While the production value of Inception was undoubtable quite high, a lot of visual ideas pretty intense and interesting and the narrative tempo highly entertaining, the movie still disappointed me in quite some aspects. A lot of logic flaws, this insanely obvious speed issue between the parallel running dream layers and a quite uninspired diCaprio who actually just reprised his role of Shutter Island. A surprising twist was missing nearly completely, the final scene not only forseeable but nearly a little cheeky.
But what was annoying me most are lines of lines of dialogue to explain certain issues. It’s never a good sign, when authors are not able to explain their ideas by the story but by their characters. Even worse when these spoken out rules then don’t hold up later in the movie. Maybe this is also a necessary marketing issue for an audience that tends to think less and wants to get everything pre-chewed, but I feel personaly offended if I’m not taken at least a little serious. Honestly, if Nolan wants to make an intelligent movie, then he should make an intelligent movie and demand the same intelligence from his audience. Even in mainstream, there have been better examples than this. And Nolan already proved, that he can do better than this.
Yet, the movie is highly entertaining. But that’s it. It’s far away from being at least close to what eXistenZ already was able to deliver 12 years back in every aspect except the action. Even Matrix 1 had a more intelligent way of storytelling, if you asked me. From this perspective, besides the visual and the production, Inception had actually nothing new to add to the ideas of dream layers. Pity.
Still nice, but not the best movie for me this year.
I agree although I enjoyed it a lot. Then again, I was expecting nothing else than a blockbuster. You are right about a great deal of exposition though, they should have left many things unsaid… Still, probably the best sci-fi work (at least in mainstream) since Matrix.
Haven’t seen it yet, but I got the feeling that with the whole Avatar-hype (which both sucked: the hype AND the movie) this flick got a lot of attention it usually wouldn’t have gotten otherwise. Okay, maybe DiCaprio was one argument for the female audience to see it (even though he was always good in his other movies) and the other half to see it because of Nolan as a director (although I have to say I really didn’t like the new Batman movies which were completely overrated). I might go and see it when the hype is over and I can make up my own mind about it.
@Agustin: You’re probably right. I expected something like existenz but got a mainstream movie with some intelligent storytelling. It’s quite likely completely different if you just expect and „ordinary“ blockbuster. It’s still a good movie, no doubt about it.
There’s no way I can expect anything as daring like Existenz because not even Cronenberg himself is making that kind of movies. I do know what you mean though…
Hehe, critical reception here. Hmm. I thought then and now, that at least 3 minutes of explanation were actually missing. Yes, I know and agree that full frontal exposition is clumsy and considered as bad style; but on the other hand this is one of the most complicated movies I have ever seen which had large parts of the audience leave cinemas in some places because they couldn’t follow anymore.
It feels as if the explanations were there but cut out, I am waiting for the director’s cut. To be more precise than your post, which is a little vague on most of your points, the role of the architect before and during the dreams (why were they planning to leave her behind, huh?), the need for the ice action scenes, why/how exactly did the Cobbs joyride the Limbo and a few minor things.
I guess I am more casual than you guys and need to be taken by my hand more. But discussions with others had similar results, I believe a little more well done resolution/exposition could have actually helped.
Hehe, critical reception here. Hmm. I thought then and now, that at least 3 minutes of explanation were actually missing. Yes, I know and agree that full frontal exposition is clumsy and considered as bad style; but on the other hand this is one of the most complicated movies I have ever seen which had large parts of the audience leave cinemas in some places because they couldn’t follow anymore.
It feels as if the explanations were there but cut out, I am waiting for the director’s cut. To be more precise than your post, which is a little vague on most of your points, the role of the architect before and during the dreams (why were they planning to leave her behind, huh?), the need for the ice action scenes, why/how exactly did the Cobbs joyride the Limbo and a few minor things. We were all puzzled on those points when discussing it afterwards.
I guess I am more casual than you guys and to need to be taken by my hand more. But discussions with others had similar results, I believe a little more well done resolution/exposition could have actually helped.
Just skipped the movie.