Inception (2010)

When writer/director Christopher Nolan was figuring out this film, I'm pretty sure he said multiple times,"Oh look. There's a stake we haven't raised yet. Let's raise it."

Inception is a dramatic, action-packed, science fiction, thriller of a heist film. So if you were looking for mindless summer blockbuster entertainment, run away. You need to go into watching this one knowing that your brain will be running the gambit.

Mine likes to wander off sometimes when I'm watching a movie. I'll start thinking about what other movies I've seen these actors in, or why they chose to light that scene like that, or, if the film is especially not engaging, things I should be doing instead of watching this movie.

Inception did not let me wander to any of those places. My attention was completely wrapped up for all 148 minutes of it. Plus, with how they mess with the concept of time, it doesn't even feel like 148 minutes. Actually, it doesn't feel like any specific amount of time. At the end I had no idea how long I was sitting there. And I wanted to see it again.

As others have said, it's not an easy movie to describe without having to say too much, but here's the premise. Cobb (Leonardo DiCaprio) leads a team that steals ideas out of people's dreams, usually in the name of corporate espionage. After trying to prove they can do it undetected to energy company head Saito (Ken Watanabe), Saito offers them a job doing the much tougher opposite--inception. He wants them to plant the idea of breaking up his dying father's energy empire into the mind of Robert Fischer (Cillian Murphy). Cobb's point man Arthur (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) has reservations about it, but Cobb insists it can be done. If they can do it, Saito will make sure Cobb can see his children again.

There's no standalone star here, even if Leo is on the poster. Instead it's a great ensemble--so much so it reminded me that there should really be a Best Acting Ensemble award at the Oscars. A solid team makes for such a more enjoyable and easier to get lost in film. Ellen Page who plays the team's new architect even manages to remove most of her Juno-esque line delivery and falls right in with the rest of the crew. Marion Cotilliard as Cobb's wife, Mal, pulls off being both caring and menacing. Tom Hardy (Eames, the forger) and Joseph Gordon-Levitt's banter is amusing without becoming tedious. And Dileep Rao as Yusuf the chemist plays the science guy without resorting to a stereotype.

In fact, the whole movie follows the balance you see in the acting. It has strange concepts without getting too trippy. The special effects are amazing without relying too much on CGI. Dialogue moves the story along and informs without hit-you-over-the-head narration. There's a lot of chase scenes without it becoming tiring. Even with some comparing it in ways to The Matrix, the whole thing just feels so fresh. Although the best part of all when I saw it was the collective noise most of the audience made at the end. It's a brilliant move.

Of course, as with most things, if you think about certain elements long enough you can start to pick it apart. But don't do that. Just enjoy the ride.

Rating: 5/5

Recommended for: Its elegant complexity

Shutter Island (2010)

When Leonardo DiCaprio and Martin Scorsese collaborate you have certain expectations. For example, you expect the movie to be good. Maybe you expect it to be a little violent. You might even expect it to not treat the audience like idiots.

Well... Shutter Island at least lives up to the second one. And it has an interesting plot. Or at least it makes you think it has an interesting plot.

Teddy Daniels (Leonardo DiCaprio) is a US Marshal in 1954 on the case of a missing patient from a hospital for the criminally insane on the allegedly unescapable Shutter Island. With his new partner Chuck Aule (Mark Ruffalo), Teddy comes across several roadblocks from the staff to the investigation and begins to suspect that something akin to the sinister activities he witnessed in death camps during World War II is taking place on the island. Things are further compounded by a hurricane, more escaped patients, and Teddy's dead wife.

Unfortunately Teddy and Chuck tell us way too many things explicitly. At some points it wouldn't be surprising if they turned to the camera and relayed the lines. And with the storm and the fireplaces and the men sitting in high-back chairs, you almost expect Teddy to announce it was Col. Mustard who absconded with the missing patient in the library with the candelabra.

There's a fair amount of suspense but it gets tiring after awhile and the story really starts to drag. Eventually, it's just annoying and tempting to fast forward to the end.

The actors do a fair enough job with what they've been given. Patricia Clarkson probably gives the strongest performance, but then again she was just making the most of the 5 minutes she's in the movie. DiCaprio and Ruffalo seem like an odd pairing. I never think of them as being in the same genre of films, but they work well together here.

In the end, only parts of it were the thriller I expected and instead of finding the ending itself clever, I felt betrayed. Looking back I see where all the seeds are sown, I just didn't care any more when it came time to harvest.

Rating: 2/5

Recommended for: People who like to be reminded that sometimes great film people put out a not-so-great movie

Vertigo (1958)

Vertigo stars James "Jimmy" Stewart as recently retired, acrophobic police detective John "Scottie" Ferguson. Scottie's been hired as private investigator by an old college friend to follow his wife Madeline (Kim Novak). Despite Madeline's apparent ritualistic behaviors and suicidal tendencies, Scottie finds himself falling for her.

