wait, people think the girl with the dragon tattoo is a bad movie??? i found it absolutely wonderful and thrilling. watched it multiple times over the years.
And look at all the movie rating sites (imdb, letterboxd, rotten tomatoes). It got all good scores. I think it's a difference when talking about "bad" films if you as a single person don't like a film or if a film is generally disliked by a lot of people. The second would've been a better approach for this video.
Exactly. They just dont like coz it didnt match their expectations... It's not extraordinary but still better than 99% of the crap that comes out these days...
To say Tenet is a bad movie, and a result of hubris is only an indication of the failing of the audience making the claim. Tenet is a masterpiece, and shows how much respect Nolan had for the audience’s intelligence & comprehension. Unfortunately, it revealed how misplaced that respect was.
Tenet is not even specifically a bad movie, as these people are trying to put it. it's just a example of one of the moments when a filmmaker drifts away too much on experiment (it's not really a bad thing, it happens with everyone). and made something that is astounding in filmmaking but doesn't resonate with the audience it's like Michael Mann's Miami Vice situation. it was so much experimented to point that, upon release everyone called it pretentious and boring.. but now it has found it's cult audience, I think Tenet will eventually find it's right audience as well
I love Tenet! It’s one of my favorite movies. Plus it came out during a time when people weren’t sure about going back inside theaters because of COVID. If anything Tenet is a movie ahead of its time …. years from now people will wish they would’ve seen it when it came out in theaters .
I am surprised to not see studio/backer/producer/distributor interference on you list. I also think that sometimes a film is just marketed wrong, making people expect a different film. Sometimes, it is hard to forget what you have been told, and watch what is on the screen.
@viewz only 3 of his 10 movies could be considered “bond adjacent” and that’s being generous categorizing any non-superhero action movie in that category. Also what does Bezos buying mgm and a possible broccoli death have to do with that? It’s not like they can do anything about people making “similar” movies. Genuinely curious. Also I think him and his brother are quite creative with their scripts.
@viewz ahh ok thanks. I didn’t know she said that. Last I knew, he said he’s like to, but they wouldn’t need him unless they wanted to reinvent the series. I understand your comment better now. With that being said though, I still think it’s been more helpful than harmful, not having studio interference with his films. Determinism is just such a bold concept to handle, I don’t know if any director would’ve had got mass praise for a film like tenet.
Tenet at worst is an underwhelming film for many. By no metric is it a bad film. Personally, I think its far better than Interstellar and is my favorite of his films.
I appreciate your work and the thought that went into the video, but I was hoping one of its questions would be "how do we know for sure that the film is bad?" or "how many people have to say it's bad before that label is accepted?" or "how many elements of a movie have to underwelm before you call it bad overall?" Tenet is a movie that may be recognized as a dip in the director's career, but why can't it just be that? I feel like mixed success is often rounded down to failure.
Despite the hefty budget, I believe that TENET would have made its money back in normal circumstances which sucks because I really like John David Washington and Robert Pattinson.
TENET isn't a bad film. It's a modern classic in the making and one of the smartest, most unique and uncompromising studio blockbusters ever made.. BLADE RUNNER was similarly lukewarmly received and dismissed, and ten years later, boom. A unanimous reappraisal.
Nah I disagree, TENET had a terrible and pretentious story and completely hollow and empty characters. Blade runner 2049 felt long and drawn out and it wasn't as intelligent as I thought it was. Btw, I am a HUGE fan or both Nolan and Villeneuve so it pains me to say this
@@YakobBell It’s weird because I’m such a passionate defender of TENET, while simultaneously totally understanding why it would underwhelm and alienate audiences, even Nolan fans. I get mad when a movie so clearly thinks it’s smarter than me as well, it’s why I don’t care for PRIMER (another notoriously intricate time travel movie). I can’t explain why I reacted so strongly to the movie, but I’m happy I did. It feels like it was made for me. Buddy cop/spy duo of two exciting young actors, solving a secret agent time travel conspiracy, shot on 35mm and IMAX film, directed by Christopher Nolan, with an amazing score and practical action that I’ve never seen in a movie before. Plus the cheeky tie-in soundtrack song by Travis Scott that references the movie in the lyrics. I’m in Heaven lol.
