The film we've all been waiting for has finally arrived. And it's awesome.

I've just got back from seeing Inception at the cinema. Trying to review a film of this scope, ambition and complexity is a pretty impossible task - it's hard enough to describe, so how Nolan conceived the whole thing I've no idea - but I'll try and give some reaction. To try and do a plot summary would be foolish, and you all know the concept anyway, so I'll just say it's a quasi-sci-fi-heist-thriller, a blockbuster with brains as well as brawn.

Acting? Top notch. Di Caprio as Cobb is a haunted man trying to pull 'one last job', battling guilt and fighting to control memories which are very much a threat to him. Tom Hardy, Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Ellen Page are all up to the task as his team. Ken Watanabe is his usual engrossing self, and Nolan's go-to creepy guy Cillian Murphy doesn't disappoint either. The best performance, however, probably comes from Marion Cotillard, who is fast becoming one of my favourite actresses. Wherever she turns up - Public Enemies, Nine - she is completely gripping to watch. Here she's the splinter in Cobb's mind who puts everything in jeopardy, the skeleton in his mental closet that he must confront or give in to.

Visually, it's all amazing to watch. The physics-bending fight sequences (particularly the one in the hotel corridors) are incredible to watch, and I already can't wait for the behind-the-scenes footage on the Blu-Ray. The debt to The Matrix is clear, but it doesn't feel like a Wachowski rip-off; it's too well done for that. There's more action than you could possibly want in a summer blockbuster - explosions, fist fights, snowmobiles, shoot-outs...you're as bombarded by sound as you are by ideas.

Some reviews have said this just feels like a very expensive college lecture, Nolan droning on about dreams and the subconscious for two-and-a-half hours with occasional pauses for things to blow up. It's true that you have to keep listening, and the film has to keep explaining itself because things really aren't straightforward (by the end we have four simultaneous action sequences all featuring the same characters, happening at different locations and in different time-frames), but I don't agree that it's cold and emotionally dry. The story of Cobb's guilt is genuinely affecting, and the scene towards the end with Watanabe and di Caprio is a treat. Yes everyone - apart from Hardy - takes things very seriously indeed, but given what's at stake that's not surprising.

I agree that as far as capturing dreams onscreen goes, this isn't the definitive work. No-one dreams about sex here, ever - there's no romance here at all, except the screwed-up kind between di Caprio and Cotillard. And despite the clever visual tricks, everything still feels very logical. In fact, there are probably more flaws that I'll start to pick out as the days go by, but right now I'm too bowled over to care. In terms of boldness, ambition, narrative cleverness, breathtaking visuals...this is first-rate stuff. Two and a half hours flew by,and the stakes just kept going up and up and up; none of the lagging third act that TDK suffered from slightly here. The final image is perfect, too.

Imagine The Matrix meets old Bond movies meets Mission Impossible meets Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, and you'll be vaguely close to understanding what this film is. It's a thumping action pic that explores fundamental, rich themes like love, guilt, death, memory, time...it's not just about dreams and reality, it's about the whole human condition. In Avatar, Cameron put story and ideas on the back-burner and focused on the visuals. Nolan delivers in both departments.

My Oscar predictions last year turned out to be pretty wrong (NO nominations for Public Enemies), but I'll stick my neck out and say we have a guarenteed Best Picture nomination right here. Kudos to Warner Bros. for giving Nolan the money to make his vision a reality. If this is what he can come up with, and I have no doubt it'll do the business at the box office (the 4:10 screening I was in, in a pretty small town, was almost full), then I say keep the money coming.

Hey Jonny,

I just got back from watching this today, and I have to say that it pretty much blew me away.  I usually like to let movies simmer in my noggin for afew days before deciding whether or not I really liked it, but in this case it's not really necessary.  

I think you've done a wonderful job of reviewing this flick, because it's really no easy task.  Anyone who sees it will no what I mean.

