Film Review: Christopher Nolan’s ‘Inception’ is Bold, Cold, and Ultimately Exhilarating
by John NolteFor a storyteller to fully satisfy an audience after promising to bring to life a particular concept, they must include every detail about that concept the audience is already familiar with, remind them of a few things they forgot, and then find a way to wrap all of that into a logical and clever story that touches on those familiar and unfamiliar beats while constantly surprising with the execution. That’s a tall enough order when Pixar is bringing toys to life. With “Inception,” writer/director Christopher Nolan brilliantly pulls this off in previously unconquered territory.
Nolan’s mind-melting triumph is without a doubt the most psychologically ambitious film I’ve ever seen. Previous cinematic attempts to grab hold of and realize the concept of consciously entering the world of dreams have usually focused on the visual (Hitchcock’s “Spellbound”), stuck to very simple rules (“Nightmare on Elm Street”), or fizzled out entirely (‘Dreamscape”) when the boundaries beyond simplicity were nudged. The idea of fully and successfully exploiting a psychological dimension where there are no rules seemed futile. Until now. Leave it to the director of “Memento,” a brilliant neo-noir Rubik’s Cube of a mystery audaciously told backwards, to be the first to successfully crack this genre.
What does the average person know about dreams? Among other things, we know that there can be dreams within dreams within dreams. We know time has no meaning, that we wake before we die or as we fall, and that oftentimes what’s happening, for good or bad, is a reflection of our subconscious fears, desires, and knowledge. Without giving any of the story away, Nolan takes these universally familiar ideas (and many others) and then uses a familiar framing device — The Last Big Heist Before I Get Out — to explore the living hell out of them.
Leonardo DiCaprio is Dom Cobb, a black market Extractor who, for the right price, will invade the dreams of your business rivals and steal their secrets for you. With a bounty on his head and only ever just barely out of reach of those looking to cash in on him, Cobb does what he does for the money, because he’s the very best at it, but also for the narcotic-like connection the technology he uses offers to a life he desperately wants to return to but can’t due to his many legal problems.
As is always this case with the One Last Heist genre, one person who needs something from our protagonist holds the key to everything he wants. Here, it’s a way home for Cobb. The price of the golden ticket, however, is that Cobb must do the impossible, what’s never been before. Both desperate to see his children but also intrigued by the challenge, Cobb bites, assembles a team, puts the plan into place, and then we’re off on a righteous cause to dreamland – inside the many psychological layers that exist within the mind of a powerful businessman.
Like the performances (DiCaprio has finally won me over), the special effects are absolutely flawless and serve the story perfectly. From your own dreams you’re sure to recognize the various visual moods Nolan explores: chaos, the inability to move quickly or escape, moments of inexpressible beauty and how an emotional connection conceived in your dreams can profoundly penetrate your waking reality. Nolan could’ve obviously gone anywhere with this idea but using the conceit of an “architect” (that’s all I’m going to tell you), we’re not subjected to dinosaurs or space aliens or any of that other crazy story-killing nonsense designed to sell the film’s trailer.
Like I mentioned earlier, “Inception” is a triumph and certainly one of the best films you’ll see this year, but until an absolutely exhilarating climax, the intricacies of the plot always feel a little further ahead of you than they should be and even then require an awful lot of exposition for the pieces to finally click into place. Also, the characters and their relationships are surprisingly and unnecessarily clinical. Cobb’s team, which includes Joseph Gordon-Levitt as an efficient fixer, Ellen Page as the “architect,” Tom Hardy as the “forger,” and Dileep Rao as the “chemist” – never gels.
Individually, each character is well-crafted but there’s very little chemistry between them and this causes the second act to be more mechanical and less involving than it should be. From the beginning, Cobb’s personal journey, which involves his wife (Marion Cotillard), promises to give the film a much needed emotional core, but that promise is always just a whisker out of reach until the very end, which, to be fair, is quite moving.
There are reports that “Inception” cost as much as $200 million to produce, and for that we should be thankful to Warner Brothers. Nolan is a once-in-a-generation auteur whose career is just getting started (he’s still a few days shy of 40) and his talent deserves a studio willing to finance it. Because there’s still a little justice in the world, that’s happened with this bold, challenging, slightly imperfect journey into the true final frontier that’s like nothing you’ve ever seen before.
Opening everywhere tomorrow, “Inception” deserves respect and an audience.
