Madame Tutli-Putli

Total Recall: Kurt's INCEPTION Review

by Kurt Halfyard, July 17, 2010 4:15 PM


total_recall_large_03.jpgBecause Leonardo DiCaprio is now making it a habit of playing damaged characters with all the answers and none of them (simultaneously) it is difficult not to look at Inception without it bringing to mind Shutter Island (and a touch of Revolutionary Road.)  There is even twin scenes of a rattled and ill DiCaprio leaning into a sink and splashing water on his face to either steel his nerves or wake from the nightmare.  Whereas Scorsese moulded his film on the noirish Val Lewton films from the 1940s with Gothic sets, character driven and macabre imagery, Christopher Nolan is building off the new millennium blockbuster of the Wachowskis, Michael Mann and Michael Bay.  While he certainly adds a lot more brains to the proceedings, the film is all steel and glass and clean geometric lines.   Nolan as a screenwriter is not above the classical mythology name-dropping (Ellen Page's dream architect is so named after Ariadne, she who helped Theseus out of the Minotaur's maze) favoured by slightly more pretentious writers along the lines of Richard Kelly, The Wachowskis or the creators of Lost.  Do not get me wrong, Inception is head and shoulders above the big budget science fiction extravaganzas of the early 2000s, but seems far more interested in connecting its own dots and shooting off its big guns rather than goosing its audience with the subconscious ugliness that Marion Cotillard represents in the film.  Contrast Natasha McElhone's suicide and confused-yet-aware construct in Soderbergh's Solaris or the hyper-conscious meltdowns of Naomi Watts or Laura Dern in the two post-millennial David Lynch films.  They are all gut punching, heart-ripping moments that crawl up into your brain and lay eggs.  Inception is far more concerned with watch-building and origami and telling you the trick before showing you.  But dang are those pretty and complex baubles crafted here!  As the directors film following the wildly successful The Dark Knight, there is no Joker to put a dangerous and ribald anarchy into the mix.  To use another belaboured filmmaker analogy, comparing Nolan's Inception to the far more down and dirty The Prestige is like comparing David Fincher's pretty but frivolous The Curious Case of Benjamin Button to Fight Club.  Maybe it says something about me that I prefer sticky and mean and darkly funny over comforting and visual and slick.

The film wrestles with a concept it explicitly states within the film, "How do you translate a business strategy into an emotion?"  You see a $200M dollar venture cannot go to the ickier or weirder places without alienating the size of an audience it needs to earn its moolah back.  So instead of the gonzo awesomeness of Paprika, Synecdoche New York or The Fountain we are left with something just a little too polished and linear to truly rattle those transfixed eyes in the dark.  It is kind of baffling to criticize a movie for articulating its concept so elegantly to its own viewership, not to mention astounding in its construction, but the parts that should niggle at your soul and vex the brain are all in the structure and not at the heart of things.  The trailer for Inception plays like that jittery subconscious video tape from Ringu, yet the film plays like The Matrix.  One thing that differentiates Inceptions 'reality' from the red pill/blue pill (or going back further, Neuromancer's ultimate closing bargain to the broken protagonist in William Gibson's seminal novel - a pact to live in bliss, retroactively unaware of the artificially controlled construct that you have surrendered to) is that it postulates that reality is whatever we choose it to be.  In a bull session over beers and wings (or port and brie) I am not going to convince you that God does not exist, or that liberal-libertarianism is the better way to live than the religious right, because both you and I see the world through such fundamentally different glasses that our reality is our own.  As M.C. Esher clearly shows, perspective is a harsh mistress (and life is too busy or too comfortable to really face her.)  It is Cobb's greatest trick in that he very likely 'incepts' himself, not Cillian Murphy's heir to boring old billionaire Kobayashi (the ever ubiquitous Pete Postlethwaite) or just happy to be a rich space-tourist, Saito (Ken Watanabe.)