If I'm being totally honest, the first 20 minutes or so were a little jarring for me, in part because we are thrown right into the fire.  I just told myself to go with it, and while I'm still not sure that I totally understood everything that was going on, it more than came around for me in the end.  We got out of the theatre and had no idea it was a 2 plus hour movie.  

I agree that the acting was superb all around.  With each passing film, I can't help but like Leo more and more as an actor.  He's been on quite a roll.  For me though, I thought Tom Hardy was terrific.  His character was not only a wwiseacre, but he kicked plenty of ass.

I left the theatre thinking of people who said that "Avatar" was the best movie they've ever seen.  I'm not saying that this is the best movie I've ever seen, but it blows "Avatar" (different beasts, I know) out of the water IMO.  It worked on at least three levels for me: the "love" story b/w Leo and the beautiful Cotillard, the father/son relationship (which def worked for me), and the great action scenes which I think built off of the "Matrix" and took it to a cool new level.

Anyway, terrific movie, IMO, and I couldn't help but wonder what this screenplay must look like.  I'll be thinking about this one for a while.

Craig

WOW! I thought I'd catch a 10am Sunday morning screening so I didn't have to put up with many people talking through it, but it was a few seats off a sellout. I've never seen the cinema so busy on a Sunday at that time. Luckily, everyone was quiet throughout, probably blown away just as much as I was.

What a movie! Very impressed with all the actors involved. I used to hat Di Caprio so much that I thought the best part of Titanic was when he died, but his recent movies have been great and my opinion of him is rapidly changing. I wasn't sure about the casting of Ellen Page, but I'm glad to admit I was wrong.  I do agree that the standout was Marion Cotillard. She was amazing in every single scene she was in.

The visuals...wow...I don't think I'll see anything like it for a while. I wasn't as confused as I thought I'd be, even after the dream within a dream within a dream etc. Amazing film, I'll definitely be taking advantage of my unlimited card to see it a few more times in the coming weeks.

Avatar doesn't even come close.

"Ooh, does the top keep spinning or doesn't it?!"  

That's about the most conversation you'll get out of Inception.

Highly enjoyable but far from intelligent, Nolan's heist flick is a fun, slick amalgam of pulpy sci-novels from the last 50 years that somehow seems to have given the impression of being thoughtful, original entertainment.  Obvious and stunted in its expression of science fiction ideas, it is nonetheless a rip-roaring action flick with just enough sci-fi to keep itself going, and certainly one of the most involving action plots in years.

Inception's real strength is its adherence to the strict rules of storytelling; despite being way too long, the film hits every mark exactly when it's supposed to, and more importantly, centers itself and its conflict around the internal struggle of its protagonist manifested (very literally, in this case) into external forces -- something which scriptwriters seem to be forgetting about lately.  This is the story of a man learning to accept a loved one's death, through and through, and it never forgets that.  

As one must expect of Christopher Nolan, we are also treated to several very fun and well-designed action sequences, some gorgeous cinematography, and a well-handled, complex story.  The cast is very strong, albeit no stronger or weaker than they normally are.  Michael Caine, wasted in a useless and obligatory bit part, is the sole exception, but given his spirited performance in Harry Brown one can forgive his apparent lack of inspiration here.  Nolan certainly owes a lot to DiCaprio and Page, whose relationship -- imperative to the story but totally undeveloped in the script -- was saved to a reasonable degree by strong performances (who the heck WAS Ellen Page's character, anyway?)

As a science fiction film, however, Inception is pathetic.  Not a single opportunity is taken to explore original aspects of the ideas; not a single idea is developed past what is necessary to drive the action.  Worse yet, every bit of the premise is explained to us in such excruciating detail that we are robbed of even the fun of figuring it out for ourselves.  After the enjoyable opening, where we jump around and gradually figure out what's going on, we have everything we just figured out spoonfed to us for fourty-five minutes.  And that is the beginning and end of our problems; science fiction is about posing questions, and this film is only interested in answering them.  Nolan eagerly skirts anything interesting in favour of developing the obvious ideas to serve the action, and we are given a great action film and a terrible sci-fi one.

