Christopher Nolan's "Inception" (We're giving up on spoiler tags)

[Watashi]

Really? I honestly didn't think Leo still had that kind of box office pull. I thought he picked some great scripts and projects to work on.
Leo is a huge bankable star. He's probably the biggest out there right now.

[megladon8]

Leo is a huge bankable star. He's probably the biggest out there right now.


Wow. I wasn't being sarcastic, I am honestly shocked.

I thought the craze over him pretty much came and went with Titanic (give or take a few years, into the early 2000s).

He's perhaps one of the greatest cases I've experienced where my opinion on an actor totally flip-flopped. Up until about 2006, he was, to me "that annoying pretty-boy from Titanic". I really didn't see any difference between him and the hundreds of Paul Walker's and Hayden Christensen's that come and go in Hollywood every couple of years.

But then I saw The Departed. And then Gangs of New York. Then Catch Me if You Can. And suddenly I saw that, wow, this guy has some serious acting chops, and all of a sudden I kind of like him.

Now I will actively seek out what projects he has coming out.

[Winston*]

I think a lot of people are going to see this movie because the trailer makes it look like a good movie.

[Ezee E]

Will Smith might be the only more bankable star than Leo.

And people know Scorsese once they hear the movies he's directed. He's basically at Spielberg, Tarantino level.

And yes, the sweet imagery of the previews is what's selling this movie, no matter how "weird" it looks. Or "confusing." People are still excited.

[megladon8]

I actually thought many people would be excited by the mere mention of it being by the director of The Dark Knight.

I doubt many know who Christopher Nolan is by name, but they sure as hell know The Dark Knight.

[BuffaloWilder]

People know Christoper Nolan.

My father, who knows fuck-all about movies outside of Bruce Lee and Bruce Willis, knows who he is.

People know Christopher Nolan.

[MadMan]

I think a lot of people are going to see this movie because the trailer makes it look like a good movie.Nah, that's just crazy talk ;)


Also, as far as it goes, I'd probably back the opinion that Nolan's a far stronger filmmaker than either Wes Anderson or, on the whole, Steven Soderbergh.While I haven't seen a great deal of Soderbergh's work so I can't comment on him being better or not, but I think Anderson is superior to Nolan as a director.

[Fezzik]

Wow. I wasn't being sarcastic, I am honestly shocked.

I thought the craze over him pretty much came and went with Titanic (give or take a few years, into the early 2000s).

He's perhaps one of the greatest cases I've experienced where my opinion on an actor totally flip-flopped. Up until about 2006, he was, to me "that annoying pretty-boy from Titanic". I really didn't see any difference between him and the hundreds of Paul Walker's and Hayden Christensen's that come and go in Hollywood every couple of years.

But then I saw The Departed. And then Gangs of New York. Then Catch Me if You Can. And suddenly I saw that, wow, this guy has some serious acting chops, and all of a sudden I kind of like him.

Now I will actively seek out what projects he has coming out.

QFT. This is exactly how my respect for him came about too.

[number8]

Pftth. Did none of you watch Basketball Diaries?

[[ETM]]

Pftth. Did none of you watch Basketball Diaries?

Indeed. That and Gilbert Grape.

[Pop Trash]

;268295']Indeed. That and Gilbert Grape.
And This Boy's Life. Hell, he even outshined everyone as the homeless kid on "Growing Pains."

[BuffaloWilder]

Here's a question for you - since Nolan was all about placing a strong emphasis on stylistic realism, why did he make The Dark Knight second, which was in terms of superficial plot just Batman and The Joker being pitted against each other, with no holds barred, instead of - well, ninja cults trying to destroy a giant American city with fear-inducing poppy-seed drugs, and all of that kind of thing?

That never made any sense, I've always thought.

[Qrazy]

Here's a question for you - since Nolan was all about placing a strong emphasis on stylistic realism, why did he make The Dark Knight second, which was in terms of superficial plot just Batman and The Joker being pitted against each other, with no holds barred, instead of - well, ninja cults trying to destroy a giant American city with fear-inducing poppy-seed drugs, and all of that kind of thing?

That never made any sense, I've always thought.

Because he's about stylistic naturalism not narrative realism. Also I think he wanted to pave his own path a bit and do some original villains (in terms of the filmverse) first.

[number8]

Well, you know, the villains (and plot) were Goyer's, not Nolan's.

[megladon8]

Well, you know, the villains (and plot) were Goyer's, not Nolan's.


Wasn't that the same for both Batman Begins and The Dark Knight?

[number8]

No.

Goyer wrote Batman Begins's screenplay by himself and got the project started. Then they hired Chris Nolan as director and he retooled the script, mostly dialogue but I think shuffling the flashbacks. I don't remember. I had Goyer's original script and it's very similar to the finished movie.

For The Dark Knight, Nolan and Goyer worked together to come up with the story, then they gave it to Jonathan Nolan to write the screenplay.

[number8]

This is kind of cool. Someone edited The Dark Knight into a trailer with the Inception music.

KGdQURlmsjc

[BuffaloWilder]

Why are fan-trailers usually so much better than studio trailers?

The good ones, I mean.

[Qrazy]

Why are fan-trailers usually so much better than studio trailers?

The good ones, I mean.

I'm guessing this is mostly a rhetorical question... but I'll throw out a theory anyway. Probably because a fan trailer is often made after the film has been released. As a result there's more footage to play with, the tone of the film is more clearly established and there's no studio exec breathing down one's neck to cut the trailer in such and such a way... and also some fans are simply quite talented. :)

[angrycinephile]

Devin Faraci gives it 10/10


Inception is a masterpiece. Making a huge film with big ambitions, Christopher Nolan never missteps and manages to create a movie that, at times, feels like a miracle. And sometimes it doesn't even feel like a movie; while presented in woefully retro 2D, Inception creates a complete sense of immersion in another world. The screen before you is just another layer of the dream.

I don't even know what's the most remarkable aspect of Inception. It's huge-budget filmmaking harnessed to tell a personal story that's smart and uncompromising. That's certainly remarkable in this age of Hollywood. It's a production that brought its cameras to six countries, never allowing a backlot to do when a shot could be achieved in a real location. That's starting to feel unheard of in this day and age. It's a movie where Christopher Nolan manages to bring together all of his obsessions and quirks, where his personal issues are the life and death issues at the center of the story, and where he has managed to turn every single one of his directorial weaknesses into massive strengths. That, perhaps, is the truest miracle - the auteur finally completed before our eyes.

Every single movie Christopher Nolan has made until now has led to Inception. The fractal, recursive nature of Following and Memento informs the structure of reality in Inception. The exploration of narrative and storytelling in The Prestige leads to this film. And the obsession with control, a throughline that leads from Insomnia to Batman Begins and fully blooms in The Dark Knight, takes Nolan directly to the drama at the heart of Inception.

The advertising for Inception presents the film as a dream-based heist thriller, which is true enough in a larger sense. But the heart of the movie is psychoanalysis presented as kick ass action. Nolan's interest in dreams doesn't come from the surreal nature of them (in fact very early on Nolan, who wrote the script, presents an in-universe rule that makes the dreams be as realistic as possible) but from what they say about the dreamer. Nolan is looking at dreams as the entryway to the subconscious. They're the gate through which a repressed, emotionally distanced person can access the feelings that trouble them deep inside.

And that's the genius of the film. Nolan is a director who has always been chilly; some may kindly call him restrained. While visually he is an unabashed pupil of Ridley Scott, Nolan is a student of the Stanley Kubrick school of emotion, and Inception reminds me of The Shining in that the emotional content isn't subtext or nuanced but rather blaring, plot-motivating text. Leonardo DiCaprio is Cobb, the best extractor in the world. A dream thief, Cobb and his team get into your mind during sleep, when it's most vulnerable, and they find and steal information they need. But Cobb has a problem - he can't keep his own subconscious under control, and his repressed feelings about his wife keep manifesting themselves in the dream space, becoming more and more aggressive and dangerous.

In another film that's the subtext, the subtle motivation behind Cobb's character. In Inception it gradually becomes everything, and it is explicitly dealt with as a part of the plot. By making the pain deep inside Cobb another element of the heist movie structure, Nolan is free to deal with it analytically, with a cold eye for what it means to Cobb as a contained man. Like in The Dark Knight the greatest danger isn't external, it's completely internal - the loss of control. In The Dark Knight that loss of control was represented by the dual figures of The Joker and Two-Face, while in Inception that loss of control - the scariest thing Nolan can imagine, it seems - is represented in the haunting beauty of Marion Cotillard.

All of this happens against the backdrop of a gripping thriller. Cobb has been hired by a mysterious businessman, played by Ken Watanabe, to perform the most difficult dream job there is: they are not going to steal something from the mind of industrialist heir Cillian Murphy but rather leave something there. They are going to go deep into his subconscious and plant an idea that will blossom into something that will benefit Watanabe; it turns out that the planting of an idea - inception - is markedly more difficult than the stealing of one. And so Cobb must gather a crackerjack team of dream experts to get deep into the mark's mind - many layers deep into his subconscious - and give him an idea so firmly rooted that when he awakes he'll be convinced it's his own.

Joseph Gordon-Levitt is Arthur, Cobb's usual point man. His job is to do the research into the mark, to get to understand the target intimately so that the team can create a dream that will feel convincing and real. Tom Hardy is Eames the forger, the team member who impersonates people within the dream, making the dreamer think that certain thoughts or ideas come from his own subconscious. Dileep Rao is Yusuf the chemist, the guy whose specially concocted sedatives allow the team the freedom and flexibility to move throughout the mind. And Ellen Page is Ariadne the architect*, perhaps the most important member of the team. She actually builds the dream world, creating a space for the team to work and where the mark will feel comfortable. In the world of Inception the worst thing that can happen during a mission is that the mark begins to realize he's dreaming.

