Masquerading as a Psychological Thriller... Inception is far from Nolan's best

Rating: 6/10 (16 July 2010)

If you've navigated any of the other pages having to do with Christopher Nolan's "Inception" on this site, there is no doubt in my mind that you have bared witness to its accolades. The action, the cinematography, the exploration of our subconscious as a ghostly apparition to reality (sound familiar Memento fans) seem to be common points of consensus among the film's most vocal fans. Some may even say "Inception" is a groundbreaking film for Nolan; this may in fact be true. But what makes this film riveting, artistic, and perhaps even "groundbreaking" also makes it commercially unappealing, convoluted, and horrendously long (2.5 hours? This isn't The Godfather Part II). Ultimately, "Inception" is very difficult film to watch, even for the most engaged and conscientious moviegoer.
"But wait!," you say. "Inception did well at the box office. All the theaters were packed on the opening night. Not commercially successful? Just check out all of the 10/10 reviews online." While I cannot deny the films popularity, I can, with my sincerest conviction, state that this movie couldn't have sold many tickets had it been marketed for what it truly is. This is not The Dark Knight folks. This movie is not easy to understand and doesn't try to make itself easy to understand. Key plot elements are not repeated, general assumptions are made on behalf of the audience. This film is the pure artistic outpouring of Nolan's pen...a description that may sound appealing but trust me, it isn't. Any attempt by Nolan to give your ears and mind a break comes in the form of action scenes, where he suddenly abandons all of his creativity in a flash of gun-slinging violence, and Matrix-like slow motion fury. Then he picks up again with totems, Fischer corporations, Mrs. Cobb, architects, limbo, and an ethereal dream within a dream within a dream within a dream.
If you doubt my ability to convey the films inherent intricacies, read the Wikipedia summary. My guess is that you will garner little to no understanding of the film beyond the fact that-- Leonardo DiCaprio is in it, and it has something to do with dreams. Well, watching the film wont much remedy that confusion. In fact, you might be left scratching your head even further. That's why I will spare you any form of plot summary in this review. It does little good. Don't get me wrong. It's still a film worth watching. Just keep your eyes glued to the screen and give yourself breaks to sit and soak in all of the information thrown your way.
My closing remarks stand as such: Inception is not a bad film. It raises some well posed explored questions about dreams and preys upon our sense of what is real (like most Nolan films). Where Inception falls short is in consistency. The film lacks a sense of balance and is incredibly self-indulgent. You're more likely to buy into Star Wars than you are this film. Likewise, blink and suddenly you've lost track of what's going on. Inception is good, but HIGHLY overrated, and definitely not Nolan's best. He could have used some advice from an editor on this one. So much participation expected from the audience with such little return.