UPDATE: Cannot believe I forgot to mention Hans Zimmer’s incredible score, which is almost certain to be nominated for an Academy Award. Though not melodic like the scores of old, it is lush and large and unobtrusive like the scores of old and a vital part of the film’s most effective moments.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
89 Comments
Well, okay – "Blood Diamond" won me over with DiCaprio. Gone is the pretty boy, and in his stead is the meatier, grittier Leo.
Out of respect for Nolan's storytelling, I was already going to see "Inception."
Too bad Gordon-Levitt and Page swallowed the Kool-Aid and put a damper on the enthusiasm to see this.
Alright, Nolte your review is forcing me to watch this movie despite Leo and Page being in it. If you say Leo has won you over I know this movie must be something special. Chris Nolan continues his streak.
Yeah! Even if his actors are buffle-headed morons, Nolan knocks it out of the park again. I'm seeing this on the biggest screen I can find.
I thought this looked stupid, but I trust Christopher Nolan. He, along with Peter Jackson, the folks at Pixar, and very few others, is someone whose films I will happily take a chance on even when it doesn't look like the story will appeal to me. He's earned that, several times over.
Like most others here, despite the left-wing windiness of the actors involved, I am still highly motivated to see Inception, not least because of Chris Nolan being at the helm. No surprise for me that the movie cost $200 million; a lot of people on other sites think that after The Dark Knight, the studio basically gave him carte blanche for Inception, and he figured this would probably be the only time he'd get to make the movie entirely his way, so he went for it. Interested in how this will turn out.
The story is fascinating and Nolan's work thus far has been excellent. I'll see it despite the leftwing airheads in the movie that were blathering about Darth Cheney.
I'm soooo happy to hear this is good. I had decided to see it despite the unholy idiocy of the stars because Nolan has earned so much goodwill in my book. I'm going out tomorrow for my anniversary and we're going to see this. I'm really looking forward to it now!
The price of the golden ticket, however, is that Cobb must do the impossible, what’s never been before. Both desperate to see his children but also intrigued by the challenge,…….
This is an off topic comment but this quote reminds me of a docu-film I recently watched, Touching The Void [2003], where the main character [it’s a true story] also had to literally do the impossible and if he was able to achieve that he would then need a miracle to survive. I think it’s the greatest story of the triumph of the human spirit I have ever heard/seen, and there have been some incredible stories like the movie Alive based on a true story. There are those movies you see that just hit you and this one did it for me; I had to go for a ride after watching it just to think about what I had just seen. The docu-film is narrated by the actual participants in this horrific tale and it is beautifully done, for me it was too realistic, it seemed as if the actual events were caught on film. If Big Hollywood had a suggestion box I would recommend any contributor here that was also blown away by the film to do a review, maybe a “Look back at….” or an anniversary special about this epic mountain climb by the two Brits. I saw it a week ago and I’m still thinking about it. Remarkable film.
God, I love Nolan. He's so damned smart and talented. You can't be dumb and make "Following" for $6,000, and with performers who aren't even actors (the lead was an architect, for Christ's sake). You can't be talentless and make "Memento". (My first thought when I saw that film was – 'I have never seen this plot twist before.') So I just love Nolan. Which is why it hurt me to think those dumb ass actors spouting off their bullshit were going to deprive me of watching another example of Nolan's awesome work. (Especially this film. Man, I was really looking forward to this one.)
So, thanks, Nolte. I'm in your debt. You've just made me realize I need to rise up above Gordon-Levitt and Page (somebody take those jerks out back behind the woodshed) – and see this film. Again, thank you.
There are only three movies I want to see from now until the end of the year. Scott Pilgrim, Solomon Kane, and Inception. Yes Leo, Ellen Page and Joseph Gordon -Levitt are liberal twits. I'll force myself to ignore them for Christopher Nolan. This guy is a visionary filmmaker. A rarity in Hollywood these days.
I will not see it because of Leo's dreadful hypocrisy, and the remarks of the two co-stars during the recent junket. I feel that if more people were to vote with their pocket book, the message will get through. For those of you willing to see it despite your natural objections, you will merely embolden the nit-wits you rightly revile. They will smugly think that they can say whatever they want without repercussions and snear at you. And they will be right.
I'm sorry to nit-pick, but I'm compelled:
You cannot, by definition, "literally do the impossible".
