Well here’s the short, spoiler free verdict;
Inception is a masterpiece.
Want a bit more info, then read on, but at some point I’m going to have to talk about the story so I’ll warn you when the spoilers are about to hit. Because, complex though it is, you’re better off watching Inception in a cinema, with as little prior knowledge as possible, to gain the most from the experience.
If you’ve read other reviews of Christopher Nolan directed flicks in these pages then you’ll know I rate his work very highly. In fact, I think Nolan is the best, most consistent film director working today. Spielberg’s had a couple of blips, Cameron’s Avatar, while visually stunning, lacks weight and Shyamalan lost the plot with The Happening. Only Bryan Singer and Peter Jackson come close in the last decade. And Inception is one of Nolan’s best, if not his very best movie so far (only time and the potential for repeat viewings will tell).
Let’s get some of the obvious stuff out of the way first. Wally Pfister’s photography is richly detailed, subtle and classy, as normal. Hans Zimmer’s score is mesmerising, as normal. On a technical level, it’s a near flawless piece of work; the effects, stunts, editing, production design and make up are all of an award winning standard. The ensemble of young, A-list talent is on top form. It’s surely DiCaprio’s finest performance while Tom Hardy brings a notable roguish charm as the forger, Eames.
While the film has gone onto remarkable critical acclaim, there are a few that have found fault. So, allow me to retort to those criticisms:-
1/ It’s might be intellectual, yet it’s emotionally cold. Bollocks to that I say. The ending is as emotional as anything I’ve seen (the moment Cobb’s kids turn round to look at him had me choked up).
2/ It’s full of plot holes which make the emotional payoff worthless. Bollocks to that I say. The plot, despite the complexity, is remarkably tight. What possible plot holes there are can be explained away….depending on how you interpret the story (see below).
3/ There’s nothing surreal or imaginative in the dream worlds. Of course not I say! The whole point of this movie is that you can’t distinguish between the dream world and reality, while you‘re experiencing a dream. Therefore, while a character would accept a fire breathing dragon as absolutely real while in a dream, the audience would know it’s not. The whole point of Inception is that the audience can’t tell either. Dumb asses.
4/ It’s boring…Total Recall is much better. Bollocks to that I say. The people who are bored seem to be the ones who can be arsed to concentrate on the plotting or work at deciphering the subtext. Total Recall, which is undoubtedly entertaining, is a string of violent action sequence with two or three scenes suggesting it’s all going on in Arnie’s head. It hardly competes with what’s going on here.
So with that out of the way, I need to talk about Inception’s remarkable script.
Basically, Leonardo DiCaprio’s Dom Cobb is hired to plant an idea (a process called Inception) in Cillian Murphy’s mind, via his dreams. Structured like a classic heist movie (The Italian Job/Oceans Eleven), Cobb recruits his team before embarking on his mission impossible. Cobb’s incentive to complete the task is that his name will be cleared with the U.S. immigration authorities, allowing him to return home to his two, young children. However, things are complicated by Mal (Marion Cottilard), Cobb’s dead wife, who still lurks in his subconscious thoughts, waiting to disrupt any job he’s working on. Reminding me of the structure of
The Matrix, the rules of the dream world are carefully laid out in the first half of the film, and repeated throughout the mission, so that the audience clearly understands the complex parameters of shared dream technology. There’s a hell of a lot to take in, so even a momentary lapse in concentration, may end up in you playing catch up for the rest of the story. Inception is definitely designed for multiple viewings.
What’s wonderful is that, like the aforementioned Matrix, Inception not only works perfectly on a surface storytelling level, but also on other levels as well, if you’re prepared to look for them. And it’s a rare skill for a mainstream movie to accommodate. I adore films like Guy Richie’s Revolver or Alex Proyas’ Dark City which deal with complex philosophical themes…but neither work smoothly for an audience that wants a story to make sense on just it’s own terms, without having to decipher a load of pretentious mumbo jumbo (their words, not mine) to get a sense of resolution. Inception, even at a two and a half hour running time, is a lightening paced rollercoaster ride that engages from it’s first to last frame, gathering momentum unstoppably as it goes. And when you leave the theatre, you understand what’s just happened.
