There is an argument to be made that the best ideas are the ones that inspire more ideas. In the world of cinema then, the best movies of our time don’t just entertain us but will inspire the entertainment to come. Some movies are overt indicators of the society they were popular in—ex. last year’s Best Picture winner, “The Hurt Locker.” Other movies are so separated from their time that to place them requires examining the production, actor age, secondary technicalities and the film’s relation to its genre counterparts. Genre counterparts though might be the biggest disadvantage in the Oscar race—yet the greatness indicator—for Christopher Nolan’s “Inception.”
Maybe “Inception” is a dramatic, award-baiting, elitist film. In the film, Leonardo Dicaprio struggles to come to terms with his own guilt-ridden conscious—as he gave his wife an idea that later, inadvertently, inspired her to commit suicide. This, as a premise, is borderline “Oscar-bait.” It’s an acting showcase that threatens hamfisted emotion for two hours or a tour de force from one of Hollywood’s best--not to mention the other seven Oscar-nominated actors. Unfortunately for Dicaprio, “Inception” cost around $160 million and those kind of blockbuster productions don’t get actors nominated. Small production movies like “Crazy Heart,” “Milk,” or “Capote” get actors trophies. So no, “Inception” isn’t an Oscar showcase, a star vehicle, ‘The Little Film that Could’ or any other award angle Hollywood likes.
Maybe “Inception” is a summer blockbuster. It made over $825 million worldwide. Things blew up. Faceless minions got shot. Filmed over six countries and three continents. Gravity disappeared in the best fight scene of the year. Hell, a city folded over on top of itself. At some points it seemed as if director Nolan had so much money that he was finding the most elaborate ways to spend it—ex. duel suicide by mid-city runaway train. A person’s subconscious could be represented by an empty room (and, indeed, was); or it could be represented by some ice-fortress destined to blow the hell up in the middle of Siberia (and, indeed, did). Somewhere Michael Bay was slapping his forehead saying, “Why didn’t I think of that?” But no, something was missing. Both “Transformers” movies made more money in America than “Inception.” Why? “Inception” was alienating. “Inception” had one (likely improvised) joke. “Inception” didn’t have the easy set-ups and payoffs, pop culture references or sweaty cleavage shots. “Inception” was confusing. And boring. And nerdy.
Maybe “Inception” is a science-fiction film. It set-ups a crazy breakthrough in scientific technology and explores the concept and implications. It’s like “Dark City,” “Twelve Monkeys,” or “The Matrix.” We go in and out of worlds and play the technicalities of reality. The films poses several “what-if” questions and then answers a few. So many more questions in and about this cinematic universe are left unanswered that a sequel would seem possible, probable or even inevitable…in someone else’s hands. In someone else’s hands, “Inception” would have been about the technology and business of idea-stealing. In someone else’s hands, any other character, or every other character, would have had a history, a desire, a fear and/or a future. But not in the film that is. This film isn’t about the science of dreaming any more than it’s a heist movie.
Wait a minute. Maybe “Inception” is a heist movie! Slick professionals organize a team and attempt a convoluted caper. “Inception” certainly is structure like a heist movie—opening with a low-end, failed heist and aims to fool the audience with the last piece of the robbery plan. But no, heist movies are about stealing, not creating.
Also, heist movies are about things going hilariously awry.
So maybe “Inception” is a film about films. A reflective critique on the dream-like qualities of movies. The most powerful, the most visceral, moment of the film was the quiet exiting of the airplane after two hours of mind-bending chaos. The characters were waking up but they all maintained such silent, dead-eyed, blank expressions that they had might as well just be leaving an auditorium after two hours of mind-bending chaos. Is it over? Are they awake? They don’t even fully feel, see or hear the real world until getting into their cars and driving home.
“Inception” isn’t a perfect film, as it fails to be exceptional in any genre. But it is an inspiring movie. Or at least we can hope it is. We can hope that filmmakers see the strength of film without fixating on the genre conventions. In twenty years, in fifty years, film audiences will look back on 2010 and ask, “what came out that year?” I think it’s important that we can point to the film that was impressive and popular; that we had good timing to be there and clarity to see the influence before the influenced; so that we can say, “duh, that was the year of ‘Inception.’”
No comments:
Post a Comment