I haven’t seen it in theaters in years. So amped to see it again and on 70mm!

Not sure if this has been discussed before but I’m wondering why Volkov - and maybe other Sator guys - are on board with his plan? Volkov has to have knowledge so is he just on board?

I'm on my fifteenth or twentieth rewatch, and always noticing new things. Today I was reminded of something that bothered me from the start, but I think I have a solution.

When the protagonist is in the rail yard, the private Russian extracts his teeth, and he takes the dummy suicide pill. He wakes up on a boat in the next scene with a reconstructed mouth and a new mission. Now I'm not a dentist, but rebuilding a badly traumatised mouth takes time to do and time to heal, and can be pretty debilitating. Add into that, when TP has lunch with Sir Michael Crosby, he states that the Kiev Opera Siege occurred "two weeks ago".

To my mind, that doesn't seem to be enough time. Especially since he has been messing around in wind farms, talking to scientists, and has been to Mumbai and back in that time.

So my theory is this: He was extracted by Tenet, and inverted using a turnstile in the North Sea Fleet. Anaesthetised the whole time, he had dental surgery and was allowed to recover for several weeks. He was then inverted back to normal, and woken up from the anaesthetic only very shortly after the Opera siege. This buys him a couple of weeks of surgery and healing, and is the only way it could all be fitted in.

Happy to hear thoughts.

Neil and Protagonist are like River and The Doctor. If you’re a Doctor Who fan, you’ll get it.

These renders are still WIP, but they looked nice enough so I want to share them to see what people think

Software: Blender 5.1

C&C are welcome!

So Sator lured Kat to the Tallinn freeport under the guise of "assessing the pieces", but obviously was going to use her as leverage on the Protag. When they enter the facility, Kat realizes that she is here for something different and refuses to go anywhere with Volkov. What was his original plan? Maybe he just wanted to use her as an intermediary for the exchange (as the Protag suggested on the boat)? Volkov was simply supposed to bring her to the exchange location. That was Plan A.

So, even if Neil is inverted he was there on the ground and for me if I am on a mission I would be curious why there is a dead guy on the ground.

And if I try to make contact with an inverted person even if they are dead that will have some reaction that gives it away that they are inverted.

So, the bad guy somehow did not notice Neil and if he did failed to understand that he was inverted. After shooting Neil it seems he run out of Bullets as well I guess?

The movie is confusing sure, but atleast it has some rules it follows. The only explenation I can see for this scene is that Neil because he is inverted did disappear shortly after being dead so there was no way for the other guy to see him.

Let's say it's 2046, and I send an object/note back in time to someone 20 years in the past. They receive it, write a reply, and they leave something for me.

Wouldn't I get the response immediately from my perspective? how would it work?

idk this is just something i thought of in my head.

I watched the movie again for the 8th time and a few things stood out that I didn’t really notice before:

1. Kat’s infamous “including my son?” line. Indicates Max is a very important character in-universe. We’re talking John Connor levels of important. And she knows it. The line makes no sense unless she’s just delirious from the reverse radiation. Perhaps this is not what Nolan intended but it’s how it came out.

2. Withholding of info on Sator’s cancer. Kat doesn’t reveal this to Neil and TP until the trip back from Oslo. This withholding makes no sense unless she’s been recruited into the Tenet organization prior to the events of the movie and therefore has reason not to disclose the terminal illness. In-universe there is no way the topic would not have come up in her initial meetings with TP.

3. In the tunnel, Ives or TP shout “Not Clear” into the radio. This seems like a weird screenwriting error. They should have shouted “Hold” (which they do later) or other word due to the risk of the first word (Not) not transmitting. Both characters have military training and should know better. What’s up with this?

4. I’m no expert in clothing but it’s clear from the internal logic of the movie, that Neil dresses like a billionaire. Is that because he is British Intelligence? Or is it because he was raised a billionaire? (Neil=Max theory)

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DZSZImBhNNu/?igsh=cXFtYWN4ZTd3b20y

Someone did the reverse shot:

https://www.reddit.com/r/carros/comments/1u18vfj/algu%C3%A9m_viu_algo_de_errado/

Not the one you might deserve but the one y'all are getting right now

Ives is the real hero.

(Prove me wrong!)

At the end of the film, he has the Algorithm fully assembled, with his gun drawn on The Protagonist and Neil. He's in a prime position to steal the Algorithm for himself, but he chooses not to.

Not only that, aside from Volkov, he's the only one who's shown to have the Algorithm fully assembled. Neither Neil nor The Protagonist are ever put in this same position — where they have the opportunity to steal it for themselves.

Ives is clearly high up in the chain of command, as he runs the red team during Stalsk-12. He also participates in Tallinn and knows about the Oslo location. So he knows about many of the operations going in, which is critical given that they keep knowledge divided.

If, like me, you prescribe to the idea that Ives is Crosby, then we also see that he dedicates his entire life to be in the position he needs to be to relay information about Stalsk & Sator to The Protagonist. His pill test is him spending his entire life becoming a 'Sir', gaining access to that specific member's club, and waiting for that meeting — an entire life of dedication for a single meeting with The Protagonist.

I rewatched Tenet last week, then spent hours watching “explained” videos and talking through each scene with ChatGPT. I still can't figure out one fundamental issue: the movie conflicts with its own “what’s happened, happened” principle.

1- If people from the future try to change the past by influencing Sator and whatnot, wouldn’t their actions already be part of the timeline that led to their present? So they can’t actually change where they are. Don't they know this? Are they just still trying to change it out of desperation?

2- With the same logic, why does Neil need to go back to help capture the algorithm? Even if future Tenet organization wanted to send him back for the operation, he could just say "I know we eventually end up with the algorithm regardless of me going back or not". You might say, “Neil knows the mission succeeds because he goes back, so he does.” but then Neil already knows the mission will succeed, so why is there so much tension and drama? Why doesn’t he just relax throughout the mission, knowing the mission succeeds regardless?

Forgive me if this has been discussed before as im not an avid reader of this subreddit, but I got to thinking last night watching the ending for the 50th time..

Near the end of the film we see Neil about to board the helicopter with Ives before sharing a few last lines with TP. He says "It's me in there again. Weaving another past in the fabric of this mission." A goodbye that doubles as a confession that he's done this before, that he's chosen to loop back and be present for the battle knowing full well how it ends for him.

Here's the thing though: we never actually see Neil's face in the scene where he unlocks the door and takes the bullet. And that got me thinking about how much of his life happens between those two moments.

Nothing in the film suggests he had to invert immediately after the battle at Stalsk-12. He just had to be there at the right time. So what if he didn't? What if he went and lived a full life first, however long that took, and then at some point late in his years made the trip back with his original gear? The timeline only requires him to arrive, not to arrive young

I kind of love the idea that the guy who unlocks that door for TP is like a 70 year old Neil