The cast that Nolan has assembled is just as crackerjack as Cobb's team. These are among the best young actors; beautiful faces to be sure (and I don't know that anyone has photographed Ellen Page as angelically as Wally Pfister does here), but also among the most serious actors of their generation. Structurally Inception is a heist film, and as in a heist film most of the characters are defined by their functions, as opposed to anything deeper. But with a cast as great as this, Nolan is able to get characterization out of the smallest moments. He knows that he can trust this cast to round these people out, that they will become more than just their job description, and that their interrelationships will take on a life of their own. That's exactly what happens; while the greater pleasures of Inception have to do with epic action scenes and satisfying psychological catharses, the smaller joys come in moments where Arthur and Eames bounce off of each other, or where the troubled, weary Cobb slowly warms when dealing with the fresh-faced, talented Ariadne. Nolan shows a facility for maintaining the team dynamics while also keeping the central story focused on Cobb, as his inability to keep control over his deep-seeded issues begins to endanger his team.

The first half of the film is set up: the explication of the world (done with panache and thrills), the building of the team, the outline of the heist. And then the second half of the film is the heist itself, a journey through multiple layers of the psyche that span the globe and have relativistic chronological connections. This leads to one of the most incredible, jaw-dropping and beautifully-created sustained action set pieces in cinema history. The action ranges across levels, with car chases and shoot outs and fist fights, and with the events in one level of reality impacting the next. Moments in one level are hours in the next, and crashes and explosions in one ripple down to those below. It's heady and smart and most of all completely and totally thrilling. What could be the most thrilling, though, is the way Inception shows serious promise for Nolan as an action director. His action scenes have always been confused and poorly shot; while a handful of Inception's action scenes - like a chase through the streets of Mombasa - are vintage Nolan mess, most of the heart-stopping action in the third act is next level stuff, which hopefully means Nolan has begun to conquer his fear of long shots in fight scenes.

As amazing as the bravura third act is, the most transcendent part of it is Joseph Gordon-Levitt's zero gravity fight in the dreamy corridors of a hotel. The simplistic comparison is to The Matrix, but I think it's also the best - no action scene in a mainstream movie has been so incredibly realized, so elegantly staged and remained so viscerally exciting since the Bros Wachowski shook up the world of action movies. It's a scene that made the hair on the back of my neck stand up, not because it was using some exciting new technology or because it was incorporating underground techniques but because it was just so well done, because it was so beautiful and so fun and so fresh. The biggest problem with the zero-G fight is that it ends, that Nolan doesn't keep dragging it out so that we can keep living in that perfect cinematic moment. I wanted to get to my feet and applaud.

To be honest I wanted to get to my feet and applaud all through the third act. The stakes keep raising while also becoming more and more personal. The goal isn't a knock out punch or an explosive finale (although both come into play) but rather emotional breakthroughs. And to make those breakthroughs be an organic part of the sound and the fury going on around them is the work of a master, a filmmaker who has truly come to a place where his skills are unsurpassed. In the final moments of Inception you realize this movie has worked on every single level, from Hans Zimmer's edging on monster movie score to Pfister's stunning visuals to the textured and believable CGI effects that give the dreamworlds their depth. A standing ovation is the natural impulse when faced with such perfection.

I can see how some might dislike Inception. Nolan's vision of dreams is one that is fairly staid and antiseptic and frankly not that resonant with how I dream. And if a viewer cannot engage in the beginning, during the film's opening dream heist, it's possible that they'll never be able to engage with the rest of the film. But I can't see how someone could say Inception is bad. Thematically it is Nolan's most complete and whole vision (which is a relief, as I think thematics has been where the director has dropped the ball in the past), but cinematically it's also his grandest vision. It's his complete statement as an auteur, bringing together his personal quirks and his stylistic quirks; Inception is his ultimate city movie, and it's his ultimate repression film. It's the summation of everything he has done to date. And it's delicately assembled, with each piece having meaning and a perfect fit with every other piece. There's not a wasted moment or an unnecessary diversion (again, a relief, as Nolan was all about diversions in The Dark Knight). Everything means something.

What's perhaps best about Inception is that it's not a trick film. A smart, aware viewer will find most of the movie's answers given to them in the very opening scene. Nolan's not trying to hide anything or pull any twists, and he's more interested in paying off emotional beats than pulling the rug out on viewers at the end. Memento works despite being a puzzle movie, but The Prestige is fatally crippled by being a one and done fluff experience. Nolan wisely avoids that here; a lesser director might have tried to twisterooni his film to death, but Nolan knows that we're going to be looking everywhere for clues and meanings, and he's happy to deliver them. This, again, is a psychoanalysis film, and Nolan wants us to interpret it just as a therapist might interpret our dreams. The ending isn't intended to shock or stun but to pull together the pieces, while sending the audience out discussing the larger meanings and contexts of what they've just seen. And it's a film that will reward mightily on future viewings. Inception works on the most basic levels as the ultimate in cinematic entertainment, and it also works on deeper levels of meaning and character. The film I am most reminded of, weirdly, is Lawrence of Arabia. While Inception has nothing to do with David Lean's masterpiece (except for some gorgeous location photography), it contains the same scope I find there. I can watch Lawrence as the gripping examination of the meaning of a man, or I can watch Lawrence as a lush, epic adventure. Both ways of approaching the film are equally correct and both ways are equally satisfying. Inception brings the epic scope of Old Hollywood together with the psychological realism of New Hollywood, creating a fusion that feels timeless and classic.

I loved Inception. I loved seeing the world Nolan created. I loved visiting the locales and spending time with the characters. I loved every moment of the waking dream, every frame of the celluloid reality. Cinema is dreaming, and Nolan understands this implicitly and completely. While Inception didn't remind me of many dreams I've had, it reminded me of many incredible, transporting moments spent in movie theaters. I'm glad that Nolan opted not to post-convert his film to 3D, as that process would only distance the audience from the movie. By shooting on 65mm film, Nolan has created a massive, immersive and complete visual experience. I actually can't wait to see this movie again but in IMAX, to be completely enveloped in the universe that Nolan, the year's leading cinematic dream architect, has created.


http://chud.com/articles/articles/24313/1/REVIEW-INCEPTION/Page1.html

[amberlita]

Why are fan-trailers usually so much better than studio trailers?

The good ones, I mean.

Right. I'd even say the trailer makes the movie look even better than it is, and the movie is pretty damn good.

[megladon8]

Another stellar review. (http://www.cinematical.com/2010/07/05/inception-review/)

[angrycinephile]

The embargo was lifted a few hours ago and a wave of reviews hit the net. I've must have read 20-25 reviews and thus far the weakest one was comingsoon who gave it a 7 out of 10.

Yeah, this will be gooooood.

[baby doll]

Yeah, this will be gooooood.Definitely. It's not like advance internet reviews are prone to hyperbole.

But seriously folks, do I have to read any further than, "while presented in woefully retro 2D..."?

[B-side]

But seriously folks, do I have to read any further than, "while presented in woefully retro 2D..."?

I'm hoping he was being facetious. For his sake, at least.

[Spun Lepton]

Armond White will hate it. There, I've saved everybody a click.

[Spun Lepton]

But seriously folks, do I have to read any further than, "while presented in woefully retro 2D..."?

Of course, he was being facetious.

[Boner M]

Anyone got some predictions for Armond's review?

-He'll assert that the praise for Nolan's film is a sign that Lang's Metropolis has been forgotten
-Henri-Georges Clozout's Inferno, opening in NYC on the 16th, will be also used as a Nolan-beating stick
-A long attack of Dicaprio's choice of film roles, Dicaprio as the poster-boy for contemporary film culture nihilism, etc
-the review will be unfavorable

[Qrazy]

Anyone got some predictions for Armond's review?

-He'll assert that the praise for Nolan's film is a sign that Lang's Metropolis has been forgotten
-Henri-Georges Clozout's Inferno, opening in NYC on the 16th, will be also used as a Nolan-beating stick
-A long attack of Dicaprio's choice of film roles, Dicaprio as the poster-boy for contemporary film culture nihilism, etc
-the review will be unfavorable

- He will praise Turteltaub's The Sorcerer's Apprentice as a much more thoughtful and morally valuable film which people ought to see instead.
- He will get one or two of the Inception characters names wrong.
- He will quite clearly not understand the plot of the film he just saw.

[Boner M]

- He will praise Turteltaub's The Sorcerer's Apprentice as a much more thoughtful and morally valuable film which people ought to see instead.
- He will get one or two of the Inception characters names wrong.
- He will quite clearly not understand the plot of the film he just saw.
-He will damn film culture anmesia while referring to Memento as Nolan's debut

[Derek]

- He will praise Turteltaub's The Sorcerer's Apprentice as a much more thoughtful and morally valuable film which people ought to see instead.

And he will bring up a poorly reviewed film from the past several years that everyone has forgotten bout and complement it on its more elegant dreamscapes.

Can we get an Armond White Review Anticipation Thread?

[Ezee E]

And he will bring up a poorly reviewed film from the past several years that everyone has forgotten bout and complement it on its more elegant dreamscapes.

Can we get an Armond White Review Anticipation Thread?
What Dreams May Come?

Love the thread idea.

[B-side]

Valhalla Rising (Refn, 2010) ***½

It's settled. I'm seeing this. Tarkovsky comparisons made me interested, but the raves are making me excited.

As for Inception, the glowing reviews are helping me stay somewhat positive about how the film will turn out, but the one-liners in the trailers are still pretty off-putting. Has anyone complained about too much exposition in the film? I have a hunch that will be a big issue with this one.

