Inception

[Shred87]

Havn't seena thread on this and I guess I'm wondering...who's seen it? what's everyone think?

[Cipher]

Mediocre action movie marred by its emphasis on character drama. Unfortunately I can't tell you anything about the characters besides the facts that they frown and wax philosophical. Looks pretty, but it's below average and all-over-the-place in terms of focus.

And public reaction has been sickening. If you mention this movie in the same sentence as 2001, you're not only bad at being a movie critic, you're bad at having opinions.

This review is one of the few to really nail it: http://nymag.com/movies/reviews/67155/

[MrPliggins]

::minor spoilers maybe::

I agree, Cipher. I thought it was entertaining and all, but I've seen many people saying it's the best movie ever made..and I just don't see it. The character development was minimal. And the dreams weren't very "dreamy". I'm pretty sure I'm in the minority here with these thoughts. Maybe there's something I'm missing.

[The Stryker]

About an hour too long. Also for a movie about dreams they leave absolutely NOTHING to the imagination. Every minor detail is explained in a wall of dialouge.

Flawed movie. Not terrible but not great.

[ToTheNines]

I liked it quite well, I wouldn't call it a masterpiece but it's still a really cool movie.

Originally Posted by MrPliggins

And the dreams weren't very "dreamy

I know what you mean here, I'm used to dream sequences from The Sopranos and stuff (and my own weird dreams). But the reason the dreams weren't very dream-esque was so you couldn't tell the difference between what's real and what's fake when it came down to the "twist" ending.

[Spitfire]

I thought it was a very well done film. It was not only technically done well but it was well acted and written. You have to pay attention because every scene and almost every line of spoken word has a purpose. I saw the film twice and appreciated it even more on a second viewing. If you want to go to the movies and shut your brain off, like most people do, then this is not the film for you. I do find it hilarious though that people **** all over this movie for the same flaws they turned a blind eye to in Shutter Island.

It gains a lot of hate because it's not only popular but it's good and the internet is nothing but quick to crap all over sucessful things. That's all people did when Dark Knight came out and when Hurt Locker won the Oscar even though no one saw it in theaters. It's really something you have to experience for yourself.

[Cipher]

Originally Posted by Spitfire

That's all people did when Dark Knight came out and when Hurt Locker won the Oscar even though no one saw it in theaters.

I could write a short essay on all the ways Dark Knight succeeded while Inception did not. Dark Knight is how you do a pop-philosophy action movie.

Inception's like a slightly more boring version of The Matrix with terrible tacked-on melodrama. Which means that it's okay, but not great. And it means I'm really glad the Wachowski brothers didn't spend half their movie trying to convince me that I should be emotionally invested in Keanu Reeves' character. Because that would have really shat things up.

[Spitfire]

Originally Posted by Cipher

I could write a short essay on all the ways Dark Knight succeeded while Inception did not. Dark Knight is how you do a pop-philosophy action movie.

I liked Dk better too but they're different films. Trying to compare them wouldn't really work.

Inception's like a slightly more boring version of The Matrix with terrible tacked-on melodrama. Which means that it's okay, but not great. And it means I'm really glad the Wachowski brothers didn't spend half their movie trying to convince me that I should be emotionally invested in Keanu Reeves' character. Because that would have really shat things up.

The Matrix was an action film, Inception is a character study. They're different kinds of film. Also The Matrix plays with the age old cave parable idea, IE what its like to see the real world after being in simulation for so long, while Inception plays with "what is real". I never felt like we were overly tasked to care for Cobb. He was not only completely messed up but he wasn't really a great guy either. He puts everyone in life threatening danger to benefit himself which to me does to opposite of trying to make us care for him.

Also Leo is an amazing actor and Reeves a horrid one. Reeves can play one character and he does it well but he only fits in certain roles. Every movie I see him in he's just Reeves.

[Turo602]

I'm gonna have to agree with Spitfire on this. People talk sh*t about this movie only because they're too ignorant to understand it so they say it was a confusing movie. I for one enjoyed this movie and have to say it's the best movie of 2010 so far.

[Slap-Happy]

Inception is an exceptionally crafted film with good writing, acting, directing, etc.

I enjoyed it very much.

Originally Posted by Spitfire

It gains a lot of hate because it's not only popular but it's good and the internet is nothing but quick to crap all over sucessful things. That's all people did when Dark Knight came out and when Hurt Locker won the Oscar even though no one saw it in theaters. It's really something you have to experience for yourself.

