Review: Inception (9/10) - 2010: Mind-Bendingly Clever

From the moment I watched this film I wanted to write about it, so here is my very belated verdict. I must admit though, that I actually started writing this a few months ago but got work on a feature film, so am now picking up where I last left off. Christopher Nolan has been in the spotlight since his phenomenal comic-book adaptation of Batman. Every single comic-book film I've ever seen (aside from Kick-Ass, and the original Spiderman films...yes the 80's versions), have been terrible in my opinion. Lots of people have raved about comic book films, etc. but perhaps I just grew out of that phase of my life during my teens.

With this in mind, Christopher Nolan's Memento first caught my (and possibly the film-world's) attention through his thought-provoking "Memento" (2000), with its unique narrative playing from the ending to the beginning. Ten years have passed, and Nolan returns with an almost entirely unique script that he has secretly been working on for years, describing the film as a "contemporary sci-fi action thriller "set within the architecture of the mind."

Inception is one of those films that's fairly hard to describe without ruining the plot. As must be mentioned that this is the first and only review that will contain spoilers. With this in mind, if you have not watched the film, I strongly suggest that you rent/buy the film on DVD as it is definitely worth the investment.

Dom Cobb (Leonardo Di Caprio) is a highly trained thief, the best possibly professional in the dangerous art of extraction, stealing valuable secrets from deep within the subconscious during the dream state (The dream state being when the mind is at its most vulnerable). "Cobb's rare ability has made him a coveted player in this treacherous new world of corporate espionage, but it has also made him an international fugitive and cost him everything he has ever loved. Now Cobb is being offered a chance at redemption. One last job could give him his life back but only if he can accomplish the impossible-inception. Instead of the perfect heist, Cobb and his team of specialists [Arthur (Joseph Gordon-Levitt), Ariadne (Ellen Page), Eames (Tom Hardy), Saito (Ken Watanabe) and Yusuf (Dileep Rao)] have to pull off the reverse: their task is not to steal an idea but to plant one. If they succeed, it could be the perfect crime. But no amount of careful planning or expertise can prepare the team for the dangerous enemy that seems to predict their every move" (Warner Bro's).

Watch the following trailer to get a taster of the film:



I have to admit that the first time I watched the film, I sat there in awe. From a psychological point of view, it hit every single button in my brain. I absolutely loved it. It contained aspects of NLP (neuro-linguistic programming), a subconscious practice which has always fascinated me. The was so thought-provoking that when a friend mentioned that she hadn't seen it, I didn't hesitate to go back to watch it again...not to mention the fact that this 9 year old kid sat next to me, eating nearly every noisy sweet/snack known to man, throughout the first sitting.

Christopher Nolan first pitched the film to Warner Bros. after the completion of his third feature, Insomnia (2002/I), and was met with approval from the studio. However, it was not yet written at the time, and Nolan determined that rather than writing it as an assignment, it would be more suitable to his working style if he wrote it as a spec script and then presented it to the studio whenever it was completed. So he went off to write it, thinking it would take "a couple of months", but it ultimately took nearly eight years (IMDB).

With this film in particular, I will be giving my views on acting performances, as opposed to storyline. It can be mentioned that my high rating for this film come from the phenomenal story, effects and engrossing action that provides an experience to the viewer. From an acting point of view, I think that the only people who performed extremely well were Tom Hardy and Leonardo Di Caprio. Di Caprio needs no introduction or explanation in my opinion, as his roles have defined his capabilities as a versatile, realistic character in almost any scenario.

"The name of Leonardo DiCaprio's character is the same as that of one of the main characters in Christopher Nolan's first feature film, Following (1998). Further, both the characters have the same profession - they supposedly play thieves (IMDB)

From the moment I watched Tom Hardy's performance in Bronson (2008), I couldn't believe the person giving the behind-the-scenes interview was the same person who acted in the film. He is possibly the most versatile actor, and (you heard it here first), the next Johnny Depp. Hardy possesses this rare ability to look different in everything he acts in, not too dissimilar to Depp. He is definitely one to look out for in the coming years.

