As I watched this movie, I wanted to play smaller and smaller balls. I’m happy for those who liked the movie, but I can’t say the same. First of all, not everything is clear, but it does not even matter, the desire to understand something closer to the end simply disappeared. Even the adepts of Nolan, penetrated into the very essence, will not be able to explain all the plot absurdities. Most importantly, the movie is boring. Already at the end of the first hour, there was a desire to see how long it was. In the end, it just didn’t matter what was going on. It wasn’t really my movie at all.
My favorite director is Christopher Nolan, and the audience has become too sophisticated, since the work of the director, who is still afloat, is so shattered. The whole year will be in vain if I don't watch "The Argument." So I decided at the beginning of the year, but in March, the rental died, and I respected Nolan even more, because he was the only one who did not bow to the Pandemic and the producers who proposed to postpone the rental for next year. After months of struggle with the studio and circumstances, the film was released on the third of September. I was lucky to get to one of the first sessions and appreciate his new work on the screen. Then there will be an unconscious stream of thoughts and emotions. I will share my impressions of acquaintance and some thoughts on this work.
A narrative criterion or narrative. After a terrorist attack in the Kiev Opera House, a CIA agent teams up with British intelligence to confront a Russian oligarch who has made a fortune in the arms trade. To do this, agents use a time inversion that causes events that have already occurred to go backwards. This movie may be a sequel to "The Beginning," and I see a few confirmations of that. The original film is called Tenet, which is a mirror image of the word “Ten.” Fast-forward to ten years ago, in the tenth year, at the sunset of zero, the film The Beginning came out. The film is about the inversion of time. Namely, after the film “Inception”, none of Nolan’s films was recognized as a masterpiece by both camps. So many true fans would like to turn it back from now on. The film is accused of illogicality and the fact that it chews up any scientific exposition. So this is a problem for the viewer if he can not find joints in the storylines and delve deeper into the proposed material. Nolan can't be seen by stopping the flow of gray matter. It wasn't better before, it used to be stupid to blame Nolan for peeing. Nolan has found his way, and he's walking it. Experimenting with the genre, trying to transform the film language, the fact that it is not understood is normal. That he's not doing well is normal. But no one will call him one of the faceless mass of directors. Let's get back to the interesting. The film was released at the sunset of the tenth and Nolan with a great result enters the new decade. Ten years ago, he completed zero with a sonorous final chord, releasing the Introduction.
I want to dedicate a separate paragraph to trying to show you my understanding of the thesis that “the smarter the movies, the more logical holes disappoint.” In the case of this film, mistakes like too quickly changing events and showing things too unusual. But you'll never understand Nolan if you don't accept the terms of the game, if you don't go that way. Learn to trust the director and he will surprise you. Prestige and the beginning I did not understand. It took several times to review and exclaim "Ai da Nolan!" You son of a bitch! It's as if he knows that if we catch him in the jamb, we'll be on the same level as him. He's doing it intentionally. But what’s disappointing in some films, for Nolan, it acts as a way to satisfy the intellectual needs of the viewer. At the same time, it is impossible to break away from the film. The film has many, once not enough to appreciate all the semantic definitions of this movie. I really liked the story.
Visual criterion or technical support of the tape. This time the camera work was led by Hoyte van Hoytema. He previously worked with Nolan on Dunkirk and Interstellar. In this respect, both paintings were liked. The visual feature of the Beginning is a designer of scenery, when the whole quarter, as in a mosaic, joins the other, creating two tiers of surroundings. Sooner or later, he had to experiment with the space-time continuum. The gesture in combination with the word "argument" is like the top that Cobb had, plays here not the last role. Every detail of the frame has an impact on the atmosphere created. Dig into the physics of the inverting process as much as you want, but it looks cool. That sounds even cooler. The form is a spy thriller, the content is a typical Nolan. Technical equipment and sound - hitting the target. Each tune sounds powerful and convex, it can only be felt in the cinema. The operation in India, the penetration into the high-rise is set at the level of “Beginning”, not the architecture of worlds, but also beautiful. The pace of development is good, especially for 150 minutes, the music fills the dialogue and action scenes with tension. I watched and listened with pleasure, the drama and character psychology are secondary. It's a tech movie. And dialogue, they're on top. This criterion is an unambiguous plus.
Acting. No matter how much they say that the actors themselves do not understand what they are playing. This is total nonsense. It's in life they're vegans and they come from all sorts of communities, and they're puppets in the hands of a director and a screenwriter. The film is based on the original script of Nolan, therefore the writer and director here in one person. There are four acting characters constantly on the foreground - John David Washington as the protagonist, Robert Pattinson as Neal, Elizabeth Debicki as Cat and Cannet Bran as Andrei Sator. It is on the interaction of these four characters that all the action is focused, the necessary information and contextual background are Clemence Poesy, Michael Kane, Dimple Kapadia and others. Of Nolan’s paintings, only Michael Caine has ever appeared. John David Washington was discovered by Denzel’s son, who often starred in Tony Scott’s action films, and I think I would do it again if he made a similar film. Pattinson, I think, managed to get rid of Edward's halo from dusk. These two images do not converge. Gavrilin’s voice sounded organic as always, the actor managed to catch a new organic actor. Batman will be more difficult in nature and degree of involvement. Kenneth Branagh worked well, especially in emotional moments, pleased with his game of villain. But I'll add to Washington's game that he plays a character without a name, a character function, he just follows the characters. He has no background, he just acts. In this I see a reference to the film “Persecution”, from whose perspective we also observe what is happening, almost knowing nothing about it.
