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: Avatar (10/10) - 2009: A 3D Experience Like None Other, That Will Leave You Wanting To Have Your Own Avatar!

For the first time since I began writing this blog, I actually do not know where to start. 2009 and the "Noughties" could not have gone out with a bigger bang than with this movie. I have to mention that due to the sheer vast nature of this film I have never needed to use so many quotes and links to a film. Please click on these links for further information on where I obtained the text that is italicised.

Let me take you back to where I first heard about the movie. I was on Facebook (shock horror) a while back, when I decided to start chatting to an old Portuguese friend from my first year at uni. Joao was studying his masters in 3D Animation then (in 2006) and I was a 19 year old Advertising student. For those of you who don't know, Bournemouth University's media school is one of the top in the UK and 3D animators almost land jobs as soon as they graduate. Graduates have worked on Shrek, Australia (my German friend Johannes was the compositor for the Rising Sun) and numerous other productions. Joao mentioned about a film called Avatar that was being made and I should definitely see it. I duly noted it and put it in the back of my mind.

Two years later, when Avatar trailers began gracing our cinema screens, alarm bells began ringing, especially when the name James Cameron popped into the teaser campaign, so I contacted Joao and he mentioned that he was working on it (and after some research discovered he worked as a pipeline technical director). I was so proud of him and how far he'd gone considering in 2006, we were all in Cranborne House (Bournemouth University Halls), having a great time as one big family, and then once they all graduated, I was one of the few left in town.

When his twin brother is killed in battle, paraplegic Marine Jake Sully (Sam Worthington) is drafted to take his place in a mission on the distant world of Pandora, an Earth-like moon in a distant planetary solar system in the year 2154. Through the teachings of Dr. Grace Augustine (Sigourney Weaver) and Norm Spellman (Joel Moore), Sully is ordered to understand the culture of the native sapient and sentient race of humanoids indigenous to the planet. The humans, headed by Parker Selfridge (Giovanni Ribisi), are engaged in mining Pandora's reserves of a precious mineral, while the Na'vi resist the colonists' expansion, which threatens the continued existence of the Na'vi and the Pandoran ecosystem. The movie follows Sully's adaptation and integration into the Na'vi culture as an Avatar (a personalised remotely controlled, genetically engineered human-Na'vi hybrid bodies used by the film's human characters to interact with the natives), with the help of a native Na'vi, Neytiri (Zoe Saldaña).

Personally, I felt that the teaser trailers were just not effective in my opinion. Avatar basically screamed "AVERAGE" at me and I'm not sure if this was down to the editing, or the lack of impact it seemed to have in 2D. In a way though I'm glad that I went into the movie almost "blind" to the storyline as it had that much more of an impact on me. I have no idea why, but before I realised this was the film that Joao worked on, I thought the storyline was average, if not a bit boring. Some local Cypriots were contacting me saying that they didn't like it.


After viewing it, I don't think I've ever been so wrong in my entire life, and neither have the locals. I don't know what film the other locals were watching because the people I came out with were coming out stunned; literally stunned. I came out in the same perplexed state of mind, and bumped into a South African friend of mine who was going for the second or third time, bearing in mind that each ticket for this film is €12 in our local cinema and normal films at the inflated €7.50! This is possibly the only film that I would pay that kind of money for, let alone for a second time. As of December 2009, with an alleged budget of US $280,000,000 (estimated), Avatar is also one of the most expensive movies ever made.

What I find funny about this film is that everyone asks before and after people go to watch it if they are "going to watch it in 3D?"... Why did I find this funny? Well it was well known to those interested in the film industry that James Cameron was developing a brand new form of filming with this film, and probably the key reason why I "forced" myself to go watch it at all.

The following 2D trailer simply does not do this film justice, due to the fact that when you are in the cinema, you live and feel the world around you:

In December 2006, Cameron explained that the delay in producing the film since the 1990s had been to wait until the technology necessary to create his project was advanced enough. The director planned to create photo-realistic computer-generated characters by using motion-capture animation technology, on which he had been doing work for the past 14 months. Unlike previous motion-capture systems, where the digital environment is added after the actors' motions have been captured, Cameron's new virtual camera allows him to observe directly on a monitor how the actors' virtual counterparts interact with the movie's digital world in real time and adjust and direct the scenes just as if shooting live action; "It’s like a big, powerful game engine. If I want to fly through space, or change my perspective, I can. I can turn the whole scene into a living miniature and go through it on a 50 to 1 scale." (Link)

This movie combines the use of both live actors and digital technology to form a vast cast of virtual creatures who convey emotion as authentically as humans. The New York Times article goes on to state that this technology has been implemented on a smaller scale with, Golem in the Lord of the Rings (which, as a character, proved to Cameron that the technology had now progressed enough for him to develop this film) for example. However noone has

gone as far as “Avatar” to create an entirely photo-realistic world, complete with virtual characters, on the expected scale of the new film, Mr. Cameron said in a telephone interview. “This film is a true hybrid — a full live-action shoot, with CG characters in CG and live environments,” said Mr. Cameron, referring to computer-generated imagery (CGI for short). “Ideally, at the end of the of day, the audience has no idea which they’re looking at.” (link).

