Tell us what you thought of ‘Inception’

Posted by · 9:06 pm · July 15th, 2010

Had enough yet? Well, we hope not. We want to know what you think! I’ve had my say (and again, and again), as has Guy. But enough about us. Midnight screenings are flickering to life on the east coast right now so “Inception” has hit. If you get a chance to see it over the weekend, rifle off your thoughts here.




→ 87 Comments Tags: | Filed in: Daily

87 responses so far

  • 1 7-16-2010 at 8:48 pm

    Marshall said...

    Here’s my review; I absolutely loved this movie: http://marshallandthemovies.com/2010/07/16/inceptionreview/

  • 2 7-16-2010 at 9:30 pm

    Jason Flores said...

    For me this was the best movie I’ve seen all year. It kept me hooked and interested throughout the whole thing.
    Come Academy Awards time we can see this getting multiple nominations, already it’s going to get nominated for Best Picture, Best Directory, and Original Screenplay, and other technical catergories.
    And quite possibly because this is going to be a nomination hog we might see one of the actors getting themselves a nomination.
    Joseph Gordon-Levitt for Best Supporting Actor and Marion Cotillard for Best Supporting Actress seem like the only two actors who might be able to get a nomination out of this film.
    Hopefully though, Warner Bros. Pictures aren’t going to be as dumb as The Weinstein Company and campaign Cotillard as Lead:)

  • 3 7-16-2010 at 11:08 pm

    red_wine said...

    I feel kinda duped with all the people saying how confusing the movie was and how it needed to be seen twice to understand it.

    I actually found it very easy to follow, though the plot was convoluted and at no point was I lost. My female friends, who never watch these kind of movies and only watch romantic comedies had no trouble throughout the movie.

    I mean this as the highest compliment to the editing, which SHOULD win the Oscar, that the movie is completely coherent.

    Nice movie, I would rate it 3 out of 5.

  • 4 7-16-2010 at 11:58 pm

    ThreeOfAKind said...

    “In the fourth level (Cobb’s dream) Cobb tells Mal that they did grow old together in their dream. Yet he explained to Ariadne that they both committed suicide via train and they both looked young. Which one is it? Did they grow old in their shared dream or did they kill themselves early on?”

    Can anyone explain this? This is might lead to some major alternate theories, or it’s a pretty massive hole in the story.

  • 5 7-17-2010 at 12:14 am

    salvo3000 said...

    G1000,

    Good point on Saito, but he could be a projection of Cobb’s, like the Browning character was Fischer’s projection the second time around.

    Also, I wonder if the Eames character is a reference to the architect/designers Charles and Ray Eames who made the “multi-level” film Powers of Ten? I have forgeries of their shell chairs.

    Arthur Schnitzler’s Dream Story and Ariadne from Greek mythology are also cool to think about. Personally, I think they’re Cobb’s real kids.

    Lastly, this was the greatest film to round out the trilogy of Catch Me if You Can, and Shutter Island!

  • 6 7-17-2010 at 12:21 am

    salvo3000 said...

    Final note… for how brilliant Cobb’s web is, they should change the references to the “subconscious” to “unconscious”. There is no “subconscious”… but then again, there are no emotions in the unconscious, so maybe this is why?

  • 7 7-17-2010 at 12:23 am

    Rare Addict said...

    I loved it. The film continues Nolan’s trend of intellectual, yet crowd-pleasing films, while demonstrating more creativity than perhaps any of his previous movies.

    If there’s one complaint that I can imagine people having over this film, it’s that the plot can be particularly difficult to follow. And while I feel that this is true to some extent, that’s because Inception is, in and of itself, a puzzle. All of the pieces are presented to you, and solving it depends not so much on intelligence, but on whether or not you find that sort of element appealing in a movie. It’s a film in which much of the dialogue is spent simply explaining the rules of this complex dream world, and therefore demands that you be wide awake.

    Even so, there had still better be an endearing cast of characters to follow, especially with this being a two-and-a-half hour experience, and thankfully, Inception delivers. While none of them, outside of DiCaprio’s character, have much backstory to speak of, they all feature exceptionally likable personalities, so by the time that the stirring climax hit, I was concerned about the fate of each and every one of them. Joseph Gordon-Levitt’s performance as DiCaprio’s right-hand man, Arthur, blew me away in particular. The guy doesn’t have a ton of screen time, but damn, does he leave an impression!