Because nobody wants to build elaborate practical sets unless they can spectacularly destroy them, Inception is as much about tearing down and folding physical space as it is building up ideas.  As with any effective dream, we enter in the middle of the fray and stay the duration because the movie stays in perpetual motion, like the spin-top talisman constantly used as a plot barometer.  Inception is an admirable collection of practical set-pieces (go go Zero Gravity Hotel!), exposition on dream theory and M. C. Escher writ large as a science fiction heist flick. Yet for all its hubris about the idea as a virus (one explored with more casual humour and paranoia in last years micro-budgeted Pontypool) all the hard science fiction takes a back seat to the popcorn munching.  Sure this may be one of the more ambitious and thrilling blockbusters to come along in years, and it rightfully expects its audience to pay attention, but since the platform has already been built with The Matrix and Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, all you need is a very fancy train to pull into the station.  There sure is a lot of hand-holding exposition that hamstrings its talented cast, particularly Joseph Gordon Levitt who is reduced to slick clean-up operator, Ellen Page as more of a pathfinder than an architect and Tom Hardy as dead-pan comic trickster and sniper (looking so far different from last years serial crazy Bronson that it is uncanny - here, he is essentially James Bond, darling).  Michael Caine cameo-ing for less than 10 minutes of the films 2.5 hour run time walks away as more of a human being than just about anyone else caught up in the Rube Goldberg corporate ploy.  I will concede the out of left field casting of Tom Berenger who is a bit of a hoot to see as pudgy and a clueless corporate player.  And Marion Cotillard, is sexy and sad, but even icier than Samantha Morton in Code 46.  (Tangential aside:  co-incidence or not that the song to pull people out of dreamland was Édith Piaf's iconic "Non, je ne regrette rien" where Cotillard has an Oscar on her shelf for the 2007 biopic of the diminutive french vocalist?  The song is of course ironically appropriate to the films themes of guilt and manipulation and hermetically sealed happiness.)

So in the end, Inception is more interested in wow-ing you with cleverness, conforming your imagination by showing off the abundant brainy craft, all the while having your plug together the plot and guess the reality rather than searing your soul.  There is not a boring minute in the whole enterprise, but it is more of a ride than a consciousness expander.  See you at the Party, Richter!

At Mubi

24 Comments

I agree with your sci fi classification of Inception. In my opinion, this film resembles Micheal Mann's Miami Vice; both films are in the rare art house, blockbuster zone. Yet, they both end up leaning more towards the spectacle than the art house (unlike Collateral and The Prestige). In the end-- despite the flaws--for an American blockbuster, they are an enjoyable experience.

The film could of been better if the exposition was cut out. It works for the first viewing... but it is going to be a hassle for multiple viewings. It is the inverse of The Matrix(first half is good, while it loses its steam in the second half).

user-pic

I agree on the art-blockbuster front, but I disagree on the Miami Vice front. I think that film gets under your skin, I like the edgy, elliptical nature of the storytelling in that film, particularly the lack of exposition, sink-or-swim, opening club sequence.

I find the opening half of the matrix rather over-stuffed and find it better hits its stride later on in the film. I'm of the rare variety who likes the sequel better than the original, because of all the crazy programming/computer metaphors visualized. Admittedly Reloaded is also a bloated mess, but not so much beyond the first entry and I liked Inception also trying to visualize its metaphors (The Forger, the Kick, etc.) in an interesting way. Heck, I enjoy Inception a lot, I just expected a lot more. For such a complex structure, a marvelous artifice, it spends a lot of time telling the audience what it should see, rather than trusting it. I agree that upon subsequent viewings, all the exposition is going to be a slog. We'll see.

As for Christopher Nolan, THE PRESTIGE remains my favourite of his works for getting dirty and tackling the theme of how we want to be informed and entertained, but are resistant, always, to radical new ideas. The Tesla/Edison portion of The Prestige is the master-stroke of that film. Two duelling scientist/industrialist reflecting the two magicians. Bliss.