I 100% agree, and also feel it was made for me. But I think it asks too much of the spectator, namely to think non-linearly (in a linear art form, which is difficult) and to actually think about it afterwards to understand it. The movie doesn't try to impress you with how clever it is, it's trying to make you experience reality in a different way. Whether you enjoy the movie or not, you can't deny it's showing you things you've never seen before. I also enjoy the themes of the movie, you could say Tenet follows Inception and Interstellar in that regard.
I think studio intervention deserves some mention here. It’s very common for Hollywood studios to take up and coming filmmakers with a good film or two already under their belt and essentially use their name for the films they’ve already decided how they wanted to make. Josh Trank for Chronicle to Fant4stic and Edgar Wright for most of his work to Ant-Man are prime examples.
But those directors didn't play well with marvel studios. that's a bad look on them not marvel studios. every film director should know going into a marvel movie that you don't mess with formula.
@@BlipBloop33 I’m just using Marvel as an example as it’s an instance of the director admitting to too much interference after the fact. And Fant4stic was by Fox pre-merger so they were their own thing back then, but if you want more examples of studios other than Disney, Avi Arad was a major reason for Spider-Man 3 feeling so bloated as he forced Raimi’s hand with the inclusion of Venom.
I would rather watch a risky/failed movie from a good director rather than the same old generic factory-made movies. That's just my mind set at the moment, people might not share the same feeling
Tenant is not a bad film, it's just experimental, good directors make bad films because they get a lot of power to make the crazy things they want to make. I think it should be celebrated, more interesting premises and less cookie cutter MCU shit please.
Tenet had jaw-dropping visuals, music, action set pieces but it had awful editing and a story that was convoluted for the sake of convoluting and 80% exposition dumps. It’s imo Nolans worst film but still Tenet is better than a good 90% of dross that comes out of Hollywood. Shows you the standards of the man.
not at all the rest of his films other than batam triolgy achieve that and are still great films. this was arty and bad i liked aspects but it cam off as he bit off more then he could chew it didnt feel like a finished film like his others.
@@thesahel7218 I think panic room is finchers worst personally. Dragon tattoo i really enjoyed, more than the first version. I was not overly impressed by gone girl but i guess im in the minority there.
Remember you are a filmmaker not a psychologist so when you are stating something as factual it's wrong. You never been in their shoes. Every human is different so every filmmaker has to be. When does a film became good or bad based on audience reaction? You may like it or you may not. That's it. I am not talking about unwatchable amateur/stupid filmmaking, But Describing a film failure of a great director is really strange. I have enjoyed girl with dragon tattoo. And I still do.
I pity anyone who thinks the girl with the dragon tattoo and tenet are bad movies because they are not just because A. movie wasn't a financial success and B. audience did not comprehend immediately it doesn't mean it's a bad movie when Extraordinary film directors i.e. Fincher and Nolan get to the peak of their careers just like professionals in other fields like engineers(inventors) they push the limits they invent and develop the field even further the problem with that in film is that only a few get it those who truly understand the concept of film and how its evolving....
Don't forget audiences. Their emotional swings pertaining to films is tremendous. They'll look at one film and then maybe another good sequel of it but compare the two. Or they tire of a genre. Or the studios promotion of the film is not on target. Sometimes it's against another film premiere. Or maybe societal events have made the film less desirable to look at. Maybe the studio just placed it at the wrong time of the year. There are many other factors that have nothing to do with the script or the director. But scripts are important as you say. That gets into how a script reads versus how it's actually presented. Two directors with the same script can have totally different presentations as you very well know.
Agree, and I think it's a good argument for staying with universal themes that cut close to everyone's home. Every good story, in some way, is about the two forces that tug at people's hearts: the expansive and contractive.
Tenet is not a bad film. I think it was too complicated for the mass audience so they can't recommend it by word of mouth. I think in time, it will have a huge cult following. I personally thought it was great. The audio? I don't mind either because I'm into it, but I totally get that it doesn't work with everyone.
I enjoyed the movie. I still dont really understand it but I thought it was ridiculous that I had to have the subtitles on to understand simple dialogue lol.
@@pratimklik1 100% yes. I am a diehard theater guy and I almost did not go because of the pandemic. No one showed up at my theater which is not normal obviously. Usually packed on weekends and Tuesdays
I liked Tenet. It's a trip. Like some others said, it might've been too complicated for the mass audience. But that shouldn't be a yardstick of "good". Audiences DID change. They were dumbed down. The flood of "franchise" crap is junk food.
