Better than average 'Dream Gimmick' movie

Rating: 8/10 (26 July 2010)

'Inception' has already been defined by its makers as a mixture of James Bond and 'The Matrix'. I was hoping that it would be more, and it was, but not as much as I would have liked it to be.
Conceptually it was fascinating. Dreams are fascinating in themselves, and the idea of being able to enter and manipulate the sub-conscious has been around for awhile in movies: 'A Nightmare on Elm Street', 'Dreamscape', 'The Cell', and 'What Dreams May Come'. The best of these is 'The Cell', which spins a horrific tale. Yet, as a dream-concept film it is the most visually interesting because it gives us the kind of abstractions that are associated with dreams; abstractions that can make sub-conscious sense, particularly to the dreamer. 'Inception' initially depicts some dream abstractions, but conveniently overrides this by introducing the 'dream architect' whose job it is to make the dream as real as possible.
As a result, as our actors jump through dream levels, in which there are four (psychology has determined there are primarily two sub-conscious levels) we observe commonsensical realities - for the most part. Although this is significant to storyline development, it unfortunately means that we are left with familiar visuals (chase scenes and shoot'em- ups) that merely differ from level to level. Soon we find ourselves watching two to four recognizable action scenarios that are implied to be transpiring simultaneously.
Since this can present the possibility of confusion for the viewer, the film often becomes visually redundant and subsequently monotonous. This was the major flaw of the film, so much so that I almost nodded off. Myself.
Yet, the concept of the film overrides this flaw, and much of the imagery is particularly stunning.