Monday, July 19, 2010

INCEPTION

“INCEPTION” (Leonardo DiCaprio, etc.)

My initial reaction when this film ended was, “Worst Leonardo DiCaprio movie EVER!”
Then I remembered “Revolutionary Road” (Which I was so grateful to have forgotten)
This movie sucks. I mean really, really sucks.
It isn’t often that I’m so disenchanted with a film that I spend most of the second half wishing it were already over, but that was definitely the case here. My wife told me that if I had said something she would have gladly left.
I would say if you like crap like ‘The Matrix’ films, you’ll probably like this crap as well, but I hated ‘The Matrix’ & thus, I hated this equally (the only difference is the acting is better in this one) But the only way the actors could have saved this film is by refusing to do it, thus saving my wife & I 3 hours of our lives that we’ll never get back.
Although I came up with an even worse DiCaprio movie, I do believe this is far & away the worst Joesph Gordon-Levitt film to date.
Now those who have seen it are probably thinking I was bored by the convoluted plot, but that isn’t the case at all – it’s actually fairly simple to follow – My problem with it is that its incredibly stupid. The entire reason for this film to exist is so writer/director Chris Nolan can amaze those who are easily amazed by using that tired old Matrix trick of showing the amazing scenes in amazingly super slow motion. If filmed in regular motion the entire way, you’d knock a good hour off the running time & might have something worth viewing... though the plot would still be stupid.
Good cast though; DiCaprio, who has earned respect lately after some piss-poor showings after ‘Gilbert Grape’, plays Dom Cobb, a man who specializes in entering others dreams / Joeseph Gordon-Levitt as his partner Arthur / Tom Hardy is Eames who for some unknown reason can make himself appear as someone the ‘mark’ knows – in this case Tom Berenger’s ‘Browning’ / Ken Watanabe as Saito, a victim of Cobb’s that turns around & hires him to bring down Cillian Murphy’s Robert Fischer – the son of a recently deceased billionaire whom they want to influence to disassociate himself from his father’s inheritance / Marion Cotillard as Teddy Daniels dead wife Delores, who haunts his dreams & hides a secret involving their children... No wait, that was the much better ‘Shutter Island’, but same character, different name (Mal) / Michael Caine plays Cobb’s father-in-law / & the over-rated Ellen Page as an apprentice dream architect.
The fact that there is a similarity between DiCapiro’s Cobb & his Teddy Daniels from his last film made me chuckle – Both characters are haunted by their dead wives in dreams / Both share peripheral visions involving their children / & at one point Cobb is shown splashing cold water on his face in a rest room – In my head I heard, “Get a grip, Teddy!”
But alas, “Inception” didn’t have the delightful plot twists that “Shutter Island” gave us;
In fact, “Inception” didn’t have much of a plot, period. In Nolan’s vision of ‘dreams within dreams’ there are car chases aplenty, bullets being expelled from automatic weapons in the millions & enough fiery explosions to last thru 2 or 3 Die Hard movies.
Now initially, I bought into the concept; I liked the fact that Cobb shoots & kills his best friend Arthur in a dream so he’ll wake up – but following that rule, how come all those thousands of thugs who are shot & killed inside the dream world don’t just wake up & re-enter the dream again? I’ll tell you why, because this movie is STUPID.
I got a kick out of the packed house that watched this sleep inducing story with us when they let out a collective gasp when the screen went to black after the final scene. Without giving anything away, I was just relieved that it was finally over, so I could care less what the object onscreen was going to do. So don’t be surprised if you go to see this incredible blockbuster involving revolving dream worlds & it makes you yawn....
You’ve been warned.

10 comments:

movieluva said...

Wow... it's like we saw two different films ! I liked it. A lot. It's easily the most ambitious and imaginative film of 2010.
I liked that there was more than one plot going on, many times in one scene even. Also one scene may serve the viewer different tempos and complexities within that one scene.
At least this isn't like so many of the cookie cutter, people acting half asleep and collecting a paycheck movie and the screenplay is a original idea instead of this crap that's being remade ( oh I'm sorry rebooted ) or stupid TV shows turned into movies.
I applaud Nolan for bringing his ideas to the big screen and on top of that the tech work that done is brilliant. Unlike Avatar Nolan used real location shoots, and didn't totally rely on CGI like Avatar and The Matrix.
For my money though, I think Leonardo was better in Shutter Ilsand and I think he still might get a Oscar nomination for that film by having a two solid films in the same year.

blue stater said...

I was waiting for your Inception review. Damn- you didn't like it. But you make out like you despised it. This is top notch filmmaking at it's finest. In all aspects.
I thought it was near genuis, at least in the whole scope and ideas part of it. I liked the ideas of extracting dreams from other people or planting ideas ( Inception ) into others.
I tend to always think in terms of the actual filmmaking process. The writing, then setting up the storyline and executing it. And in that sense I think was was highly well done.
And like the person wrote above, at least it's an original thought compared to a lot of other movies, this year and past.
I think it's the best film of 2010

dbm said...

