This movie was, frankly, pretty stupid, though quite fun. It’s by Cristopher Nolan who made The Prestige so it should be good, but it was too self-consciously complex, if I bothered to trace the story through all its complex layers I’m pretty sure it would have huge internal holes in it, and most annoyingly the ending was obviously deliberately set up to spark a circle jerk of wanky speculation as to whether or not the whole thing was a dream. Which is shit, because we all know that “he woke up and it was all a dream” is a huge narrative cop-out (or, in this case, a feeble excuse for an equally long-drawn-out and painful sequel) and we all know that a movie can only sustain this kind of wankery at interesting levels of debate if the movie itself was good enough, which this one wasn’t.

There’s a point I think where every movie director needs to recognize that the complexity of the movie is too much, not only for most of their audience, but also for their own skills, and the movie is suffering from the complexity. There’s also a point where movie directors need to recognize that sticking to existing relationship models in a new setting is better than trying to create complex new ones. In my opinion, the relationship between Cobb (one of the lead dream-snatchers) and his dead wife Moll was weak and silly, and all aspects of their backstory were unbelievable and silly. Also the resolution between them was stupidly weak and I think it broke a fundamental rule of the dreamworld and wasn’t a resolution at all.

So overall this movie was pretty ordinary – even the action scenes in the dream world were pretty uninspiring – so here’s my attempt at describing how this movie would have been better.

SPOILERS BELOW

First, the attempt to plant a dream in Fischer’s head should only occur at a second level of dream, not in the third, and there should be no limbo. The extractors simply try to go one level deeper than usual, something they have shown they can do but which has also been shown to be unstable in the first scene. This creates the tension, with the second level of dream-adventure being shaken up by the actions in the first level. To add tension, the sedation used should imply that anyone who dies in the dreamworld dies for real, so Saito san’s injury is the cause of the race against the clock. Though I think they hardly need the death thing or Saito going along for the ride.

Also, all the scenes in the dreams should be more surreal.

Second, Moll should be treated as a straight-out environmental enemy, not some kind of weird psychological dooby-thwacker, and resolution can be obtained by Cobb finally having the balls to just shoot her in the face. Perhaps the architect, who discovered what was going on between them, can help him do this, giving her a somewhat more interesting role than “I know what’s really going on but all I can do is constantly appeal for Cobb to do something he doesn’t do.”

Also, the reason that Moll is vengeful and angry would be more relevant to the story if it indicated something fundamentally evil about inception, and Cobb. If Cobb had implanted in Moll’s mind the idea that she should marry him, and then she had committed suicide to frame him because incepted ideas always create suicidal confusion, then we see that the mission they are on is going to kill Fisher eventually, and Cobb is genuinely and truly a bastard. This also maybe gives the architect a basis for helping Cobb kill Moll (“she’s got to be put out of her misery . You didn’t know inception would do this,” etc) and he could even pull out of the mission to save Fisher, thus ensuring his own arrest in LA and a kind of redemption for killing Moll.

Three possible forms of resolution involving Moll:

  • Cobb shoots Moll in the face
  • Moll interferes with the dream so that all the extractors are going to die, unless Cobb confronts Moll. Then Cobb agrees to pull out of the dream, fail the mission, and arrive in LA to be arrested by the cops, in exchange for the safety of the other extractors
  • Moll interferes with the dream so that all the extractors are going to die, and the architect (who twigged to what’s going on) confronts Moll. She talks to Moll and gets Moll to agree to disappear if they fail the mission, so that Cobb goes to jail when he arrives in LA. Since Moll is a projection of Cobb’s subconscious, this makes it a kind of reverse inception, or an admission of guilt by Cobb. Then Moll deconstructs the dream and they all wake up.

Then the last scene could be a redeemed Cobb lying down to dream normally.

Either way, the whole thing would be less complex, more coherent, and less wanky. Which was the problem with this movie.

Posted in , ,

12 responses to “Current Viewing: Inception”

  1. Paul Avatar
    Paul

    “most annoyingly the ending was obviously deliberately set up to spark a circle jerk of wanky speculation as to whether or not the whole thing was a dream”
    How could you say this without a spoiler warning? I haven’t seen the movie yet [1]! The only people who knew this happened were the people who’ve seen it and everyone who doesn’t have some form of severe brain damage [3].

    Now, the eternal question: Should I spoil the movie for myself and read the rest of your review so I can critique you grammer and logic in a snarky biased way, or pass up that pleasure?