I liked the film, it perfectly combines - saving the world in the best traditions of a spy fighter and a drama about the liberation of a woman from the bonds of a tyrant. Both lines are interesting and together they are well combined. Intellectuals speculate about the concept of the inversion of time, connoisseurs of good stories will be able to observe the relationship between Cat and Sator. I loved the movie, it was definitely worth going to the cinema. I advise you to meet connoisseurs of the genre. All health, peace and pleasant viewing.
The film “The Argument” (2020) from director Christopher Nolan is a grandiose sci-fi action film that managed to attract the attention of viewers and critics from around the world. The plot of the film is original and interesting, and the visual effects are simply fascinating. However, despite this, the film is not without some shortcomings.
The main idea of the film is that the protagonist is an unknown agent who enters a mystical world where time moves in the opposite direction. In this world he faces many dangers, overcomes many obstacles, and all this in the present tense. The plot of the film keeps the viewer in suspense all two and a half hours of its duration. The film explores the theme of time and its irreversibility, as well as the idea that even if we fully master this concept, we cannot change the past or the future.
The visual effects in the movie "Argument" are simply amazing. They create the feeling that we ourselves are in a world where time moves backwards. Nolan managed to create a unique atmosphere that immerses the viewer in the mystical world. The details and visual design are well thought out, which creates a unique atmosphere that does not allow the viewer to break away from the screen.
However, despite all the advantages of the film, it is impossible not to note some shortcomings. The action scenes in the film are somewhat protracted and not always clear, which creates some inconvenience when watching. Actors in the lead roles - John David Washington and Robert Pattinson, although perfectly coped with their roles, but somewhat lacked emotional saturation.
All in all, Christopher Nolan’s Argument is a great action movie that stands out from many other similar films. The plot is interesting, the visuals are breathtaking, and the actors played their roles well. However, some shortcomings in the action scenes and the playing of actors in the main roles are present. In general, the film “Argument” is a cinematic masterpiece that is worth watching for anyone who loves sci-fi action movies.
I watched, although I will hardly say right away, the widely discussed film by K. Nolan “The Argument” / Tenet, 2020. Of course, this is not my genre, I have never been particularly interested in fiction, and in this case it seemed to me that this is not the best example of it, although it is not for me to judge. In addition, the film is terribly long, especially the end, well, how much you can run and for some reason shoot at someone, I was frankly bored to watch, anything really understand and catch the logic of what is happening was impossible, because the whole story, in general, is rather incomprehensible from the finger sucked. The main characters are strange, but almost immortal, present at times in two hypostases - from the present and from the future, sometimes fighting with themselves, because over time everything is difficult there. The main villain is a very elderly woman hiding behind the image of her husband, and the methods are still the same, the main of which, of course, is murder, and this terrible algorithm was invented not by anyone, but by a woman who, however, was smart enough to commit suicide so that she was not forced to invent something else. The author’s message to me, too, was not completely clear – it seems to be for all the good, but always goes on the edge regarding the methods of achieving it. The world was saved from disaster this time, of course, as usual, at the last second, but who knows how it will develop in the future or in the present? Curiously, I only watched the views of my native city, including my home, in our ditch (this is how we call the deep highway passing through our district), they rolled from the heart back and forth and back and forth again, I thought it was good that during the filming I was not in Tallinn, was in England, although, on the other hand, I could look from the balcony. Well, in other areas of the city shot, and the Kiev Opera is our once famous Gorhall, which some have long sharpened a tooth to demolish, although the building is not too old, just has long been closed, although as a concert hall it was very good. And the movie? I didn't like the movie at all.
Returning to the film 3 years after the first viewing in the theater, I finally realized that I do not care about the opinion of critics, the audience, I love this movie. I like the concept of time backwards, I like the way it is implemented, I like actors. Here is a very cool and unusual soundtrack (for the first time in a long time, Nolan’s composer is not Hans Zimmer, but Ludwig Goransson).
The film immediately engages in action, starting the narrative with the capture of the Kiev opera, at the same time presenting the main character, after which he will receive knowledge about the reverse entropy and the very “argument” that will still help the protagonist in the future. Throughout the film, Christopher Nolan immerses the viewer more and more in the story, moving the narratives back and forth in time, twisting the plot thread and looping it in the finale.
"The argument" turned out to be incredibly beautiful, many countries, cities, different locations and everything that happens in them is also interesting to watch. Here is an unusual soundtrack, also flirting with the passage of time, retaining the orchestral style of Zimmer, but adding an electronic sound that is very suitable for action scenes. Which here, probably, even more than can be expected from Nolan, and they all appear in the right places, qualitatively diluting the dynamics of the film, not allowing the viewer to constantly load with scientific terms and play with time.
Speaking of actors, yes, I understand that John David Washington is almost unemotional, but who said it wasn’t meant to be? After all, in the same credits, and in the story itself, he is listed as the protagonist. There is also the most threatening and terrible Andrei Sator performed by Kenneth Branagh, and also explained why the villain is a Russian.
What an incredibly charismatic and pleasant Robert Pattinson in the film, it was after “The Argument” that I looked at him in a new way not only as Edward from “Twilight”, but also as an actor and completely trusted him in anticipation of the then still upcoming Batman.
As a result, it turned out to be an excellent spy action movie, in which Nolan’s signature techniques are very clearly traced, and in combination with reverse entropy, I want to review the film more than once and understand what and when happens here.