[Dead & Messed Up]

Here's a question for you - since Nolan was all about placing a strong emphasis on stylistic realism, why did he make The Dark Knight second, which was in terms of superficial plot just Batman and The Joker being pitted against each other, with no holds barred, instead of - well, ninja cults trying to destroy a giant American city with fear-inducing poppy-seed drugs, and all of that kind of thing?

That never made any sense, I've always thought.

There's a story that Nolan showed Blade Runner to his cast/crew before starting work on Begins, and then he showed Heat before The Dark Knight, so it seems that he was aware of the disparity in tone and realism between the two. Hell, even the first film's Wayne Tower is more Gothic than the modern one in the second film.

[Watashi]

Nolan showed Pink Floyd's The Wall to everyone before shooting Inception.

[Morris Schæffer]

So I guess there's a huge risk in reading any of these reviews?

[Boner M]

Nolan showed Pink Floyd's The Wall to everyone before shooting Inception.
Gross.

[baby doll]

Nolan showed Pink Floyd's The Wall to everyone before shooting Inception.Man, it sounds like this guys loves showing off his home theatre system.

[number8]

Man, it sounds like this guys loves showing off his home theatre system.

Not as much as Tarantino, who would show films to his crew almost every night during shooting.

[Skitch]

JoBlo gave it a ten as well. Wow. I knew this might be my favorite movie of the year, I didn't expect critics to be handing it '10/10's and 'masterpiece!' status. Interesting.

[number8]

Pete Hammond said in his review that Kubrick would have been proud. Pete Hammond has a frothing mouthful of dicks.

[Henry Gale]

At least two separate reviews summed it up as The Matrix and Synecdoche, New York becoming one. The first one seemed obvious from the earliest footage with some of its action and ideas of plugging in to one's mind, but my love for Kaufman's film and imagining how Inception will in any way mirror it has left me on the very edge of anticipation for next Friday.

I don't tend to get really excited for too many movies these days, but Nolan's is definitely one of the few.

[Derek]

Gross.

SYMBOLISM FTW!!!

[Ivan Drago]

Gross.

Yeah! They don't need no education or thought control!

[Spun Lepton]

I'm not a fan of The Wall. Love the album, don't much like the half-assed movie with Bob Geldof flailing around like a pretentious toothpick. Having him sing during ... crap, the song name eludes me right now ... but, having him sing during any Pink Floyd song is pretty much blasphemy in my eyes.

As for Inception, this will be the summer movie that gets me to the theater.

[D_Davis]

I like The Wall - the album and the film - but I like The Final Cut more.

[Dead & Messed Up]

I'm not a fan of The Wall. Love the album, don't much like the half-assed movie with Bob Geldof flailing around like a pretentious toothpick. Having him sing during ... crap, the song name eludes me right now ... but, having him sing during any Pink Floyd song is pretty much blasphemy in my eyes.

As for Inception, this will be the summer movie that gets me to the theater.

I didn't mind him, and I thought the film was evocative, well-shot nonsense. The animation was especially cool.

[Ezee E]

Technically competent but otherwise rubbish.

[Boner M]

Technically competent but otherwise rubbish.
This could be the subtitle for a Nolan retrospective.

[[ETM]]

This could be the subtitle for a Nolan retrospective.

Wasn't he talking about The Wall?

[Spun Lepton]

Technically competent but otherwise rubbish.

The Wall or Inception? Your post came at the tail end of a off-topic discussion about The Wall.

[Boner M]

;270716']Wasn't he talking about The Wall?
Doesn't matter.

[Qrazy]

This could be the subtitle for a Nolan retrospective.

Or the subtitle for a retrospective of your face.

[B-side]

Or the subtitle for a retrospective of your face.

:D

[Boner M]

Or the subtitle for a retrospective of your face.
...WHILE I BANGED YOUR MOTHER!

[Grouchy]

I like The Wall - the album and the film - but I like The Final Cut more.
What? You crazy motherfucker.

[number8]

I think I like The Wall more than Memento.

[Qrazy]

...WHILE I BANGED YOUR MOTHER!

Twist ending! She was actually your own mother wearing a Mission Impossible face mask!

[D_Davis]

What? You crazy motherfucker.

The Final Cut is Roger Waters' masterpiece. A top 5 Floyd album/performances, without a doubt:

1. Meddle
2. Live in Pompeii
3. The Final Cut
4. Obscured by Clouds
5. An Hour With Pink Floyd: Live at KQED

The FC is devastating, thought provoking, emotionally engaging, and expertly arranged and performed; one of the most profound, personal and artistic statements ever made by a rock musician. It contains all of the pathos and artistry of The Wall, without the bloat.

[megladon8]

I was never much of a fan of "The Wall", myself.

Like D, I much prefer "Meddle". I also still love "Dark Side of the Moon".

[Grouchy]

The Final Cut is Roger Waters' masterpiece. A top 5 Floyd album/performances, without a doubt:

1. Meddle
2. Live in Pompeii
3. The Final Cut
4. Obscured by Clouds
5. An Hour With Pink Floyd: Live at KQED

The FC is devastating, thought provoking, emotionally engaging, and expertly arranged and performed; one of the most profound, personal and artistic statements ever made by a rock musician. It contains all of the pathos and artistry of The Wall, without the bloat.
Well, disagree. I consider it by far the worst thing Pink Floyd has done and a poor imitation of The Wall's themes and even sounds. It's just that The Wall was so iconic that, even if I liked TFC, it still would have surprised me.

And I'm a fan of Roger Waters. I think the man is an underappreciated visionary. But The Final Cut never sat so well with me at all.

[Glass Co.]

One thing is for sure: no way The Final Cut is a poor as A Momentary Lapse of Reason. What a stinking pile.

[D_Davis]

I've run into a lot of people over the past few years who are warming up to The Final Cut, and for good reason; I've even recently met a few who think it is among Floyd's best. It truly is Waters' singular, personal masterpiece - his heartfelt, genuine artistic expression about the human condition in the face of the tragedy of war. It's not nearly as dated as The Wall (no silly disco songs), and it is written with such brevity; it is short, concise, and to the point. It really is a Waters solo-album; even the liner notes say Roger Waters, with The Pink Floyd. It was going to be his first solo album, but he chose to strike out with The Pros and Cons of Hitchhiking, another brilliant album. Waters was a force to be reckoned with in the late '70s and early '80s.

[Russ]

The Final Cut
And just imagine - as big a Floyd fan as I've always considered myself to be, I've never heard it...tho, curious now.

[Derek]

And just imagine - as big a Floyd fan as I've always considered myself to be, I've never heard it...tho, curious now.

It's essentially a Waters' solo project and considering it Floyd's best is pure heresy. I love Waters, though I've always favored Gilmour. I'll take Wish You Were Here and Animals over The Wall and Final Cut any day of the week.

[D_Davis]

Thus far, no one has said it is their best. Top 5, yes, but not "the best."

[Derek]

Thus far, no one has said it is their best. Top 5, yes, but not "the best."

Still, putting it above all their post-Meddle 70s album is heresy enough. That said, I love Meddle, so props for giving that one the edge. On some days, "Fearless" is my favorite Floyd song.

[D_Davis]

Fearless and Echoes are my favorite tracks.

[eternity]

I feel as if all the ratings for this movie were predetermined when the teaser trailer came out.

Mine included? Probably.

[[ETM]]

Sorry to break up... whatever the current topic is here. This is pretty damn cool:
http://chud.com/articles/content_images/17/InceptionBuildingAd.jpg

http://www.cinemablend.com/images/news/19445/_1278543474.jpg

[Ezee E]

Psh, the bricks don't even match with the rest of the building.

[number8]

I took my own pics of the two in Manhattan;

http://www.justpressplay.net/movies/movie-news/6757-the-good-the-bad-and-the-wtf-building-an-inception.html

[Grouchy]

Psh, the bricks don't even match with the rest of the building.
Seriously. Since they were going for that epic effect, they could've done a better job.

But the first one is awesome.

[[ETM]]

mEItJLwvsF0

[number8]

Got Insomnia Blu-ray for review, and it comes with a $7.50 ticket for Inception. Woo?

[amberlita]

Got Insomnia Blu-ray for review, and it comes with a $7.50 ticket for Inception. Woo?

Die.

[Boner M]

Mike D'Angelo (http://twitter.com/gemko), who thinks Nolan is the greatest filmmaker working today, gave this a 58/100.

[Derek]

Got Insomnia Blu-ray for review, and it comes with a $7.50 ticket for Inception. Woo?

So a coaster and $5 off your ticket. Not bad.


Mike D'Angelo (http://twitter.com/gemko), who thinks Nolan is the greatest filmmaker working today, gave this a 58/100.

Awesome, maybe I'll actually like this a lot.

[Boner M]

Awesome, maybe I'll actually like this a lot.
I'm cautiously anticipating the film, but I don't buy the criticism that dream films are in principle 'tautological'. Does reflexive automatically mean tautological?

[B-side]

My friend is going crazy in anticipation of this. I'm gonna feel shitty if I don't like it.

[MadMan]

My feeling is that either this is going to be goddamn mindblowingly amazing, or it will turn out to be a complete and utter mess. Either way, I'm seeing this in theaters.

[eternity]

My friend is going crazy in anticipation of this. I'm gonna feel shitty if I don't like it.
I keep telling him to shut the fuck up. It's theraputic.

[B-side]

I keep telling him to shut the fuck up. It's theraputic.

Heh. He's gonna be crushed if it isn't a masterpiece.

[Morris Schæffer]

My feeling is that either this is going to be goddamn mindblowingly amazing, or it will turn out to be a complete and utter mess. Either way, I'm seeing this in theaters.

I don't think mess, but considering that I admired Memento more than I actually liked and enjoyed it, I think I understand some of the trepidation. I wonder if this movie is going to have a payoff, a final reveal or if i'm just going to be sitting there with a puzzled look and a big question mark over my head. Supposedly, one feels at all times what Nolan is getting at, where he's going with the narrative and the story he spins is masterful.

