Avis des utilisateurs

The debut that plucked from obscurity one of the brighter stars of contemporary noir is an assured, if limited, stab at the con game and obsession. Filmed for zero money, Nolan couldn't have chosen a better subject than the drab and seamy underside of London to ply his trade, given the lack of funds. This short (67 min) is at its best in playing with the audience's and protagonist's expectations about who is scamming whom, though the initial set-up does ring some alarm bells in the credibility dept. The muddy cinematography (he often used natural lighting due to budget) can be mostly chalked up to noir stylization, though the limitations do show at times.

One can easily see Nolan's style developing in this fledgling effort; many of the same themes of blurred identity and expectation smashing recur in MEMENTO and INSOMNIA. Not a masterpiece but good and certainly worth a look for modern noir and Nolan fans.

After watching Memento one might well wonder how Christopher Nolan pulled off something that audacious, that brilliant, in what was his major directorial debut. Watch Following, the no-budget thriller which was Nolan's actual directorial debut, and you begin to understand. With no money, with an amateur cast and doing pretty much everything (writing, shooting, directing) himself Nolan created a little masterpiece. Whatever "it" is that enables someone to make great movies Nolan clearly has it. And had it right from the beginning.

Fans of Memento will see a lot of similarities, hints of what was to come, in Following. The most obvious parallel is the nonlinear time structure as the story here unfolds completely out of order. Whereas the story in Memento proceeded more or less in a straight line which just happened to be moving backwards here there is no line at all. Scenes are placed in a seemingly random order. We're all over the place. At the end, in the beginning, somewhere in the middle, back to the end again...it really could have been a jumbled mess. But Nolan gives us a little assistance in orienting ourselves with the shifting appearance of his main character. He has three distinct looks to him and once you figure that out you can figure out where you are in the story. But there are still enough twists and turns to make your head spin, to keep you guessing right up to the end.

The less said about the plot the better. Best to let you try to piece the puzzle together for yourself. Much like Memento you really have to see it all the way through to fully appreciate the true genius of it, to understand how any missteps from Nolan along the way could have unraveled his whole story. When the movie concludes you can't help but be amazed that Nolan could pull this off essentially by himself. At least with Memento he had a little help. Here it's just Nolan and his small cast. There are really only three roles of any significance in the film, maybe four if you're being generous. But this little troupe and their first-time director combined to create something really special. The acting may at times seem a bit amateurish but that has to be expected from performers who are certainly not acting pros. And any little quibbles with the performances do not detract at all from the overall movie-watching experience. The actors do more than well enough to get by, well enough in fact that you're surprised there were not bigger acting roles for them somewhere down the line if they wanted them. That the performers have a great story to work with certainly helped their cause.

Things do get a little convoluted in the end as Nolan's story takes its final turns. You worry that things may be getting away from him a little bit. But he manages to ultimately pull it all together. You may have to really think about it after things are through but it all makes sense when you run it back in your mind. And it's nice every now and again to have a movie that actually requires you to think isn't it? Christopher Nolan seems to specialize in movies like that. He just makes great movies. Here he did it with no money, all on his own, never having made a movie before. It takes a special talent to pull that off. And among his many talents Nolan also apparently possesses the ability to see into his own future. When you watch Following note the Batman logo on the main character's apartment door.

Christopher Nolan's first directorial effort, a year before he did "Memento," and this is almost as brilliant as that classic. He uses time differentials in a similar manner to tell his story, and it's a very clever one.

Bill is this young writer who begins following complete strangers around just to see where they live and what they're all about. One day, he follows this man, Cobb, who turns the tables and confronts Bill, who breaks down and confesses what he's up to.

Cobb is a burglar and he takes Bill along on a few jobs to teach him the ropes. Both men are voyeurs of a sort and a bond begins to grow between the two of them.

But there's an ulterior motive for Cobb nurturing this relationship, and it all ties in very smartly at the end. No, I won't spoil it but this is a very cool movie and I'm beginning to think Christopher Nolan is a genius.

If you like suspense films with surprise endings, this one is a must see.

Christopher Nolan's first feature film wowed critics who saw it when it first came out. Shot on a micro budget of $6,000 this is a student film with real class. The film is shot in black and white, and features people who you assume are friends of Nolan's appearing in the movie. This is not to say they are bad actors because they are quite good. You could see Jeremy Theobald and Alex Haw appearing in other projects but unfortunately they haven't since this was made 6 years ago.