Being smart is ultimately irrelevant when you have a soulless film utterly lacking character development & thus unable to engage the audience with their uninteresting characters, Nolan's work otherwise is always centered around the people & their relationships, take inception as an example, the intricate plot is only just a plot device to further the complexities of romantic heartbreak and the torture of the soul. People who liked Tenet, in my opinion, they know nothing about what makes a good film, they only appreciate the superficial temporal complexity which isn't supposed to be important but I guess it is when the film lacks anything else to captivate the audience, it reeked of creative fatigue.
@@chelovek500 Hahaha exactly, maybe it's just trendy to nitpick Tenet's intentional writing of its characters. Whereas such nitpicking doesn't exist while watching a film like Primer coz, of course, it's low budget and less popular.
Constantly creating something new is the really big thing. A Chef doesn’t mess up and omelette because he doesn’t have to constantly reinvent the omelette. And a violinist may play other people’s compositions masterfully all his life because he only has to repeat himself. If that same Chef had to invent new recipes every time or if the violinist had to compose new works each time, they’d “mess up” a lot more.
My thinking is the Chef probably messes up an omelette - he just doesn't make it again or let anyone eat it. It's like when people say, "Your pictures are always so good." Right. I don't show you the bad ones.
I disagree with Ready Player taking massive risks. It was based on a YA book. It's filled with young people and nostalgic IP. Story telling wise, it's so bland and by the numbers as well as just being stupid in that regard. Even technically speaking it didn't take many risks, Spielberg and probably the producers just handed most of the VFX to a VFX team same as all the other big modern blockbusters. Plus everyone else has also seemed to mention this but studio interference is almost always the biggest issue. Panicking and going with the trends instead of trusting the directors.
Filmmaking is a team work. Sometimes producers try to play it safe so they would make more money. That’s why modern films are so bland and unoriginal. Or a script is rewritten so many times it barely resembles the original idea. It’s not always a director’s fault.
I think the reason why directors are being blamed is common is that it was easy to blame them. They're the leader of the team. They're the team face. If the project failed, they look at the face first.
@@vb8428 The audio was 85-90% intelligible in Tenet. It’s a valid criticism but not a major one, since the dialogue that wasn’t comprehensible didn’t really affect the audience’s understanding of the plot.
@@mrcoatsworth429 Haven't re-watched "Fight Club" or "Seven" in a while so they're not so fresh in my memory but I've re-watch "The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo", "Gone girl", "Zodiac" and "The social Network" so many times. What a director Fincher is.
I'm just an 80-year-old nonfiction writer/editor and prosumer photographer. Still, I'm fascinated by what makes films work. (Maybe in my next life.) I think, "Watch the end credits on any major film - and be very scared." There are SO many things that can go wrong. And SO many people who can make them go wrong. And then there's a whole self-enclosed world of people whose credo is ... money - and SO many bad decisions they can make (marketing Galaxy Quest for 8-year-olds just because Rug Rats was making a ton of money). If I were a director, I would be very, very careful about choosing my friends. Then there are movies that seem so beautifully well-made, I just long to know the backstory and learn how it all seems to have gone so right. Okay, this is personal, but The Accountant. And the tragicomic story of how the company's attentions were distracted by the death of a star actor on a blockbuster film, so the Galaxy Quest makers were left more or less on their own.
You forgot the most obvious: directors are human and part of an entire workforce of humans working on a film. Humans make mistakes, so therefore it is impossible for every product (film) resulting from that workforce to be of equal quality. I'm pretty sure that's the answer to the question, not one of your imaginative over-the-top reasons.
Tenet isn't a bad film ffs! 🙄🤦🏻♂️ It's bloody brilliant and the concept is completely unique. I know people weren't ready for this kind of movie and most of them got confused, but in time, it'll grow on everyone and go on to become a classic.
I think "bad" movies from good directors are fine things to happen sometimes. Because it can be them trying to adventure themselves into something new just like any artist. Of course this can be expensive, a lot of money and resources put into it but, how would they know they are not really fit for that story if they don't try it? Who knows? It could work.
Correct me if I am wrong - Did you just say 'The Girl With A Dragon Tattoo' is a bad film or incompetent? This is wrong. I think David Fincher's weakest film is The Game.
