Inception Forum

• Add

Browsing the user reviews, all 5 stars, I'm amazed nobody else has a negative word to say on this movie.  Please, anyone else, tell me I'm not crazy by disliking this.

What didn't you like about it?

You'll definitely be in the minority here.  All my friends who have seen it loved it, I thought it was great.  Didn't like a few things but nothing major enough to warrant it being below anything but great.

At some point, Nolan should've cut some exposition.  Ellen Page's character was basically a Wikipedia for Nolan's Dream World.  The subplot involving Leo and his wife was irritatingly cryptic (very similar to Shutter Island) and dour.  I don't think Leo smiled once in this movie, he's either speaking exposition or going into intense Shutter Island mode with visions of his wife, all of which just sucked away the film's considerable momentum generated by a great first half.  The second half though, is utterly incomprehensible.  It's not that I couldn't understand what's a dream and the rules for each "dream layer" upon 
repeat viewings, but I don't care.  When he keeps piling on crazy shit and exceptions to rules laid down earlier, then at some point I just say, "fuck it, I don't care anymore".   The Matrix is a much better take on the genre.

I thought it was good but definitely a film of two halves with the opening section just being a huge exposition dump while the second half is absolutely amazing. I really, really enjoyed it but I don't know how it will hold up on multiple viewings

I did find it weird that Ellen Page, being the new person, suddenly totally understands the importance of Marion Cotillard's character, who was in turn the weakest part of the movie. And I actually found the story to be very straightforward, almost to a fault ( I was expecting a little more mindfucking, I guess).

It had some story flaws, but I liked it.

I think a lot of people decided they liked it before they saw it.

I didn't much care for it. I'm working on my review right now, I'll let you know when I finish. But yeah, one of the major problems I had with it was the heavy use of exposition - too much telling rather than showing - however, that problem is not my largest. The film does not only have the same thematic inconsistency that is found in a film like The Dark Knight, but instead the film seems to lack any sort of central theme, or at least one strong enough to hold up the two and a half hour run time.
 
Ultimately, I left the theater feeling unfulfilled, and that is not a feeling that I care to have after finishing a film.

I really liked the movie.  The only people I have seen that have negative views of the film are those that state that they "don't get it". All the negative reviews from critics are from those who didn't get the film or those who have a vendetta against Nolan.
 
And to those complaining that there was too much exposition, how else would you portray the rules of this universe, if they had to show every rule visually you would end up having to compromise the latter half of the film. Most films would have been made into a franchise and have the first film create the universe, explain the rules and introduce the characters. I commend Nolan for being able to do all of this within the first hour of the film and at the same time have a full on movie to watch afterwards.

@DavidSnakes: There are a few critics who have the same position as you, but I'm guessing you aren't much of a fan of other Christopher Nolan films, either. 
 
Question: if the movie didn't have Leonardo di Caprio, and instead had [insert your favorite actor] would that have fixed most of your problems?

@TheBootlegSaint: 
 
In a film that is so incredibly fictitious it would be easy to let something happen early on and have it be accepted as a truth in the world on screen. But it's not even the exposition that's completely the problem for me, but rather the constant need to repeat exactly what is happening nearly one character at a time, and to do so in incredibly condescending language that made me feel as if I couldn't figure it out by myself. For a film that attempts such a layered and complex narrative it seems to have incredibly little faith in my ability to follow along with the world.

@FLYmeatwad said:

" @TheBootlegSaint:   In a film that is so incredibly fictitious it would be easy to let something happen early on and have it be accepted as a truth in the world on screen. But it's not even the exposition that's completely the problem for me, but rather the constant need to repeat exactly what is happening nearly one character at a time, and to do so in incredibly condescending language that made me feel as if I couldn't figure it out by myself. For a film that attempts such a layered and complex narrative it seems to have incredibly little faith in my ability to follow along with the world. "

I didn't get that at all. The first half for me was just "here are the rules". The second half was "hope you remember them!"