Or do you? The great thing is about this film is how your perceptions change after you’ve left the cinema. Nolan often wants you to experience the story just like the characters experience the story. In Memento, Nolan delivered the narrative backwards in 10 minute chunks, so you can experience what it’s like to have no short term memory. In The Prestige, he unravels the plot like a magic trick…so when the illusions in the story are revealed at the end, it ties in with revelations about the magic trick the main characters are obsessed with.
Inception is all about the perception of reality. Throughout the story, Cobb is challenged by the memory/subconscious projection of his wife Mal as to what reality is. At what point does he perceive to be dreaming and at what point does he perceive himself to be awake. Through clever, some might say infuriating story devices, Nolan puts us, his audience, in that mindset too!
I was confident about my interpretation of the story upon my initial viewing, but soon afterward, I began to see, not only alternatives in terms of what I perceived the story to be, but also multiple readings as to the thematic content of the film.
SPOILER WARNING!The ambiguity comes down to two things. At no point is there a cinematic device to communicate to the audience that they’re watching a dream. There’s no flying farmhouse like in The Wizard of Oz, nor is there the ‘travelling down the telephone line’ that alerts us in The Matrix to our dreaming/waking state.
Then there’s the film’s final shot. Cobb, and his dream invading colleagues each carry a totem; a unique object (in Cobb’s case a spinning top) that only they know how it feels like and behaves. That way, they can use their totem to see if they’re awake and back in reality, or still asleep or in somebody else’s dream. Previously, we’ve seen Cobb spin his top to check reality, and if back in the real world, it topples (in the dream state it will carry on spinning). The final shot see’s Cobb spin the top, only to walk away from it. Both Cobb, and us the audience, never get to see the top fall over as the movie cuts, mid spin.
My Original InterpretationMy initial reaction was that Cobb had completed his mission, successfully planting the idea in Fisher’s dreams, woken up and returned to his kids. Although we never see the spinning top fall in the final shot, it does wobble, implying it will fall over soon, thus confirming he’s awake and in reality. Try this
link to have the whole thing explained.
The Dream AlternativeThen the doubt started creeping in. If the spinning top doesn’t fall then Cobb is still in a dream. If his reunion with his kids isn’t in reality, then at what point in the story have we actually seen ‘reality’. Is it after he’s tried out the new drugs which induce dreaming (since we never get to see Cobb spin his totem after that) or is he unknowingly in a dream the entire movie? There's plenty of references supporting this argument including a drug den employee who states that for his customers, who experience 40 hours a day in their drug induced dreamstate, that, "It has now become their reality. Who are we to say otherwise?" Cobb's father as played by Michael Caine implores his son to "Come back to reality" while later, Yusuf replies "Depends on the dream" when asked by Ariadne why someone would want to stay in a 10 year long dreamstate. There’s a great explanation of that theory
here.
Of course if it is ALL a dream, that means that most or all of the characters are all figment’s of Cobb’s imagination; or in Inception terms, projections of his subconscious. If you subscribe to the theories of renowned psychologist Carl Jung, then you’ll know that he believed that the mind was divided into distinctive archetypes that interact with each other. These archetypes are why classic stories retain their power, such as Star Wars, The Bible and Lord of the Rings. Within these stories, and our own mind, lie the archetypes such as the hero, wise man, trickster etc. All of these archetypes can be applied to the characters that surround Cobb in Inception. Check out this
site for more on that concept.
The Other TheoryIn the movie, Cobb completes the job he’s hired to do by Saito, a wealthy Asian businessman, and as a consequence manages to resolve his personal issues regarding his dead wife Mal.
But, what if Cobb has been conned into thinking he’s doing a job for Saito, where he’s really being lured into a perpetual dream state where he can deliberately be allowed to resolve his subconscious issues.
Maybe it’s not really Cobb who’s conning Fisher into inception…maybe it’s Saito conning Cobb into inception. Or perhaps it’s Ariadne, not Saito, that’s the one organising the con, as a way to perform some shrink therapy on Cobb. Either way, it may not be Cobb who’s pulling the strings. See
here for more.