Another commendable mention can be said for Ken Watanebe, of whom I have been a fan of since The Last Samurai (2003). I believe that he played the role of both friend and foe extremely well. Michael Caine didn't seem to really require the need to stretch his acting as in Harry Brown (2009), but was convincing enough. I thought that whilst Marion Cotillard (who won the Best Actress Academy Award for her role as Édith Piaf in La Vie en Rose) is usually a good actress, I felt she couldn't really grasp the role completely. It just didn't seem like a believable relationship between her and Cobb (Di Caprio).

Unlike his performances in Brick (2005) and The Lookout (2007), I felt that Joseph Gordon-Lovett underperformed in this film. James Franco (Spiderman 3) was originally scripted for the role but was unable to play the role due to scheduling conflicts. In a way I think this was for the best, as although he is a great actor, Joseph was much better suited for this particular role. Joseph has been a great actor from an early age (3rd Rock From The Sun), but he seemed almost wooden/stiff and scripted when communicating his role in this film; which for me is a shame, and whether these were specific instructions from Nolan or not, I'm unsure if it was a positive move.

According to IMDB, "Evan Rachel Wood was Christopher Nolan's first choice to play Ariadne, but she turned it down. Nolan considered casting Emily Blunt, Rachel McAdams and Emma Roberts, but chose Ellen Page instead." I bet Wood is kicking her heels at missing out on this film now. Ever since I watched Hard Candy (2004), I believed that there was something special about Page. In that film she completely commanded the attention of the viewer with her sterling performance. I do believe however, that Inception, she merely came across as a wooden, moody teenager (not too dissimilar to her Juno role). I feel that her true strengths were not utilised to the best of her ability, which is quite a shame.

From an effects point of view, the zero-gravity scene still has me perplexed as to how they actually made it. It was too fluid for strings and no bubbles for water, therefore the only thing I can think is that they built a set in a plane and let it free-fall. I guess I will have to buy the special edition DVD with the "making-of" tied into a 2nd disc, in order to find out.

One of my favourite composers ever Hanz Zimmer provided some insight into his choice of music for the "slow, gloomy, blaring trombones in the main theme of the film score [which] are actually based on an extremely slowed down version of the fast, high pitched trumpets in the beginning of the Édith Piaf song "Non, je ne regrette rien," which is used as a plot device in the film. Furthermore, when music is heard by someone who is currently within a dream, the music is perceived as slowed down. Thus, the main theme of the film score is almost exactly what the beginning of "Non, je ne regrette rien" would sound like to a dreamer. This thematic device is brought to its logical conclusion when the song plays at the end of the credits, signaling that the audience is about to 'wake up' from the film."

Story-wise (now I'm sure this will cause some debate), the ending was flawed because if you thought about it, it means he was either asleep from the beginning, or he was awake and Christopher Nolan just wanted to piss us off and falsely confuse us. Some say if u stay to the end of the credits, you actually hear the pin drop, but I can't confirm this as I have not checked this out personally.

In any case, the only thing I thought was lazy was the snow scene as it was an exact replica of a James Bond film (with Pierce Brosnan). Furthermore, throughout the film, the characters continuously explained and plugged the importance of mazes and confusing the inner brain. Instead, all they did was go through a GINORMOUS VENT outside this supposed maze. What could have been more effective is if they entered this so-called maze, show how complex it was, then when it became impossible to breach due to time constraints, would use/find a vent above them that would bi-pass this maze. Without this, I believe that the breaking-in depicted in this film was somehow a little too easy.

Anyway, despite these very, very minor faults, I've rated this brilliant 148 Minute film 9/10. Christopher Nolan really did bring something special to our screens. It was thought-provoking, engaging, imaginative and incorporated all walks of psychology that I find so interesting. I can't remember a film that had me sat almost upright throughout, trying to figure out what level of dream each of the sequences represented and how they correlated with the original dream level. With this in mind, I wish more films were as engaging as I find it a fairly untapped form of filmmaking.