@sureokay: 
 
I can understand that, but then why the constant reminder about kicks and limbo in the final act? It seemed like I was being strung along the entire time, all leading to a fairly obvious conclusion that provided an interesting stopping point, but did little to work toward any larger concept.

@Red said:

" @DavidSnakes: There are a few critics who have the same position as you, but I'm guessing you aren't much of a fan of other Christopher Nolan films, either.  Question: if the movie didn't have Leonardo di Caprio, and instead had [insert your favorite actor] would that have fixed most of your problems? "

No, I think Leo's a totally compelling actor, but he's played the same character twice now this year.  As for Chris Nolan, he's the best action director working today.  I really enjoyed Memento, didn't like Batman Begins, and liked the Dark Knight, although it is overrated.  There's a lot to like about Inception, and I found the action scenes pretty incredible, but at some point the movie buckles and collapses under the convoluted nature of the dream world.

You know, my opinion of the film has diminished slightly since I walked out of the theater, but not for the reasons that you laid out.  The rules of Nolan's dreamscapes are well laid and followed,  and this is something that I actually thinks works in the film's favor.  However, I can't help but wish for a more intense "dream-like" quality to some of the sequences, particularly in the 2nd and 3rd layer dreams.  I feel like the different dream layers were used to justify neat set pieces and the sort of time dialation that is very common in film (this was one of my favorite concepts in the film) rather than being interesting on their own.  Some visual things that happen very early and very late in the film approach the kinds of surreal imagery that I was hoping for, but I left the theater wanting slightly more.  It felt like a very well put together heist film with the dream aspect putting an interesting twist on things rather than a movie which takes advantage of what actually makes dreams interesting.  A good example of what I am talking about is The Cell with Jennifer Lopez and Vincent D'onofrio.  While it's certainly not the film that Inception is, it does some really neat things with dreams.   
 
I should say that I liked the film a whole lot, but there are certainly ideas that I wish would've been further capitalized on. 

Kicks were definitely confusing.  I kept wondering what would happen if Joseph Gordon-Levitt triggered his level 2 kick before the level 3 kick or why everyone wasn't waking up in the van since isn't that a kick?  Didn't Ellen Page "die" in level 4 thus condemning her to the limbo state?  Did Ken Watanabe die in the 1st level or the 3rd and what happens depending on which.  This isn't even half of what I'm confused about. 
 
I'd agree with wfolse1 about the bland nature of the dream worlds as well.  The movie was so self-serious they couldn't fit in a joke about the male subconscious and sex or anything like that?  People talking backwards, things actually being weird and dreamy?  Maybe that would've been more David Lynch-ish and thus more alienating but still, it doesn't feel right.

@DavidSnakes said:

" Kicks were definitely confusing.  I kept wondering what would happen if Joseph Gordon-Levitt triggered his level 2 kick before the level 3 kick or why everyone wasn't waking up in the van since isn't that a kick?  Didn't Ellen Page "die" in level 4 thus condemning her to the limbo state?  Did Ken Watanabe die in the 1st level or the 3rd and what happens depending on which.  This isn't even half of what I'm confused about.   I'd agree with wfolse1 about the bland nature of the dream worlds as well.  The movie was so self-serious they couldn't fit in a joke about the male subconscious and sex or anything like that?  People talking backwards, things actually being weird and dreamy?  Maybe that would've been more David Lynch-ish and thus more alienating but still, it doesn't feel right. "

 
 I was definitely confused about some of the specifics concerning kicks as well.  You mention the thing about Ellen page in level 4, but I was sort of assuming that : 

@Retnex said:

" I think a lot of people decided they liked it before they saw it. "

That's just stupid. No one likes a movie because of preconceived notions I went in knowing nothing about the plot and loved it, but I had seen Screened's coverage and I was familiar with the actors and director involved. My dad on the other hand went in having never heard a thing about the movie and he also liked it.

@JeffGoldblum: I don't think that's stupid at all.  I'll come out and say that I was absolutely expecting to love it based on Chris Nolan's previous films as well as the actors involved.