haven't been already made.
That Book would simply be a Paradoxon and a shit one at that, as an example for a good one watch "Predestination". The paradox in it works perfectly and is pretty much caused due to the invention of time travel itself.
>We can also assume that people don't grow OLDER when inverted
How moronic can you be, it's called inversion, yet people dont get fkn inverted.
In your example people still age normally in real time, they just life backwards.
So by definition, they arent inverted, not to mention the implication would be immortality.
Just turn yourself once a year, you never age and there can be infinite versions of you.
Whenever I think Nolan is getting stupid with his writing these days, I see Comments like these that remind the viewers are still to stupid to understand it.
>How moronic can you be, it's called inversion, yet people dont get fkn inverted.
Then explain to me why inverted people can't breathe normal air and need to bring their own air.
>Then explain...
I just did that, how dense are you?
They get inverted, from our view they become younger until the point of their inversion.
Breathing CO2 in and O2 out, taking in shit' piss and vomiting out food.
>Why do you receive a book though
It's has been a while since I watched this Movie, but I cant think of anything that matches your example. So its still all just your hypothetical nonsense stacked on top of Nolans nonsense script.
But yes, a Book would go to shit in this case.
Washington junior is a charisma vacuum, and the director's cut was probably over 5 hours long - should have split it in two parts instead of binning the lot. Overall a pretty decent flick if you can get past the initial confusion and piece the story together, cause sure as shit they tried to make it hard on the viewer
Why wasn't Debicki perceiving anything as reversed when she went back to that day on the boat? I get that her husband was a version of himself from the future just like her so that makes sense, but the guy sweeping was normal. The world around her wasn't reversed either. I think at some point I lost track of this movie's rules.
She inverted herself to go back in time, but then she used the turnstile again to uninvert and so she was currently flowing through normal time.
When the Protagonist and Neil get to the turnstile in the safeport, they encounter two instances the Protagonist himself: one is coming out of the turnstile inverted while the other is coming out normal. The version of Kat that encounters her husband on the boat is the version that comes out of the turnstile normal. Her inverted version was somewhere else, doing the trip in reverse.
>KINONIK
>exposition dumps you from one silly action scene to another
Sounds exactly like one of them Bond movies he was trying to emulate
yeah the ending was sad
Getting drunk on vodka and watching this was insane
[Spoiler]We know
>one MacGuffin after another as nameless protaganist traveles from one le epic movie stunt to another and then the movie turns around and does all the MacGuffins again but in reverse.
First and only Nolan movie I've walked out of halfway through. The audio was horrible in the theater. The plot was both confusing and predictable at the same time which I think is a real cinematic achievement. The shallow characters gave me nothing to root for. The hollow plot wasn't convincing for driving the characters to their final conflict. This was the epitimy of style over substance. this was an excercise in creating an entire movie over a plot device with out properlly creating a story to support.
>First and only Nolan movie I've walked out of halfway through
Joke's on you moron, you already watched second half backwards
TrashsarT
How does this building exist? In the past, it's a pile of rubble, and in the future it's a pile of rubble. Only during this split second is it standing upright.
It was built as a normal building and all the time travel shit only happened to it during that one scene you posted?
did the workers who constructed the buildings seal bodies into the concrete walls?
I think tenet is deeply flawed and occasionally breaks its own rules, but these are really good, interesting questions.
Imagine you meet a version of yourself from the future, travelling the same direction in time as you.
He's used the turnstile to reverse himself, and then un reverse himself, so that he is now going forwards normally through his past (your present)
And let's say he gives you a Harry Potter book. This book was given to him by his future self and he's repeating the process by giving it to you.
This book is stuck in a loop but this doesn't mean you INVENTED Harry Potter. There is an ""implied timeline"", one that's basically theoretical only, that we never see, in which the book reaches your hands for the first time.
Eventually as it's passed around in the loop, this book will degrade and versions of yourself will just be passing to each other a handful of dust and paper, having no clue that it used to be a book.
There is an implied, theoretical timeline in which the building was built perfectly normally. the chances of you existing in this timeline are the same for you to exist in any other timeline - I guess it would be like rolling an infinite sided die.
You might be in a version where the book is in good condition. Or one where it is worn. Or one where it's long since turned to dust.
TLDR: in the movie the building is firmly trapped in a loop where for all of time before it got hit with the rocket, it was a pile of rubble. But there is a theoretical "implied first timeline" in which it was constructed normally. this is at least how I understand it to work.
Good post
>Eventually as it's passed around in the loop, this book will degrade and versions of yourself will just be passing to each other a handful of dust and paper, having no clue that it used to be a book.
False.
The way time travel works in this movie, it reverses entropy.
Once bullets hit a target, they are deformed, but inverted bullets (bullets that went through the turnstile) go back to normal once they are inversely fired and go back into the clip.
The Harry Potter book would restore itself when inverted and deteriorate only when returns to the normal flow of time.
We can also assume that people don't grow OLDER when inverted: they actually grow YOUNGER. So that when they return to the normal flow of time they won't be any older than they were when they first passed through the turnstile. Which is also why you need your own air when inverted: because your lungs probably breathe in reverse, so you need air with high concentration of CO2 in order to breathe. Normal air doesn't have enough CO2 to keep you alive while inverted.
>We can also assume that people don't grow OLDER when inverted: they actually grow YOUNGER.
I think this sentence demonstrates exactly what way in which you misunderstand the mechanic. Inverted people don't grow younger, they continue aging, even while inverted. I can't talk too much right now but I think you are mis understanding how inversion affects things
How do bullets put a wall back together if you don't grow younger while inverted? Its essentially the same process.
>you're wrong but I'm not going to explain why you're wrong
the bullets put the wall back together because the wall isn't inverted.
