"Don't try to figure it out." How Christopher Nolan's "Argument" combines a cool idea with empty heroes

On September 3, a film by one of the most popular directors of our time will be released on Russian screens. Literally everyone was waiting for the "argument," and he had already been dubbed the savior of the film industry: for Nolan's blockbuster, the audience will definitely go to the newly opened cinemas.

And in this regard, the predictions are one hundred percent accurate - hardly anyone will arrange a more grandiose spectacle on the big screens in the near future. As always, the director combines a convoluted idea, returning to the days of "Inception", with large-scale explosions, chases and shootings, filmed with a minimum of CGI. The picture is worth seeing in the movies, and even better in IMAX.

Only those who criticized Nolan's previous works for pseudo-intellectuality, and especially for being too formal about characters and dialogues, will be convinced that they are right. The director is more important about the idea and the shooting, not the disclosure of the characters.

Puzzle or diagram

The protagonist, played by John David Washington, works for the secret services. He receives a very unusual task - to stop the Russian oligarch Andrei Sator (Kenneth Branagh), who has taken possession of revolutionary technology that can destroy the entire world. The hero is helped by another agent - Neil (Robert Pattinson), who in a strange way finds himself in the know.

Perhaps, on this, the description of the plot should be stopped, since any detail may turn out to be a spoiler. After all, "Argument" is another construction film from Nolan. This is its main advantage and this is the main drawback.

As in Inception, the director offers a global and very unusual concept. Somewhere after the middle of the picture, I want to sketch it in the form of a diagram, so as not to get confused in the turns. And this component makes the plot incredibly exciting. Nolan did not come up with just another story about moving into the past or the future (after the complex "Detonator" and the detailed "Darkness" in this genre there is hardly anything more impressive), but used inversion - the reverse flow of time.

The palindrome in the title of the picture is not accidental - Russian localizers have worked perfectly this time. The plot of the film itself is partly based on this technique. Unclear? It should be so. After all, the main purpose of the "Dovod" is to confuse the viewer.

And to make it easier to immerse yourself in the atmosphere of what is happening, Nolan makes the protagonist experience exactly the same confusion.

At the very beginning of the film, the secondary heroine says to the Protagonist: “Don't try to understand this,” in fact, probably referring to the viewer.

It is not for nothing that during the promotional campaign they talked about the plot itself in the most restrained way. Even all the trailers, except for the final one (it is better not to watch it before going to the cinema), are made up of the first half of the picture - the simplest part. Trying to figure out what will happen next and how the world of "Argument" works is just as interesting as watching the great action.

But the director's love for complex plots kills almost all the emotional component of the picture. In "Argument" Christopher Nolan acts as a kind of grandmaster for whom it is important to place chess correctly on the board and force the opponent to follow his strategy (in the role of the opponent, of course, the spectator). He cares very little about the figures.

The director does not even try to hide it. The main character does not even have a name, he is simply called the Protagonist, he is as impersonal and standard as possible. Nile's past is not revealed: he is charismatic, cool and smart at the same time. Such people do not exist in life. Well, let it be, but the character is perfect for the plot.

Even the dialogues in the picture are absolutely functional. Apparently, Nolan understood that it is very difficult to fit all the explanations even in two and a half hours. Therefore, every conversation of the central characters is informative. And therefore you need to listen as carefully as you look. Even a couple of missing phrases can have a profound effect on perception.

It seems that they decided to leave all the emotions in the line dedicated to the toxic relationship between Sator and his wife Kat (Elizabeth Debicki). This part really seems livelier than the rest of the plot, and the actors are very bright. But if you think about it, they are exactly the same functions as everyone else. And a child, because of whom a lot of problems arise, will only flicker in the frame a couple of times.

But in the case of "Argument" such coldness of the director towards his characters is not a drawback. It's just that for Nolan, the idea has always been more important than the heroes. Even Interstellar was pretending rather than being an emotional movie. Perhaps only in "Dunkirk" was dominated by humanity, not war.

