I once had a dream where I was being chased. I don’t recall who pursued me or why, but I do recall outmaneuvering them. No matter how they tried to ambush me, I was always one step ahead. The dream drifted from my memory years ago, yet the chase and its concurring exhilaration returned midway through Christopher Nolan’s Inception. His latest epic largely takes place in a dream world, one where kinetic action coincides with psychological warfare, and the stakes are more thoughtful than they initially seem. The exploration of his premise harkens back to the most brainy sci-fi writers, so there are rich ideas amidst breathtaking combat. The power of dreams is so central to the movie that you, too, may find yourself recalling your most vivid subconscious journeys. Once again, Nolan and his A-list cast outdo themselves.
Cobb (Leonardo DiCaprio) is an Extractor who has the ability to invade dreams. Arthur (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) is the Point-man, whose primary job is background intelligence. Businessman Seito (Ken Watanabe) hires Cobb and Arthur for a sinister mission of corporate espionage: they must perform “inception,” or the undetected introduction of an idea, on Fischer (Cillian Murphy), Seito’s snoozing business rival. In addition to a reward, Seito will give Cobb legal entry into the United States (the reason for Cobb’s fugitive status is one of the more rewarding secrets). Cobb begins to recruit others. Earnes (Tom Hardy) is the Forger who specializes in disguises, Ariadne (Ellen Page) is the Architect who constructs impenetrable worlds, and Yusuf (Dileep Rao) is the Chemist who ensures dreams last as long as they must. When Cobb or others die in the dream world, they typically regain consciousness instantly. Inception requires heavier sedation, and now dream-death has more dire consequences. Complicating matters is Cobb's wife Mal (Marion Cotillard), who has tragic motivations. With Seito in tow, the team begins the mission, but Fischer trained for such an invasion, so dangerous subconscious forces disrupt each layer of subterfuge.

Nolan’s smartest choice is to forego any explanation of the dream-invasion device. It has no name, nor does it provide a sense of how it works. Cobb notes, “Dreams feel real while we're in them,” and his remark is for Ariadne as well as the audience. By accepting the immediacy of the dream world, absorbing experience quickly follows. The mission is Inception’s centerpiece – I was too enthralled to check its precise length, but it easily lasts for ninety minutes. During that time, Nolan flushes out the ideas introduced by the intriguing opening act, and the plot nearly becomes impenetrable. Characters exist on planes with dizzying levels of dependence and responsibility, and the suspense/complexity they generate is agonizing. Emotions are the guide through the dreams-within-dreams, and while the audience will find it difficult to recount a character’s specific goal, they will grasp its necessity.
Strong performances can be lost amidst action and a high-concept premise, but the cast adds gravity to the implausible situation. DiCaprio delivers another slow-burn performance – he conveys urgency and near-panic with a determined gaze and a razor-sharp delivery. When Cobb does raise his voice (as in the trailer), his ulterior motive suggests a penetrating intelligence. A petite frame and large eyes make Page’s Ariadne a good foil for Cobb. Few grasp the depth of her intuition, and her considerable empathy clarifies the murky morals of the team’s mission. Hardy and Gordon-Levitt are another well-suited pair. Compact and lithe, Arthur is the consummate professional of the group. The movie’s best action scene takes place in a hallway, and Gordon-Levitt maintains a steely poise as he must deal with improbable complications (I assume Nolan hired a physicist as part of his effects team). Hardy, on the other hand, delivers his lines with detached bemusement – he has the compact body of a boxer, an asset during his chaotic snowbound firefight. Wantabe and Murphy have trickier roles; as the financier and mark, respectively, they must strike an appropriate balance between sympathy and scorn. Nolan’s script eases such a balance, so the reliable actors are always on the cusp of becoming likable.

When a top director has a considerable budget for his original screenplay, there is always cause for excitement. Inception is Nolan’s first original since Following, and the growth since his modest debut is staggering. Even without the suspense and labyrinthine plotting, his movie is a visual wonder. Gravity-defying fight scenes are only a small piece – his effects are sleek and majestic, yet integrate seamlessly with the dream-world. This is never more apparent than when dreams literally collapse, for their beautiful destruction signals multiple levels of danger. Nolan filmed on six different countries, and the breadth of locations is a highlight, particularly when we enter Cobb’s otherworldly subconscious. Of all the characters, Cotillard’s Mal best personifies this connection between chaotic dreams and their real-world implications. Her existence is perplexing in a manner similar to Solaris, and the paradox she raises inspires ironic feelings of regret.