Sorry, but Dragon Tattoo and Matrix 4 are great. The Irishman is a very risky film thematically, the subject matter isn’t indicative of less risk. Tenet rules. The Lost World is pretty great. M Night also didn’t get too much hubris. Praying with Anger, Wide Awake, and Last Airbender, are bad but all of his other films have something to love or appreciate in them. I think people who think the films listed here are bad are too focused on mainstream pop criticism, and don’t read good interesting criticism. It isn’t that these films are bad. People just have a boring idea of what makes a good movie and when filmmakers inevitably start doing interesting work that is more expressive of themselves as individual artists, people with basic taste always turn on them and call the films “bad.”
I have no idea why you used tenet and space odyssey as example in this video. Because neither stanley kubrick nor christopher nolan till now made any bad movie
Here's a short answer as to why - its cause they end up believing their own hype, smelling their own farts, fulfilling expectations, doubling down on style over substance and never being told no cause they became so successful. People don't like to admit it, but fame and fortune is poison for art
The random clips should have served to explain and amplify your thesis. I couldn't tell which you thought were good films and which were bad. You only called out Matrix 4 (not 2 and 3?) and "Girl with the Dragon Tattoo". What did you intend by the 3-4 Tarantino movies?
@@Mcf4742 Perhaps he just means in terms of smaller is scope? Nolan still has the ability to make an autobio conceptual, similar to how he approached Dunkirk, so I agree that its too early to say its a step back
I think The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo was one of the best Fincher's films (a long with Curious Case, Social Network, Fight Club). He puts in there a lot of soul and love for the charecters. Totally disagree about your opinion about someone like Ridley Scott, Nolan or Shyamalan. It's just problem of audience with auterish films. It's just of matter of time when people get it the whole thing of particular feature.
Film making is very difficult and complex. It costs hundreds of people years to make one movie, and a director must coordinate every one to come to a product where all fits together and tells the story. If people would know how much work is in one movie they for sure would not make illegal copies.
Tenet is established as a renowned cult classic. Not my opinion, just fact. This video is just proof that there are critics who believe that their opinions are somehow universal, but the reality is that for every fan of a film there will be a negative critic.
I don't think Tenet was a bad film, I think it didn't go well with a passive audience. The film connected to another film done by another British director with a similar plot. It overlaps with that film that replicated the theme of the Sator Skull. But, Nolan depended too much on an audience that either knew the works he was referring to. Or, cared enough to look up what he was talking about. Neither happened because audiences appreciate handheld spoon-fed spectacles. Just because the movie-going audience doesn't understand Tenent doesn't make it a bad film.
First of all the video is pointless and pretentious, second of all do you have any idea how difficult it is to make a film? Third of all, what the hell are you smoking saying Girl with the dragon tattoo and Tenet are bad films?
And the fact that their life changes after success, because money, and they become disconnected to real life which is a center piece in making a good film.
I’m sorry but if there was any implication Quinten Tarantino had hubris when he made OUTIH, I have to respectfully disagree. That movie is a masterpiece, and IMO one of his best films. I think he just doesn’t make a movie unless he is balls to the wall in LOVE with it.
i really want to like tenet but i still dont fully get it. its not as difficult to understand as primer and i dont know if its the editing or if im just dumb. but i can say with confidence that the wachowsky were a fluke with matrix. absolutely nothing after that movie was worth anyones time and a joke.
SMH…. This sums up guy Richie’s career to a tee, after "lock, stock and two smoking barrels" everything went down hill. He pretty much recycled the same narrative over and over again.😒
I feel like you miss the importants of the hole production. there are a lot of thing that can ruin you film that you cant handle because of production choices and budget.
I agree that the "past their prime" reason is often just ageist and stupid since there are plenty of directors who have produced masterpieces at an advanced age (Sidney Lumet directed Before the Devil Knows You're Dead 50 years after he did 12 Angry Men, for example). But what does really happen is that directors who were once on the cutting edge of cinema fail to stay on that cutting edge as time goes by. Not that Hitchcock's last films are bad exactly, but you can see him still using techniques, like very phony-looking rear projection shots, that stick out like a sore thumb in the 1970s because better methods had been widely adopted by then. George A. Romero's Diary of the Dead *is* unambiguously bad, and it's largely because he's trying to both use and comment on a newfangled found footage style of horror movie that he clearly doesn't understand. This can be exacerbated if the director takes a long break before returning to the director's chair, as George Lucas did between the original Star Wars and Episode I.
