Inception

Title: Inception
Rating: 3.5/5
Genre: Action, Mystery, Sci- Fi, Thriller
Starring: Leonardo DiCaprio, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Ellen Page, Tom Hardy, Ken Watanabe, Cillian Murphy
Director: Christopher Nolan

I love a good mindfuck, and the very notion of a big budget film delivering on just that is unquestionably somewhat exciting to me, but Inception doesn't quite deliver. Don't get me wrong, its definitely a complex and detailed plot, but for the most part that's just it; complex. Any film that questions the fabrication of reality with any sort of serious intent is bound to become a little detailed but in terms of forcing the viewer to think, it more often than not feels like a lesson in memory, recalling the rules as you briefly piece together a certain action or event and put it into context. I know what comes next, the “what about the ending” arguments flying at my direction, what about this and that and the other. Well that's why I wrote this little explanation just for you, as there is certainly some ambiguity to it all, despite the answer being slap bang in your face all along.

» Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... «

I could waffle on about this and that, pick apart tiny details (like a lot seem to be doing) but with a little thought, everything bar the ending isn't too difficult to figure out; Saito and Cobb ended up in Limbo because they both died and that's what they said would happen, but since Cobb died on level one and Saito level three, Saito ages far more than Cobb; Cobb and Mal's limbo was shared between them (and later Ariadne), and not Saito, which is why he isn't there until later, etc, etc. If you really want better explanations, a quick google search trumps up with this and this which seem to brief everyone quite nicely. The crux of what people are questioning is “Is Cobb still dreaming,” and actually the answers pretty damn simple when you think about it.

I was expecting a twist and mid-way through I felt on top of things, I had it all figured out; the level we were told was reality was in fact simply Cobb's dream. It all made sense; his wife was right, she really WOULD wake up but of course he didn't believe her and wasn't exactly willing to try that for himself, it explained why he was the only one with a sub-conscious that interacted so strongly with him that it interfered with him without any provocation, and the only tiny little plot hole that bugged me was why he then needed to initially perform inception on her if it was in fact him who had forgotten that he was dreaming (perhaps she had forgotten on one layer and he had forgotten on the layer above it?). And as I thought about it, I remember the wedding band that was only shown only on that 'highest' layer which would certainly suggest that he was finally in reality, that the real inception was not the job at hand but a clever way to help him alleviate his feelings of guilt at the loss of his wife, but then why was his dead wife (and hence his sub-conscious) so fervently hunting him, trying to drag him back, even 'jumping across' into other peoples dreams to hunt him down, unless it was all a fabrication of Cobb's mind? And why were his children “not quite right” compared to his dream?

These are the two main possibilities on the table; either it was all a dream or it wasn't, and I suppose I have the slight benefit of making this 'leap of faith' early on the film, that it allowed me to process both possibilities from the beginning (whilst it seems most were trying to remember the “rules”), so when that final shot rolled around which caused everyone to start questioning everything once more, it drifted to the back of my mind somewhat as little more than an obvious way of screaming “start thinking a bit more.” But I was wrong, it's actually the most important piece to the puzzle and it has nothing to do with the top itself but rather his reaction to it. The spinning top is his totem; its his way of determining whether he's dreaming or not, and he walks away to see his children's faces. At no other point in the film does any character not stop to wait and see if it'll keep spinning or fall, and yet he walks away; he doesn't care if this is reality or not, he wants to be with his children in whatever manner he can and this decision to show him walking away, as well as denying us knowledge either way further reinforces the fact that we simply aren't meant to know. In fact, we aren't meant to care either way, because that's not the point.

Now, don't get me wrong I absolutely despise the kind of 'twists' without an answer; for my love of film and music I've spent too long dealing with the absolutes in mathematics for it not irk me and make me feel as though it was all a waste of time, but its not; there is actually a point here. The philosophical idea that our perception of reality is but a dream is one that has existed for thousands of years, with arguments on both sides; the mind over matter paradox: is reality a fabrication of our mind or is it simply interpreting reality? It's called Dualism and was one of Descartes famous works back in the 1500's. The point is to let go; he spent his life striving to spend his life with his children, to be able to return home in the real world and live there once more, and whether it truly is reality or but a dream becomes a non-issue when it comes to his desire. The moral is to accept whatever reality we are presented with and put aside whatever existential arguments might plague our thoughts and instead live for the moment, or any other Hollywood cliché you feel like placing in its stead. A lovesick and over-used idea? Sure, but undeniably presented here in a rather unique manner. Disappointing? Not at all. In fact, it's precisely the notion I would expect from Hollywood, making it perfectly on par with expectations.

