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+".

Christopher Nolan's debut feature 'Following' revolves around the life of a writer who turns to stalking as a method to overcome his writer's block and how this new-found hobby affects his life. Noted for its meagre budget, 'Following' manages to look professional more often than not. Just under 70 minutes, the movie is fast paced with an intriguing plot aided by a non-linear narrative structure that forces the audience to be constantly attentive. While the movie is not highly polished and shows off the technical mastery that Nolan later goes on to demonstrate to the world, 'Following' still manages to stand out from the many other low budget debut features.

Following is Nolan's first film, and undoubtedly is one of the director's most unknown masterpiece that did great works such as The Prestige, Memento, Inception, Intertellar and the highly acclaimed Batman trilogy, Following is the weakest of the Nolan has a low budget, but the film is not bad, we see some features of Nolan face, the plot tries to be confused at times, the cast is very competent, the photography is good, the script Is good, the pace is competent, even more that the film is very short, the direction of Nolan is good, even more with limitations, Following is an competent film, is the beginning of a director of an enviable curriculum. Note 6.5

This is an interesting little movie. This was feature debut of now famous director Christopher Nolan, and was made on the budget of only six thousand dollars. So as you can imagine, this was a small movie, but I feel it is genuinely impressive what they made with so little of a budget.Like most Nolan films, Following has a very interesting and tight story. The story has many signature Nolan moments where a scene will cut in between two or three different times and places, and its up to the viewer to try to bring together in the end. The story isn't as complicated as Memento or Inception but it still has some complexity to it.Another thing is that the acting is surprisingly great, for a cast that was just Nolan's friends at the time. The cinematography was also surprisingly good and the fact that there budget was so low makes some shots pretty impressive. My only gripe is that there are some shots that are somewhat amateur, but they are few and far between.In the long run, Following is an impressive first film and has many aspects of it you will probably notice in later Nolan films. It isn't anything mind blowing, but is a well made and interesting neo-noirFinal Score: 8.5/10