Action-Adventure TENET

[Blade Hoarder]

Major no to Nolan doing Bond. Nolan lacks the two things that make Bond movies sing. Good characterization and sensuality.

 

[shauner111]

I’m down for a one-off Bond from him. Let him make his next original movie, horror genre while we all take a break from Bond post-No Time To Die. Then Nolan gets some say in the casting of the next Bond and makes that film...hands it off to the next director.

But I did hear they want Fukunaga to return, so we’ll see.

At this point I just want to see Tenet again in a week or two!

 

[Filmfan93]

Agreed.

-He's used up his "Q" references with Lucius Fox
-He's used up the gadget angle.
-The femme fatale many times(cotillard twice and now Debicki).
-Exotic locations
-Big set pieces

What else is left to motivate him to make a Bond movie?

Yep.

All of the above are are good examples on why Nolan would be perfect for a Bond film.

And especially in Tenet, the characters possess that "coldness" that Craig's Bond had as well.

 

[BatLobster]

So gorgeous. I cannot wait for the 4k.

 

[Micromind]

 

[shauner111]

So gorgeous. I cannot wait for the 4k.

OH my god.

 

[Doctor Jones]

Nolan has aped Bond so many times at this point it would be redundant for him to make an actual Bond film. Tenet was his answer to the spy genre and it was spilling over with his style and sensibilities (arguably too much). It would be limiting in a way for him as an artist to be tied down to a franchise at this stage in his career.

This is true. What's the point of going to the source when you've already referenced it yourself a lot? Plus I don't know if Nolan can handle the sexuality.

 

[BatLobster]

This is true. What's the point of going to the source when you've already referenced it yourself a lot? Plus I don't know if Nolan can handle the sexuality.

I think the stars would have to align in a certain way for it to ever make sense. Like in 2005, when Nolan took over Batman and stripped down all the heavily stylized elements of the series and brought it down to Earth...that was exactly what was needed at the time.

The problem with Bond is...that already happened with Casino Royale, right around the same time of Begins. I think the Bond series would have to become pretty stale again for people to really crave the Nolan treatment. And Nolan would have to somehow figure out a way to justify not just doing something new for the franchise, but new and groundbreaking for his own career with it-- based on the way he's always operated from project to project. And this being AFTER he made a giant spy epic that turned the concept of linear time on its head.

It seems like a pretty tall order, but I guess you can never say never. A few years back when he was on the the Happy Sad Confused podcast, Horowitz asked him point blank if he had a specific take in mind for Bond, and Nolan was basically like "OF COURSE!", but obviously played extremely coy. It's definitely sounds like something he's put some serious thought into at least. He also said that he doesn't really think the franchise needs him and is doing just fine.

I go back and forth on it. We've had the gritty reboot of Bond. With No Time to Die we're even going to get the first Zimmer-scored Bond. It feels like it's been Nolanized in a lot of ways without him ever touching it. And I have a hard time imagining what he could bring to it that could check all of these boxes. Then again, I couldn't imagine Batman Begins before I saw it either. It would have to be that level of fresh and different.

The only possible cool thing I can think of for Nolan with Bond at the moment, is it would love to see him tackle a period piece that took place in the 60s or 70s. I've really enjoyed how he tackles period both in The Prestige and Dunkirk. The naturalistic, non-stylized approach really works for me and gives it a sense of immediacy that feels more authentic somehow. I think he could potentially have a field day going back to the classic era of Bond, but through a modern lens. It'd just be a question of what story do you tell with that that isn't nostalgia for nostalgia's sake.

 

[Doctor Jones]

I think the stars would have to align in a certain way for it to ever make sense. Like in 2005, when Nolan took over Batman and stripped down all the heavily stylized elements of the series and brought it down to Earth...that was exactly what was needed at the time.

The problem with Bond is...that already happened with Casino Royale, right around the same time of Begins. I think the Bond series would have to become pretty stale again for people to really crave the Nolan treatment. And Nolan would have to somehow figure out a way to justify not just doing something new for the franchise, but new and groundbreaking for his own career with it-- based on the way he's always operated from project to project. And this being AFTER he made a giant spy epic that turned the concept of linear time on its head.

It seems like a pretty tall order, but I guess you can never say never. A few years back when he was on the the Happy Sad Confused podcast, Horowitz asked him point blank if he had a specific take in mind for Bond, and Nolan was basically like "OF COURSE!", but obviously played extremely coy. It's definitely sounds like something he's put some serious thought into at least. He also said that he doesn't really think the franchise needs him and is doing just fine.

I go back and forth on it. We've had the gritty reboot of Bond. With No Time to Die we're even going to get the first Zimmer-scored Bond. It feels like it's been Nolanized in a lot of ways without him ever touching it. And I have a hard time imagining what he could bring to it that could check all of these boxes. Then again, I couldn't imagine Batman Begins before I saw it either. It would have to be that level of fresh and different.

The only possible cool thing I can think of for Nolan with Bond at the moment, is it would love to see him tackle a period piece that took place in the 60s or 70s. I've really enjoyed how he tackles period both in The Prestige and Dunkirk. The naturalistic, non-stylized approach really works for me and gives it a sense of immediacy that feels more authentic somehow. I think he could potentially have a field day going back to the classic era of Bond, but through a modern lens. It'd just be a question of what story do you tell with that that isn't nostalgia for nostalgia's sake.