9 out of 10
At the moment, I think ‘The Argument’ is Nolan’s worst film, but it’s fun to watch.
An American intelligence agent must neutralize Russian businessman Andrei, who wants to destroy the whole world. I've heard that before. He is going to destroy the world with the help of technology from the future, which helps to move backwards in time, not by simple teleportation, but by inversion. In essence, this means that you will go from house to store, and people will see you go from store to house backwards.
The idea with these jokes over time is really interesting, but Nolan, apparently, just put the bolt on all the other components of the film and therefore nothing else the plot of the Argument does not catch. If we abstract from these temporary jokes, the whole film is like an action scene from a Bond movie. Robberies, shootings, bombings, kidnappings, the seduced wife of the main villain. If you don't eat bread, but give a puzzle film, it will generally come, but I don't care about these confusing plots and this is even though I have almost no questions after watching. I mean, yeah, I get it, inversions and inversions. Can I go now, please?
The characters are almost not disclosed, but the actors scored quite good, and the characters themselves are not annoying and seem quite adequate, except for the villainous villain.
Well, the atmosphere in this film is worse than in other works of Nolan. The quality of the picture and the soundtrack, of course, are good, as always, but from afar it all looks like some action movie by Michael Bay and no soul behind it is not visible.
It will come to those who want to strain their brains for 2 and a half hours.
5 out of 10
Very boring. Even Hermione with the flywheel of time was more interesting. Invert that, invert that, longing green. The whole plot only revolves around inverting and revolves, and the relationship of the characters is 2 minutes. I just loved the way the buildings were being rebuilt and collapsed again, it was majestic and extraordinary. Or when a piece of building flies out from under the foot of a military man and imprints on the spot. Recovery is so aggressive that it is already becoming destruction. Just like the inversion of the world. Sator, of course, is an M freak. I didn't like Cat either. All I liked was the protagonist. Pity the man. He loses a friend he needs to make again, knowing that he will lose him again in the end (although the boys know how to invert, they will find a place to cross). To go through the whole thing again to save the world, no quiet life. He fell in love with an emotionally unstable woman who almost killed the whole world and her beloved son out of personal insults. It's understandable, but shit. Oh, yeah. And the muse didn't like the accompaniment. I even skipped half a movie so I wouldn't listen to it boo-do-dadam-boo-do-tytz-tatz.
5 out of 10
It was 2020, a terrible time of coronavirus and general isolation, after a few months of which I began to groan with boredom. So when the restrictions eased in the summer and the theaters started to work, I went to "Controversy." Not that I was a fan of Nolan or the trailer hooked me. Just wanted to unwind, and the alternative was only Disney remake of Mulan.
The results - the film is very cool, with a cool idea, but in it at all nothing is clear!
The protagonist (seriously, he has no name) played by John Washington and his partner, played by Robert Pattinson, are trying to save the world from certain terrorists from the future and the evil Russian oligarch. And then there are some events and people know how to "go the other way around."
I can't describe anything else. Not because spoilers, but because that's the only thing I've learned about the movie.
Dignities:
1) The film is very interesting and interesting. Although it’s not a damn incomprehensible, Argument is a cool action movie, as the protagonist and partner travel the world and try to save the world. The film is filled with an incredible number of fights, car chases, action, shootouts and all this is really cool done. Plus beautiful landscapes of European cities.
2) An idea. As I said, the fun of the plot is that some things here know how to “go the other way around” and the characters are trying to figure out the nature of this phenomenon. It's a great idea, I just didn't get one thing. When inverting, the characters use breathing masks because supposedly the lungs cannot receive inverted air. And the eyes? It seems to me, or would human eyes not perceive a world that goes backwards, because the eye sees the world inverted?
3 Characters. They're good. Especially the Russian oligarch Sator. He is, by the way, the only character in the film that we know about his past. He is of course a complete villain, but the villain is charismatic and cool. By the way, he really resembles some oligarch from the 90s.
Robert Pattinson has shown that he is capable of serious roles. John Washington isn't bad either, but he's a problem. He's black. I want to believe that Nolan didn't do it because of a social agenda, because it was weird. The film is mainly set in Eastern Europe, a region where there are very, very few blacks and so a black secret agent will be visible, which is clearly bad for special operations. I'm the only one who thinks it's reckless to send black people to a region where there are no blacks. I remembered an anecdote about how an American spy is detained in a Russian village and when asked “How did you find out about me?”, he is answered “Son, we did not have blacks since they were born.”
Problems:
1) Incomprehensible. Let me say this, if you can understand the plot of the Argument and can retell it, then your brain can be alcoholized and placed next to Einstein’s brain, and lectures on quantum physics will seem like a bedtime story. Because the "argument" is as incomprehensible as possible. It consists of intricately abstruse dialogues that the characters do not even try to translate into human. A typical conversation here looks like this:
This phenomenon has an isomorphic character of crystallization, and not isotope-radiation, as we thought.
- Does this mean that the subatomic level of molecules is not available to us?
Yes, but we have an ion pathway of splitting.
- So the inversion is
That's it, two hours! You know that situation when you are in the company of two friends and they start discussing a series that they watched, and you do not and in the end, they say phrases in Russian, and you have the feeling that you are listening to the conversation of aliens? That’s the best feeling of “conviction.” I don’t know who I feel more sorry for: the actors who were supposed to say it without prompting, and even as if they understood what they were talking about, or our translators who used a textbook on quantum mechanics instead of a dictionary.
