IMDb > Inception (2010) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Inception More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 3 of 247: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [Next]
Index 2469 reviews in total 

202 out of 331 people found the following review useful:

hopefully more people who rightly thought this was rubbish

Author: grumpy-3 from london
24 July 2010

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

easily one of the worst films ever made, that some critics fell for it, just shows how bad today's professional critics have become. no doubt all the 14 to 18 year old Nolan fan boys are going to attack all of us, that have seen through this psycho babble non sense. ultimately the worst thing about the film is that it was utterly boring, from start to finish. at no time to you feel anything for any characters, the dialogue is of such a juvenile nature he must have got a 14 year old to write it. the guy has no idea of what dreams are what takes place during them, i will not go into any philosophical or psychological discussion here as the film does not warrant them, giving there is no sense in anything that is said or done. like dark knight this will have its time in the sun and in a few years the very same people who raved about it will wonder why. as for the ending with the top still spinning telling the audience that anyway it was all still a dream, totally makes the whole exercise futile. shame that a once good film maker has gone right up his proverbial

Was the above review useful to you?

124 out of 178 people found the following review useful:

Overrated because it makes people "feel" smart...

Author: mreesesh from United States
4 December 2010

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Christopher Nolan has done some great work.

His ideas and direction singlehandedly gave new life to the beloved superhero Batman.

While the film Dark Knight will always be recognized to the new dimensions it added to the classic Batman series of movies and comics, Inception was nothing more than a dull and linear plot, surrounded by and an even duller and more linear plot.

The centerpiece of this movie was supposed to be its convoluted storyline which was scattered across multiple levels, in essence puzzle that forces the viewer to think through the movie and decipher the ending.

The concept of "levels" and or "interconnected plots" worked very well for such great films such as the Matrix, 2001 A Space Odyssey, Logan's Run, or Total Recall. Inception not only miserably fails at this but it also lacks in other places as well.

-Characters: Great actors, whom have all done great work in many movies spanning decades. However the characters in this movie came off as neutered eunuchs who lacked sense, emotion, and any sort of cohesiveness. (Sir Michael Caine and Tom Berenger's performances were appalling and the "team" of dreamers lacked screen dynamics and chemistry.)

-Action: For a dream world, the action in this movie is very unimaginative and is well within the typical Hollywood bounds. Car cash scenes where the heroes drive and shoot, building shootouts, and melodramatic bullet wounds (as always one character is wounded critically, the team must save him; however the character can still "fight".)

-Plot: This movie could have easily been over within 1 hour of rolling. Not only was Inception's "puzzle ending" blatantly obvious 40 mins into the film, but the storyline it self lacked any substance or draw. The overly complicated "puzzle piece" effect which Nolan was trying to achieve, was nothing more than the main story line being surrounded by excessive fluff and whimsical bullplop.

*I will credit the movie with one notable mention. Nolan managed to work a Matrix style fight scene (which have been overdone by Hollywood since the early 2000s) into the small confines of an elevator.

In the ending, Inception is not the great rave that many make it out to be. While the movie takes place in a "dream world", where bounds are limitless, the movie itself is sterile, cliché, repetitive, and unimaginative. This is even further compounded by one dimensional characters, and a drawn out storyline that pretends to be an enigma.

Perhaps Christopher Nolan's true intent was to make a sterile and lack luster movie aimed strictly at making today's self-absorbed and obtuse Facebook-hipster generation feel "smart".

Inception can be compared to a class presentation where the student is unprepared. To hide this, the student uses convoluted and circular logic to stammer through the presentation and pass the time. It is obvious that the student knows nothing and has wasted several minutes talking about a subject that could have been explained in seconds. Nonetheless, since the student used "big words", talked excessively, and is deemed to be in the "mainstream" the class gives a standing ovation regardless...

Was the above review useful to you?

118 out of 185 people found the following review useful:


Author: Alex Correia from United Kingdom
10 November 2010

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Inception didn't bring anything fresh and original like everybody's claiming it has and calling this an intellectual movie is an insult. It tried, but it didn't succeed due to poor, nonsensical writing.