    Also, as expected, Hans Zimmer proves once again that he is the boss when it comes to musical scores, as each scene is enhanced tremendously by his material. He’s the sort of musician who can make even the simplest of actions seem more important than anything else that’s happened in human history. If only you, sir, could score my life.

    With its challenging narrative structure, likable characters (if somewhat lacking in depth), and sheer visual splendor, Inception is easily among my favorite movies of the year, second only to Pixar’s latest classic. It’s been a rough summer movie season, and while we’ve still got quite a few weeks left before it’s officially over, Inception succeeded in reminding me why I dig this medium so much.

  • 8 7-17-2010 at 12:38 am

    Kristopher Tapley said...

    red: It’s not that it’s confusing, it’s that it has a lot of layers that are truly enriching on a second look. At least for me.

  • 9 7-17-2010 at 6:40 am

    Mr. Gittes said...

    Cillian Murphy gives the best supporting performance in this, yet no one’s talking about him. I hope he’s a major player in the next Batman film. Please, Nolan!

  • 10 7-17-2010 at 6:56 am

    Mr. Gittes said...

    Oh, and you’re right, Kris. I think Bale as Cobb would have brought something to the film not present in the screenplay. Leo is fine — he’s far better in Shutter Island in my view — but I think Bale, as you say, would have gone a little deeper, especially in the scenees with Cotillard. The use of Edith Piaf: Stunning. Haunting.

  • 11 7-17-2010 at 8:49 am

    Bryan said...

    There’s really no villain in this movie, and that’s pretty great.

  • 12 7-17-2010 at 9:13 am

    Michael said...

    My immediate reaction was that they did such a fucking fantastic job advertising this movie b/c I had no idea the role that Marion Cotillard was going to play and I also assumed that Ken Watanabe was going to be some badass evil person and instead he was more of a slippery chill dude that you couldn’t really trust but wasn’t the “villain” as I had thought. I really loved this movie, and not just b/c I wanted to. I immediately wanted to re-see the film and that hasn’t happened to me once this year with any other film that I have seen. I think this was Nolan’s finest hour alongside The Prestige and Batman Begins and I have been blasting that soundtrack nonstop since I bought it on Tuesday. I hope it gets nominated for the trifecta of Best Picture, Best Director, and Best Screenplay and then gets a lot of the behind the line nominations as well b/c it truly deserves them imho.

  • 13 7-17-2010 at 11:06 am

    Andrew M said...

    This was an amazing movie. Not the masterpiece I was hoping for, just short of it, but it was still great. I had the same problems as most people (to much exposition in the beginning, side characters not developed fully) but to a lesser extent. I thought the exposition was needed to understand the story, but it should of been cut down a little and happened more naturally. Those were my only problems with it, I thought everything else was fantastic. I didn’t think the dreams were too “real”, but maybe that is because I have fairly real dreams.
    9/10

  • 14 7-17-2010 at 11:36 am

    Fitz said...

    Spirithunter’s theory is definitely something to look into when I see this again.

    But I get the sinking feeling that Cobb is stuck in his own subconscious. Why else would the kids have not aged? And the clothes were all the same as earlier. With the totem not toppling over Nolan definitely delivers a crippling blow.

    This is why I can’t see the “emotional coldness” label that other critics seem to latch on to.

  • 15 7-17-2010 at 12:58 pm

    matt said...

    A great movie that solidifies Nolan’s place among the greats, but not as cerebral or mind-blowing as it seemed positioned to be.

    Interesting that a recurring theme in Nolan’s movies is the protagonist’s loss of his lover/guilt over loss of lover (see Memento, TDK, Prestige I think)

    Agreed with those who said
    a) it was engaging intellectually but not emotionally- for me there was no reason to care about Cobb and Mal at the end
    b) too much exposition- although the reason for the exposition became increasingly clear as the film went on, the method in which it was delivered (especially with Cobb and Ariadne in Paris) seemed almost too cut and dry for a movie of this creative level
    c) the visuals weren’t cool enough-
    -first the action scenes were great, but nothing mind-blowing, and for those who are raving about the scenes in level 2 dream, those reminded me of Constantine, where it seemed to work better
    -second the locations- the crew filmed all around the world, but the scenes with the best aesthetics were the Japanese house and Tokyo skyline (which is actually reminiscent of the superior Hong Kong skyline in TDK)

  • 16 7-17-2010 at 1:15 pm

    MovieMan said...

    For the record, I didn’t find it “emotionally cold,” just an absolute dud in the emotion department. Nothing connected me to the characters’ plights. But it wasn’t related to what Nolan did, rather what he didn’t do: flesh out anyone in the film. Quite a bit of talk about acting nominations, much like with “Avatar” last December,” and again for me, none of the talk is warranted.