[number8]

If this movie meets my expectations, I will kill myself because life can't possibly get any better after that. If it doesn't, I will kill myself out of shock and despair.

[Dukefrukem]

If this movie meets my expectations, I will kill myself because life can't possibly get any better after that. If it doesn't, I will kill myself out of shock and despair.

Pretty much how I feel. So if you don't hear from 8 or I on Saturday, we're both dead.

[SirNewt]

I think thrillers have slowly become my favorite type of film. I especially like a sense of confusion and fragmentation. I have a lot of respect for Nolan as a writer (not so much as a director). So I may be a little more psyched for this than I should. I've pretty much been chanting "please be good, please be good" for about a year now.

[angrycinephile]

Rex Reed despised this film (http://www.observer.com/2010/culture/can-someone-please-explain-inception-me).

Now I know this film will be great.

[Derek]

If this movie meets my expectations, I will kill myself because life can't possibly get any better after that. If it doesn't, I will kill myself out of shock and despair.

Awesome. One less person I need to worry about leapfrogging in rep points.

[megladon8]

Rex Reed despised this film (http://www.observer.com/2010/culture/can-someone-please-explain-inception-me).

Now I know this film will be great.


I love that he claims the movie is "incomprehensible gibberish", then writes this...



It cuts straight to the chase that leads to the junkpile without passing go, although before it drags its sorry butt to a merciful finale, you'll be desperately in need of a "Get Out of Jail Free" card.

[Derek]

Rex Reed is a complete waste of space.

[megladon8]

Rex Reed is a complete waste of space.


Would you say he cuts straight to the chase of the junkpile without passing go, and leaves you wanting a "Get out of jail free" card?

[Winston*]

"Like most dreams, this one will be forgotten by morning."

Has anyone used this one yet? I'm copywriting it.

[transmogrifier]

D'Angelo, who is a Nolan fanboy par excellence, gave this a 58/100.

Like me, he is not exactly enamoured with "dream" films.

[Boner M]

Nick Pinkerton's review for the Village Voice made me laugh:


Nolan's follow-up offers more muted colors, gift-wrapped themes, and GQ leading men with stockbroker comb-backs over the frowns carved in their brows—indicators of high-minded artistry, all.

[Derek]

Mike D'Angelo (http://twitter.com/gemko), who thinks Nolan is the greatest filmmaker working today, gave this a 58/100.


D'Angelo, who is a Nolan fanboy par excellence, gave this a 58/100.

Like me, he is not exactly enamoured with "dream" films.

Do you find them too repetitive?

[transmogrifier]

Do you find them too repetitive?

I make it a habit to never read anything Boner posts, so you'll have to forgive me my indiscretion.

[Derek]

I make it a habit to never read anything Boner posts, so you'll have to forgive me my indiscretion.

Understood. Boner can be a little hard to deal with sometimes.

[transmogrifier]

Understood. Boner can be a little hard to deal with sometimes.

Yeah, he's always popping up at inopportune moments and gushing forth with assorted gibberish.

[Boner M]

:sad: What a cold splash of reality.

[megladon8]

I hope this is a really good movie.

[Derek]

:sad: What a cold splash of reality.

Yeah, you and cold water are not a good combination.

[transmogrifier]

:sad: What a cold splash of reality.

Sorry, I thought it was about time you got the shaft. It just all came to a head this morning, what with you penis penis penis penis.

[B-side]

Armond White's review is his typical brand of silliness.

[Watashi]

Armond White's review is his typical brand of silliness.
At least he didn't compare it to Sorcerer's Apprentice.

[B-side]

At least he didn't compare it to Sorcerer's Apprentice.

Let me guess: He enjoyed that one?

[baby doll]

Nick Pinkerton's review for the Village Voice made me laugh:I also liked this one:

"The Hans Zimmer score suggests we shouldn't be gassed on these images so much as, I dunno, respectful?"

Anyway, now that I know what the story's about, and how incredibly stupid and formulaic it sounds, I've lost whatever interest I might've had in seeing the flick. I guess my options this weekend are to get a lift out to the suburbs to see Cryus (as a rule, when it comes to disposable commercial features, I prefer mid-level Hollywood features to elephantine blockbusters, especially if they're funny, besides which I'll take John C. Reilly and Marisa Tomei over Leonardo DiCapprio and Ellen Page any day of the week), or check out The Girl Who Played With Fire after catching up with the first one on video. (After all, considering that most folks around here despise it, I might get some small kick out of it.)

[baby doll]

At least he didn't compare it to Sorcerer's Apprentice.Pinkerton did:

"Cobb also lays down the rules of shared dreaming to us via Ariadne, explaining that 'we only use a fraction of our brain's true potential'—a shopworn line that appears almost verbatim in this week's The Sorcerer's Apprentice, though it's a sure bet that only one of those movies will be buried in laurels."

[baby doll]

As a sort of post-script to my last two posts, I started wondering if I wasn't mentally filtering out or dismissing the positive notices the film is getting in favor of those that agree with my working hypothesis that the film won't be very good, given my antipathy for Nolan's previous work, in exactly the same way that fanboys are comping at the bit to declare the film the greatest thing in the history of visual representation, and trying to discredit those heretic reviewers who want to rain on their parade. So I went looking on Rotten Tomatoes for a reviewer I admire who liked the film (Peter Travers only fits one of those criteria), and came across Eric Kohn's review at IndieWire (http://blogs.indiewire.com/kohn/archives/brief_throughts_on_inception/), which praises the film in moderate terms (commending Nolan for his ambition, but lamenting the absence of sentiment and saying nothing at all about style).

[Qrazy]

Pinkerton did:

"Cobb also lays down the rules of shared dreaming to us via Ariadne, explaining that 'we only use a fraction of our brain's true potential'—a shopworn line that appears almost verbatim in this week's The Sorcerer's Apprentice, though it's a sure bet that only one of those movies will be buried in laurels."

It's funny how screenwriters always try to use this bullshit to justify their supernatural phenomenon. People don't only use 10% of their brain. They only use 10% of their brain at any given moment. We use our entire brain just not all at once because certain areas are functionally different than others.

[[ETM]]

"A fraction of our brain's potential" is not the same as the old "using 10% of our brain". Nolan's not making "The Flight of the Navigator" here.

[Qrazy]

;272784']"A fraction of our brain's potential" is not the same as the old "using 10% of our brain". Nolan's not making "The Flight of the Navigator" here.

Ah okay, in what way do we only use a fraction of our brain's potential then? Because if it's in the same way as people in general only reach a fraction of their 'potential' then we may as well just cut out the misleading brain commentary and speak directly about human action and behaviour.

[[ETM]]

I'm thinking it's in terms of "processing speed" and such, also memory access, that sort of thing. As in - some people are "wired" in a way that enables them to, for example, perform incredible calculations in and instant, or recall any tiny detail from their whole lives vividly, or read whole pages of books in seconds, which means it's possible and naturally occurring, yet most of us don't possess the ability.

[Skitch]

So we're basically all rocking Pentium 166's?

[[ETM]]

So we're basically all rocking Pentium 166's?

No, we're rocking hexacore Thuban CPUs, but we're only playing Freecell.

[kopello]

Surprise surprise Armond didn't like it, and compared it to Grand Theft Auto.

[Qrazy]

;272823']I'm thinking it's in terms of "processing speed" and such, also memory access, that sort of thing. As in - some people are "wired" in a way that enables them to, for example, perform incredible calculations in and instant, or recall any tiny detail from their whole lives vividly, or read whole pages of books in seconds, which means it's possible and naturally occurring, yet most of us don't possess the ability.

Hrm that's not what the quote is suggesting to me but it's out of context and I haven't seen the film and even if it is that old 'we only use a fraction of our brain power' either way I'm not going to let that ruin the film for me so... fair enough.

[[ETM]]

Ebert's review is highly positive and unsurprisingly straight forward. I don't care about the reviews at all, there's no way the film is not at least a worthwhile time in the theatre, and if it ends up being really, really good - jolly good show, Nolan.

[MacGuffin]

;272862']there's no way the film is not at least a worthwhile time in the theatre

Oh, there's a way alright.

[Barty]

Seeing tonight in Imax.

[BuffaloWilder]

I like how a few people are kind of - unsure of how the film will be, now. It has almost sixty positive reviews and like eight or nine negative ones on Rotten Tomatoes, and the score is still building.

This is very probably going to be as good as the hype is saying it might be. I'm excited. Don't let me down Nolan, or Vern and I will break your face.

[Derek]

I like how a few people are kind of - unsure of how the film will be, now. It has almost sixty positive reviews and like eight or nine negative ones on Rotten Tomatoes, and the score is still building.

Because when there are 60 positive and 8 or 9 negative reviews of something, everyone should be certain they will like it?

[Watashi]

I hope this film is awesome, but then again I loved The Dark Knight on initial viewing and now I can barely muster any energy to watch it again. Batman Begins was really bad on a rewatch.

I don't think Nolan will ever top Memento.

[MacGuffin]

I hope this film is awesome, but then again I loved The Dark Knight on initial viewing and now I can barely muster any energy to watch it again. Batman Begins was really bad on a rewatch.

I don't think Nolan will ever top Memento.

I'm guessing you're probably going to like this movie then, as it appears to have the same pretentious trappings as his Batman movies did. Myself, I think Insomnia and The Prestige are Nolan's best movies, and really the only ones that show signs of a director with a potentially distinctive artistic vision.

[BuffaloWilder]

"Pretentious."

Explain how that word is relavent to Nolan's two Batman films, please.

[MacGuffin]

"Pretentious."

Explain how that word is relavent to Nolan's two Batman films, please.

