Comments on:

By: Sed

Sed — Tue, 29 Apr 2014 16:48:54 +0000

“I really get irritated when people pretend this is a smart movie,
and then tell you that you probably don’t ”get” the movie because you didn’t like it.”

Seriously.. if you liked the movie that’s fine with me, just please spare us the excuse that those who don’t fall for a movie of gimmicks are of inferior perception. If anything, not being able to see over the barrel-full of contradictions that is Inception is a sign of a logic-driven brain.

By: Steve

Steve — Tue, 12 Nov 2013 15:00:20 +0000

It’s pretty rare that comments actually add content to an article that doesn’t solicit more content. Kudos for coming up with so many more examples of bad reviews, even if it was by accident.

By: muni

muni — Mon, 11 Nov 2013 22:33:20 +0000

The first Matrix is a lot better

By: shakya

shakya — Mon, 11 Nov 2013 22:19:21 +0000

Boring movie

By: From Holland said...

From Holland said... — Sat, 02 Jul 2011 15:07:50 +0000

Movie maker don’t explain everything in there movies thats true. But if you want to tell you’re story a good framework is gold. Take Jurassic park for instance, part one had a 15 to 20 min sequence explaining why there are dinosaurs on the island. Its was a clever mix between fiction and science. This had to be told because its the keystone of the story. The audience is buying in to the explanation and they can sit back for the ride.

The explanation for mutants in X-men, another leap in evolution caused by mutation. Okay you can accept that ore not. If you do you can enjoy the X-men movies.

But its just kinda strange creating an entire movie about entering dreams, and not explaining the mechanism ore perhaps the impact on society. Its the unexplained centerpiece of the movie. literately not one mention is made. And that in a movie that tries to explain the smallest details.

Because the movie is not build on a solid foundation i could not click with the the characters and drama you are right about that.

My purpose fore writing the comment above was not to call people that liked inception lemmings ore lairs and i apologize if it seems that way. If you like the movie and the concepts then thats great and you got what you paid for.

Reading the comments above just gave me the sense that people who don’t like the movie a retarded, and so i probably was a bit sharp in my comment.

By: Jason L

Jason L — Thu, 30 Jun 2011 15:31:32 +0000

I’m sure you do; fortunately that’s not what happened here. The only people criticised here have first called the movie dumb and transparent, then said themselves in the same breath that they were confused by it. That’s not the action of a fool, but it is the action of a trolling liar.

If you don’t like the movie, the most probable cause is that you didn’t click with the characters and drama. That’s sad, but there’s nothing to be done about it. As in any good sci-fi, the rules help but they’re not the foundation of the action. Where can I get some trilithium? How does an entire galaxy avoid ever inventing gunpowder? What frequency does the Sonic Screwdriver run on? Bah, all this magical bullshit! BTW, it’s sillier than you remember; the suitcase ‘an’ wires connect ‘tho’ the users’ wrists. You’re welcome.

Those of us who like the movie are not distracted by the structure. We are not saying that the Emperor’s cloak is beautiful; we are saying ‘Woooow, he is ripped‘. I was moved by the character interactions. I had great fun in the action sequences. I was utterly terrified of and for Moll. I love this movie, and it has nothing to do with membership in some club. I wish it had clicked with everybody. Please do not call me a liar or a lemming.

By: From Holland said...

From Holland said... — Thu, 30 Jun 2011 13:29:38 +0000

I really get irritated when people pretend this is a smart movie,
and then tell you that you probably don’t ”get” the movie because you didn’t like it.

Meaning your not smart ore perhaps philosophical enough.

The main flaw of the movie is its framework, for example;

The movie the Matrix has a framework where you can say; okay that makes sense because humans life in a digital prison created by robots. Now you can do all sorts of weird shit in the movie. (only liked the first movie)

But Inception just expects you to accept that you can enter a dream with a ”magical” suitcase an some wires connected tho a human head. Then they distract you with a lot of visual bullshit and ”rules” to make it seem complicated. Manipulating you to say the movie is good because you don’t want to seem dumb. Kinda like the story of ”The Emperor’s New Clothes”

Nolan had a ambition to make a movie about entering dreams. He didn’t had any idea how the entering in a dream should work so he just didn’t explain it.
Its like putting pink flying elephants in the movie en just say; accept it.

The character are flat boring and two dimensional. The way Ellen Page character was recruited and the training felt very forced and meaningless.
I was really exited to see this movie but it was quite disappointing .

