Inception (2010)

[Guest The Second Spitter]

Dom Cobb (DiCaprio) and Arthur (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) lead a team of professional thieves who steal idea from people's minds through shared dreams. After a bungled operation, Cobb is required to perform the act of "inception"; using dreams to secretly implant an idea. The target is Robert Fischer (Cillian Murphy) a gazillionaire magnate of some description.

To achieve this Cobb assembles another team, enlisting the help of Ariadne (Ellen Page of Juno fame) a student of his former mentor (cameoed by Michael Caine). Ariadne uncovers Cobb's dark secret that threatens to jeopardize the mission and the livelihood of their team - the nightmare of his deceased wife, played by Marion Cotillard (A Good Year and a bunch of French movies).

The plot is complex, multi-layered and demands your full intention. Probably the wrong movie to see when you're recovering from a concussion. The inevitable comparisons with the Matrix will be made -- ignore them, this movie is in a different league. An extra degree of suspension of disbelief is required and if I have to make a criticism here, it is that the movie makes-up its own rules as it goes along. This marginally detracts from the experience.

The ending will keep you thinking and thinking and thinking (I'm still thinking). I'll go out on a limb and say this will win Best Picture at the next Academy Awards. Another minor criticism is that the action sequences felt a bit flat, but this is certainly not the type of movie that relies on such things. (I didn't watch it in IMAX -- probably would have added to the overall experience)

The cast puts in a five-star performance with special praise going to Gordon-Levitt (rumored to be the Riddler in the next Batman movie) and Page who excels in a less annoying role as the main heroine. DiCaprio is quality as usual, although at times seems to "phone-in" his performance. Still he's aging gracefully and I think he's a much better actor than he was 10 years. Murphy was solid as well. He probably had the more difficult scenes in the movie and he sold them very well. The one weak link was Cotillard, a curious casting who stands out like a turd in a punch bowl against the all-star cast ensemble -- she does nothing for me aesthetically or in terms of her acting ability.

[Edgy MD]

I haven't seen a Leonardo DiCaprio film since Catch Me if You Can, so I'm basing this on the publicity shots and trailers for his films, but doesn't his head seem to be getting progressively larger with each movie?

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Are you accusing DiCaprio of Boli-for-Dollars?

(Also, no Aviator, Departed, or Shutter Island? He's done good work in each.)

(Also, also... you're right; he's turning into Nicholson, headwise.)

[Vic Sage]

overrated, convaluted, unsatisfying.
Actually, the action was ok. But its just a mindfuck movie with no apparent purpose.
In fact, i had the opposite view of Spitter above on just about every point, including Cotilliard.

If you want to experience real "what is reality" SF, read a Philip K dick novel. Start with MAZE OF DEATH. You'll never be the same. but this? tedious bullshit, with some tasty frosting.

[nymr83]

mmmmm frosting

[Ceetar]

I enjoyed the movie. Probably my favorite of the last couple of months.

But it's right along lines of what I find most entertaining in movies, twisting plot that keeps you thinking, but does sorta make sense when you think it out. Some graphics, some Escher staircases..what's not to love?

[soupcan]

The Second Spitter wrote: The plot is complex, multi-layered and demands your full intention... An extra degree of suspension of disbelief is required and if I have to make a criticism here, it is that the movie makes-up its own rules as it goes along.

This almost exactly how I've described the movie to people.

The difference bwtween Spitter and I is that I didn't think much of it as a whole. I think the fact that it did make up the rules as it went along was a big reason that it was hard to follow. I've no problem with a complex plot, but give me a chance to follow it, you know?

[Guest The Second Spitter]

Vic Sage wrote: If you want to experience real "what is reality" SF, read a Philip K dick novel. Start with MAZE OF DEATH.

Actually, Inception reminded me a lot of Ubik -- now there's a story they can't possibly pull off on the big screen.

soupcan wrote: I've no problem with a complex plot, but give me a chance to follow it, you know?

