| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| randall |
Posted - 07/17/2010 : 18:44:05
NO SPOILERS
I'm sorry to report that I was let down, especially since I hate to throw stones at a real original, of which there are far too few made. But my brain was not big enough, nor ears sharp enough, to receive more than intermittent snatches of the plot once the "big operation" got under way about a third in. Incessant and incomprehensible yakety-yak, and the sound design is awful to boot. There was exactly *one* compelling visual effect. The movie's very last shot was great. If it becomes a blockbuster a la MATRIX 1 [another one I felt was hard to understand, but it did have the visuals], I'll be flabbergasted.
One other interesting occurrence: there was a trailer for something called DEVIL. People trapped in an elevator, very intense, superb editing. It looked great. Then came a full-screen card: FROM THE MIND OF M. NIGHT SHYAMALAN -- and the audience *laughed*! |
| 15 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| MisterBadIdea |
Posted - 08/27/2010 : 15:01:09
I need to register my opinion right now.
Die Hard 2 is an awful, awful movie. Easily the worst and most unpleasant of the series. Hated it from beginning to end.
Inception is not as great as everyone says, but I will not stand to hear someone compare it unfavorably to that slobbering idiot Renny Harlin's crap pile Die Hard 2. |
| Falken |
Posted - 08/10/2010 : 22:52:43
Super Mario Inception |
| BaftaBaby |
Posted - 08/07/2010 : 10:22:04
quote:
Originally posted by Joe Blevins
quote:
Originally posted by benj clews
I'm not sure I totally agree as regards Nolan not being a storyteller of at least some considerable merit. Sure, the characters aren't necessarily ones you root for immensely but you can't deny the skill in his juggling- what was it?- four parallel, interconnected dream storylines, each occurring at different speeds and still having the audience understand what was going on. Heck, he didn't even have to resort to split screen to do it either.
Okay, sure, but here's the thing:
It's been less than a week since I saw Inception, and the film itself has all but evaporated from my mind. There are no scenes or lines that have stuck with me, haunted me, rattled around in my head, etc. I would agree that it is a clever piece of plotting -- the narrative equivalent of juggling, as you say -- but I'm not sure that any of it constitutes a genuine "story." Earlier I called the movie "a neat trick," which makes the juggling comparison even more apt. To put it another way: a juggling act is a neat trick, but is it a story? (NOTE: It's not juggling, but there is a scene in The Aristocrats in which a magician performs a narrative card trick, actually a series of card tricks that tell a story!)
Getting back to Inception, the film made only a minor impression on me, but its popularity has caused me to re-examine my ideas of narrative itself. I ask again: What is it that we as human beings want out of a story? What is a story, exactly? Why do we tell stories to one another? Well, a multitude of reasons. Sometimes stories make us laugh (but Inception isn't particularly funny). Sometimes stories make us cry (but Inception isn't particularly moving). Sometimes stories arouse us physically (but Inception isn't particularly sexy). Sometimes stories give us insight into the human condition (but Inception isn't particularly wise). I could go on and on listing the things that stories -- as I understand that term -- generally do for us as audience members, and I can't say that Inception does any of them particularly well. Even judged purely as an action movie, it's middling at best. I recently had the opportunity to rewatch Die Hard 2, and I was surprised at how quickly I got involved in the film's simple yet effective narrative. The action in DH2 was every bit as contrived as that of Inception but felt much more visceral, much more powerful. That, to me, is an action movie.
So I guess my concern is: what are we, as audience members, supposed to get out of Inception besides an admiration for how clever Christopher Nolan is? How does Inception fit into the grand tradition of storytelling that stretches back to the cavemen re-enacting the saga of the hunt? How is Inception a story and not just a neat trick?
Well, referring again to what I've said above about what the film is actually about: like a handful of films, story isn't really the point.
I believe what Nolan's trying for - as he did with Memento, albeit with more story - is what the human condition feels like. In that sense it's an expressionistic film whose roots you can trace along a rocky road to such as Dali and Bu�uel.
Inception seems to provide story points, in the way that dreams seem to follow a kind of logic. But it's the process that matters. And it's all too damn mercurial.
Maybe that's why the film doesn't really work, because, as you say, it's not very satisfying on your list of other requisites.
