Tenet

Josh
3 min readDec 4, 2021

--

Tempting to say “Inception done right”, if that’s fair. Your tolerance may vary based on how able you are to keep up with the near-incessant rattling off of plot details in low voices — which comes to an apparently intentional breaking point in the finale — but if all else fails it’ll definitely support a rewatch. John David Washington and Robert Pattinson are up to the challenge of keeping it ticking over, both with a sort of pleasant, easy charisma, and they’re aided by a relentless, frenetic pace to the action for the bulk of the film.

Inception is increasingly hamstrung as it goes along by Nolan’s bloody-minded refusal to approach camp or psychedelia in his film entirely about dream-worlds. Which is not to say he refuses to get silly with it, just that what Dark Knight Rises does for “some days you just can’t get rid of a bomb”, Inception does for all of dreams. The world of Tenet, pegged as it is to the world of James Bond spy thrillers, is a much better match for Nolan’s pared-down aesthetic.

The video-game overtones of Inception make a reappearance here too, with the first pass through the tax haven vault following impeccable video game logic, up to the dispensing of a dual boss fight against a mysterious opponent. The motif makes a slightly less successful appearance at the climax of the film, where we’re forced to wait at a locked grille while the villain monologues over a PA.

The film’s commitment to the forwards/backwards theme is complete, with Branagh’s villain beginning the film attempting to have the protagonist killed, progressing from there to being deceived into having him to dinner, and departing the film as the image of the consummate family man (billionaire). Are we meant to think that his silver suicide pill is identical to the one that does not kill the protagonist at the start of the film? In that case, it’s only the presence of Debicki’s vengeful wife which allows him to be killed at all.

The most significant complaint I’d level is that the final action sequence is both a little confused — a showcase for forward/backward thinking that doesn’t quite linger long enough on the logic of any given part, and centred around the progress of protagonists who are difficult to pick out under their military gear. I assume it all makes sense in retrospect, but it lacks the finely tuned amping up that characterises the earlier action sequences — drip feeding a logical progression of increase in scope as we move from backwards bullets to backwards guns to backwards people to backwards plans.

It’s all very (brace for it) Steven Moffat, and one wonders about the link there — not least the extremely Doctor Who finale for Pattinson’s character. Who and Bond have a long history of mixing and matching that’s too interesting to explain here but it’s absolutely a sensible leap for someone making a sci-fi Bond. And of course they do little else the whole film long than reversing the polarity of things.

The costuming is pristine at every point, as you might hope. Special mention as well to the perfectly scored stamp on a cello in the opening sequence. It would have been nice to see this in a cinema — hopefully the opportunity will present itself at some point in a post-COVID world.

--

--

No responses yet