Absolutely not impressed

Rating: 2/10 (20 December 2010)

I truly cannot understand why anyone would call this a good film. Fancy special effects, yeah, plenty many lots... but special effects do not make a film. It also needs a storyline that doesn't shoot in every direction, left, right, backwards and forwards throughout the entire film for lack of substance.
OK, so the dude wants to plant an idea in someone's brain. Got that after a minute or so of viewing. And then what? It feels too much like a storm in a teacup.
Frederic Dard (french novelist) used to describe futuristic gadgets by means of expressions like "he's pointing a gloombobber with spiral condensing palchromium in my direction" but, being a talented writer, he had the good taste of limiting such eccentric nonsense to a single sentence per book, whereas Inception is made up of nothing but that from beginning to end. Each time the dream-team runs into a potential nag, there comes a gloombobber out of a hat. Too predictable after a while. "This can't be done in a three-dimensional space... no problem, we'll do it in seven!" would be an adequate tag-line for Inception.
I couldn't follow the storyline and am not convinced there actually was one. It reminded me of the Brownian movement observed at the surface of a pot of boiling water. It was so confusing that switching actors every two minutes for the part of the main character would have gone unnoticed in this maelstrom of nonsensical garbage.
In conclusion I don't see any point in watching Inception unless you're extremely high on speed or a fan of special effects who doesn't give a whoopdeedo about well-constructed stories in the first place.