    Viscerally, “The Dark Knight” did just about everything better. As a mindfuck, “The Prestige was more involving, though by my estimation, neither film added up to much at the end. But at least “The Prestige” connected me to the characters.

  • 17 7-17-2010 at 1:23 pm

    Fitz said...

    I just don’t see how you couldn’t connect to Cobb, granted I’m not tearing down your opinion, it is after all your opinion, I’m just perplexed.

  • 18 7-17-2010 at 1:33 pm

    Speaking English said...

    Better than “The Dark Knight,” for me. Brilliant opening, a bit of a clumsy expository stretch there in the middle, but then a magnificent and immensely satisfying closing third that makes me kind of want to forgive the self-serious dramaturgy.

    Was also very very surprised at how big a part the Mal/Cobb relationship played, and thought it could hardly have been handled better.

  • 19 7-17-2010 at 1:43 pm

    Bryan said...

    I really don’t get the problem with the exposition. When I was watching the film, I never consciously said to myself “Ah! Look! They are explaining this for me!” It felt very natural.

  • 20 7-17-2010 at 1:46 pm

    Matthew Starr said...

    No one has answered any of my questions. I am still perplexed on whether Cobb and Mal grew old together or killed themselves when they were young.

    Also how come Saito got so old in limbo but Cobb did not?

  • 21 7-17-2010 at 2:07 pm

    Speaking English said...

    Matthew: two options, 1) them growing “old” together was simply a metaphor for their state of mind, not their physical beings or 2) they really were physically old, then they either died or killed themselves in one level and woke up young again on a higher level… maybe?

    And I don’t believe Cobb was ever really in limbo, right? He went looking for Saito to finish the deal and bring him back to reality, he wasn’t stuck there with him.

  • 22 7-17-2010 at 2:17 pm

    Matthew Starr said...

    Option 2 seems solid since Cobb and Mal did go into various deep levels. No one can know for certain.

    Saito was in limbo so for Cobb to find him he also had to get into limbo. Didn’t Mal stab Cobb in dream level four. How did he survive that? Perhaps that is how he got into limbo and found Saito?

    Also why was that energy company after Cobb in the beginning?

  • 23 7-17-2010 at 2:21 pm

    Kristopher Tapley said...

    Matt: Just guessing, but I would say Saito had been in limbo for a few minutes before Cobb got there, and time being what it is on the various levels, that equaled a long time, whereas Cobb got there, washed up, was taken to Saito, all in a matter of moments. Maybe?

    And I think the energy company was after him because he failed the mission, therefore they were pissed and didn’t want to leave evidence in the form of Cobb and his team. Again…maybe?

  • 24 7-17-2010 at 2:34 pm

    Matthew Starr said...

    Yeah that is true that Saito died and went into limbo first. It’s just the fact that Cobb did not age at all.

    Also Kris any ideas on Cobb and Mal in limbo. Did they grow old together? Did they commit suicide while young?

    How about the main question. Are we in reality or a dream in the very last scene?

    This film’s narrative is extremely ambiguous. It can be perceived in so many different ways.

  • 25 7-17-2010 at 3:01 pm

    m1 said...

    Sorry to say this, but I can’t give it an ‘A’ or an ‘A-‘. It’s a ‘B+’ for obvious reasons.

  • 26 7-17-2010 at 4:59 pm

    Kristopher Tapley said...

    Matt: I’m not sure whether they actually grew old or it was a state of mind (since that’s an interesting thought that’s been brought up). My initial thought was simply, yeah, they got old, per the discussion about him being in there for 50 years. So I’ll stick with that. And the idea that they kept killing themselves and bouncing back up the chain to explain that they’re young in the train scene.

    I dunno…

  • 27 7-17-2010 at 7:42 pm

    Drew Choiniere said...

    After my first viewing of the film tonight, I agree with Kris from his podcast, when the snow starts to fly the film begins to fall off the rails. I just think it becomes almost too clever for its own good. It finds its footing again, but that’s my slight sticky point.
    Did anybody else get a gut punch of “Citizen Kane” toward the end?
    Secondly, from a purely visual level, the film is a masterwork especially the sound design, score, and art direction. Just like the film, Nolan and his creative team have layered all of the techinical elements in a beautiful tapestry whose individual threads are just as strong as the work overall.
    Nolan continues to defy what contemporary films can do and say, and when the heart finally connects with the head (which he certainly tries and achieves in several instances this time around), I think we’ll be even more surprised about what he can achieve.