Yeah, I know Nolan's fans will tell me I'm the dumb bastard for not understanding genius. But isn’t it the director’s job to make his point clear to the viewer? And in "The Argument," the feeling is that Nolan is either blatantly bullied, or he decided to just check to see if he would be called a genius if he made the most obscure film in history.
2 It does not save the situation and the fact that all these dialogues the characters say with a stone poker face, statically standing / sitting opposite each other. You can remember how in other science fiction movies, when characters explain something complicated, they use models, holograms, visualizations – Back to the Future, The Matrix, Chernobyl, Armageddon, Terminator, Jurassic Park. Pff... it's for the wimps who want their audience to understand the film. Here's Nolan, the characters just talk, and you sit there and try to understand. “Interstellar” was once considered an incomprehensible film.
3 The fact that all the characters of the film (except Sator) are completely impersonal does not save the situation. The main character has no name, we know nothing about him. There is not a single superfluous line in the film, except for the plot of the film. You know, in the novels of Franz Kafka (Castle, Process) the protagonists were impersonalized to show their inconspicuousness and "grayness". The Argument. The protagonist is impersonal for what? Is his profession such an ordinary occupation?
Of course, there are examples of good characters without the past: Joker,The Shooter Clint Eastwood, The Sailor Kevin Costner from "Waterworld", but those characters catch on with charisma and bright character, but the protagonist of "Argument" is not.
4 All of the above poses a major problem. It's not clear what's going on in the movie. Characters at Oslo Airport – Why? They're stealing plutonium for Sator in Tallinn, so why is he stealing it from them in the next scene? From whom does the protagonist save the world? Where do they end up fighting, with whom, why?
I suddenly realized that it reminds me of "Argument." "Inhabited Island" Bondarchuk. It's also a good idea, but it's a completely incomprehensible narrative. And it's funny, because "Argument" probably refers to films in which "idea, not effects", but in fact, the idea is unclear, so you look only at special effects.
Conclusion: I’ve always thought the most intricate film I’ve seen is Stone’s Wall Street dilogy, where characters with the same clever look chat about the stock exchanges. But Wall Street at least had the vibe of the 80s and the charisma of Michael Douglas. And "The Argument," as I said, is cool with cool special effects, but absolutely incomprehensible. Nolan should be more respectful of people who are not geniuses like him. I hope in “Openheimer” the characters will not be so dull talk about physics.
6 out of 10
I will not describe the plot, google the trailer, so only I will express my opinion.
First of all, it's just a fantastic shot. I am not so much about the presence in the frame of the simultaneous normal movement of time and the movement of it backwards, we take this out of brackets as obviously a genius thing. I'm more about shooting in general, about all the shots. Very beautifully and very correctly placed cameras, emphasized angles, worked out the mise-en-scene, a deep background ... In short, you'll pump!
The friends we discussed the film with were talking about a cool soundtrack. Perhaps they are right, I honestly did not pay attention, but if it suddenly matters to you, then keep in mind.
Cons: plot. Just after “Beginning” and especially “Interstellar” you expect something even more brilliant. I don't know if it worked that way for me, but compared to previous work, Nolan didn't jump over, he didn't even reach his own bar. To be fair, he bullied her, but for that he is one of the best directors of our time to do something new every time.
There is no study of the characters, they are kind of flat and motivating, there is no background. Many questions to the protagonist, to his partner, and to a married couple. Particular discontent was caused by the picture (who saw it, he will understand), it is completely unclear why it was so much time to murmur. This applies to the central gesture, after which the film is named, and the technology of time inverting.
In general, the film is definitely cool, until you become a meticulous non-film critic, noting all the disadvantages that others do not care about: I definitely recommend watching, but, as for me, this is an ordinary action movie with a cool, but undiscovered idea.
I like Nolan’s work, and considering that the phrase “Nolan genius” has already become meme, I want to get acquainted with all his works. I like “Prestige”, “Remember”, “Inception”, which, unfortunately, I cannot say about “Controversy”. I'm going to take a look at the movie.
Plot. In a nutshell, “evil Russky Andrew” takes over the technology of time inversion and wants to destroy the world, and our brave guys need to prevent him from doing this. Um, uh, the cliché is there, let's move on.
Characters. An antagonist about whom nothing is known from the beginning. He wasn't even given a name. Is it for the plot so we can see the twist at the end? Okay, but at least show some character development so that by the end of the movie, it's not just a blank slate. But no. The antagonist's assistant is Neil - we don't know anything about him either, which is also necessary for the final twist. “Evil Russky Andrew” – “evil Russky Andrew”, hailing from the secret military town of Stalsk-12 (it smelled like another nuclear suitcase, didn’t it?) – in comparison with all the other characters, perhaps looks more interesting, but still faded. Cat, the wife of the “evil Russian Andrew,” whose father is a high-ranking man in the UK, but, oh horror, the oligarch husband she has long disliked, blackmails her by taking her son and she can’t do anything, really? (Incidentally, we don’t even see much violence against his wife for the time being, given the fact that she was trying to kill him, and nothing, walks herself alive and unharmed.) Bottom line: there is not a single character that you want to sympathize with, because they are all spelled out slightly less than nothing.
Game of actors. There is absolutely nothing to say here because of the absolutely flat, faceless characters.
