Inception

I have been looking forward to "Inception" since I saw its first preview, even though I remember the trailer as incomprehensible at the time.  The sole reason for the excitement was that Christopher Nolan's name was connected with it.  Nolan has actually directed a relatively small body of work, but I have really enjoyed every one of his movies that I have seen.  They are all tense, well-made, and very original.  Also, the ones that have "twists" or surprise endings are actually surprises.  He is becoming one of the major forces in Hollywood. 

In high school I watched a little-known Nolan movie starring Guy Pearce called "Memento."  It told the story of a man who lost his short-term memory when criminals broke into his house and raped and murdered his wife.  He spends the bulk of the movie as a vigilante hunting for one of these men, but can only remember the clues he finds by leaving himself notes, often in the form of tattoos on his own body.  Half the movie is told in reverse chronological order.  My description of it here doesn't do it justice and probably makes it sound too confusing.  But its awesome, and you should watch it.  The ending is great.

In 2002 Nolan released Insomnia with Robin Williams and Al Pacino.  I never saw this one (I actually remember trying to buy a ticket for it but it was sold out.  I never got back around to it), but it has a 92% "fresh" rating on rottentomatoes.com, so my hunch is that it's pretty good, too. 

I also really enjoyed "The Prestige," which stars Hugh Jackman and Christian Bale as competitive turn-of-the-century magicians one-upping each other to the point of ruining their individual lives.  Also tense, original, and well-told.

Then Nolan re-envigorated the Batman franchise with Batman Begins and The Dark Knight, making that cooky Tim Burton look like a real chump in the process. 

Nolan's next project after The Dark Knight was Inception, so the moviegoing public was understandably pretty jazzed up to see what Nolan was going to cook up next.  Such high expectations usually spell disaster for a movie, but in the case of Inception, Nolan delivered yet again. 

the deal: Leonardo DiCaprio's character is a thief. Only instead of stealing jewels or gold or cash or art or whatever thieves steal, he steals ideas. He and his team break into people's minds and steal their inner most secrets while they are dreaming. We find out that he has been banned from the United States for some reason, so in return for a promise to be allowed back into the country, he agrees to put an idea into someone's mind instead of stealing it, a process known as, you guessed it, Inception. 

They decide that the best way to do this is to go several dreams deep. In other words, if they place the dream within a dream within a dream within a dream, the subject has a greater likelihood of thinking it was his own idea. So that's what they do...they go several dreams deep. It's wild.

What I like:

1. It's blazingly original. As the moviegoing public had hoped, Christopher Nolan delivered again. While it will remind of you The Matrix and Shutter Island, it's perhaps more like The Italian Job or Ocean's Eleven or another heist movie. But even then, it's a totally unique moviegoing experience, which is such a breath of fresh air in the era of sequels, franchises, and remakes.

Seriously, let's look at some of the biggest movies out right now (or very recently).

Inception = screenplay by Christopher Nolan, written as a screenplay.
Toy Story 3 = sequel (but still very good).
Iron Man 2 = sequel, based on a comic book
The A-Team = weird remake of a 70's drama/comedy series
Twilight whatever = sequel, based on a novel
Predators = sort of sequel / remake.
The Sorcerer's Apprentice - Full-length feature loosely based on a 3 minute cartoon. still don't understand that one.
Knight and Day = also known as Mr. and Mrs. Smith. Except not good.
Sex and the City 2 = sequel / based on a TV show
Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time = based on a video game. ?
Clash of the Titans = remake / based on a Greek myth or something.
Shrek, part 95 = sequel.
MacGruber = based on a Saturday Night Live skit.
Robin Hood = based on other movies/legends. Except not good.

The point is...there just aren't that many totally fresh ideas any more. But Inception is one, and that's very refreshing.

2. It's engrossing. Usually two and a half hour movies have me looking at my watch a couple of times or at least noticing their length. I did not do that in Inception. Yes, it's long. But it's so good that I wish it was longer.

3. The Special Effects. Nolan has been vocal about his desire to use as few computer generated images as possible. That is evident. The special effects are excellent, but they are all made with creative camera work and actual stunts instead of the cartoon-like sequences that filmmakers try to pass off as exciting. (Think 2012...give me a break). Not only does Inception avoid those cartoony special effects, but when effects are shown, they just look great.

4. It takes some real concentration. And even then you probably won't fully get it. As I mentioned above, there are dreams within dreams within dreams within dreams here. It's probably not as impossible to follow as that would make it seem, but the viewer still has to pay pretty close attention. Make a special point to empty the bladder before it starts, or you'll never catch up.

5. The imagery. A lot of it really sticks with you. good, good stuff.

What I didn't:

1. It leaves you hanging.  Not in a there-will-be-a-sequel kind of way, but in a you-will-argue-about-it-with-your-friends-in-the-car-on-the-way-home kind of way.  I realize that's the point, but I guess I'd prefer a hard and fast answer.  It by no means ruins the movie. It's still great. Just watch it.