It is relevant in how Nolan attaches film school-level morales and themes to stories about men running around in Halloween costumes.

[BuffaloWilder]

There's two separate things to confront there, but I'll take on the second one rather than the first, because it's easier -

- whether or not they're sub-film school level or not, are you saying that the material isn't deserving of such attention? Or what?

[MacGuffin]

- whether or not they're sub-film school level or not, are you saying that the material isn't deserving of such attention? Or what?

I don't have a problem with Batman; I have a problem with people needlessly overinflating Batman with half-assed attempts at self-importance.

[BuffaloWilder]

It's difficult for me to see how Nolan "overinflated" the character when virtually everything in the film was drawn from the source material in some fashion or another.

[eternity]

It is relevant in how Nolan attaches film school-level morales and themes to stories about men running around in Halloween costumes.
It's pretty restrained and passable in Begins, though. The Dark Knight is a freakshow in this regard.

[[ETM]]

Oh, there's a way alright.

I don't think you're me. Are you?

[Rowland]

I'm going to the midnight showing tonight, should be fun even if the movie disappoints, which I obviously hope it doesn't.

[number8]

Dilemma. I can go to an IMAX screening at 3 AM, which means I don't sleep and go straight to work after the movie, or I go to a regular screening at midnight and I can catch a few hours of Z's.

Can't... decide.

[[ETM]]

Can't... decide.

Fuck sleep.

[number8]

;272987']Fuck sleep.

True. Don't want to have my thoughts stolen, anyway.

[megladon8]

I don't have a problem with Batman; I have a problem with people needlessly overinflating Batman with half-assed attempts at self-importance.


That's officially one of the most ignorant things I've ever read.

[number8]

Nah, I don't mind when people refuse to see the legitimacy of a superhero's social importance. That's perfectly valid. It's only when they offer other literary characters—any one of them—as more worthy of such treatment that they lose any credibility to their argument.

[B-side]

Nah, I don't mind when people refuse to see the legitimacy of a superhero's social importance. That's perfectly valid.

I don't think it is. What does it matter what the character is that brings forth the issue?

[number8]

Well, you know, I was being slightly mischievous. What my complete post was saying is that all fictional/literary characters are equal. If you don't see their legitimacy and validity in commenting on the world, that's fine. You just don't put much stock in art. It's only when you suggest that Batman is less capable of commentary than, say, the Brothers Karamazov that you are being laughably silly.

[number8]

3 AM showing it is.

FUCK YOU SANDMAN.

[MacGuffin]

Nah, I don't mind when people refuse to see the legitimacy of a superhero's social importance. That's perfectly valid. It's only when they offer other literary characters—any one of them—as more worthy of such treatment that they lose any credibility to their argument.

I think Batman could be used as a stepping for worthwhile commentary, but we haven't seen it yet. I wish people didn't consider Nolan as the "be-all, end-all" of the Batman franchise, because I'd like to see the character in a less washed out, boring Gotham City, and then maybe any commentary would appear less contrived.

[Watashi]

Have you seen any of the Batman: Animated Series, Clipper?

It still remains as the best visual representation of Batman.

[MacGuffin]

Have you seen any of the Batman: Animated Series, Clipper?

It still remains as the best visual representation of Batman.

I've seen parts of it when I was younger and if I actually brought myself to rent it (I have no problem with superhero stuff, I just have higher priorities when it comes to what I'm renting), I'm sure I'd probably agree with you.

[BuffaloWilder]

I think Batman could be used as a stepping for worthwhile commentary, but we haven't seen it yet. I wish people didn't consider Nolan as the "be-all, end-all" of the Batman franchise, because I'd like to see the character in a less washed out, boring Gotham City, and then maybe any commentary would appear less contrived.

Batman on a monthly basis is as pulpy as any other character, but taken the character's bibliography on a whole he seems to be the one that most great writers and artists inside the field and out gravitate toward to do new and interesting things with, in this regard.

Stuff like Miller's Batman Year One, and The Dark Knight Returns, or Alan Moore's The Killing Joke although that's more inwardly driven than the other two. Morrison's Arkham Asylum, and Paul Pope's Batman Year One Hundred are, among quite a few others, all great works where this is concerned.

[Barty]

Movie is great. Especially the final hour. Holy god.

[megladon8]

I think Batman could be used as a stepping for worthwhile commentary, but we haven't seen it yet. I wish people didn't consider Nolan as the "be-all, end-all" of the Batman franchise, because I'd like to see the character in a less washed out, boring Gotham City, and then maybe any commentary would appear less contrived.


People can think what they want.

I like Nolan's interpretation of Batman better than I like Burton's. And I like Burton's better than I like the '60s Adam West show.

If you don't, that's fine. But don't tell other people that what they think and like are wrong.

[megladon8]

Have you seen any of the Batman: Animated Series, Clipper?

It still remains as the best visual representation of Batman.


Agreed 100%.

[Derek]

If you don't, that's fine. But don't tell other people that what they think and like are wrong.

How does his statement ("I have a problem with people needlessly overinflating Batman with half-assed attempts at self-importance") tell anyone what they think and like are wrong? He believes that Nolan needlessly overinflates Batman's by being self-importance and it's you who is telling him that he can't hold that opinion. I definitely disagree with him re: Dark Knight, but I do find Begins to be insufferably self-serious, but I that doesn't mean I'm telling anyone that they can't disagree.

I agree with 8 re: fictional characters though, because you can't say that one character is inherently less capable of commentary with another. That said, I wouldn't see a problem if someone suggested that Batman could never offer as effective commentary as Brothers Karamazov if BK happens to be your favorite book. But it'd be equally valid for someone to say that Dostoevsky could never offer as valid a commentary as Batman: The Animated Series. Both are opinions and both would have people lined up to disagree with them, but hey, that's what discussion boards are here for.

[MacGuffin]

If you don't, that's fine. But don't tell other people that what they think and like are wrong.

I'm not sure where I ever did this?

[Derek]

And more on topic, I'm seeing this in IMAX tomorrow afternoon.

[MacGuffin]

How does his statement ("I have a problem with people needlessly overinflating Batman with half-assed attempts at self-importance") tell anyone what they think and like are wrong. He believes that Nolan needlessly overinflates Batman's by being self-importance and it's you who is telling him that he can't hold that opinion. I definitely disagree with him re: Dark Knight, but I do find Begins to be insufferably self-serious, but I that doesn't mean I'm telling anyone that they can't disagree.

For me, yeah, The Dark Knight is less of a problem, but I think that may have been because I was really entertained by Heath Ledger's performance. If I were to see the movie again, I imagine I would be monumentally bored.


I agree with 8 re: fictional characters though, because you can't say that one character is inherently less capable of commentary with another. That said, I wouldn't see a problem if someone suggested that Batman could never offer as effective commentary as Brothers Karamazov if BK happens to be your favorite book. But it'd be equally valid for someone to say that Dostoevsky could never offer as valid a commentary as Batman: The Animated Series. Both are opinions and both would have people lined up to disagree with them, but hey, that's what discussion boards are here for.

It's more the fact that Nolan's Gotham City—visually dry and in these two cases, a terribly unsubtle metaphor for New York—totally clashes with Batman's look and persona. Probably this is why I can see the Animated Series (or hell, a videogame) working better.

[eternity]

Walter Chaw hated it. Didn't he love TDK?

[angrycinephile]

Walter Chaw hated it. Didn't he love TDK?

He didn't exactly hate it, but he did give it two stars. And yes, he loved TDK.

Besides Kick-Ass, has Walter Chaw liked any movie this year? If it continues like this he's going to have some trouble compiling a Top 10 at the end of the year.

[eternity]

And more on topic, I'm seeing this in IMAX tomorrow afternoon.


He didn't exactly hate it, but he did give it two stars. And yes, he loved TDK.

Besides Kick-Ass, has Walter Chaw liked any movie this year? If it continues like this he's going to have some trouble compiling a Top 10 at the end of the year.
I feel like I can relate in that regard. There really hasn't been much this year.

[transmogrifier]

Quite funny the critic circle-jerk surrounding this film. We've got critics taking pot-shots at others for not liking the film, critics reviewing the consensus of a film that hasn't even been released yet, a serious theory that WB screwed up by allowing web-based critics to see it first, and allowing their fawning to lead to a backlash from the print critics etc. Movie criticism is getting increasingly masturbatory.

[Rowland]

Besides Kick-Ass, has Walter Chaw liked any movie this year? If it continues like this he's going to have some trouble compiling a Top 10 at the end of the year.He gave both The Crazies and Toy Story 3 ***½, but that's about it in terms of really positive reviews he's written. I remember in the intro to last year's top ten, he admitted that he wasn't sure he'd even seen enough movies he felt were deserving of Top 10 placement to make a list, until he caught up with a bunch of movies that hadn't opened in his area at the last minute.

[Rowland]

Oh yeah, and I saw this.

Eh.

[B-side]

This was good. Maybe very good. My mind is currently telling me it's better than The Dark Knight. The exposition I so feared going in feels more natural, like a tour guide leading you down a hall of mirrors. I perceive this going over better than the likes of The Dark Knight. A certain train sequence brings directly to mind a similar sequence in The Dark Knight. I'll stop comparing it to The Dark Knight now. Anyway, it's a tad unwieldy, but in that charmingly over-ambitious kind of way. There's something to be said for the writing of Cotillard's character, and Leo's gravitas-ridden man-with-a-dark-past protagonist that their relationship incites a myriad of emotions, none of which feel particularly stolid. At any given time, the film feels like a commentary on the cutthroat nature of business and copyright, or the story of how one man struggles to discern between his wholly subjective memory manifestations of his wife and the true nature of their relationship, digital culture and the creation of alternate not-so-real worlds, and a few other things I don't have the savvy to relate to you right now. Essentially, I had a few different interpretations running through my head at various times, all of which roughly as engaging as the other. On the negative side, it's a bit on the nose at times, some clunky dialogue and some disorienting handheld camera work during action sequences. The ending is neat, and feels influenced by the recent ambiguous Coen brothers endings. My theater was near full-up, and the IMAX showing sold out in advance.