The soundtrack doesn't match the movie, it's too suspenseful in a movie with no suspense whatsoever.

The mission is something I can't really connect with and I don't know who can really.

There was really no sense of any danger at any point as it was all in a dream(s) and the limbo idea didn't make any sense. And by using that limbo concept on the character you couldn't care less if he lived or died, come on, who would care about a multi-millionaire asshole that's trying to get even richer by destroying his competition? He couldn't go back to the US because "They think I killed her"? Is that how the law works now, there was no evidence that he killed her, no witnesses, nothing, he would never be convicted for it, Leonardo, go back and go to court please ;-) They could have used more imaginative dream worlds instead of Dark knights Gotham city in day time, James Bond ice Fortress style and a Matrix like corridor (hallway).

The faceless subconscious militia, booooring. Or maybe the problem is that the subconscious of all of these people have no imagination. How come there was no crazy dream like scenes in a movie about dreaming? My dreams are much more interesting than the scenes of this movie...

I could go on and on but I just want to lower this high rating, because 9 out 10 is 3 or 4 more than this movie deserves.

Was the above review useful to you?

101 out of 157 people found the following review useful:

Incredibly Overrated!!!

Author: Sanyi1984 from Slovakia
1 November 2010

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Well, first of all, I have to absolutely clearly admit that I'm writing this review to lower the rating of this movie, since it was one of the biggest movie disappointments of my life. Currently 9.1 for this thing is unbelievably high. But I guess I get why the rating of this movie is so high. It makes the people feel good about themselves because they understood the "complicated" plot. Yes, thats it! Inception actually managed to plant the idea to the people that it was a good movie. At best its an average action movie with too long boring action scenes with the "added value" of a "smart" story. However the story is not smart at all. Its about people that somehow are able to get into people's dreams and do stuff there, or even go to dreams in dreams, and dreams in dreams in dreams, and limbo... Wow, you get it? You are really smart, and should rate this movie 10!!! But seriously, this story is really stupid. Why should I care that the Japanese guy wants to destroy the other guy's (the scarecrow from Batman) company? How did the architect girl become expert on dreams and psychology after two dream sessions? How are they even able to get into the dreams? I guess the acting overall is not bad, but who cares if the plot is so annoying. And finally, the twist at the end is really predictable. Yay, the spinning thing stops to spin: he might be dreaming! Really original. You might say that I did not get the message of the movie. Well, I did get it, but it was too stupid to care about it.

Was the above review useful to you?

108 out of 175 people found the following review useful:


Author: Danijel Pajur from Ireland
12 November 2010

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This movie is so predictable that it takes all of 10 minutes to figure it out. At that stage you know you're going to waste another 2 and a half hours watching the nonsense where people slip in and out of dreams in an attempt to fabricate a story where there was no story.

The plot starts in the first few minutes and ends in the last few minutes, everything in between... well... is better left unwatched.

If you haven't figured it out immediately, then chances are you won't by the time it's over, in which case you're also wasting 2 and a half hours of your time.

The only thing I got from watching this horrible overrated bloated cinematic experiment was a wish to kill myself. Maybe I'm dreaming, too?

Was the above review useful to you?

62 out of 86 people found the following review useful:

"9 out of 10"...Are you actually serious right now?

Author: deep-in-silence from United States
13 December 2010

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Just to start off, I read about 20 pages of reviews of this movie and had a few things of my own to add. I actually had to register to IMDb so I can explain why this movie is so bad. Seeing that this piece of garbage is rated 9 out of 10 made me wanna vomit. But enough about that, let's get to the serious issues with this movie.

1: Leonardo DiCaprio has not changed his role for the last 5 years. Am I the only one that notices this? He always plays some guy that has deep seated emotional issues relating to the loss of a loved one. Can he play anything else besides the loner that lost the love of his life and now has psychological scars that go so deep they hit the street he's standing on?

2: Why didn't they shoot his stupid wife anytime she showed up? He wasn't the only guy on the team that knew she was out to mess things up. Why not say, "Hey guys, if you see my wife shoot her because she's going to get us all killed. She's not real and is already dead, so go ahead and blow her away so we can get back to work."?

