Customer Reviews

Inception (Two-Disc Edition) [Blu-ray]

5 star:		(544)
4 star:		(149)
3 star:		(74)
2 star:		(84)
1 star:		(122)

 

 

If you want to read a review of the film itself, just google "inception review" and take your pick. Ebert gave it four stars. Do you really want to read yet another Amazon user's opinion? This review is for people who already know they want the film, but are wondering which edition to buy.

If you're only interested in the film, buy whichever one you can find cheapest. There is not currently an extended edition or director's cut available. If, however, you're interested in the special features, you're sort of between a rock and a hard place. Here's why:

1. The single-disc Blu-ray edition has a pathetic 12 minutes of special features--the same ones included on the single-disc DVD edition, and they're not even in high-def.

2. The "two-disc" Blu-Ray edition is actually three discs: two Blu-rays and one DVD. If you see it listed as "two-disc" some places and "three-disc" or "combo pack" others, they're the same thing. The first Blu-ray is the film along with an option that gives you behind-the-scenes content as it plays (cleverly named "extraction mode"). The second Blu-ray is just special features--but NOT the ones on the single-disc Blu-ray or DVD. The third disc is a standard-def DVD, but NOT the same DVD you get when you buy it separately--this DVD is a "rental" edition which has NO special features of any kind, and--get this--it doesn't even have a scene index. The "digital copy" is actually a code printed on a paper insert to download the film from the internet. Also, some of the 2/3-disc editions come in a lenticular slip cover, but not all.

3. The standard-def DVD is a single disc with the same 12 minutes of special features on the single-disc Blu-ray.

4. There's also a hard-to-find, two-disc, standard-def DVD edition. Unfortunately I haven't seen it in person and I don't know for sure what's on either disc, other than the film of course. My guess is the second disc is a special features disc like that included in the 2/3-disc Blu-ray edition. I'm just wondering if the first disc is the "rental" edition or the single-disc DVD edition.

5. Best Buy's exclusive edition is the same as the 2/3-disc Blu-ray edition, but with the added bonus of Christopher Nolan's script/notes.

6. FYE's exclusive edition comes in a "steelbook" case.

7. The limited edition comes in a scale replica of the briefcase used in the film. It's the same 2/3-disc edition but also includes mini-posters, a couple of booklets (I believe one is the script and the other is the shared dreaming device's "user manual," which is online at pasivdevice.org) and Cobb's totem.

I gave a rating of three stars because it seems you can't get all the special features without buying two editions, and that's incredibly lame.

On the surface Inception seems to be a crime caper, complete with master of disguise Eames (Tom Hardy), planner Aridane (Ellen Page), point man Arthur (Joseph Gordon-Levitt), and master thief Cobb (Leonardo DiCaprio). But it's so much more than that, taking place in dreams within dreams within dreams.

Inception, like Total Recall and The Matrix, is about perception. The audience is never sure what reality is because the protagonist isn't sure what's real. There are clues providing evidence for the real/not real theories, but the best movies of this type don't come down on one side or another. Total Recall ultimately had enough clues indicating the "right" way. The Matrix stumbled after it made it clear that reality was fiction, thereby losing an audience who enjoyed the tantalizing mystery. Like so many mysteries, once the truth was revealed it wasn't quite as exciting as we all hoped. Inception wisely avoids providing answers.

Inception is also a thought experiment. The central conceit of Inception is that once you put a thought in someone's head it's like a virus, incapable of being removed. In fact, attempting to not think about the idea causes the mind to just focus on it more. This concept, a key tenet of neuro-linguistic programming (NLP), is part of how our brains are wired. Director Chris Nolan knows exactly what he's doing when the characters explain the premise. It is the key argument between Cobb and his wife Mal (Marion Cotillard): is this life just a dream?

Once you get it into your head as to which of them is right, Inception burrows into your psyche and you see all the evidence you need to reinforce the idea. There are enough discrepancies to suspect that Cobb's stuck in a dream, but there are enough rules defining reality that indicate otherwise. Unless, of course, you believe that Cobb is fooling himself by making up said rules to convince himself he's not in a dream when he actually is. If that sounds confusing, Inception's done its job.

Inception is a little too long in places, testing the viewer's patience as it delves four levels deep into the subconscious, each with different timeframes, settings, and plots. Part of the fun is watching the movie again to look for clues that reinforce what we secretly thought we knew all along.

Me? I'm convinced I know the truth. But then maybe Inception put that idea in my head.

BLU-RAY:

I just finished watching Inception for the second time. The Blu-ray is amazing. The PQ and AQ are perfect in every way. I did notice that the video was not as sharp, crisp, or clear as The Dark Knight. However it was very, very good. The audio is very bass heavy, but is up there with some of the best Blu-ray AQ I have heard. The movie was stunning all the way through and after another watch it is just as good if not better than the first time I watched it.

The special features are great. Disc two is full of behind the scenes and a dream documentary by Joseph Gordon-Levitt. On the first disc there is expansion mode which takes you behind the scenes and shows you each special effects scene and all which went into creating it. It is really interesting to watch. Very little CGI special effects were used on this film. They actually did most of the stunts or build huge models. It was really cool to watch.

