Okay, if there was ever a statement that proves that this mindless basher is completely inept when it comes to judging the quality of films, this ‘dumb as a bag of bricks’ comment is it!

You’re comparing the garbage film 2012 to a tense, psychological thriller like Inception based on the fact that there was “more at stake?”

Well, if we’re going to use that kind of logic, why not just go all the way with it?

Who cares if the Godfather involves a son slowly falling into the dark underworld of his fathers localized criminal organization and losing his soul in the process? BATTLEFIELD EARTH WAS ABOUT FREEING THE ENTIRE EARTH FROM ALIEN ENSLAVEMENT!!!

- Laura

Because of the overwhelming success of “The Dark Knight”, which was due in VERY large part to both Ledger’s performance and Ledger’s untimely (for him, but not for the movie) death, Nolan seems to be getting a creative and critical pass. That’s too bad. I’m not drinking the Nolan Kool-Aid. If one of his films is masterful I will be the first to admit it and defend it. “TDK” was not and neither is “Inception”. They are both interesting in their own way and worth watching at least once, but their flaws are obvious and numerous.

Take away the gravity-defying visual gymnastics of “Inception” and the film will have to rely more heavily on script and logic, and then it will be in real trouble.

Personally I’m not quite decided on Inception just yet. I know for a fact it is a far better movie than Insomnia, or worse The Dark Knight which was a complete mess what with all the irrelevant plotting (hockey mask Batman copies, the death of Rachel, the bombs on ships etc). Not sure if it will measure up to Memento/Batman Begins, which I love, and The Prestige, which I love even more and might just call Nolan’s best work to date, but like those films I’d have to see it again to be sure.

Honestly, vary rarely do I think his films are amazing the first time I see them. In the cases of Insomnia and The Dark Knight I knew I’d never want to sit through the whole thing again because they were deeply flawed, but the others warranted further study. I’m glad I did, because when I was able to fully absorb the stories and make sense of the audacious use of layers I realised they were great works. Inception has all the hallmarks of being another one of these.

I’m not at either end of the scale: I neither adore this and want to line up to kiss Chris Nolan’s hand like so many over on iMDB seem to, but neither do I think it’s entirely without merit. I’m reminded of when I saw Synecdoche New York too… I was blown away but not entirely convinced, to begin with. Again, after getting to grips with the density of the film and finding the emotional core that I wasn’t sure was there the first time around.

Incidentally, Inception does have quite a few emotional arcs; it’s not the cold and dead, unrelatable piece Charles seems to think it is. He must have missed the massive amount of screen time that was given to Cobb grappling with losing the love of his life, the amount of regrets about leaving everything and everyone behind. I’ve had dreams like that and thought, in it’s own abstract way, the film was pretty accurate. We can bury things deep in our subconscious mind, but somehow they’ll find a way to push through no matter what.

Sure there was some sci-fi storytelling license taken, what with the dreams within dreams, and there were the odd holes I noticed. These were all small enough that they didn’t cripple the story: it would have been better for the enemy “antibodies” to have had some kind of leader or characters of their own, Saito’s motive should have been clearer (i.e. he wants the idea implanted to stop Fischer’s company smothering the competition) and a few other things, but overall not a huge amount of things for a story so dense and symbolic.

On a more angry note, of course it isn’t original! What is these days. With the vast reference pools available, the internet being the keystone, it’s easy to see that nothing is. The most successful artists are those that amalgamate various parts together to form a pastiche that is both identifiable and challenging, building on their influences. I spotted the following during my initial viewing:

* The Matrix (1999) – Anyone who doesn’t see this must be blind; they seem to come from the same seam. It’s one of the few similar films that can stand up next to it though.
* Dark City (1998) – The buildings, the gravity. I can’t say more than that.
* Blade Runner (1982) – Chris loves this film. It’s more in visual styles than story but it’s there. And when I think of the title I can’t help but think of the term “incept date”.
* Star Trek TNG – For the holodeck reference/style mostly (think the “convincer” scene with Fischer in the final vault)
* Heat (1995) – The action scenes, despite the fantasy settings, seem remarkably tight and often quite realistic.
* Synecdoche, New York (2008) – The more I think about it, the more similar it seems to this film, and the more this film seems similar to Dark City. Which is why I like them, I guess.
* Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind (2004) – Love is a big theme and how the mind deals with it an even bigger one. It would spoil Leo’s story arc to say more.
* eXistenZ (1999) – Can’t believe I nearly missed this one. In that film it is virtual reality, as with The Matrix, but there are still a lot of parallels.
* Ocean’s Eleven (2001) – The whole thing about it being a concerted team effort to pull of such an ambitious caper.

That doesn’t bother me, particularly. A lot of my favourite films are like this. The question is, are they more than the sum of their parts? In this case I would say, yes, definately. The incredible score and careful use of effects (although the Paris cafe one was a bit much) plus some great cinematography added to what was already there: an intriguing story and great performances by the main cast, even though a couple of them got lost in the shuffle – Yusuf for example.

This might not be his best work. But it’s definately one of his stronger ones.