Let me just say that I hate Dark Knight bashers.

[Cipher]

Originally Posted by Turo602

People talk sh*t about this movie only because they're too ignorant to understand it so they say it was a confusing movie.

Ha. Hahahaha.

Originally Posted by Spitfire

The Matrix was an action film, Inception is a character study. They're different kinds of film.

Inception was the worst character study ever then. It could have been a decent action film. Unfortunately an entire half of it is devoted to Leonardo DiCaprio's personal problems. Now, Leo's a great actor, and I agree with you that Reeves is terrible. But this should have been a Reeves-type role. Because for all the movie hammers DiCaprio's tragic backstory onto its audience, I can only tell you three things about his character:

1. He frowns a lot.
2. He bounces expository dialogue off of other characters a lot.
3. He waxes philosophical a lot.

Congratulations. I cannot care about what happens to this man at all.

Inception is a lot of things, depending on your taste. It might be a good action movie (in fact I strongly suspect it would have been if you took out the character elements). It might be pretty. It might be clever and well-constructed. I could agree with all those things. It is not, however, a deep or emotional movie, so let's take that off the table right now. And the fact that it spent so much of its time trying to be brought the entire experience down.

The Matrix is a good action movie. It doesn't ask me to care about Reeve's character, so I can get into its interesting concepts, visuals, and action. Aces. Hell, the Bourne movies are good action movies, but they don't pretend for one second that you're supposed to care more about Bourne's character than all the twists, conspiracies, and action.

2001 is a good thinking movie, or at least a good obtuse movie. It also doesn't ask me to care about Bowman's character. It only prompts you to get into its psychedelic otherwordliness.

There's a place for character drama, and that's in a character-driven film. Cohen brothers type stuff, for a big name example. Hell, even The Dark Knight did a decent job of balancing its action and characters, and pulled off all its thematically transparent melodrama. This wasn't the right movie for that kind of stuff. This was shoehorned and terrible. This was an attempt to pull audiences and it cheesed the whole thing up to a distracting level.

Originally Posted by Slap Happy

Let me just say that I hate Dark Knight bashers.

I love The Dark Knight, but am extremely underwhelmed by Inception. I don't dislike things because they're popular. I dislike them because they're not very good.

Originally Posted by Slap Happy

Inception is an exceptionally crafted film with good writing, acting, directing, etc.

No, yes for what they had to work with, yes. And yes for good concepts, even though they were wasted on this film.

[jeff the cheff]

I liked it, but was a bit dissapointed with the hype and all. I think this is my least favorite Nolan film. Of course, that doesn't make it bad.

Originally Posted by Spitfire

I never felt like we were overly tasked to care for Cobb. He was not only completely messed up but he wasn't really a great guy either. He puts everyone in life threatening danger to benefit himself which to me does to opposite of trying to make us care for him.

I agree with this. He's a thief, and the inception mission is going to ruin someone's life just so he can get what he wants.

[Spitfire]

Originally Posted by Cipher

Ha. Hahahaha.

Inception was the worst character study ever then. It could have been a decent action film. Unfortunately an entire half of it is devoted to Leonardo DiCaprio's personal problems.

I view it like a more mainstream Hurt Locker. You take a damaged character and watch him put others lives in danger for his own benefit. In Hurt Locker though he was even more of a scum bag because he did it for his own action fix and not because he loved his kid. I can see it working better the other way but the movie also wants to have it's cake and eat it to. It needs a reason to show the world working the way it does.

Now, Leo's a great actor, and I agree with you that Reeves is terrible. But this should have been a Reeves-type role. Because for all the movie hammers DiCaprio's tragic backstory onto its audience, I can only tell you three things about his character:

1. He frowns a lot.
2. He bounces expository dialogue off of other characters a lot.
3. He waxes philosophical a lot.

Congratulations. I cannot care about what happens to this man at all.

I never once felt like the exposition was badly handled. I actually praised it because the characters only spoke it to the new girl and didn't just say how things work to one another even though they knew already. A character in training is an age old way of doing exposition but if it has to be done that's the best way to do it.

I learned plenty more about the character then what you listed above. I've been talking about some of those things you didn't mention for two posts now.

Inception is a lot of things, depending on your taste. It might be a good action movie (in fact I strongly suspect it would have been if you took out the character elements). It might be pretty. It might be clever and well-constructed. I could agree with all those things. It is not, however, a deep or emotional movie, so let's take that off the table right now. And the fact that it spent so much of its time trying to be brought the entire experience down.