Nolan's thriller, much like Memento, does not play chronologically, it shifts the scenes around much like Pulp Fiction. The writing is fantastic. It is a great twisting thriller but because the temporal order of the film is shifted around it makes it even more interesting. I thought the last ten minutes in particular when everything starts to become clear were excellent.

For a film of such a small budget and with no recognizable names at all, this is so good. It is superior to most that Hollywood studios offer and Nolan after three films (this, the superior Memento and the not quite as good but still excellent Insomnia) has cemented himself as the most exciting new talent of recent times. I can't wait for Batman.

This film is short and sweet and certainly a great watch. It is very professional and the twists are fantastic and completely surprising. I also thought that the score from David Julyan was also excellent, very atmospheric and had a chilly quality to it. He has gone on to compose Nolan's other films.

Overall I would recommend this, I intend to get all of Nolan's films. This is a low budget gem. *****

Just watched this on DVD three times - Once the 'normal' way, once with the scenes in consecutive order (in this doozy of a film noir, the beginning, middle and end of the story intertwine), and once with the director's commentary running. Quite amazing. A bare-bones tale, told with more flair, energy and substance than most big-budget overblown features being released today.

I think this is an even more accomplished film than the subsequent Memento, which turned me on to Nolan in the first place. Can't wait to see what he does with a bigger budget (and bigger box-office stars) in his next film, Insomnia.

Saucy, eh ? If at all you're familiar with Christopher Nolan's style of film-making, watching this will at once make you realize where it all started. Its also of course possible that it began much before this but since much of that material isn't accessible to the public (save Doodlebug), we'll never really know. For all purposes, Following remains Nolan's feature film debut and it surely is a remarkable achievement.

The story follows Bill, a struggling unemployed writer who takes a liking to following people in hopes of finding material to write about. This liking soon turns into addiction forcing Bill to set rules to allow him to restrain his activities. One of the rules which he ends up breaking, is following the same person twice. The person with whom this rule is broken is Cobb, who soon confronts Bill about being followed. As it turns out, Cobb is a burglar who enjoys robbing people, not for the money, but rather for the sheer pleasure in taking away things that people took for granted; his belief being that it would make them realize what they had. Taken away by Cobb's lifestyle, Bill becomes a partner in his burglaries which is where the trouble begins.

Digging any more into the plot would serve to spoil the complex mystery that Following is. Following has a lot of those narrative structures that would become trademarks of Nolan's directorial style (intercuts, close-up inserts, non-linear editing, multiple chronologies, and so on). Nolan and crew were forced to make certain hard choices to obscure the severely limited budget, one of which was shooting the film in black and white. Of course, the plot was such that these decisions worked the film's favor. The film's incredible naturalism repeatedly comes to mind while watching the film. This is due largely in part to the film being shot hand-held, with scenes filmed in a take or two to save on film stock. The behind the scenes material with the film reveals this and other fascinating details about the film's production such as the crew shooting over weekends due to their jobs on weekdays as a result of which the film took a year to complete.

Despite the low budget, you're always hooked on to Following and that is due largely in part to the film's plot and tight writing (another of Nolan's strengths). Unlike many filmmakers who use lavish editing styles and gimmicky display effects, Nolan's films rely primarily on story and screenplay to get the viewers attention (with the occasional non-linear editing thrown in to really keep the audience alert at all times). Add to it, the intriguing characters which have personalities so distinct it appears Nolan himself followed a handful of people to get the traits right. Jeremy Theobald is as natural as the gullible Bill as Alex Haw is suave in the role of Cobb. And the chemistry between the two is so natural, it makes most of the dialogues they say seem improvised, as though real people were conversing.

Following is a great start for Nolan who has now moved on to bigger, elaborate and definitely better projects. It is a lesson for aspiring filmmakers that even with a limited budget, it is possible to make a feature as interesting, riveting and thrilling as some of the best noirs of the early 40s. While it may not be perfect, most of the limitations it suffers from are largely due to production values rather than plotting and pacing. It is nevertheless, a must watch for anyone who has even the slightest of respect for Christopher Nolan's film-making.

Overall Score: 7.0 / 10

I just finished watching Following and I thought it was great. I rated it 8 out of 10. I plan on watching it again with the director's commentary and then again in chronological order.