Dude, put down the thesaurus for just a minute and actually review the film. I THINK, amidst all your rambling, that your trying to say this is a good thinker for a high-budget, mainstream movie. While indies tend to be thought-provoking, a lot of them just aren't any fun to watch. If you consider Nolan's M.O. in creating movies and his target audience, I think he hit the nail squarely on the head with this one. There are various inconsistencies and oversimplifications, but for the most part, the delivery is pretty successful.

On another note, I wholeheartedly agree with your statement "For such a complex structure, a marvelous artifice, it spends a lot of time telling the audience what it should see, rather than trusting it." I'm not a huge fan of hand-holding, and I found that having characters ask stupid/leading questions repeatedly is a bit insulting.

user-pic

Thoroughly enjoyable read, Kurt. I've been struggling to articulate my feelings on the film since seeing it yesterday: The components of my satisfaction and disappointment with it have been buzzing around in there and I feel myself agreeing with your on most levels. It's a nice little click trick when that happens. I will be seeing it again within he next week mind you.

user-pic

I think it is fair to save that I loved the film, but still had some reservations in terms of the overall effect on me beyond the spectacle. I think it is magnificent mostly when it says that two people can spend a lifetime together in a split second, if only they could dream together on a very connected level. That is romanticism of the highest order. It is the closest to feeling warm and fuzzy inside the film that I got.

Inspire by Kurt's review, my spoiler free review:

From the moment that Spielberg scared millions of people from swimming in the ocean: the blockbuster has become Hollywood’s bread and butter. From the late 70’s to the new millennium, most of Hollywood’s theatrical releases-- primarily caters to the fanboy/adolescent audience. Gone are the days, that the adult audience is the target demographic for Hollywood; nowadays-- for the most part-- adult theme films are confined to the independent and to the foreign film scene. The absence of adult oriented blockbusters, usually means that most of the mainstream films are either mindless entertainment and/or do not dare venturing in material that is provocative, controversial, or profound.
Despite the dominance of low brow blockbusters… once in awhile, emerge blockbusters that blur the line between the blockbuster and the art house. Films such as Children of Men, Collateral, and Zodiac are adult, art house films with both a bigger budget and a more widespread theatrical release.
Ever since making an impact in film festivals with Following and primarily with Memento, Christopher Nolan has been able to work in the Hollywood system, while still managing to churn out films that are aim at an adult audience. Does Inception continue Nolan’s trend of mixing the art house with the blockbuster? Well… not really. “Not really”? Is the answer yes or no?
Inception’s major weakness is that it leans more towards the blockbuster side than the art house side. Yes, the film has an unorthodox structure and has creative, original sequences. Yet, it leans more towards the blockbuster-- due to its inability to both venture and dwell on the story’s darker aspects and on being subtle when addressing its rules. In other words, Inception is too afraid of offending a large segment of the audience; the film spends too much time with exposition and with bombastic, action sequences than with dealing with the protagonist’s existential crisis and with the philosophical implications of both the technology and the moral practice surrounding dream espionage and voyeurism.
It does not mean that film should be avoided. On the contrary, the film is a tour de force blockbuster. The acting is great, especially Tom Hardy: who overshadows the other actors. Wally Pfister continues his trend of delivering a recognizable, gorgeous cinematography. Hans Zimmer’s score is fantastic…although, the film could have a deliver a better sound design (on many occasions, it is difficult to discern the dialogue). Unlike The Dark Knight, most of the action sequences are top class; the hotel, action sequence is mind-blowing. Overall, it is a well made blockbuster-- but it is not a masterpiece, and therefore, nowhere near the top of Nolan's filmography .
Inception’s problem is not whether it is good or bad; Inception’s problem is that it could have been a masterpiece. Instead of simply being on par with The Matrix, Inception had the potential of being Crime and Punishment in the dream world.
Rating: 8 out 10

user-pic

Kurt, what is your favorite movie?

user-pic

A seriously tough question, I'm not sure if I have any single film locked down, even knocking it down to 50 would be tricky. I'll give you five films:

The Maltese Falcon
The Sweet Hereafter
L'Avventura
2001: A Space Odyssey
Chinatown

user-pic

Kurt, I'm impressed.
In your Mega-Tom last year this was your top 8:

The Conversation
Chungking Express
Code 46
The Maltese Falcon
The Sweet Hereafter
Picnic at Hanging Rock
The Double Life of Veronique
Once Upon a Time in the West

You remembered 2 out of 8 for your 5. This means your top 50 is way more stable than mine!

user-pic

Nice. These things are so fluid, and highly dependent on what I've watched (say out of my 50 favourites) recently to remind why I love them so. When I was reading the 'top 8' from my own T-O-M that you recently posted, there was a couple 'of course' forehead slaps! Chungking Express! Code 46 (which I actually mention in the review above) and The Conversation! Picnic at Hanging Rock and Double Life of V. are both of my go-tos when I'm in a certain type of mood.

user-pic

You (should :p) already know I disagree with you, Kurt, but I will say this; I think Nolan does a tremendous job of trying to convey the sensation, but I agree that Paprika has a better grasp of dream logic. At the same time, in pretty much every other respect I am convinced Inception is the better film by miles. Much more coherent and far better filmmaking than The Prestige, too, which suffers badly compared to the book - I liked it, but I'd say The Prestige is far worse at weaving ideas into the narrative, pretty much because of how it tries and conspicuously fails to cram the sheer strangeness of Priest's novel into a conventional cinematic framework.

This is an insightful review of the movie, insightful partly because you're honest about what you're looking for in film:

"Inception .. seems far more interested in connecting its own dots and shooting off its big guns rather than goosing its audience with the subconscious ugliness that Marion Cotillard represents ... Maybe it says something about me that I prefer sticky and mean and darkly funny over comforting and visual and slick."

I agree with you about the film being a little too slick visually, a little too focused on tearing down and destroying its elaborately conceived sets. But based on where I am at this point in my life, I trust a movie like this much more than one that gooses me with subconscious ugliness, one that features "gut punching, heart-ripping moments that crawl up into your brain and lay eggs."

If you attend movies for the "gut punching, heart ripping moments taht crawl up into your brain and lay eggs," isn't this just another way of saying that you want to be goosed -- or something a little more intimate than that -- and possibly brainwashed in the process?

In "Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man," Joyce makes a case that art that primarily attempts to evoke an emotional response in the viewer is akin to pornography; Brecht made a similar point in his critical writing on "epic" as opposed to naturalistic theater: epic theater is supposed to make your reflect, not just react.

Whether "Inception" qualifies as great art is doubtful, I think, but the director deserves kudos for provoking us to think rather than trying to lay eggs in our brains that compel us to feel. Intense feeling is a common commodity these days; it was partly by peddling this commodity that manipulators like the Bush-Cheney crew connned the American public into supporting an illegal Iraq War. Relatively unemotional relatively clear thinking is a much rarer thing in American culture: we should applaud anybody who's promoting it. On this score, "Inception" is pretty good, although the repetitive gun battles and the vast urban landscapes collapsing into the sea somewhat undermine the cerebration.

user-pic

Fair enough on the 'instant reaction' comments, but you'd be surprised as to what films affect on a strong level upon reflection. I find CODE 46 to be a devastating film, but it is far from being one to incite a 'reactionary' response to it. Ditto on something like Redbeard or Ace in the Hole or Mulholland Dr. or The Thin Red Line.

And don't get me wrong. I loved INCEPTION, it just, at this moment is not a film that is going to keep me occupied or obsessed for days. It lays most of itself right out to the viewer.

user-pic

I read a couple of other reviews saying Inception didn't work on an emotional level but damn, I totally felt for Cobb, Fischer and Watanabe's character.

I think this might trump The Prestige as my favourite Nolan movie.

