When you consider the fact that Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker was the first movie I’ve gone to the theaters to see since Star Wars: The Last Jedi, you might think that I’ve never been a fan of seeing movies at the theaters, other than Star Wars. Not true. In fact, going to the movies was something I did a lot growing up. I still have distinct memories of seeing films in the theater and with whom I saw them. More to the point, Inception was the last movie I saw at the theater more than 3 times, and I remember who I was with for each viewing. A fair amount has slowly changed in the past decade when it comes to the movie-going experience, however, and there hasn’t been a film I’ve seen in theaters since that would convince me to go have the modern experience more than once.

It’s not that I hate going to the movies. The process has arguably gotten better. With your ability to choose your seats on a map when you buy the tickets, you can make a better decision with your money on where and when you want to see the film of your choice. Plus, even the scuzziest theaters seem to have comfortable seats these days. But if you want to get there early enough to claim the seats without paying a Fandango fee, you just have to sit through a half-hour of commercials like you’re watching TV at home before even the previews begin to roll—which will take another forty minutes. Not to mention, most places make the sound system louder than it needs to be, as though you’re going to see a concert. Of course, it hasn’t gotten any cheaper either.

All that being said, I wouldn’t say that Inception is that special of a movie. It’s certainly special enough to get a three-paragraph intro to a review that I’ve never written for this website. However, it’s not so special that if it were to come out today, I’d be willing to back to the theaters to see it again. I’d rather watch it at home on my own television with my own speakers multiple times, which I certainly have. It’s not just that the movie-going experience has changed in the past 10 years, but I have as well. I’ve become more cynical (duh) and less excited about seeing things in the theater, content to skip any zeitgeist and just wait for it to come to my home. Seeing movies that way just doesn’t hold the appeal it once did. Inception, however, is as good as it ever was.

Pros

Unique take on the heist formula with the use of dreams
Strong cast of actors who work well together on-screen
Action sequences and effects still look impressive and exciting
One of Hanz Zimmer’s best scores
Slick stylish look with necessary attention to camera angles and editing

Cons

Ariadne is a walking exposition plot device that annoys more than serves her purpose, in the long run
Concepts like “limbo” and “riding the ‘kick’” are introduced too late, bogging down the script and making things more complicated
Moments where the digital effects occur stand out as having aged somewhat poorly
Some rather cheesy cliche lines in the script
Still requires a significant suspension of disbelief

Plot & Thoughts

Dreams are something that’s fun to explore in fiction because of how it allows people to experience wild and fantastic concepts or surreal visual adventures without compromising our sense of reality and disbelief, to some extent. There have been plenty of horror movies to utilize dreams to a small or significant extent over the years, but when it comes to the heist genre, there haven’t been many. Inception plays, not only with the surrealism of dreams but with the actual heist genre as well, because it’s not about stealing anything. It’s about planting something instead.

Cobb (Leonardo Dicaprio) is a man of various talents and skills that are particularly crafted to utilize a special futuristic device that allows people to control and navigate the dream space of a person. Doing so allows the mental explorers to tap into the inner subconscious of a person’s mind. Cobb is a master at it, but he’s also a damaged individual, which complicates things. He’s a fugitive from the law and he has to make his living as a mental thief, along with the help of his associate Arthur (Joseph Gordon-Levitt). After a botched attempt at stealing information from the mind of the powerful businessman, Saito (Ken Watanabe), the would-be victim turns around and recruits the two thieves to build a team capable of breaking into a person’s mind and planting an idea: Inception. Without much of a choice, Cobb and Arthur agree. A few other specialists are brought in, along with Ariadne (Ellen Page), a young college student who’s good at drawing mazes, I guess. She’s brought along because Cobb’s issues are getting in the way of being able to craft a unique dream that will allow the team to navigate the mind of a person safely. She’s also there to be the plot device of the movie that allows the characters to explain everything to the audience, and this movie has a lot of explaining to do. Inception is an example of a film that relies heavily on exposition to build its narrative, showing that exposition is not always a bad thing. That being said, even Inception doesn’t perfectly execute its use.

After wowing the audience with the initial action sequence involving the botched heist and the dream-within-a-dream sequences, it wastes little time getting to Ariadne so it can start explaining everything that is going on. Special devices originally designed for the military allow people to more lucidly control their dreams and reshape the world inside their own minds or inside the minds of others. This allows multiple people to share a dream together. Architects can build and craft the dream world like a maze, with exotic locations that act like fortresses holding secrets for people like Cobb to steal. There is a problem though. Everyone who is in the dream is injecting their own subconscious into the experience, which means that Cobb’s mental issues, like his antagonistic subconscious projection of his wife, Mol (Marian Cotiarde), are putting everyone at risk. And, after all, it wouldn’t be a heist movie if things went according to plan.

Inception is not perfect, by any means, but it’s a fun ride. There’s a lot of information to take in, just to accept how the world works. However, if you manage to suspend your disbelief and get over that initial hurdle of trying to grasp all the concepts at play, it’s still a lot of fun to watch for a number of reasons. The action sequences are all brilliantly shot with a lot of slow-motion cameras, as well as some rotating room shots. In the era of computer-generated action sequences, Christopher Nolan’s films stand out more due to his preference for practical effects. The digital moments in Inception are noticeable as already being somewhat outdated, but since they’re so few in comparison to the traditional effects that required a ton of effort, money, and talent to put on the screen, it’s not much of a drawback.

The biggest drawbacks, which I’d argue are still pretty minor, come in when the big heist hits a snag. Ariadne—who has already exhausted her use and welcome thanks to Ellen Page’s innate ability to play nagging, smug women who think they’re the smartest person in the room, despite asking all the questions—spends a significant portion of the rest of the film psychoanalyzing and lecturing Cobb, while still being clueless and asking questions. Aside from having someone present to serve as the translator to the audience and being the only woman among the sausage-fest of a heist team, Ariadne does not justify her presence for the rest of the film. As I said, she doesn’t really have a personality—or a likable one at least. She just follows Cobb around and asks questions, which could have been asked by anyone else. I think that had a little more effort has been made to make Ariadne a more interesting character, she wouldn’t be the nagging ball-and-chain she becomes by the end of the film.

The other main drawbacks I have with the film have to do with Inception’s script. There are a few scenes scattered throughout the film that have some cheesy lines that could have been cut entirely. For example, when someone asks about a room full of people hooked up to devices if they all just come here to sleep, a random character says, “No, they come here to wake up.” It’s a pointless line said by a pointless character that is too dramatically vague and stupid for a movie that is trying to be so smart. A minor gripe, but these sorts of lines are scattered around the script.

Arguably more of an issue is how late into the film we learn about the concept of ‘Limbo.’ At the halfway mark of the movie, when the heist has started and everything is in motion, the stakes have to be raised to make the heist have some real risk—they are all in a dream, after all. Unfortunately, in order to raise the stakes, they introduce the new concept of Limbo in a film that is already loaded with concepts. It starts to feel a little bloated with ideas by the end with the way that everything gets resolved. If this concept had been flushed out a bit more before the heist started, or at least defined at an earlier time, it would have been easier to accept when the stakes were raised. Again, if you can suspend your disbelief and just go along with all of it, you’ll have a good time.

TL;DR (Conclusion)

Other than the minor issues I have with it, ten years later, Inception is still a damn good movie. In fact, it’s probably my favorite movie that Christopher Nolan has done. It’s a unique take on the heist genre with some great action sequences and a superb score that makes for a wild ride that is still fun to watch again and again.

Dagon Dogs Posts