Joseph Gordon-Levitt in Christopher Nolan's Inception. [Photo: Warner Bros.] Inception

Inception

by Nick Schager on July 14, 2010   Jump to Comments (7) or Add Your Own


Inception is Instruction Manual Cinema, a film that spends so much time explaining—and explaining, and explaining—the rules of its narrative conceit that it fails to either emotionally engage or, except in a few notable spots, viscerally thrill. Working from a canvas at once larger than The Dark Knight and yet markedly reminiscent of it (not to mention countless other celluloid sagas), Christopher Nolan's would-be epic is a work of sometimes stunning imagery but only affected heart, a pseudo-heist film that borrows liberally from all corners of the cinematic world (The Matrix, eXistenZ, Last Year at Marienbad, the canons of David Lynch and Michael Mann) in service of a tale that's as hollow as its reality-bending Rubik's Cube ruses are intricate.

Focusing on a secret agent man named Cobb (Leonardo DiCaprio), who enters people's dreams to steal vital pieces of well-kept information, Nolan's sci-fi latest is enraptured by the sense of falling down the rabbit hole, not simply via its dreams-within-dreams-within-dreams centerpieces, but through the sheer wealth of information it vomits up at every turn. Head-spinning exposition takes the place of wonder throughout, leaving only the transient rush of particularly vivid visuals and a faint whiff of a better film that could have been.

Nolan wastes no time with setup, immediately thrusting viewers into a perplexing scene in which Cobb washes up on a sunny shore, sees a vision of two young children playing in a grassy yard, and then visits an elderly Japanese man whom he seems to know. This encounter takes place in a gorgeously decorated chamber with wall panels and hanging lamps, but lingering to admire the sights isn't Inception's strong suit, and soon the film is off into other apparent realities, with chitchat filling in the gaps at breakneck speed. Turns out, Cobb is trying to pilfer valuable knowledge from corporate bigwig Saito (Ken Watanabe) as a test to see if he's up for a larger task—one that involves not taking info from someone's mind (a process called "extraction"), but rather, inserting a new idea (dubbed "inception") in the noggin of energy magnate Maurice Fischer's (Pete Postlethwaite) only heir, Robert (Cillian Murphy). For mysterious reasons related to his dead wife, Mal (Marion Cotillard), who has a penchant for showing up unannounced in dreams and thwarting Cobb's robberies, Cobb isn't instantly interested in this dangerous, difficult gig. Nonetheless, Saito's promise that performing the job will mean Cobb can finally return home to the U.S.—where his kids are, and from which he's been exiled for enigmatic legal reasons—quickly seals the deal.

From there, we're treated to a lengthy middle section in which Cobb assembles his team and concocts his ruse, a standard heist-film structure that quickly proves most notable for the myriad rules governing dream infiltration, and for the wholesale lack of importance of said regulations. Phony tech, philosophical, and psychological terminology abounds but it's all of little concern except as a means of generating confusion, which in turn distracts attention from the inconsequentiality of the heist itself. Inception's interest in Robert's daddy issues only extends to the point that those hang-ups allow for inordinate talk about how one might plant the seed of an idea in a man's mind and then allow it to flower naturally so that it seems homegrown. It's a tantalizing notion, or at least would be if Nolan imbued this scheme with some sort of standalone significance. Instead, the film courts engagement with Cobb's inception plan only through the operation of its mechanisms, which are at once migraine-inducing complicated (Cobb aims to plunge through layers and layers of dreams, and escape through wakeup signals known as "kicks") and yet—as with the actual defibrillator-ish contraptions used to enter dreams—embarrassingly undeveloped.

Whereas David Lynch's Mulholland Drive expresses every nuance of its protagonist's fractured psyche through suggestive aesthetics and plotting, Nolan merely relies on blather about the guidelines of plumbing the subconscious. And, like Martin Scorsese's Shutter Island (DiCaprio's previous say-don't-show head game), he compensates for this situation by indulging in baroque imagery, though as is his penchant, Nolan's latest doesn't radiate hothouse need and passion through standout compositions, but rather, cool, icy menace. The director's favored aerial shots of a twinkling nocturnal metropolis lend the action a chilly beauty, and a phenomenal extended bit in which Cobb's accomplice (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) battles enemies in zero-gravity hotel corridors potently captures the dizzying down-is-up nature of the mind-bending material. Yet too often, Inception's signature moments seem derivative of others (a trippy bedroom set recalls, without thematic warrant, 2001), as well as his own prior work, from a train barreling through a crowded city street (shades of The Dark Knight's underground semi chase) to a random arctic mission that's equal parts Batman Begins and James Bond. Such duplication furthers the impression that Nolan has constructed his thriller in only certain dimensions, favoring some elements at the expense of others and figuring that 100-mph pacing will obscure the proceedings' familiarity and thinness.