[eternity]

This was good. Maybe very good. My mind is currently telling me it's better than The Dark Knight. The exposition I so feared going in feels more natural, like a tour guide leading you down a hall of mirrors. I perceive this going over better than the likes of The Dark Knight. A certain train sequence brings directly to mind a similar sequence in The Dark Knight. I'll stop comparing it to The Dark Knight now. Anyway, it's a tad unwieldy, but in that charmingly over-ambitious kind of way. There's something to be said for the writing of Cotillard's character, and Leo's gravitas-ridden man-with-a-dark-past protagonist that their relationship incites a myriad of emotions, none of which feel particularly stolid. At any given time, the film feels like a commentary on the cutthroat nature of business and copyright, or the story of how one man struggles to discern between his wholly subjective memory manifestations of his wife and the true nature of their relationship, digital culture and the creation of alternate not-so-real worlds, and a few other things I don't have the savvy to relate to you right now. Essentially, I had a few different interpretations running through my head at various times, all of which roughly as engaging as the other. On the negative side, it's a bit on the nose at times, some clunky dialogue and some disorienting handheld camera work during action sequences. The ending is neat, and feels influenced by the recent ambiguous Coen brothers endings. My theater was near full-up, and the IMAX showing sold out in advance.
http://blogs.houstonpress.com/rocks/fuckin-rainbows-01.jpg

[B-side]

http://blogs.houstonpress.com/rocks/fuckin-rainbows-01.jpg

http://soundlessearshot.files.wordpre ss.com/2008/07/juno_soundtrack.jpg

[eternity]

http://soundlessearshot.files.wordpre ss.com/2008/07/juno_soundtrack.jpg
My post was relevant to the post preceding it.

The quoted one is not.

[B-side]

My post was relevant to the post preceding it.

The quoted one is not.

You know I love you, but if you see this and claim Juno to be the superior film, I will kick you in the nuts. Virtually, of course.

[eternity]

You know I love you, but if you see this and claim Juno to be the superior film, I will kick you in the nuts. Virtually, of course.
If I see Inception (I purposely avoided it tonight despite people willing to pay for my ticket and give me a handjob if I went), given Nolan's track-record and the promotional material for this film, Jennifer's Body is probably a superior film.

It looks like an eloquent adaptation of ICP's Miracles. Except instead of being for juggalos, it is for people who like to eat their popcorn while still describing it as shallow and pedantic.

[B-side]

If I see Inception (I purposely avoided it tonight despite people willing to pay for my ticket and give me a handjob if I went), given Nolan's track-record and the promotional material for this film, Jennifer's Body is probably a superior film.

It looks like an eloquent adaptation of ICP's Miracles. Except instead of being for juggalos, it is for people who like to eat their popcorn while still describing it as shallow and pedantic.

But... I liked it. Am I that kind of person?

[eternity]

But... I liked it. Am I that kind of person?
You like every film I despise. You, like meat loaf, are shallow and pedantic.

[B-side]

You like every film I despise.

Lies.


You, like meat loaf, are shallow and pedantic.

<3

[Watashi]

Very good movie.

[number8]

Saw the movie, had breakfast, then went straight to the office. Didn't sleep a wink. Woo.

[baby doll]

I like this quote from A.O. Scott's review in the Times:

"The accomplishments of Inception are mainly technical, which is faint praise only if you insist on expecting something more from commercial entertainment. That audiences do--and should--expect more is partly, I suspect, what has inspired some of the feverish early notices hailing Inception as a masterpiece, just as the desire for a certifiably great superhero movie led to the wild overrating of The Dark Knight. In both cases Mr. Nolan's virtuosity as a conjurer of brilliant scenes and stunning set pieces, along with his ability to invest grandeur and novelty into conventional themes, have fostered the illusion that he is some kind of visionary."

[[ETM]]

I'll definitely see for myself, but Scott sounds like a major condescending douche there.

[Dukefrukem]

Im gonna try to get out of work early today to see this...

[Rowland]

I'm fond of this passage from Zacharek's review, even if I disagree with her suggestion that all of Nolan's career has been equally mechanical; his best movies, for all their steely philosophical trappings, are actually rather soulful.

"Everything he 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. This may be a movie about dreams, but there’s nothing dreamlike or evocative about it: Nolan doesn’t build or sustain a mood; all he does is twist the plot, under, over, and back upon itself, relying on Hans Zimmer’s sonic boom of a score to remind us when we should be excited or anxious or moved. It’s less directing than directing traffic."

I'd like to see Nolan scale back and tackle something like Insomnia for his next project, which by the by still features his best action sequence.

[Sven]

Everything I've read about this movie has indicated two things:

1) mainstream film criticism is almost completely worthless at this point
2) I will not like this movie

[baby doll]

Everything I've read about this movie has indicated two things:

1) mainstream film criticism is almost completely worthless at this point
2) I will not like this movieGo on.

Any who, I'm so intrigued by the discourse around the film that I'm glad it exists simply to see how people are talking about it. Whatever my reservations about Nolan's greatness as a filmmaker, he certainly knows how to get people talking.

[Ezee E]

Seeing this tonight. I've basically been able to avoid all spoilers and reviews on this. Cannot wait.

[number8]

Boy this ran pretty long.

http://www.justpressplay.net/movie-reviews/40-reviews/6783-inception.html

[Watashi]

I find the narrative structure and set-up eerily similar to Shutter Island. Just reflecting on the two is kind of bewildering that you must think Scorsese, Leo, and Nolan worked secretly together.

[D_Davis]

I think "mechanical" is a really good way to describe Nolan's films. While I almost always enjoy them on a technical level, I rarely feel anything from them.

[Watashi]

What's the definition of mainstream film criticism anyway?

[Philosophe_rouge]

The film unfortunately has little to no emotional pull and while the performances, script and set pieces are incredibly executed... it still feels somewhat lacking. On the other hand, as I think back to the film I am mostly going back to the more "emotional" scenes and am finding them more interesting than I did initially. The action or twists are not really what stands out as much as the scenes between Cobb and Mal. They are still somewhat shallow, but some of the implications of her decisions in particular, as well as the perceptions of her within his dreams are still eating at me. The next day, I am really surprised that this is the part of the film that is sticking with me.

I do, however, enjoy the kind of labyrinth plot. Not so much that it becomes confusing or complex, but as the film progresses one feels as though you are moving deeper and deeper to the center of a maze. I am not sure I have ever described as film as "physically" deep, but there is a definite sense that the film is somehow moving through space, as if it were falling deeper into a well, or moving further into a large seemingly endless building.

[number8]

What's the definition of mainstream film criticism anyway?

Any outlet that's not Fox Criticism.

[Watashi]

The film unfortunately has little to no emotional pull and while the performances, script and set pieces are incredibly executed... it still feels somewhat lacking. On the other hand, as I think back to the film I am mostly going back to the more "emotional" scenes and am finding them more interesting than I did initially. The action or twists are not really what stands out as much as the scenes between Cobb and Mal. They are still somewhat shallow, but some of the implications of her decisions in particular, as well as the perceptions of her within his dreams are still eating at me. The next day, I am really surprised that this is the part of the film that is sticking with me.

I do, however, enjoy the kind of labyrinth plot. Not so much that it becomes confusing or complex, but as the film progresses one feels as though you are moving deeper and deeper to the center of a maze. I am not sure I have ever described as film as "physically" deep, but there is a definite sense that the film is somehow moving through space, as if it were falling deeper into a well, or moving further into a large seemingly endless building.

Yeah, it doesn't have the strong emotional catharsis from its main protagonist like in Memento where you really invested into Leonard's journey to unravel the truth. I think the film works best as a straight-forward noir with its gloomy photography and the crazy femme fatale. No real performance stands out like Heath Ledger did in The Dark Knight, but there really wasn't a deadweight among the ensemble.

There's some coincidental plot devices and some some Psych 101 exposition sequences, but overall, it's quite a strong piece of work with some insane set-pieces and interesting ideas. The hallway fight scene is the best fight scene I can remember in a long time considering there was little to no CGI work at all.

[Derek]

Everything I've read about this movie has indicated two things:

1) mainstream film criticism is almost completely worthless at this point
2) I will not like this movie

Zacharak and Scott are both pretty great.

[Watashi]

Zacharak and Scott are both pretty great.
One could argue that Armond White has propelled himself into mainstream eye making him a household name among the critic circle and have news sites start countdowns to his eventual pan of a successful film that no critic to this day has ever received.

[Philosophe_rouge]

Yeah, it doesn't have the strong emotional catharsis from its main protagonist like in Memento where you really invested into Leonard's journey to unravel the truth. I think the film works best as a straight-forward noir with its gloomy photography and the crazy femme fatale. No real performance stands out like Heath Ledger did in The Dark Knight, but there really wasn't a deadweight among the ensemble.

There's some coincidental plot devices and some some Psych 101 exposition sequences, but overall, it's quite a strong piece of work with some insane set-pieces and interesting ideas. The hallway fight scene is the best fight scene I can remember in a long time considering there was little to no CGI work at all.
I think I prefer this film to Memento, then again, I never was much of a fan. It is difficult not to be invested in the struggle I think, and that really helps the film. It is something of a Noir, but I also think that Nolan is shooting for something more, and falls short... I think. I might have to see the film again to really make a decision. It is sticking, but I am not sure how much of it is due to the film or my own emotional state post the viewing of the film.

