My hope in this aimless rant is to figure out where I stand on "Inception." With loose organization...
BACKGROUND PERSPECTIVE:
Over a decade ago, I caught Christopher Nolan's "Following", a low budget indie with a raw film school feel that I identified with. Then, after the memorable "Memento" (haha, irony not intentional), and recreating the Batman series into something respectable, I certainly don't mind putting him in the worthy filmmaker category. More importantly for myself, I felt a personal connection with the themes and overall tones he likes to present. So, with "Inception" being Nolan's first completely original piece since "Following", of course I felt it worth checking out. Worth checking out even after expectations being lowered from seeing the trailers. Turns out those adjusted expectations were appropriate.
THE REACTION:
I came out of the theater liking it overall despite the lack of true Oomph!. But then people started to rave about it like they raved about the Matrix. ("Wow that movie, like, blew my mind." "That's because you're stupid." But, that's a rant for another day.) After the elevated hype, I started liking it less and less. That's too bad. There's nothing like overrating something, anything, to detract from whatever decent elements it might have had to offer. On the other hand, I find that I agree with most of the reviews that dislike the movie, yet I feel like I want to defend the movie against those same reviews.
In response to the ravers whose minds were blown: if your mind was blown, well, your mind probably wasn't so intact in the first place was it. either that, or you watch shitty movies without realizing they're shitty.
In response to those with their noses high in the air huffing at the movie: your expectations were either ill placed-your fault anyway, or you had bad expectations which led to a self full-filled prophecy. it's a crime caper. why knock it for something it's not?
What this movie isn't:
It's not a mind-blowing epic, it's not a profound exploration of the depths of our mind, it's not a thought provoking or even a "great" film. (and it's not deserving of the #3 spot on imdb of all time. but hey, congrats nolan.)
What it is: an entertaining thriller with a little more substance than the average american movie.
RANDOM RANTINGS:
on ellen page:
ellen page's peformance gets worse and worse in my memory. the scene in the trailer when she dopily asks, "Wait, we're dreaming?" almost made me not want to watch the movie. unfortunately, that scene IS in the movie, and the line is even worse in context. though not a great example, it's pretty representative of her role in the film. her official role is the "dream architect," but the purpose she really serves is to ask the questions that the confused viewer in the audience is asking himself. that is, she asks the questions to clarify what's going on in the movie so the audience can follow along. (so, if i press that button, we all die right? yes ellen. we all die if you press that button. so, don't press that button. ok, i won't press the button.) clarifying plot elements is not a crime. the problem is, she nags at you like the idiot next to you asking stupid questions. then when she all of a sudden comes up with some brilliant half-baked solution, it's just not believable. i loved her in juno, but sorry ellen, you are the weakest link.
on "The Dreamscape":
while the concept at the base of "Inception" is certainly an interesting one,
once the premise of the movie is established, there is no further delving into this idea. No exploration of fascinating depths of the subconscious. After accepting what this movie is and isn't, I say this as matter of fact and not necessarily critically. The concept of shared dreaming, invading someone else's subconscious are merely plot devices and not philosophical ponderings.
the layers of the dreamscape, the dream within a dream w/in a dream (4 times), is merely for the sake of the plot without any relation to "layers of subconscious." If the movie's "confusing," it's merely plot details that may have gone by too quickly. And the plot does move quickly.
the "inception" in the movie-that is, the planting of an idea, is not really an idea. it's a decision to make an action-and not really a significant one. again, it's a plot element, not an idea to motivate further exploration. there were moments where i hoped for further discussion- for example, when they were trying to come up with how to plant the idea in cilian murphy's character's head. leonardo rejects one of the first suggestions saying, "no, it has to be a positive motivation. People want ..." Times like these it seems like movie wants to be more than it is, but then says, "let's stick to entertainment value."
the end-product:
for such a concept such as penetrating one's dreams, nolan keeps it pretty simplistic. time and space within the dream stay fairly intact, and the surrealistic quality of actual dreams is avoided. though that might be the kind of film that i would love to see, it's not the kind of film that is going to be number 1 at the box office weeks in a row. he keeps the dreamscape simple enough to lay the groundwork for an interesting premise and exciting thriller to make sense linearly.
being what it is, a plot driven thriller with an interesting premise, it doesn't completely fail, but doesn't necessarily succeed either. at times it does seem like it wants to be more but then veers away. had it just stayed course, it might have better
the film is fairly effective at making you almost lose track of what's "real." the viewer could easily get lost in the serious of dreams within dreams, particularly in the beginning when the premise hasn't been established. (though the main chunk of the 4 subdreams seems to take the easy way out) but for some reason, the film chooses to clarify what's "real" for us and not let us wander and wonder. it seems like it was almost 2 movies in one that couldn't quite blend. (the substory with mol..) if the film found a way to blend these two disparate portions into a more cohesive piece...
CLOSEOUT and extraneous repetition:
if you had any inclination to watch it, it's worth checking out, you'll probably enjoy it. if you didn't, or were wary of it before going in, your mind will not be changed from watching it
inception, while not great, still makes believe that he does have film making chops. is it a masterpiece, far from it. a work of art even? ehhhh, a stretch. an entertaining movie that well utilizes the elements of film, sure. it's a step above a lot of the crap that comes out these days which is probably why the average film goer is so blown away.
now that expectations are out of the way, i might be willing to give it another viewing to see what i really think. i guess there's something to it to inspire a review this long.