I rented this movie because of my fascination of Christopher Nolan's more recent movie Memento. Following has some similarities; this movie was probably the blueprint for Memento. Even the music in some parts is very similar.

Shooting the movie in black and white gives it a mysterious feel. The story and dialogue is really good. The performance of the actors is believable.

Christopher Nolan made this movie on a really low budget. I look forward to his next release Insomnia, a big budget movie with my favourite actor Al Pacino.

Vital and inventive British film about a man who becomes obsessed with randomly picking people out in the street and following them

Bill becomes obsessed with picking people out in the street at random and following them. He is drawn into the criminal underworld when he chooses to follow a burglar, Cobb, who catches him in the act and encourages him to take things further...

This is a rare and inventive British film, one not concerned with being flavour of the month in the style mags. Its low budget is displayed like a badge of pride, which is refreshing rather than annoying. It runs out of steam before the end, but Nolan hints at something very special here.

Great film. No gratuitous gimmicks like in most Hollywood films. Everything supported the suspense of the plot. B&w gave it a basic, no-frills feel also. In short, it was visceral in its simplicity of cinematography and cast.

Following serves as an interesting contrast to Memento. Characters in both used manipulation and subterfuge extensively. In that sense, both reminded me somewhat of "In the Company of Men," also highly recommendable. One difference between Nolan's two films is that Memento was a little easier for me to follow, given that the b&w scenes progress in a constant chronological direction, and so do those in color. I don't think that was true of Following, where scenes seemed to be shown at random. If you have the choice between VCR and DVD, I'd highly recommend DVD, since that gives you the option of watching the movie a second time in chronological order, not just in the scrambled (albeit ingenuous) order presented by Nolan. It also makes it easier, upon a second viewing, to piece the order together for yourself, if you want to.

As another viewer noted, one of the best things about both this movie and Memento is that none of the cast were famous. They were characters, not big-name actors who brought in personas developed in other movies.

Given certain similarities in the plots, I wonder if Memento is sort of a remake of Following, but intended to reach a bigger audience, like Edward Burns made She's the One in the mold of -- and with largely the same cast as -- The Brothers McMullan.

Not one of Nolan's best films (second weakest from personal opinion), but for a debut and for being made on such a low budget much of 'Following' is very impressive. Even if it became much more refined in his later films, there is a sense that Nolan has found his style and not hopelessly trying to find his feet.

'Following' isn't perfect. The motivation for the lead female character is very thin, likewise with the character herself and Lucy Russell is a blank acting-wise. The film doesn't get going straight away with a slightly dull first 10 minutes, and there is one or two twist(s) too many which gives the ending a convoluted and contrived feel.

However, the production values could have been much worse considering that it was a debut film and that the budget was reminiscent of a miniscule student film budget. Granted, Nolan's visual style became more audacious in later films, and very quickly (the difference in style between 'Following' and his next, and best, film 'Memento' is staggering), but as the way it's shot, lit and composed has much more atmosphere and class than most "student films" calling it one seems somewhat of an insult.

David Julyan provides a chilling score, that is not as good as his thematically complex one for 'Memento' but on the same level as that for 'Insomnia' and better than the fitting (within the film) forgettable (on its own) one for 'The Prestige'.

Apart from the odd stilted moment, the dialogue has many clever and thoughtful ones, and Nolan does a good job directing even if more expansive, ambitious and refined in his later films. The story is interesting and remarkably tight, with very few needless elements, a case of ambition mostly not getting in the way (something that undermined 'Interstellar' and to a lesser extent 'Inception', though those films have many strong elements) until the ending tries to do a little too much.

Characters are interesting, being likable but doing not so likable things. The acting is mostly very much committed, with Alex Haw especially being very good and charismatic.

On the whole, Nolan went on to do much better things (especially with 'The Dark Knight' trilogy and 'Memento') but 'Following' is not a bad start at all and fares better than some more famous and more influential director's debut films (Kubrick with 'Fear and Desire' for example). 7/10 Bethany Cox