One of the key points made in this paragraph is about what is CGI and what is real as you sit there, watching the characters interact with the fauna, the backgrounds, the water, and so much more around this virtual world that you are constantly having to decide for yourself (often wrongly) what you think is real.


According to IMDB, the movie is 40% live action and 60% photo-realistic CGI (with motion capture technology being used for the CGI scenes). Such is the predicted demand for 3D, that Jim Gianopulos, a co-chairman of Fox Filmed Entertainment, said that he expected theaters to update their facilities to accommodate the 3D demands of the film. “This will launch an entire new way of seeing and exhibiting movies,” he said. (link).

Sam Worthington's performance was brilliant, especially acting as a paraplegic, when alternating between Na'vi and human, movements of which were both brilliant. He was believable as both characters and I believe that there is much more to come from this budding Australian actor.

Stephen Lang was an extremely realistic army general and was very convincing in his transition throughout the film, thus indicating brilliant casting direction from Cameron's production crew. Joel Moore was an interesting choice as I recognised him from Grandma's Boy, where he played possibly the worst character known to man, however in this film I believe that he surpassed my already low expectations of him.

Giovanni Ribisi was another interesting choice as he will infinitely be typecast in my mind as Ralph Mariano from My Name is Earl. His performance however was average due to the fact thta he did not come across as the ideal candidate for a power-hungry corporate owner bent on screwing over an entire population. Perhaps Cameron could have cast someone more suitable.

I admit, that throughout the film I was absolutely convinced that Neytiri was played by Penelope Cruz. She sounded almost identical and considering Zoe Saldaña was portrayed entirely in 3D, I felt that her performance (albeit in a 3D suit) was phenomenal. She has also acted as Anamaria in Pirates of the Carribean: The Curse of the Black Pearl, and Uhara in the 2009 film Star Trek.

According to IMDB, Sigourney Weaver supposedly plays a James Cameron persona for her character in this film. Sigourney stated in an interview, "I teased him because to me I'm playing Jim Cameron in the movie as this kind of brilliant, approach-driven, idealistic perfectionist. But that same somebody has a great heart underneath. So I have to say I was always kind of channeling him." One criticism of her performance was that she seemed constantly irritated as a human towards Worthington, and happy and smiling as an Avatar way before she accepted him as a viable candidate for the Avatar program (without spoiling the movie).

IMDB state that in order to to help the actors prepare for their roles, director James Cameron took the cast and crew to Hawaii, where they spent their days trekking through the forests and jungles and living like tribes (building campfires, eating fish, etc), in order to get a better sense of what it would be like to live and move around in the jungle on Pandora, since there would not be any actual jungle sets to aid and guide the actors and crew. Zoe Saldaña even dressed up as a warrior during these journeys, complete with an alien tail symbolic of the one her character has in the movie. These hikes were only done during the daytime, though; The cast and crew spent their nights at a Four Seasons hotel. (At least they didn't "rough it" completely then).

Composer James Horner scored the film as his third collaboration with Cameron after Aliens and Titanic. Horner recorded parts of the score with a small chorus singing in the alien language Na'vi in March 2008. The Na'vi language itself was created entirely from scratch by linguist Paul Frommer, who was hired by James Cameron to construct a language that was easily pronounceable by the actors, but lacking any resemblance or influence from any single human language. Around 500 words were created.


It can be noted that all of the machinery such as helicopters and robot bodies used in the film were developed by specialised product designers who then had their designs passed off by industry experts for authenticity and realism. However there is one thing that I do not understand...surely copyright is a major issue in film making, but years ago in 2007, I discovered the following video (which consequently took me years to find again). Does this machine not look extremely similar to the machinery in the image above? For me, viewing the movie version was merely an improved form of this original design below.



I try to challenge my readers by bringing them information from numerous sources, which often takes much longer than it seems, however I do hope that you enjoy this extra mile of data. If not, just tell me and I'll stop!

Some people complain that this film has a simple and predictable plot, however if you simply sit down in the cinema, take in what you are watching, bat away the odd mosquito you think is coming at you, and just watch without trying to predict the outcome, this movie will be one of the most phenomenal pieces of movie making you will come across for some time to come. Avatar's Gross Revenue worldwide is surpassing the $726,612,776 it has already made, so how can so many people argue its success?

I have rated this film a phenomenal 10/10 for this 161 minute beauty. I didn't want it to end and the thought of a second or third leaves me simply desperate for more. Who knows what else Cameron has up his sleeve, and who knows just how much this technology will improve in time for the sequels. All I know is, that I will be following this very closely and pre-ordering IMAX-3D tickets as soon as possible. Do not miss this movie while it is still in the cinemas... This ladies and gentlemen, is history in the making.