Inversion of time. Nolan is a big fan of playing with time, but here his idea works crookedly. I'll just write one moment. In the lab, he fires a gun and the inverted bullet returns to an empty store. What would have happened if there had been a bullet in the store? Will the gun shoot her and the inverted bullet stay in the wall? Or will the inverted bullet return to the store? Nagging? Yeah. But such questions arise throughout the film, where we are shown an inversion. For a fantastic concept to work, it must not violate its own laws. It happens all the time here. Well, either these laws are not spelled out and we just have to agree that Nolan is a genius and it should be.
Picture. Standard, just OK.
Music. Just fine.
The overall picture. What did I get when I put all the components together? Don't know. I can't even call it a movie. It’s like just a demo of Nolan’s idea of time inversion, for which I had to cast, sketch a plot and make it into chronometers in 2.5 hours. But all this together doesn’t work at all, you don’t care about everything that happens on the screen, you just don’t believe it. India, Oslo, Tallinn – all this is very “interesting”, some people for a couple of scenes, unknown where they came from, who are needed only to promote the plot and immediately disappear (Priya, Mahir), for example, at the click of a finger to steal a plane, and so on. Sumbur at the end with the storming of the base “evil Russky Andrew” in Siberia, fleeing special forces, firing at no one, doing something the main characters – generally do not care. The final twist doesn't matter. All this just doesn’t work as a whole piece, for me it’s a crooked thing.
Result. The film is an absolute waste of Nolan's genius. I don’t like to score on a numerical scale, so I’ll just say it’s weak. Or not even weakly. It's better to say "nothing."
Piercing through, apparently, inverted bullets plot, corroded all the advantages of the movie in the form of a beautiful frame, tense action scenes and beautiful music of Hans Zimmer.
Super-clichéd strong Russian men with muzzles of bulldogs from the city of Stalsk (what is this name?), drinking vodka and beating wives with plutonium at the head want to destroy the whole world. The plot for the Russophobic low-grade cinema of the end of the Cold War hails from the 90s. In an opera in the Russian military, even the uniform was Soviet-era, as if old Nolan had revised class B fighters about bad Russians, smacked a number of moments from there and did not even bother with historical inaccuracies. This is the real inversion of time where it went backwards!
In addition, completely illogical actions of the characters, a bunch of blunders in the narrative and “scientific” theory, completely undisclosed characters, ridiculous dialogues, inefficiencies and plot holes.
The most revealed character was the wife of the oligarch, all her dialogues with the protagonist are filled with family and household problems with her husband, the essence of which she spilled on him in the first 10 minutes of acquaintance, her motives and actions are now clear, unlike the main characters. A family drama with a cruel Russian is probably more important than the end of the world, explaining who the descendants are, why they decided to create such a pseudo-scientific adventure with the games of the past, explaining many plot holes and inefficiencies.
Separately, I would like to note the acting level infusoria shoes of younger Washington. Apparently, Nolan realized that in this case, the talent rests on children and decided not to even give the name of his hero.
The most ridiculous thing is not even the film, but that, according to Nolan, he wrote the script for 20 years. And then it is not at all clear how the man who directed the iconic Batman and Inception trilogy could create such a thing. Apparently, the plot of “The Argument” was written in reverse entropy from logic, talent and the desire to make a coherent narrative.
The beginning of the liberation of Ukrainians from Russian terrorists. Nolan directly reversed the trends.
The main characters are agents of the CIA and British intelligence, trying to figure out what is happening. If we were to turn to determinism, but no. Free will remains. Although, they immediately say through the lips of a scientist: "Don't try to understand, feel." Pseudo-science fiction. The word "inverted" will then be dreamed.
The spy-detective plot is densely diluted with a banal melodramatic component. The atmosphere is created by an epic musical accompaniment, this time by Ludwig Joransson. Even Travis Scott’s track “The Plan” was written with Joransson.
War with the terrible Russian mafia selling inverted bullets. Bullets coming back from the future. And that's just the beginning. For about an hour, the narrative is more or less clear, and then gradually the inverted game begins. And finally, something similar to science fiction associated with time travel.
The main plot feature is this inverted reality in the present from the future. You can live your time in reverse order. Accordingly, at such a time, the laws of physics in space work unconventionally.
In fact, it looks more like pseudo-scientific fiction, where they do not bother much about a coherent theory. Just accept and forgive. A kind of interpretation of Alice in the Looking Glass. I want to throw concepts and theories about the war of worlds and the paradox of the murdered grandfather, but without it everything is too vague.
So, the idea is interesting, but the science fiction base is weak. They suggest not to understand, but to accept. The idea with the paradoxes of time is fascinating because it has long been invented and sucked. The very themes of the meeting of parallel time currents and travelers are hum. The idea of an inverted world moving out of the future, contrary to paradoxes, is also a good thing. But the physics of the inverted world itself is questionable because it is selective. For example, why is earthly attraction and not repulsion? And those nine-part plot themes, of course, are closer to fantasy or, say, Marvel. Hence the fantastic pseudoscience. The base is there, but carelessness in detail makes everything look more like magic. It's not bad. Just reasoning.
But the action and dynamics are great. Although the plot, of course, is unnecessarily confusing and, frankly, even when watching it again, you do not catch the whole logic of what is happening. But it's nice to watch. That's the Nolan thing.