Superbly mounted and executed, Inception is one hell of a thriller, and one of the year’s best films. It is a reminder of why I love the movies, for it’s an arresting experience that provokes an intense reaction. Perhaps the physical experience of watching Inception is the best way to describe its quality, for a mere summary might make you think I’m exaggerating. In awe of its craft, I leaned forward for most of its running time. Its emotional climax caused the hair on the back of my neck to stand, and its captivating action left me slack-jawed with awe. By its end, Cobb’s complex feelings become important. His journey is cathartic, and offers a cerebral exploration of the mind’s mysteries. Note-perfect endings are hallmarks of Nolan’s work. Inception is no different, but make sure you watch closely – the object in focus may tell us one thing, but a character’s thoughts toward it are far more revelatory.
Previously in Another Movie Guy?:
- 9/16: Another Movie Guy?: "The Interrupters."
- 9/16: Another Movie Guy?: "Straw Dogs."
- 8/31: Another Movie Guy?: "The Debt."
- 8/26: Another Movie Guy?: "Pianomania."
- 8/26: Another Movie Guy?: "Brighton Rock."
- 8/19: Another Movie Guy?: "The Names of Love."
- 8/19: Another Movie Guy?: "Attack the Block."
- 8/12: Another Movie Guy?: "The Guard."
- 8/12: Another Movie Guy?: "30 Minutes or Less."
- 8/5: Another Movie Guy?: "The Devil's Double."
God loves a cheerful giver.
LEOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Yeah, I can't think of the last time I stared in awe at a movie. This was stunning.
yeah, this was quite something. it seems so rare these days to watch that much imagination and creativity happen on the movie screen. that, and it's nice to see a movie treat its audience as something more than a bunch of stupids with ADD
great review. I'm thinking about putting on a pair of diapers and going to see it on IMAX for the second time around.
I'll say this, too. I've never really appreciated film as an honest medium for telling stories until this film. Watching the images, simultaneity, imagination, etc. unfold in front of me made me think that there is no other medium through which you could display this. It could only be a movie.
Plus it didn't use a bunch of lame cgi and shit. Hooray!
This is a really shody piece of writing.
Read this and see how your review leaves something to be desired:
http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100714/REVIEWS/100719997
No I am not holding you to this standard, but you do not approach it at all. Also, some one in the editing staff should have read this out loud, because there are obvious errors.
(stop using parenthesis you dolt)
GRAAAA, BAGGA BAGGA BOO DOO DUM DAGGGA!!! BLEEP BLOP BORP BUNGA BUNGA DOO DE DUM PARENTHESIS!
Opinions are fun!!
Great film. Great review. ("NIce Job" is a f--king douche)
158752 @Nice job on a crap review: For one who has no idea how to use a comma in a sentence (after "no," and never in front of "because") you have the nerve to speak of syle. It's "shoddy," you dolt!
158752 @Nice job on a crap review: Parentheses, not parenthesis.
Someone, not some one.
Great review, Alan! I can't wait to see it.
@Nice job on a crap review: As long as we are being dicks, the period goes after the parentheses, asshole ( * ).
and why do you use parentheses to decry the use of parentheses? unless you are indicating that your entire thought is in fact satire! good one, nice job. i get your jokes. glad you like alan's review so much!
This is a fine review. However, I disagree completely. This is the worst movie I've seen since 21 Grams. Many film critics including NYT and NPR agree with me (who reads Roger Ebert?). The film makes a weak attempt at philosophy and the visuals leave something to be desired. It's nothing new. READ my entire honest opinion here... http://newyorkisboring.com/film-tv/inception-waking-up-from-a-bad-dream/
158752 @Nice job on a crap review: There is a special circle in hell for nit-picky, friendless, little pieces of shit like you sir. I hope that your children are dyslexic.
You're wrong; David Edelstein is right: http://nymag.com/movies/reviews/67155/
Good review.
@Nice job on a crap review: You must be an old woman to think Roger Ebert's review is great. In fact, I found it as boring as I found Inception. I thought Ebert was dead but oh well..I guess he is alive and writing. He thinks Inception is original and lacks plot holes? really?