Tenet: The Situation Is Enough
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 вер 2024
- Tenet is perfectly paced, why? Because the situation is always enough for us to care. Christopher Nolan's Tenet came under some flack for John David Washington's "Protagonist" and Robert Pattinson's Neil being "one-note" but I think the tension and drama of the situations our heroes find themselves in are more than enough to make us cheer them on.
PATREON ► / fullfatvideos
Facebook: / fullfatvideo
Instagram: / full_fat_videos
Twitter: @FullFatVideos
Watch | Like | Share | Subscribe
All footage used in this video is for educational purposes only.
#tenet #christophernolan #videoessay
Playing the footage backwards to avoid a copyright strike? Interesting.
Or maybe as a nod to the movie?
@@kaelanirevyruun1676 Impossible
Good strategy
@GRAMØ huh?
@@kaelanirevyruun1676 It is, and it's a great one
I personally adored this film. Adored the premise. I was enthralled the whole time. The characters gripped me. I loved the set pieces. I just generally love Nolan and his style and this film felt really Nolany to me. I just loved it
Yeeah same!!! I hope Nolan never stops making movies 😂
same
Same Man It Was A Very Intriguing Film! From start to finish with Great Set Pieces, Premise, Score, Visuals etc! To Me A Classic!!!
What characters are you talking about? The cardboard cutouts
As if you read my mind! Such an immersive and rewarding experience. Just loved this super cool (not cold!) movie!
The Protagonist crying when he learned he lost his team was enough backstory to show us he cares about his brothers in arms. His combat skills show us that he is a highly trained operator, no need to flashback to his time serving. This movie was fantastic
True bruv and his growing love for Kat was amazing
Agreed. Also when the audience at the opera house will get blown..
"That's not our mission"
The Protagonist: "Mine now"
JDW delivery of "You've known me for years." Helped solidified it for me.
Right there I knew why I cared about this guy.
THANK YOU! Finally someone who understands how backstory is so risky to movie pacing. In the context of Tenet it is absolutely unnecessary.
Bro even the end scene when he kills Priya and looking at kat and max going he wanted to get a life with her but he just can't afford to take risk as it can affect her and max's life......
His eyes and Neil's voice behind: "it's the bomb that didn't go off danger no one knew was real that's the bomb with the real power to change the world"... Hits on another level with that background score and suddenly credits rolls out and the plan song starts to play which takes it to another level of coolness .....I was literally weeping in the last scene then suddenly after listening to the plan' goosebumps 👍👍👍🙏🔥🔥
This movie gets better on rewatches
In my opinion it was already great im probably going to watch it tomorrow then to see how much better it gets
That's what Nolan wants from his audience. It is a marketing strategy.
@@rnilu86 No it's an opposition to modern filmmaking. Most people just want to sit down and have the movie tell you exactly what happens, how it happens, and what it all means. Nolan wants you to think about it and figure it out for yourself.
@DarkZ Recon Yeah pretty much, though I have nothing against Marvel movies really.
Seen it 3 times in IMAX so far and it’s better each time. And I’m still confused lol
Nolan achieved something special near the end of the movie, and I think he’s tried to do this is all of his work. He wants the viewer to relinquish their grasp of time. By the end of Tenet there are multiple characters moving in different directions through time and as a viewer you can’t really keep track of it all. You have the let go and that feeling is what makes Nolan’s movies memorable and transcendent.
Loved 'Tenet', second time even more. Movie magic.
I already LOVED this movie, but this video makes me love it even more! Also comforts me, as I felt bad for not remembering the Protagonist's real name, so finding out they never tell us reassures me I was indeed paying attention XD
But there is no character arc. The protagonist has no personal conflict, maybe that he doesnt want to die or that its his job to understand all of this, but there is no personal connection between any obstacle he faces and him or his life.
The protagonist is established right in the opening scene as someone who cares deeply about people in general (going out of his way to save the innocent civilians in the Opera scene, crying when he heard his teammates died), so being a CIA operative on top of that means that saving the world is all the motivation he needs (caring about Kat gives him the a bit of personal stake too). This is honestly enough when we take into account that there are actual soldiers, etc in the real world who risk/sacrifice their lives for similar selfless reasons, without there necessarily being 'personal conflicts' driving them.
@@arjunmanoj2155 i didnt say there is no motivation or that he has no character, i say there is no personal conflict that changes who he is or makes him question who he is (the only thing he learned in this quest was that he was the one who set him on this quest, which doesnt change his personality in any way though)
I think on a first viewing, the pace might've been too fast, but on a second watch it feels more balanced.
You can’t compare this to Batman as proof that you don’t need characterization, just action. Batman is a character archetype people already understand. The protagonist is just some dude.
I really liked Batman, I think he has been good character. I didn't care much for Protagonist.
I disagree he’s not just some dude he’s a bond-esque spy a archetype everyone knows the only twist is his is physical appearance of being a short/average sized African American man the only thing that’s explicitly mentioned is his nationality but Michael Caine’s character definitely looks like they’re going to mention race near the end of their conversations and his height definitely played into that kitchen fight were they all under estimated him and his fighting style was very brutal in that scene using all objects around him like a Bourne film he’s not a photo copy of Bond or Bourne by any means but he has familiar elements that straight away by the end of that kitchen scene I felt like I knew exactly who he was/going to be as a character
False the Protagonist is a (potential) archetype like most of the icon spy characters
@@SonRob01 Full stops and commas are very useful in long bodies of text such as yours.
Novel Seeker
As Timothy Dexter once said “founder mister printer the nowing ones complane of my book the fust edition I put in A nuf here and may peper and solt it as they plese” ...,.,,?!?.,.,.,.,.,&,?.,()()(:;:;/“”-
in other words and much better English go fuck yourself and put the punctuation in yourself this should be enough
Fr though this is a UA-cam comment section why do you expect well written essays?
I agree mostly. I think what's interesting about this movie is that you don't really get shown a lot of things but are expected to believe they're happening. Most of the stuff that actually developed characters or relationships actually happens off screen and out of the viewer's eyes. We don't really get to see the Protagonist start to care about Debicki, but when she's shot he's determined to save her. We don't really get to see Debicki's attachment to her son aside from what she says, but that's her entire character's motivation. We don't personally feel or truly understand the way the characters on the screen do because we don't fully see everything they experience.