  • 28 7-17-2010 at 8:39 pm

    ron said...

    long read but I believe I am getting close. I don’t believe there is a definitive answer.

    I have read and agree with the fact that saito died in the van where he was originally shot sending him to limbo just after from level one while the van was still falling. While cobb willingly goes back to limbo because when he is the dreamer it is the only place he returns to with Mal from his subconscious. Cobb and ariadne go to limbo from level 3 to limbo (levels right next to each other so time does not go by as fast which is why fischer is not alot older than them and ariadne realizing that killing your self in limbo will work to get you out but only if your in limbo because that is how cobb and mal got out orginally, so she tosses fischer and herself to there death leaving cobb behind.
    At this point is when they start heading back through the levels where everyone returned to level one except cobb and saito. Because cobb drowned in the van only milla-seconds later in level one after saito died he went back to limbo which was like a reset. He wanted to stay and find saito but because he died in level one after saito there for saito was the new inhabtant of limbo with his gaurds and new buildings and Cobb was new to saito’s long time spent in limbo. Saito was convinced of his limbo until cobb convinced him to leave by killing them selves.

    Tricky part is who got shot first if Leo was shot first then he would wake up and the end could be real. But my belief is Saito shot him self and then Cobb not realizing it took over limbo and set up the dream scenerio of the ending that he went home to his kids and everthing was fine but it was a made up limbo that he was willing to except.

    If it is a dream everyone gets what they wanted the mission was completed and the company was destroyed but Fischer even comes out on top with a new found destiny spawned from postive thoughts of his father. Cobb gets his family back in a well concived limbo. And even if you get sad about his real kids out side the dream he could live a whole life time with them in limbo and maybel, just maybe he wakens from limbo and would only be an hour later with saito still making the call and a chance for him to go home. I am not saying I am right or wrong but I fell I am on a right track.

  • 29 7-18-2010 at 9:42 am

    Matthew Starr said...

    Cobb and Ariadne don’t die in level three so how is level four limbo? I thought they connect all three of themselves (Cobb, Ariadne, Fischer) to a shared level four dream?

    Also why would Cobb see Saito shoot himself and then take over limbo? Just to create his own fantasy world where he gets to live with his children? That seems to goes against what Cobb was trying to change about his character.

  • 30 7-18-2010 at 10:51 am

    The Dude said...

    Just saw this. Kris, I think the central point of your review (that it is a movie with flaws but that the flaws do not detract from the experience) is spot on. This is probably the best or second-best movie of the year so far for me (the other being Toy Story 3), and I will say that I was engaged the whole way through.

    I didn’t feel the exposition was all that long…maybe in “real-time” (haha) it was, but it breezed right by for me. And considering how much info was laid on us during that time, I’m glad they took the time to explain some things. I also didn’t find the dialogue as clunky as some say…yes there were some “groaners,” but I thought the cast delivered their lines so well that even the clunkiest of lines seemed pertinent and poetic.

    All in all, the biggest flaw (for me) is something a lot of people are praising: DiCaprio’s performance. He seemed to be on auto-pilot in this movie…it wasn’t a bad portrayal, but I thought the supporting cast looked as if they were putting in a whole lot more effort.

    Speaking of supporting, I’m going to start an Oscar campaign RIGHT NOW for Cotillard. Her performance was simply haunting in the best possible way…if Nolan ever makes a Bond film, HE HAS FOUND HIS FEMME FATALE.

    All in all, I thought the movie was great. It’s 2 1/2 hour runtime breezed right by (it felt more like an hour and 45 minutes), and the action was spell-binding. I’ll have to see this again (and again) to determine if this is a true masterpiece, but this is EASILY the best blockbuster-type movie I’ve seen since the Lord of the Rings trilogy. Nolan, you sir, are awesome.

    (Side-note: if this movie does not win the editing Oscar, I might die a little inside. Seriously…I can’t imagine how the Academy could be so dumb…).

  • 31 7-18-2010 at 1:28 pm

    JJ said...

    OK. Saw it. Excellent. Blew my mind. 9/10.

    I have issues; however, they’ve alllll been brought up here already. I will see it a second time to come up with my final opinion on the theories. However, it may need a 3rd, haha.

    Performances, all great, nothing earth-shattering. Enjoyed JGL, Hardy, Cotillard, & Cillian Murphy most. And while I’m no Ellen Page fan, I thought she was quite good, actually.