I know it frustrates a lot of people who require a definitive resolution to their movies. One prominent
reviewer stated that Inception had a Schrodinger’s Ending, referring to the infamous quantum physics experiment Schrodinger’s Cat. In that experiment a cat is sealed in a box with a 50/50 chance of it being poisoned. Until the box is opened there's no way to know if the cat is dead or alive. Therefore, the cat exists as both living AND dead at the same time, until the answer is revealed. So with Inception, the reviewer argues that all interpretations of the story are valid until Christopher Nolan tells us definitively which version is correct (which I'm sure he'll never do). The reviewer, monikered Massawyrm, hates this. I do not. Who says a film HAS to have one definitive interpretation. It's narrow minded. Either pick a version you like or accept that all versions of the story are valid and shut your pie hole!
And that’s just the story itself, to say nothing of the subtext or meaning that lies within. Nolan streamlines the visual and dialogue, often repeating images or phrases to make a point.
Trains = This comes to represent Cobb’s ex-wife Mal, as she unstoppable bursts from his subconscious. A verbal image is used to represent Mal’s beliefs about death/the afterlife; that it will take you on a journey where you don’t know the destination, but it will reunite you with loved ones. It's revealed that the Cobal job, which is the film's opening dream sequence, ultimately takes place on a train (Cobb elects to get off,
before it reaches it's destination as he doesn't like trains, as we find out.)
Water = In one form or another, water plays a large part of the dreamscapes we encounter. In the first dream level it’s raining (amusingly because Yusuf's subconscious is telling him he wants a pee!) In the second, water behaves strangely during shifts in gravity. In the third level its all ice, snow and avalanches. And in the forth level it’s the ocean. In all levels water represents the unconstructed, volatile fluidity of the subconscious mind.
As with other movies, it also represents a cleansing of the human spirit. Only Cobb and Fisher are seen to drink a glass of water on the plane, before they start dreaming…and it is those two who emerge from water (the river/the sea) changed men after their experiences.
Squares and Grids = Like The Matrix and The Dark Knight, the streamlined, man-made and angular locations the characters find themselves in are meant to communicate they’re in a controlled, constructed environment. There’s never any curved architecture or little countryside (aside from the ice…see above). The film’s suggesting that whenever you see this rigid structures you’re seeing a dream world that’s been constructed by an architect. The thing is, these angular locations, inside and out, can also be seen in scenes that are supposed to be taking place in reality (like in the Parisian classroom or Cobb‘s apartment) …suggesting that Cobb is in a dream state at these moments as well.
Drugs = Not only do the dreamers have to induce a compound to allow them to share dreams, there are repeated references to dreamings addictive qualities. As Cobb correctly observes about Ariadne, "reality won't be enough for her now". For Cobb himself, it's suggested that "he can't dream anymore" without the assistance of a compound, much like a drug addict can't do without a fix to achieve a level of normality in their life. Also, Cobb visits what clearly looks like an opium den, with compound users led in a hidden basement, sharing a 'fix'.
There’s a lot of conceptual tensions that are set up in the story.
1/
Reality vs. Dreams. As mentioned before, the perception of what is imagined and what is real is the foundation of Inception. Also, does it at the end of the day matter? Cobb and Fisher both achieve a positive, emotional catharsis (and so does the audience)so really, who cares if it’s real or not?
If you're familiar with the notions put forward by philosopher Bauldrillard in the 60's and 70's, then you'll know these concepts are right up his street. He put forward the case of "the loss of the real". That we're bombarded by so many images, descriptions, theories and ideas about our world, that it's no longer possible to separate what is actually 'real' and what we perceive (from all the media manipulated information that we're bomarded with) as 'real'. If, 1000 years ago, you encountered a horse, then that
genuine experience would have been real. These days we've seen pictures of horses, magnificent paintings, soundbites on the radio, races on television, photographs of cloned horses in magazines, cartoon representations in comics that our perceptions of what it would be like to actually encounter a horse, is different from a face-to-face experience with one. Just like the difference in Saito recognising the difference, at the beginning of the movie, between a real rug and a simulation; a copy constructed from perception of reality, not reality itself.