Touching the Void is an inspiring film, and the story is harrowing and inspiring, but nothing impossible was done in this true story. All of it, I assure you, was entirely in the realm of the possible.
only movies i'm looking forward to this summer: ***INCEPTION***, Expendables, Scott Pilgrim..
>>Yes Leo, Ellen Page and Joseph Gordon -Levitt are liberal twits. I'll force myself to ignore them for Christopher Nolan. This guy is a visionary filmmaker. A rarity in Hollywood these days<<
Indeed!
I would say 99% of climbers who would have gone through the same ordeal would have died, imao. Although I don’t mountain climb I’m an athlete and an avid snowboarder, what that climber achieved is virtually impossible on all levels: physically, psychologically and against the elements under the circumstances. Although the climber does not believe in God it seems to me divine intervention was involved. His will to live was so strong it seemed as if God threw him a lifeline as a reward.
Thankfully it's the director who controls the story, flow and much of the dialog of a movie, NOT the actors, even if the actor IS the self important DiCaprio.
Now I'm thinking I might see this in the theater….
I've got a conservative tv/movie review blog at http://hollywoodpropaganda.wordpress.com
Check it out, and if you like it, pass it on!
Yeah, a movie that I'm really excited to see. Nolan is one of my favorites. Not crazy about who is in it but have been waiting for this all summer.
It's always a shame when liberal flavor-aid-drinking actors have to pull down a director's movie with their idiocy when this is probably the kind of movie that audiences ask for: something that seems original and doesn't insult our intelligence. I only say "seems" because I've seen this plot before in the Satoshi Kon anime film "Paprika", which goes along the same lines of using not-too-distant future technology for police investigators to enter suspects' dreams to solve crimes.
It's sort of like the line Marty McFly said to Doc in Back To The Future 3: "All the best stuff's made in Japan."
It's a shame that they had to hire a cast of liberal haters. When the movie bombs Nolan will have no one to blame but himself.
All the real conservatives will be in line for The Sorcerers Apprentice.
Sounds like an intelligent movie… but is it 'holistically' intelligent?
Except that in this case, the person misusing the technology to take advantage of people is the protagonist instead of the villain.
I don't know. A lot of conservatives would have to think very carefully before rejecting a Christopher Nolan film in favor of yet another sh__ty live-action adaptation of a property that Disney wasn't doing anything else with.
Thank you Jim, for pushing me into the theatre this weekend. This film was not going to be missed, but I had no big rush to see it. Now I do. They gave enough away in the tv commercial to hook me with the "what is reality?" angle. Memento is in my top 5. I'll watch what ever Nolan directs. Add your brilliant review, it's a must see – now.
Just heard "Leo" (I still can't call him that with a straight face) DiCaprio is going to be on the Dennis Miller Show. Even Dennis Miller seemed to be surprised by the news. Perhaps a teeny-weeny bit of walk back on the liberal diarrhea previously spewed by the leads on the talk show circuit? Nah, who am I kidding? Still…..
Why was my ordinary but typically incisive comment moderated/
I won't die if I don't see this, or any, movie. I'll feel a lot better knowing I didn't help provide a venue for these libturds to spread their messages of hate and idiocy.
Just got back from a midnight showing. I agree … the beginning struggles, but the payoff is worth it anyway. It bears a second viewing.
POTENTIAL SPOILER BELOW
… but .. the message intrigues me. Thematically, is it a film about the futility of faith?
I just hope the ending isnt flat like the end of the Dark Knight.
Okay, I may be the only poster on this (or any other) board who believes Christopher Nolan is a mediocre storyteller. I found DARK KNIGHT to be a slogging, disjointed bore full of misplaced solemnity and incomprehensible action… but Nolte's review intrigues, so attention must be paid. In other words, I probably will go see INCEPTION.
(Hands over ears) Lalalala, lalalala, lalala. I can't heeeaaar you Nolte, I caaaaan't heeeeaaar youuuuuu.
Agreed, "Following" and "Memento" are brilliant. Not having seen a movie in a theater in years, I still can't bring myself to do it. Sure, we might be "rising above" those jerks, but they're still getting my money darn it! I believe you might be waring me down though….
Di Caprio won me over with "Aviator" (I know, I know, ya'll hated it). Until then I thought of him as De "Crapio". (I despised him in "Titanic" but then I despised everyone in the film save for David Warner who always is good).
