[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 than Dunkirk, while this movie has interesting ideas, it struggles with some of the same problems that Nolan has with his other projects but here the original idea is “wasted” in a generic spy thriller.
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 has no time to breathe because it is scene of exposition after scene of exposition, there is no scene just to see the characters interact 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 possible and move on (lack of establishing shots and a lot of weird; unnecessary 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 it weird that he wastes so much time using practical effects and shooting in IMAX (IN FILM!) when he doesn't put any thought into his camera work, everything looks like it was "point and shoot" and I know most people don't give a shit about this, but for me, he just looks so lazy, And I though his camerawork got a lot better after The Dark Knight, but this was big step 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 or great, there aren't bad by any means. I think Nolan has great ideas for action scenes, but I never like how it executes them, for me the worst, is the climax battle, you can see a lot of money on screen but it just feels too confusing and not very entertaining.