I feel like a lot of the movie is like that, stuff happening off screen but just enough being shown so you know its happening. Is that a good thing or bad thing? I would've totally been satisfied if we had another 20 minutes of runtime to give us scenes like that to develop character/motivations/stakes, but I can also accept that maybe we're just seeing snippets of everything happening and I take the characters words at face value; The Protagonist cares for Debicki's character and Debicki's character cares about her son. When I watched it I found it weird that The Protagonist was so determined to save Debicki, I didn't think he cared that much about her, so I thought that was poor development/characterization.
Honestly I don't remember all the scenes anymore but if the character wants to save Debicki I'll assume he cares that much. This wouldn't really work in character driven stories, but Tenet isn't really character driven, so I let it slide. If your story is going to focus on characters relationships and development I think you need to be shown that relationship developing because that's central, but I didn't think the characters and their relationships were the main focus in Tenet, and I'm fine with that
I feel like the daughter story in Gravity is there to play up the themes of rebirth and letting go of tragedy. Great video btw 👍
Someone has probably pointed this out already but I love how every scene used in this essay is done in reverse.
I both agree and disagree with this. I agree with the notion that backstory is being used to overdefine motivation at the loss of pacing and action, BUT ive also seen stories where the opening (finding nemo, or Up for example) where the opening serves as a short visual snippet for why the characters do what they do - it defines every action that follows; without it, we'd be told why they care but never experience it, Marlin would be seen to be overreacting without the empathy attached.
Theres a thing in Improv called CROW where you set up a platform of Character, Relationship, Objective and Where, and once you've got a basic understanding (which is where backstory gets overblown) you Tilt the scene with a twist, usually considered the Inciting Incident in stories. Tilt too early, and we dont understand why we're here or why the character does what they do. Tilt too late, and nothing happens while you get bogged down in setting the scene.
Backstory is overrated, but Motivation is key. The problem is that the best motivations could be maybe a 10 second flashback or eg. Jack wants to shoot Barbossa because he took his ship. No flashback needed, we physically see Barbossa maroon jack with one shot and we repeatedly see Jack sacrifice just to keep that shot as an option. Or with IRobot, where the backstory is filtered out over the story as a growing trauma for current events, but we get from the start that Will Smith detective wants to help the case because Character: He is a detective, Relationship: he knew the guy, Objective: He doesnt believe it was Suicide, Where: a world where robots are inherently trusted, and then Tilt: theres a robot EXACTLY where the guy died. COINCIDENCE? I THINK NOT!
Then the backstory only serves to Develop that motivation. Its not just dumped on us in a prologue, or hiding it from us entirely for the sake of a single unemotional reveal that finally gives the motivations too late to matter (which is what i feel Captain Marvel does to an extent, but Amnesia plots in general tend to feel padded to me.)
I guess im saying that Motivation should be given right away. Without it, actions happen and we have no context, no values to hold to, so anything can happen at any point without clear stakes or intuitive consequences. Whereas Backstory is exposition, and usually exposition given before audiences ask for it. Prologues like Lord Of The Rings has or the star wars crawl may be old fashioned - but are different, theyre setting the scene, not just telling us why we should care about frodo or luke. Theyre Hooks, not backstories. Whereas Backstories serve to develop characters we havent met yet; its like reading someones bio but never meeting them, you like them in concept maybe but not through experience. So ... motivation is asked for from the beginning, its the core Why, but backstory is only asked for once enough mystery is built around that, its the developed Why. Its not character, but it can be used to explore them the same way moving forward does, but in both directions, need to have enough relevance and momentum to matter.
Well to be fair the motivation in the story doesn’t make a lot of sense, but at the same time the motivation relates to the problem, and in this story the problem is an event that doesn’t occur in the timeline of this story - it occurs in the future. However the actions of today impact the future, and its these actions that are key.
In my opinion the motivation doesn’t work, because the problem doesn’t make really any sense. Perhaps if they flushed out the intentions of the future and the goal of the future it would work.
My understanding is that in the future a group of people collect a device that combines inverted states and normal states of existence and annihilates them. As it was somewhat explained by Neil in the film, basically it’s a matter-antimatter reaction thus resulting in annihilation. That is when matter and anti-matter collide the charges of the two particles cancel each other out and you result with no matter but a 100% release of energy. This problem doesn’t make any sense, because if the future did this then they would destroy themselves along with the standard existence of the world - so their decisions result in a zero sum game.
If there’s no motivation behind why people in the future would do this, then there’s likely not motivation for the present except to prevent this from happening despite causing the annihilation of their own existence (as in they die)
I have to disagree a bit. Firstly I need to state that I am a big Nolan fan and I believe all of his movies are fantastic and very well crafted. Tenet is a great achievement and I am glad it had the financial possibility to be made and I was happy seeing it in the cinema on the big screen. Really great experience. However I think Tenet could have used something in a beginning, perhaps a bit of some backstory or at least getting clear Protagonist motivation or mission. I know you pointed that his characteristics are known from his actions and I agree but the beginning wasn't very emotional engaging (at least for me). The first hour for me felt like action packed scene after action pack scene. Altought there were scenes with dialogue, it felt like exposition only needed to get us to another action scene with a big set piece. I wasn't emotionally invested in the scenes. Sure they were cool but nothing else. That changed when the inversion started happening and the viewer got the pay off. When they came back to Oslo and the whole fight scene started I had a big smile on my face and I was enjoying every second of it. From there the film was truly great. But it still doesn't change that it felt very confused by what it's goal is in the first hour. For example in Inception the goal is for Cobb to get back to his kids. You get this info in the first act and as the film progresses you find out more plot twists about his past. The whole 'breaking into dreams' is just a way for him to get to his goal. The concept is great and visually very pleasing for the viewer but there is even the emotional engagement. You care if Cobb and his team will succeed and you want them to. Here I just didn't have the emotional connection. Sure I enjoyed the visual concept of inversion but I just didn't care. And now SPOILER, but I also wasn't very much hit by the fact that Neil dies. Although he was very charismatic and fun character, I just didn't feel it. And I am a guy who isn't afraid to cry (I cry every time when Fisher opens the vault in Inception). I think Tenet would benefit with just a little backstory. Or maybe more time with Protagonist and Neil just being more friendly than always explaining the plan or the rules and concept of inversion. But I don't want to sound like sucker for backstory. Honestly in Nolan previous film Dunkirk I think that his decision of not knowing anything about the soldiers only made the film better. Because in this case you don't need to know anything about the characters. This fact just highlights the Humanity of the film for me. You care about the soldiers because they are humans, not because they have somebody waiting for the. However Dunkirk and Tenet are two very different movies. In plot and tone. That's just my opinion :D
We finally start to learn about the characters towards the end of the movie. We learn about the protagonist's future and Neil's past to the point where one can deduce that Neil is Kat's son. Upon that realization, the relationship between the protagonist and Neil suddenly becomes so much more meaningful. This movie is incredibly rewarding to the people who actually pay attention. Everyone else just complains about it.
