Nolan's film returned not only viewers to cinemas, but also a review on the ShishKINO website. I will not wait for a second viewing, but I will describe the primary emotions as a keepsake. I have some fears that "Argument" is waiting for the fate of "Dunkirk" , which made incredible impressions in the cinema (or rather in IMAX), and left a feeling of emptiness in home viewing. I would be glad to be wrong, because now about Nolan's new painting I want to say: I have never seen this before, you have never seen such a thing before, NOBODY HAVE EVER SEEN THAT.
ABM "NO SOUL "
It's easier to start with the minuses, so that later you can coat the film with honey and delight. I don’t know how it sounds in the original, but in dubbing these are the dumbest dialogues in Nolan’s career. Someone calls them pretentious, but I would give a more precise definition - they are lifeless. As if they were written by a neural network, and not by a living person. Everything with them is so strange and bad that sometimes it causes sincere laughter. Mostly scenes with the main character and the villain's wife - this is where the face stretches into a grimace of " what the fuck" . In addition to the strange remarks, all this is also assembled in a very strange way, in some kind of broken rhythm, broken dynamics. However, there is a reason for all this - Nolan is more interested in the method of storytelling, and not the story itself. I'll talk about this later.
The second point worth mentioning is the absence of a “soul” and living people in history. Except for Neil (Pattinson's character), absolutely give a fuck. Especially the wife of the main villain is the weakest link in the picture. I want to immediately forget her remarks and actions, and throw out most of the scenes with her participation from the timing. Kenneth Branagh, they say, in the original sounds like a boch with his Russian accent, but in the dubbing everything is somehow past. A charismatic bastard, no doubt, but he performs exactly the same function as the rest. All of the actors play the director's dummy roles so that Nolan has the opportunity to have fun to the fullest.
ABOUT IMPRESSIONS
There is a HUGE nuance in all this. "Argument" is an attraction. In the best sense of the term. Anyone who wants an emotional return from the characters and the story, to get a charge of empathy and their own piece of drama - go to hell, because Nolan's new film is about cinema experience, about cinema sensations, about cinema emotions, but of a completely different order. In fact, purely for a theatrical session - it still does not affect the sensations in any way, but on the contrary. The viewer is not distracted for a second by thinking about the feelings of the characters, because all that interests the film itself is to fuck our previous experience of watching a movie. "Argument" copes with this the way no one has ever.
I don’t remember at all that I sat for so long with my mouth open and with a contented smile all over my face from contemplating what was happening. Perhaps the last time this happened to me was in 2007, when I first watched Transformers on the big screen. I will even say more. When an important plot twist takes place in the middle of "Argument" and the film turns into a completely new format, my friend Artem Remizov (who had already seen the film before) whispered in my ear: "Now you will be looking at this game for another hour and twenty minutes." These were some of the best words I've ever heard in a movie theater. The realization that this UNIQUE experience had just accelerated made me the happiest person in the cinema.
This year I completely lost my faith in modern genre cinema and started studying the classics. Dived back in time, so to speak. “Argument” gave me back my inner child film lover, when I wanted to scream every few minutes and thank all the gods for creating cinema. The last time I experienced something similar (but slightly weaker) was on my first viewing of Blade Runner 2049 . When you watch a movie and constantly break into a contented smile with the thought "what the hell are the filmmakers, thank them for that . "
Nolan has repeatedly stated that the basis of his painting is escapism. That is why it was important for him to shoot everything on location, test different parts of the world, show the audience what they had not seen before. Starting from windmills on the water, ending with sports riding on tricky bathing sailboats. The director drew on his personal experience from watching old Bond films, which immersed viewers in different worlds and carried them through new adventurous and breathtaking experiences. Magic, fuck, pure cinema.
ABOUT MUSIC
It is especially important to experience this experience in the cinema, because it is there that you can feel one of the main features of the picture - the SOUNDTRACK. I was very worried when I learned that Zimmer could not work on the picture, but during the time you realize that the best outcome of events happened. More powerful than what Ludwig Goransson wrote (a young talent who took an Oscar for the sound of "Black Panther" ) is simply impossible. Music in Dovod is a separate film experience. She is huge... Like a concrete slab, it presses firmly into a chair and does not let you breathe. To be honest, it is precisely because of the feelings that the soundtrack evokes that I want to re-watch the movie in the cinema. Especially during the robbery of the gallery (composition "FREEPORT") and on the scene of the chase with a fire engine (composition "TRUCKS IN PLACE").