The scam is that they want you to go back to see it multiple times.

[Guest LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr]

Saw it twice-- finally-- over the last few weeks.

Looking over the comments here... Soupy, I'm not sure what you were looking for heading into this. It's a smartypants popcorn movie with some interesting questions about our minds' construction-of-reality posed (Baudrillard for Dummies?), if not satisfactorily answered. I found it plenty followable-- if not immediately, entirely digestible-- on a first watch. Frankly, if all wannabe blockbusters operated at this level, I'd pack up the family and move to the theater during the summer.

SPOILER ALERT (although, if you've not seen it yet at this point, any spoiler's really on you):

I think I've got the ending sorted out-- it's immaterial whether or not the top is wobbling/will topple... Cobb's turned away from it toward his family (as opposed to several other times in the film, when he stares it down at every spin, usually with gun/other suicide instrument in hand). He's moved past obsession over whether "this" is "real" and toward acceptance of what happened/what is... which is indicative of some sort of character growth or progress, I suppose.

One big plot question/hole I noticed-- why, when they go zero-gravity in Arthur's dream (level 2/the hotel/"Mr. Charles"), is there no consequential loss/disruption of gravity in Eames' dream (level 3/the snow-bunker/the vault)? Is there some conceivable dream-world-logic explanation for this, or does it just seem like an "oopsie"?

SPOILER ALERT ended

[Guest themetfairy]

I'm with Vic here. I thought this was tedious and self-important. It may be a well-crafted film, but I didn't find it to be at all enjoyable. It was a waste of some very good acting talent.

[Guest sharpie]

Just watched this for completions sake as I have seen the other 9 nominated best films this year.

Not my kind of thing. I'm with Vic and Fairy here. Overblown and way too impressed with itself. Nice effects, cartoon acting.

[TransMonk]

Sat through this on Sunday, just hours before it won all of those technical Oscars.

I agree with most of what sharpie said above. Decent flick, not my cup o' tea.

[RealityChuck]

Pretty good, especially if you ignore the clunkiness of the concept. They managed to keep all the needed exposition (and a lot was needed) to palatable chunks.

Loved the ending, especially because people are going crazy trying to figure it out. But it doesn't matter if it was the lady or the tiger - I mean, if the top fell or not. The ending was delightfully ambiguous and I loved that.

Anyway, the falling top meant nothing - he could dream it fell, too.

Biggest flaw was the section in the snow - you couldn't tell who was who.

[metirish]

I finally watched this Saturday evening....I had it on the DVR since June I think but waited for the right time to watch, wife out and son sleeping.......what a mindfuck it is, it really does demand your attention and even then it's all over the place at times......the whole concept though is crazy but once they explained what they were going to try and do I was on board........the ending, wow......the top falls right?, Michael Cain being there is proof no?

[Ceetar]

metirish wrote: I finally watched this Saturday evening....I had it on the DVR since June I think but waited for the right time to watch, wife out and son sleeping.......what a mindfuck it is, it really does demand your attention and even then it's all over the place at times......the whole concept though is crazy but once they explained what they were going to try and do I was on board........the ending, wow......the top falls right?, Michael Cain being there is proof no?

We'll never know. It's supposed to be ambigious. What's important apparently is that Cobb doesn't care what the totem reveals.


the totem always annoyed me though, because he gives away it's secret.

[metirish]

True, but .....ha, this is why it could drive you crazy......Michael Cain only ever appeared in Cobb's real life and not his dreams....I think......

[Ceetar]

metirish wrote: True, but .....ha, this is why it could drive you crazy......Michael Cain only ever appeared in Cobb's real life and not his dreams....I think......

you think.

But there's nothing saying that he couldn't dream him up later either.

But he knows how he got to the airport, which is supposedly a sign he's awake. But they don't show how he got to the house ultimately.

Anyway, that it can drive you crazy is why I love it. One of my favorite movies in a while.