3: The dream world was the dullest I have ever seen. "Oh man...M.C. Escher stairs, a train driving down the street, buildings that go sideways and upside down..." That's all they could come up with? "Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory" was more imaginative than the supposed "dream-world". I'm pretty sure most dreams have more random stuff than that happen in them. Where's the off-the-wall imagination? I don't think anyone that says they had "the weirdest dream" explains it as, "Well the world was the same, but a train showed up." "And?" "That's it. Everything else was completely normal." Weak.

4: If I wanted to watch "Call of Duty," I'd play the game. All of the shoot-out scenes looked like they were taken from "Game Informer" magazine screen shots.

5: How come when they went to Limbo, it was in DiCaprio's mind? Can anyone explain that? Is there just one Limbo that in all this movie world's history of dream exploration, but only he and his stupid wife got to and did stuff in? Or was his team (two of whom knew how messed up in the head he was) too dumb to say, "Why don't we keep you out of this and go into someone else's head just in case this turns out badly?".

6: As far as 9 out of 10, (really folks?) go watch "Citizen Kane," "Lawrence of Arabia," or even "The Dark Crystal" if you want a good movie that can stand-up to even the most mediocre critical observation.

Was the above review useful to you?

62 out of 92 people found the following review useful:

Inception: A Fail

Author: Wasi Ahmed (electrifier4) from Bangladesh
18 April 2011

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I would have honestly given the movie a 7 but the current rating is very undeserving and I had no choice but to make the least contribution I could make to it. The writer/director of Inception thought if maybe they pretended to have a very complex plot and great special effects, the audience would not realize how pointless the whole story is. The audience were like; "OH! Such a complex plot! A Genius!! A Masterpiece!!" The first hour and a half all they do is explain the whole inception system without moving the plot forward. I am sure most of the audience didn't get what the movie was about but they pretended so they would not look stupid. And Christopher Nolan is going;"I don't really think of films in terms of light and dark...blah blah blah! I am a genius! blah blah blah! ...thriller that takes place in the mind...blah blah blah! I am a genius! blah blah blah!" The intention of the film clearly reflected on itself. The point was not to entertain audience but rather it was a show-off of what artistic capability the director/writer possesses. It tried to point out the fact what a movie genius Christopher Nolan is. I mean I love this guy. The Prestige was great and so was the Dark Knight. But Inception was really showing off. Look at Kick-Ass, Watchmen and Scott Pilgrim vs. the World. They were complete honest movies. Their intentions were clean and they reflected in the movie. They were meant for pure entertainment and that's what we got. On the other hand Inception was trying too hard. I could really point the fact on how the intentions of the movie was showing off but I would rather suggest the audience to watch the movie once again. They said the movie was very unpredictable. Suppose there is a man chopping onions in the movie and suddenly the chopped onions turned into a chicken. Now would that be predictable? They might say Cobb's wife living with him till old age in the dream was unpredictable. Are you serious!! How come you haven't seen that one coming!! It was so obvious! It is only the fact the way it was dramatized that made it seem unpredictable and shocking. Top 10 in the IMDb chart!!! Are you kidding me!!

Was the above review useful to you?

64 out of 97 people found the following review useful:

Inception is a poor representation of the dream world - Look elsewhere, this one is too literal and unimaginative.

Author: mnoraznan from Malaysia
31 October 2010

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

UNDERWHELMING, LITERAL AND PRETENTIOUS.. These 3 words pretty much summed up the whole of Inception. Why populate the dream world with the same landscape and tone as the real world? Why the dreamers and their subconscious armed with real-world accessories and firearms? Why must the travel initiated with the actor's pretend sleep? Why does the levels are differentiated with only different decor? (Except the LIMBO realm)

WHERE IS THE IMAGINATION? Nolan has the perfect opportunity to execute his wildest imaginations and he messed it up and served us mediocrity. Apparently, he only has the most literal interpretation of dreams. No quirky visual manifestation (mirror-world? top-down switched?), no mystical representation of the subconscious (shadows, shades, animals etc), No difference between dream levels (tones-darker?grayer?more grotesque?), No symbolic representative of weapons ( energy? aura's? light? dark? ). AND OF COURSE, the travel method!

