Why Inception is Not Actually as Good as Everyone Thinks

I appear to be the only person in the world who didn’t think Inception was god’s gift to cinema for the summer of 2010. 

The movie centers around the idea of invading people’s subconscious whilst they dream in order to extract information or implant an idea... Fine, but has no one realised that dreams are not actually that interesting? I have never been interested in other people’s dreams, ever. They’re just dull. I wouldn’t care if you dreamt about a pogo-sticking llama with the face of my great grandmother.

Also, Christopher Nolan - what kind of dreams are you having? And who came up with this idea of an 'architect' designing a 'maze' in a dream, expecting this to be a believable, legitimate basis for the blockbuster of 2010? These are the ramblings of a madman.. Actual dreams don’t work like this movie says they do. Even if they did (they definitely don't) this still doesn't explain why all the dreams in Inception look like they belong in a James Bond film. None of them even come close to looking like an authentic dream. Have you ever dreamt of a city made entirely of grey blocks with lots of paper fluttering around in the breeze, complete with random house you lived in as a child? No, me neither. 

Leonardo di Caprio failed to impress, in general. What has happened to you, Leonardo? It’s hard to believe this puffy faced chap is that very same heart throb who grabbed the attention of adolescent girls nationwide with his portrayal of Richard in The Beach. The years have not been kind to di Caprio. What a waste. Also, why hasn’t anyone noticed that Leonardo’s character in Inception and Shutter Island are the same person? Switch over Dom Cobb and Teddy Daniels mid-movie and no one would bat an eyelid. I don’t even think the outfits were different. Bring back Richard.  

When Leonardo was nice to look at..

Nolan has inserted a few jokes into this (tryingtoohardtobe) dark and mysterious film, apparently at random. They completely clash with the mood of the film. It feels silly. A film this moody should not also try to make you laugh. You might as well have had a giant easter bunny merrily hopping across the screen during one of Jigsaw’s twisted games. 

Admittedly the special effects were good, there’s a nice bit where a street folds in on itself which made me go oooh. However Ariadne’s tour of dreamland goes on just that little bit too long, which detracted from my fascination somewhat. It started to feel a little less isn’t this mindbending and a little more... look how much money we have spent. 

The film’s saving grace is the relationship between Mal (Marion Cotillard), the late Mrs Cobb, and Di Caprio. This part borders on the brink of good as there is actually some substance to this sub-plot, with crazy Mal being all crazy due to a prologued time spent in the grey, windy dreamland... which is where you go if you die mid-dream, obviously. This was my favourite of the jumbled mess of sub-plots featured in this film because it does that thing that films normally do.. where the loose ends get tied up in the end, it all makes sense and then you all feel much better and go home. The rest seem to be there solely to keep you guessing as to what is actually going on. Ariadne asks "Whose subconscious are we in, exactly?" She's in the film. If she can't work it out we might as well not bother trying. 

I wouldn’t say Inception was boring, it is ambitious and it has obviously got people talking. It is just not as good as everyone thinks. I got the impression Nolan was trying very hard to be complicated, edgy and confusing and I couldn’t quite work out why. By the time the film was drawing to a close my brain was getting tired and Inception was definitely losing its grip on my attention. Normally when a film is that difficult to keep up with there is some kind of climatic, unexpected ending which makes it worth all the trouble. In Inception..they wake up. 

Then again, I didn’t like Avatar either. 


From Alexandra