Trust you, though, Joe, to stimulate such an interesting discussion  Thank you!
|
| Joe Blevins |
Posted - 08/07/2010 : 02:23:16
quote:
Originally posted by benj clews
I'm not sure I totally agree as regards Nolan not being a storyteller of at least some considerable merit. Sure, the characters aren't necessarily ones you root for immensely but you can't deny the skill in his juggling- what was it?- four parallel, interconnected dream storylines, each occurring at different speeds and still having the audience understand what was going on. Heck, he didn't even have to resort to split screen to do it either.
Okay, sure, but here's the thing:
It's been less than a week since I saw Inception, and the film itself has all but evaporated from my mind. There are no scenes or lines that have stuck with me, haunted me, rattled around in my head, etc. I would agree that it is a clever piece of plotting -- the narrative equivalent of juggling, as you say -- but I'm not sure that any of it constitutes a genuine "story." Earlier I called the movie "a neat trick," which makes the juggling comparison even more apt. To put it another way: a juggling act is a neat trick, but is it a story? (NOTE: It's not juggling, but there is a scene in The Aristocrats in which a magician performs a narrative card trick, actually a series of card tricks that tell a story!)
Getting back to Inception, the film made only a minor impression on me, but its popularity has caused me to re-examine my ideas of narrative itself. I ask again: What is it that we as human beings want out of a story? What is a story, exactly? Why do we tell stories to one another? Well, a multitude of reasons. Sometimes stories make us laugh (but Inception isn't particularly funny). Sometimes stories make us cry (but Inception isn't particularly moving). Sometimes stories arouse us physically (but Inception isn't particularly sexy). Sometimes stories give us insight into the human condition (but Inception isn't particularly wise). I could go on and on listing the things that stories -- as I understand that term -- generally do for us as audience members, and I can't say that Inception does any of them particularly well. Even judged purely as an action movie, it's middling at best. I recently had the opportunity to rewatch Die Hard 2, and I was surprised at how quickly I got involved in the film's simple yet effective narrative. The action in DH2 was every bit as contrived as that of Inception but felt much more visceral, much more powerful. That, to me, is an action movie.
So I guess my concern is: what are we, as audience members, supposed to get out of Inception besides an admiration for how clever Christopher Nolan is? How does Inception fit into the grand tradition of storytelling that stretches back to the cavemen re-enacting the saga of the hunt? How is Inception a story and not just a neat trick? |
| BaftaBaby |
Posted - 08/05/2010 : 12:33:46
quote:
Originally posted by benj clews
I'm not sure I totally agree as regards Nolan not being a storyteller of at least some considerable merit. Sure, the characters aren't necessarily ones you root for immensely but you can't deny the skill in his juggling- what was it?- four parallel, interconnected dream storylines, each occurring at different speeds and still having the audience understand what was going on. Heck, he didn't even have to resort to split screen to do it either.
It's not just because you are benj-Borg that I agree! Nolan didn't just abandon his considerable story-telling skills, nor his intelligent approach as a film-maker. He may not always get it right - and with Inception I think he just goes at it too long and hard - but he speaks the language of film.
I'm glad ChocoLady and Joe have brought up the action quotient. I've been thinking about why those sequences appear when they do and how they seem to interrupt the more 'story' aspects. If you take the premise I outlined above in which I maintain that the film is not about dreams, but about shaping the fabric of your life - then the action sequences make perfect sense.
This is because - given our overstimulated western lives, mostly fragmented into sectors of family, work, and leisure - our thinking time, however little we make for ourselves during our waking lives, is continually interrupted by meeting the external challenges of the moment.
This makes it really tough to deal with the tough stuff - like reconciling relationships with dead/dying parents, being tempeted by the destruction of moral imperatives, taking responsiblity for our actions and coming to terms with the consequences.
Those action sequences which are the diversions of our lives, cloud our judgments about the past, and throw us into confusion about the present. We speculate on a future that remains unknown, unspun. We take refuge in dreams, which are neither logical, nor provide any answers. Even when they seem to recur, our perspective changes.
We wake. And BANG! We're shot again into a frantic world demanding our attention.
No, it's not the greatest film ever made, but it's more absorbing than a dream-fest. IMHO 
|
| benj clews |
Posted - 08/05/2010 : 12:01:08
I'm not sure I totally agree as regards Nolan not being a storyteller of at least some considerable merit. Sure, the characters aren't necessarily ones you root for immensely but you can't deny the skill in his juggling- what was it?- four parallel, interconnected dream storylines, each occurring at different speeds and still having the audience understand what was going on. Heck, he didn't even have to resort to split screen to do it either. |
| ChocolateLady |
Posted - 08/05/2010 : 11:48:59
quote:
Originally posted by Joe Blevins
The film's immense popularity has me asking myself: what, exactly, do we want out of movies? What do we want out of narratives in general? I heard one Inception-related podcast in which Nolan was described as an "accomplished storyteller," and yet after watching five of his movies, I am still in doubt as to his ability to actually tell a story. I think of a master storyteller as someone who knows he/she has a good yarn to tell and can't wait to let you in on it. I'm not sure Nolan fits that description exactly.
