Why "Inception" Doesn't Matter

Was it all just a dream? Will the top fall or keep spinning? Christopher Nolan’s new blockbuster “Inception” raises quite a few frustrating questions as the screen cuts to black and the credits roll. But the most pressing questions in my mind are “Who cares?” and “What does it matter?”

I don’t. Nolan’s film hasn’t earned my pondering. I don’t know what all the hype is about. I had high hopes going in to the “Dark Knight” follow-up. Nearly $200 million was spent on this film. The ensemble seemed impressive.1 I was looking forward to good time and well-spent $9 on a hot summer night. That’s what I got. I enjoyed Nolan’s film; I really did. I “ooh”-ed and “ah”-ed at the zero-gravity sequence and Paris folding on itself as I sipped my coke, munched my popcorn and chewed my Mike N Ikes. What am I complaining about then?

“Inception” is good, not great. It’s an entertaining and fun summer blockbuster, smarter and more impressively-crafted than most summer fare. But that’s it. “Inception” is “a tale told by a [genius], full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.”2 That’s all. It is not, by any stretch of the imagination, a great film. Being a good summer blockbuster is like being the valedictorian of summer school. According to ever-unreliable imdb.com (a online movie database run by a bunch of ignorant fan boys), “Inception” is the third greatest film of all-time. It’s better than every film ever made in the history of the art save “The Godfather” and “The Shawshank Redemption.” Really, fan boys, really? It’s better than “Citizen Kane?” Better than “The Rules of the Game?” Better than “8 ½?” It’s not even one of the five best films of the year. It’s not even Nolan’s best film. I’m in the minority, though, I know.

So what do I have against “Inception?” What’s wrong with it? Why isn’t it a great film? I’ve condensed all of my arguments into 5 points so to not risk running the word limit on a Facebook note.3

I. There are no real people in the film. I don’t mean that literally, even though some people are thinking that’s a possibility. Nolan’s cast comprised of 7 Oscar-nominees and 2 Oscar winners, with 3 Oscars between them4, stands around embarrassingly wasted. DiCaprio’s not bad, but is playing the same role he played in Shutter Island who is related to the role he played in Revolutionary Road. If Leo wants to become a character actor who specializes in stressed-out, disturbed hubbies, fine, but then he’ll never be a great actor. Joseph Gordon-Levitt is one of coolest, most-promising young actors, but he was given nothing to do of interest here. Ellen Page stands around mouthing expository dialogue designed to make sure we’re on the same Page (sorry, I had to) as Nolan. Cotillard is unbearable in another horrible female role written by Nolan. (He’s like the anti-Woody Allen in his ability to write women). And the beat goes round and round. This is why I didn’t care about the ending. None of the characters was anything more than a prop or your stereotypical heist film archetype.

II. Nolan is a fine director but can’t write to save his life. He’s making films in the tradition of James Cameron and George Lucas (though much better than both). The man can tell a story, but he often can’t construct a story worth telling. The Dark Knight, though, stands as a triumph of film mixing excellence in art and pulp fiction. But remember, Chris’s brother Jonathan wrote it. One of the most outstanding things about the film is the screenplay and how the characters develop over 2.5 hours. This is missing drastically here. In 2.5 hours Nolan does a mediocre-at-best job of developing his character. Instead, he writes lines and lines of dialogue just explaining his world. I don’t care. I’d rather meet the people who inhabit it. Furthermore many of the characters and plot points (Leo’s wife and his backstory with Saito come to mind) are just filler – motivation for the story, but droll and uninteresting, which leads me to…

III. …a disturbing lack of inspiration. For a film being called “mind-blowing” and “innovative,” “Inception” is incredible uninspired. Nolan creates his own world, and then layers it, and then layers it, and then layers it. Isn’t that clever and interesting?5 Aside from the zero-gravity fight in the hallway and Juno’s first walk through the dream world, where is all the cool stuff? For a film being compared to “Blade Runner” where is all the intelligent and challenging philosophy. For a film being compared to “2001: A Space Odyssey” where is HAL 9000 or the monkey sequence, or the final ride through space.6 Why, when you can literally rewrite all the rules and expectations of the cinematic world you have created, is there just a standard action film at the core of it? Why does your “innovative” and “mind-bending” film climax in a snow-covered Bond villain dwelling?