I agree that there was no need for any backstory, however, I wouldn't agree that the pacing is perfect. I think the first act is very difficult to follow because there are so many new faces and names and places and concepts being thrown at you and the Protagonist is seemingly teleporting everywhere he needs to go with little breathing room for the viewer in between scenes to actually obtain and make sense of the information presented to them. The second and third act are done very well and even though you don't understand everything you can still follow along. All in all, I was completely enraptured by this film and I think it's one of those that gets better with every rewatch.
I agree with your points about Tenet but have to disagree with your critique of Stone's backstory in Gravity. The loss of her daughter is the core of her character and the film is a metaphor for healing after trauma and loss, of literally coming back down to Earth and finding stuff to keep on living for. I agree wholeheartedly with your comment on it as a 3D experience however - I saw it in 3D and it remains the only film I've seen in 3D that earned it.
@akshay satish I mean I suppose it depends on what you get out of the film. I love watching it periodically and getting so much out of the overall message and theme and how it plays out across the film (as well as the acting, directing, setpieces and music) but it's fine if you don't. Can't wait to see Tenet again though!
@akshay satish Same with every Nolan movie. The more you watch more you find loopholes in his movies.
_Tenet_ is a tightly-strung, finely-tuned violin, playing one note for the first hour, and a back-note for the second. It's efficient. But I don't watch films for efficiency. _Tenet_ enthralled the mind, sure, but it did nothing for the heart. It did nothing for me.
I’m not sure how I feel about the edit on Tenet. Sometimes I wish they’d just kept a shot for like 1 or 2 more seconds, lots of them feel like they were cut off too soon.
Almost like the movie was long and they cut a second off every shot to make it shorter overall
Best appraisal of the movie's crafting logic on the net. Excellent video.
I also feel that Pattinson's Backstory is done quite elegantly. If you subscribe to the Neil is Max theory, than his motivation is that he wants to save his mother from his monster father and that he will sacrifice himself for his best friend and mentor who showed him how to help others.
I think that Tenet was too fast-paced. Couple of character moments between the action would have made the pacing better.
There are "character moments" between the action, more than there is action.... All you need to know is right there. The movie expresses urgency, it is an action film. No disagreement with you exactly, but the context of the film compelled me to respond.
@@GrownManPat you're speaking facts
@@GrownManPat The "character moments" felt so shallow for me
I just realized this the biggest original sci fi movie since interstellar.which was also by nolan!that's why i love nolan cause he is special and is the only one capable of doing this
I just love that all the video goes "back" in time.
I think you are wrong about Gravity. The backstory for her is important because it becomes the detonate for her to really hope to survive after she hears the baby in the radio with the eskimo. Also i think is one of the best scenes in the film imo. Anyway with this video you gave me a new perspective for Tenet and The Protagonist.
P.S: sorry if my english is bad
The entire point of the movie was that ignorance was a weapon - the less tracks they left in the present, the less the future could use against them. The entire movie revolved around that concept, even going as far as to never actually identify the main character. It didn't 'feel' like a typical movie, where you're introduced to everyone in series, build up little relationships between them - Tenet avoided nearly all of that. It's a very unique watch - but if you're expecting the usual tropes for this kind of film, you're going to walk away disappointed. I feel like the marketing for this movie wasn't really clear about that - though I'm not entirely sure how they'd accomplish that anyway - explaining to the audience that this one's 'different' from other movies. You're either going to 'get it' and be entertained, or not.
Good video, but I think Stone's dead daughter in Gravity is kind of the point of the movie. She has to learn to stop living in grief and disconnected from the world (floating in space) and take action over her life (getting back to Earth)
Minor spoilers? Well, I'll be back after I watch it in glorious IMAX tonight
3:58 Surely this is an example of why backstory matters? We've been told quite a bit about Vader over the course of the 3 films at that point, much of which suggests he won't turn and some that suggests he will, thus we have tension over the resolution
Remember that Star Wars 4, 5 , 6 were released first. They created the backstory later.
But you’re talking about tension caused by decisions. Tenet doesn’t have that. Every decision the characters made aren’t made for dramatic purposes. The drama and the tension are in the actions. I’m not saying one is better than the other, but they are different kind of tension/drama causes.
Thank you. Just, thanks you 🙏
Inception is my favorite Nolan film. Because the characterization of Cobb and his backstory with Mal made me invested in the story itself. It’s not a coincidence. You can have characterization intertwine with plot. It’s the main reason Inception is so fantastic. You’re watching a holistically competent film. Maybe some people don’t need characterization to become invested in a story but that’s not the case for me. It’s why I never understood how people love Rogue One. I watched the entire movie and the only part of the third act that didn’t make my brain sizzle in complete indifference was when the *droid* died. I literally just sat there for the last thirty minutes feeling nothing and having the visuals pass over me. Dunkirk is the kind of film where the action is prioritized above all else because it’s based in historical reality and those are all representatives of real people we should empathize with regardless due to the harrowing effects of war, but for a fully fictional narrative film? I need somebody to connect with on an intimate level otherwise I go numb. Hell, even Eames and Arthur in Inception have real personalities to make you lean forward when they’re on screen. I can’t be expected to just watch action in a narrative film and be expected to care, unless we’re being kept out of the contextual loop on purpose to develop intrigue.