NOLAN could've presented a more sophisticated facade. Maybe a dream room with vivid machines powered with mysterious matter. Or for mobility, more visible contraptions for head, neck or body. Then, the transition can be cued with portals, or one's self entering the target's body be more fantastical; the reality bleeds or tears itself into an underworld which is the dream.

INSTEAD, what we've got is inferior chase and action set pieces. Save for the gimmicks of collapsing the landscape onto itself, making pathways, the movie's rather bland. It also features too many characters - the forgers, architects, point man, sedative-man, corporate-sponsor get it. IT SHOULD be anchored by one solid protagonist that's let say have a latent talent for some form of ability (dream-walker but is named with Latin words), his target and the source of his internal conflicts (family, lover, friend).

This movie fools layman into thinking that they're smart.IT is basically an inferior imitation of Michael Bay's summer blockbuster disguised as a thinking man's movie. IT'S ABOUT CORPORATE ESPIONAGE - Tell people that and it would be 100% true. CERTAINLY NOT travel between dream worlds....

Was the above review useful to you?

87 out of 145 people found the following review useful:

A Potpourri of Vestiges Review: Buñuel meets Kubrick in Nolan's most ambitious venture, till date

Author: Murtaza Ali from India
26 July 2010

Surrealism can appear to be ineffably bizarre, or inquisitively titillating, depending purely on the viewer's intellect. Though the realm of surrealism is highly nebulous and complex, but even a slight attempt at improvisation can sometimes go awry and open a Pandora's Box, making the task highly improbable and nigh impossible. This facet of reality may pose a handicap to the most gifted of the directors, but not to the genius of Christopher Nolan, who not only dabbles with the concept of surrealism, but also ingeniously blends it with the elements of Science Fiction in his latest wonder named Inception. Nolan created a niche for himself a decade back by unleashing a monster of a movie called Memento. He further substantiated his status by conjuring movies like Insomnia, The Prestige, Batman Begins, and The Dark Knight. His unremitting desire for innovation and uncanny craving to foray into the unexplored realms of imagination deservedly earned him an auteur tag, which gave him the carte blanche that a story-teller like Nolan desperately needs. It's highly apparent that Nolan takes every possible advantage of this liberty while filming Inception. Inception is not only dreamlike, but is a dream in itself and is superior to any other thing conceived on the silver screen. With its entwined layers, the movie for the most part serves as an unfathomable riddle and makes multiple viewing extremely essential. It incredibly does extremely well on both the humanistic as well as the technical fronts. In fact, the balance between human emotions and the elements of Science Fiction is so adequate that it's impossible to separate them.

The movie is about a futuristic world where the human mind can be intercepted through dream invasion. Cobb is an expert in the art of extracting information (stealing valuable secrets) from deep within the subconscious in the dream state. His proficiency in extraction is marred by a turmoil that begins with his wife's untimely death. He is forced to live the life of a fugitive away from his children. His only chance for redemption lies with a Japanese tycoon named Saitu, who wants him to do an inception (planting information into someone's mind). In order to accomplish this unprecedented task, Cobb and his team must overcome a labyrinth of unforeseeable challenges, where even a slight miss could trap them in a perpetual limbo. Any further revelation would be remissness on my part as the plot is filled with such intricacies that even expatiation would be incapable of justifying its profundity.

Leonardo Dicaprio gives a solid performance in the lead role, following his memorable performance in Shutter Island. He has brilliantly depicted the complexities and limitations of Cobb's enigmatic character highlighting his pain and mental trauma. Marion Cotillard is ravishingly scintillating as Cobb's whimsical wife, Mal. The rest of the cast has given a thorough performance with special mention of Ken Watanabe, Ellen Page and Joseph Gordon-Levitt.

