Inception

Inception pretends to be super clever. Through astonishment over the hitherto unseen, it gives the audience a consumerist, comfortable feeling that everything in the movie makes perfect sense. If it had contained any real emotion and some sort of message, drawn its sense of fatefulness and urgency from the story instead of from Hans Zimmer’s awesome, robust music, and enabled me to connect with the characters instead of leaving me in awe of their magical dialogue, I might have succumbed to the tempting feeling of perfection and awe of an extraordinary filmmaking event. But there is no more of these key cinematic values in this film than there is life in the image of monotonous grey skyscrapers in the background of Cobb and Mal’s fifty-year-long dream. Inception thus remains “just” an incredibly spectacular Matrix-like pose. (22/07/2010)

A perfect delight for Nolan's pleasure. What this directorial master has most enjoyed in his films, he enjoys to the very last second in Inception. Whether it's the main character full of internal conflicts in an environment much larger than himself, ambiguous conclusions, or, not least, several plot lines alternating at the center of the action (this delight, so proven in The Dark Knight, is taken to the furthest possible maximum here). In short, we are getting all the tricks that have ever made us shake our heads - in one impressive package that wraps around you so tightly from the first few minutes that there is nothing else to do but hungrily follow the fateful story threads. And when Leonardo DiCaprio finishes his acting megaperformance and Hans Zimmer finishes the music, it is clear. A new movie life-changer has arrived. (22/07/2010)

The beginning could best be characterized as a combination of Cronenberg's eXistenZ and the Wachowski brothers' The Matrix. A magnificent high-budget summer blockbuster that is surprisingly smart and multi-layered for its category. Of course, like The Matrix, it can be criticized for its gratuitous action scenes, the shallow plot in relation to the promising premise, and a number of other shortcomings, such as the underutilization of the "defensive dream team" built into Cillian Murphy's character's brain. If he were endowed with intelligence and not just serving as an action element that fills the screen with a series of bullets and dead bodies, there would be a truly thrilling battle. On the other hand, given the nature of the film market and the producer's expectations, it is clear that these limitations are entirely logical and that Nolan could not have bypassed them. In fact, I can't recall any blockbuster that required the viewer to strain their brain so much. Strictly speaking, the script does contain some logical errors, but they can be brilliantly explained by the fact that the story takes place in a dream. Furthermore, the very clever final scene and the view of the moving object on the table clearly indicate how things actually are and whose head the story is unfolding in. Nolan's film offers top-notch cinematography, bombastic special effects, and a gripping dramatic plot without compromising on the high demands for other film elements. It also has an excellent cast led by one of the best contemporary American actors, DiCaprio. For me, it's the strongest film experience of this year after Scorsese's Shutter Island. Overall impression: 95. (09/08/2010)

We wish to make our dreams come true. We can't really materialize them unless we use film technology to do so. Inception is a perfect example of when dreams become reality and we can escape from reality into a dream. Unfortunately, we perceive it as exactly the opposite of the characters in the film. Two and a half hours go by like only a few minutes. (25/07/2010)

It's a good movie, but it has its flaws. I think the most annoying thing was the frantic camera work, where at times I wasn't sure what it was actually trying to show me... When I walked out of the cinema from Nolan's previous film, The Dark Knight, I had a very different feeling. A sense of fulfilment, a feeling that I had really seen something. Unfortunately, that feeling didn't come this time. Yes, I could discuss this film for hours and hours (and during that time, I'd incorporate my knowledge of Murakami's book “Hard-Boiled Wonderland and the End of the World", which would certainly be nice), but to have to watch it again because of that? Nope. Yes, totally interesting idea, good story, but I have no idea what I'm taking away, if anything. Just the knowledge that I've seen a good movie. And I certainly don't consider it the movie of the year. Still, definitely check it out, because it's worth at least one viewing – preferably at the cinema (even the home one :-)). (23/08/2010)