I personally hated Cobb’s backstory and it added nothing to the plot for me (emotionally). Flashbacks make me snooze. But that’s just me
“Start the movie as close to the end as possible”
Nolan: I am going to start Tenet on the same time as the movies end. So much so they are happening consecutively.
The emperor from example is the perfect example of this. We don't need to know his backstory or his motivations. There is just an evil empire, a dark lord in Vader and a master in the emporor. And that's enough!
The backstory with the daughter in Gravity is there because the entire movie is a metaphor for dealing with this loss
Whilst I usually enjoy your analysis, have to say that I fundamentally disagree with aspects of this video. Will start by saying that I enjoyed Tenet as a mindless blockbuster (given I haven't enjoyed one on the big screen for a while), but felt it had major issues ... and those mainly centred around how much I cared about what was going on.
Some spoilers: I actually agree that the protagonist doesn't require some backstory or suchlike. But, ... one of the main problems of Tenet is understanding his choices or emotions. Like his decision to save Debicki's character via inversion. Did he care about her? This is implied during the film. But I didn't really feel it. Much like the same character outright states her love for her son. Which felt like a cheap ploy to make us care about her situation than anything meaningful. It seems like her character is more integral to the plan then anything else. A bigger issue felt like his tears upon the reveal regarding Neil at the end of the film. I get a relationship has developed, but ... again I didn't really feel it. The film showed me but didn't convince me. Hence the emotion felt hollow. And the reveal became merely about the plot mechanics as opposed to servicing the characters within the story.
Hence, my response would be that I don't need to know more about the protagonist. But I need to buy into his relationships with the two other main characters - which developed during the timescale of the film itself, of course. And I really didn't, which is why the film fell flat.
There are so many bad, mishaped fan reviews to Tenet. I wish people did not feel compelled to respond immediately to a challenging film far before they have had time to understand it.
Great vid
I think that seeing this film on blu-ray / high-quality streaming where the fps is higher (smoother) than in cinema and that will help with following the details (pacing) in the film - especially the action scenes. Or maybe I'm getting old and my brain can't kept up visually or intellectually....
Subtitles will be nice too!
I really liked this analysis, my only hangup with the film is the sound levels. It was so hard to hear characters sometimes much less understand what was going on during specific pivots of the film that I was lost a few times.
I was used to long pauses so when everything happened back to back it kind of put me off
You want to feel you know a character, instead of just wanting them to succeed, no?
I'd say I disagree...
I really like character driven stories, just as many people do. I really like Interestellar and it's not because they're saving the world or they're on space oooh! I care because I like the characters, I understand them and I feel heartbroken for them. And what's wrong with that? Reducing long storytelling to "thing bad actually" is pretty boring, innit?
It's not a matter of letting the situation be enough - even though it works for many stories -, but a matter of pacing, showing not telling, and cutting what doesn't contribute to the story.
Hi. Does anybody Know what the name of the music that starts at 3.33. Thank you.
Thank you so much, man. I'm writing a screenplay for my short film that only in a matter of a few days went from "short film" to "film". I immediately knew I was overwriting it the moment I started noticing that in order to tie up all the setups, my page count was going up.
Imma start again. Keep it brief. Eliminate the backstories.
Good luck!
It’s more important for you, the writer, to know people’s backstories than it is for your audience - as that is what helps you understand how your characters will behave - So that works not wasted.
Despite all of this, Niel became a more relatable character to me than John D.oe Washington in this movie.
What is the name of the music before the James bond cut
Clever, quoting Vonnegut in a review of a film about time going backwards and events being unchangeable
Someone noticed
(Spoiler Warning)
I loved this film, and maybe it's just me but I found the film's plot pretty easy to follow, especially the whole themes of Free Will vs. Determinism at play - with the Russian billionaire's dying wish to take the world with him, and the protagonist's journey and conflict with the concepts as he exercises his will to change/enact what has already been determined.
As for the character interactions, I actually found it to be quite engaging and warm by comparison to the online voices saying how detached and cold they are - to that I'd argue that rather than having their life spelled out or explained so people can latch onto that thought, the film requires the viewers' own empathy to interact and understand what these characters are going through, which is far better than having endless exposition.
But then yeah, maybe this is the film we need, but don't necessarily deserve.
we disagree
Have to disagree with your assertion of Gravity. While clunky, and not perfect in execution - the idea of a woman who lost the most important thing in her life (her daughter), the film is enhanced by it being her journey to realize she actually wants to live. She has to live. Again, the film is definitely heavy handed and quite likely could have been done in a less clumsy/on the nose manner. Just my two cents, overall thanks for the video!
for any and all well writtien characters...SHOW DONT TELL
Am I the only person who kept calling this movie tenent by mistake also really good film and vid
Can’t wait to see it
There are always somethings that Nolan's action scenes promise but let's face it he doesn't do them well.
People should watch this video if they have mixed vibes from TENET. It really helps to understand what Nolan was trying to accomplish with this film!!!
I still think the pacing in the first half was wayyyy too fast. maybe i'm just stupid but i have no idea what anyone is doing for a chunk of it
_Warning: Contains tangential writing [RANT]_
I'll always much rather watch a film that lets me find my own impression, understanding and meaning in itself. I like to imagine the context and background to a characters life. This is always better than being shown IMO, although it can get tiring more easily and sometimes you just want a some popcorn entertainment.
For example:
Neil's short conversation with The Protagonist above the collapsed hypercentre is a huge reveal in the film at face value. But it get's even larger then more it is thought about. The Protagonist lives on owing his life to Neil and then recruiting him while hiding the knowledge of his death. That can be soul-crushing. We could also talk about the psychological effects of Time's certainty and that, TP might not even show any guilt because his understanding of time is that it is fixed and that Neil was always going to die, no matter how much TP tried to stop it. This is the most likely outcome because it is shown throughout the show... or 'developed' rather, that TP's character is intelligent, wise (not a naive noob) and empathetic. He begins to understand the rules of inversion quite soon after being thrown into the world of time travel when, even I, a week after watching Tenet, have only just finished thinking about the shows many interactions between seemingly inverted and seemingly non-inverted entities (when in one form, the other appears to be inversion despite the 'universal' flow of time being positive/primary. TBH, I still haven't thought about everything, just the human interactions)
I'm tired of writing, I should do my homework... thanks for reading my rant XD
I'm sorry, but I think your wrong. Not that there is a problem with doing a blank main character, but that's not how it's done.