I'll see this film based on Nolte's review. I've not been steered wrong by him since I stumbled on "Dirty Harry's Place" years ago.
Thanks, John. I'd have skipped it but for this review.
Nolan is the best thing going as far as story-telling. I hope he and his brother get to work on the 3rd Batman installment soon.
I know DiCaprio is a liberal goofball, but I can't hate the guy's acting. Blood Diamond was a pretty good movie in large part to his ability (great Rhodesian accent). I had high hopes for Gordon Levitt. He seems a likable guy on screen, but neither he nor Page have the names to spout their world view to everyone else and get away with it.
It's a shame really, both of them have talent. Pity they feel the need to alienate people.
I started paying attention to DiCaprio after watching him in a minor supporting role in Daniel Day-Lewis' Gangs of New York.
Agreed. Mr.Nolte is pretty brutal in some of his reviews, which is exactly what I want in a review. I don't want to hear some critic kissing ass, I want to hear what they think.
And Nolte does that.
Interesting dichotomy. On the right people are willing to accept people on the left in other endeavors. But on the left, no one from the right is ever acceptable.
Guess that's a good indication which side the adults are on.
I'm not a conservative, so I'll have to take your word on this one.
Libertarians will be lining up to see what ever they believe is a fair exchange for the labor they provided to earn the money.
Dept. of Homeland Security.
Haven't seen the movie, just a comment on your statement the futility of faith
Is it that faith is futile, or do we just demand too much from it?
I had reservations after watching The Dark Knight too.
When it was over, it didn't seem to have a real ending. My wife stepped out of the room for a few moments, the movie ended, and when she came back in, she looked at the credits rolling on the screen and asked me why I changed the channel. I said I didn't that was the end, and we had to rewind it a bit to verify that it was the end.
While I don't have a problem with redoing the traditional Hollywood ending, something about it didn't seem to click with us.
Once again, although I would like to see this movie, I will wait and pay $1 vice $40. Now, I know it will make little difference to the bottom line, but I'm one who refuses to put the personal rants of the "stars" on the back burner to satisfy my desire for entertainment. While I agree that Nolan's Batman movies were good and non offensive unlike so many others from Hollywood (I won't rent Damon, I won't watch him on free TV…nothing, just to name one, Robbins, Sarandon, JL Curtis, many others), they weren't the greatest Batman stories ever written or presented by a long shot. This does look like a cool movie, but I couldn't know i spent that much money to see whoever this bimbo is that is so smart she knows the oil spill was caused by Cheney and Palin. And then Mr Tough guy Leo (who doesn't look to me like he could beat his way out of a wet paper bag) going on and on about the environment while riding private jets all over the world..F YOU!
Aviator was a pretty good flick too. I enjoyed it.
What's Eating Gilbert Grape sold me on DiCaprio. The guy can act, but you wouldn't learn that from James Cameron's PR lackeys.
That's the beauty of America. People can exercise their freedom of speech, and then face the consequences of their speech. For you, that's fewer ticket sales. For others, it's continuing to watch them do what they do best (act), but ignoring them with every fiber of their being when they're not on a script.
Gilbert Grape is still one of my favorite movies. Regardless of anything else, you can defend DiCaprio's acting.
I never really liked DiCaprio, but I will admit that he has matured as an actor and person very well, and I see him only getting better. Though he has always been a good actor, he didn't seem very versatile
I also recommend Shutter Island – he was very good in that film, as well
Dirty Harry gets one wrong. I'm not a griefer or a troll. I wanted to like this. I went to the IMAX opening. Paid the cash. But it sucked.
First of all, the music. Way too loud and bombastic. I couldn't hear the characters talking, especially Watanabe, and the scenes rarely justified the bombast. And I am someone who LOVES movie soundtracks, especially Hans Zimmer.
Second, way too convoluted. I don't mind trying to keep up, but when the pay off doesn't justify all the effort trying to keep up, it's annoying.
There was no payoff. He goes back to his daughters…or does he really??? It's left as a mystery. That's it? That's the payoff?
Fourth, the plot was uninteresting. Corporate sabotage to get the young CEO to break up his dad's company? YAWN.
And then the action. Cutting back and forth between three different dream levels (or was it four?) was not "suspenseful." It drained any suspense from each and every one of the dream levels, and it wasn't ever clear why anything happening in each of the dream levels were important.