Still, regardless of Hans Zimmer's grating loud-louder-loudest tonal score, at least the film's construction has a sleek, shiny elegance, something that can't be said of the script's nonexistent characterizations. With Gordon-Levitt as Sidekick, Bronson's Tom Hardy as Second-Banana, and Ellen Page as Gifted Newbie, Inception flaunts its disinterest in human beings, such that when Sidekick cons Gifted Newbie into a kiss, the moment amazes because it's the first glimmer of personality from either. Cobb, on the other hand, boasts identifiable traits and dilemmas, and yet he too is constantly positioned as a stick figure knowable only via what he tells us about himself. Cobb's tortured feelings about Mal, whom he's trapped in the basement of his brain out of guilt over her death, are intended to be the film's emotional crux. But as every word out of DiCaprio's mouth has only a functional purpose, there's no heat to this central thwarted romance-across-realities, only ominous totems (spinning tops, chess pieces, pinwheels) and a few sumptuous visions, such as a shot from Cobb's POV as he rises above Mal in an elevator. Admittedly, Nolan is less after heartrending surrealism a la Mulholland Drive than stylized puzzle-box intrigue. However, his inability to enter into his characters—a glaring irony given his fascination with probing the landscape of the mind—is a fatal flaw here, leaving one to marvel only at the often-striking scenery.

Inception's third act features four separate, intertwined narratives that showcase the director's skill at parallel editing as well as his knack for staging sequences of escalating tension and suspense. Alas, his action choreography has regressed since the admittedly middling level of The Dark Knight, thereby sapping an armed chase through Parisian streets and the climactic arctic siege of any entrancing lucidity that might have made up for the general who-cares nature of these moments. Even so, formal shortcomings are ultimately less problematic than simply a dearth of meaningful ideas. Despite the characters' endless jibber-jabber, Nolan crucially never delineates—in terms of importance, or impact—between waking and slumbering thoughts and feelings, thereby undercutting his entire premise. And his story's final insights are the stuff of torpid platitudes: the necessity of distinguishing imagination from reality, the vital value of letting go, and the cinema's role as a dream factory. "An idea is like a virus," opines Cobb on multiple occasions, one with the power to grow like a cancer in unpredictable, dangerous ways. It's a metaphor that quite nicely fits Inception itself, an ambitious, initially absorbing film that mutates into something unpleasantly unwieldy.


  • Director(s): Christopher Nolan
  • Screenplay: Christopher Nolan
  • Cast: Leonardo DiCaprio, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Ellen Page, Tom Hardy, Ken Watanabe, Dileep Rao, Cillian Murphy, Tom Berenger, Marion Cotillard, Pete Postlethwaite, Michael Caine
  • Distributor: Warner Bros.
  • Runtime: 148 min.
  • Rating: PG-13
  • Year: 2010



Comments

jameschrissy on July 18, 2010, 10:33 PM

Just saw Inception and it blew my mind. It was the most absorbing movie I've ever seen. The explanation was for us, the viewers, to question our own reality, hence it was one of the layers. Granted the explanation section was a bit clumsy, but in the end necessary to add to the experience of the movie. Also what I saw in the movie was an answer or a philosophy on what happens when we die, that our infinite subconscious takes over. It was a beautiful movie.

My feelings reflect those of the people who enter the surreal dimension of shared dreams.

wabdatl on July 19, 2010, 07:14 AM

After seeing Inception I was bothered by exactly what Schager wrote about, the endless talking and explaining, but also blown away, by the genius of the film recognized by the L.A. Times review. So I both hated it and loved it; and wanted to discuss it endlessly with my friends who I saw the movie with, the waiter/actor who served us our dinner, and now you dear reader, and by you I mean me. Because the problem is the movie is deep. The film itself, the art ties in, mythology, psychology versus psychiatry, dreams themselves, ones relationship to ones father, things we regret, guilt, the list goes on. No matter how you cut it film-wise there is grist for the mind to work through. And I have to take exception with Mr. Schager on one important plot point when he writes about the protaginist that, "he's been exiled for enigmatic legal reasons", that is not true factualy as the reason is explained clearly and with great force. But there is so much going on in the movie anyone could be forgiven for missing it. And so my reaction to the movie is to want to see it again because I am sure I too missed a lot. And I think you will agree that any movie that makes you want to see it again is a successful movie at least in business terms.

jameschrissy on July 19, 2010, 10:18 AM

I could see the wheels turning in the director's head at those clumsy and remedial points, as if he were wondering whether it was necessary to leave the talky bits in or not. You could see the seams there. But at the same time, the protagonist conducting the teaching session to the new architect was, in retrospect, is a reinforcement of his totem to convince himself over and over of the concreteness of his world.

I thought the idea of inception itself and the discussion of its possibilities between Cobb and Eames, about getting to the lowest common denominator of emotions and ideas. The salience of an idea depends on its simplicity. This comparison comes as a direct result of watching an episode of Mad Men in close proximity to Inception, but that show also addresses these things in a much more direct way, the way advertisers access our subconscious to plant emotions, needs and ideas. I guess I'm probably just coming to Nolan's purpose in a roundabout way.

pomophobe on July 25, 2010, 02:22 PM

Sometimes you write stupid cunty reviews...This is one of those times.

thefjk on August 15, 2010, 10:11 AM

Think about this for a second...that van took years to fall into the water, years I tell you!

Bamshad on August 23, 2010, 05:30 AM

This was one craptastic movie. I've never seen dreams so boring, it almost put me to sleep.

stu2630 on September 12, 2010, 07:43 AM

I'm with Bamshad—this was tedious nonsense and I did find myself dozing a couple of times. I love good sci-fi but it has to make sense. Utter drivel!

Add Your Own

Login to post comment

or Create an Account



Giveaway

Malcolm X
Newsletter