I don't have time to comment as I have to go somwewhere right now for a moment. Don't reply back Terry till I get to toss in my 3 cents please. Be back in an hour or so. Oh...and I KNEW you wouldn't like it :)

dbm said...

OK...I'm back. Like I said I told my buddy, I bet my corresponding movie friend doesn't like this. And was I right. With mass disdain too. Ouch !
I like Chris Nolan as a filmmaker and a screenwriter. But I can't convince you to like the movie. You are amusingly so, one of the most hard headed movie goers I have ever come across in my entire life. Toughest sell by a long shot.
But you do have a pattern Mr. Reid. I don't know if it's subconscious or not. But it seems a lot more times than not, when a lot of people seem to like a film and on top of that, is a critical success, you seem go the other way. I don't have to mention every film here and name every movie, just can just go back in your archives.
So obviously everybody has their right to their own opinion but for a second.... go outside your normal way of thinking. Outside your movie goer box so to speak. Think of yourself sitting down and crafting a film. First on paper, then construct these actual things you have written ( that's unlike any other movie before ) and put that work and vision onto a film set. See yourself as a screenwriteer or filmmaker. And bring that all into fruition.
On that basis alone you should at least give Nolan some props, to making something that's completely outside the box of normal movie making and storytelling, and in those terms alone that reeks of originality. And that's what I yearn for when I look for a movie to see because Inception is light years ahead of so many movies on so many aspects of filmmaking.
Biggest thing I was impressed with the film was the filmmakers invloved. Wally Pfister should win the Oscar in cinematographer. He should have won for The Dark Knight. Same goes with the cutting of the film. Excellent edting, the scenes melded into eachother like butter. Not an easy film to cut either. Art direction is excellent. I also like that the film wasn't completely dominated by CGI unlike many sci-fi or action films. They were actually put on location in many shots.
And then just the basic idea of the film, which is a original idea is outstanding from just a broad scope on the actual premise.
I really liked it and I never felt for a second that the film had any lags.
Sometimes when I read a nasty review from Terry, I tend to think his age may come into it. As maybe it is true that you become less patient with things and become more borederline curmudgeonly in your taste in film. I say this because I don't know how I'd feel about Inception if I was Terry's age. I might think the same things.
But I am not and I firmly believe this film is light years ahead of many in many apsects from a filmmaking and originalaity aspect.
And you hated this movie and you gave something like Shoot Em Up a thumbs up ?

Sam Peckinpah said...

I take it you didn't like it ? dbm and blue makes some good points. I liked it just fine. I agree that Christopher Nolan has a good eye for filmmaking. ut to hate it ? I think it was better than most of the stuff out there, but my favorite of the yr is another Leo film and that's Shutter Island. I hope they don't forget about that film. I wish they would have released it in the winter and gave it a proper release. Oscar voters will likely forget about that movie. I bought the Blueray.
And just before I logged on here, I read a real positive review of Salt. Really ? It looks just like a combo of Tomb Raider, Wanted and Mr and Mrs Smith. Naturally have to see it for myself but I just don't see it being a great movie even though Philip Noyce has directed some fine films.
And Get Low comes out on the 30th. I hear some good stuff about that too. That is on my radar. How bad can Duvall, Murray and Spacek be ?
Oh- and Hitchcock says hello and he's already turned over 3 times when he heard they are going to remake The Birds.

Terry Reid said...

movieluva has a point with saying 'at least it isn't a sequel or a remake', but calling it 'original'???
It reminded me of the Matrix with all the stupid super slo-mo & there was a character named Freddy Krueger (you may have heard of him) who has been entering others dreams for decades... But yes, kudos to Nolan for now... until the sequel comes out, then I get to bitch some more.

For the record, I did NOT give a thumbs up to 'Shoot 'Em Up' - I hated it. I only saw it because of the cast, which I thought would elevate it above the title, but they couldn't.

I don't know if my age enters into which movies I enjoy - It certainly influences my taste in music, but I don't see how it affects movies. My mantra is I want a good story; well told & well acted. I don't really give a crap what it 'looks' like (Unless I see womething like 'Cyrus' where the elementary school camera work drove me nuts) So from that aspect, a movie like 'Inception' which is all visual & no substance isn't going to entertain me. But it wouldn't have entertained me 30 years ago either. & just for the record I'm 55, but as anyone who knows me will tell you I am a very immature 55...
As far as me disliking movies other people like, I have to disagree only for the fact that I usually see movies on their first weekend - I had no idea people would like junk like 'Inception' - It is shocking to me that it is being exalted as a great, innovative film. I found the plot to be too simple (Who couldn't follow the plot - there was nothing to it!) All the ultra slow-motion scenes were boring (C'mon, you can't tell me you weren't yawning during all those idiotic scenes where Arthur was tying everyone together with a cord & floating them into the elevator - that seemed to take up about half an hour of the film, I wanted to scream out, "Hurry the ---- up, for cryin' out loud!")
I don't go into films wanting NOT to like them, I want to get my money's worth & be entertained - when I'm not, I vent with this blog. But dbm said right off the top - "I knew you wouldn't like it"
I like that he knew that it wasn't 'my kind of film' - because that's what critics are good for; You may disagree with most of my reviews & I'm fine with that - we have different tastes, big deal. My goal is to write something that entertains you - Even if you say, "That guy's an idiotic, but that was a pretty funny line he wrote." I'm more satisfied with a comment like that than I am with someone who agrees with me. Movieluva went to see 'Solitary Man' after reading my review (& enjoyed it) THAT'S what makes writing these reviews worthwhile to me... Although I must admit, when I get on an island by myself by hating a movie everyone else seems to love, I kinda like it... keeps me from having to label myself as one of the sheep.