By: Tristan

Tristan — Wed, 18 May 2011 01:04:52 +0000

the ending of the movie was very rosebud-esk, here is a joke I saw about inception,
http://ponderingstuff.com/2011/05/15/extractors-inception/

By: Jason L

Jason L — Wed, 16 Mar 2011 03:34:29 +0000

What happens if you respond with more reactive bull about how the film didn't sufficiently spoonfeed you? OH SHIT

By: steve

steve — Wed, 16 Mar 2011 01:26:32 +0000

BTW it is not that complex.. If it had the right complexity it would make sense. These ideas are not exclusively Nolan’s and he did not create them. Read Carlos Castaneda and you’ll realise that Nolan only has a little piece of the pie. This is an introduction to REAL dream techniques. Understand that, and maybe you will piss your pants.

By: steve

steve — Wed, 16 Mar 2011 01:17:34 +0000

Actually the review is very accurate. Your comments on the page are just adolescent angry reaction. There is no contradiction in the review as he is describing it from many angles. He is not saying he didn’t like it because it was smarter than him. It TRIES to be smart. The film ends up just a spy heist.. As I watched it I conjured up a better ending to it in my imagination, so . And so the conclusion was a let down. It tries to be clever and doesn’t really achieve it. It DOES look like planet Hoth – this part has no integral part within the story and could be left out. The characters are not “human” – there is not appropriate development. And the girl IS woefully miscast. It is a decent film – well the first half of it – but as it gets into it, it does not make sense. E.g. go into target’s subconscious which is completely infested by DiCaprio’s dream houses. ??? And why dreamers walk slowly everywhere? And he is right, the “bigger gun” thing had to be consistent. It is like someone wrote good part of the film and the rest was pulled out of backside. Don’t respond to this post with more reactive bull about how the film “explained this”.. no it didn’t. (Only thing I disagree with is about Memento – Memento IS an excellent film)

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 06 Feb 2011 23:52:37 +0000

It was just a mish-mash of ideas lifted mostly from Philip K Dick, interspersed with (admittedly impressive) action scenes. The characters were crap. The ending was predictable and lazy, they just copied Total Recall.

By: james

james — Sun, 06 Feb 2011 16:42:22 +0000

If you want a great, deep, emotional, and well crafted film then watch John Hughes ‘The Breakfast Club’. Now there’s a real director.

By: Nolan

Nolan — Sun, 06 Feb 2011 16:37:59 +0000

I’m sorry, I apologise for recreating the Matrix.

By: Jason L

Jason L — Thu, 20 Jan 2011 04:10:28 +0000

Just watched it again on DVD. They don’t use masks in the cab. God dammit. It’s all falling apart like the projections have noticed me.

(No, I still loved it.)

By: Psiloc

Psiloc — Wed, 19 Jan 2011 19:39:35 +0000

Just watched the movie and I didn’t even catch the characters names. Must have been sleeping.

By: Bret

Bret — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 21:56:11 +0000

Genius may be subjective, but I find idiocy quite easy to catch.

It comes with the defense “Subjective lol”.

The widespread use of “lol” or as I like to think of it to preserve my sanity “Upside-down Geth” would be a bane of internet debate if it was not so useful for isolating bad arguments quickly and efficiently.

By: Jaz

Jaz — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 18:34:13 +0000

Quite an accolade. Sounds like I should watch Shutter Island.

By: the "unreasonable" critic

the "unreasonable" critic — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 15:25:05 +0000

Well… genius is subjective lol. The actual point is that Inception doesn’t deserve it’s rating. Yeah it’s a fun movie which offers a ‘groundbreaking’ experience but should it actually be in the top 10 and be ‘better’ than shutter island? I would say shutter island also offers this rare experience with the exception of better directing, greater suspense, a decent script and a sound plot that allows all of these to gel nicely into a quality film.
Forget about inception – it’s all about shutter island.
Last comment, peace

By: Jason L

Jason L — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 12:45:32 +0000

Yeah, blah blah IQ versus functional intelligence. You're missing the point; what's important here is that Unreasonable doesn't just like the film less than us, he's better than us because he holds that opinion. Unlike those of us of mere 'above average intelligence', his genius lets him see through the pseudointellectual facade Nolan's thrown up by demanding the audience think a little about alternate physics and multiple storylines during a whiz-bang adventure flick. Sadly, it's been impossible so far to convince us sheeple to throw off the shackles of really enjoying that rare experience. But he keeps trying, bless his heart.

