TENET - General Information/Discussion/Speculation

An original action espionage film releasing in IMAX on July 17, 2020.
Posts: 100
Joined: September 2018
Sharkboy wrote:
May 1st, 2019, 1:26 pm
Angus wrote:
April 30th, 2019, 9:30 pm
I'm kind of wondering if this is another historical epic based on something that actually happened, like Dunkirk.

Having thousands of extras makes me think it's a historical event. And the fact that these locations could be used for the past / have a timeless look to them.

Man, I'm curious if this is really a time travel thing.

Can anyone share any significant historical events that have happened near these locations?
How in the world could you figure that?
Not necessarily historical, but it does have to be something that has to do with politics, or society.

Posts: 854
Joined: May 2017
Location: San Bruno, CA
Maybe it's a concert. Maybe it's a sporting event like TDKR. Maybe it's a large-scale evacuation in the center of a city, or a disaster relief site. TDKR also had maybe close to 1500 extras walking down Grand Ave in police outfits... could be another battle scene, for all we know.

Or yes, maybe it's some sort of march/protest/riot, or something. Who knows? I'm not leaning toward that as a result of their casting call, though.

Posts: 2142
Joined: January 2016
Location: Norway
Yeah could be literally anything. But still exciting news.

Posts: 196
Joined: June 2018
TeddyBlass wrote:
April 24th, 2019, 7:53 pm
And that’s how you get a week ban folks
I'm back, hahahaha

Posts: 196
Joined: June 2018
MuffinMcFluffin wrote:
April 20th, 2019, 12:19 pm
Oh, we're definitely the weird ones. Anyone who is on a message board talking about a movie is the "weird one." Casual moviegoers won't give a damn about the exposition in Inception, and they love the film. For the most part, it's a win. The Academy is another exception entirely, but they too are the weird ones. The exposition concerns, though, are partly why I wish Inception was a two-filmed arc with Extraction as the original and Inception as the sequel, because they could expand the rules slowly and basically whilst getting a lot of character in the films at the same time.

No one is saying that being less expository means making a silent film, not at all. Ocean's Eleven is a good example of this, since it is a heist film in an attempt to screw over a corporate head much to the charms of a female potentially bent to indirectly foil the operation based upon one's decisions to play close to the chest. O11 has a lot of talking, as do O12 and O13. Most of the time, the talking is even regarding the plot itself. They never appear to succumb under my #1 and #2 items listed in my previous post, though. When Danny and Tess speak in the restaurant about their past, it sounds like an ex-couple having a conversation, and it sounds like they have/had a life outside of the film's chronology.

Sure, not all eleven heist members are filled out as much as Danny, Rusty, and Linus... but I can give you their quirks and traits, and could've anticipated some of their next movies in O12 and O13 based on who I know they are. I cared about their state of being quite a bit. And it's not like I don't for Inception, but I cared those pieces remained intact for the larger goal, and that alone. That's fine, because that was Nolan's intent. Same went for Dunkirk. He decides to characterize in different ways than other writers/directors. Admittedly, we did hit a changeup with Interstellar and although I could feel out the characters, I still had a slight hinge of emotional emptiness in comparison to what I felt he tried to weigh heavily upon. Honestly, I think the score overlays have a lot to do with that, but since that helps create compelling cinema I'm willing to let it slide. But I digress.

Screenwriting is not easy. Making exposition not sound like exposition takes a lot of craft. Some don't see the need to avoid that bit strictly by design, and others simply aren't good at it; Nolan falls into the former, and the latter is normally a set of overall very bad films that even a director couldn't save. Don't worry, no one here is labeling him a hack or anything. I'm surprised I'm seemingly berating his style as much as I am right now because I've adorned his work to the end of the universe and back, and cannot wait to see what his next spectacle is. But if he wants to iron out some of his expository materials, I think that Jonathan needs to be a part of this for that to happen. People don't radically shift their ways that easily. Lord knows I haven't.

EDIT: I've decided to add Fischer as a well-versed character in Inception as well, maybe even more so than Cobb actually.
I know I'm in your ignore list according to you, but I still have to address this BS, because this entire "Nolan tells but never shows" nonsense contradicts itself every time when someone tries to accuse Nolan of it. The problem is there is no middle ground here. People who criticize Nolan for exposition don't know what the F they want from him. Because when Nolan tries to be subtle or not explain things, he gets criticized for not doing good enough job or just writing a story with plot holes. On the subject of subtle, take Two-Face in The Dark Knight for example. Many Batman fanboys lash on Nolan for not delving into Harvey's twisted side before he becomes Two-Face. They say that he just goes mad after Rachel dies. And there lies the problem with those "he tells, doesn't show" accusations: Nolan gave us subtle hints to Harvey's unstable condition and his duality, but he never made an attempt to blatantly discussing it within the film to the point where it would become obvious. Nolan shows you in the first scene with Dent that Dent has something behind him that is out of an ordinary. He comes late to the hearing, he shows us his coin, thus giving us the first hint of his "there's only two ways" ideology and also his arrogance, and then he punches the monster that tried to kill him. So all of those moments already show us who Harvey is. And then throughout the movie we SEE - we're not told, remember - how Harvey's common sense starts to deteriorate. When Joker threatens Rachel, Harvey kidnaps one of Joker's goons, drives him to a dark alley, and is ready to shoot him in the head to get the information. Throughout the movie we are shown how Harvey can lose his common sense when pushed to the edge. So no, he doesn't just go haywire after Rache's dies; Rachel was the last straw for him. And on the topic of plot holes, look at The Dark Knight Rises. People still to this day wonder how Bruce managed to get back to Gotham and enter it despite it being guarded. Nolan didn't explain that thing in the movie, but anyone with a minimal brain capacity can figure out how he did that. Bruce was traveling the world before for seven years without his resources. So him coming back to Gotham isn't hard to imagine. And he managed to enter Gotham unnoticed because of the tunnels underneath Gotham that were built by Bruce's grand grandfather, which was referenced in Batman Begins. See the problem? With Nolan, you can never win over everyone. People will find reasons to shit on him.

Posts: 3516
Joined: June 2010
Batman's Batman wrote:
May 1st, 2019, 9:55 pm
TeddyBlass wrote:
April 24th, 2019, 7:53 pm
And that’s how you get a week ban folks
I'm back, hahahaha
yay!

Posts: 100
Joined: September 2018
160 pages and still not even a title.
Barvo Nolan

Posts: 25736
Joined: June 2011
Batman's Batman wrote:
May 1st, 2019, 9:55 pm
TeddyBlass wrote:
April 24th, 2019, 7:53 pm
And that’s how you get a week ban folks
I'm back, hahahaha
This is definitely not something to gloat about

Posts: 3516
Joined: June 2010
Batman's Batman wrote:
May 1st, 2019, 9:55 pm
TeddyBlass wrote:
April 24th, 2019, 7:53 pm
And that’s how you get a week ban folks
I'm back, hahahaha
I missed you

Posts: 3323
Joined: September 2013
Location: Copenhagen
I almost forgot about this.

It seems an announcement won't hit us until the first day of filming.

Post Reply