Yes, this makes him a great 'effects shower' but not necessarily a great storyteller.
What do we want out of movies? I know what I want but apparently, that's irrelevant - I'm obviously so much in the minority it isn't even funny. It seems to me that there's a large group of people in Hollywood who think we want to be bowled over by the newest and most fancy technology they can come up with, and hang the story, acting and directing. If they're right, then the art of making movies is going down the tubes fast and big-time.
(Thank heavens we can still get TCM and MGM and buy films that would give you your 8-9-10/10 on Film Threat's little set of categories.)
|
| Joe Blevins |
Posted - 08/05/2010 : 00:55:51
quote:
Originally posted by ChocolateLady
Which makes it a pretty lousy film.
But... isn't this list of items missing something - the "Pow" factor? This is an action film, and therefore it should also be judged on that scale as well.
You took the words out of my mouth -- or would have, if I'd been able to come up with words. The major design flaw in the Film Threat scale is that it does NOT account for action films and thrillers, so a film like Inception is left out in the cold. There definitely needs to be a sixth category -- "pow" -- to accommodate them. It's tough to put into words the mental and physical reaction we have to on-screen action. (In my original post, I considered something about the heart beating faster or the pulse quickening, but it didn't have the ring of the other five categories.)
The film's immense popularity has me asking myself: what, exactly, do we want out of movies? What do we want out of narratives in general? I heard one Inception-related podcast in which Nolan was described as an "accomplished storyteller," and yet after watching five of his movies, I am still in doubt as to his ability to actually tell a story. I think of a master storyteller as someone who knows he/she has a good yarn to tell and can't wait to let you in on it. I'm not sure Nolan fits that description exactly. |
| Conan The Westy |
Posted - 08/04/2010 : 22:56:16
quote:
Originally posted by demonic
I was talking to a friend tonight who totally missed the fact that the whole last scene could just be limbo and not reality, but I guess he missed the point about the spinning totem...
That was exactly what I went out of the cinema thinking demonic.
quote:
Originally posted by Joe Blevins
And then there was Joseph Gordon-Leavitt, the thinking person's Shia LeBeouf, floating around zero-gravity-style in a fancy hotel for a good half hour, I think.
I absolutely loved that scene. 6/5 |
| ChocolateLady |
Posted - 08/04/2010 : 06:09:12
Which makes it a pretty lousy film.
But... isn't this list of items missing something - the "Pow" factor? This is an action film, and therefore it should also be judged on that scale as well.
|
| Joe Blevins |
Posted - 08/04/2010 : 02:46:03
quote:
Originally posted by randall
Any film clever enough to inspire discussion -- assuming it keeps its audience awake -- is good for the medium. I will now warn anyone downstream that this flick has been out long enough: SPOILERS LIE BOTH AHEAD AND BEHIND, as if you didn't know already...
I agree with the above sentiment. In the interest of fostering ongoing debate, I have a little more to say about Inception:
The magazine Film Threat used to occasionally rate movies on each of five separate categories: Laugh, Cry, Scream, Orgasm, Think. These are a little reductive, maybe, but they basically encompass what we're hoping to get out of movies as viewers. After watching Inception, I had to wonder how this film would hold up when rated on these criteria.
Laugh: Well, there are a couple of mood-lightening moments of humor here and there (as when Joseph Gordon-Levitt steals a kiss from Ellen Page), but I think we can all agree that this is not -- and is not trying to be -- a funny movie. No higher than a 3 out of 10.
