Is Christopher Nolan’s Tenet the masterpiece that some people misunderstand?

John David Washington in Principle Warner Bros./Warner Bros.

At one point during Christopher Nolan’s convoluted sci-fi contraption Principle, the conversation briefly veers from impenetrable temporal logistics—shop talk about this baffling spy film—to a few anecdotes about Robert Oppenheimer and the Manhattan Project. From the perspective of our current moment, it feels like an Easter egg sent back in time, like Nolan talking about his own future and teasing a titanic phenomenon that, in 2020, is still a speck on the horizon. Of course, the truth is that The Father of the Atomic Bomb weighed heavily on the filmmaker’s mind five years ago, with one project growing in his imagination (a la Oppie’s chemistry theory) as another emerged. One might even see his latest blockbuster—his magnum opus,Oppenheimerit was on the verge of Oscar glory — like a phoenix rising from the ashes of its sole failure.

Those failures, both commercial and creative, came with huge asterisks. Principle is the only film written and directed by Christopher Nolan that could be considered a box office disappointment, but there were some extenuating circumstances. The film was released early in the pandemic, hitting multiplexes in September 2020, months before vaccines made people more comfortable with the thought of returning to cinemas. Nolan’s insistence Principle play on the big screen – a decision that may have been influenced by his financial arrangement with Warner Bros. and his well-documented theater experience – was irresponsible for many reasons. Putting aside any moral implications (was this the director’s Oppenheimer moment, truly endangering the world with his vision?), there’s no argument that releasing the film during a global medical crisis was a move destined to backfire.

A man sees a bullet hole through the glass in Tenet.
Warner Bros.

Most of the world doesn’t see it Principle on the big screen. This weekend, more people will get the chance. Warner Bros. has arranged a mulligan of sorts: an IMAX re-release afterward Oppenheimersuccess. In more ways than one, this theatrical revival proved enlightening. Fans of this film will find it just as it should be. More than anything Nolan has ever made, Principle is spectacle for spectacle’s sake, an epic of surface pleasures, visual and sonic, calibrated for the canvas of a giant screen (though the home-available subtitles come in handy for a film that buries so much exposition beneath so much Dolby blasting). Meanwhile, those who aren’t convinced may gain a new perspective on the film – if not fresh admiration, perhaps a deeper understanding of its place in the vast film timeline of a Hollywood hitmaker.

Now, as before, Principle remains stubborn and even very difficult to understand. Some claim that it is actually very easy to follow. Their brains must be studied. The concept of “inversion” – reversing the relationship between cause and effect – is difficult to understand. And midway through, the film begins to bend over backwards in a way that poses a fundamental challenge to moment-by-moment understanding. This author will admit to getting lost when his own characters begin to move backwards in time. This is about as close to a $200 million movie as there is, and perhaps ever will be, with its labyrinthine logic Base.

Principles of 4K HDR IMAX | Reverse Fighting

Nolan’s critics have long accused his films of being bad less more complicated than everyone claims. Or at least less intelligent. “A stupid person’s idea of ​​a smart movie” is the most common term. The conceptual courage of Dunkirk and the wealth of original ideas within it Oppenheimer put a reverse bullet hole in that accusation, but hey, intelligent is as subjective as it gets Big. It’s harder to deny that Nolan’s films are structurally ambitious and at least pretend to be of greater existential importance than the average production of his budget and scale. Genius is in the eye of the beholder, but the aspiration of the brain is there.

In some ways, Principle is a gift to the anti-Nolan crowd. This is the film skeptics say he’s been making all along: a bombastic, emotionally distant popcorn entertainment that muddles pretzel logic with real complexity. Most of his films transcend the structural complexity of his designs in one way or another. Principle probably the closest he got to making that film only structurally complex, which revels in its palindromic architecture at the expense of everything else. It’s like an expensive illustration Oppenheimer that lesson is only because of you Can doing something doesn’t mean you should.

Two men look at each other in Tenet.
Warner Bros.

The film also, unexpectedly, won the hearts of some Nolan agnostics. It has been reclaimed by Michael Mann’s constituency, celebrated as primo Dudes Rock Movie. The suits, the gunfights, the existential conceit: That the film doesn’t “make sense” is, according to some fans’ logic, no obstacle to appreciating the real fun. After all, Nolan essentially gives you permission to go with the flow, even as he paradoxically devotes most of his creative energy to changing puzzle pieces. “Don’t try to understand, just feel,” someone tells John David Washington’s “Protagonist,” but it’s really the audience.

As a pure work with a big budget, Principle it mostly delivers, and especially on the big screen. This is an off-brand 007 film made by a James Bond enthusiast, from its media opening to its enduring appreciation of the high life. The action is fluid, muscular, and inventive, even if it feels derivative of the director’s IMAX-scale triumphs of the past (movie hallway battles). Birth, a big chunk of his Batman films). And there’s the pleasure of seeing Nolan throw a very clever sci-fi filter onto the conventions of spy and heist thrillers – although the best examples of both tend to attach themselves to less functional characters, to ciphers with more personality.

TENET | Trailer Re-Release

Sandwiched between an affecting survival drama nested in wartime Dunkirk and messy historical-psychological investigations Oppenheimer, Principle can’t help but feel like a palate cleanser and perhaps a flex. It’s Nolan taking a victory lap, indulging his parallel tastes for meandering storytelling and money-grubbing pyrotechnics. It’s easy to forget that it was once considered an inconsistent action orchestrator, given the spatial incoherence of Batman’s early fights. Principle was the reply, the shining evidence to the contrary. It’s a blockbuster that feels like a monument to its impressive construction, to the brain and brawn of the man who made it.

And perhaps it’s a relatively breezy summer movie that Nolan needs to get out of his system before he can dive into his heaviest, loudest, most thoughtful project. Fission before fusion, if you will. Not that these back-to-back films – one a box-office disappointment, the other a widely acclaimed cultural sensation – were complete disappointments. So different in the end. Beyond that one name check, seeds from Oppenheimer is it inside? Principlefocus on cause and effect (however reversed) and a man gets caught in a chain reaction of his own making. Following this filmmaker’s train of thought is a joy in our blockbuster age, especially in a darkened auditorium and even when you get lost along the way.

Principle now playing on select IMAX screens. For more of AA Dowd’s writing, visit his writings Authority page.

Editor’s Recommendations






Leave a Comment