the_lady_lily (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
the_lady_lily) wrote2010-08-04 09:32 pm
the_lady_lily) wrote2010-08-04 09:32 pm
Entry tags:
Filmography
Inception
Let me start with a disclaimer - I had read the New Yorker's review of Inception before going to see it, which was pretty much the only thing that got me into the cinema in the first place. Those of you who know me will be more than aware that things Nolan previously have offered, most notably Memento, are Not At All My Cup Of Tea, and I needed a bit of reassurance that we weren't stepping into gorefest spectacular. I was also prepared to be disappointed - as the New Yorker review says, so sadly, if only he had tried to think less with his Great Big Ideas and done a bit more work on the people.
There are a lot of flaws with this film. Leonardo DiCaprio was a terrible choice for the lead, who is meant to generate several megatons of emotional wattage, because he doesn't do emotion or connection or - well, much of anything, really. You really don't care about him, and while initially the whole 'get me back to my children!' line that is ostensibly driving the plot works, Nolan never really builds on it. He offers it as the excuse for getting things moving, and then assumes that's just fine, we're all on board, it's done and dusted and he can do the cool technical stuff. It's a real shame and a colossal waste - because the relationships between the rest of the DiCaprio's team are real, and vivid, and alive, and you feel for them and their motivations for getting involved in the heist (for fundamentally this is a heist movie; G described it as Ocean's Eleven with extra sci-fi). DiCaprio just... sits there lumpenly, providing plot motivation but never actually engaging with his fellow actors. The closest he comes is with Ellen Page, and can I just say how pleased I am to see her continuing a film career?
But. But but but. Let us just take a step back and think how this is being marketed. It is, unashamedly, putting itself out there as a summer blockbuster film.
Let us take a moment to reconsider summer blockbusters of recent years. Iron Man. Sex And The City. Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time. Twilight and Harry Potter, installment whatever. Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. Transformers.
And now let's look back at Inception. Which has people flocking to see it despite the fact that everyone claims it's really confusing.
People, first of all, if you think this is confusing, you haven't been watching enough Herzog. The reason you think this is confusing is because Hollywood summer blockbusters have stopped requiring you to think. They give you a plot with a straightforward trajectory, they hang a bit of sex and violence off it, and they hope that's enough to win the paying public's affection. This? This asks people to cope with four layers of narrative, playing out in different times, not to mention deep psychological ju-ju, and still, still people are flocking to see it. I am, frankly, deeply deeply heartened that something this intelligent has made it whilst marketing itself as 'summer blockbuster'.
Alright, it's not hugely intelligent, there are plot holes as every summer blockbuster has, there are failings, and frankly had he stopped and actually spent some time thinking about characterisation, Nolan could have made a far better film. But this is probably the most intellectually demanding film marketed towards the general public that I have seen in years - and audiences are lapping it up.
Here's hoping Hollywood takes notice.
Four stars. Cos while there are wobbly bits, some of the acting and script is great ("I bought the airline. It seemed neater."), and the scenes in the hotel are glorious. And hey! I enjoyed it. A little hope for intellectualism at the movies.
Oooh ooooh ooooh, and can I just also say how please I was that the name of the maze designer is Ariadne? (And also that she was played by Ellen Page, creating a classically named character theme I hope she continues, but that's beside the point.) It's a classical reference that's an utter throw-away, completely lost on 90% of the audience - and yet it assumes again a higher level of intelligence from its audience than simply throwing in a Minotaur joke. Yes, definitely a higher percentage of intellectual content here, and not before time.
Let me start with a disclaimer - I had read the New Yorker's review of Inception before going to see it, which was pretty much the only thing that got me into the cinema in the first place. Those of you who know me will be more than aware that things Nolan previously have offered, most notably Memento, are Not At All My Cup Of Tea, and I needed a bit of reassurance that we weren't stepping into gorefest spectacular. I was also prepared to be disappointed - as the New Yorker review says, so sadly, if only he had tried to think less with his Great Big Ideas and done a bit more work on the people.
There are a lot of flaws with this film. Leonardo DiCaprio was a terrible choice for the lead, who is meant to generate several megatons of emotional wattage, because he doesn't do emotion or connection or - well, much of anything, really. You really don't care about him, and while initially the whole 'get me back to my children!' line that is ostensibly driving the plot works, Nolan never really builds on it. He offers it as the excuse for getting things moving, and then assumes that's just fine, we're all on board, it's done and dusted and he can do the cool technical stuff. It's a real shame and a colossal waste - because the relationships between the rest of the DiCaprio's team are real, and vivid, and alive, and you feel for them and their motivations for getting involved in the heist (for fundamentally this is a heist movie; G described it as Ocean's Eleven with extra sci-fi). DiCaprio just... sits there lumpenly, providing plot motivation but never actually engaging with his fellow actors. The closest he comes is with Ellen Page, and can I just say how pleased I am to see her continuing a film career?
But. But but but. Let us just take a step back and think how this is being marketed. It is, unashamedly, putting itself out there as a summer blockbuster film.
Let us take a moment to reconsider summer blockbusters of recent years. Iron Man. Sex And The City. Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time. Twilight and Harry Potter, installment whatever. Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. Transformers.
And now let's look back at Inception. Which has people flocking to see it despite the fact that everyone claims it's really confusing.
People, first of all, if you think this is confusing, you haven't been watching enough Herzog. The reason you think this is confusing is because Hollywood summer blockbusters have stopped requiring you to think. They give you a plot with a straightforward trajectory, they hang a bit of sex and violence off it, and they hope that's enough to win the paying public's affection. This? This asks people to cope with four layers of narrative, playing out in different times, not to mention deep psychological ju-ju, and still, still people are flocking to see it. I am, frankly, deeply deeply heartened that something this intelligent has made it whilst marketing itself as 'summer blockbuster'.
Alright, it's not hugely intelligent, there are plot holes as every summer blockbuster has, there are failings, and frankly had he stopped and actually spent some time thinking about characterisation, Nolan could have made a far better film. But this is probably the most intellectually demanding film marketed towards the general public that I have seen in years - and audiences are lapping it up.
Here's hoping Hollywood takes notice.
Four stars. Cos while there are wobbly bits, some of the acting and script is great ("I bought the airline. It seemed neater."), and the scenes in the hotel are glorious. And hey! I enjoyed it. A little hope for intellectualism at the movies.
Oooh ooooh ooooh, and can I just also say how please I was that the name of the maze designer is Ariadne? (And also that she was played by Ellen Page, creating a classically named character theme I hope she continues, but that's beside the point.) It's a classical reference that's an utter throw-away, completely lost on 90% of the audience - and yet it assumes again a higher level of intelligence from its audience than simply throwing in a Minotaur joke. Yes, definitely a higher percentage of intellectual content here, and not before time.
no subject
no subject
I think people found the film confusing because it asked them to engage their brains - no more than that. For those of us who work on complex ideas and even more so those of us who are into art films and stuff (*hem* (http://the-lady-lily.livejournal.com/711658.html#cutid1)), this really didn't even register on the 'filmmaker wants you to think' scale, but at the same time it's miles beyond what the normal Hollywood output aims at. At least it looks like it paid off in terms of box office, and I hope Hollywood does take the risk again.
no subject
I suspect that the Next Big Thing in Hollywood will be 3D blockbusters about dreams.
no subject
I think the question of whether the top level world was a dream was well handled, actually - it wasn't discussed explicitly, it wasn't presented as a Great Reveal, it was just left as a possibility. I think it would have been much cheaper to go 'tada! Look, this was all a dream too!' So I'm rather glad that impulse was resisted.