2/
Knowledge vs. Faith. A lot of Cobb’s issues stem from the fact he still doubts whether he’s awake or dreaming. When Ariadne says of Mal, ”She’s not real” Cobb replies, “How do you know?” In his final conversation with Mal (well himself actually, as she’s just a projection of his subconscious) he tells himself he KNOWS the difference between dream and reality. But she responds by asking him what he believes, not by what he knows.
Throughout, both Saito and Mal invite Cobb to take a “leap of faith”, to stop questioning what he knows and to believe in what he sees as reality and to believe in his choices.
3/
Past Vs Future. Cobb, guilt ridden and regretful, has abandonded his future ,as represented by his children, whose faces he willfully avoids looking at (he regretfully chooses to flee rather that having been chased away) and is haunted by his past, as represented by Mal, whose suicide he blames himself for).
4/
Order Vs Chaos. The conscious mind is seen as ordered, such as mazes, cities, buildings and roads while the subconscious is seen as chaotic; naturalistic and unpredictable.
5/
Heaven Vs Hell. Hell is seen as being an “old man, filled with regret, waiting to die alone” as represented in Saito’s limbo residence, all lit with flame coloured hues. Heaven, the brightly lit, out of focus, slow motion world that’s represented during the last few minutes of the film is seen as somewhere cathartic, where faith has been embraced, innocence inside yourself has been rediscovered and where reunions with long seen loved ones can happen.
Choices & PromisesLinking these ’tensions’ together is the theme of choice. For inception to work then the mark (the target, in this case Fisher) has to believe that they originated the planted idea themselves. They have to decide whether the idea is theirs and theirs alone. Cobb has to make a decision to choose between the opposites listed above, whether to choose as to whether Mal’s real or not, to stay with her forever in limbo or to return to his kids, and to decide between reality and dreaming.
Of the latter, Cobb decides it doesn’t matter, He turns his back on his totem, effectively ignoring what ‘truth’ it will tell him. We’re told that dreams are constructed like mazes, to keep the dreamer trapped inside so they remain unaware of their dream state. In the final shot Cobb exit’s the house and enters the garden…which could be seen as him exiting the maze (as it no longer matters what ‘reality’ he’s in). However, while Cobb might have turned his back, we the audience have not, effectively keeping us in the maze.
The choice of performing inception on Mal has obviously placed its toll on Cobb; regret and guilt being the outcome. The guilt stems from the broken promise where he’d guaranteed his wife they’d be together forever. Since guilt leads to doubt, which in turn leads to a lack of belief in ones choices, Cobb has to start believing again… to make a “leap of faith”…in order to move forward. By letting go of Mal (by acknowledging her death rather than trying to keep her alive as a memory) and by choosing to embrace a reunion with his kids (by saving Saito from limbo so he can fulfill his promise to clear Cobb’s name) he’s able to achieve catharsis.
If you subscribe to the theory that Saito is performing inception on Cobb then “taking a leap of faith” is the idea he’s trying to plant.
Movies As DreamsMoving on, the film can be interpreted as a dream itself. What you’re watching on the big screen isn’t ‘real’, it all imagined with everything onscreen from the locations, sound, dialogue, story and performances having been constructed by a collaboration of imaginative minds. So while the characters onscreen share dreams, so we the audience are sharing the dream that is Inception too.
In the movie, the team of characters are seen to collaborate on performing inception by constructing the dream. Therefore, if the movie is a dream, then Cobb and his team are responsible for the film and as such, can be seen to acquire the primary roles that go into movie making. E.g., Cobb is the director, Arthur is the producer etc. See
here for more on that reading of the film.
So there you go. The ramblings of a film geek. Congratulations and apologies if you’ve finished this article, but it had to be done, if not for your benefit then for mine. With so many layers, ideas, concepts and interpretations on offer then I guess I needed to get this typed out so I can make sense of it myself.
Is it a great movie? Hell yeah. A great drama. A great action film. A great heist movie. A pub debating movie. Just take care. If you watch this then go straight to bed then insomnia* might just be the result as this film gets stuck in your head.
* No, I’m not talking about Christopher Nolan’s 2002 crime movie
remake.