By: the "unreasonable" critic

the "unreasonable" critic — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 11:58:16 +0000

Lol @Jaz. Im not even gonna comment on that. @Entropy I never said it wasn’t a good movie. I said I disagree it’s a smart film and the fact that the majority hail it as a masterpiece. The film is good with what it has to offer – action and great visuals. But then again so does 300 and no one is hailing that a masterpiece. For what it is, inception is a good movie deserving a rating of 7-8. Not the blow out of proportions 9.0 or whatever it’s current rating is in imdb which commands a top 8 rank in the top 250 films. I think people bumped up their rating by 1-2 points by also thinking it’s an intellectual film. Nolan sure knows how to make a film that sells – we have to watch it twice to fully understand it, and don’t say it’s easy to understand. It’s easy to accept one theory and ignore other possibilities. There is no one definitive answer which is why people loved it – pick a theory that makes most sense to you and you’ve got a ‘very intellectual’ film with the luxury of action and visuals ‘on the side’. I’ve almost convinced myself it deserves to be in the top 10…

By: Jaz

Jaz — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 09:07:20 +0000

They have a word for the level of intelligence that most people have. That word is average. I disagree that it’s better to be smarter – infact, I’m not really sure I believe that intelligence exists at all. I’d argue that we don’t know enough about our own brains and the forces that drive us to excel or to fail, to grasp concepts and invent things, to have a useful opinion on intelligence. Who’s to say that dumb kid isn’t just dyslexic? Afraid of being singled out for correctness and nerditude? Terrified of academia? Who’s to say that the problem isn’t a lack of potential knowledge and insight (“Intelligence”), but a culture of anti-knowledge that is perceived by the weak and afraid as a club whose favour is more important than intelligence? Because that’s what it looks like to me.

I think Inception was proper bo.

By: Entropy

Entropy — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 02:58:36 +0000

Low intelligence is bad in its own right, but high intelligence has a really high chance of coming with some nasty drawbacks- insanity being one of many. Maybe being average-to-just-above-average is normal (so much as that word applies to anything), and therefore the popular opinion is correct? The majority is rarely wrong, after all.

You say the movie is an action flick. If it is, then it did a really, really good job. The zero-gravity fight was incredible, and the last half to last quarter is full of great action and tension. By that metric at least, it’s a good movie then, yes?

The way I interpreted the ending was that it didn’t matter if the top fell or not. DiCaprio’s character was with his children again, and he didn’t care if he was in a dream or not. Either way, he was happy. Besides, ambiguity isn’t automatically a bad thing. Ambiguity inspires critical thinking and debate. When you leave a movie like, say, Jackass, you’re laughing with your friends, yes, but there’s not a lot to talk about. Leave Inception (Or possibly Shutter Island- I haven’t watched it, but I mean to eventually) and you’re talking with your friends about the intricacies of the plot.

Either way, I had fun with it (enough that I’m defending it on the internet) and I’m not a stupid person. Not the brightest bulb in the box either, mind you, but I’m not an idiot, and it’s silly to say that only morons like this movie.

By: the "unreasonable" critic

the "unreasonable" critic — Sun, 16 Jan 2011 22:36:42 +0000

Average intelligence is only good if you have below average intelligence. And since most people have it it’s not good – it’s standard. I liked the reference to RPGs. Now can we go back to reviewing the film?

By: Jaz

Jaz — Sun, 16 Jan 2011 21:33:34 +0000

Average intelligence is good, by the way. That’s a good thing, that you want to have. It’s only in RPGs that Average Dexterity really means “CAN’T DODGE FOR SHIT”.

By: the "unreasonable" critic

the "unreasonable" critic — Sun, 16 Jan 2011 20:31:28 +0000

Hmm, I should phrased my comment a bit differently. It should have been from “average to JUST above average intelligence”. Having cleared that up, Entropy I would like to know which theory you used for interpreting the ending as that is only what we get – theories. There are four or so theories to what the ending is. Hell, I’m sure even DiCaprio doesn’t what the actual ending is, but that’s what the whole film is about. Being able to debate about it hours after the film has ended. Goes back to what I was saying – thinking about it doesn’t make the film clever, it makes it ambiguous. I think the link Jason L has provided addresses the plot holes quite definitively and humourously (also having taken Nolan 8 years to write Inception while there are still plot holes is quite extraordinary). I guess anyone having ‘too much’ fun watching the movie would ignore the plot holes and concentrate on the action which is what ultimately this film is – an action-flick. Perhaps also pseudo-intellectual but that just means it’s stupid but trying to be clever. I have found many people use that description… rightly so might I add. Anyway a smart film would be Shutter Island because if you engage and pay attention to detail you can understand and appreciate how good the movie is. Scorsese has outdone himself.

By: Jason L

Jason L — Sat, 15 Jan 2011 14:09:22 +0000

No, see, he said he was dumb sarcastically; that means he’s preemptively immune to that criticism, even if it’s true by his own logic. That’s how sarcasm works. What?

