Inception Movie Review
Review by Emanuel Levy
With “Inception,” his most ambitious (and outlandish) film to date, Christopher Nolan continues to demonstrate that he is one of the most audacious, inventive, and original filmmakers working in Hollywood today.
As writer and director, Nolan proves that it’s possible to make a big-budget, effects-driven movie that’s not mindless and vacuous in the way that “Transformers” and the others of its ilk are. Dislocating time and space, the two most distinctive dimensions of cinema as a medium, “Inception” quickly plunges the viewers into a loopy, trippy ride, unlike any they have taken before.
The most eagerly awaited picture, in what’s so far a weak summer season, “Inception” is an impressively mounted blockbuster that’s driven by ideas rather than action set-pieces, though there are plenty of the latter. Both complicated and complex in narrative structure, the movie may benefit from repeat viewing by spectators wishing to unravel the labyrinth plot that, at first sight, might not entirely make sense or appear coherent.
Combining elements of a sci-fi, thriller, and actioner, “Inception” is globe-trotting travelogue that digs deep into the subconscious, or more specifically into the intimate and infinite world of dreams. The tale moves swiftly from the striking skyscrapers of Tokyo to the crowded markets of Tangiers to the interiors of a bizarre hotel with surreal corridors to a snowy mountain compound in an unnamed setting.
Read Full Review
Review by Variety
If movies are shared dreams, then Christopher Nolan is surely one of Hollywood’s most inventive dreamers, given the evidence of his commandingly clever “Inception.” Applying a vivid sense of procedural detail to a fiendishly intricate yarn set in the labyrinth of the subconscious, the writer-director has devised a heist thriller for surrealists, a Jungian’s “Rififi,” that challenges viewers to sift through multiple layers of (un)reality. As such, it’s a conceptual tour de force unlikely to rank with Batman at the B.O., though post-”Dark Knight” anticipation and Leonardo DiCaprio should still position it as one of the summer’s hottest, classiest tickets.
As a non-franchise follow-up to the enormous success of “The Dark Knight,” this long-gestating project reps something of a gamble for Warner Bros. at a time when sophisticated original entertainments are neither as common nor as bankable as they once were. Availing himself of the resources that come with a studio’s confidence, Nolan places mind-bending visual effects and a top-flight cast in service of a boldly cerebral vision that demands, and rewards, the utmost attention. Even when its ambition occasionally outstrips its execution, “Inception” tosses off more ideas and fires on more cylinders than most blockbusters would have the nerve to attempt.
Review by The Hollywood Reporter
In a summer of remakes, reboots and sequels comes “Inception,” easily the most original movie idea in ages.
Now “original” doesn’t mean its chases, cliffhangers, shoot-outs, skullduggery and last-minute rescues. Movies have trafficked in those things forever. What’s new here is how writer-director Christopher Nolan repackages all this with a science-fiction concept that allows his characters to chase and shoot across multiple levels of reality.
This is, in some ways, a con-game movie, only the action takes place entirely within the characters’ minds while they dream.
Following up on such ingenious and intriguing films as “The Dark Knight” and “Memento,” Nolan has outdone himself. “Inception” puts him not only at the top of the heap of sci-fi all-stars, but it also should put this Warner Bros. release near or at the top of the summer movies. It’s very hard to see how a film that plays so winningly to so many demographics would not be a worldwide hit.
Not that the film doesn’t have its antecedents. “Dreamscape” (1984) featured a man who could enter and manipulate dreams, and, of course, in “The Matrix” (1999) human beings and machines battled on various reality levels created by artificial intelligence.
| Print article |