Cry: Here there is room for debate. Are we meant to be truly moved by the saga of DiCaprio and his wife and DiCaprio's quest to return to his children, or are these just pieces of Nolan's complicated puzzle? I'm guessing the latter. I never for a second bought DiCaprio and Cotillard as a "real" married couple with a shared history, and their idealized children never even emerge as fleshed-out characters. It is possible that people who really have been separated from their own children will find this aspect of the film more compelling than I did. Both Cotillard and DiCaprio are so inscrutable that I had a tough time getting a handle on who these characters are. What kinds of people are these? Does Nolan even know or care? Overall, this is not a particularly "emotional" film. Most of the main characters, DiCaprio especially, remain fairly stoic in demeanor. Inception is no tearjerker. Elsewhere, Cillian Murphy deals with some daddy issues and attendant grief over his father's death. Again, to me, this felt like something meant to advance the plot rather than to arouse emotions from the viewer. On the "Cry" scale, I can only give the film a 4 out of 10 - still a marked improvement over "Laugh."
Scream: Hmmmm. Is Inception a "scary" film? There are some moments of classic horror-film tension, as when Ellen Page descends to the "basement" of DiCaprio's dreamworld. One concerned viewer even yelled out, "I WOULDN'T GO IN THERE!" at this point. But calling Inception "scary" is a stretch, especially compared to something like the thematically-similar Shutter Island, which is much closer to the gothic horror tradition. On the plus side of the ledger, we do have occasional "gotcha!" moments and jump scenes, so let's be generous and give it another 4.
Orgasm: I guess it depends on the individual viewer. The cast, by and large, are photogenic enough and generally are photographed in a flattering way. Maybe that's enough for you, if either Leonardo DiCaprio or Ellen Page is your "type." Only Cotillard's wardrobe could conceivably be called "arousing," and her dresses do reveal some pleasant sedimentary upthrusts. But for a movie about dreams and the subconscious, Inception is surprisingly unconcerned with sex. Come to think of it, where was the sex in this movie? 2 out of 10. We're backsliding.
So that leaves us with...
Think: A grand slam for Inception, right? An easy 10 out of 10? Not for me, it wasn't. I didn't particularly find the movie to be a consciousness-raising, mind-expanding experience. For one thing, it's -- let's not forget -- an action movie with shootouts, explosions, crashes, chases, etc. This is a demolition zone, not a zen garden. And much of the dialogue (and there's a bunch of it) serves as exposition rather than philosophy. Hell, The Matrix had more philosophy in it than Inception, as did Fight Club, to name two equally-flashy CGI enhanced action films. If there's food for thought during Inception, it's pondering the mysteries of Nolan's intricate plot -- a matryoshka doll with dreams nested within dreams -- not the mysteries of existence. Quick, name one profound idea in Inception. Name one insight into the human condition Nolan gives us. I can't really think of any. Inception is a neat trick, all right, but is it anything more than that? To me, it fits the Nolan pattern of being complicated and yet curiously shallow at the same time. I can think of any number of excellent, memorable visuals from the film but can't really remember any "great scenes," per se, i.e. individual moments you want to savor because they're so well-written and well-acted. Maybe a second viewing will reveal some great scenes to me, some moment of perfectly-realized drama within Inception. Until then, I can't give the film any more than a 6 out of 10 on the Think scale. |
| randall |
Posted - 08/03/2010 : 23:17:05
Any film clever enough to inspire discussion -- assuming it keeps its audience awake -- is good for the medium. I will now warn anyone downstream that this flick has been out long enough: SPOILERS LIE BOTH AHEAD AND BEHIND, as if you didn't know already... |
| Beanmimo |
Posted - 08/02/2010 : 04:04:50
quote:
Originally posted by Salopian
quote:
Originally posted by Beanmimo
Incidentally, Ariadne is...
And she span the thread that led Theseus out of the Labyrinth.
Yes, that too and maybe slightly more valid.
Either way she'd be the ringer... in the dream. |
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 08/02/2010 : 03:52:14
quote:
Originally posted by Beanmimo
Incidentally, Ariadne is...
And she span the thread that led Theseus out of the Labyrinth. |
| Beanmimo |
Posted - 08/02/2010 : 03:27:38
Well now that we are giving spoilers
Sludge, that was a fine compliment, thanks a million!!
A lovely open ending for either a once off or to spawn a sequel, whatever the market demands.
Here's the sequel I'd like to see spawned, the architecture of the entire movie is Adriadne's investigation of Leo's wifes death through his dreams so that in the sequel he wakes up at some point and then it becomes a bourne identity/strangedays/minority report/blade runner with dreams kind of a thing.
Incidentally, Ariadne is also a late ninteenth century short story about an artificially created woman so I didn't believe in her from the start.
Interestingly enough I saw Shutter Island on dvd the next day, it was funny seeing them so close together as you can imagine.
|
|
|