A lot of the plot holes are picked apart, unsurprisingly, in the Editing Room parodic review I linked above http://www.the-editing-room.com/inception.html . One is big enough that it actually does bother me and I don’t like spoiling others’ fun so here’s another that doesn’t. Cobb’s wanted in the US, but doesn’t seem to be on the lam internationally. Is Doing One Last Job for a shadowy power broker really superior to, say, having Arranger Michael Caine move his motherless fatherless kids to England?

By: Pentadact

Pentadact — Sat, 15 Jan 2011 10:36:38 +0000

Wouldn’t that leave only people of below average intelligence thinking it’s not clever?

By: Entropy

Entropy — Sat, 15 Jan 2011 05:28:03 +0000

Unreasonable is right. Inception is a fun movie. It’s great from both an intellectual standpoint and an action standpoint. It had me floored from the start with the incredible CGI, then the breathtaking action scenes. If you’re there for a punch-n’-shoot flick, there you are. However, if you’re willing to give it some thought, it’s also a wonderful flick to think through. My date and I spent most of the night talking about how the dreams worked and the plot of the movie- that never happens. Since you’re complaining about the vagueness, I suppose you didn’t quite understand the ending. Don’t feel bad, not many did, and it took me awhile to puzzle through it myself.

I’d love to see your definition of a “smart” movie. I’d also like to see some of the plot holes- They may well exist, but I was having too much fun watching the movie to notice, and that’s the mark of a good movie in my mind.

By: the "unreasonable" critic

the "unreasonable" critic — Sat, 15 Jan 2011 03:17:16 +0000

Wow. What can I say? People from average to above average intelligence only will think this film is intelligent and complex and deep. Sooo that’s about 90% of the population, explaining the 9.2 rating in imdb. What’s up with films being intentionally incomprehensible and debatable on all levels including the ending that leaves the general public astounded by it’s “cleverness”. Just because the film makes you think does not make it smart. Have you considered all the plot holes and illogical action? It seems the dumber movie you make, the more intelligent they think it is. Haha – for a second I considered Nolan has ‘incepted’ you with the idea that this film is great. Stupid me…

By: Jivers

Jivers — Thu, 23 Dec 2010 17:51:54 +0000

Inception was a mediocre movie. Not awful, but not good either. It certainly was not the masterpiece that some pseudo-intellectual teenage boys claim it is.
The fact that it was confusing doesn’t make it a smart movie. It’s not a complicated plot at all (nor a “thought provoking” one either, IMO), but Nolan obfuscates it with unnecessary explanations about the mechanics of the dreams.
I thought it was quite unimaginative that the third dream stage was a snow fortress filled with bad guys (like any other shitty action movie).

BWAM BWAM BWAM BWAAAMMMMMM

By: Jason L

Jason L — Sun, 05 Dec 2010 13:36:16 +0000

I expected a lot of writers who were simply confused, and largely that’s the case, but some of them seem to be trying for some kind of award for clumsy criticism.

Many of them, happily, are just terrible. This isn’t a round up of negative reviews. Some of them, like Salon’s, do a good job of explaining their opinion without whining, lying or embarrassing themselves. This is a round up of the other ones.

‘Heavy wise acting’ isn’t a phrase,

Please don’t strawman people.

By: bERT

bERT — Sun, 05 Dec 2010 07:35:43 +0000

I forgot to delete the (spoiler alert) as while writing the first comment I decided to leave out the spoiler. Sorry!

By: bERT

bERT — Sun, 05 Dec 2010 07:31:26 +0000

(spoiler alert)
So much condescending comments here towards the negative reviews that those comments shoot themselves in the foot. Yes some of the negative reviews may be a consequence of the reviewers not getting the plot or dream layer mechanism or being lazy to get it. I’m belonging to neither of those categories and still think this movie is a heap of trash. Nolan took 10 years to end up with this kazillionth Night M Shyamalan kind of movie, ie a +2 hour movie filled with a 9/10th no story first part with characters without character so you don’t give a flip about them just to end with an ‘amazing ending that keeps audiences fascinated even long after they left the theatre’. The only thing you have to do to get the ending is to not being lazy. But I can understand some of the negative critics: it takes a lot of patience to make it till the end as you have to waddle through endless pseudo intellectual tripe, endless boring action scenes and ‘heavy wise acting’ with the only purpose to mislead you into thinking you’re watching something sophisticated. In reality Inception is a scam. One can only hope Nolan will not scam the public three times like they did with The matrix

By: Lack 26

Lack 26 — Sat, 27 Nov 2010 16:24:35 +0000

Or being chased by Velociraptors.