The coincidental things, and Psych-101 didn't bother me quite so much as some of the action sequences. I also kinda wish the winter level didn't look so much like a James Bond movie. That scene was great though.

[Watashi]

The coincidental things, and Psych-101 didn't bother me quite so much as some of the action sequences. I also kinda wish the winter level didn't look so much like a James Bond movie. That scene was great though.

I read Ary's review and thought of how each of the different layers of the dream represented a different genre of film (1st layer is a a gloomy rainy film noir, 2nd is a heist thriller, 3rd is a James Bond action film, and 4th is an apocalyptic drama). I don't really have anything further to expand on it, but I do like the theory that Ary brought up that dreams are an allegory for filmmaking and each member of the ensemble are part of the crew.

I couldn't help feel like I was playing Goldeneye during the winter scene. It brought out a lot of nostalgic memories.

[Rowland]

Talk about wasting great actors. How such a collection of charismatic actors/actresses failed to leave any mark on the material (anyone wanna bet that impromptu kiss was improvised?) speaks volumes about its surface-depths. By comparison, just think about how amazing the ensemble was for Nolan's Memento.


The hallway fight scene is the best fight scene I can remember in a long time considering there was little to no CGI work at all.I seem to be one of the few people who wasn't blown away by it. Sure, it looks fairly convincing, but Nolan doesn't film it or stitch it together in a manner so that it's all that viscerally exciting or formally impressive. In fact, between the lack of compelling emotional context and Nolan's formal indifference, these are probably the worst actions sequences in any of his films. The mountain sequence is the worst offender in this respect, as Nolan fails to really impart the notion that it's designed as a labyrinth (as he fails to in general with all the environments, to be honest) or really organize it with any spatial coherence.

[MacGuffin]

How such a collection of charismatic actors/actresses failed to leave any mark on the material (anyone wanna bet that impromptu kiss was improvised?) speaks volumes about its surface-depths.

You've confirmed my fears about this movie. I may catch it on home release, but absolutely no hurry here.

[Watashi]

Talk about wasting great actors. How such a collection of charismatic actors/actresses failed to leave any mark on the material (anyone wanna bet that impromptu kiss was improvised?) speaks volumes about its surface-depths. By comparison, just think about how amazing the ensemble was for Nolan's Memento.

I seem to be one of the few people who wasn't blown away by it. Sure, it looks fairly convincing, but Nolan doesn't film it or stitch it together in a manner so that it's all that viscerally exciting or formally impressive. In fact, between the lack of compelling emotional context and Nolan's formal indifference, these are probably the worst actions sequences in any of his films. The mountain sequence is the worst offender in this respect, as Nolan fails to really impart the notion that it's designed as a labyrinth (as he fails to in general with all the environments, to be honest) or really organize it with any spatial coherence.
Outside of the two Bat films, Nolan's films aren't really brimming of action set-pieces. I thought any action scene in Inception was better than the chaotic-"what the fuck is going on"-action scenes in Batman Begins. I liked the chase scene in the rain (though it's been done better in We Own the Night) even though it suffered from "bad guys can't aim for shit" syndrome. Also, if they could manifest anything in these dreams (such as a grenade launcher) why didn't they all have grenade launchers or have the van turn into an armored truck?

[Spinal]

Was kind of wanting to see this on the IMAX screen tonight, but I'm having trouble bringing myself to paying $17.25.

EDIT: Yeah, I think I'll just go see it at my neighborhood cinema for $4 instead.

[Watashi]

Was kind of wanting to see this on the IMAX screen tonight, but I'm having trouble bringing myself to paying $17.25.
I'm not sure the regular folks here will dig this a lot (considering they side a lot with the critics who panned this film).

You like Nolan, right?

[Spinal]

You like Nolan, right?

Basically, yeah.

[Ezee E]

Was some of this shot in 70MM again or no?

[number8]

ZrYPJ4Yc31g

[megladon8]

One of the guys who writes for the local paper and hates everything gave this movie a perfect score. The first perfect score the paper has given to a movie in 10 years.

[RoadtoPerdition]

Just got back from seeing it. It's one of the most wholly unique and original films I've ever seen. I can't think of anything similar and I don't believe there will ever be anything else quite like it. It was clearly a well-thought out movie with good execution on its ideas. For how complex the ideas were, I thought it was pretty easy to follow, though you do have to pay close attention. While Ellen Page did a good job, I felt she was miscast.

[Spinal]

This is a perfect film.

What Nolan has done here in terms of writing and directing is extraordinary. It's like watching multiple films at once and having the full weight of it hit you. Extraordinary as an action film. Extraordinary as a mindbender. This hit me deep. How nice to see DiCaprio in a role that truly works for him. How nice to discover that Ellen Page can actually be quite engaging and likable. I'm really quite speechless right now.

[Sycophant]

Great. Now I'm actually wanting to watch this again. Thanks a lot, Spinal.

[Spinal]

I apologize for contributing to hype, but man, I loved this.

[[ETM]]

:pritch:

22nd... Thursday...

[Sycophant]

I apologize for contributing to hype, but man, I loved this.

It's okay. Your voice carries a lot of weight for me when it comes to... this kind of movie, whatever that means exactly.

[Spinal]

The film unfortunately has little to no emotional pull ...

It does if you've been married for 10 years and have a kid.

[Spinal]

It's okay. Your voice carries a lot of weight for me when it comes to... this kind of movie, whatever that means exactly.

Sure, because it's something that I would normally be skeptical about.

[Sven]

Sorry to sing Sycophant's exact comments, note for note, but really, your approval means more to me than even Armond's disapproval. :D

[MacGuffin]

It does if you've been married for 10 years and have a kid.

Perfect example of why film criticism is sometimes completely objective.

[B-side]

Perfect example of why film criticism is sometimes completely objective.

:|

[MacGuffin]

:|

We have one person arguing that the movie has no emotional impact and another that it does. How is there any way to determine who is right? Wouldn't it be easier to say they are both right?

[B-side]

We have one person arguing that the movie has no emotional impact and another that it does. How is there any way to determine who is right? Wouldn't it be easier to say they are both right?

They are both right, but what does that have to do with objectivity?

[Spinal]

I think you meant 'subjective', but your point is a good one.

[Sven]

We have one person arguing that the movie has no emotional impact and another that it does. How is there any way to determine who is right?

If you ask me, that a film is emotionally engaging is not, in itself, a plus. Show me footage from any angle, edited in any fashion, of a child being beaten or a man killing himself and I bet you that my emotionally reaction will be the same both times. Real film criticism describes how the film communicates emotion, not just THAT it is emotional.


Wouldn't it be easier to say they are both right?

I think you meant to say "subjective" originally.

[Barty]

When me and Spinal agree on a film its always a good sign. :)

[Sven]

Also, I think that may be the first time I've ever used the green smiley. Felt, and still feels, kinda wrong. But at the same time, oh so good.

[MacGuffin]

They are both right, but what does that have to do with objectivity?

It means certain aspects of film criticism simply shouldn't be bothered with.

[MacGuffin]

I think you meant 'subjective', but your point is a good one.

Sorry, yeah I think I did.

[Spinal]

If you ask me, that a film is emotionally engaging is not, in itself, a plus. Show me footage from any angle, edited in any fashion, of a child being beaten or a man killing himself and I bet you that my emotionally reaction will be the same both times. Real film criticism describes how the film communicates emotion, not just THAT it is emotional.


Another excellent point. If I were a real film critic, I would do a better job of clarifying that, for me, it was definitely the good kind of emotion. As opposed to the kind I felt when the guy in Despicable Me was reading a story to the kids. That's just cheap. But right now, it's Friday night and I just feel like saying OMG over and over again on the internet.

[MacGuffin]

If you ask me, that a film is emotionally engaging is not, in itself, a plus. Show me footage from any angle, edited in any fashion, of a child being beaten or a man killing himself and I bet you that my emotionally reaction will be the same both times. Real film criticism describes how the film communicates emotion, not just THAT it is emotional.

Good call, man. I hadn't thought about it like that, but that's really true.

[Spinal]

And holy crap, how the hell did I not realize that was Marion Cotillard? I just saw Nine not too long ago. Man, I gotta see that Piaf movie.

[MacGuffin]

And holy crap, how the hell did I not realize that was Marion Cotillard? I just saw Nine not too long ago. Man, I gotta see that Piaf movie.

And you need to watch Innocence again. ;)

[Derek]

It means certain aspects of film criticism simply shouldn't be bothered with.

So because two people have different emotional reactions to the same film, objectivity in film criticism is never possible? And what aspect of film criticism shouldn't be bothered with?

[MacGuffin]

So because two people have different emotional reactions to the same film, objectivity in film criticism is never possible? And what aspect of film criticism shouldn't be bothered with?

I was saying the emotional impact of the film should not be discussed if people cannot agree, but then iosos pointed out that that was not the problem; the problem was what should be discussed is the road that film takes to reach the emotional impact.

[Derek]

I was saying the emotional impact of the film should not be discussed if people cannot agree, but then iosos pointed out that that was not the problem; the problem was what should be discussed is the road that film takes to reach the emotional impact.

Ah, ok. I'm with the 'sos. I don't see a problem with bringing up one's emotional response, but the focus should be on what in the film created it.

[Spinal]

Living through all that Dark Knight hype was worth it so that Nolan could make this film the way he wanted to.

[MacGuffin]

Living through all that Dark Knight hype was worth it so that Nolan could make this film the way he wanted to.

I wish he could make a movie with the right amount of intelligent substance to go along with the gleefully flashy style of The Prestige, and to a much lesser extent, Insomnia (although to Insomnia's fairness, it does have some wonderful performances). I fear Inception is going to be ridiculously composed with nonsensical Richard Kelly-esque sub-plots thrown all over the place. Pretentious, in other words.