In this intriguing noir thriller (looking like the Forties, but with a psychology befitting the Nineties), Director Christopher Nolan employs a number of techniques he would perfect in his internationally acclaimed Memento (2000), most notably scenes presented out of time sequence for effect, and a naive protagonist taken advantage of by others. The film opens with "Bill, the Innocent" (as I might dub him), played by Jeremy Theobald, trying to explain to someone, perhaps a social worker, perhaps even a police inspector (John Nolan), why he took up following people just for the fun of it. He doesn't just follow women, he points out. He's not a stalker, as such. He's just curious. He's an intriguing and sympathetic character, a Brit writer with a lot of time on his hands who seems something of a throwback to an earlier age with his clanking manual typewriter and the photo of a pursed-lips Marilyn Monroe on the wall of his shabby apartment. Things began to go wrong for him, he further explains, when he broke some of his "following rules" and got too close to his prey. What he doesn't know and what we don't know yet, is that his clumsy following technique has allowed him to unwittingly become the followed himself. Enter a juicy blonde (Lucy Russell) walking down some steps from her apartment. (This scene is out of sequence as far as chronological time goes, but psychologically speaking, her appearance signals his entanglement). Enter now a scheming, sophisticated psychopathic thrill-seeker named Cobb (Alex Haw) who entices Bill with his (apparent) practice of burglary just for the powerful feeling one gets from invading the sanctity of another's life. Although justification for the temporal inversions here is not as clearly established as in Memento, nonetheless the technique works well, and Nolan provides us with a clever ending that sneaks up on us and makes in a few seconds all that went before clear. Or mostly clear. You might want to rewind and view the first few minutes of the film, and then everything should be clarity. This low-budget, black and white, deliciously ironic little film (71 minutes) marked the auspicious debut of a film maker who has already made quite a name for himself, not only with the aforementioned Memento, but with Insomnia (2002). It will be interesting to see what Nolan does next.

Following is the directorial debut of Christopher Nolan. As it was made on almost no budget with unprofessional actors, I was not expecting much. The protagonist is a young writer who has resorted to stalking people that he finds interesting so as to pass his time.

On one particular day, the guy that he was stalking confronted him and questioned the reason for why he was stalking. Both of them begin to break into other people's home and just try to guess the type of people that lived there.

Despite the lack of professional actors, it never feels as if the acting is poor due to the well rehearsed scenes. According to Nolan, all of them had rehearsed every scene so well that the majority of the movie had scenes which were filmed in the first or second take.

To make a movie without any distributor is courageous and a bit of a gamble. However, Nolan took the risk and today he is among the most well known directors in the world. Do not go into this movie for viewing a technical masterpiece because it isn't. However, if you are looking for a compelling story with a stellar ending, this movie is right for you.

People seem to love this film. Reviews talk about its ingenious twists and turns. Well, maybe if I'd never seen "House Of Games" or even "The Usual Suspects" I might have been a bit more surprised. But as it was, I figured out who was pulling the wool over whose eyes pretty much from the word go. Perhaps I've just watched too many double-(or triple-)cross thrillers.

This is basically apprentice work. Nolan wrote a film he could shoot for peanuts. In that respect, there's no denying he's done a great job. Despite the fact you can hear the camera running in most shots, he's put together a well directed film that manages to rise above its zero budget. But the script needs so much more work - it really could've done with a couple of more drafts. It falls into some very basic traps, like characters constantly "explaining" the plot to other characters for the benefit of the audience. The acting is okay, though funnily enough the best performance comes from someone who never had any intention of becoming a professional actor (he's now an architect).

I thought all the twists and turns a bit tiresome. Very much hand-me-down Mamet. The actual idea of "following" complete strangers is quite intriguing. Too bad the movie doesn't bother to pursue it after the first few minutes.

Still, Nolan designed this as a calling card movie. Like an eye-catching student movie, it got him noticed, and he's now working in Hollywood. And I wish him well. In fact, his Director's Commentary on the DVD of "Following" is much more interesting than the film itself.

Watch it if you're a bit curious. But, really, it's no great shakes.

Bill, Jeremy Theobald, is an inspiring writer who hasn't gotten anything published as of yet. Bill also has an odd and strange habit, he likes to follow people.

Bill picks out some stranger in the streets diner or on the subway, metro, and follows them as if he were their shadow. Maybe Bill does this to help him in inspiring himself to write the great novel that he's been dreaming about or get an article of his get printed in a major magazine? Maybe it's because it fills Bill's lonely life with a purpose and even makes the person of his curiosity a face in the crowd with meaning and substance by his paying attention to him or her? Or maybe it gives Bill someone to look after and care about and be responsible for besides himself? Bill has a simple rule that he follows religiously when he follows someone : after you follow him or her to their home or place of work you stop.