The vanilla finale, as expected, gives us some incomprehensible idea of faith. It's unclear because it's not clear what or why someone's faith is better. In fact, the main good characters are no better than the main bad ones. Everyone is ready for self-sacrifice, pursuing some global goals, sort of for the sake of the future, equally killed, killed and ready to kill a lot of people. Selfishness, one way or another, is also present in everyone. But Nolan showed that these guys are good, not talking about their bad side, but these Russian scoundrels, because that's obvious. In fact, nothing is clear even in the final. Everything is hidden in the future and even the ideas that have been conveyed to us in the present are not based on facts, but rather on rumors or not the most reliable information, according to the interested characters.
But the movie is worth seeing. A great example of a quality and original blockbuster.
The first time I didn’t understand anything, but I realized that I didn’t understand something important. A few months later, she made another attempt - with stops, going back, replaying scenes five times. And when it came to me. . . That's awesome. Nolan is a genius. This is incredible to think of, and to remove – at all! One of the best movies.
The publicized Argument, which came out at the most inopportune time and collected a very small cash register by budget standards, in fact turned out to be a dummy. Yes, beautiful, moderately interesting, but - empty. In fact, flirting with the timeline turned out to be the only feature of the project, without which the viewer would have to watch an average action movie with an average plot at the level of not the best parts of the Bond.
The technology of "temporary inversion" does not receive proper disclosure within the picture. In fact, the tape does not answer any question that can surface in the mind of the viewer during viewing. Just accept that such a thing exists in the world of "Argument", and how, why and why - well, that's all our authority. Think for yourself, and in general, we have bullets flying in the opposite direction!
I would like to praise the caste for its presence, but not for the game. Take Pattinson - a man has long outgrown the awkward and kringe vampire Edward from Twilight, but he has nothing to play here. Like all the other actors. This is especially true of D. D. Washington, who plays the role of the protagonist – a man without a name, without a past, and without a present. Faceless mannequin. From the actors as if sucked all his life, leaving on the set sterile empty shells.
But I swear, I swear, and the grade is still good. Why not? Because Argument is an ordinary summer blockbuster that is played with a space-time continuum. He is not the first, as they say, he is not the last. There’s nothing Nolan’s genius in the film, but that doesn’t automatically make it bad. This is just a good project, which stands out from competitors due to its concept. No more, no less.
Christopher Nolan’s new film, which turns the whole idea of the plot, its presentation and how we perceive films – Argument. At first he showed the plot in the opposite direction (Memento), then the world was presented with a Dark Knight who could well live among us with a stunning antagonist, then games with dreams (Inception), space with time and gravity (Interstellar), and now we see the reverse and direct flow of time in one frame. I don’t know how these ideas are born in his head, but the film in terms of the plot and the way it’s presented is absolutely amazing. On the one hand you break your brain every 5 minutes, and on the other hand you can not take your eyes off what is happening on the screen.
It’s one of those movies that you just have to watch three or four times exactly to catch all the loopholes and trivia, although I personally understood most of it. Acting here does not cause great excitement and does not manifest itself in full, because here because of the setting it is not very necessary. The music is dynamic, but not cutting the ear, and the shooting that was performed live deliver. Where did you see a real plane blow up instead of an animated one just because it was cheaper? Of the disadvantages, I can only highlight what was described above. Many people will not get into the plot because of the shaking, and someone will not want to think at all. After all, many go to the movies for this film because there is nothing else... so you can understand that after a long break they are given a puzzle, not a relaxation for the body.
9 out of 10
For an interestingly confusing plot, actors, music and effects. It's real art. Prepare for the fact that on this film you will not sleep and enjoy watching.
Two and a half hours of tension, flipping the edges of events, absolutely fascinating sound, complex reflections, guesses, meanings. And all this in the kaleidoscopes of beautiful landscapes and streets of beloved London, as well as truly beautiful technology.
The first thing I noticed, and what didn’t let go to the credits, was the sound. Deep, immersive and holding in the moment here and now, whatever happens, as does accent vacuum silence.
Entropy turned out to be not only an element of history, but also of perception of the picture, introducing the mind into disorder, chaos, dissipating attention on the plot lines, turning their parts back and returning them to their own circle, but with more knowledge of what is happening.
In the meantime, the inversion is weaved into reality with a red thread, it is infinitely pleasant to look at the dressed frames of urban moments of history in the exquisite cut of the “civil” costumes of the heroes.
Any worthwhile charade begins with a word, and here is a separate love of the find in Russian translation, both names contain the same technique: both “tenet” and “argument” read the same and in reverse order. What, if not the reception itself, can better describe this story? I wonder how the idea is played at the box office in other countries?
The work is worth revisiting to see history from the future, anticipating events, trying to understand every twist, every sign and every hero as much as possible.
I liked the camera work, the sound and the setting of the frame.
Everything else is bad. Nolan has been hatching the plot idea for years, but it looks like he wrote the script based on a strange dream.
Fiction came out unscientific and uninteresting. In the scenario, primitive and flat characters, poorly written dialogues, pretentious presentation. The plot is confusing, difficult and boring to watch. The story is raw, not brought to mind.
Another failure is the casting. The younger Washington does not play a major role at all. He's just a weak and unprepared actor, with a minimal technical arsenal. Lisa Debicki impresses with her 190 centimeters of height, but the improbability of her character’s motivation and complete lack of harmony with the character of Washington kill everything she depicts in the frame.
Pattinson’s episodes bring the film to life (it should be his), but these episodes, for the most part, drown incoherently in a meaningless storyline. Kenneth Branagh is good, but he's not allowed to turn around. There is an episodic flash with the great Michael Kane, but he remains a “guest celebrity”.