I'm more a fan of Hitchcock's mental thrillers than his more blatant harming people right in front of your face. I'll take Notorious over The Birds any day. So since I knew Vertigo would include an on-screen death, I felt I was getting a little adventurous with this movie choice. And in a way, I was.

This movie is sort of amazing. With the time period in which the movie was filmed I expected some hokeyness - perhaps along the lines of Dial M for Murder which came out four years earlier. While a little hokeyness persisted in Vertigo, it's not enough to make a lasting impression. Instead it's surprisingly deep story. Jimmy Stewart is more known for uttering lines that include the phrase "hot dog!" but here he gradually transforms into a man compelled by one dark notion.

My only gripe is one that transcends this movie into a general Hitchcock gripe. It's the use of glasses to make a girl "unattractive" so the audience can dismiss her as being anything but a character who will be used by our protagonist. In Vertigo it's Barbara Bel Geddes as Scottie's friend (and former girlfriend), Midge. Her big, red frames (and prior Hitchcock knowledge) telegraph right from the beginning that despite her being the most likable character and the biggest help for Scottie, we can't even hope anyone will take stock in her. You could spin it and say the glasses are a sign that only she sees what's happening to Scottie, but with Judy's existence that seems less likely the case. It's too bad because she's a fantastic character and Bel Geddes give a fantastic performance.

I don't want to give too much more away. It's definitely more fun to view it not quite knowing where it's going. But I was impressed - with the story, symbolism, and acting. I guess I haven't seen enough of the films that came out in 1958 to understand why Stewart didn't at least get an Oscar nomination (although he did win the Zulueta Prize at the San Sebastian International Film Festival).

Rating: 4/5

Recommended for: seeing an exquisite Hitchcock balancing act

The Hurt Locker (2009)

Within the first ten minutes of The Hurt Locker you know you're watching a wonderfully crafted film. You may think from the poster and the critics' quotes that pepper the advertisements that it's going to be an ultra-violent, non-stop adventure. But it's not. The nerve-wrecking, explosive episodes are delicately balanced with moments of quiet and reflection. It's so well thought out. And with fantastic cinematography, there is so much to see.

With her trusty team of handheld cameras and a psuedo-documentary style director Kathryn Bigelow provides a realistic (although I have no idea at how accurate) look at three men's approaches to modern war. She doesn't give us action heroes. She gives us regular men who specialize in certain activities just doing their job. Each time this Explosive Ordnance Disposal team goes out to do that there's an element that makes it different from the last even though it's essentially the same job. And each time has it's own tension, despite the monotony that also exists in their task being never-ending. The main actors (Jeremy Renner, Anthony Mackie, and Brian Geraghty) flow along with this balance. Their lines are brief but they show you everything they're thinking and feeling.

The whole film is definitely show more than tell. Bigelow presents a story and in doing so raises questions and lets you take what you want from the film. The most poignant question seems to be how do men and women live in those tense conditions eventually come back to their regular lives back home? How do they reconcile those two lives?

If this doesn't at least get the Oscars for cinematography and directing, I'll be disappointed.

Rating: 5/5
Recommended for: its real feel and suspense appeal

Strangers On A Train (1951)

Lonely socialite Bruno Anthony (Robert Walker) meets rising amateur tennis star Guy Haines (Farley Granger) on a train out of Washington DC. Through casual conversation Bruno reveals his theory on how two strangers could get away with murder as well as how he's noticed both him and Guy have someone in their lives they could do without.

Strangers On A Train is #32 on the American Film Institute's 100 Years... 100 Thrills list. And while it was directed by Alfred Hitchcock, it's really the plot that makes the film a classic. It's so classic the concept has been used on every television crime show. In fact, it's pretty easy to be familiar with this movie without ever having seen it.

The film itself though is not all together timeless. Many elements that worked just fine in the 50s come across as corny today, making it harder to come by character buy-in. One such corny element is the blatant attempts to make two female characters, Miriam and Barbara, look dowdier than the romantic lead through the use of incredibly thick glasses. While the glasses also serve another purpose, they practically yell out how you're supposed to feel and think about these two women. In other words, subtlety is lost on this film. Another incident involves an out-of-control carousel, which raises too many credibility questions and almost ruins a tense moment with its ridiculousness.

But even with the film's datedness, there are still enduring Hitchcock facets. One is his patented slow chase. Much like in 1946's Notorious, there's a chase that includes a fair amount of waiting, sitting, and stopping but amazingly retains its urgency throughout. The tension Hitchcock creates there, and really through the last half of the film, is so well done - especially since the characters weren't so sympathetic to begin with.

Possibly the most timeless element of all though is Bruno's creepiness. Although this isn't so much to Hitchcock's credit as it is to Robert Walker's performance and the story itself.

Rating: 3/5

Recommended for: People who enjoy watching slow, shoddy police work