[Spinal]

I wish he could make a movie with the right amount of intelligent substance to go along with the gleefully flashy style ...

He has.


I fear Inception is going to be ridiculously composed with nonsensical Richard Kelly-esque sub-plots thrown all over the place. Pretentious, in other words.

No, there's really no sub-plots. Just layers. It's all highly organized and surprisingly easy to follow. Just see it.

[MacGuffin]

He has.

This?

[Spinal]

This?

This is what I'm saying.

Also, now that I have officially joined the hype committee, I will be categorizing all future negative reviews as 'backlash'. I know my internet forum duties!

[Sven]

Yeah, just to be clear, I don't mind responses to cinema that are not "real criticism." Spinal's personal candor has caught my attention more than any review for it has.

Mostly what I am saying is that Spinal is not mainstream criticism, and can therefore be trusted.

Speaking of Spinal, I imagine you never saw Public Enemies, right? Marion Cotillard is hot-damn-dynamite in it. And that's just talking about how she looks...

[Derek]

I apologize for contributing to hype, but man, I loved this.

Heh. I honestly don't know what to make of your response. I'm not surprised you liked it, but shocked you call it a "perfect film".

[B-side]

I'm really interested in how this is going to go over with everyone. Kinda surprised Rowland isn't a fan, but glad to see Spinal adore it.

[Sycophant]

I have created a photo collage/essay about this thread.

http://www.whatnotstudios.com/shit/inceptionthreadphotoessay.jpg

[MacGuffin]

Who's the person with the dynamite supposed to be?

[Spinal]

Heh. I honestly don't know what to make of your response. I'm not surprised you liked it, but shocked you call it a "perfect film".

It's just so ambitious and then it succeeds at everything it is trying to do. A lot of times you come away from something and think, oh, I can see what they were trying to do there. This is just like the perfect combination of indie mentality with big budget resources. There's no annoying supporting characters. The comic relief plays out just right. The effects support the script. Eventually, someone will probably come along with a nitpick that will make sense to me. But I've been watching movies long enough to recognize a rare movie-going experience. I would compare the feeling of walking out of this film to the time I walked out of Dancer in the Dark or Boys Don't Cry or Dead Man Walking. Films that really matter to me.

I know I've turned into a hyperbole machine over this one, but that's just where I'm at. I hope others enjoy it like I did. I was fortunate enough to go in with modest expectations, little knowledge of the subject matter and some degree of skepticism about the lead actor. I hope my praise doesn't spoil that for others.

[Sycophant]

Who's the person with the dynamite supposed to be?

This girl who turns up in the Google Image Search for dynamite.

The woman who is dynamite is Marion Cotillard.

[MacGuffin]

This girl who turns up in the Google Image Search for dynamite.

The woman who is dynamite is Marion Cotillard.

Oh, I saw the eye patch and thought "Captain", which would make sense since my posts are dynamite.

[Sycophant]

Oh, I saw the eye patch and thought "Captain", which would make sense since my posts are dynamite.

That'd be just precious!

[Sxottlan]

Excellent film.

Poor Leo. Between this and Shutter Island, two crazy dead wives haunting his dreams in one year.

[Derek]

I know I've turned into a hyperbole machine over this one, but that's just where I'm at. I hope others enjoy it like I did. I was fortunate enough to go in with modest expectations, little knowledge of the subject matter and some degree of skepticism about the lead actor. I hope my praise doesn't spoil that for others.

Btw, I didn't mean that in a bad way at all. I never thought this would be a film you would love, so your reaction threw me for a loop. Now I have no idea what to expect tomorrow, but I'm certainly looking forward to it even more.

[B-side]

SPOILER-ISH:

The significance of the name Ariadne given to Page's character seems pretty obvious, but a neat little Easter egg nonetheless. In Greek myth, Ariadne aided Theseus in overcoming the minotaur.


Karl Kerenyi (and Robert Graves) theorizes that Ariadne (whose name they derive from Hesychius' listing of Άδνον, a Cretan-Greek form for arihagne, "utterly pure") was a Great Goddess of Crete, "the first divine personage of Greek mythology to be immediately recognized in Crete",[7] once archaeology had begun. Kerenyi observes that her name is merely an epithet and claims that she was originally the "Mistress of the Labyrinth", both a winding dance-ground and in the Greek view a prison with the dreaded Minotaur at its centre.

[Watashi]

Surprise no one is talking about the extraordinary final shot. A lot of theories have already hit the web about it.

I've been thinking he's in reality, but now... I'm not so sure. How long has Leo been away doing his job? His kids look like they haven't aged at all and are still in the same position he always invisions them to be in. I also read theories that his kids are dead and are just an idea that was incepted into his mind by Caine or Mal but I don't see that as being true. Lots of good stuff to talk about.

Also, the moment the credits hit, biggest audience reaction I've EVER seen in a movie.

[Watashi]

Also, Spinal, this makes up for Toy Story 3.

[Spinal]

Surprise no one is talking about the extraordinary final shot. A lot of theories have already hit the web about it.

I've been thinking he's in reality, but now... I'm not so sure. How long has Leo been away doing his job? His kids look like they haven't aged at all and are still in the same position he always invisions them to be in. I also read theories that his kids are dead and are just an idea that was incepted into his mind by Caine or Mal but I don't see that as being true. Lots of good stuff to talk about.

Also, the moment the credits hit, biggest audience reaction I've EVER seen in a movie.

BIG-TIME SPOILERS

I think it's perfectly pitched so that there is no definitive answer. I would be very surprised if Nolan had a single 'truth' in regards to that scene. So well done. Ditto here with the audience reaction. After he saw his kids' faces, I lost it, man. I wanted that top to fall so badly.

[Spinal]

I'm really quite speechless right now.

Liar.

[Watashi]

BIG-TIME SPOILERS

I think it's perfectly pitched so that there is no definitive answer. I would be very surprised if Nolan had a single 'truth' in regards to that scene. So well done. Ditto here with the audience reaction. After he saw his kids' faces, I lost it, man. I wanted that top to fall so badly.

I think that the totems/top is just a McGuffin and whether it spins or falls, it doesn't mean anything. He already made up his mind to look at his children's faces that he didn't bother to watch the top topple. If it is a dream, he has accepted it.

[Spinal]

If it is a dream, he has accepted it.

Yep. And if it isn't a dream, he has successfully reconciled with his past and is content to be where he is rather than somewhere else. How generous of Nolan to allow us to envision both endings.

[Watashi]

I guess I was proven wrong with the whole "why haven't the kids age theory". On imdb, there are two castings for each kid with a 2 year age gap difference.

[Watashi]

I don't understand how certain critics are so confused by this movie labeling it "lost" or "puzzled". The basic premise is so straightforward and the parallel editing clearly tells you where everyone is at and how much a difference of time there is. Aren't this critics professional and watch movies for a living? How can they be so lost and don't understand? My midnight showing of a bunch of high schoolers was completely engaged and never seemed to get confused about where it was going.

These are the reviews I am referring to:

http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1643791/20100715/story.jhtml
http://www.tri-cityherald.com/2010/07/16/1093255/inception-spirals-into-cure-for.html
http://eclipsemagazine.com/Movies/18641/

It's like when all the publicists who thought that Lost's ending was they were dead the entire time on the island

I mean... hello?

[Bosco B Thug]

Kneejerk reaction! My turn!

This is a movie with lots of heart. It's a very very competent, well-thought-out thriller/mind-bender. It has the virtue of Nolan's ambition and audaciousness, and he has succeeded in big blockbuster action movie-making that has genuine passion, soul, and a need to communicate an emotional story. The film reveals itself in the end to be filled with a refreshing anti-cynicism, where we get corporate shenanigans that can actually morph into personal, positive odysseys for all involved (although I'll admit I may still be really confused... so, is anyone's nasty energy industry schemes panning out or not? Or is it all peachy because the goodness-of-life has been affirmed so mind-blowingly for even the entrepreneurs?). So this is movie-fantasy. If it lacks in practical considerations, it's because its a lovely emotional journey film.

But ugh, before the often thrilling last half (that is, the whole "Heist"), the movie plays out like a feature-length montage. And sorry, I just hate montages. They irritate me and this film was often irritating. I get it that sometimes that's what it's going for - disjointed narrative for a film about dreams - but no, sometimes it was just symptomatic fast-paced modern filmmaking making more and more incredulous a story already tottering on the cliff of credulity. The "training/planning" chunk was just unbearable for me, what with the gobbledy-gook dream logistics that would be fine if they weren't mixed with endless, endless non-scenes! Making it even worse, did Zimmer's violins have to be gnawing away underneath the entire film? Is that the only way Nolan can weave together a movie??

Final tidbits: the unadorned action movie antics are well compared to a James Bond flick and take away from the dark surrealism and visual poetry often achieved. Cotillard's psychology could've been fascinating and deeply unsettling but it's written away into accessibility.

The ambiguous ending I don't see as generous but as being uncommitted to making a judgment on Leo's character.

I felt the film edged our emotions towards thinking he fully deserved his chance to move on with his life, and to embrace living. So even though his happiness may go hand-in-hand with an unrealistic, rose-colored-glasses view of the world, I thought Nolan letting us open to a grim real world ending shows insecurity with his life-affirming fable.

[Spinal]

I don't understand how certain critics are so confused by this movie labeling it "lost" or "puzzled".

Totally. He does an excellent job of teaching the audience the conventions of the film early on. And the rest is crystal clear if you have been paying attention.

[Ezee E]

Yep, I can't say I've seen another movie where the entire crowd gasped at that last shot. Myself included.

This was everything I had hoped for it to be. Strong stuff. Can't wait to see it again.

[Saya]

Saw this last night. Loved it. Did anyone else think Mal (Cottilard) was terrifying in some scenes?