Special effects were great, but why was Leo and his wife's dreamscape so special that she couldn't let go of it? It was a urban hellscape as far as I'm concerned. 50 years living in that hell hole? And she wanted to go back? Ridiculous that she would be so attached to it.
The movie was boring.
The only two lefty actors actors I absolutely can not tolerate are Sean Penn and Matt Damon. I really don't like the movies they make which is probably why it is easy to completely ignore them. I hope that doesn't make me any less of an adult.
Off subject. You commented back to one of my comments about Camille Paglia. I just purchased two of her books. She really is interesting. I think she is a true intellectual, she is honest. Do I agree with her on all subjects, no. I'm curious to read more about her thoughts on religion and the left.
Yes Paglia is very interesting. She is very close to what used to pass for liberal democrats back in the day. When she's stating her opinion, the last thing she's interested in is party affiliation.
She's got a once a month column at slate.com I think, you can follow the link from Drudge, but she's on hiatus at the moment writing a book.
Intellectually honest criticism I have no problem with, and that's what she does.
I'm still undecided on seeing this on the big screen…..but who knows? That said, on the rare occasion I do go to theater and it turns out to be a stinker on many levels……I find my mind wandering to the exact size of the carbon footprint left that went into making said turd movie. Now really I don't buy into that whole sack of lies, but still a mind does wonder how many rich spoiled movie makers does it take to wreck a planet? Much more than my Honda Odyssey ay, Leo, Page, Levitt, and that beacon of the climate change ilk James Cameron.
I may see this movie, or I may not contribute to their Tyrannasorical, not a real word,ego, I mean FOOTPRINT!
I didn't think it was great, but I wasn't bored for even a moment. I wasn't a big fan of the Dark Knight because of the music, which was so melodramatic. For this film, it sets the creepy table, though not perfect. SPOILERS BELOW As for Cobb's wife's dreamscape, who doesn't want to live in the right reality? Wasn't that the point of the Matrix? Even though life in the Matrix was preferable, it wasn't real and that's why the heroes wanted out. Cobb explained that during her time in the subconscious, it was so convincing it became her reality. How many of us have had dreams that while we were in them, we desperately wanted them to be real? She simply was in a place so deep that once she "forgot" her past life, she didn't want to come back because that wasn't real to her. If you notice, in dreams, we often almost immediately accept something that is definitely not real as being real.
I don't think the movie was great, but it was at least three times better than The Dark Knight. I hope Tron Legacy is the fun ride you and I are looking for. I wonder if maybe the print you got was playing too fast. That has happened at theaters with me before and, as someone involved in the arts, I can tell when the gaps between the dialogue are too short. People say I'm nuts for saying that but it has happened a few times and takes away from the film.
As a Christian, I thought we could glean two things from it: 1. you wouldn't want to be trapped in Hell. 2. Cobb, apparently, makes a choice to face reality and overcome his guilt.
I was disappointed, though not surprised, with Joseph Gordon-Levitt. I was hoping he would never reveal his political views to us. He was fantastic in Brick and The Lookout. I also really liked him in 500 Days of Summer (didn't care for the movie). I consider him an actor and hope he avoids future political questions.
I want to be wowed by great acting and a great film. Knowing an entertainer's politicals views can sometimes, at least for me, ruin both. I'm becoming a little more objective, though Hollywood still pretty much sickens me.
SPOILER BELOW….
"…why was Leo and his wife's dreamscape so special that she couldn't let go of it? It was a urban hellscape as far as I'm concerned. 50 years living in that hell hole? And she wanted to go back?"
She didn't want to go back. She couldn't be convinced anything was real, that was her problem. Leo had inadvertantly planted the idea in her that nothing was real, so she killed herself to get to reality and to her children, not to go back. What Leo did was damn her forever into never believing she was ever in reality. That's where his guilt came from. He cursed his own wife.
I wasn't surprised either, but very disappointed. Some actors I can over look. DiCaprio is a liberal but he's not a complete bastard about it. I don't recall him ever bashing Bush or conservatives. He's on an eco-trip though and is being misguided by Al Gore, but it's not something vile like what Penn and Robbins say and do. I can let his liberalism slide, until he morphs into a Penn Jr…..
But up and coming actors like Gordon-Levitt should be careful, acting like a tool before you're established will have consequences at the box office and then the roles dry up. Hope he sees that and keeps his politics to himself because I do like him on the screen.
and if they dont want you're advice, perhaps they should look at Megan Fox.
