“Tenet” Review

I saw Tenet a few months ago in theaters. Going there, sitting in an enclosed space with more people than I felt comfortable with, and breathing heavily through my mask was arguably more intense than the movie itself. I didn’t review the movie back then because, well…I could barely understand it. A few people have had issues with Nolan’s sound mixing in the past, whether it was too loud, the voices too muted, etc. I for one have never had a problem with hearing any of his films. So when I heard people complaining about how they couldn’t understand a lot of the dialogue in Tenet, I figured it wouldn’t be an issue for me because my masterfully trained ear would help me decipher everything absolutely perfectly.

NOOOPE.

This was by far the most frustrating movie experience I’ve had with a Nolan film. I could barely hear 50% of the dialogue. Seeing as how the film was so exposition-heavy, I was basically going into each new scene playing catch-up, and I couldn’t keep up minutes after the film’s start.

I had a chance earlier this week to watch it on Blu-Ray, with subtitles (Hallelujah!). It felt like watching the movie for the first time. Now I can finally offer my thoughts on it. Here’s my first thought: Nolan, fix your damn audio mixing!!!

Tenet is somewhat of a mixed bag for me. At its best, it’s got some of the most jaw-dropping CGI-less action scenes and stunts that you’ve ever seen in a movie. The gorgeous 70mm film captures the paradoxical nature of how everything feels and looks so real, yet what the camera is showing you seems to be so otherworldly and fantastical.

At its worst however, Tenet tries to tell a story that keeps the viewer struggling to keep up. It’s a film that demands numerous rewatches, and multiple YouTube videos explaining the plot. It makes Inception seem like a elementary school project in terms of its depth and scope, and that’s not really a good thing. It’s also got a bit of a cold, emotionless core that left me wanting more.

Now, when I first read criticisms about this movie being cold and heartless, I just thought to myself, “it’s those Nolan haters at it again, criticizing a SPY ESPIONAGE film to not have enough jokes and one-liners. It’s not Marvel-y enough for them.” I stand by those comments. People who say that the film is cold in that sense just give a flat-out bad take. Why does there need to be joy in a thriller like Tenet?

The part about this film being cold and heartless that I actually DID agree with, was that of its main female character. Obviously no spoilers, but a lot of the film’s narrative revolves around Elizabeth Debicki’s character, and her relationship with her abusive husband. Because so much of the film is centered around her plight and how our hero, the Protagonist (I still think that’s a dumb name) played by John David Washington, tries to save her, you expect to feel a certain emotional pull towards both those characters. In the two times I’ve watched it, I haven’t felt that pull yet. They don’t have a lot of moments that flesh out their characters, and I think it causes the central gravity of the story to kind of miss its mark.

I really have to applaud Nolan’s mind though, because the stuff he thinks of are incredibly imaginative. The whole concept of inversion and how he shows it unraveling into crazier levels just never ceases to amaze. I don’t know how much longer movie studios will just continue to throw endless amounts of money at Nolan, so I do hope that he makes the most of it. However this one definitely left me more confused than I wanted to, and a part of that is just the way that the film paces itself. It’s almost like Nolan assumed you completely understood everything he was trying to teach you the moment he shows you, because that’s kind of how JDW’s character is. Sometimes he’s confused and asks for clarification, and the characters kind of just brush him off and he adjusts to it. I was even more lost at times, but was too wrapped up in the spectacle to pause and wonder.

I think after viewing this film twice, this is my least favorite Nolan film. That’s not saying I didn’t enjoy it, because that is definitely not the case. Most of his movies I think are of an A or A+ caliber, but this one has a bit more missteps than the grand leaps I’m accustomed to. With that being said, I think it was important for me to point out some of the flaws in his directing style. The audio mixing was definitely my biggest gripe, and I hope that he tones it down for his next film. Even though I had some problems with the emotional resonance of the film along with some of its concepts, I cannot get over how amazing the set pieces are, how brilliant Nolan is in being able to film something so conceptually complex, and how persistent he is on giving a reason for the theatrical experience to exist. This was definitely a film that deserved to be seen on the biggest screen, because in my mind very few directors do spectacle the way Nolan does. I just wish I could have understood more of it at the time.

Grade: B+/83

“Mank” Review

David Fincher’s last film was in 2014. It feels like an eternity since Gone Girl. He’s one of the directors that I’ll watch no matter what he makes, but with that being said, I actually had no idea he’d make a film like Mank.

Based on the screenplay written by his late father, Jack Fincher, Mank tells the story of Herman J. Mankiewicz, a screenwriter who eventually pens the screenplay for the critically acclaimed film Citizen Kane. I rewatched CK right before I saw Mank, and for those who are interested in seeing the film, I’d recommend watching both. Citizen Kane is an informative primer for the events that unfold in Mank, even if at the core of the film, it’s less about the making of the screenplay than it is about the life of Mankiewicz.