    Technically, top to bottom, amazing. Dream level 2 … I just sat there and looked at the people left & right of me and we acknowledged the crazy goodness of what we were seeing together. I’m just still confused by some points and hope to be cleared up on further viewings.

  • 32 7-18-2010 at 1:30 pm

    JJ said...

    Oh, and everyone I know whose seen it loved it. And my packed IMAX 12:20pm theater today clapped at the end.

    I get why some people won’t “like” it. And some of the exposition got to me. But a bad movie, it is not. I loved it.

  • 33 7-18-2010 at 6:18 pm

    Chris138 said...

    Haha, whoever above said that Lee Smith deserves the Oscar, I totally agree. That was one of the first things I thought about after watching the film.

    I really liked it a lot though. I didn’t totally understand everything, it is certainly a very challenging film. It certainly demands repeated viewings, and I look forward to it.

  • 34 7-20-2010 at 10:04 am

    Traves said...

    Loved the movie. Loved reading other peoples posts. A few things I noticed with the movie:
    1. When Leo is in the hotel room right after he fails that first job and his children call on the hotel phone to talk with him… If he’s running from this “industrial company” that’s trying to hunt him, they can’t find him but his kids and there grandmother can?
    2. When he first meets his buddy at the bar (don’t remember his name) and they get chased by the “industry”. Did that not seem very similar to the attackers in a “protected mind?”. This a hint that he was always in someone dreams/limbo or whatever.
    3. When he spins the top at the end of the movie, it spins for quite a while before it “could fall”. Didn’t take that long when he spins it at the start… Whooo knows
    4. After the failed first job he goes to spin his totem and he drops it…. No proof he is ever not dreaming, no concrete proof he is
    5. Kids didn’t age, same cloths$$$ WTF clleeaary a dream still
    When other above spoke of after the flight how no one looked at him, cllleeaaarrrllly not wanting to draw attention. And when Fischer looks at him clearly its because he recognized him from the dream.
    Like his lloooony wife said, a small idea in a dream can grow in the mind. When I first saw him unable to spin his totem to prove reality, that idea grew until everything I believed about the movie to be a dream

    What do you guys think???

  • 35 7-23-2010 at 4:12 am

    aspect ratio said...

    Finally saw it last night, and it’s undoubtedly a great film, best I’ve seen so far this year (though that isn’t saying too much). There were two things that bugged me though that at least for now keep me from giving it the top grade:

    1. The constant back-and-forth with the Joseph Gordon-Levitt zero gravity fight and the fact that he’s floating weightlessly in the van. The movie must’ve cut back and forth between these two at least 3-4 times and it was just really heavy-handed and really took me out of this amazing fight scene, which otherwise will probably be the coolest thing you’ll see in a movie this year. I mean, we get it after the first time the cut back to him floating in the van that it is the reason he’s weightless. There’s really no need at all to keep referencing this. It wasn’t just this scene where they do it either, though the fight scene was where it was really unnecessarily overused.

    2. The whole snow fortress thing was just.. lame. Like Anne Thompson said in the Oscar Talk, it’s the James Bond sequence, in fact it’s a lot like The Spy Who Loved Me’s opening scene where Bond jumps off the cliff with a parachute after being chased by bad guys in skiis with machine guns. Thankfully it didn’t take up too much time, but I’m kind of shocked they couldn’t think up something “cooler” (for a lack of a better word) when everything else is like WOW, HOLY SH#T!

    Both could be chalked up to high expectations on first viewing though, so it should be interesting to revisit it now that I know how it plays out.

  • 36 7-23-2010 at 5:26 pm

    Big Braveheart said...

    Amazing film, totally mind-bending. Another Chris Nolan classic, possibly his best yet. Fantastic ideas
    with a good ensemble cast who all work well together so much that not one of them gives a
    bad performance, Murphy i thought was a stand-out and Leo was good but Marion Cotillard for me was just brilliant in this and like somebody else said she was very haunting and alluring too, the back story on her and Leo was quite sad so how some reviewers said that this movie is not emotional is quite beyond me. Some of the ideas, twists and imagery that Nolan has conjured up for this is very unique and quite fantastic, the thought of dream placement and being in a dream within a dream within a dream is something never seen before and the ending will
    be talked about for a long time. Great film and great to see Tom Berenger finally get a film out in the cinema for the first time since 2002 ha ha!
    Can it win Oscars, let’s think so and let’s hope it puts thoughts into Academy voters heads!!