By: Jason L

Jason L — Sat, 27 Nov 2010 14:41:18 +0000

Ur rong. It deosnt conceptualize dreams, nobody is in they’re underwear or taking a math test or looking for a lost object for hours.

By: Leela

Leela — Sat, 27 Nov 2010 08:55:41 +0000

This movies falls apart scene after scene. It has very good points, but only in terms of action. The storyline is shallow, and though it is comprehensible, it makes no sense within its own logic. Barely a 5 out of 10 and only because the topic is very interesting and there are not many movies that conceptualize dreams.

By: Bret

Bret — Fri, 19 Nov 2010 08:15:02 +0000

Didn’t say the trolls were kindergarteners.

Just that they were in a kindergarten.

Man. Some of those teachers…

By: Sarkany

Sarkany — Thu, 18 Nov 2010 13:56:28 +0000

The idea of kindergartener trolls is both horrifying and adorable.

By: Bret

Bret — Thu, 18 Nov 2010 05:57:31 +0000

0/10. Poor concept, poor execution.

I am sorry to say I have seen better trolling in kindergartens. Please reconsider in the future, or at least put a little effort into the whole procedure.

We all know you can do better.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 18 Nov 2010 00:42:10 +0000

Oh get a life. Who gives a shit about that dumb movie?

By: Jason L

Jason L — Tue, 02 Nov 2010 13:08:52 +0000

You have three too many ‘over’s there.

However, one thing pointed out in The Editing Room’s version http://www.the-editing-room.com/inception.html will forever cause me nerdpain on rewatchings :( It’s an unusual usage, but truly a ‘spoiler’.

By: Joe

Joe — Tue, 02 Nov 2010 03:37:22 +0000

You said: “That isn’t what happens, and it’s explained several times why changing the dream too much is dangerous.”

Yes, it was. Several times. Over and over and over and over and over again, like everything else in the movie. Exposition has never been so overused.

The movie was just horrible.

By: Andrea

Andrea — Sat, 07 Aug 2010 20:12:30 +0000

This is so funny, its like they are saying hey dont like it because the film is smarter than them, so they are trying to come up with things to say about it thats bad, i though reviewers like something to think about. XD
-one reviewer qoutes that it is ‘gibberish’
– another said he pays to much attention to detail and major logic holes jump off the screen without 3-D
i thought the film was excellent and even though at times i was confused i knew what was happening after and it was all quite easy to understand, i thought it was clever, and a never before seen type of movie.

By: Pentadact

Pentadact — Sun, 01 Aug 2010 07:30:12 +0000

Oh yeah, totally. In fact many of the positive ones are worse. But they’re bad in a sort of drawn out and tedious first-year media studies way, which is less entertaining to mock.

Ronin: Yep, I have seen that. Can’t wait to see the movie again, I think it’ll make even more sense in context, given the time dilation.

By: Blackout62

Blackout62 — Sun, 01 Aug 2010 05:39:28 +0000

Remember, these are just the negative bad reviews. There are probably tons of positive bad reviews that fail to explain how the movie is good. A fault I regret making many times. DAMN YOU HIGH SCHOOL JOURNALISM!

By: Dante

Dante — Sun, 01 Aug 2010 01:53:06 +0000

I’m sorry, the film has cleverly mislead us and that makes it stupid?

I think you’ve made a basic misunderstanding here David, we aren’t confused, we are aware that Inception is a classic heist movie with a lot of clever ideas layered on top of it. It reminds us of why such formulae exist, to provide a solid base for a clever spin. We like that.

By: Dave_C

Dave_C — Sun, 01 Aug 2010 01:34:45 +0000

Hey, David Homer. You are stupid.

By: David Homer

David Homer — Sat, 31 Jul 2010 17:09:28 +0000

This film seems complex and indepth but its all just confusion and misdirection covering a shallow plot of lets sneak into someones dream to change their mind about a business deal. Stupid. Also I get a dream in a dream and that the deeper the dream the slower time runs. So you’re telling me the guy who they were duping was actually having 3 dreams all at different speeds at the same time (his sub concisious was actually attacking the guy in the van in the top level dream throughout the film). Stupid.

By: Ronin08

Ronin08 — Thu, 29 Jul 2010 22:42:28 +0000

Tom, have you seen this video yet about the soundtrack?

http://popwatch.ew.com/2010/07/27/inception-music-twist-the-hidden-meaning-of-the-evil-foghorn/

I think I realized this during the movie, but realizing it again made my head explode. This movie just keeps getting better and better…