This is easily Fincher’s least Fincher-y film, so temper your expectations if that’s what you were hoping for. It’s very much a straightforward drama without any of Fincher’s signature thrills. The dialogue is almost Aaron Sorkin-esque, but somehow at an even faster pace. I’d say the biggest fault of this film is that it’s not very accessible to the general public, because a lot of names get dropped and if you don’t have knowledge of the historical context, a lot of it flies over your head. It’s kind of hard to keep up with the characters sometimes, as a bunch of them get introduced very quickly and without a lot of background, so there’s an assumption there that you know the majority of them.

Regardless, it’s a very well acted film. Gary Oldman is of course, simply magnetic and charismatic. He knows how to play the alcoholic character of Mankiewicz without hamming it up too much, but with just the right amount of degeneracy. Amanda Seyfried is also fantastic in her supporting role, which is surprising because I feel like I haven’t seen her in anything in a long time.

This film delves heavily into the history of Mankiewicz’s political beliefs and the beliefs of those above him. I was surprised at how much of the film was centered around the events of the election between Upton Sinclair and Frank Merriam.

I don’t think this film is for everyone. I didn’t really have much of an interest in the political back-and-forths in this film, but I was still able to enjoy Gary Oldman’s portrayal of a man who wrestles between what he believes in and his expression of it in the medium of screenwriting. It’s a compelling drama that offers a little something for everyone, and the film itself is a beautifully crafted period piece that looks more authentic than it has any right to be. If you have an interest in 1930s Hollywood, I would say that this film is absolutely for you. Whether or not it’s completely accurate, as is the issue with these kinds of films, it’s still well acted and well written enough to stand on its own.

Grade: B/79

“Fantasy Island” Review

I FINALLY DID IT.

At the beginning of this year I made a resolution to watch more bad movies in hopes of lending a more sympathetic ear and eye to films that are “misunderstood.” After a botched attempt of watching 1 bad movie per month due to the pandemic, I finally saw all the movies I set out to watch prior to most films getting delayed. I am a man of my word, and after seeing Fantasy Island, I truly wish I wasn’t.

I’m just gonna go straight into it: this movie is garbage. Hot garbage. It’s one of the worst movies I’ve ever seen, and it doesn’t deserve anyone’s attention. The whole premise seems simple at first: fortunate winners of a contest arrive in Fantasy Island, a place where all your dreams come true. The only catch is that some fantasies play out in ways you don’t expect it to, but you have to see it through. What happens next is a true exercise in mental gymnastics, as the 2 hour film takes you on a painful, nonsensical ride.

This film tries to throw as many twists at you as it possibly can, and then spends way too much time explaining the twists to you like you’re a child and don’t understand anything. At the end of the film, I was so exhausted from seeing how many times the writers threw in a Oh, what if we did this? to the overall narrative.

Everyone in this movie puts on a terrible performance, with the one exception of Maggie Q. Poor Maggie. She did everything she could to salvage this dumpster fire of a film. She really seems to be trying her best, while everyone else just tries to give a convincing argument as to why they should never get another acting job. It’s unfortunate because I know it’s not their fault, but more so the writer and director. Well…okay, it’s probably a bit of their fault too.

I won’t waste any more time writing about this movie. It’s a waste of everyone’s time, including Blumhouse for producing it. The biggest thing that hurts about these kinds of films is the thought in the back of your head that the money gone towards making this movie could have went to something else. Hindsight is always 20/20, but this film had to have a hopeless outlook from the start. Blumhouse is generally a pretty good production company, so I’m quite disappointed in them.

If this movie has taught me anything, it’s that I don’t know if I can tolerate actively seeking out poorly rated films anymore. I don’t know how much more my feeble heart can handle.

Grade: D-/45

“First Cow” Review

Anyone who’s read a few reviews from my blog will know that I absolutely love the movie distribution studio, A24. I think they really have an eye for finding bright independent voices in film, and showcase a lot of hidden talent that might not have gotten a chance on bigger movie/streaming platforms. With that being said, First Cow has gotten a lot of recognition in the awards circuit this year, possibly due to the fact that there hasn’t been much to go up against, but also because it’s quite good. While I did enjoy this film, it wasn’t as emotionally resonant as I had hoped.

I’ve never seen of Kelly Reichardt’s films, but I like what I saw. Her ability to make a film with an incredibly simple premise compelling for most of its runtime shows that you don’t need an elaborate narrative or conceptual hook to get audiences interested. A simple friendship is sufficient to get someone like me interested in the story, and that’s precisely what this film is about. The friendship between two nomadic souls, “Cookie” Figowitz and King Lu (played by John Magaro and Orion Lee) is both unexpected and delightful. The overall feel of this film is just plain pleasant and whimsical, until a late turn in the final act. Obviously I won’t spoil anything, but I really did enjoy all the performances. All the major cast members talked like they were trying to put you to sleep (in a good way, I swear) and it added to the overall aesthetic of the film.

I do think that the ending rushes itself a bit, but overall the film was paced pretty well. The friendship between Figowitz and Lu is the foundation that holds the movie together, and I think most people will find enjoyment in their unexpected partnership. I wanted a bit more out of what I got, but overall I still found the film to be quite enjoyable.

Grade: B/80