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+".