One day Bill follows Cobb, Alex Haw, home and instead of following his rule of stopping he still keeps following Cobb. Bill will soon realize how right he was with that rule he set for himself in following people and at the same time how wrong he was by breaking it.

Amazingly good low-budget movie made by Christopher Noland in 1998 before he hit it big in Hollywood with his ground-breaking and original motion picture classic "Momento" some two years later that has already become a major cult movie.

"Following" is actually a much better movie then "Momento" because it's a conventional and easy to follow story. Compared to "Momento's" which was at first confusing and then when you realize what the movie is telling you in it's backward storyline very complicated. Whats makes "Following" so much better is just by it being simple but at the same time brainy in it's affect on those who watch it. The movie is far more direct as well as devastating and you don't have to see it over and over to get just what it was trying to tell them like "Momento" did. "Following" is a story within a story within a story with one of the most surprising as well as simply manipulated ending, if you watch the movie again and notice the clues, that you'll ever see.

Made with an unbelievably small budget of $6,000.00, thats less then what most Hollywood movies budgets out for coffee-breaks, with a no-name cast in black and white and just over one hour, 71 minutes, long. Hollywood as well as the motion picture industry outside of Hollywood can learn a lot from Chris Noland in how someone with nothing more then talent and imagination can achieve what millions of dollars in most cases can't; make an intelligent and at the same time penetrating film with next to nothing in money and no big name stars.

I saw this movie after I saw Memento. I was very impressed with Memento so when I saw this at the local video store, I decided to check it out. I was equally impressed with this little film. I like black and white films so that was bonus, especially for a noir film. I thought the acting was very good by actors I have never noticed in other films. It is short and makes you think, which you can't state about many films. I loved to guess where a film is going and 90% of the time I know the general outline of the film and where it is going in the first 10 minutes. Nolan's films are never that easy to decipher at first glance. I won't spoil the film other than to state the protagonist of the film is not talking to his shrink after he has taken his stalking too far at the beginning of the film as I originally surmised. This movie is basically a rough draft for some of the ideas and themes Nolan would later explore and exploit in Memento. It works on its own and if Nolan had never done anything afterwards would still be a major talent.

Christopher Nolan's debut feature film is a tightly crafted thriller that cleverly twists and turns. It's remarkable that Nolan managed to execute the film so seamlessly, considering he made it on a shoestring budget of around six thousand US dollars, filming on weekends with his friends.

Despite the absence of a grand scale often associated with Nolan's work, the film still contains his signature elements. The sharp, non-linear editing is paired with an unpredictable and intriguing narrative, while an exciting score enhances the suspense.

However, the movie falls short in terms of acting and dialogue. Though the performances are not entirely amateurish, they feel somewhat dry and detract from the overall engagement. Nevertheless, Nolan's directorial prowess shines through, making this debut a promising start to his illustrious career.

Following 9-29-08

Every narrative film needs that hook...that undefinable something that will keep your butt in the seat till the credits roll. Its the one thing any remotely "good" film has to do. Following's non-linear structure interestingly enough had me hooked nearly immediately. The film begins with a clean cut looking fella dressed nicely then flashes back and we see the same character now looking rather bohemian....another jump involves our hero lying on the ground having been beaten with a rubber glove shoved in his mouth. These sorts of jumps in the narrative arc of the character occur frequently throughout the film. Begging one to ask how did these future events occur and why? Following's structural approach gives us a narrative that is much greater than the sum of its parts.

Revisiting the earliest features of acclaimed filmmakers can be a fascinating experience. Sometimes we'll see them exploring a style they moved on from, and often we'll see the first hints of their approach to making movies, and exploring familiar themes. Almost without exception, though - especially for those who are household names today, but got their start years ago - their early pictures are astoundingly low-budget, requiring no small amount of ingenuity and resourcefulness to see their labor come to fruition. To learn a bit of the history for 'Following' one quickly understands the lengths Christopher Nolan went to to produce his first film, and one can only admire his tenacity. The effort paid off handsomely, however: while the bare-bones nature of the production is fairly evident, it in no way dampens the quality of the end result, and if anything the ardor Nolan poured into this does much to mask how little he had to work with. I began watching with mixed expectations, based just on similar titles I've seen, but I cannot overstate just how impressed I am. 'Following' is fantastic!