The good: short and punchy with some really solid questions and an opinionated conclusion, obviously drawn out of the experience of analytically watching thousands of good, bad and mediocre movies. The not so good: No real arguments, detailed examples or proof. This is food for thought, something to chew on, I like it very much, thanks! BTW: I thoroughly enjoyed TENET about ten times now. It has major flaws in logic and comprehension, it’s cold and for many viewers emotionally distanced to a fault. And, of course, it’s chronologically disjointed a.f. by concept. But I love it. It somehow hits my sweet spot. I don’t know why.
this video is hilarious, legit cracking up. I never realised that film quality was objective. Does he realise that most movies involve more than just a director, and it takes usually thousands if not hundreds of peoples efforts and choices to create the final result. (also tenet is one of my favourite movies)
I don't believe a Director, especially one with vision, makes any bad films, it's usually the studio that makes a mess of it, and by extension, an audience's expectation also can play a factor. Take the Star Wars Prequels for example, George Lucas made three films that he was extremely passionate about, and he had a story to tell, and he told it brilliantly, unfortunately it was the so-called "Critics" and certain fans that thought those films sucked, when in reality those films were more creative, innovative, and more interesting than most Modern movies today.
In what world is Fincher's Girl with the Dragon Tattoo a bad film? It was a financial disappointment, but that's it. It got great reviews and everyone I know who has seen it likes it. I loved it.
No I disagree with that. That’s the reason Tarantino is stopping at 10 films, likewise why chess players are at their best when they’re young. Age plays a big role… just not all the time.
A dumbed downed generation is not gonna get good filmmaking also some of these directors and studios are part of that generation. Take GOT for instance. a master of a show until the last season (SAY MOST). so they just discredit the first 7 seasons too. Season 8 was good too. just the audience was different by that time and they the directors seem to be in a hurry to end like most HBO endings for shows
Contrary to the opinions of many casual movie viewers.. Tenet was the greatest Nolan film… he defied all the rules of cinema ON PURPOSE and still had a theatrical release. Any other film would have NEVER seen the light of day. -Main Character has ZERO story arc -Main Character attempts ZERO rapport to viewers -Main Character has no name for use to define him by -The Plot was incredibly convoluted to the point even critics got confused -Movie DOES NOT even attempt to explain many mechanisms of the plot to the viewers In order to make this film, have it pass the producer/financier screenings, and still have a theatrical release is not only hard to do but has hardly been done. Tenet is not going to hold your hand along the way. You have to actually use brain cells when watching it. It will be a decade before another film can attempt this. The last film to successfully perform this was probably Lynch’s “Mulholland Drive” back in the year 2001.
Sometimes the director doesn't have the right people around him, for example - when Hitchcock didn't have a good story - then he made a dud(Under Capricorn). I think you also have to look at George Lucas, without people like Gary Kurtz, Marcia Lucas and Lawrence Kasdan - his prequel Star Wars films suffered.
Sorry but your argument could have held its stand if you would have used "actual" bad movies as an example. Not those which "you" personally think are bad but are actually one of the underrated masterpieces of respective directors, Ex. TENET, OUATIH, Girl with Dragon Tattoo, Irishman, Tropic Thunder, etc. Maybe could have used "Terminator 3" as an Example. Completely missed the mark here.
What a silly premise. The author of the video must be a teenager. EVERYBODY'S performance varies throughout time (athlete, scientist, soldier, CEO, president, plumber, actor, gigolo, etc) depending on circumstances...
This take makes me wonder, have we become spoiled? What exactly is a good or bad film? Are we too caught up in everything outside of the actual film itself, and use that as variables to judge aa film? I personally don't think it's fair. When I watch a film, I try my very best to judge it based solely on how it connected with me and nothing else. A film being good or bad, outside of the technical aspects, should mostly be judged by how it connected with the individual. One example, I loved the film Amelie, but my wife didn't like it at all. It didn't connect with her. I think we should all re-evaluate what it means to appreciate the art or filmmaking.
The answer to that question is simple: No directors have the same tastes as you. Christopher Nolan thought that Tenet was a good movie, you didn't, boom there is your answer. How is this complicated to people? There really is no such thing as a bad film, only films you don't like. When you say "bad film", in good faith, we assume that you just mean you didn't like it. But your perspective here shows that you don't actually understand that film is subjective.