There is nothing original or daring in this film; nothing thought-provoking that is not incidental; nothing that reflects on the state or the thoughts of, or ideas about, humanity.  This film's contribution to science fiction is remarkably small.

There is nothing un-enjoyable about this film; no time that is not either exciting or quick-paced; no sequence that is not tense and technically impressive.  This is one of the most fun blockbusters of the year, and it easily has the best score.

I strongly recommend seeing Inception, but if you're looking for fresh ideas, grab the first sci-fi book you see from a garage sale; it will be much more thought-provoking.

On an end note, it's amusing that Inception would be accused of essay-style filmmaking when Dark Knight was a much more developed and intelligent lecture on good and evil than anything Nolan bothers with in this film.  I assume Nolan made Inception to relax after putting so much care into meticulously constructing Dark Knight.  

Saw this a couple days ago. Figured I'd wait a couple days to digest it. At this point, I have to say I'm simultaneously shocked, delighted and embarrassed at how much I liked this movie. I left the theater with my friend who asked me what my letter grade was. I said A+; he literally laughed in my face and asked if I was crazy. Apparently, he didn't care for the more James Bond-esque moments and thought the plot was morally reprehensible (forcing a person to change their mind about a decision that is rightfully theirs to make).

Anyway, I imagine my reaction to Inception was similar to that which so many people had to Avatar as well as my own reaction to first Matrix film. Hopefully, there won't be an Inception 2 and 3 which completely ruin the mythology of the original. Along with The Matrix and The Dark Knight, I think Inception is one of the only Hollywood blockbusters that wasn't completely stupid or pandering to the audience. If anything, Inception engages the audience and forces them to pay attention.

Between the story, the action, the superb cast/performances and filmmaking prowess, I actually found myself completely lost in and entranced by the film. As far as Hollywood blockbusters go, this hasn't happened to me since The Matrix and I was completely able to forgive the film's plot holes and shortcomings rather than just overlook them. I can't imagine I'll feel this way forever but just the fact that the film made me feel that way at any point is a testament to how good it is, at least in my book.

The most surprising thing about the film was despite the absolute dynamite supporting cast, the standout was actually Di Caprio. I just watched Shutter Island and found his performance in that film to be absolutely stiff. In fact, I'd go so far as to say the film made me realize that Di Caprio is stiff in all of Scorsese's films. Not sure why. But he is. Not the case in Inception. He felt very free and loose here and was able to hit those dramatic notes with much more grace than usual. Not sure if it was the script or Nolan's direction but he was really top notch in this one.

The most remarkable thing about the film, at least to me, was the fact that it nearly made me change my mind about something I've felt very strong about for a long time:

It is impossible for film to effectively portray dreams. The dream world is so far removed from reality that we can't possibly use tools of the real world to reproduce it. Call me defeatist. The two worlds are just too different.

Inception is no exception. The film itself explains why dreams can't be portrayed onscreen: you don't realize the strangeness of a dream until you're awake. Watching a movie, you're awake and aware of the strangeness. Thus at no point did I actually get the feeling I was in a dream.

But I came close. If the film weren't eight years in the making, I wonder if it would've been as effective.

This is more of a theory of what the film means than a review.

I want to talk about the ending of new film Inception and it's meaning...

MAJOR SPOILERS TO FOLLOW... !!!