And it's even good that the author stopped pretending. He makes films for lovers of puzzles and spectacles. Why be distracted by something else?

Blockbuster or gigantomania

Christopher Nolan has always distinguished himself from other filmmakers with a love for intricate plots of incredible scope. And now he has reached the level where he can afford literally everything.

Moreover, the plot of the "Argument" allows the author to produce a maximum of impressive scenes. A significant part of the picture does more resemble the next episode of the James Bond film than a science fiction movie. The spectators, along with the heroes, go to Mumbai, then to London, then to Vietnam. And the tram ride in Tallinn gives way to sailing races on the high seas. Each time the shooting is striking in its scale.

And it's important not to forget that Nolan is one of those authors who work with a minimum of computer effects. Everything that can actually be done on set is built and then broken. The director, with the delight of a large child who has gained access to an expensive toy store, grabs all the biggest and brightest. In the process of creating "Dovod" they crashed a real plane. The action scenes were filmed two times: forward and backward, to further develop the theme of inversion.

When watching at certain moments, you involuntarily wonder: what else did Nolan do to amuse and impress the viewer?

In this approach, there is sometimes a kind of deliberate boasting. It seems that the director is too eager to demonstrate the high cost of his film. And in action there is simply no room for simple locations, simple clothes and simple conversations. Everything should be at the highest level.

Although the heroes will make a witty joke about pathos at the very beginning. This means that the author understands this perfectly and simply allows the viewer to enjoy an unprecedented scope and quality.

Even Ludwig Joransson's music is too heavy, loud and pretentious here. In any other film, she would overpower the action. And only the equally massive "Argument" manages to leave the soundtrack as the background for the plot.

But we must pay tribute: with such a timing and a confusing idea, the picture turned out to be incredibly dynamic. The first half is a great example of how spy action movies should be filmed. Action scenes in bright locations replace one another, interrupted only by the necessary explanations, and there is simply nowhere to get bored. And in the second part, a real puzzle begins, and here it is already impossible to tear yourself away, because you need to understand what is happening. And in the end, it's even hard to believe that more than two hours have passed. Maybe the director actually managed to rewind time?

Complexity or simplicity

Skeptics have always scolded Nolan's paintings for the fact that their intricacy is too obvious and even somewhere fake. In Remember, two timelines were needed to unfold the plot, but in Inception, four levels of sleep already seemed like an idea for the sake of an idea itself.

Exactly the same will be said about Dovod. The theme of the inversion and the idea of the film-palindrome seem as deliberate as the expensive costumes and yachts of the heroes.

But there is some kind of deception in such nit-picking. Nolan does not present his films as revolutionary and confusing. He's just filming cool, energetic blockbusters, adding extra twists and turns. "Argument" is a clear continuation of high-profile spy fighters, which should simply entertain the viewer.

Therefore, the tape will seem complicated only at a superficial glance. The heroes will talk about the predetermination of fate and free will. Of course, they will remember the "grandfather's paradox" and even think about parallel worlds.

But the viewer, together with the Protagonist, must understand absolutely everything by the end, if he looked carefully enough. "Argument" will not cause controversy in the interpretation of the plot or philosophical overtones.

This is not Twin Peaks, but Mission Impossible, which needs some thought.

And if all large-scale blockbusters about chases and explosions were worked out in such detail, mass cinema would look different.

Argument is the most striking example of Christopher Nolan's style since Inception. In the new film, the same idea prevails over the disclosure of the characters, and the intricate plot serves only as an addition to the non-stop and grotesque action.

The director proves once again that no one else can shoot like he does. His favorite cinematographer Hoyte Van Hoytem is sure to be one of the main nominees for the next Oscar, since making such a loaded video sequence easy, without unnecessary flickering, is something on the verge of magic.

The very idea of "Argument" reminds that cinema is primarily a visual art. Inversion, action, vivid heroes - all this needs to be seen, not heard, read or retelling. Such stories only live on the big screen. But they look great there.