Thanks for this review. As with most reviews, im the kind of film viewer who is interested in what reviews say and if it strikes a chord, ill go with it. i would still like to see this film despite the typical cold intellectualness and no soul of nolans work, which admittedly has sent me to sleep in the past ( from memento to insomnia, but batman woke me up) as its probably the best thing out in the cinemas right now. which isnt saying much i know but at least nolans soullessness is naturally honest and artistic. tough times to be a picky movie viewer huh lol

user-pic

The Prestige is fairly good until the (SPOIIIIILERS AHEAD::::::::::) twin of Christian Bale appears. I found that to be just lazy writting, and kept the movie from being way better.

user-pic

That is an interesting criticism of THE PRESTIGE, because the twin element is hiding in plain site for the whole movie. Bale keeps even calling attention to it all over the place. Loaded looks here and their, the crucial conversation with Jackman about the Chinese Magician they see early on in the film for inspiration (on advice from Caine's character) on how far one has to go for his art. Of course, Jackman goes significantly further in the end, while looking like the suffering wuss for much of the film by killing himself multiple times for his art. It is a wonderful film not the least of which for the 'any form of science advanced enough is indistinguishable from magic' and how they time and time again go so far to blur the line with Tesla's work. THE PRESTIGE clearly is my favourite of Nolan's films. It's not about the twist or even bring things back (the prestige act), it is about everything else in the film, the dark corners ambition and fulfillment and all the confusion throughout. Bliss.

user-pic

Have you read the book, Kurt? It handles the twin element much, much better. The introduction is far more polished. The film eliminates the bookend sections entirely and so loses the final sequence rounding off that plot thread, which I really, really couldn't forgive - I can see why Nolan wanted to lose the present-day sections but I don't think it was ultimately for the best.

I've avoided writing a review because I still can't quite decide how good I think the film was. On reflection yes, Ellen Page and all the exposition surrounding her was a bit too on the nose even for me. I still don't agree with you, but you have tempered my enthusiasm a little. It's still one of the best of the year, without question, and my God, so much better than Paprika. Kon's film has no genuine character development whatsoever, no real story progression, and the entire final act just exists so he can thumb his nose at the audience by way of covering up the fact there's no other reason for his cast to do what they do. Shudder. Sorry, still bitter about that one.

user-pic

Paprika certainly doesn't do its exposition as elegantly as does Inception, but I must admit I get worked up on the dark imagery in that film. I get worked up on the 'love letter to cinema' within the Cops dreams. And I love how fragile the reality is in that one. You also, for my money, beat the 'parade of joy/terror' that threatens to overwhelm the fantasy worlds within that one. Our collective pop-culture as a monster.

Paprika may be as shallow on character as inception, but there is much of the PRIMAL to chew on. Paprika is a place with a lot more terror and joy.

user-pic

Sure, the twist doesn't kill the entire movie, but it did kill a bit of it's effect to me. Also, there's no way you would have guess of the twin prior to knowing that. So, it feels that it comes out of just nowhere.

user-pic

I'm going to see "The Prestige" tonight, as the BluRay just arrived. Missed it the first time in theaters, and...
...what, Bale has a TWIN???

user-pic

one of the many layers (some would call it a major spoiler), but the trick is often in the construction as much as the details, this is certainly true of Mr. Nolans filmography.

When you watch how the two magicians read each other diaries, along with Michael Caine investigating the court case, tell me that the flashbacks within flashbacks structure is not MORE complex than Inception. And yet the story moves along well paced (with far more chances to BREATHE than any of Nolan's other films)

Besides, the Tesla portion of the story has always been the most interesting aspect. Ambition tempered with success and embarrassment and ostricization-of-your-peers-and-audience along the way. This film remains Christopher Nolan's best work for me. I really should go back and Revisit FOLLOWING though, last time I watched it it was on VHS.

user-pic

Ugh, sorry if i spoiled that one man.

user-pic

Sorry guys, just pulling your leg.
It's true that I have "The Prestige" and planned to watch it tonight (fate intervened AGAIN), but this specific plot point was spoiled to me years ago already.


Leave a comment

Related Posts with Thumbnails