Review - Transformers: Revenge Of The Fallen (4/10) - 2009: Transforming From Bad To Worse

I remember sitting down on a Saturday morning throughout my childhood, waiting for my weekly dose of Transformers...and the cartoon soundtrack "more than meets the eye". I even remember purchasing my first Optimus Prime from Tip Top (a local toy store), including the Transformer collection where you connect five other Transformer toys together to produce a Super-Transformer. It fills me with a sense of nostalgia looking back, and when I first heard that Hollywood had decided to make a human version of the series, I was extremely sceptical at first and didn't want to watch it.

With the fond childhood recollections of this well-written (from what I remember at least) series, anything that could ruin these memories was a risk I was unwilling to take at first. However, after numerous positive appraisals from a lot of people I decided to watch the first one. I wont delve into complete details but I will admit that it was much better than I had previously expected. With this in mind, I was far less reluctant to watch the second movie. Of course it had its flaws but like the sequel I believe this was down to the actors selected.

Shia LaBeouf. Where do I start on this actor? I'm not being funny but every single film he's been in (as with Daniel Radcliffe in Harry Potter), he has the same look of bewilderment throughout the entire 150 minutes. I do not understand what Steven Spielberg sees in him as an actor, as there are far more capable of doing a better job. I don't like to slate individuals, because in the movie Disturbia, I thought his acting was realistic and suited the part.

This was all until I discovered that it wasn't really tailor-made acting for that film, but more his actual generic acting itself. Regardless, I refuse to critique him for Disturbia, or Holes as I feel he did a good job. Unlike Radcliffe however, Shia has not progressed as an actor his age might have hoped. At least Radcliffe moved from specked-bewildered-with-mouth-open acting to much-more-realistic-specked-bewildered-with-mouth-open acting.

Megan Fox is potentially the most beautiful actress to come on to the movie scene in a long time but even this will not deter me from describing how I see her acting abilities. I will take my hat off and admit that her seduction techniques worked on nearly every male in the cinema and were almost too realistic for most to stand up during the half-time interval, however hey may as well have cast Carmen Electra for her similar "acting" qualities.

Besides.. the day I see someone who looks like Shia LaBeouf walking around with a Megan Fox and being so cocky as to believe that she wouldn't leave him for a Ryan Reynolds lookalike...I'll eat my words. Is this just a sad state of affairs that Hollywood has resorted to in recent years? What happened to the James Dean's or Joaquin Phoenix's (in Gladiator) of the world where every movement and spoken word is more believable than skin-deep looks of beauty?

Similarly with the first movie, I felt the special effects and graphics were phenomenal and explosions worked in sync with the post-production graphics expertly. I don't like to be completely negative about movies from an overall aspect as I believe that credit will be due where it is deserved, and the special effects team saved this movie almost single-handedly.

The following trailer for Transformers: Revenge Of The Fallen provides a taste of things to come throughout the movie:



As the trailer gives away, the cheap (almost forced) humour is a massive no-no and fail in almost every situation except for perhaps one part of the entire film. I don't understand what Michael Bay/his writers were thinking when developing an Action-Comedy-Sci-Fi-combination within a single film. I am unsure if these writers wrote the roles specifically with the chosen actors in mind or not, because Shia LaBeouf tends to have the similar goofy lines in the majority of his recent movies.

Furthermore, the slightly racist connotations of the twin robots stereotypical urban black personalities has been overlooked by most people, yet it even made me chuckle at how a Blockbuster could write this into the script. Maybe I should take my own advice from a previous post in that I should watch these movies with a pinch of salt rather than the underlying meanings of things.

My flatmate accurately described how the movie was written before I watched it and I can agree with his quote: "You know when you're a kid and you write a story and you're locked in a massive battle where your team is losing... but suddenly, you forgot to tell people, that you own the Sword of Elzar with the capabilities of destroying everyone that would have been previously impossible, but is now easy because of the weapon I just told you about just then"... Well this is basically how the movie is laid out, so if you like an easy-to-watch, CGI-fuelled action-movie, with intense graphical scenes, Megan Fox (mmm) and (err) comedy thrown in, by all means go ahead...But seriously...robot heaven?!...come on.

It's not all bad for Paramount and Dreamworks however, as the movie did score the best opening day ever for a Wednesday release, with an estimated $60.6 million domestically (USA). Furthermore the movie has also earned an estimated $201.2 million, bettering Spiderman 2's $152.4 million to become the second biggest five-day domestic gross of all time, not to mention becoming China's biggest box office hit ever by earning 400 million Chinese yuan ($59 million).

I've rated this movie 4/10 based on the reasons mentioned. Don't take my word for it if you don't want to, but don't say I didn't warn you.