If I'm inverted and I push you, from my perspective, the energy I imparted on you acts normally- I shove you and you stumble back.
From your perspective, you are drawn, stumbling, towards my hands. The forces I applied on you are reversed.
But inverse radiation is just radiation when you, too, are reversed- From my perspective I don't grow any younger while inverted, I just continue to age. (I'm assuming when you say you age backwards, you mean to say that from the perspective of an inverted person, they age backwards. Thats incorrect. If you mean instead that everyone around you sees you aging backwards as you are the only Inverted person, then you are correct and I'm sorry for misunderstanding and pointing my autism beam at you)
>the bullets put the wall back together because the wall isn't inverted.
The bullets themselves have been inverted though, and they go back to their normal shape. They're not deformed when they go back into the clip. This proves you're full of shit.
When a bullet hits a wall, the impact deforms the bullet. If you were right, inverted bullets should still be deformed when going back into the clip.
>When a bullet hits a wall, the impact deforms the bullet. If you were right, inverted bullets should still be deformed when going back into the clip.
the more i think about it, the more i realize that its me thats misunderstanding, not you. because you are right... the bullet should be deformed as it goes back into the gun, and it isn't. either the rules are extremely inconsistent or i have a fundamental misunderstanding
Because the bullet imparts inverse radiation onto the target. to us normal people it looks like the target comes together and repairs itself and a nice undent bullet flies back into the gun.
But... the wall should ALSO impart some NORMAL radiation onto the bullet, denting it. it should fly back into the gun dented, and it doesnt. u are definitely right i think.
>There aint shit like that, its called Loop for a reason
Why do you receive a book though, and not a blob a purple matter that youve never seen before? i think this implies that even if you could never "reach" a "first timeline", there is some kind of origin for every Paradoxon.
If you follow every Paradoxan to it's inception then there must be some kind of origin. and if there is no origin, a normal object would quickly be ground into dust from being handled quadrillions of times.
>But... the wall should ALSO impart some NORMAL radiation onto the bullet, denting it. it should fly back into the gun dented, and it doesnt. u are definitely right i think.
Inverted objects affect entropy in a limited space around them.
It's why the Protagonist gets frostbite when his car burns.
The entropy of the wall is affected by the bullet when the bullet hits the wall. Which is why both the bullet and the wall go back to normal once the bullet goes back into the clip.
>Inverted objects affect entropy in a limited space around them.
is it just me or is this 1000x less interesting than your matter being inverted
Forgot to quote you
for
I cannot blame anyone for being confused though as the movie itself is inconsistent about how the inversion mechanic works which is frustrating because there's certainly a right way to do it.
An example is PT stepping into a puddle while inverted. The movie breaks its own rules here, as while inverted, he sees the splash before he steps but that is INCORRECT !!!! the energy he imparts is inverted and thus, the splash should act normally for him! As cool as that shot is I am thoroughly bothered by its inaccuracies.
>2 Smartass WoT Comments
>Both wrong
Just your typical /tv posters
>There is an implied, theoretical timeline
There aint shit like that, its called Loop for a reason. Time loops are the prime example of Predetermination, no choices that haven't been already made.
That Book would simply be a Paradoxon and a shit one at that, as an example for a good one watch "Predestination". The paradox in it works perfectly and is pretty much caused due to the invention of time travel itself.
>We can also assume that people don't grow OLDER when inverted
How moronic can you be, it's called inversion, yet people dont get fkn inverted.
In your example people still age normally in real time, they just life backwards.
So by definition, they arent inverted, not to mention the implication would be immortality.
Just turn yourself once a year, you never age and there can be infinite versions of you.
Whenever I think Nolan is getting stupid with his writing these days, I see Comments like these that remind the viewers are still to stupid to understand it.
>How moronic can you be, it's called inversion, yet people dont get fkn inverted.
Then explain to me why inverted people can't breathe normal air and need to bring their own air.
>Then explain...
I just did that, how dense are you?
They get inverted, from our view they become younger until the point of their inversion.
Breathing CO2 in and O2 out, taking in shit' piss and vomiting out food.
>Why do you receive a book though
It's has been a while since I watched this Movie, but I cant think of anything that matches your example. So its still all just your hypothetical nonsense stacked on top of Nolans nonsense script.
But yes, a Book would go to shit in this case.
There are no hypothetical counterfactuals. That was kind of the point of the movie...
Literally the biggest pile of shit I've ever seen
It was slightly better than Interstellar, but still shit.
UNN TSS TSS TSS
UNN TSS TSS TSS
UNN TSS TSS TSS
UNN TSS TSS TSS
DogshitihsgoD
Reminder that if you havent watched Tenet backwards yet you are a fricking poser and should have a nice day
Yeah of course it was, since the queen was in it
I ordered my hot sauce an hour ago
Washington junior is a charisma vacuum, and the director's cut was probably over 5 hours long - should have split it in two parts instead of binning the lot. Overall a pretty decent flick if you can get past the initial confusion and piece the story together, cause sure as shit they tried to make it hard on the viewer
Why wasn't Debicki perceiving anything as reversed when she went back to that day on the boat? I get that her husband was a version of himself from the future just like her so that makes sense, but the guy sweeping was normal. The world around her wasn't reversed either. I think at some point I lost track of this movie's rules.
she reversed, travelled back in time, then reversed again.
She inverted herself to go back in time, but then she used the turnstile again to uninvert and so she was currently flowing through normal time.
When the Protagonist and Neil get to the turnstile in the safeport, they encounter two instances the Protagonist himself: one is coming out of the turnstile inverted while the other is coming out normal. The version of Kat that encounters her husband on the boat is the version that comes out of the turnstile normal. Her inverted version was somewhere else, doing the trip in reverse.