The formula for a big summer action blockbuster could not be simpler:

1. Start with an absurd premise.
2. Use the absurd premise as a pretext for generating loads of over-the-top action sequences.
3. Flesh out those action sequences with a bunch of over-the-top special effects.

With Inception, Christopher Nolan has followed the formula dutifully, and I think there can be no further discussion (as Stephen raised on Twitter the other day and again here on one of his Twitter round-ups) about whether this movie is going to be a flop. It isn't.

It's got all the right ingredients to pack the summer movie popcorn munchers into the seats. I just returned from a nearly full-house screening of Inception, and the mostly teenagers and twenty-somethings who made up the audience were highly appreciative, especially of the very end of the film, on which I'll have some comments in a moment. 

So, yes, the film appears to have summer movie chops, but it offers a bit more than just that. For example, it provides a rather sly commentary on the movie business -- Leonardo DiCaprio and his posse of dream-manipulators are really just a kind of specialized film crew. One of the challenges discussed early on in the film has to do with how the artificial dream world is established and made real to the dreamer. It may just be coincidence that this issue is raised during a sequence in which we go from Kyoto to Paris to Mombasa all in fairly short order, and each time with a visually stunning establishing shot (or set of shots) telling us where we are now. Sure, it might be coincidence, but I don't think so.

Along the way, Inception asks some fearless questions about the power of ideas, where they come from, and, ultimately, the nature of reality. I don't think that a spoiler alert is required before writing that one of the film's principal conceits is the notion that dreams can be embedded within dreams. Watching characters deal with the various levels of reality, I couldn't help but be reminded of the Simulation Hypothesis. The chief problem with establishing multiple layers of reality is a simple but profound one -- how can you ever know for sure that  the world you are experiencing is the real world?

In taking on the question of where ideas come from, Nolan does something brilliant. He pulls off an Inception of his own. That is to say, he plants an idea in the audience's mind so subtly that we believe that we came up with it ourselves. A theory is introduced in the film which is described as a grave error. Believing it leads to tragic consequences. And yet we as an audience are led to conclude that this theory may, in fact, be true.

The movie ends with an amazing confirmation, not that the theory is true or false, but that somebody has, indeed, been messing around in our heads for the last couple hours. That's a pretty scary thought, but maybe one we should consider more often than we do.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Inception will thrill you, then change the way you watch movies [Movie Review] (io9.com)
• Inception, Christopher Nolan, 148 mins (12A) (independent.co.uk)
• Inception Review " Dork Shelf (atomiurl.com)
• 8Questions with Ken Watanabe: Actor who plays Saito, "The Tourist" in 'Inception' (jozjozjoz.com)
• Inception Dreams Up Impressive Opening Day (screenhead.com)
• 'Inception' earns dreamy reception with $60.4M (seattletimes.nwsource.com)

Posted by Phil Bowermaster at 11:57 PM | Permalink | Comments (3)

UPDATE: The movie Avatar is absolutely gorgeous. I was stunned at the technological leap I was seeing on the screen. The uncanny valley has been crossed. There is nothing unsettling about the digital characters in this film. They are as real and as expressive as any actor I've ever seen on the screen. The creatures and plant life are realized in incredible detail.

James Cameron is an technical and artistic genius.

But I'm not sure how often I'm going to watch this film in the future. Its filled with self-loathing for humanity and our technological advancement. The military is portrayed, with a couple of notable exceptions, as a bunch of trigger-happy sadists. Corporations and capitalism are shown to be the engines of environmental destruction both on Earth and on Pandora.

This is not a happy message. Its also wrong.

I can't wait to see the incredible tools that Cameron has developed in service of better stories.

---

ORIGINAL POST (2009-12-17 13:02:39):

I've had a sinking feeling for a few weeks that Avatar might turn out to be "Captain Planet" for the big screen. This review at Popular Science doesn't reassure me:

Avatar is every militant global warming supporter's dream come true as the invading, technology-worshiping, environment-ravaging humans are set upon by an angry planet and its noble inhabitants. But the film's message suffers mightily under the weight of mind-boggling hypocrisy. Cameron's story clearly curses the proliferation of human technology. In Avatar, the science and machinery of humankind leads to soulless violence and destruction. It only serves to pollute the primitive but pristine paradise of Pandora.

Of course, without centuries of development in science and technology, the film putting forth this simple-minded, self-loathing worldview wouldn't exist. You'd imagine Cameron himself would be bored to tears on the planet he created.

Posted by Stephen Gordon at 6:02 AM | Permalink | Comments (19)

I saw Benjamin Button last night. My three word review is: "a beautiful disappointment."

Spoilers from here forward.

...

Seriously, major spoilers.

...

Continue reading "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button - a review" »

Posted by Stephen Gordon at 9:25 AM | Permalink | Comments (19)

FFR listeners know of my fondness for the first Ghostbusters movie. To me, it is the Godfather of comedy. For years fans have wanted a decent sequel. Finally, it looks like there's some chance that it might happen.

