I assume I'm not the only one still trying to make sense of Inception. Not the plot (think I've pretty much got that down; in the end it's not that complicated now is it?), but of my own feelings towards it. Everyone in the world has an opinion on this movie right now, and for most people it's a little bit more complicated than the "Duh, awesome!" variety. You could say there's been a kind of mini-war unfolding on the internet over the past week or so, such is the impassioned, explosive intensity of the writing on this subject, and the divide between the lovers ("amazingly crafted" + "so inventive" + "finally a blockbuster that smart people can enjoy") and the haters ("all brain, no heart" + "underdeveloped characters" + "hokey expository dialogue" + "logical loopholes").
I agree to some extent on all of those charges and I need to see it at least one more time to know where exactly I stand. What I really want to do soon is rewatch Nolan's biggest other non-Batman films, Memento and The Prestige, both of which I've adored fanatically in my time. Right now I'm having trouble comparing the 3 properly in my mind - not unlike a typical Nolanesque protagonist my profound affection for my past loves is clouding my objective present judgement. When I think of Memento and Prestige, however, I think not only of the pulse-quickening sense of tantalizing, excruciating dread that caved in on me when I watched them - but also the geniune emotional connection and sympathy I had for both Guy Pearce's and Hugh Jackman's characters, which was not wholly to do with their respective good looks, I swear. When I search my heart for that same kind of essential human feeling in Inception, though, I draw a blank. The supposed emotional center of the film felt like so much going through the motions. And it's not really anything to do with my total inability to relate to Leo DiCaprio's onscreen, and offscreen, persona (see Shutter Island - sigh). For me that's the biggest difference (and disappointment?).
So right now I'm predicting that on second viewing Inception is not going to hold up quite as well for me. But we'll see after tomorrow night. Anyway enough about me, here is some reading I thought was interesting from the past few days:
- One of the fairer reviews from Incontention - "The trouble I had with the dreams that make up “Inception” is that they don’t feel much like dreams at all: each one is a linear, cohesive episode with a practical objective and a consistent, unbending locale. It’s entirely possible that Christopher Nolan dreams in these straight lines, but I, and I suspect most viewers, don’t." A valid point...?
- Another less-than-wowed review from Capital New York (really, who wants to read the ecstatic reviews?) - "Of the legion of acclaimed actors in the movie, wraith-like Cillian Murphy gets the best direction... When he confronts his dad in the climactic crosscutting dream sequence, he's astonished to learn that... Well, that would be a spoiler, so I'll hold off. But let's just say that you'll be astonished, not at the plot twist, but at the fact that it emerges, my God, VISUALLY, through a simple insert shot and a beautiful closeup of Murphy's humbled, haunted face streaming real tears."
- A fun-to-read conversation between a lover and a hater from fourfour - "I also did not like when joseph gordon-levitt was like, "paradox!" when he threw the guy off the hotel stairs. come on joseph gordon-levitt, back to work. you have things to do! here comes the kick!"
One good that has come out of these intense discussions is that I've noticed people using the phrase "the Cillian Murphy dreams" to describe the second half of the movie - a phrase I've always hoped would become popular. I've had a few Cillian Murphy dreams myself, if you know what I mean.
No comments:
Post a Comment