The central problem with Inception is that it's too complicated
to be a movie, even a 2-1/2 hour movie.
That’s why we have the constant exposition of rules and amendments to
them. If we all knew we’d wake up if we were killed in a dream, that wouldn’t need explaining. And we wouldn’t need to find out later that
if we were dreaming under sedation and were killed in a dream that we’d
wash up on the shores of our unconscious and our consciousness would be a
mush. But we don’t know that, so someone
has to explain it. And they have to
explain what a “kick” is, why we shouldn’t use memories in a dream and whose
projections hate whom and why. And then
there are the corporate and family connections that figure in the film. And the technique for incepting an idea. There is just way too much explaining in this
movie.
There is also too little heart. The most complex character, Cobb, is a string
of adjectives – lovelorn, hurt, guilty, manipulative – but despite DiCaprio’s
best efforts, there’s not enough time amid all the exposition to connect these parts into a cohesive
personality.
And the other characters are mono-dimensional. Adding to character weakness, Ellen Page, with one of the main roles
in the film, is completely unable to commit to Ariadne and delivers her lines
in precisely the same way regardless of the dramatic circumstances. With so much
exposition and so little sympathetic engagement, Inception doesn’t have a lot
of options for audience appeal.
But it uses the remaining options very effectively. For one, what Nolan can’t do with characters
he does well with plot. Like in Following
and Memento, the plot of Inception is broken into parts and reassembled with a
cleverness that draws us in. To perform
the inception, Cobb designs an intricate, three-level operation with the
actions on one level being important to the actions on the others; time in all the
levels is related. And we even get a
bonus level at one point. Inception has something
of a geek appeal in the way all the levels cohere, but they cohere with a satisfying
consistency.
There are fun visuals
in the film, too. Action sequences are
effective and logical. Chases like
the one on foot though Mombasa and the one with cars and a train have lots
of dynamism and surprise, and the James Bond-ish snow fight is particularly easy to
follow. Nolan complements these with
great special effects. Arthur’s
fight in the free-fall hotel corridor is the central action sequence of the film as the
fight occurs on floor, walls and ceiling, but the slow-motion plummet of the
truck, too, has fun visuals. Likewise the scene of Ariadne learning what she can do in
a dream by folding Paris up and creating bridges and mirrors at will. And all these aside, there are fun images
like the bullet train speeding across a marsh or the elaborate décor of the Japanese palace that opens the film.
Nolan is at his most effective at technical feats like these.
Like much of Nolan’s work, Inception excels at the mechanics
of an action movie. Its plot is like a
well-oiled machine, and technical elements like special effects and action hum. There’s even the clever use of “Je ne regrette
rien,” a cute nod to Marion Cotillard’s role here. But someone should have reined in Nolan’s elaborate
world and the complicated, unfamiliar rules that needed so much
exposition. And added a bit of heart. Inception is fun, but
it could have been much more.
No comments:
Post a Comment