——-SPOILER ALERT———-
——-SPOILER ALERT———-
I found it boring, not confusing and certainly not compelling. All of the "twists" were seen hours ahead of time. Oh, she's dead? SHOCKER! Oh, Leo planted that idea in her head? I supposed I could have been surprised if they hadn't hung the whole movie on him already doing the Inception thing on SOMEONE.
The movie was too long, didn't trust the audience enough, and it was logically inconsistent (no points for "it's a dream" logic; when you make the rules you have to follow them). The only mystery in the film arose from facts purposely and needlessly withheld from the audience in order to create artificial confusion, not for any pacing or story consideration (other than they needed to make it longer so they could fit in more spoken exposition, great.). The "payoffs" were inserted as if they were cuts from another movie ("paradox" – give me a f-ing break that shot was bad).
I'm surprised at the early response to the performances. Gordon-Levitt and Page seemed wooden, and Page's entire character relied on the audience carrying her water.
This is probably Nolan's poorest effort yet, unfortunately.
——-SPOILER ALERT———-
——-SPOILER ALERT———-
It's an entertaining, if imperfect film. It's worth watching. It's still the best original story we have this summer, but it's a disappointing follow-up to Dark Knight, and solidifies that Nolan HAS to have another writer work with him at least.
It cannot justify the expense however. It's not going to be a budgetary drag like 'The Fountain" – but this movie NEVER should have been slated for more than $100M. It cannot generate the same excitement and repeat viewing of Dark Knight, or even Memento.
I don't think that's a fair reaction. You end up hurting a LOT of films that you would probably otherwise support because the actor's spoke up.
Actors don't matter. Their job is to reflect light.
Conservative filmmakers have the same pool of idiot stars to use. If you want more conservative films, you HAVE to ignore what actors say. Otherwise you're just giving up on ever returning mainstream film to a quality medium.
Gordon-Levitt isn't exactly up-and-and-coming – he's actually making a comeback with this effort.
I find it somewhat odd that conservatives have no qualms with hurting their own interests by boycotting all the films made for them because they don't like the actors.
Do you look up the political affiliation of an architect before building a house?
Do you think Reagan should have walked out of the hospital had his surgeons replied "well, we're actually Democrats but we'll still fix your bullet hole." ???
Evaluate the work as it is and on its own merits. The opinions of actors do not matter.
You find it odd that people don't want to see movies with people they don't like in them??
How….odd…..
The rest of your post is nonsense. A place to live or life saving surgeries are a necessity. Movies are not. So if I decide to not see a movie because the actors starring in it are complete d-bags, or the poster was the wrong color, or whatever reason then so be it. Movies are a pleasure, not a necessity, and we are all free to choose how we spend our money on entertainment in what ever way we see fit. Some actors I can give a pass to, like DiCaprio. He's earned it. Gordon-Levitt has not.
Clear things up for you?
MC? This was a tough call for me, as well. The idea of those Leftist morons profiting from me just turned my gut. But I'm making a compromise. I will NOT see this film in the theater but on Netflix. Before Nolte's review, however, I wasn't going to see it at all.
BTW, whatever happened to those 'morals clauses', etc., which actors had to sign promising not to endanger their films?
I tried to be generic as possible and ended up making a statement I can't explain!
Let's say, the futility of religion and the, um, distraction of faith.
I saw this movie last night, and I basically agree with everything you're saying … although I did let them squeeze the emotion out of me at the end anyway. Would you say it bears a second viewing after seeing the end … or was it just too obvious to you anyway. Some of the jargon and exposition at the beginning seemed like a really bad anime movie … it was confusing to me (and coldly delivered) and I was thinking if I could go back now and understand it, it would be a better film for me. WDYT?
SPOILER ALERT
It seemed to me that Page's character sole purpose was to keep reminding us that Leo was screwed up in the head. She just kept saying it over and over. It was, well, pretty lame …
I agree … it was boring for the first 90 minutes. The end made the movie experience acceptable to me, which is quite a different reaction I had to that piece-o-crap Avatar.
I would've had Caine play Page's role which would've allowed that expositionary concern to come from a place of concern but also warmed up the group dynamic considerably.
I would've made the Chemistt the novice (the audience) who needs things explained to him so we understand.
Thanks for the site info!