This is all pretty true.

I only disagree with a period Bond film. He should be contemporary, per what Fleming says and that's a major reason how he's endured. What makes Bond last is the fact he himself is a relic in a changing modern world.

 

[BatLobster]

This is all pretty true.

I only disagree with a period Bond film. He should be contemporary, per what Fleming says and that's a major reason how he's endured. What makes Bond last is the fact he himself is a relic in a changing modern world.

Very, very fair point. Maybe Nolan can really lean into the "man out of time" element and do a gritty Austin Powers reboot instead.

Tom Hardy in a double role as Austin and Dr. Evil. Let's GO.

 

[Schlosser85]

Very, very fair point. Maybe Nolan can really lean into the "man out of time" element do a gritty Austin Powers reboot instead.

Tom Hardy in a double role as Austin and Dr. Evil. Let's GO.

 

[Prison Mike]

I just realized that Tenet is probably going to land on HBOMAX right? I wonder if that will piss off Nolan...

 

[BatLobster]

I forgot to add that Michael Caine will reprise his role as Nigel Powers in this reboot, obviously.

 

[kguillou]

Just watched the Prologue on Youtube and gotDAMN thats a Hell of a way to open the movie. Ugh, I feel like Im not gonna like this movie at all from what you guys are saying but that prologue got me amped.

 

[BatLobster]

Just watched the Prologue on Youtube and gotDAMN thats a Hell of a way to open the movie. Ugh, I feel like Im not gonna like this movie at all from what you guys are saying but that prologue got me amped.

Honestly, if you liked the prologue I think you're in for a great ride. That's the tone and style of the movie, and it only gets crazier, especially in the second half.

 

[OutOfBoose]

Watched the UHD. Decided to give the movie another chance in English. Had to use subtitles and pause button a lot to keep up with what's going on. I liked it better this time. Nobody films it like Nolan. Still, I'm mostly impressed with technical side and ambition. The good guys cast is likable and JDW is excellent in action scenes.

The bad stuff didn't change for me. Exposition-driven, thin and frequently generic plot. Outside Debicki, I didn't care for any of the characters. One-dimensional villain with bad fake Russian accent was more annoying that I expected, since I watched the movie initially in Russian dub, so he didn't have any accent. So, in the end, this movie is one of the weakest of Nolan. He needs to get back to good character-driven stories. Enough with these editing experiments.

 

[Filmfan93]

Looks like Christmas came in early.

These bad boys just arrived:

 

[Persona]

Just watched the Prologue on Youtube and gotDAMN thats a Hell of a way to open the movie. Ugh, I feel like Im not gonna like this movie at all from what you guys are saying but that prologue got me amped.

I do like the prologue. If the rest of the film had been more like that visual storytelling and less relentless exposition that you are straining to follow, it would have been much stronger for that. Instead, the longer the film goes on, the more disconnected you become from it. Probably the only Nolan film that's felt hollow to me, and its narrative is kind of excruciating. It's an impressively awkward flick.

 

[Prison Mike]

I preordered the movie on Amazon Prime. Looking forward to watching this finally.

 

[kguillou]

I do like the prologue. If the rest of the film had been more like that visual storytelling and less relentless exposition that you are straining to follow, it would have been much stronger for that. Instead, the longer the film goes on, the more disconnected you become from it. Probably the only Nolan film that's felt hollow to me, and its narrative is kind of excruciating. It's an impressively awkward flick.

Sigh. And thats what I was afraid if. That was my issue with Inception, so much damn talking and exposition and explaining of the premise, it just gave me a migraine each time i watched it. I prefer gf showing not telling.

 

[Blade Hoarder]

If you hated the exposition of inception you will hate this one even more. This one adds confusing spy and tech jargon that’s even more confusing than Inception’s dream world rules and frankly uninteresting.

 

[Stringer]

I do like the prologue. If the rest of the film had been more like that visual storytelling and less relentless exposition that you are straining to follow, it would have been much stronger for that. Instead, the longer the film goes on, the more disconnected you become from it. Probably the only Nolan film that's felt hollow to me, and its narrative is kind of excruciating. It's an impressively awkward flick.

This is true. There's the prologue, Neil staking out Freeport and a sadly quick scene when JDW first becomes inverted feeling out the world that do some great visual storytelling. Nolan should have relied on that more especially since this is one of his better/cleanest looking films.

 

[Blade Hoarder]

And no effort is made to make the exposition seem good. It’s just witless, wall to wall jargon. Like a boring lecture being aired through Zoom with a crappy sound setup. Can’t blame people for checking out. It’s anti-cinema.

 

[kguillou]

Thanks for the heads up @Blade Hoarder, I will probably skip this then. I'll likely watch it someday inevitably, but I'm just not in the mood for Inception on steroids. Shame, that prologue is DAMN good.

 

[flickchick85]

That's a shame. I think anyone who skips this is missing out on some damn good stuff (and the exposition wasn't nearly as bad as Inception, imo). But to each their own.