Review of Inception (2010) by Jamesd. — 25 Jul 2010

Not very good really. I've heard the word visionary thrown Nolan's way, but this film was the work of a rather sterile imagination. Yes, it had many layers of narrative cleverly interweaved with eachother, but there was little to compel me at its core.

The root cause of Cobb's state of mind just didn't grab me - partly as this relationship was never given the chance to develop to a tangible level. The elements of subconscious displayed were tame and the approach to the dreamworld rather banal - focusing as it did mainly on bland designs, bendy gimmicks and exploding things.

There was little edge to Nolan's vision, he seemed quite happy to drown us in relentless exposition and unimaginative slow-mo shots. Scenes were very quick and at no point approached the atmosphere and interest of a real dream.

A shame, because at their best, this is what films can do - engineer the quality of a waking dream. Compare Inception to the more intriguing work of Lynch, where scenes seduce with the perfect balance of the real and surreal, and whose images tend to linger in the mind.

On top of this, Nolan is simply not a very good director of action; he is quite loose with the camera, and I yearned for more flair and invention in these scenes. Instead, he relied on an incredibly insistent score to give the action some punch.

For a film about dreams and the subconscious, it was curiously impersonal and mechanical. Certainly, the real danger and sexuality of the subconscious might scare off mainstream audiences, but Nolan was given free reign to do what he wanted - so why not do something more interesting? Freud and Jung would find little to interest them here, as the film is less concerned with psychology and more with the narrative possibilities afforded by a convoluted dreamworld fiction.

Perhaps Nolan does dream of corporate worlds and Bond fortresses. Unfortunately, such things don't interest me.