Kmb_the_Nepali_reviewer A debut movie of a great filmmaker is either a stinker ("Alien 3", David Fincher) or a statement that he is there to stay. ("Reservoir Dogs", Quentin Tarantino and "Following", Christopher Nolan). "Following" is a very well made film, considering the circumstances under which it was made. The film is, in fact, a rulebook or a template of future Nolan films. Most of his future movies can be found in "Following" in the sense that most of his future movies have - broken timeline and non linear storytelling making the movie more thrilling, crime or criminal-ish adventure, manipulation of people and a surprising reveal, that's either mindblowing or in the case of "The Dark Knight Rises" (2012), studio's insistence. This movie is a crime thriller. Keeping away the circumstances and knowing nothing about other Nolan films, it's very good. Not excellent, not great, but simply very good. The pacing of the story feels rushed. There is character development but the pacing is so quick that we do not have enough time to get invested in the characters. Some things about the protagonist are simply addressed in the story by the characters in it, rather than telling it dramatically. The fight scenes and some acts of violence are a bit poorly choreographed. However, the suspense was excellent and the twists were mind blowing. Consider now, that you have watched Nolan's other movies as well. The rushed pace was inevitable for a movie which wanted to deliver a lot, but had only an hour of runtime. The issues with fight scenes and acts of violence are still the same, however, we can get a clue of how things played out off screen when a character addresses something about the protagonist. It's like the future Nolan films made it better. If you've seen any of his future movies containing a theme of manipulation, it's quite easy to figure out. The awesomeness of the suspense and the twists are retained. At last, consider that you also know how this movie got made. Man! It was lucky even to see the day! A budget of $6000 during the 90s for British film? It's probably gonna be forgettable. It might not be as good as it was supposed to be if it got a made under favorable circumstances, but surely ain't forgettable. I don't find it appropriate myself, but this movie is a masterpiece - in the sense that an almost no budget flick was made to be so good! I have seen other almost no budget films like "A Fistful of Fingers" (1995 or so) made by Edgar Wright, and it was just plain bad for me. I would never watch such films ever again, except for this one and any other such film, if I find them in the future. It was my fifth Nolan movie. I watched all three of his Batman movies, and I absolutely loved the second one, the first one was excellent and the third one was just good. Then I watched "Memento" (2000) which made me a Nolan fan. But it was this movie that made me appreciate him as a filmmaker in the way I do today. Judging it in a plain manner, I would give it an "8/10" and an "A-". But, for the reasons explained in this review, it gets a special "10/10" and an "A+".

MJB784 Why is this story told backwards and what's the chronological version like? Is there a way to find it online? Also, is the burglar's name really Cobb or the name on the credit card that the young man forged? The old man at the end states there's no listing of Cobb and that the house being robbed was Danny's (the name on the credit card). Yet, in the beginning, we see the two rob Cobb's house without the young man knowing that it's his. It would make sense since Cobb never had a last name and police don't know what he looks like anyway.

putosamofficial As a young aspiring filmmaker that has no idea where/how to start making films, this movie showed me that money is not an issue. You should use what is within your reach and make it happen. If you don't have money, skill or time to get insane color grading, huge dolly shots or high-end professional lighting equipment just record on black and white, hand-held, take advantage of the natural daylight and don't do a 3 hours long film. This feature film directed by Christopher Nolan, the man behind some of the biggest movies in the current generation and nominated for multiple Oscars, was made with a 6,000$ budget! If you pay close attention to the movie you can see that but when you do you are already into an intriguing story, a mysterious thriller about a young man who follows strangers and meets a burglar that doesn't steal for the money.

D' Francis It's easy to see, in his first production, exactly why Christopher Nolan is one of the best modern directors. Like with what we would eventually see in Memento, this is an out-of-order complex confusing psychological thriller with plot twists galore. Stylized in black-and-white and stripped of 90's technology, it could pass for an old school noir-film.While not as intricate and lavish as his later films, Nolan does a tremendous amount of good with practically no budget and a cast of competent actors. The fact the cast plays their roles like regular people instead of the Hollywood cliché acting we'd expect from a drama is sort of refreshing. At 70 minutes, it's short but definitely not short-changed.