NOTE: Expect this discussion to contain SPOILERS about Inception.
By now everybody who really wanted to has seen Christopher Nolan’s Inception. One of the big discussions going on for weeks leading up to the film’s release was whether or not expectations for the filmÂ were set too high.
Now I want to know: after seeing the film, were they?
For me that answer is yes for two big reasons – the trailers and the reviews.
It was obvious from the trailer that Inception was going to be a visual spectacle of high order. Various clips from the movie showed a zero gravity hallway fight scene, the city of Paris folding in half, and sleeping men floating and being tied together. Based on the 2-minute previews I was under the impression that what I had seen was only the tip of the iceberg and the visual effects that were in the movie were greater than what was hinted at. Unfortunately, almost every major visual trick that I saw in the movies, I had already seen briefly in the trailers. They were still impressive, but not as exciting.
The other reason I was disappointed were based off several reviews of the film. I try not to read entire reviews of movies before I see them. I always skip past the syopsizing andÂ straight to the criticism. More than a few of the early reviewers drew direct comparisons between Christopher Nolan and Stanley Kubrick, specifically 2001: A Space Odyssey. In Kubrick’s film, he and Arthur C. Clarke took something as abstract and incomprehensible as space and presented it in a surreal andÂ fantastical way. In Nolan’s film, he took something as abstract and incomprehensible as dreams and presented them in a logical, realisticÂ way. Nothing is necessarily right or wrong with either approach, but apart from a bed scene at the end of Inception which resembled the end of 2001, I fail to see anymore similarities.
Did Inception meet, fall short, or exceed your expectations? Why or Why not?