IV. The Philosophy Is about as Self-Sufficient and Contained as Something Written by Ayn Rand. Just having Leo ramble on and on about what reality is and what dreams are isn’t enough to invoke contemplation. In fact, it’s nearly an insult to the work of great philosophers. Now it’s controversial about how well film can contain good philosophy, but “Inception” isn’t even consistent. Films like “The Matrix” and “Fight Club” at least pose a problem, work with it, dive into it, and offer an interpretation. “Inception” puts on the mask of philosophy, using it to add gravity or a perception of depth, intelligence and importance into an otherwise generic film. There are more things in heaven and on Earth than are dreamt of in your philosophy, Mr. Nolan.7

V. Striking Inconsistencies and Plot Holes You Could Drive a Truck Through. For being so densely and heavily plotted, I found many cracks in Nolan’s plot even on first viewing. To name a few, why does Arthur go all zero-gravity on us when the van falls, but the guys in the James Bond snow lair don’t? How exactly do you wake up from limbo?8 Why didn’t Scarecrow recognize The Last Samurai? How and why was everyone partying in limbo the first time/at the beginning of the film? I know Leo has a baby face, but why didn’t he age in limbo but Saito did? Why didn’t Juno ever use her hamburger phone to call Gilbert Grape?9

And lastly, if I haven’t made this clear enough, the ending is a gimmick. It’s not clever, it’s a gimmick. One of the rules of creating good art is that the audience should be your friend. When Nolan does his last-minute, final-shot twists and game changers, he’s not playing in the same game with us anymore. He’s bullying us. He’s pushing us around. Nolan’s little gimmicks are an ironic separation from his own material, as if to say, “none of any of that mattered because nothing is what it seems.” If you really want to base your story in a world of skepticism, then I choose not to care. If nothing is real, then nothing really matters. It’s movement of post-modernism in the film world, where the story no longer matters, only the storytelling does. It’s style over substance. Watch some films by Wes Anderson and Paul Thomas Anderson. Observe their sincerity and care and love for their characters and universe and you’ll know what I mean.

I don’t hate “Inception.” It’s pretty good. But don’t get seduced by the fancy special effects or deceptively shallow philosophy. Please don’t. I want to like this film, but everyone keeps throwing in the same sentence with the world “masterpiece” or “Blade Runner” or “2001: A Space Odyssey.” Don’t throw the words “Oscar” or “Best Picture” around, or I think I might have found my front-runner for Titanic-ally Over-rated Film of the Year. In other words, I’ll have to start hating on “Inception” when I hate on “Juno,” “Forest Gump,” “Slumdog Millionaire” and “Avatar.”

-TJ Keeley

25 July 2010

[Originally published on Facebook.]

1. I’ll see anything with Sir Michael Caine in it. As Roger Ebert writes, Caine has the ability to seem way wiser than the rest of us the moment he appears on screen.

2. From Act V Scene V in William Shakespeare’s Macbeth.

3. I could not find an actual word maximum for a Facebook note.

4. Nominees: DiCaprio, Cotillard, Berenger, Caine, Postlewaithe, Wantanabe and Page; Winners: Cotillard (La Vie en Rose) and Caine (Hannah and Her Sisters, The Cider House Rules).

5. No.

6. Or anything else approaching the brilliance of Kubrick.

7. From Act I Scene V of William Shakespeare’s Hamlet.

8. The not-so-cleverly titled middle ground in the “Inception” dream world, not where St. Augustine sent unbaptized babies.

9. Jk, honest to blog.