I get what you're saying. You don't believe that carbon emmissions = scorched planet Earth (neither do I) but they claim to believe it, even going around preaching sermons on it. Yet, following the righteous path of their Prophet Algore, they use more fuel and leave a larger carbon footprint, both collectively, as an industry, and individually, than those of us to whom they proselytize.
It can't be said too many times: The hypocrisy of the libturds knows no bounds.
Who are the conservative filmmakers?
The studios for whom the lefturded idiots work market the films. That marketing includes interviews with the films' actors. On the boss's time, it's within the boss's rights and not infringing on the individual rights of the actors to state, in writing, that the actors are not to talk politics or anything other than the film they're appearing in during interviews set up by the studios for the purpose of promoting the studios' films. The studios aren't going to do that, however, because the producers, movie studio owners, investors, etc., are all lefturded idiots, too, just like the actors they've hired and with whom they've developed professional and, often, personal relationships.
Way to go (or, in this case, not go), RonD504! Tell 'em to F OFF by keeping that $40 in your pocket instead of giving it to them.
If you were so inclined, you could take it a step further by sending that $40 to the campaign fund of a conservative candidate of your choice. Then send a letter to the studio that produced the movie that you were forced not to go see because of the actors voicing their hateful, lefturded BS during the pre-release interviews and let them know what you did instead with money that you would have spent to see their movie. That would add the AND DIE to your F OFF!
I am going to see it again, my wife hasn't seen it yet – and it's certainly worth watching. I'm not saying it's bad. It's just not as good as Nolan has done in the past, nor is it at the level I would expect him to perform consistently, and I think it is being publicly overpraised because we are so starved for quality, original content we don't want a poor performance here to cast doubt on Hollywood's hoped-for abandonment of its current model. Inception is too big to fail, as it were. But the fundamental shift in Hollywood is happening, despite the success of any one film – much like the Tea Party and the success of any particular candidate. It's a societal phenomenon, not local. But I'm WAAAAY afield now.
I think the jargon and exposition was confusing and cold because it was ultimately empty. NOTHING of substance was said, it was all vague references to THINGS OF IMPORT that are only important because we don't know what they are. But I'll think about it more when I see it again.
I agree. Definitely Nolan's worst film (not including "Following", which I haven't seen) so far. Nolan's films are often criticized as "mechanical" – due in part to all the fine-tuned twists and turns in his plots that make the story almost seem like an exercise in structure – but most of his films are, at their core, character studies. Memento, The Prestige and Insomnia are all about characters, their morality and the choices they make. Batman Begins and The Dark Knight are also about this to a lesser extent. There was certainly some of that at play in Inception, but too much of it was about the dream worlds, the rules, and the heist, rather than the characters. I would have rather seen the Leo-Coitilard storyline told as the main story rather than in flash-backs.
But if you drop Page for Caine, you lose the chick! Gotta have a girl! We've got the Asian and African boxes checked, we really need a girl…
I wish we'd been able to spend more time with Leo's character and really explore his psyche – I was getting excited about the possibilities for the story once the movie ended – about when leo wakes up on the plane. If, say, that "last heist" were actually act two, and act three is Leo's fight out from the ultimate dream – the "reality" we ended in. What if he wakes up and he actually HAD killed his wife. I just wish we'd gone one layer deeper and paced the movie properly for that. That's what happened with Dark Knight – it was so dense and full and compelling the whole way through. Inception wastes lots of time.
The ending wasn't satisfying for me because I'd been wondering if the top would stop for about 90 minutes, and I wanted to get into the rest of the movie. When it finally caught up the credits rolled.
I think overall the script needed another pass or two. There are a lot of great elements there that ultimately didn't pay off.
You're just wrong.
The studios used to control what the stars could say in interviews, when they were under contract. But now most of the power lies within the stars – and their agents. The studios would stop them from talking if they could.
Jerry Bruckheimer, if you want a big name, is conservative – or at least openly Republican. I know others. This site is dedicated to them. I happen to be one myself.
If I'm fortunate enough to score a big, bankable star name in my film are you going to boycott it because the star says something stupid, beyond any semblance of my control? Does that help or hurt the conservative movement in Hollywood?
Look at the substance of the films and judge them on their own merits. The stars are animated bounce cards that talk.
I didn't see anything religious in it at all, nor anything about faith being futile. And I usually have very sensitive antennae for that sort of thing. Go see it.
