Now that the dust has settled, did your opinion of it improve over time?
I liked the whole "future friendship" ending relationship, but I still hated that exposition dump of a dialogue.
the music was 10/10 though
Now that the dust has settled, did your opinion of it improve over time?
No.
it was good. not perfect and it would've benefitted from a more refined plot. soundtrack should've won the oscar.
I have watched it twice in theaters. I really liked it then, even if the overload of exposition is sometimes tiring. Great cast (Denzel Jr is fine by me, nice to see some new faces, and i don't care that he's a Black person), kino OST and great effects (those are rare these days).
I think i'll torrent it and rewatch it now to see if i still feel the same.
>racism
>on my Cinemaphile - Television & Film
Get lost
>and i don't care that he's a Black person
he didn't act like a Black person, thats what is important.
Tuvak in star trek playing a highly logical race was a ticklish idea, yet it was refreshing to see a black person that doesnt act like a Black person so I don't mind it.
Frankly I wish more of blacks tried to strive for something like that rather than their current culture.
No, it's still a boring marriage drama.
soundtrack was sublime, yet poorly mixed and highly compressed which is sad due to the already horrendous audio mix.
it was shit
the twink batman actor should've been the protagonist
It was okay, I'm just tired of Nolan's autism
I really liked Dunkirk and thought he'd move on from his time gimmick frickery and make more stuff like that
Cinemaphile or nuCinemaphile just hates anything and everything
Can someone explain to me why the protagonist was literally called The Protagonist in the film? What was added narratively by that choice? Why not just call him something basic a vaguely symbolic like Adam? It's just always struck me as extremely dumb, especially given he even says
>"I'm The Protagonist"
at one point.
I don't get your joke because i completely forgot the whole plot of tenet other than some time frickery and bad guys magically appearing out of nowhere if they needed bad guys.
>I don't get your joke
what joke? Washington's character is credited and referred to as The Protagonist and I'm genuinely asking why did Nolan choose that?
he was up his ass
Oh lol, i assumed you made a bad joke. Haha, why the frick did nolan do that yeah...
Because in the movie, a Protagonist is a friendly co-operator, who moves in the same direction as you. You may have a protagonist or an inverted protagonist. And an antagonist is an enemy, and he also may be inverted or not.
What the frick is so hard about that?
when do they establish protagonist as language for moving in the same direction as you?
I get what you guys are arguing and I agree spies assume fake names and whatnot, but I'm looking from the perspective that literally calling a film's protagonist 'The Protagonist' and drawing attention to it in dialogue is an inherently meta choice, but there's absolutely no other meta elements present in the film at all so it's just distracting and out of place in that context. Again, why not just name him Adam which is basic and vaguely symbolic also?
Idk, because it's right there kinda obvious and untaken. It's not easy thinking up names or words that sound cool when you want to.
dialogue is an inherently meta choice, but there's absolutely no other meta elements present in the film
Other than the movie's title which also runs backwards. The whole
SATOR
AREPO
TENET
OPERA
ROTAS
Naming device.
The 10 minute countdown mission at the end.
The ROTAS Freeport having hallways marked from 0 to 5 to 10.
Idk, It's structurally just neat to clean those things up in your story.
>Idk, because it's right there kinda obvious and untaken.
so it's not established anywhere at all?
>Other than the movie's title which also runs backwards. The whole (etc)
Good point those examples you given are meta you're right but not the meta I was referring too, they are metatextual not metafictional. My whole confusion is "The Protagonist" is a metafictional choice seemingly, Nolan wrote a script with a protagonist literally referred/credited as The Protagonist and it just seems like a silly, pointless, inclusion when he could have been named literally anything else. Drawing attention to "The Protagonist" in my mind should have a point too it, if there isn't a point then why not just give him a bland name?
>but I'm looking from the perspective that literally calling a film's protagonist 'The Protagonist' and drawing attention to it in dialogue is an inherently meta choice
I don't know but to get you started off on what he might've intended, In the previous film Dunkirk the protagonists were also nameless. My understanding of that film was that whatever effort you put in for the future even if it is as minor("I'll be useful sir") as merely surviving is good enough. You don't have to believe you'll be the singular game changer, just take a leap of faith and do the right thing. You don't need to know 100% that your actions are going to be meaningful. Something similar could've been intended in TENET.
> “What's happened's happened,” Neil says, “which is an expression of faith in the mechanics of the world. It's not an excuse to do nothing.”
> but I'm looking from the perspective that literally calling a film's protagonist 'The Protagonist' and drawing attention to it in dialogue is an inherently meta choice,
> but there's absolutely no other meta elements present in the film at all
The entire thing is a meta-film exercise in storytelling designed to play with the audience's expectations and understanding of story progression. Nolan placed a title card at the beginning of the film specifically to emphasize that it's a story told in both directions simultaneously. If that's not meta I'm not sure what is.
He works for the CIA so he has to keep his name to himself.
Whats stupider
James Bond announcing his name everywhere he goes or a CIA agent not giving away his name and having a moniker.
>he thinks "james bond" isn't a code name used to draw out stupid bad guys
Because Nolan is so far up his own ass at this point that he can see his own tonsils
Oppenheimer is gonna rule, and only a virtuoso like Nolan can make it. Go watch your Jap shit arthouse and commit that suicide you keep promising yourself anon. Let us normals enjoy life.
>Oppenheimer is gonna rule, and only a virtuoso like Nolan can make it
Kek
Your post just gave me aids.
It was too pretentious.
As opposed to Drive My Car?
>Drive My Car
that wasn't pretentious
>Opening credits 40 min into it.
>Could've told the story in one hour not 3
>Drags on
>Named after a beatles song but completely misses the point of song
>Poetry
It's pretentious as shit moron. Tenet is based.
i dont know if it was intentional or not, but the protagonist was... completely lifeless. I can't think of an example of such lifeless protagonist. Robert Pattinson actually had some charisma, and it made the protagonist... he was furniture.
>Named after a beatles song but completely misses the point of song
I assumed the point was that the word is the same forwards and backwards, nothing more.
Did my opinion on that it was the best movie of 2020 improve? No. It remains that.
>I ordered my hot sauce an hour ago.
It's forgettable trivial trash like everything Nolan has ever put out since Memento. What's worse is he near always takes an actually interesting premise and makes it the bleakest, most pretentious, near monochromatic and color corrected flick where everything looks as clean sterile and calculated as a calvin klein or a hugo boss commercial.
His films are the epitome of what people rightfully call McDonalds Arthouse and embody everything that's wrong with hipsters.
I liked it
watched it, loved it, rewatched it with the girlfriend, she loved it, i loved
nolan can do no wrong
I liked it, though I think it could have been done better.
Over all it's a good modern spy movie, certainly much much better than the bond shit.
The only reason this film exists at all is because of all the dumb Reddit gays who mapped out the plot to Inception. Nolan must have thought they were cool and came up with this stupid idea for a time travel film where the story timeline is a mirror image. Developing a story that way is stupid, though, it's like trying to develop a story and characters around an "epic twist." It never works.