Skip to the 5 minute mark:

Posted by Stephen Gordon at 5:41 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)

It was field day for my older kids today, so they got out of school early. I couldn't let them waste the day, right? I took off and we went and caught a matinée.

This is a great movie. Not just a great comic book movie... its a great movie.

I won't spoil it.

Oh, stay through the credits. You'll be glad you did.

Posted by Stephen Gordon at 3:39 PM | Permalink | Comments (5)

I saw Spiderman 3 with my kids tonight. I didn't quite know what to expect because the reviews have been mixed. I figured the kids would enjoy it but that I'd be disappointed.

I wasn't. It is true that this third movie is not be quite the masterpiece that the last one was. The scene on the train in the second movie remains the highlight of the series. It was exciting and, ultimately, very touching. And this third movie is marred, slightly, by at least three coincidences that completely strain credibility...which is a bad thing to ask of an audience that is already accepting the existence of superheros. That said, I had a great time.

I was afraid that this movie was going to be overly crowded with supervillians. It didn't feel that way. Each character had a pivotal role to play. And, ultimately, it feels like this movie completed the story arc that was started with the first two movies.

And, as usual, there are some good morals for the kids - and the rest of us. The lesson of the first movie was, of course, "with great power comes great responsibility." The second movie taught that you shouldn't run away from your responsibilities.

Spiderman 3 teaches that you don't have to bear your responsibilities alone. That you can always choose to do the right thing. AND that there is power in forgiveness. That's a lot to ask a superhero movie to teach, but as usual Spiderman gets the job done.

By the way, the special effects are amazing. The CGI in these films just gets better and better. You can see why Spiderman 3 is the most expensive movie ever made.

In short, I highly recommend it if you enjoyed the first two Spiderman films. And who didn't enjoy the first two?

Posted by Stephen Gordon at 9:48 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Somehow a rumor got started that Gillian Anderson had ruled out involvement in any future X-Files project. Well, she felt compelled to address this rumor and those gossip hound(s) that started it at her blog:

I want to address the recent confusion around whether or not I enjoyed working on the X-Files... I don't even know where to begin but I need to keep it short and with my claws in...

The series went on for a long time - longer than any of us had anticipated or some of us had wished. It was the hardest work I will ever do in my life. I hope for the sake of my children and my sanity that I never have to work that hard again.

Did I hate it? At times yes.

Did I love it? At times yes.

Did I regret it or do I regret it now? Not for a second.

Did David and I hate each other? At times yes like any brother and sister, husband and wife, co-worker and co-worker forced to spend that much time together under such strenuous circumstances.

Do we hate each other now? Not in the least.

Do I imagine that when we do the film together we won't hate each other for a few hours during the filming? No. We will. Vehemently. As David waits patiently, again and again for the hair dryer to calm my frizzy hair between takes so it matches the beginning of the scene... he will undoubtedly be thinking "what the hell was I thinking agreeing to shoot with her f****** frizzy hair again?"

But we will also love each other and laugh with each other and pull pranks on each other and bug each other like we did for nine years.

The claws are in... but ready.

So Gillian Anderson doesn't hate David Duchovny or the X-Files. And she's doing another film with Duchovny. In this context I have to think she means a new X-Files movie!

H/T to Aintitcoolnews.

Posted by Stephen Gordon at 5:51 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

Let me get the movie review part out of the way. The Prestige is great! Go see it. 5 out of 5 stars.

What I really want to do is talk about the movie - with spoilers. Trust me - you don't want this movie spoiled. Imagine having The Sixth Sense explained in advance. Come back when you've seen the movie.

[BIG BAD SPOILERS AHEAD]

Continue reading "A discussion of the film "The Prestige"" »

Posted by Stephen Gordon at 10:18 AM | Permalink | Comments (4)

In the last couple of weeks I've seen two very different movies that I'd highly recommend to anyone who enjoys the topics we cover at The Speculist: The Astronaut Farmer, and The Prestige.

The Astronaut Farmer (which just opened in theaters) is the family film of these two. This is the sort of dream-affirming film that is perfect for whole family, but is often panned by the critics. Liam Lacey of Globe and Mail had this to say:

You keep waiting for the other shoe to drop: When will the irony start? The twist is there isn't one. The Astronaut Farmer starts out looking like a parody of wholesome inspirational fare and then gets ever-more sincere…

The lack of irony is a twist? Er…Liam…dude, who says that movies that promise to be inspirational and wholesome and sincere have to be ironic? Why can't they just be inspirational, wholesome, and sincere?

He should be thankful. His smug crowd would run out of things to parody without stories like this. It's a very old-fashioned movie - Mr. Smith Goes To Space, or maybe Rocky with a Rocket.

[MINOR SPOILERS AHEAD]

If it's Rocky, its actually Rocky 1 and 2 rolled together. Perhaps the critics would have liked it more if the movie had ended before the last reel. But I enjoyed watching the understated way that the final triumph was portrayed. The family picks him up in their old rambler and drive into town for pizza.