If the protagonist is a blank character and has been such in order to progress the story, why do the side characters has actual back story, motivations and feeling (Kat and Sator) ?
The lacking of the protagonist doesn't work because he's surrounded by characters who are made badly. The starategy of making minimalistic characters to prgress the plot is incossistent, hence it fails.
In dunkirk the blank characters worked really well because they mainly exprienced and felt the situation rather than moving it forward. They had a cleae motivation (survive) and clear feelings (fear) and nothing else was indeed needed. The protagonist has none of those, that's why his connection to Kat is unbelievable (he doesn't convey no motivation nor feelings towards caring for her, but only action).
Characters need either motivation or feelings, not back story, in order to exist. Tenet has those things, but it destributes them in a wrong way between characters.
Nolan is really REALLY bad at show don't tell. The first half of the film is mostly exposition.
and near the end where they explain heat inversion is reversed before it happens and then again after it happens I understand why they did it before but all Neil had to say was the first person to die from hypothermia after a gas bombing instead of explaining it again to the protagonist then making the joke
True
I mean, he’s not awful. The whole Neil sacrifice and saving the protagonist in the first film is shown, not told. The woman jumping off the boat is shown and told to us, but he shows us that it was Kat. The whole red room blue room scene was shown in inverse, not explained.
Only the more complex concepts like the freezing fire or inverted bullets were explained (as well as a few others). I think any less exposition might negatively affect the film either way, a lot of the negative reviews are due to confusion about the plot. I completely get what you mean though, Nolan does like his exposition, especially in Interstellar.
@@billylardner Yeah not terrible compared to others
Billy exposition isn’t bad though interstellar is complex sci-fi if there was no exposition it would be unwatchable same with Inception or to some degree the prestige (explaining the steps to a magic trick) 3/11 of his films are time travel sci-fi driven movies that need exposition (Inception,Interstellar and Tenet)
Why so so many people have Problems understanding the dialogue. For me it was just fine
i really like the movie. I’m a big nolan fan. I love all his movies but i do have to admit a flaw in one of his movies when there is one and that’s the sound mixing of this movie. I think watching in IMAX actually does a disfavour in a weird way because it was so loud it was muffled and i really wanted to know what they were saying. I liked it and then i went home and watched a bunch of videos explaining what was going on and i loved it even more and i can’t wait to rewatch it now thst i actually understand it.
@@juxe411 how bad was it? Like How many percent of the dialogue did you miss. I've heard some people saying that they've missed half the dialogue
FelixDer Müller it was a weird one because it wasn’t like i completely had no idea what they were talking about, i knew what they were saying and talking about roughly but couldn’t hear the specifics. The main parts i couldn’t hear were in the start when the protagonist is going to meet everyone for information at resteraunts and stuff and then at the end with sators thick russian accent on the phone, i probsbly couldn’t hear like 45% of the dialogue
@@juxe411 thats a lot. But If you kinda knew what they were saying it's okay i guess
I think its a mistake to believe the only way character development can be done in a movie is through present situational "action" or showing their backstory - the aspect of Tenet that was I thought was lacking were the more quiet, intimate moments in which the depth of character is explored and we become personally invested in them, moments when we can feel the gravity of their emotions and motivations - and this can be achieved in so many other ways, not simply cutting to backstory/personal exposition. By the end of Tenet I felt an overall lack of conviction for the characters whereas Nolan typically captures emotion so well - Batman, Prestige, Memento, Inception all have very intimate moments where we can see and feel what the characters are experiencing so that what happens to them throughout the plot impacts us as well....Tenet felt like it remained too surface level, so while I enjoyed the viewing experience, I didn't feel nearly as attached to the story or characters as I did by the end of Inception or the Prestige
The headspace advert ruined the pacing of this video
(Still sat through it to give u guys the revenue)
Lord of the Rings starts far from the end
Because it’s necessary to see the battle. That’s what that means.
i agree mostly with the video, but The Dark Knight is a terrible example because it's a sequel. ?
@Our One True Emperor Shall we continue the conversation here?:
Lol ur everywhere in this comment section
@@crazyolben_ I know, I should be doing homework or watching TheBoysS2
I agree that a good director can convey the backstory and intentions of the characters through action, rather than exposition. But the problem with Tenet is the action is so frantic and hard to understand it distracts the viewer and doesn't give them time or context to understand what the action means. So the viewer leaves the film exhausted and confused about what they just saw, what it meant. We see what the characters are doing, but all context is lost in the narrative and many action sequences. And the inability to understand the limited dialog in the film doesn't help, it just makes the viewer frustrated and angry.
I've seen the film 3 times now (with closed captions), and understand the time shift going on, but I'm still at a loss as to what is motivating all of the characters. It sounds like it was clear enough for you, but I think you are the exception.
Reminds me of what Nolan said about Dunkirk. It's about wanting them to survive because they are humans in a deadly situation... not because we know they have their girlfriend waiting for them back home or because their mother already lost sons in the war. It's watching these soldiers who are barely men just trying to survive. The situation is enough.
Yeah and I'd buy that if the characters were convincing, I'm not saying I want the character to flick open their wallet and have a picture of their kids, but you do need some connection and if that's the survival element, you don't feel it. It's just a bunch of actors who don't know what they're doing trying to look stoic for two hours. You may as well watch Twilight, there's the same level of acting lol You never feel any need for survival.
@@tomimpala yeah, i think you completely missed the point entirely. It's ok.
@@mary2761 Holy shit, stop having that weird power thing cause someone replied to you with a different opinion, Jesus Christ. "I win this conversation cause I'm gonna patronise you", it's like I'm talking to a 13 year old.