PRO ACTION
Because of the director's love for location filming, not the most (in theory) spectacular scenes acquire a fucking WOW effect. It would seem, how can you surprise the modern viewer with the explosion of an airplane in the frame? Nolan knows how - buy a real Boeing 747 for a movie and fuck it up in a real airport. It would seem, how can you surprise with an ordinary chase? Nolan knows how - he takes and flattens real cars with the help of a couple of trucks and a fire engine and films it all live. The very first fight with a reverse opponent is fucked up. As a fan of combat choreography, this scene simply destroyed me at all levels. Lost speech, stopped breathing, heart pounded to the rhythm of the soundtrack. The spirit was captured in the same way as the fight in the corridor in zero gravity from "Inception"... The case when you see something new and unique for the FIRST TIME. Previously, it seemed that modern cinema has gone so far ahead that nothing can surprise. How wrong I was.
I would like to say a little more about all these chips with reverse and temporary freaks, but this is simply pointless. Whoever has seen it knows everything and so, and whoever has not, will not understand. Nolan just rolled the eggs onto the table and said "the directors of everything are your move . " The dude took and closed the directing to dicks. Conquered life. Because doing such a confusing and technical fuck is simply impossible, unless you are Nolan. I'm not sure that the audience in general will be able to appreciate all the coolness of this technique, but fortunately, I'm one of those who were not just impressed, but kicked on the head.
Of course, not all of Nolan's action is great. Some spoilers.
At the end of the film, a magnificent crowd scene takes place - a war that takes place in two times at once. It is very unique, it is large-scale, no one has ever done this before ... And yet there is one bold nuance that fucks the entire potential of the scene, which will prevent it from going down in history. There are no Opponents in this war. The two squads simply run and shoot in the air and at empty buildings. It felt like it was all like an airsoft training ground in which crowds of men run and imitate an epic battle. Throughout the scene we were shown two corpses of opponents and two shooters in the windows from afar. That's all. You admire the whole scene with the direction, but in the story you ask yourself the question "who are they fighting with, then the fuck?"
ABOUT THE SPECTATOR
At the "argument" clearly will be a big problem with reviews. Because of the delight of some, there will be shit stuffing from others. It just so happened that we have before us a rare beast - a blockbuster for nerds, which will be hated by the masses, for whom the blockbuster actually exists. It's not about the snobbish "all viewers are stupid", it's just that "Argument" refers to the type of paintings that you SHOULD look not only with your eyes, but also with your head. I'll explain more clearly. Nolan always gives answers in his works before asking questions. So that this or that scene in the second half does not seem complicated or incomprehensible, you need to keep in mind every dialogue, every scene or detail from the first minutes, so that everything comes together.
I (like many movie buffs) have no problems with this approach to viewing at all. On the contrary - I love it when the viewer is NOT held for an idiot and given the opportunity to deal with everything on his own. In "Argument" a lot of answers are scattered in advance so that you can come to an understanding of the plot twists before they happen. For example ( small spoiler ), during a fight in the vault, a twist is easily read, which will be explained in the film only an hour later. And you don't need to be smart to read it, you just have to look carefully and keep all the information received in your head.
If you watch "Argument" analyzing everything that happens, then it will seem as simple in its plot as any other Marvel blockbuster. If you watch it with your brain turned off (which is usually required by a modern popcorn studio film), then you can break down somewhere in the middle and then tell your friends that it's fucking incomprehensible and in general there is no soul in the film. Don't be ungrateful and inattentive spectators, gentlemen. Watch the movie with your head, not your eyes.
TOTAL
"Argument" is a director's fuck. In all senses. One of the most unique genre directors of our time took and said "look as best I can" . He totally does not care about the emotional component of the film, it is important for him to plunge the viewer into a never-before-experienced feeling and temporarily change the perception of reality. Even the very fact that the main character is called that - Protagonist - says a lot. Nolan needs this story and these characters only to have something to tell. The main goal was to remind viewers that cinema is magic that takes you to unknown worlds and gives you a unique emotional experience.
Thanks Nolan, I again believe that cinema can still amaze. Argument is a very vivid reminder of why I fell in love with cinema when I was a child. It took me a few minutes to leave the cinema to accept the fact that I live in a normal world without time distortion. If you don't go to the cinema for such shocks and emotions, then why the fuck should you go to it at all?