It is a pity that palindrome is not a palindrome. It would read emordnilap if you tried and your spellcheck will go berserk screaming murder.
This opening line has nothing to do with anything I am about to write but as you would discover the post has nothing to do with anything I might want to write. If all this sounds weird, it is.
I am reduced to reviewing reviews of prospective Hollywood blockbusters these days. So I might as well make the best of it. Christopher Nolan’s palindromic spectacle ‘Tenet’ has received diametrically opposite reviews in two respected newspaper reviews—in The New York Times by Jessica Kiang where the movie has been accorded “Critic’s Pick” honor and in The Guardian by Catherine Shoard where it has been called a palindromic dud. Get it? Dud? Palindrome? I am sure you do.
As sheer writing goes, both critics have written their diametrically opposite takes brilliantly. In fact, I tweeted to Jessica Kiang saying this and meaning it sincerely (I still do): “My compliments on an excellent review of 'Tenet'.
"Within the context of this self-created brand of brainiac entertainment, “Tenet” meets all expectations, except the expectation that it will exceed them."
Sharp.
The quoted line is from her review which I found striking.
And then this morning I tweeted this to Catherine Shoard about her particular line which I have quoted.
"And his affectations can be a welcome distraction. But he still just seems like some bloke who’s got drunk in Banana Republic’s scarf department."
Hilarious...hilarious.
I am a compulsive connoisseur of sharp writing irrespective of their substance and have a habit of complimenting people.
With that out of the way, I am struck by how so completely opposite the two reviews are. Nolan, whose last name should have been changed to Nolon just for this movie, might be confused if he reads both of them together which would be like watching this movie, I suppose.
I have not watched it but since I knew that it briefly features Dimple Kapadia as a Mumbai arms dealer I have watched the trailer. I am told you are not supposed to try and understand this genre of Nolan’s movies but just feel them because trying to understand them would elude them. Got it.
I could have guessed that since it is palindromic in its theme and about time-inversion, there would be scenes where what has already happened would cross what is about to happen, which are both the same thing in time-inversion. Or at least that’s what I think. So if you were Tenet, the letter n would be the point at which the time-inversion would collapse like wave function.
By employing such conundrumery (Not a word but coined here in honor of Nolon) the director apparently keeps up his reputation as a filmmaker who baffles the hell out of you.
At some point, I would like to watch the movie on big screen if that is possible any more and also check out Dimple Kapadia. My only apprehension is that I may start singing “Sagar kinare dil yeh pukare, Tu jo nahi to mera koi nahi hai”. Hindi movie aficionados will catch my drift.
As for just the sheer writing quality, both Jessica and Catherine do a superb job of conveying their points of view. Interestingly, I felt their points of view kind of converged in these two observations, the first by Jessica and the other by Catherine.
“Indeed, take away the time-bending gimmick, and “Tenet" is a series of timidly generic set pieces: heists, car chases, bomb disposals, more heists.”
“Some of this is weariness: for all Tenet’s technical ambition, the plot is rote and the furnishings tired. Eastern European heavies lumber about with pliers and meat-cleavers. Clocks literally tick. Synths groan deeply on the soundtrack.”