Maybe it ruined it for you. For me I don't need to see another bone head action flick. It did something different and that's what helped not only make it stand out but made it more interesting. I'd have cared less about the characters if they just ran around with no drama at all in their lives and were a bunch of smug thieves who robbed people's thoughts. The Matrix was one of a few "smart" action flicks and Inception could have been one if it had more action. I didn't feel like it did and they just advertised it that way because they knew no one would see it otherwise. Kind of like what happened with V for Vendetta.

The Matrix is a good action movie. It doesn't ask me to care about Reeve's character, so I can get into its interesting concepts, visuals, and action. Aces. Hell, the Bourne movies are good action movies, but they don't pretend for one second that you're supposed to care more about Bourne's character than all the twists, conspiracies, and action.

2001 is a good thinking movie, or at least a good obtuse movie. It also doesn't ask me to care about Bowman's character. It only prompts you to get into its psychedelic otherwordliness.

You seem to have some extreme disposition about films making you care about their characters. Which is ironic because you keep mentioning that Inception failed to make you care about the character. Which is it? Honestly if I don't find myself with any reason to care about the main character I lose interest in the film. That's one of the main problems I had with all the Bourne films. It as the main problem I had with Predators too.

There's a place for character drama, and that's in a character-driven film. Cohen brothers type stuff, for a big name example. Hell, even The Dark Knight did a decent job of balancing its action and characters, and pulled off all its thematically transparent melodrama. This wasn't the right movie for that kind of stuff. This was shoehorned and terrible. This was an attempt to pull audiences and it cheesed the whole thing up to a distracting level.

Again for you maybe. I get the sense you over hyped yourself for this movie and now you're jaded it didn't meet you expectations. That's fine I've done the same thing myself. You might go back and watch this film in a few years and judge it differently or you just might forever hate it. I'm in that position with Spider-man 3 and it taught me the lesson of never over hyping a film for myself. People are always telling me it's not as bad as I think it is.

One last thing to keep in mind, and this is something someone said to me recently that I think is pretty awesome. "When watching a movie don't think about how you would make it. Watch it as the filmmakers intended you to see it and let the world of the film draw you in. Go in with a blank slate and soak in the film. This way you can judge it in the least biased way possible but also open yourself up to enjoy something you might have otherwise disliked."

[ToTheNines]

I wasn't totally emotionally invested in Dom, but he was pretty bad-ass. And pretty much everyone can related to not being able to get something/someone from your past out of your dreams... but we have the luxury of not having to use dreams for coporate espionage heist jobs.

[ThirdMarioBro]

Originally Posted by Cipher

Mediocre action movie marred by its emphasis on character drama. Unfortunately I can't tell you anything about the characters besides the facts that they frown and wax philosophical. Looks pretty, but it's below average and all-over-the-place in terms of focus.

And public reaction has been sickening. If you mention this movie in the same sentence as 2001, you're not only bad at being a movie critic, you're bad at having opinions.

This review is one of the few to really nail it: http://nymag.com/movies/reviews/67155/

Worst opinion I've heard in a while. Guess you couldn't keep up with the plot. Inception was a masterpiece.

[Sewer Bull]

Saw it today. I like how so many movies are referenced to in this flick. From James Bond to Citizen Kane.

An awesome watch. Not going to over-analyze it to death, tho'. Probably not going to see it again for a while, too.

[ZariusTwo]

I saw it a while ago, it is definatly one of the best philisophical action movies of it's time, and the story, whilst "borrowing" from a lot of video game stereotypes, holds together long enough for all the major points to be addressed without getting in the way of the action scenes, and at times also furthering them

Anyone ranting against this is just being a living cliche of the internet's typical bravado of poser-level negativity.

[Sewer Bull]

I discovered that hardcore Inception fans get pretty anal when I ask them about the sequel.

[PAAATE]

Boring movie. It was supposed to be confusing, but after those first few confusing scenes it was surprisingly straight storytelling. They didn't make me care about the characters, the action was boring, the need to think was basically non-existent... Also it was way too predictable. I dunno, I'm just disappointed, since I was so sure I would like it.

[plastroncafe]

I really liked it, and found that most of my main complaints about the movie as a whole are pretty easily explained away by the last few seconds of the film.