Inception (with implanted spoilers)

^^^^ I agree totally

i three-gree

i mean, i think he isn't being profound, i think he gets these ideas and figures "oh this would be AWESOME" and yes the notion of industrial mind-thieves messing around in the minds of other people and having insane action scenes in their dreams is kind of awesome. and he's just really, really good at bringing the audience along. the cross-cutting between various levels of subconscious and the time differences in each was pretty brilliant, and not because of the "idea" as much as the execution (which solved an action movie problem via the time differences: cross-cutting between different action scenes and not missing a beat in any of them.)

George Lazenby's thoughts

i think if the movie is saying anything "meaningful" it's about the creative process/movies and not necessarily the metaphysics of reality, etc...

it's a bit tiresome to attack the movie for not being as smart as Nolan thinks it is...intentional fallacy, etc...maybe you could argue Nolan invites that kinda thing but it's a pretty boring way to talk about a movie.

xpost -- uh, wait, THE George Lazenby?

yes, that one. he's great on twitter.

If Nolan invites it, it's certainly up for discussion. And this is just internet discussion, which really is rarely more than boring. Anyway, I love a well-made movie as much as anyone else, and this one is well made, too. Totally enjoyed it as I watched it. But Nolan is such an exacting, self-consciously cerebral filmmaker I would be shocked if he simply set out to make an entertainment. But I suppose my personal struggle (not that it keeps me up at night) is that I deeply suspect Nolan made this movie for us/me to get more out of it than I did, but as with any good magic trick, I'm beginning to feel not that I don't get it but like a bit of a mark.

I think Nolan is a pretty great filmmaker, for what it's worth, and a smart guy, but this may be his first film where his reach slightly surpassed his grasp, especially compared to his other original properties ("Memento," "The Prestige"). No harm, no foul, though. I look forward to his next flick.

i like good magic tricks!

yes, that one.

That's pretty sharp. And I gotta say, he of all people should have been the one to invoke the Alpine setting of On Her Majesty's Secret Service as a comparison but he didn't = A+

I really liked Lazenby's post! Who knew?

mind blown @ george lazenby tumblr

mind blown @ ppl liking The Prestige so much

George Lazenby went politicking/businessmanning or something after Bond?

is the prestige the one with the clones or is that the other one

yes

he was in a series of Emmanuelle films in the 90s, it seems. reiterating my recommendation of his twitter.

xpost

Ha, turns out Lazenby is pretty interesting critic, who knew?

If I were Nolan, I'd be very proud of that dissection. That's awesome.

Personally, I love the idea of the movie as movie-making metaphor, though I suppose the double-edged sword is that it can come off a little smug if that indeed was fully what he was after. Like, aimless machine gunning as a sign of mastery of what it takes to put asses but also used as bait to put assess in seats? Unpacking that suitcase is a blast.

In 1968, Lazenby was cast as James Bond, despite his only previous acting experience being in commercials, and his only film appearance being a bit-part in a 1965 Italian-made Bond spoof, Espionage in Tangiers.[3]

Wow, his Tumblr is great!

Um, where does it say that it is George Lazenby?

He linked it from his twitter, which is twitter.com/georgelazenby. Ebert has confirmed it is him.

amaaaaaze

(and it's not just a Lazenby forger that got into Roger's dream?)

FWIW, Ebert's post and follow-ups from others:

http://twitoaster.com/country-us/ebertchicago/i-think-georgelazenby-is-one-of-the-smartest-tweeters-in-the-world-yes-that-george-lazenby/

Oh yeah, tried to look at that but it was blocked.

hey guys you know how you all said you wanted MORE Inception trailer mash-ups?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AY69-AgUmDQ&feature=player_embedded

this is now the george lazenby discussion thread

http://twitter.com/georgelazenby/status/20056138645

incredible

no way its actually him

http://twitter.com/georgelazenby/status/19952099465

looooooooooooooooooooooooooool

holy hell that is funny

bbbut ebert CONFIRMED

that's not the real ebert

http://www.wreckthetapedeck.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/usual-suspects-spacey_l.jpg

IMO a movie is really only a "B movie" or "B-style" movie if it's one or more of the following:

1. Cheap
2. Uses stock characters, especially reuse of the same characters
3. Lacks emotional/human development between characters
4. A take on traditional B tropes (film noir, capers, etc)

I can see where on 3 & 4 that Inception could fall into this, but there are plenty of other movies that sacrifice emotional development for action/plot and use capers that are not B-style

The budget, I concede, is undeniably A, but the characters are even given stock titles: The Forger. The Chemist. The Architect. The Plot Explicator. The Michael Caine. Again, no harm no foul, but it's pretty much a standard let's get the gang together for one last gig sort of formula at work here.

Loved the South Asian-looking chemist from a predominantly Muslim East African city breezing through US customs with no probs. Proves it was all a dream.

That Up/Inception trailer mash-up is pretty grand.

Coming from someone who enjoyed the spectacle, this movie gets dumber every time I think about it

maybe you're just getting smarter

sometimes I think ILX wants to back away supporting this movie for f33r of being held in less regard by other critic p33ples

not me! IT ROCKS IN UR FACE ILX

The more pressing anxiety to Nolan is the nightmare of anyone engaged in sustained creative activity: that the ineffable juice will find a crack in you somewhere, and drain away. We’ve all seen these movies. Formally, they’re in tip top shape: taut script, polished photography, sympathetic editing, the whole nine yards. But you come away from them with a profound feeling of emptiness. They’re like a piece of coral you’d keep on your desk. Incredibly intricate. Everything has proceeded in lockstep to make something enormously complicated, but it’s vacant. It houses nothing. Wind whistles through its impressive construction.

feel like this is a pretty otm description of inception, if only lazenby also felt this way

I demand to know what Ja Rule thought of this movie....

something something 'kicks' something something 'always on time'

um no, I enjoyed it but I also thought it had no character development whatsoever and that while its internal logic was smartly devised, at points it fell down and resorted to blagging it, and when considered at any depth it's JUST another sci-fi unreality ruse, and not an especially convincing one

the idea that his wife would come and shoot the guy just when he was about to complete the mission was crude but actually does resonate with the inevitability of dream logic - shame her continual appearances were so crassly managed

plus the 'limbo world' stuff was so hilariously unconvincing

plus it wasn't really a movie, more an idea! with guns!

and the snow-station scenes were rubbish and almost heroically confusing in their frantic action-idiocy

ah man that description is PERFECT

sb'ed for starting a new paragraph after every sentence

this wasn't anything like "a b-movie with an a-budget"

and nor was shutter island, are you effing kidding me?

pretty sure hitchcock's spellbound was not a b-movie

plus it wasn't really a movie, more an idea! with guns!

derp