Oh and for those interested, I came across this extended movie ending for those who wish to find out what really happens!



One more very interesting fact about this film is that "According to Cinematographer Wally Pfister, Warner Brothers executives approached Christopher Nolan about making the film in 3D, but he refused the idea, claiming "it will distract the storytelling experience of Inception" (IMDB). What are you thoughts on this? Have great week.

Review: Blindness (3/10) - 2009: Blind (Staff) Leading The Blind (Cast)?

When I visited my local DVD store, after browsing the shelves of the movies I've already watched, deciding what I could blindly pick (no pun intended), this was when this movie cover really caught my eye. I read the synopsis on the back, and the concept was very different to anything I'd come across in a long while.

The idea of a "White Sickness" where an airborne virus renders people blind without any visible signs of infection was extremely intriguing to me. Directed by Fernando Meirelles (The Constant Gardener, City of God), inspired by José Saramago's novel, Blindness takes the viewer on a 121 minute deteriorating process of an infection, not dissimilar to 24 Days Later.

I have always thought Julianne Moore (Hannibal, Evolution) was a good actress and adding Danny Glover (Lethal Weapon) and Mark Ruffalo (Zodiac) was an interesting choice of cast for this seemingly low-budget movie. Ironically scenes with empty streets and damaged property indicate that there was a higher budget than I originally expected, however this did not come across in the final production of the movie in my opinion.

The story of the movie as indicated begin with an individual suddenly becoming blind whilst driving home. This sickness spreads to the point of isolating the sick from the healthy in a hospital's blind ward, guarded by soldiers. An eye-doctor (Ruffalo) contracts the disease whilst treating the original victim, whilst his wife (Moore) is seemingly unaffected by the sickness. This renders her the only sighted person in the blind ward after refusing to leave her husband's side in his time of need, and feigning illness to allow her into the quarantined area. The storyline follows the individuals' plight in increasingly squalid conditions within the ward, with limited supplies and support on the way.

The following trailer shows the potential this movie has to offer:



Whilst Blindness was selected as the opening film at the 2008 Cannes Film Festival, this does not automatically safeguard it from the numerous flaws and inaccuracies that the film exhibits. IMDB state that in order to prepare for acting in the film, all of the actors, crew and extras participated in so-called "blind camps". In these camps, participants were blindfolded, taken to an unknown location and left in the middle of the street to find their way around.

It can be noted that there was always someone on-hand to guide them, yet almost always, Director Fernando Meirelles claims that someone would always breakdown and give up. As with the training, the film lacks any realism when it comes to acting blind. Of course it is a hard skill, but there are always ways to make it more realistic, including blacked-out lenses for example.

I had high hopes for this movie and I felt continuously let down by the camera angles, poor musical composition and quality, and the way the movie seemed to drag on, rather than build up anticipation to an emphatic climax. Unrealistic scenarios that include an unsupervised blind ward are one of the many moments which suspend this movie from really working well, and I feel that in another world, developed by a different company, with superior cast, this film could have been a major blockbuster. This is the reason for the low 3/10 score I've provided it.

The numerous continuation errors and seemingly endless patience from Moore, when she could simply take charge of the entire situations she faced remaining as the only sighted person was almost petty. City of God was fantastic, but I feel that Fernando Meirelles did not reproduce the quality found in that production, with this movie. I find it increasingly frustrating that I cannot divulge into exact examples, which could ruin the movie for those who would like to see it, however I'd like to offer my view that I really do suggest that people give this movie a go despite what I've said.

The reason for this is that it is a completely new concept, it is exciting and unpredictable at times, and if you put aside your differences with the acting and the unrealistic scenarios mentioned, (among many others) it can be an enjoyable experience. I think for a film like this, it may be down to the individual, but in my opinion it was a poorer-executed 24 Days Later.