YLoveEverything’s review published on Letterboxd:
I am a big fan of Nolan's work, the only movie that doesn't quite work for me is Dunkirk.
And this may be worse then Dunkirk, while this movie as interesting original idea, it struggles from some of the same problems that Nolan as in each of his movies and what makes it worse then other movies is that this original idea is "wasted" in a genric spy triller.
I think Nolan doesn't know what is "show, don't tell" because this movie is full of exposition, for him every scene needs to progress the plot and the viewer as no time to breath, because is scene of exposition after scene of exposition, there is no scene just to see the characters interest with each other in a normal situation. The editing doesn't help it either. It just wants to give you the information as fast as it can and move on (lack of establish shots and a lot of wierd unnessary jump cuts).
Well, the story is a bit convoluted and generic but at least Nolan directing saves this movie ? Well no. While the acting is solid and the movie has an amazing soundtrack, I find weird that he wastes no much time using practical effects and shooting in IMAX (IN FILM!) when he doesn't put any thought in is camera work, everything looks like it was "point and shoot" and I know most people don't give shit about this, but for me he just looks so lazy, And I though is camerawork got a lot better after The Dark Knight ( www.youtube.com/watch?v=v92uAesOimQ ) , but this is was big setup backwards.
And with a budget of $205,000,000! That mainly was used for practical effects, there is not a single action scene that feels memorable/great, there a not bad by any means. I think Nolan as great ideas for action scenes, but I never like how is executes them, for me the worst is part is the climax battle, you can see a lot of money on screen but it just feels to confusing and not very entertaining.