James Absolon explains how this Pope-themed film, despite its risky premise, works
Alex Pollard reviews Hollywood's biopic of the controversial Margaret Thatcher
Christopher Nolan’s Inception is a film under a lot of pressure: it cost $160 million to make, with another $100 million spent on advertising, a remarkably high sum for such an original production. The fact that Nolan has been allowed to make it is a testament to the stunning success of The Dark Knight, a film which raised the bar ridiculously high. Can he top it with what is arguably the most eagerly awaited blockbuster of the year (for all but Twi-hards and Tron fanatics)?
Inception follows the last job of Dom Cobb (Leonardo DiCaprio), a corporate spy who steals information from within his subject’s dreams; however, when given an offer he cannot refuse, he finds he must implant an idea instead of stealing it. This is infinitely more than a “one last heist” movie with added dreams and gravity-defying stunts. Nolan’s brilliant script and direction create, as the best dreams do, a complex labyrinth, in which it becomes nearly impossible to predict the outcome – or even the next shift in the story. As well as its relatively unsurprising considerations of the nature of reality, the film also introduces numerous other themes, such as guilt, regret and death, crafting what has to be the most intelligent blockbuster since Alex Proyas’s criminally underrated Dark City. However, unlike that film, Inception can also be taken less seriously, containing enough big blasts and gunfire to keep even the most causal of moviegoers enthralled.
But all this would mean nothing if Nolan had not centred his film firmly on its characters. Portrayed by a near perfect cast, they brilliantly flesh out the universe, ensuring our emotional connection to the film. DiCaprio gives the type of performance which, were it not in a summer blockbuster, might well put him in line for the Academy Award he richly deserves. Of the rest of the cast, Ellen Page is particularly noteworthy, managing to hold her own opposite DiCaprio’s lead and once again marking herself out as one of the finest young actresses in film today. Marion Cotillard also adds a brilliantly dark presence as Cobb’s lost wife, providing a real sense of menace and loss throughout.
On a technical level the film also shines, using almost every trick in the book to devise an astonishing spectacle. Dream cities are seamlessly constructed, featuring seemingly realistic Daliesque architecture, alongside enormous explosions and gravity-defying effects. However, despite the undoubted quality of said effects, they are the one aspect of the film which feels a little unimaginative, being heavily reminiscent of The Matrix and even more so of Dark City. However, this is minor flaw in what is ultimately a visually stunning experience that does have many original elements.
Inception will almost certainly be one of the year’s biggest hits, and it may possibly be the best release of the year so far. Succeeding on multiple levels, it should appeal to a wide variety of audiences, from those interested merely in gunfights and explosions, to those looking for something more. Nolan has created perhaps the rarest of films: an intelligent and deeply meaningful blockbuster that will take your breath away.
I was blown away by how good the cast was, every part was acted amazingly. The relationship between Cobb and his wife was perfect.
And as for the effects - Nolan can give 3D a big middle finger 
Avatar uses visuals to enthrall its audience, with Inception, the story is so compelling that you are transfixed only on what is happening due to the complex plot. If this doesn't get the prestige Avatar got, then something is seriously wrong.
But it won't, because Avatar was just a tech demo for 3D. The movie and TV industry (by which I mean manufacturers, not programme-makers) hyped it massively as a demonstration of how "Omg-awesome-I-want-that-in-my-living-room" 3D could be. Now it seems every movie has to have a 3D aspect, even if it's just cutting out the characters from the background. They want 3D. The public is indifferent towards the idea...
I'd like to think people will learn to distinguish between good 3D like Avatar, where the film is made with it in mind from the ground up, and 3D which is shoved in after filming to add extra box office revenue. But I know that won't happen...
At least filmmakers like Nolan are around who can make films with amazing visuals and great plots/characters, which Avatar can't boast to have done.
At least Nolan didn't fall for the 3D trick that all other producers seem to be pushing for. Ironic as it is that the immersion of 3D into Inception interspersed with the flexibility of the dream world would be just as fitting. Unfortunately Cieran, people would rather sit through a horrid movie just for the fact that it is in "3D", the general public are too simple minded to watch an engaging indie film or foreign language picture just because they'd choose not to think and instead only appreciate the film for its visual qualities rather than its story. I guess any production company after seeing how much profit Avatar gained would aspire to convert their films to 3D.
You must log in to submit a comment.
Report