Performance of an artist with time follows a parabolic graph/trajectory. If successful in the beginning, the director either starts taking risk or tries to portray their specific vision by the 5-6th film, believing that audience would like them on the basis of the past films. This is where they screw up, sometimes in laziness sometimes just making something purely for themselves
Using your Chef making omelettes argument. I would argue a Chef does know how to make an omelette but he can also make one that fails. He tried something new, some combination that just didn't work. But he doesn't know it would be bad until he tastes it. So, he doesn't serve that to anyone. He can just toss the omelette; it most likely didn't cost that much money. But a movie.... that's a different story.
Script script and script. If it’s a great script it’s hard to screw it up but most directors really do have limited ability and it’s often hidden in the process. They almost always are told that they are better and more talented by awards and their surrounding acolytes than they are. Most directors really aren’t that self aware either and they will often have a basic flaw that eventually is shown. Of course there is always the politics involved that can cloud judgement but most bad films fail usually on such a howling plot or script hole that it’s truly amazing that these things are not laughed out of the script meeting. They survive because of the hierarchical sycophancy that over hype and the Dutch courage needed to dump millions of budget into an idea becomes an exercise in collective delusion and blind faith. Success is often way more about luck than judgement and about who you know not what you know. That combination will always find people out given enough rope. Alien covenant is a perfect example. Once you analyse that then there’s a whole unraveling of a career of work that suddenly looks less a product of genuine talent. Terence Malik is another example of someone who really doesn’t have a clue about making a film and would probably say so himself and yet is considered a great auteur. Why?? His films are frankly unwatchable once that amateur charm becomes the only one trick pony in town. A simple tell is him making actors play chase with each other usually in an open field on a wide, from days of heaven to his latest work as if this is his only metaphor for people being natural. It’s palpable seeing the actors faith drain away as the scene goes on and on with endless attempts at non specific dialogue ad-libs that become repetitive on the word action. It’s not hubris that creates terrible films it’s sycophancy. The emperor’s new clothes? Once they are invested they just can’t back down and whilst everyone is replaceable that level of insecurity breeds an even worst hierarchical omnipotence that no individual least alone film director deserve. We see it in every aspect of life and it’s not limited to film but when budgets exceed the 100s of millions it’s hard to not notice the giant gold plated turd in the room.
The film The Irishman is not bad because it is not risky enough, but because it has a terrible script. It's just impossible to watch. The film is woven from fatal contradictions in the dialogues and the world.
You may dislike certain movies.. but stating as a fact that a movie such as Tenet is a bad movie is where I have to disagree with you. If I don't like a specific kind of food.. that doesn't mean that food is just bad 🤷♂
Not understanding and therefore not being able to appreciate masterpiece Tenet is one thing, putting Nolan next to Shyamalan, who clearly lost his way trying to recreate is one great success is another. I could argue that Nolan has no emotional touch which is why Interstellar was visually stunning but left me emotionally detached (take Forrest Gump as the contrary). Actually I’m wondering what Guillermo Del Toro gets all the praise for when I believe his only stand out movie remains Pan’s Labyrinth. Hellboy was sure entertaining with a special touch but nothing outstanding. The Oscars for The Shape of water left me with some question marks…
Don’t agree with your idea with tenet being to high concept. Do agree he needed to tone down some of the enigmatic character elements in the film to make it more emotionally cohesive and understandable, something a producer might have said before he got so big. Not sure e it’s hubris as such. More that he tried something and it didn’t work very well for me.
I think the main problem is that movies aren't really like omelettes. A movie needs to be new and different or it has no reason to exist, and there is no "recipe" for guaranteeing success under those conditions.
I am not a filmmaker, let alone a great director; but I am a proficient, working professional musician, and your analysis resonates with my experience. I play mostly cover songs pared down to a solo acoustic performance, and am always on the hunt for "new" material. Sometimes a piece of music simply excites and/or haunts me so that I feel compelled to give it a shot, but I simply can not seem to do it justice. It is super frustrating, especially when the music is relatively simply to begin with. I should be able to at least just copy the original in some satisfying manner; but nope. Then, after a while, SOMETIMES something clicks and it inexplicably works. The only explanation that makes sense is a relaxed state of mind that playfully looks at the material in a new and unique way. That connection is NECESSARY, regardless of the music's inherent value. If I don't feel it, I leave it the fuck alone. I believe that is what any artist should learn.
Tenet was awesome but you may have to watch it more than once to appreciate it. Be careful not to confuse your own personal tastes with how successful a director was making a film. There are films most people agree are dogs. Tenet wasn’t one of those.