Inception is incredibly brilliant as a movie and is a breakthrough in contemporary cinema. Nolan's creativity and his unparalleled execution definitely make it an object of great cachet, but whether it would become Buñuel's 'Un chien andalou' or Kubrick's '2001: A Space Odyssey' and serve as a prototype for the movies to come is for the time to decide. Irrespectively, Inception is sine qua non not only for an aficionado, but also for the average viewer, who is willing to delve deep enough to savour the delight.

PS: One has to imagine it to believe it. 9/10

Was the above review useful to you?

45 out of 62 people found the following review useful:

Nolan's Inception Steals Idea from Novelist

Author: g-matthew from United States
28 February 2011

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Inception no more explores dreams and the human mind than Star Wars explores outer space. Inception is a rip-off of the novel Fireflies in the Shadow of the Sun (FSS), published in 2004 but preceded by a web site on dreams (2001-2009), the thrust of which is about how dream experiences are the source of ideas and other changes to waking life, including personality development. The broader point is that like his character Dom Cobb, Nolan himself steals the ideas he needs to create Inception from a novelist and life long dream researcher.

Chapter 7 titled "Journey by Deflection" occurs entirely in a shared dream in which 2 protagonists ascend / descend through "levels of dreaming" in action-oriented sequences and even a "dream within a dream," addressing how intermittent awareness of the dreams affects the dream. But Inception does not (a) intrigue / illuminate as to how these levels are distinct and yet intrinsically related or (b) draw from real dreams and real similarities to waking life. Inception is just an action film set in dream space that neglects the essence of dreaming in dream symbolism. The dream space featured in Inception is fictitious -- a contrivance of both Nolan and of the architect in Nolan's story.

Inception would have benefited by emulating FSS in the one way it did not emulate it. In FSS the characters trapped in the shared dream have to solve the dream's logic in order to wake up. This plot is much more conducive to an education of the language of dreams, which FSS author spent an entire lifetime understanding from the time he started a diary of his own dreams at age 13 to his doctoral dissertation at age 27 exploring the relationship between dream experiences, coping strategies, blood chemistry, and symptoms in terminally ill cancer patients. Like FSS however, and this is yet another coincidental similarity between the two works, in Inception the characters are thwarted by a dream that is plugged into their mental efforts to understand it. Also as in FSS, the dreamers have to deal with the denizens of a dream world that react to periodic episodes of lucid awareness of the dream. In FSS, the whole script, including objects and aspects of the environment, respond to the awareness, but in Inception we get the juvenile and scientifically ignorant development that other characters in the dream respond to Dom Cobb and his team like white blood cells to foreign pathogens. The bottom line is that FSS teaches us things about dreams and Inception will impress only the most psychologically unsophisticated among us or those who have never remembered a dream in their life.

Also like FSS, Inception makes the point that much of the bizarreness of dreams is attributable to a higher-order thinking. It does this using a statement very similar to one from the former FSS web site, which maintained that while dreaming is a whole brain activity, the conscious person uses only about 3-5% of his or her brain. FSS author remarks that experiencing and trying to make sense of a dream is like trying to fit 100% of something into 3-5% of itself -- there will be distortion!

The subject matter notwithstanding, Nolan's storytelling and direction are designed to give artificial weight to the real value of plot twists. In Nolan we have a director who conceals and compensates for second-rate thinking with CGI and high-octane action that detracts from the story without getting the blood flowing. The action in the film was supposed to create a sense of time-sensitive suspense, but came across more like the dull dishwater backing up in my sink than a raging river.

There are also inconsistencies in the film. Nolan wants us to invest in the idea that everything that happens in a dream has an effect on the waking life of the dreamer. It works -- until Dom Cobb dismisses out of hand his shooting of all these dream characters like they were throngs of disposable orcs or storm troopers, claiming its OK because they are "merely projections of the subconscious." Suddenly, what happens in dream Vegas stays in dream Vegas. And where did the idea of "limbo" come from -- introduced as a patchwork device for a poorly articulated plot.

And much of the film's premise is contradicted by real research which shows that the relationship between perceived and actual dream time is roughly 1:1.

Was the above review useful to you?

Page 3 of 247: [Prev][1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [Next]

Add another review

Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards Newsgroup reviews External reviews
Parents Guide Official site Plot keywords
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history