There's much that's stretches credibility here. Serious X-prize contenders spent much more than the $10,000,000 prize developing their suborbital vehicles. In the movie Farmer had about $600,000 invested in an orbital space program. Also, the X-prize contenders were all large teams. Farmer was just one guy who got some assistance from a Mexican farm hand, his 15-year-old son, and an invalid father-in-law. In reality, that's just not enough.

Also, the movie makes a paranoid swipe at the FBI. About halfway into the movie Farmer is told by an FBI agent that if he tries to launch his rocket, he will be shot down. When his lawyer suggests that that agent is bluffing, Farmer replies that "Well, I think they've gotten pretty good at assassinating people with dreams."

Yeah. Because the F.B.I. assassinated Martin Luther King, Jr. Right.

The Astronaut Farmer did much better when it's criticism was aimed at NASA. In a piece of perfect casting Bruce Willis was made the personification of the agency. He was portrayed as an aging hero protecting past glories from an upstart civilian. But he was also a friend of Farmers who ultimately celebrated his victory.

[END MINOR SPOILERS]

The message, I think, is that NASA itself is an old hero that can find a way to live with and accommodate the upstarts to come. Space is big enough for government agencies and eccentric tinkerers.

I'll save my spoiler-filled review of The Prestige for an later update.

Posted by Stephen Gordon at 6:01 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The movie Rocky Balboa is great. If you have any appreciation of the series you won't be let down. The love story of Rocky and Adrian really needed this final chapter. [MILD SPOILER] It says something about Talia Shire's wonderful portrayal of Adrian that her absence is so... brutal... in a bittersweet way.

So yeah, Joseph Rago should probably stay away from this one. No irony here. This one is all heart. This is evident not only in the clear love that Stallone and the entire crew obviously have for this character, his story, and the audience, but also because "heart" is central to the plot.

At the beginning of the movie Rocky is almost defeated by life. He's been driven to his knees by the loss of Adrian. He's isolated and he's getting old. But he is still the man he always was: "it ain't about how hard you hit... it's about how hard you can get hit, and keep moving forward... how much you can take, and keep moving forward."

The pro-life extension community could really appreciate the message. Part of the melancholy of the movie is the fact that Rocky is getting older. I think if Rocky were offered youth again he'd jump at it. His triumpth is in acknowledging his youthful spirit even as his body deteriorates. He finds a way to "keep moving forward."

Posted by Stephen Gordon at 10:15 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)

I'm being forced off-topic in order to make this public service announcement - please don't buy the 2006 live action version of "Year Without a Santa Claus." It comes out today on DVD after premiering last night on television.

It is just awful. Everything about it screams that it was done cheap. The script is terrible, the film quality looks like it was shot with a cam-corder. The actors seemed to have realized - too late to get out of it - that they had made a mistake to take the job. You can actually see their embarrassment at the lines they have to deliver. John Goodman looked ill for most of the movie - probably because it was shot here in Louisiana last July. Who's bright idea was it to put John Goodman in a full Santa outfit and run him around downtown Natchitoches, Louisiana in 100 + degree weather? Goodman was so sweaty and flushed that I got a little concerned about his health.

It saddens me that somebody, somewhere is going to spend hard-earned money on this tripe for a child. Please, if you want to buy a Christmas DVD for a kid in your life avoid this one like the plague. Go with one of the classics:

• A Charlie Brown Christmas Special
  
• Emmit Otter's Jug Band Christmas
  
• A Christmas Story (its the "you'll shoot your eye out" story)
  
• Rudolf the Red Nosed Reindeer (the Rankin/Bass version).
  
• Santa Claus is Coming to Town (Rankin/Bass)
  
• A Christmas Carol

Of course there are many versions of A Christmas Carol. It's surprising that so many of these productions are good. Alastair Sim, George C. Scott, and Patrick Stewart have all done great work playing Ebenezer Scrooge - you can't go wrong with any of those versions.

Some parts of Scrooge's story are a bit intense for small kids. For them, get "The Muppet Christmas Carol." It's the same story, but the Muppets keep it light and funny. It wouldn't work except that Michael Caine plays Scrooge absolutely straight. Not for one second does he let on that most of his co-stars are puppets. A truly great kid's movie.

UPDATE: Just in case you read the title and then skipped to the last sentence... A Year Without A Santa Claus is NOT "a truly great kid's movie." It is absolute swill. It is perhaps the worst production I've seen on television this decade.

Posted by Stephen Gordon at 9:28 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

I went to a midnight showing of Batman Begins last night. Simply put, it was one of the finest action adventures movies I've ever seen. Don't miss it.

It's presently pulling 83% positive reviews on the Tomato meter. The 17% that didn't like it apparently didn't go see the movie I saw.

Maybe they rented Clooney's "Batman and Robin."

Posted by Stephen Gordon at 6:24 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)