I'm giving up on boycotting movies because of actors saying stupid things. If I required every actor in every movie to utter only sensible words and sentiments, I'd quickly run out of movies to watch. Like, instantaneously.
Instead, I'm going to focus on story, and on the ride the movie provides.
And INCEPTION provides one amazing, brutal ride. I can't wait to see it again.
You're certainly entitled to your opinion. I just don't think it's valid to devalue a film because you don't like the star personally. You're certainly entitled to do it, but I think it's foolish.
Hiring a custom architect is not a necessity, and working with any particular architect is certainly not a necessity. But that sidesteps my actual point. Politics don't enter into architecture. Neither do they enter into surgery. And (here's where my analogy makes sense) they don't enter into acting ability. The quality of a performance is not dependent on personal philosophy.
To fault a film because an actor says or does something stupid is normal and human, but I think it hurts quality films.
But that's just my opinion.
Clear things up for you?
When I went into the picture, I knew it was about dreams of course — but that it probably wasn't really about dreams, but about human constructs dealing with death and similar ideas. What I gathered from the end was that he had broken free from the dream world (a kind of heaven) so that he could live in the true reality and enjoy his children.
My religion antennae is pretty strong too; probably overly sensitive, so I understand I'm probably just crazy.
I'd be curious to read what you think after a second viewing — one thing I would like though is some dang subtitles for all the dang mumbling from those with and without dang accents.
"Touching the Void" is extremely impressive. What a story.
Just saw the movie tonight on an IMAX screen and thoroughly enjoyed it. Like the Dark Knight, Inception is a thought provoking movie. My wife and I see a lot of movies. Seldom do we spend much time discussing them afterwards. But with Inception, we spent a couple of hours talking about it story, plot, and cast. We're both looking forward to seeing it again. And soon. Along wit hToy Story 3, it's a standout moive this summer and I’m sure it’s going to have a long run in the theater.
Did they ever explain why Leo couldn't just go back into her head to reverse the damage he'd done? If not, that's another plot hole. If yes, that's kind of weak because the entire plot of Inception was planting thoughts into Cilian Murphy's head.
I've been torn myself — to go or not to go, but I think Nolte's review has pushed me into the "will see it if I have the chance" column instead of the "wait for Netflix or Blockbuster". I've been impressed with Christopher Nolan's movies for a while now, and I don't think he'll disappoint.
Just checked out and subscribed to your blog. Keep up the good work. I like what I'm seeing so far.
Oh wow! Someone else who saw "Paprika" (I caught it on a Netflix rental a few years ago). It's always nice to know that I'm not the only one that catches what sometimes feels like "obscure" anime (just saw "Metropolis" a couple of weeks ago because a friend who knew of my admiration for the Fritz Lang movie thought I might be curious).
I thought it was too!
There are lots of actors who don't bad mouth our country, why didn't Nolan hire them? Because probably agrees with their politics, but is smart enough to keep it to himself. It sounds like it might be an interesting film, but it's a no go because of the cast. I won't even watch it on a DVD.
These guys have to learn there are consequences to their mouthing off on matters about which they know nothing.
I can't get past that big mellon head of his. Looks like a balloon attached to his shoulders. But he is a decent actor. Can't stomach his politics though.
I watched Inception this morning and I have to say that I totally loved the movie. It is a rare occasion when I am sitting through a movie for the first time that I am literally engrossed and hanging onto every word and image. The musical score was amazing, the acting was superb. I have always thought Dicaprio was a great actor, even though his politics and environmental moral superiority complex is warped, he really does a great job in the movie. His performance was as good as Shutter Island if not the same. Joseph Gordon-Levitt was amazing, and the rest of the cast as well. The movie did not insult me but rather challenged me. It is the thinking mans movie – a very entertaining ride.
Sounds like this movie moved "Leverage" way up many notches.
No disagreement.
I was merely objecting to your use of the word "literally".
I saw Inception today. It's well made, but a very long and morose film with characters I never liked so the journey wasn't worth it. I didn't much care for the Dark Knight the either, so I'd say if that left you a bit cold…so will Inception.
The music and the guy who played Eames were the only things I liked. Too long and morose for me, and the big reveals fell flat because, well, I just didn't care after two hours that felt like 5. And dude–do put a spoiler warning at the top of the post for those that haven't seen it!
You must be logged in to post a comment.