@@tomimpalaLol, Nope just couldn't be bothered to expand further. Simple as that.
@@mary2761 Man, one day you're gonna have to stop being this way. It's sociopathic. Why can't you be fair and reasonable, and not see every reply with a different opinion as a threat to your ego and something where you need to "win" the conversation? You're so volatile. It's like a spiral. Do you feel good about yourself afterward? It's soo lame. Whatever, man.
the score when he meets neil, on the second viewing, does it ALL for me. such a touching partnership
I appreciate that every scene you used is in reverse
It's a cool detail
Ryan Wheeler wait why tho...
@@herbalgiles9468 Have you seen Tenet? You would understand if you have because Tenet deals with time and reversing it, going backwards.
Valeqas p now I really want to see it lol
@@herbalgiles9468 you should, its really good. Just try to be careful
I got exactly what i wanted from this movie.i wanted my mind to be blown conceptually and visually with something original
The Protagonist's backstory isn't needed because the story centers around predestined sequence of actions. The concept of his destiny is so heavy that his backstory will only cloud what he's supposed to fulfill. This doesn't take away the lack of 'character' on his part because you're simply following along for the inevitability of his future. The backstory doesn't have any impact on the Protagonist's motive as that is what he is. To do the job.
Probably the best review of TENET I've seen, not because it says 'The movie is good' but because it directly tackles common criticism and actually makes an argument in an intellectual manner. I even learned some filmmaking tips on the way, which is neat.
And writing tips too
Did anyone “care” for the characters in 2001 A Space Odyssey?
Did anyone "care" about 2001 a space Odyssey😒😒
@@rythmverma9780 whats the purpose of copy and pasting the original comment
Bruhology He's talking about the movie not the characters.
@@bruhology6437 read again.
@@rythmverma9780 Did anyone "care" about your ignorant comment?
Poorly-paced films can also be ones which are too _short_ for their content. Look at the DCEU Justice League movie. They cut every establishing shot, every non-plot-relevant character scene, and every spare moment to breathe, all so they could get the movie to two hours.
Good pacing is a balance between enough time to properly convey the story you're trying to tell, plus just enough breathing space to process it and get into proper emotional states, without dragging things out too long.
I think that's something that this film did extremely well. There was never a moment when I wanted to hear more explanation. Yet, in-between the conflict, I didn't long for an end to the calm moments. Yes, the audio mixing could have been better in the beginning but I would easily take the original EPIC intro over a theoretical one where speech is more obvious but the music and sfx are happen to be worse.
I do agree but i still think that it doesn't always work like that, i don't know how to explain it, I'm no proffesional but my point is that I've seen movies that drag out scenes REALLY long but it was still a lpt of fun because in every moment there new world building and amazing special effects or even little character moments I'm looking at your Blade Runner 2049
@@Whateveridksomething hahaha yeah i def agree i think its just a question of whether the scene is necessary or not. Whether it helps tell the story. For example in Justice League there were a couple scenes of Bruce and Diana which were absolutely not necessary and made you kind of scratch your head after, it was like they were meant to be romantic but it clearly had nothing to do with the story of the movie in any way and when the film is done it clearly leads nowhere in their relationship so why tell it? It was at best just slightly cool to see them suggest a romance. A lot of scenes between the heroes again just didn't tell a cohesive story. In Tenet absolutely every scene drives the story forward in some way, sometimes even at break neck speeds lol
What I appreciate about the movie is how unapologetically black the protagonist is without being a stereotype. Good writing and acting.
I m kinda curious as to what you mean by this, would you be willing to elaborate on this for me
JDW is in the movie not because he's black, but because he's actually a good actor and martial artist.
We don't eat bears. That makes sense now, yeah seriously tho I hate how Hollywood obsesses over diversity all the time. Like just give me a good cast
@@dopedoge3603 The reason the movie was so good was because of JDW. He's black. If you have to ask you aren't ready for the answer.
@@mr.dr0bot731 mate I’m ready I just wanna make sure I’m interpreting right
As another youtuber Exurb1a said,
"After all of the live action remakes of beloved animated stories, after all the unneccesary reboots, sequels, prequels and whatever we've gotten recently, finally Chris Nolan works his arse off to make something truly original, and all you can do is give it a 2/4 New York Post? 'Oh we didn't mean we wanted that original, we meant the other kind, because we can't watch a movie nowadays without a pop culture reference every 5 minutes'... sure the sound design is a bit weird and the first 30 minutes are a bit oddly paced but overall it's a much needed breath of brilliant originality"
Here's the link to the original video btw ua-cam.com/video/B2MLU2S9i5Y/v-deo.html
Bruh the characters fucking suck and so does the plot. An original concept does not equal an original movie. Remove the time reversal and you have a generic cookie cutter crap.
@@jamesmeow3039 That's like saying "remove the tuna from the tuna sandwich and all you're left with is some generic bread". I get it, not everyone likes tuna, but for those that do like tuna this is some of the best goddamn tuna I've ecer had. Is the bread a bit plain? Sure it is, but that's not the main point of the sandwich and the shear richness of the tuna just tskes over the taste of the bread anyway.
@James Meow Ah yes. Removing the time revearsal in a movie about time revearsal. Genius level argument. The movie is all about the time revearsal and not the characters.
@@jamesmeow3039 it is like saying remove action from john wick and lets see how good it is.u dumbass it is a part of the movie.stupid ahole
No he does actually have a point : unlike tuna in a tuna sandwich, time reversal is a gimmick and doesn’t constitute a movie on its own. Just like cinematography or sound on its own isn’t a movie. And not just that but playing with time reversal isn’t a story either it’s an idea, the actual story that emerged is saving the world, just like any other generic movie, with half the movie on top of that being about a mother thinking about her kid which nobody gives a flying fuck about.
So in this case it’s more taking the tuna out, replacing it with weeks old salmon, sprinkling it with specs of gold and marketing it as filmmaking genius
I haven't seen Tenet yet so I won't watch your video properly just yet, but I'll play the video in another tab with no audio to give youse a view, every little helps XD
Was just about to say the same thing, I'm not prepared to go to the cinema but I'll happily do this.