I think DiCaprio's character, Cobb, is still dreaming at the end of the film. Now, I know what you're think; "well, duh, of course - that's exactly what the implication is with the spinning top". But I don't mean it in this way. By the end of the film, Cobb has to go deeper into his (or whoever's subconcious it is) to retrieve Watanabe's character. Watanabe arrived there in this deep layer of subconcious due to, what appears to be, an accident that came about earlier in which he was shot. So, the story goes, that Cobb goes to retrieve Watanabe so that he can uphold his end of the bargain in the real world and allow Cobb to return home to be with his children. It would appear Cobb is succesful. That is until the very last shot with the spinning top, which would suggest otherwise, and that he is indeed, still trapped in a dream. That's a pretty clever ending. However, is it possible that Inception is much more cleverer than we are giving it credit for?

I've since watched Inception another time and I'm starting to suspect there's something else going on entirely. Even though, say, 90 percent of the film takes place in the dream world, there are still a few scenes that, supposedly, take place in the real world. This theory, which I suppose you could call it that, possits that the entire film takes place in a dream. Not only do I believe the whole film is a dream, but I also believe that it was Cobb's main goal to wind up in the dream along with his children at the end of the film. There are a small, subtle number of instances throughout the film, where Cobb's motives appear questionable. I suspect that Cobb staged every event in the film. The whole thing about Watanabe's competeting with Cillian Murphy's character, this was either partially or comepletely staged in Cobb's subconcious. Cobb's goal in the film is to return to his kids. At some point, he realized that he was screwed, and that was never gonna happen. And so he staged in his subconcious, a scenario in which this could be achievable if he does X,Y and Z for Watanabe. He creates a phony mission, or, a maze, in which the reward for completing it, is his children. He stages a scenario where he must carry out a certain task -- certain things go wrong - Watanabe being shot - and Cobb ends up still trapped in a dream by the end of the film, even though he believes he is in the real world. You see, Cobb's plan was such that, if he couldn't be with his children in real life, he could create a world which he himself could believe it was real (when in fact it isn't) and he could be with his children. Do you see? He purposely planted himself in a false reality that he could accept as being real, and thus he would be rid of the guilt he speaks of throughout the film, since he had already cleansed himself of his ties to his wife.

Anyhoo, those are my thoughts. I kinda feel like there's a lot more to talk about after a second viewing. I just wonder, are any of you guys having any of the same thoughts?

I don't know Fox, think I tend to agree with Clorox here.  

"Not only do I believe the whole film is a dream, but I also believe that it was Cobb's main goal to wind up in the dream along with his children at the end of the film. There are a small, subtle number of instances throughout the film, where Cobb's motives appear questionable. I suspect that Cobb staged every event in the film."

If he staged every moment, and his only goal was to be happy (i.e. with his kids), why not go the extra mile and also bring his hot French wife (or Juno for that matter)  along for the ride.  Haha.  I mean if he contrived the whole thing, why not make it completely perfect?

You got me there, Craiger -- I was just going for shits and giggles!

I don't know, you know.  Maybe he didn't stage everything... maybe he had help from his friends -- maybe the big goof is he was the one the people were doing the Inception thing on.  Maybe his friends implanted an idea in his mind to help him get over his baggage, I don't know - what do you want from me, ask Nolan!!

I actually thought the final shot was pretty epic but had the same reaction to it the rest of the audience had... I laughed. It's cute and gets people talking. I'm pretty sure that's all the filmmakers were after. You can analyze it all you want. That's part of the fun, I suppose. Personally, I try not to overanalyze the films I watch but some people enjoy it. Probably don't consider it overanalyzing either. But the fact remains that the cut was a deliberate choice and I don't think Nolan took the story far enough to support any fabricated explanations for it the fans might concoct.

Quoted from James McClung I actually thought the final shot was pretty epic but had the same reaction to it the rest of the audience had... I laughed. It's cute and gets people talking. I'm pretty sure that's all the filmmakers were after. You can analyze it all you want. That's part of the fun, I suppose. Personally, I try not to overanalyze the films I watch but some people enjoy it. Probably don't consider it overanalyzing either. But the fact remains that the cut was a deliberate choice and I don't think Nolan took the story far enough to support any fabricated explanations for it the fans might concoct.