Simple as David Julyan's score is, I think his compositions do a fine job of complementing the tone of the film, and the mood in any given scene. Restricted as Nolan was to minimal equipment, I think the basic cinematography is really quite good, and reliance on natural or room lighting doesn't meaningfully hamper the experience. If anything, the extra shadow that pervades much of the runtime actually lends further to the dark deeds and atmosphere of the narrative. Even the cast is superb, elevating this small movie with no major backing to another level. Jeremy Theobald, Alex Haw, and Lucy Russell in particular (but certainly their co-stars in smaller roles) all lend great personality to their characters with performances of nuanced range and practiced physicality. None of them are stars of especial renown, but judging by this alone they deserve more recognition.

Excellent as these many elements are, Nolan's writing is the grandest of all. One recognizes all the staples of classic noir: bad business, dirty dealings, dubious characters, and a deepening hole as events spiral out of control, and further timeless themes on top. The characterizations in the screenplay are wonderfully complicated and believable, with strong and varied personalities, backgrounds, motivations, and secrets. In light of the constraints of the production, it's extra clear how tight and fastidious the scene writing and dialogue are - detailed, but with no waste that could bog down the filming process. Above all, the narrative is altogether phenomenal, so unassuming as it begins but taking dire turns and going places I didn't anticipate. 'Following' boasts a couple substantial zigzags, and the way these are woven so naturally into the plot only heightens the impact.

Very importantly, the structure of the narrative writing is critical - the non-linear nature of the storytelling has been noted, but that term alone doesn't quite capture the effect. The progression of the story is so pointedly disordered that it threw me for a loop at first, which was unquestionably intentional - Nolan himself has accordingly said that he built the film in a way so as to maintain an air of mystery and confusion for the viewer until the pristine moment. Well done, sir - it worked. Not dissimilarly, there came a time when I wondered if the disjointed construction was actually necessary, or just a novel affectation, yet almost as soon as I had this thought, in the next instant all doubts were cast aside. There is an astounding intelligence to the writing here that matches some of the very best in all of cinema.

It bears repeating that no matter the reputation of a given filmmaker, their earliest movies are often a far cry from their most acclaimed works. I think it's only reasonable to approach a title like 'Following' with a measure of caution. I'm therefore all the more thrilled that this is so unfailingly brilliant as it is. It lacks the same polish, but this is a crime thriller on par with the best of anything Christopher Nolan has given us in all the years since, from 'Memento' to 'Tenet' and all points between. It's such a delightfully satisfying, rewarding experience as a viewer that I can only offer my highest and most enthusiastic recommendation for all comers. 'Following' is an absorbing, compelling neo-noir that demands far more attention; if you have the opportunity to watch, don't pass it up!

The best film done by Christopher Nolan. It is totally overlooked by his latest films but if u watch Following u will be stunned by the details that are very carefully put together. The thing that makes this film so extremely great is the dialogues in which nolan has no equal in my humble opinion. It has very dark and melancholic feeling when u are watching the film. Christopher is known for his unusual ways of filming and if u want to see how it looked before he became the brilliant cinematographer, it is his debut film so good eye will spot the mistakes and despite that u will be hooked from the first second :) ! Very underrated and beautiful film.

After all the overblown, overlong films I have seen recently thank goodness to find a real gem. Gritty, twisted and intelligent. Watch Hollywood grab Christopher Nolan and give him large budgets. Lucy Russell looks just as if she could walk into Philip Marlowe's office and kick start Bogart.

Been a fan of Christopher Nolan's and decided to check out some of his older work. My impression of this film was that it was pretty average and even though it is relatively short, some parts seem to drag on and/or be repetitive. Despite this, the film had an interesting story and was well written, the acting was also quite solid as was the movie as a whole. The ending was also quite good but by now I've come to expect that from Nolan. Several times during the film i caught myself thinking that certain parts were a little cheesy. Not something I would watch again and i do not strongly recommend it but it may be worth your time to see it once.

Not for me at all

I rate it so low because this type of movie is absolutely not geared toward me, I found it boring and I simply wasn't interested, within that, there are some positives that I want to highlight.

There are some really good scenes of Dialogue, the apparent 6k budget is beyond impressive to make a movie of this quality. The story is good but not enough for me, seems a bit all over the place it's about a young writer who follows people for inspiration that is found by a thief who takes him under his wing.

Yea not for me unfortunately and it's bottom of the Nolan barrel, a good directorial debut to say the least just not my cup of tea, 5/10.