A hero with no capes
@@dominictemple i didnt want to go either nut chances are most people think the way we do so that means most theaters are empty. I watched tenet completely by myself, there was no one else in the theater
@@manuellacke More power to you, still I'm a Londoner so I think I'll wait.
Weird
While you talked about Gravity, I was building an argument in my head about how if you don't think the death of Ryan's daughter was necessary, do you think there is substitute writing that could take its place to add to the stakes of the situation that you're talking about? Taking out Ryan's backstory would make it essentially an hour short film like you said, so what could replace it to add to the story to improve it?
And then you blew my mind with an answer that I didn't expect. You don't add anything. If taking out unnecessary backstory will make something higher in quality and remove a potential roadblock for people who see it and experience it, then you take it out! Less can be more.
I was sceptical going into this movie, just because it seemed like Nolan was going all-out and would make a mess of it but wow did he do a great job. I absolutely loved everything in this movie, and Nolan once again made me go out of the theatre in awe. I think that those who critiqued the movie didn't really pay attention to it.
Or they didn't want to really pay attention.
I agree. Many people on internet are saying that you have to see it multiple times just to understand it. But I understood most of it while my first viewing and when I was thinking about it later in the day, I got all of it. It gets better on multiple viewings but you can understand it pretty well on your first watch if you pay attention. I think Nolan once said that kids are better than adults as in they don't have any expectations and they are generally more receptive towards an experience.
They weren't "watching closely."
I saw Tenet today and I loved it!!! I didn’t need all that back story. I do want a part two after that ending.
I would actually LOVE to have a sequel/prequel (or both at the same time?) for this movie. I’d love to know more about that universe and the Prosterity. Maybe another story focusing Neil now?
The part two would lead to Neil meeting Protagonist for the first time...well I do think Neil is Max(imilien) - the end of his name is Neil Backwards.
So The Protagonist already know that Neil would sacrifice himself.
Nolan never does sequels. He always comes up with original concepts and doesn’t stretch the story so it can last multiple movies. I don’t think we are gonna get a Tenet sequel.
@@Cheto118 both at the same time. A Temporal Prequel Movement?
"Standard Operating Procedure" - I loved the use of this line and concept in TENET. Nolan has defined the Standard Operating Procedure of movie pacing. Great review and use of film clips! tight editing.
Thanks Matthew!
THANK YOU! I am tired of the 'the movie is not so good because you don't connect with the characters'. Like, so the only way to connect with characters is for the movie to be sentimental. We learn about the this characters with the story, and the story is freaking amazing.
All you need to know about the Protagonist, is how he takes up new dangerous challenges within his mission to save as many as he can, being fine with enduring torture and killing himself rather than giving up information and tearing up when he finds out his team was killed. You learn all this within less than the first 10 minutes, it’s enough to know who you’re following, the rest of the film just adds to it.
I think it depends entirely on the kind of story you’re trying to tell.
The “Everyman hero” with little to no defining characteristics (so that the audience to project themselves into the situation) is how you get someone like Bella Swan.
And then you look at something like the Last of Us; without backstory, and context, the entire emotional weight of just why Joel has such a connection to Ellie (and why he hates that vulnerability) is completely lost.
I think it depends on whether you’re writing an action story, or an actual character driven piece. Character does need to be defined and built, if they’re to be anything but a generic green screen to project yourself onto.
Thank you! Someone finally said it! Keep up the great content and thank you for inspiring me to start my own movie review channel!
The pace is the best thing about it. Love it. Love how we don't get forced into the backstory, superfluous dialogues etc. Its like an arrow, it never stops moving forward.
idk, for all we know every word said was about an unnecessary back story. We just couldn't hear any of it
I feel like the dialogue really wasn’t important just by watching the film you can understand at the beginning of the film i was a little irritated with the sound but i got used to it
😂
"I ordered my hot sauce an hour ago." Was enough to show me that even tho he's a spy he comes from very humble beginnings. Also when he's at dinner with the woman he makes a small statement them going to Mars based on the money they spent. He blew his "wealthy guy" cover while also showing me a glimpse at those humble beginnings. And when he's at dinner with Michael Caine and he says to the waiter in a wealthy restaurant "can you box that up for me?" And the waiter says "certainly not." Clearly the man doesn't come from money.
I can't agree that Tenet is perfectly paced. The start with him going from person to person discussing stuff you can barely hear felt way too fast and the middle portion felt like a slog at times
I´d argue that all the action scenes are perfectly paced, but most of the dialogue and expository scenes (specially in the first half of the movie) are overly-edited and rushed.
M P So what is the middle ground, because if you remember back in 2010 and even still today a common complaint of Inception was that it is extremely exposition heavy.
The problem is Nolan is presenting ideas in cinema that have never been explored before and as a result they really require a full 10 week lecture to properly understand. But you only have 160 minutes of film. So what is the real balance?
I do feel that Tenet is a bit rushed, but there are many extremely complex and high level subjects in this film. This film to my knowledge is the first of its kind to look at how situations of entropy and time may relate to quantum mechanics and special relativity. Granted some of the science doesn’t make sense, but these are topics that to truly understand require several years of education and that’s not really that important to the actual story.
There is definitely a lot of merit to this argument. Backstories can wear down a film at times when there is a focus on "explaining" the current event.
That said, there is equally more merit in adding emotional depth to a film by having flawed characters that we understand, as they go through events that symbolize their inner turmoils. Inception is a far greater film because we understand Cobb's desire to go back to the past, and how he has to move past that, to let go of the regret that has a hold on him.
The Dark Knight gives us a character that most people have a basic understanding of, Batman, and challenges his "one rule" that most people know.
Darth Vader may have the fewest lines in the Original Trilogy, but it all leads to that final climax as we know his conflict with his son.
The emotional depth that propels a story is what allows the audience to empathize and see themselves in the characters, not just in the horrifying and unlikely events, but in the day to day life that may take us through challenges that force us to grow in a similar way.
Take a look at Ad Astra, a film with narration that gives us a backstory. But that backstory is the propellant for the film going forward, it raises questions for the audience that it will try to answer.
