Comments by "Average Alien" (@AverageAlien) on "TENET - Nolan Has An Exposition Problem" video.

  1.  @maxleveladventures  not bland, just dry
    2
  2. How can you not be a fan of nolan, what????
    1
  3.  @quirkypurple  Wrong lol. The characters in interstellar and inception were brilliant and compelling. So nolan can do both amazingly.
    1
  4.  @quirkypurple  No it's not lmao. The only recent nolan film with slightly weak characters is tenet. And movies like dunkirk are by design not character driven. Nothing wrong with that. We need different movies every now and again. Stick to your cheap super hero movies
    1
  5. Because it's not really possible to understand fully
    1
  6.  @joeholland7314  not even close hahaha. Decade? Nope. Inception is better, interstellar is better, 1917 is better
    1
  7.  @joeholland7314  You said inception is worse because it's....easier to understand? 🤣. Ok buddy, tenet is a trash movie compared to those. It's a sub tier movie. The matrix is better, arrival is potentially better, inception is WAY better, interstellar is way better also.
    1
  8.  @joeholland7314  Tenet is chris nolan's WEAKEST movie. Literally the worst one he's made
    1
  9.  @joeholland7314  Apart from the exposition problem, the audio is off, the dialogue is drowned out in music sometimes, and the emotional attachment to the characters is non existent.
    1
  10.  @joeholland7314  every scene in 1917 is a masterpiece.
    1
  11.  @joeholland7314  ahh yes, make the movie realistic by making it impossible to hear crucial dialogue, despite it being a sci-fi movie about time travel. Makes perfect sense. You sound like a blind nolan worshipping fanboy to me
    1
  12.  @joeholland7314  Lol ok redditor. You're not very smart if you think this movie even comes close to being the best nolan film. Worst nolan film, and an average overall movie.
    1
  13.  @joeholland7314  lmao I watched it in a cinema and then again at home with headphones kiddo. It's a sub par movie. End of discussion
    1
  14.  @joeholland7314  Very easy to understand, judging by your grammar you only think its complicated because you're a 12 year old
    1
  15.  @joeholland7314  just incase it was you, thanks for the free views and interaction bozo
    1
  16.  @joeholland7314  well, that part is a little dramatic
    1
  17.  @joeholland7314  That moment when you don't realise I used a line from the movie. Guess you're not that familiar with the film then 😁
    1
  18.  @joeholland7314  Good excuse for drowning out all the dialogue with a bad audio mix and not building any sort of emotional connection with any character. NOT, god you really are average
    1
  19.  @joeholland7314  Hahah you keep trying to make it seem like this movie is supposed to be some ultra realistic documentary, hate to break it to you buddy, but it's a SCI-FI movie with very little grounding in reality or realism gtfo 😂
    1
  20.  @joeholland7314  No it's not lol. They're trying to imply that objects with reverse entropy go backwards through time, which is just not true. Many worlds is one of many explanations in quantum mechanics not a certainty nor a leading theory.
    1
  21.  @joeholland7314  You're saying words. Well done. It's not the many worlds theory, it's the many worlds interpretation for starters. It's one of many interpretations of quantum mechanics, and the leading one is the copehnhagen interpretation. Regardless, the entire travelling backwards in time thing is basically impossible and fiction.
    1
  22.  @joeholland7314  Are you talking about symmetry? Well actually there is a way to break that perfect symmetry. Z and W bosons aren't symmetrical forwards and backwards in time.
    1
  23.  @joeholland7314  You're saying empty meaningless words again buddy. No idea why you're randomly talking about entanglement when that isn't even slightly related to the movie. You're lost and confused and you don't know what you're talking about kid
    1