With that issue dealt with, I move on to the issue of originality. After all, the notion of plugging yourself into an alternate reality capable of being manipulated by those aware of it's existence hasn't been tackled by a big film, and certainly not one starring Keanu Reaves released in 1999, which in itself wasn't beyond any shadow of a doubt suspiciously similar to another film about a Dark City, but I digress. My real annoyance came from before I saw the film and had only heard a brief synopsis which sounded eerily like the Satoshi Kon masterpiece “Paprika” released not too long ago; a thriller involving a character capable of invading your dreams and implanting thoughts and ideas, manipulating the fabric of the world around you at whim, and the enormous power it can bestow the bearer of this ability. Interestingly, this describes both films perfectly and there were more than the occasional point where Ellen Page's character in particular, Ariadne, felt like a carbon copy clone ripped straight from their drawing board, particularly in the way their relationship to the detective/Cobb unfolded and the eventual importance of that relationship.

So ok, we've concluded that it's not quite as much of a brain-tickler as some films and it's certainly nothing original, but the whole point of a review is to answer is it any good? And to my surprise it actually is. Despite its lengthy run time it never feels drawn out; if a scene isn't explaining the concepts involved then its kicking off with intelligent action. The concepts themselves I cannot fathom how they could be put more simplistically; in terms of getting across his theoretical dream-machine and its many intricacies he has done a superb job of providing the explanation required to lend impact later on in the film, and despite my derision at its rather obvious 'homage' to other more recent films, he explains the mechanics in far more depth than either that preceded it.

The action isn't so obvious as a man with a big gun but based entirely around the characters intelligence in what they can imagine; how they can subtly manipulate the world around them so as to not draw unwanted attention from the dreamers projections. The layers each serve to have their own plot drawn from multiple scenes intertwined with one another, and with the focus on intelligent puzzle solving; creating a "kick" (a method waking someone up by simulating the sense of falling) in Zero-G or the very clever manner of manipulating someone's thoughts into doing your own will, even the concept of the inception itself, it prevents it all from stagnating or – god forbid – turning into one of those Bourne films where the scenes are cut so frantically you can't tell who's hitting who with what and where and leaving you wondering whose winning.

The CGI is for the most part not particularly impressive, and in the exploration of dreams – particularly when reliant on the notion of their manipulation – it feels inherently constrained by the medium in what can be created. The “Paprika” comparison once more seems obligatory given the number of similar scenes, but whilst there it could use its animated style to literally go wild with its creations and force you to constantly question the rationale behind each sequence, here the more modest and minimalist implementation feels as though he saw it before hand and decided he couldn't compete, so instead decided not to try. No effect is used superfluously, it all seems to have purpose but for the most part is rather sporadic; there are certainly the apparent uses in the crumbling buildings amongst others, but it feels metaphoric, only used where absolutely necessary to make his point or further the story. If you're looking for big CGI fight scenes, then you're clearly barking up the wrong tree.

It's long but it never feels too long; the characters at times are underdeveloped for a drama yet more fleshed out than your average action film, and so fall happily into that 'thriller' category, allowing for it to build and maintain a momentum superbly, which any further elaboration would have been detrimental towards. The action is intelligent and geared towards puzzle-solving but ultimately not all that adrenaline-inducing, the plot complex but not unique and the CGI feels underwhelming compared to even the likes of “The Matrix.” I'm ultimately torn somewhat in this review; considering your average blockbuster it genuinely is quite impressive in its intricacies but fails in producing that sheer energy that others create, and when then when compared to more effective thought provoking films it all feels rather tame, like a mind-boggler 'lite.' Thought Inception was confusing? Go try Paprika on for size, for whilst certainly not bad Inception fails to live up to the heights of others in either category.