I respect and appreciate Nolan. This movie is a mistake, unfortunately.
It's too complicated. It's too long. Despite the fact that the film is quite long, longer than the average, there is no time in the film to explain what is happening. You’ve been trying to figure out what’s going on on the screen. The film is clearly not a one-time viewing (for those interested and wanting to understand) and then it is impossible to understand until the end, because in the end there are questions to which there is no answer, as if this is a series, and not a finished film.
Very tired. It would seem that such attention to the details of time, costumes, some time delay should bring historical authenticity to the film. But that's not happening. It's just boring. Perhaps it is the secondary nature of the story. What is the Scottish struggle for independence? They've been fighting for it for 800 years and they're not working. I guess I didn’t really want to.
The film proves one undeniably historical fact. If they didn’t get it, they didn’t really want it, including those who filmed it. It's like when you've been thinking about something for a long time, in the end you just have to tick.
If Mel Gibson’s film has some tragic determination that you feel from the first frame to the last, then everything is very correct.
The authors seem to be afraid of sudden movements. And we end up with a soap opera on a historical theme.
Very dull acting work, it is difficult to remember the characters, no characters, brightness, charisma.
Perhaps in the format of the series, this film would be more interesting, but there is only a feeling of fatigue and boredom. Nolan invites us to imagine that the past was so slow and awkward. But that's just his idea.
A new film from the talented director and screenwriter Christopher Nolen. Admittedly long decided to watch this film because of the time loops. I’ve always been skeptical about time travel, and it’s always broken my mind. But this film surprised me, and it's very complex and intricate, as are all movies about time.
The plot is quite complex and incomprehensible, the characters are trying to save the world from complete destruction, which will soon occur, but at the same time it already seemed to be. The explosion of a nuclear bomb, which will destroy the past, leave the present or simply remove all people from the Earth in all temporal realities, is the main goal of the villain. Honestly, I may not be smart enough to understand the plot completely, but after watching a lot of questions, especially at the end of the film, when you do not understand the past, the present or even the third dimension.
I want to say that everything related to time is either cyclical or the change has passed brings new problems. In this world, the first option is cyclicity. Heroes save the world, but at the same time do so that would save the world once again in the past and so it will be forever, as part of life’s path.
In general, the film is not for one view, especially if you want to delve into this complex and brilliant plot.
8 out of 10
Since when did complicated movies become considered bad? Maybe you're casual.
The essence of my message:
39 If you encourage simpler films and denounce complex concepts, you are promoting script degradation. '
I was not lazy, I watched the film twice, and in my opinion, it is not in the dialogue of the film, but rather the reason why the film did not go to many, is Nolan’s pedantic attitude to the reliability of physical properties and scientific theories. I sincerely believe that it is, because of my friends who did not like the film, half said something like ' Yes, everything was clear', ' The film is bad not because it is difficult, but because it is long and drawn-out' and then they watched the explanations, said how complicated and grandiosely complex the film is, how unique in its concept, this film has a strong threshold of entry, and those who really understood it, I am sure, understand that in fact, it lasts only as long and is sure that they got a great pleasure.
Although I want to say that the first time it is simply impossible in my opinion, but for this I liked ' Beginning ' from the same director. Most importantly, not everyone knows what the movie is about. It is not so much to push the plot or idea, just they are quite simple and on a platter, but about the quintessence of scientifically confusing properties about such a thing as time.
In general, I believe that this film is just completely science fiction, and from the category of those in which scientists are inspired in the future and come up with inventions of the future. Science fiction wrapped in a blockbuster wrapper. And if you understand the causes and consequences of the film, you will just find out how colossal and confusing the work, and how competent the author of the film from a scientific point of view vision. Hence the conclusion.
If you encourage simpler films and denounce complex concepts, don’t be surprised by the scenario degradation. It is likely that now it is difficult for you, in 100 years for people will be a school problem.
You guys think everybody should think about it, you're judging the movie for being complicated. Are you surprised that the movie made you feel stupid?
It's like the casuals who didn't love the same 'Dark souls' (the famous complex series of games), to her god. It is clear that the film, like 'DS' you can not love for the setting is not suitable for you personally, and for the genre that you do not like, and for the complexity including, but it turns out taste and not an objective point of view, and this does not mean that the product is of poor quality, it means that the product is for another target audience.
You all know what madness is, right? Repeat the same action over and over again, hoping for some change. It is this concept that follows Christopher Nolan’s latest film “The Argument”, which, moreover, collects a considerable amount of cranberries and stamps along the way. As in any self-respecting blockbuster, there is a Russian villain trying to destroy the world (let’s call him Rushn Bad Guy). The bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bearing in the face of Rusher-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-bell-be Pattison and Washington are actually fighting themselves. And, of course, the poor wife of an oligarch who is forcibly married. And finally, having suffered from trading with his conscience, he decides to resist RASHN BED GAYU.
The film and the characters develop right up to the middle of the picture. We are confronted with this very madness of Christopher. Repeating the same moments that are being presented to us from a different angle, lifting the veil of “unknown puppets & #39; opposing our heroes, explaining what “argument” is and how it works. But all these twists are as predictable as possible and cause more laughter than surprise. From watching the picture, I have a clear feeling that Christopher just played with his favorite toy. Nolan really wanted to show us his time loop skills and elevate himself to the scripted Olympus. However, time played a cruel joke with a talented director. He decided not to open the instructions, having mastered only 10 percent of the possibilities of using temporal worlds. Christopher wanted so much to do something brilliant that he got entangled in these loops, making them as simple and uninteresting as possible. What he showed us in Interstellar was a very appetizing seed. And I took with great appetite to view this picture, but, unfortunately, I did not see even a small fraction of those developments that were made in the space odyssey with McConaughey.