    [1] Or ignored it for so long that I end up reading the wikipedia summary so I can follow the cultural references. [2]

    [2] But frankly not understanding Leonardo Dicaprio movie plots has neve been a cultural hinderance for me. Titanic = the boat sinks, The Bleach = paradise collapses. *Sigh*.

    [3] Possibly induced by watching too many crap films.

  2. Grey Avatar

    Paul – Don’t spoil it, just go see it. Faust’s technical points aside its still probably one of the best ones out this year by a longshot. It won’t make you bleed out the eyes and ears at least.

    Spoilers
    I think they could’ve done a lot more with Moll as far as your suggestions. That being said, her existance was one of Cobbs inner guilt eating him and everyone else alive. The resolution of it makes sense, he wasn’t resolving anything with her, he was resolving it with himself. Based on that, she should’ve done a whole lot more than she did however.

    Big agreeance on the open endedness of it finally being over. There is just enough to allow you to go either way with the explanations.

  3. faustusnotes Avatar
    faustusnotes

    Come on Paul, I didn’t say that it was or wasn’t a dream. If “the ending is a circlejerk of wank” spoils a movie for you, you’ve got a pretty weak stomach!

    Grey’s right, it’s probably worth watching if you value your time … not so highly. But ultimately even the action scenes aren’t that great, and the best one is reproduced better in a James Bond movie (Moonraker I think). It’s a crying shame. But I think you’re obliged to watch it so you can read my spoilers and criticize them. You’ll regret it, though.

  4. noisms Avatar

    SPOILERS
    I agree with Grey – it’s a film about guilt and how, unchecked, guilt can destroy everything. That’s the emotional core of it, and I thought it was pretty satisfying in those terms. It was also brilliantly directed and acted and had a cool soundtrack and a decent script. So I’m not sure there’s all that much to complain about.

    My only real quibble is that the reason Saito wanted to implant the thought in the son’s head was never really made clear. “I want to stop a merger because that would be bad for competition in the market” seems like a bit of a shitty and uninteresting motivation and seemed to hint that there would be a twist which never came.

  5. faustusnotes Avatar
    faustusnotes

    Noisms! I thought you’d disappeared into the pitiless desert of the real… good to see you’re still around.

    SPOILERS!

    You’re right of course, it’s a film about guilt, but I just didn’t think the guilt was particularly believable or powerful. He had to implant an idea in her head to save her from limbo and this then destroyed her in the real. This is the kind of guilt you resolve with a couple of trips to a grief counsellor, I reckon. And it’s not the kind of guilt that you need to hide or not talk about, as he did. Typically the kind of guilt that (cliche) “eats you alive” comes from a crime, not a necessary but difficult choice. Which is why my suggestion – that he implanted the idea of her marrying him and this ultimately destroyed her – is a more compelling form of guilt.

    I agree about Saito. The thought he wanted implanted was actually “break up a big company” (not “stop a merger”) but even then it doesn’t seem that compelling a motivation, especially not for Saito to risk himself in a dream when he is already fabulously successful. This kind of weak motivational plot always surprises me – they could have come up with a more powerful reason more easily, e.g. if Fisher ran a chemical company that had found an alternative fuel to oil, with which they would destroy their competition, and the idea was “release the compound publicly for the benefit of humanity.” This type of weak motivation reeks to me of slapdash film-making, in which the director knows that most people don’t care for the underlying plot, and he just needs to chuck a bit of window-dressing on the main purpose of the movie, which is a romp through dreamland. I think it’s insulting that they can’t even be bothered thinking of a good motivation for their movie.

    My main complaint with this movie was the excessive amount of unnecessary layers of dream. Recasting the guilt story to get rid of limbo helps to kill one of these layers, and then spending more time on the motivation and less time on the multiple layers of dream would have made it a more compelling and enjoyable story.

  6. nosms Avatar

    No, I’m still here, just about (see latest blog entry!).

    These things are all subjective, but I thought the guilt storyline worked really well. You can come up with other suggestions and maybe they are better, but in the final analysis for me it hit home and was emotionally satisfying. But different strokes for different folks, etc. etc.

    Sorry, I forgot the details of the Saito plot – been about 6 months since I watched it, I think. Did it really take that long to make it to Japan? Anyway, it was the real weak point of the film, agreed. That doesn’t stop it being hands down the most enjoyable cinema experience of the year for me. (Except Avatar, which I saw in early January.) It was a weak year anyway, but still.