dbm said...

I'm a deep down wannabe filmmaker. I put myself in the shoes of the filmmakers. Remember how easy it is to green screen for F/X. More than half of Inception was made non green screen. A lot was cinematography and editing.
I think about script to screen. That Nolan came up with this out of his own imagination and wasn't from other source materiasl should be taken in consideration. And the plot of Inception is nothing like Nightmare or The Matrix. Completely different movies. Where in Nightmare were they extracting dreams for finacial gain ? Dreams happened in fast and slow motion so you are getting ultra picky on The Matrix slow motion scenes comapred to Inception. The Matrix they were slowing down things with their conscious minds not in dreams. You wouldn't film a dream scene like a regular awake moment because that is not how dreams are.
Think of all the shite that is put upon us to see, this is light years ahead of the A-Team or What Happens In Vegas crap.
It is funny though that my top two fave films of the year are with DiCaprio in them.
Odd, because that happened a few years back with The Departed and Blood Diamond. I think Leo is just now really coming into his own and I am highly anticipating what he and Clint with do with the J. Edgar Hoover project.

Kurt said...

This was only my 5th movie of the year. Least amount of mmovies I have seen since forever ( the kid takes a lot of time these days )

But I thought it was fun. Different from what wee are used to on a weekly basis. I remembered reading a interview with Nolan during the making of the movie and him saying that he was going to do his best at shooting the film live, on weird sets, with different angles. Totally opposite of The Matrix and Avatar. Now that impressed me.
Knowing that before hand, I knew it wouldn't resemble those films.
I liked the cast. I think they all did a decent job ( Cotillard the most effective ) and the technical aspects are amazing. It's very hard to shoot a film of this magintude without a bunch of CGI.
Nolan will finally get his much deserved and belated Oscar nomination.
There is a good article in Entertainment Weekly that delves further into the making of the film that is very interesting. I don't see how someone couldn't be entertained by the movie, but more so, being impressed by the behind the scenes and not relying so much on computer graphics to get shots. That's just me. Who am I ?

Terry Reid said...

DBM & Kurt are extreme film buffs, they can be entertained by things that I could care less about.
Now, DBM & I could go back & forth for months on why this movie is/isn't boring & unoriginal & in the end, I would win because this is my blog & I could just edit out his responses - but (& you know I like & respect you 'DB') to say 'Inception' doesn't look like 'The Matrix' because the characters were causing the slow motion scenes is a very silly argument. & Cobb's entering people's dreams for financial gain separates him from Freddy Krueger? & you yourself said 'you wouldn't film a dream sequence like an awake
moment' Yet, that was another problem I had with 'Inception' - They DIDN'T LOOK any different UNTIL things started to explode for no reason or everything started winding down in super-duper-mega-slo-mo. I've had hundreds of dreams, maybe into the thousands by now, & not in any single one of them was I shot at dozens of times by guys with automatic weapons, was involved in a car chase or had things exploding all around me. Nolan didn't create a realistic dream world, he created a bad, plotless movie dream world. Which is just my opinion & I am obviously in the minority - like I was with the cheesy 'Slumdog Millionaire'(Worst non-musical to ever win Best Picture?)
I'm glad everyone enjoyed it & felt they got their money's worth, but I did not - whatever you were seeing that fascinated you, bored me to tears... I guess because when I view 'special effects' they need to make sense to me - nothing that happened in 'Inception' had much logic to it - things just happened because Nolan thought it would look 'cool' to the sheep... & by golly, he was right.
Please feel free to keep trying to put me in my place (I promise I won't delete your comments!)because if nothing else, 'Inception' has gotten us talking about it - How boring would it be if I liked it too?

dbm said...

Well you obviously can dislike the film ( I don't see how but... )
at least give Nolan credit in the act of filmmaking, whereas he could have easily turned this film into a CGI dominated fare and instead with imagination, came up with odd camera angles and set pieces constrcuted differently, than just having some computer whiz create in on his hard drive. At least this was made organtically like they did in the old days when you didn't have a whole lot of CGI.