If you leave the time loops and pay attention to other aspects of the film, it is a classic Christopher with interesting and unusual action scenes, really high-quality filling of the frame and a good selection of artists. However, from all this material extremely knocked out scenes with the plane. They are so slow, heavy and uninteresting in the background of everything else going on in the film that they only cause a feeling of extreme longing. If in The Dark Knight the exquisite combination of the huge explosion of the hospital harmonizes with the beautiful play of Heath Ledger and excites your imagination, leading to ecstasy of the visual organs, then here the barely rolling plane seems more like an old man from a nursing home, barely dragging his feet on a walk. Yes, it was certainly a great marketing ploy that Nolan doesn't use graphics and buys an entire Boeing. But damn it, Christopher, you'd better just learn to draw a light on top of an airplane.
As strange as it may sound, Christopher ruined a pretty good movie by trying to stay true to himself. The use of loops, which Nolan actively tried to promote in previous films and the minimum amount of graphics, this time played a cruel joke with one of the most spectacular directors of our time. And instead of seeing a beautiful, colorful and intelligent blockbuster, we got a pretty mediocre movie.
5 out of 10
Which for Christopher is a real failure. We hope for rehabilitation in the next picture.
Nolan obviously overdid, I understood the film, but trying to understand the concept of the behavior of time-inverted people or complex mechanisms, as well as their interaction with non-inverted on the example of one bullet, in the beginning - the brain broke, and I love what you can think about, but then it seems that the authors themselves have not thought through everything and certainly not tried to explain, so all the intricacies of the plot do not look as they should, according to the idea - "wow", but just how the hell did it happen?
Christopher Nolan continues with the help of cinema to demonstrate scientific experiments and better than other popular science works to promote physics to the masses, withstanding a fairly high bar of examples and used terminology. The director is especially concerned about time: he slows it down, then accelerates, then parallels. Now we have reached the likeness of time travel.
One declassified American spy has to be urgently rescued by another, for helping a colleague, he had to pay for hours of torture with pulling teeth, which he managed to finish only with the help of a magic pill. However, after it, the main character woke up not in the world as he expected, but still on this side of life and immediately with a new task. Save humanity. From whom and from what is unknown, because the catastrophe has not yet occurred: it is waiting in the future. And the future sends little premisses into the present: objects with reverse entropy and backward movement in time. The main character needs to find both their addressee and their addressee.
The director continues not only experiments with time, but also with the usual blockbuster genres that gather a large audience: robbery, science fiction, superhero comics. Now the spy thriller is being rethought, and it is fitting to become a special world order of the picture in two directions at once: comic and innovative. In a comical vein, the very image of a spy is presented, who to pieces the corresponding checklist: expensive suits are extravagance, flirtation is the most unsuccessful type of weapon in his hands and priceless “jokes for 300” in the most inappropriate circumstances. Innovative moves are very breakthrough and head above specialists in the genre field: the main character, with all his professionalism of the soldier, remains vulnerable physically and emotionally, few female images, including a scientist and a businessman, have never been objectified, the importance of coordinated teamwork is emphasized. Everything else: shootings, chases, saving the world is in place, but multiplied by two: direct and after inversion.
The cast as far as he is generally given a bottleneck for maneuvering acting is quite successful: John David Washington obviously stands out against the background of the pale cast and adds breakthrough to the picture, especially with a genre approach, Elizabeth Debicki is a distilled aristocrat from and to, Kenneth Branagh speaks with a chic Russian accent and looks much more impressive in the role of an abusive bearded Russian billionaire compared to a parody Belgian detective with dashing mustaches. But special attention certainly deserves Robert Pattinson, who plays the role of a charming crook, much on dashing plans. Here he is not just some kind of handsome or cute, but a charismatic professional in his field and a reliable friend - such a role suits him very well.
The adventures of this team are very dashing, the viewer is generally fraught with distraction even for a couple of moments from the screen and it is better to blink less so as not to miss anything. This is due not only to the rapidly developing plot, where screen time is used with maximum benefit: the characters are already somewhere, while discussing the details of the work. But no less – with the complex mechanics of the internal structure of the picture. No matter how many years Christopher Nolan has spent working out the script, any number may seem insufficient to work out the numerous details and lines woven into a bizarre pattern. There is beauty in this, akin to the beauty of a mathematical equation. But not everyone can really enjoy it. But not because it is so difficult, and with the expectation of the mass audience, you need to do “what is simpler”. And due to the fact that in close observation of the plot and perception of the intricately arranged physics of the film, it becomes almost impossible to see its lyrics, which would balance the entire technological nature of its presentation. Only one phrase, which is only clearly repeated 5-6 times throughout the film, can shed at least some philosophical grain. What is so attractive stories about games with time and the ability to maneuver between its different layers? The ability to prevent mistakes, which is much better than eliminating their consequences. However, this approach reduces the value of actions and reduces the responsibility of those who do them. What about a brief reflection and thoughtful action based on the predicted results, and in private and public life, so that the grandson does not come for his grandfather?
Recommended: After an advanced physics course.
Dangerous: even a single viewing is fraught with boiling brains.