Well said.  I did the same exact thing. Laughed, which at the time, I remember thinking was an odd reaction.  It is what it is.  I choose to think he got back and all was well, but I agree that they set it up perfectly.

Quoted from cloroxmartini The film is not that complicated.

Allow me to rebuttal, or contrast as you say...

Then you must not have watched it with an open mind. It's very cereberal. With a great deal of open questions.

Quoted from cloroxmartini It's fun stuff to throw you off at the end. It's entertainment.

No. Completely disagree. Cobb was the greatest architect. He couldn't build anymore because his sub conscious wife would know every path, every alley. When he finally let's go of her, he could have constructed this great outcome. That he saved Wantanabe. That he saw his kids. Got to spend the rest of his living life with them being characters of the best he could imagine. Remember, he never road the Kick back.

That's why the spinning top is so interesting. It wobbles. Doesn't fall. cut to black.

Quoted from cloroxmartini The story is a comedy in the respect that it's a happy ending, it's not a tragedy.

Comedy?? You're kidding right? I hope you are.

I'm not here to practice being a movie critic because I despise them. But, inception is great.

James

SPOILERS, PROBABLY...

I don't understand it...

There's nothing cerebral about the film!  It's not dumb but it's certainly not intelligent, and the spinning top is nothing but a -- fun, yes -- thought-provoking, no -- cheeky little moment that people can argue about while they walk home from the theatre -- are we in a dream now?  

Envision this ending -- Leo walks out with his kids, the top spins, keeps spinning, and he wakes up.  It was all a dream.  Stupid, right?  Nothing to do with the story, right?  Right!  The film is over; Cobb has dealt with his fatal flaw, allowed himself to get over his wife's death, and come back to the kids.  There can be no ending with the top except that this world, where Cobb has found his kids, is a reality; otherwise, the film has invalidated itself, and the story is stupid.  I guess I'm just repeating what Clorox said.

Can someone explain to me the brilliant science fiction that they saw in this film that I missed?

Oh and Clorox meant comedy, as the ancient Greeks would say it.  I believe.

The fact that most internet boards are filled with theories on this film tells me it's a lot smarter than people are giving it credit for. For example, this guy believes the whole movie is a dream and he goes to great lengths to back this up...

http://chud.com/articles/artic.....INCEPTION/Page1.html

Other people are saying that it can't all be a dream as Leo has a wedding ring on in the dream sequences but doesn't in the reality sequences. I recommend heading over to http://www.gointothestory.com/ as they have had some extensive discussions on this film and they are pretty interesting to read.

I'm going to see it again on Tuesday. It's the best movie this year by a country mile. 10/10

Quoted from Heretic Can someone explain to me the brilliant science fiction that they saw in this film that I missed?

There was no real science fiction to speak of. The whole time, I was wondering by what means they actually drew anyone into a dream or even create a dream in the first place and how it was stored or instituted. Is there a FinalCutPro for dreams? I saw the characters connected up to tubes and little electronic boxes and a huge gadget thing in the center of the truck but none of the technology or means to bring us to this world was explained or even mentioned really, as opposed to, say, Jurassic Park. People were thinking could that actually work? Could you actually make dinosaurs by doing that? None of that's present in Inception. I suppose I enjoyed it because that's not the kind of movie I went in to see.

Quoted from Heretic There's nothing cerebral about the film!  It's not dumb but it's certainly not intelligent,..

Couldn't disagree with you more. That's your opinion, not gonna get into it. Last I checked, this was a site for practicing screenwriters, not practicing film critics. Until you write and post a script, your opinion means shit to me here.

We can all criticize. Let me see what you've got. Woops, can't find nothing...

It's easy to bash a movie. Maybe try taking part in one. Even if it's in your own mind. If this wasn't intelligent, please grace us with your fucken masterpiece so we can all learn. Inception was BRILLIANT.

James