Bottom Line: An overlooked debut from the director of The Dark Knight.

Directed by: Christopher Nolan
Starring: Alex Haw, Darren Ormandy, Dick Bradsell, Gillian El-Kadi, Jennifer Angel, Jeremy Theobald, John Nolan, Lucy Russell, Nicolas Carlotti

Now that countless unforgettable names such as Alfred Hitchcock and Stanley Kubrick are no longer alive to produce modern classics, and several others such as Rob Reiner and Tim Burton have foreshadowed–if not confirmed–a significant drop in their careers, we’re left with only a handful or two of filmmakers that we can consistently rely on to direct just as successfully as when they had just begun. Christopher Nolan is one of such figures. Nolan always enjoys experimenting with his cinematic techniques and presenting them far less traditionally, but I have yet to witness a resulting failure. Although the vast majority of his films have been widely praised and recognized (i.e. Inception, The Dark Knight), it seems rather disappointing that 1999’s Following–his debut film, nonetheless–is by far his most overlooked.

Following “tracks” an anonymous, aspiring writer (Jeremy Theobald), young, lonely, and bored. He has made plans to write his first novel but can’t quite decide on how his characters would act or behave, what their personalities are like. To cure his writer’s block, our protagonist begins shadowing just about anybody he finds interesting while walking through the city. When this tedious habit evolves into an obsession, the writer finds himself in danger, involved in crime, and being betrayed. The film works every bit as an inspiration for Nolan’s breakthrough picture Memento just a year later. It practices the “neo-noir” genre popularized by films of the early to mid 1990s such as The Usual Suspects and Se7en. A production made on an ultra-low-budget of $6,000–making it easily one of the least expensive films ever released–Following is photographed by Christopher Nolan himself, using a subpar and often mildly shaky technique set against mysterious, low-key black-and-white photography. Dare I say that had the profanity been removed and the violence been presented in a less intense manner, this could easily fool an audience as a film shot in the 1940s and 1950s, when films-noir were initially produced. This idea, albeit with far more professional cinematography, was clearly the inspiration for the select black-and-white scenes in Memento.

The one major similarity between the two films is the narrative structure. Following is organized in a nonlinear sequence, the same way Memento did (though in a much more brilliant, harrowing, and exhilarating way) a year later. The style is admittedly neat when embellished here, but its usage is, unfortunately, almost pointless. In addition, it’s a bit difficult to comprehend. Occasionally, the “Chekhov’s gun” device is employed, allowing us to perhaps draw a conclusion about the order in which each scene is placed via minor details such as change in hair length or whether or not a character is scarred. Following clocks in quite tersely at an hour and eleven minutes. Not until the final fifteen minutes does everything begin to piece together and make sense as one complete story.

Following isn’t a film I would recommend bypassing. Although it’s nowhere close to any of Christopher Nolan’s best work, it’s overlooked to the point of shame. Yes, Memento is by far the more favorable choice. But if remakes were defined by technique rather than story, Memento would be purely a remake of Following. Among other optimal reasons, why not watch Following for the mere sake of seeing the roots of Nolan’s creativity in action? Let’s admit: while not perfect, it’s sufficiently entertaining and pretty exciting.



11 thoughts on “Following

  1. Definitely a fair review. I agree Following isn’t Nolan’s best, but it is fun to explore the roots of Nolan’s work. A very worth initial effort, but when compared to his other works, it doesn’t exactly hold up as well.

  2. When I saw this I remember it really stuck with me afterward. Nolan is a man who pays attention to every detail and in all of his movies it shows through. That’s why he can work for a budget of 6 grand or a budget well into the millions. Nice write up.

    • I most certainly agree with you that Nolan pays strict attention to detail, so he takes off no matter how high or low the budget is that he is working from. Even WHEN adjusted for inflation, he has directed two of the MOST expensive films yet (The Dark Knight at $185 million and The Dark Knight Rises at $230 million) as well as one of the LEAST expensive films yet (Following at $6,000). That’s pretty impressive, and by now, it’s actually difficult to see that he actually did begin as an indie filmmaker.

  3. Of all the blogs I’ve read as of late, I have not seen anyone review this film. I’ve been meaning to forever, as I love the movie and even own it, but I guess I never got around to it. Reading your review really makes me want to re-visit it, though. I do agree that the film is far from Nolan’s best, but the production value (when it’s dirt cheap in reality) is so good and the ideas in the film are hard to ignore as almost genius.

    • I could have graded this higher. I had high expectations. Like ridiculously high ones. I expected to (somehow?) enjoy it even more than I enjoyed Memento. Now I’ve seen all but two of Nolan’s films (Insomnia and The Prestige–which I hope to get to very soon), and I’ve written up on all but one that I’ve seen (Inception, even though I own it; I’ll probably find some time to give it a third watch just so I can have my flowing opinions here). Nolan is a great filmmaker, but I’d have to agree with the general critical analysis that Following is his weakest.

Comments are closed.