Everything he (Nolan) does is forced and overthought, and Inception, far from being his ticket into hall-of-fame greatness, is a very expensive-looking, elephantine film whose myriad so-called complexities -- of both the emotional and intellectual sort -- add up to a kind of ADD tedium.
Universal acclaim- based on 3104 Ratings
RedzuanM.Jul 16, 2010What makes Inception so special is that it's not your typical straight forward summer blockbuster. Nolan gives you bits and pieces of What makes Inception so special is that it's not your typical straight forward summer blockbuster. Nolan gives you bits and pieces of information, and as the movie plays out the viewer begins to put the pieces together and the picture gradually becomes clearer. Chris Nolan doesn't dumb down the movie for the audience like most Hollywood movies do these days, he expects us to keep up with him. And when we do, the reward is extremely gratifying. And the visuals were amazing.… Full Review »
Aug 28, 2010I'd like to keep my review rather to the point.
Pros: 1. its theme - dream is a fascinating topic to say the least. There are a lot ofI'd like to keep my review rather to the point.
1. its theme - dream is a fascinating topic to say the least. There are a lot of unknowns in the dreamworld.
2. its plot - there are several sweet twists and unpredictable turns.
3. its edgy drive - although you know what's coming next but still you feel jumpy about it.
4. its fast storyline - the story moves fast from one scene to another, making the viewers feel like on a roller coaster ride. At times, it's hard to keep up, even at the second viewing.
5. its sophistication - there is a lot of information to remember and digest. This is the very thing the modern moviegoers are after, I believe.
6. its realism - okay, pun intended. The movie explains (or at least tries to) the ins and outs of what dream is about and how it functions, some of which are very familiar with and dear to us.
1. its poor character development - although the acting was convincing enough there was not enough of character development. I wonder how many people really felt connected to the main character(s) after watching the movie. Yes, the movie talks about emotional struggles but it was more of an action film, if you ask me.
2. too many distractions - I found that the movie had more than enough characters than necessary. They may play some roles in the plot but they seemed more of distraction than anything else. I wish the movie was more focused.
3. a bit preachy - I noticed the characters would explain things about the dreamworld and then the exact things happen later in the movie. I'm afraid, Inception overused this trick.
In conclusion, its theme is fascinating but its delivery is not without room for improvement.
I highly recommend you to go and read Somewhere carnal over 40 winks, if you dig this kind of flicks.
Cheers!… Full Review »
JamesD.Jul 26, 2010Not very good really. I've heard the word visionary thrown Nolan's way, but this film was the work of a rather sterile imagination. Not very good really. I've heard the word visionary thrown Nolan's way, but this film was the work of a rather sterile imagination. Yes, it had many layers of narrative cleverly interweaved with eachother, but there was little to compel me at its core. The root cause of Cobb's state of mind just didn't grab me - partly as this relationship was never given the chance to develop to a tangible level. The elements of subconscious displayed were tame and the approach to the dreamworld rather banal - focusing as it did mainly on bland designs, bendy gimmicks and exploding things. There was little edge to Nolan's vision, he seemed quite happy to drown us in relentless exposition and unimaginative slow-mo shots. Scenes were very quick and at no point approached the atmosphere and interest of a real dream. A shame, because at their best, this is what films can do - engineer the quality of a waking dream. Compare Inception to the more intriguing work of Lynch, where scenes seduce with the perfect balance of the real and surreal, and whose images tend to linger in the mind. On top of this, Nolan is simply not a very good director of action; he is quite loose with the camera, and I yearned for more flair and invention in these scenes. Instead, he relied on an incredibly insistent score to give the action some punch. For a film about dreams and the subconscious, it was curiously impersonal and mechanical. Certainly, the real danger and sexuality of the subconscious might scare off mainstream audiences, but Nolan was given free reign to do what he wanted - so why not do something more interesting? Freud and Jung would find little to interest them here, as the film is less concerned with psychology and more with the narrative possibilities afforded by a convoluted dreamworld fiction. Perhaps Nolan does dream of corporate worlds and Bond fortresses. Unfortunately, such things don't interest me.… Full Review »