When I watch Tenet, it all flows together wonderfully. And for a Spy Flick, it's nice to have a Protagonist that is starved of personal relationships. But the fact that this isn't communicated perfectly as the issue of the film is a flaw. From an entertainment perspective, Tenet never loses your attention. There is always something happening in the Plot.
But that Plot (at least on the first watch-through, and I will watch this again, just after it has a Blu-Ray release) doesn't have a strong connection to the missing personal relationships of the Protagonist. We don't feel his struggle to build meaningful relationships with those around him because the film moves too fast for those moments. (And sometimes you do see them, but those moments run away, and instead are replaced by massive spectacle moments that while fun to watch and keep you engaged on the surface, they don't dive into the emptiness of a life alone.)
Maybe the best part of this film is that the feeling I was left with leaving the Theatre was that of loneliness. Like there was no one who truly cared at the end for me to have hope for.
And maybe that's the point. That the spy life we decorate so gloriously is not painted by exotic Women and badass one-liners, but rather the loneliness that comes with having to live isolated from others. Maybe that's what makes this film so relevant right now. And I will likely enjoy this on rewatch. But how this is communicated is done in a way that is puzzle-like. And I enjoy the puzzle, but I can't say that this film's pacing is perfect, because instead, I found myself watching the film looking for answers to how the film's plot fits together, and less interested in the struggle the Protagonist faced with relationships.
I do like this movie, and I think that our current trend in Hollywood to make interesting characters by adding worthless backstories is useless. But I do wish that The Protagonist and His role in this film was more clearly communicated to us, and that his troubles in finding relationships were put more front and center than the Situation. A Situation can be the perfect representation of an inner struggle, but I didn't feel that with Tenet. At least not on this watch.
I think I would've appreciated this movie more if I could actually hear what half the characters were saying
Bad audio at the cinema?
I heard every dialogue
2:40 Batman said "Naghhh, not tonight."
Lol, this comment is underrated!
Gonna have to disagree with your take on Gravity - that because you don't need backstory to empathise with a character, the backstory of her losing her kid in that film is unnecessary. I think you've got it all backwards. Gravity is a film about a mother who's experienced a tragedy. Because of this, she's struggling to find meaning in her life and is close to giving up. The central narrative question of the film is: given what's happened to her and the emptiness she feels because of it, is Ryan's life still worth living, and can she find the strength to carry on? The film is exciting and technically brilliant because this plays out in such a spectacular and deadly setting, space. Nevertheless, the setting is just a tool to allow the film to explore this question in an interesting way - the dark abyss of space she resigns herself to is depression/hopelessness/suicide, the 'rebirth' scene is a nice metaphor for her deciding to want to live again, and the climax is tense precisely because, having seen her reject nihilism and struggle to survive, we now empathise deeply with Ryan and would be heartbroken if she failed at the last hurdle.
On a lighter note: I always enjoy your videos, keep up the good work :)
👍👍👍
When I watched this at the cinema i thought the pacing was really good as well
If most don't understand the plot then most won't connect to the story full stop. Dunkirk was brilliant because of many of the points you made for this movie. But this movie isn't about a historical event. So this movie needed characters for us to care about and a plot that you can follow. I love Nolan but he needs to be reigned in.
Sorry, gotta disagree. In the case of tenet, the situation wasn't enough to care (at least for me). Watching it I was like oh cool the characters are in this and that kind of situation, but I wasn't fully invested in it - if/when something happened to them I wouldn't really care. Whether that's due to pacing or something else, who knows (i'm not a video essayist 😂), but that's just how I felt when watching it
I don’t agree with this. Giving the character depth allows us to emotionally connect to them more. Inception is one of Nolan’s most popular and beloved movies and Decaprio’s backstory, ghost, & personal struggle is the most important part to that
Yeah, but that was the point of the video. The characters have different motivations because there’s different stakes. In Inception, Cobb’s emotional character foundation was necessary for the plot to work, with him getting back to his children. The plot in Tenet doesn’t demand that in the same way, because the stakes (Ww3) supersedes any personal reasons The Protagonist migh have. Don’t get me wrong, giving the character depth is always better than not, but the script Nolan wrote for Tenet didn’t require it simply because it wasn’t relevant. Set the motivation, act accordingly.
I'll agree with you, and I enjoyed Tenet. Look at Joaquin Phoenix's Joker.
“I need a reason to care”
“The world will end and everyone will cease to exist instantaneously”
“...and...?”
Ryan Ratchford you are not getting the point...the depth of character depends on the story structure...so you comparing inception with tenet makes no sense... Tenet is a spy film with no requirement for personal life..because he is not cliched James Bond who goes on telling people his name
The whole story of tenet is totally different from any spy film..the fate of the characters are already decided in the future.. so their back story doesn't matter
@@cph4314 If it's a world full of one-dimensional people, then no, we don't care.
Dammit, now I have to go for a 6th rewatch of this movie.
I'm kind of on the fence about this video. I agree with the idea that backstory and "character" is unnecessary in this movie, but only under the very specific circumstances of this movie. Most stories are character driven, where as tenet and gravity are event driven which is quite rare. Honestly you lost me when you used the quote about having a blank slate character because it's easier to identify with. That's considered a writing sin and the laziest of the lazy techniques around. Works in this case because the characters are just *experiencing* the plot rather than being an integral part of it. Basically what I'm saying is that yeah most of what you say is true, but please God remember this only applies to this kind of story.
But how do you write character details about the protagonist without revealing that he created the program of Tenet which is a major plot point of the movie and a huge spoiler?
@@brian2440 you dont. Like I said it works in this case, but my problem with this video is that it kinda implies that backstory and even the crafting of individual characters isn't necessarily in any movie. That's just plain not right
Good sir, I cannot agree with you more. As much I love this video showing Nolan craftsmanship, leaving behind characters back story just won't work on every story
I agree with you about Tenet and backstory being unnecessary. But I think you completely missed the point about Gravity's plot being an entire "analogy" for how Sandra Bullock's character feels - dealing with the emotional loss of her child (she's all alone, spinning out of control, in the middle of a biggest emotional hole in the universe, open space, the feeling of floating out into the infinite black void, feelings of desperation etc). They're different kinds of movies, so the comparison isn't a fair one.