  7. faustusnotes Avatar
    faustusnotes

    Agreed totally. Except that I think I preferred Harry Potter (a bit weak at times, but nonetheless). And Alice in Wonderland (which was also weak).

    You know, it seems like it’s been a long time since a nerd said “It’s been a good year for movies.” I think that is a bad sign.

  8. noisms Avatar

    I hated the new Harry Potter. I assume in the book things are a bit more narratively satisfying and are explained semi-coherently, but in the film each scene seemed totally unrelated to the last and every plot point was a massive deus ex machina. It was like “something happens, then something else happens, but that’s okay because this certain plot device happens to be there just in time…”

    Alice in Wonderland was just pretty ‘meh’ all round – couldn’t work out why it even existed, to be honest.

  9. faustusnotes Avatar
    faustusnotes

    I assumed the deus ex machinae(?) in Harry Potter were previously-established plot devices (I haven’t seen previous films – I stopped reading the books at number 4). I think we have previously clashed over my opinion on this – I think Harry Potter’s whole life, though couched in a story of dispossession, is essentially one of inherited wealth (magical wealth and power) and he gets things for free where others have to work really hard. In that movie it really gave me the shits when some idiot told him that his first victories in quidditch were the result of natural talent and hard work. Let’s just ignore the fact that he was given, for free, the best broomstick that money could buy merely on account of his birth. The whole story is a model for how rich kids get everything handed to them on a platter, then get lauded as better people for their subsequent “achievements.” So I too am unimpressed by the deus ex machina of that movie. But I liked the scenery and sense of desperation, the special effects were cool and finally after god knows how many movies (that I didn’t bother seeing) someone admitted that they would all have been fucked from the very start without Hermione’s help. Also the latter parts of the movie (when they started doing things) were fun.

    But, as I mentioned, it was average.

    Alice in Wonderland obviously existed purely to give Johnny Depp a chance to do his mad hatter, and that too was average. 2010 was a bad year for movies.

    However, I just watched and really enjoyed Clash of the Titans. And just to calibrate my enjoyment I checked out a moment from the 7th Voyage of Sinbad and oh my god! It was bad. Acting has come on in leaps and bounds since the whatever-ies. Clash of the Titans review to follow when I’m sober…

  10. faustusnotes Avatar
    faustusnotes

    Also I would like to add (MASSIVE SPOILER FOR THE NEXT MOVIE FOLLOWING) that I guessed that Harry Potter is a hoarcrux, and I’m intrigued to find out how he will deal with that (I haven’t read the books and had the hoarcruxie thing explained to me by my partner).

  11. noisms Avatar

    The hoarcrux thing is another thing that pisses me off about Harry Potter. I haven’t read the books either, but everything in them just seems to have been ripped off other fantasy stories. The hoarcrux notion for example is AT LEAST as old as the Lord of the Rings.

    The only reason anyone gives the woman any credibility whatsoever is that most people are unfamiliar with even the commonest fantasy tropes – so they don’t realise what an unutterable plagiarist she is.

    Anyway, the plot inconsistencies and randomness in Harry Potter 7 definitely aren’t explained by the other movies – I’m reliably informed by fans that you really have to have read the book to properly understand what’s going on. Which annoys me a bit, frankly. A film has to stand on its own merit.

  12. faustusnotes Avatar
    faustusnotes

    When I heard about the hoarcruxes I immediately thought of the Rod of Seven Parts campaign… very derivative. But that’s fantasy all over, isn’t it? I think people give Rowling credibility because – at least in the early stages – she could string together a very tight plot, that was a lot of fun, with enjoyable characters, in a very readable prose style. She created a believable and enjoyable world and it was just quirky enough to be fun while containing serious elements and appealing to a wide age range. I think those achievements shouldn’t be underestimated. I also really appreciate the way an originally very light entertainment series has entered very grim and serious territory, and if I had grown up with Harry Potter – from, say, the age of 11 to 17 – I would be really enthralled with the ending. I remember when (SPOILER ALERT) Luke discovered Vader was his Aunt, and how powerfully that affected me, and I think the same could be happening with modern Yoof when they discover that actually (SPOILER ALERT) Harry Potter really is Voldemort’s bastard child.

    I am happy for movies to not stand alone if they’re part of a series but they do need to relate to the other movies. If that doesn’t work with Harry Potter then it’s a shame. But I haven’t seen the earlier movies so I can’t judge.

Leave a comment