Log In Using
Facebook
Twitter
Google

Your tor.com Acct
Fri
Jun 25 2010 5:22pm
Inception: Sci-Fi’s Last, Best Box-Office Hope?

This week, Christopher Nolan and company released 14 new stills from his sci-fi thriller Inception.

These photos might require a spoiler warning, but honestly, it’s not as if we’d know. Nolan has been tight-lipped about the project from the beginning. For months after its announcement, he would say only it was set “within the architecture of the mind.” Early promotional material was equally vague.

More recently, a set of character posters have given us a lineup straight out of a film-noir caper (with titles like Point Man, Shade, Forger, and Mark), and theatrical trailers have inevitably begun to give hints as to the plot.

We now know for sure that Inception is about this guy, and there are dreams, and a girl who is maybe dreaming or not, and you can take ideas out or put them in, and lobbies, and guys wearing suits well, and Marion Cotillard has expressive eyes, and also there are lots of hallways, and people sitting looking at each other, and Joseph Gordon-Levitt signed up for a lot of wire work, and some other stuff happens.

The thing is, in a movie landscape that’s been slowly starved of anything mildly cerebral, this movie is in a pretty precarious spot. It has a power director behind it, and an A-list cast, and what we’ve seen of the effects has been well-done and unexpected. However, part of the reason the plot is being kept vague is because Nolan has pitched this from the beginning as a cerebral film (literally and figuratively), and in the wake of grinding comic-book franchises, sequels to sequels, 80s-toy adaptations, and 80s-monster reboots, Hollywood is holding its breath.

It’s up to Inception to prove that there’s still room in the multiplex for smart sci-fi.

Of course, this is not a particularly fair position for this movie to be in. Nolan is a solid director with a good track record, but many a director with a good track record makes the occasional bomb (lookin’ at you, Ridley Scott), and without a strong trend of downward spiral (...Ridley), if a movie doesn’t do well, then it’s technically just a data point on a larger graph with invisible juggernauts like Eclipse and Toy Story 3 affecting results. 

However, in a Hollywood with a memory so short it’s already rebooting a franchise that had its last installment three years ago, even one underperforming movie is enough to put the red light on half a dozen other concepts. (That cerebral-sci-fi standby Michael Gondry is directing this summer’s Green Hornet movie speaks volumes about what the current movie market will support.)

And even if the movie does well, there are no guarantees that much will come of it. I’m not sure how many smart spec scripts have been stamped “Greenlit, Pending Inception’s First-Weekend Numbers.” But this is the industry that has declared, based on Jonah Hex’s opening box-office and her release from Transformers, that Megan Fox’s career is already over, and her franchise has only been around for three years. If Inception rakes it in opening weekend, six people in LA will ask for something just like it, and six smart-spec scripts will turn their conceptual little faces to the sun and bloom. (Also an angel will get its wings. Also there are dreams with restaurants.)

Christopher Nolan’s box-office record is that of a director who knows how to make a smart, noirish action flick that occasionally goes gangbusters at the box office. Let’s hope this is one of those times.

(A recent trailer for Inception is below. Look, hallways!)


Genevieve really hopes this movie does so well that the Trolls movie is shelved forever. No joke. She talks about other movie travesties on her blog.

16 comments
Megaduck
1. Megaduck
While I hate to judge a movie by it's trailer I don't think I'm going to go see this one.

I can not stand films that are stuck within someones head. Especially one in a dream. It always seems an excuse to show off a bunch of snazzy special effects and pseudo-philosophical BS.
Dave Thompson
2. DKT
This is the one movie I'm really, really looking forward to seeing this year. I hope it's as good as it looks.

That said, while I don't doubt a lot of what you're saying about the suits with their stamps on smart spec-fic, I'm hoping there are directors out there like Nolan (and Duncan Jones and Alfonso Cuaron, etc.) who love making smart SF/F movies.
john mullen
3. johntheirishmongol
I don't have any real plans to see it. I like to have some clue about the plot and the cast doesnt do a thing for me. I love scifi, but obscure, psychological scifi is usually boring and pointless.
Derek Dominquez
4. fomartorch
It has a feel that is really similar to the Dark Knight, but I guess that makes sense considering the director.
Paul Howard
5. DrakBibliophile
Another Trolls movie!!! We really don't need that.
Emmet O'Brien
6. EmmetAOBrien
I, on the other hand, like philosophical SF movies set inside someone's head, I just don't consider them necessarily particularly smart*, saving Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. Most of them seem to just want to redact "The Tunnel Under The World" with the names filed off. Genuinely smart filmed SF seems to me about as rare on the ground as filmed SF that has noticed that anything has happened in the written genre since cyberpunk; Moon, for all the excellence of the acting, could be a fifty-year-old story.

*Except by comparison with Transformers 2 which is a pretty low bar.
Alex Brown
7. Milo1313
I also love movies set in someone's head. I've even a short story I wrote a million years ago that is a dream and is basically just a translation of a bizarro dream I had once. Hadn't really cared about this movie until the trailer and now I'm genuinely eager to see it. Not excited but intrigued.

EmmetAOBrien @ 6: Actually, that's precisely why I liked Moon so much. It was so refreshing in a SF world where everything futuristic has to be dystopian and involve Will Smith running from 'splosians.
René Walling
8. cybernetic_nomad
There was an early teaser for Inception that reprised almost word for word parts of the narration in Berthold Bartosch's L'idée (totally different film)

@Megaduck: bad movies set in someone's head do suck like vacuums. The good one can be sublime. I suggest you look at a few classics. Something like Last Year in Marienbad for example. Cronenberg's Existenz and his Naked Lunch are also well worth watching.
Allison Lockwood Hansen
9. Talisyn
I can't wait to see this. Nolan's amazing. Look at the supporting cast - Michael Caine, Ken Watanabe, Cillian Murphy! I think it's going to be a trip and a thrill. Very excited!
Richard Fife
10. R.Fife
That looks interesting, I will not lie, although I really hope the foreshadowing-in-trailer of "The main character is just dreaming it all" doesn't turn out to be the end. Vanilla Sky did that well, but DiCaprio's attempt at it, Shutter Island, was actually just painful, and after Lost's semi-like-that ending, I am ready for writers to stop writing themselves into that corner.

Vaguely tangential Genevieve, what would you say have been the last couple good smart-spec films?
john massey
11. subwoofer
I'm almost willing to give this movie a go. I still bear a grudge against DiCaprio for Titanic- him, Cameron and everyone else owes me 5 hours of my life back- but this movie has something. It may be a sleeper. It could be a watershed movie like The Matrix was, comes out of nowhere and just captures everyone's imagination. The supporting cast is strong too, a bunch of folks on the peripheral of greatness.

Vanilla Sky was loopy. Tom did his usual acting ie in every movie he does, there is a scene with him running flat out. Penélope Cruz really brought that movie up a notch.

I am on the verge of some well deserved down time here so I am thinking "why not"? There are soooo many movies out there now, it is hard to pick and choose the gooders to see in the theaters and which to save for home viewing- mind you- schmucks at the movies are making this a non issue with their massive smart phones you can see from space. This may be a movie that represents well on the big screen anyways, schmucks aside.

Woof™.
Megaduck
12. CraigtheGeek
Don't tell me...it turns out in the end that he was in a dream all the time and the dreams he's going into were dreams-inside-the-dream.

Craig
Megaduck
13. dmg
The dynamics in Hollywood could not be more different than book publishing. No one's career -- not Megan Fox's, not Mel Gibson's, not John Travolta's (revived Lazarus-like multiple times), etc -- ever really dies; not even David Begelman's. Whereas in book-publishing, you are only as good as your last book's sales: not good enough, and you are consigned to mid-list, and failing that, you adapt a nom de plume. (Or, worse, write fantasy. :-)

I reveal nothing, but INCEPTION shares some elements with MEMENTO. Despite, or in spite of that, Chris Nolan's objective for INCEPTION at core is to entertain the masses, while he tickles the minds and fancy of the few. Pay attention (while watching).

Bottom line, let INCEPTION be INCEPTION, and not the "last best hope" for "smart sci-fi."
Noneo Yourbusiness
14. Longtimefan
So I am the only one who is thinking "Dark City II" about this movie?

Not exactly but still...

I am not that interested because the trailers are so vague. If there is a good story to tell it is not going to be spoiled by letting the audience know what it is.

After the movie comes out people will know what the story is and they will decide to see it or not based on that. Why be coy and try to trick people into seeing a movie? Besides money.
Mike Conley
15. NomadUK
Am I the only one who's depressed at the number of people posting here who seem to require that they be told the story before they go to see the film? What is it with you people? Are you so thoroughly lacking in curiosity? Are you unable to conceive of watching or reading something beyond the confines of your previous experience? Do you have to have everything nicely mashed up and spoon-fed to you so that you can consume it painlessly and effortlessly? Did your intellectual growth stop at 12? Don't you like surprises?

It's attitudes such as the ones exhibited above that have made it next to sheer torture for me to sit through film trailers. I get to see the entire film, condensed to one minute, and virtually the entire plot is given to me in advance. Why in hell should I bother to pay to see the film after that?

It suffices in a trailer to give me one or two scenes, tell me who's in it (not that I'd recognise many of the names anymore), who directed it, maybe who wrote it, and let me know the approximate genre.

Here's a 5-second trailer:

Lawrence of Arabia. Peter O'Toole as T E Lawrence. Directed by David Lean.

Not one thing more would need to be said. (And, yes, the trailers for that film said far more than they needed to.)

Actually, I suppose the posters would suffice. Get rid of the trailers altogether.

This is why I don't work in Marketing.
Lucas Vollmer
16. aspeo
I have been getting more interested in this movie the closer it has come to being released. I might have to go see it to satisfy my own curiosity.

Subscribe to this thread

Receive notification by email when a new comment is added. You must be a registered user to subscribe to threads.
Post a comment