MOVIE:

I went into Inception thinking very positive and with high hopes that this will be one of my new favorite movies. I based this simply on the trailer. I was not let down in the slightest, and I was blown away by the originality and creativity of the film. The directing, acting, and cinematography were all amazing. It is a beautiful film.

After seeing Inception I will have a hard time watching any other movie ever again. Anything else would seem boring and useless. I went to see The Expendables in theaters. Horrible. I couldn't understand what the interest in this film was. It was just violence and explosions; No story or plot. Just useless violence.

I can see where people may think of Inception as something similar to the theme of the Matrix. It sort of has the same basic idea of people being hooked up to a machine, leaving their bodies and going somewhere else. Besides that, there wasn't much at all which reminded me of the Matrix. Each scene held its own new originality in the most creative way as possible.

As far as Inception being hard to follow... well, I had no trouble following it at all. The three friends and my eleven-year-old brother had no trouble following it. I believe people who are more open minded would follow and understand it much better than people who are not willing to believe the story. Parts are incredible to believe, but you have to be open and let the story take place.

The creativity and attention to each shot and scene really paid off in the end. The film was perfect in every way in my opinion. Things were done which we have never seen before and it was done so well. It has set a new standard for films, at least in my mind. The directing style is similar to The Dark Knight, however they seemed to give Christopher Nolan more creative freedom with Inception.

The acting was top notch. I liked that Leo's character, Cobb, seemed a little weak minded at times. Usually he plays a strong character, but in this film his character had a weakness. Joseph Gordon-Levitt played a larger role than I expected. I was impressed with his character as well. Most of the crazy stunts, anti-gravity, jumping off walls and fighting people in mid air kind of stuff were with his character. Very cool. Ellen Page played a young architect which is hired to build cities within a person's mind. She did a great job as well. Each character was so well thought out and everyone added just the right amount to perfectly blend each character into the story.

There is a Limited Edition US & UK briefcase Blu-ray release of Inception, however the US release is only from the Warner Brothers site and it is currently sold out. Their were only 2,000 copies available. Check out Blu-ray.com, under the UK flag at the top, and search for Inception. There you can get more information about the Inception UK Limited Edition briefcase. It should be region free as all Warner Brothers Blu-rays are. You can pre-order it at Amazon.co.uk.

If you're a fan of films which touch on subjects which most movies dare not go, you owe it to yourself to see this film. You won't be disappointed. I am very glad I got to see it on the big screen.

Video

Video codec: VC-1
Video resolution: 1080p
Aspect ratio: 2.40:1
Original aspect ratio: 2.39:1

Audio

English: DTS-HD Master Audio 5.1
French: Dolby Digital 5.1
Spanish: Dolby Digital 5.1
Portuguese: Dolby Digital 5.1
English: DTS-HD Master Audio 5.1
French: Dolby Digital 5.1
Spanish: Dolby Digital 5.1
Portuguese: Dolby Digital 5.1 (less)

Subtitles

English SDH, French, Spanish, Portuguese
English SDH, French, Spanish, Portuguese (less)

Discs

50GB Blu-ray Disc
Three-disc set (2 BDs, 1 DVD)
Digital copy (on disc)
DVD copy
Bonus View (PiP)
BD-Live

Thank god there was one movie this summer not based on a comic book, a previous movie, television show, Disney ride, or candy wrapper. You actually had to invest some functioning brain activity to follow the plot and keep up with four simultaneous finales going on at the same time within different dream levels. And the ending was open to your own feelings or interpretation. Was he still in a dream or not? If you were still on board and paying attention, you may have noticed Leonardo's character didn't really care at that point, so why should we? It was a fun ride.

This is a great set. Ordered from Electronica Direct through Amazon. Was a little concerned about Region 2, however the Blu Ray is region free and plays on any US Blu Ray player, only the DVD version is zoned 2 and will not work in a US Blu Ray. Digital Copy works as well. Hope that clarifies.

`Inception' is a hard movie to judge. Basically, it is a mind-bender, and as such should be judged by two criteria: How good of a mind-bender is it? And, How much does it create a realm of its own with phenomena and rules of causality that work consistently?

In my mind `Inception,' despite some derivative elements, is an inventive movie that provides mind-enveloping reactions well after the viewing is over. Much like Lynch's `Inland Empire' before it, the movie coalesces well into one's imagination and lingers in the mind for days to come.

Being brief with the story is difficult, and I'm sure by now you've probably digested a great deal of material elsewhere. Washed up on an Asian seashore, American businessman, Cobb (Di Caprio) meets with an elderly leader to obtain a contract and defeat his enemies. To accomplish this, he offers to perform an "extraction," a means of obtaining secrets from a person`s subconscious during one's dream life. In the midst of their negotiations, an entire village riots and takes over the building where they meet, and Cobb and his sidekick, Arthur, (Gordon-Levitt) fight and flee to save their lives....

In this beginning scene the lines are partially drawn between dreams and awakening, but the surrealistic landscape also provides Nolan ample opportunities to provide his trademark action-adventure for his science fiction saga.

Cobb later meets an old professor (Caine) who sagely links him to a prodigy student, Ariadne, (Page) who can assist him with his next assignment and help straighten out his perspective and proper use of inceptions, or the use of subliminal persuasion, participating in another's subconscious perceptions and manipulating them during their dreams. In their first assignment together, he plans to have a rich man's son and heir, Robert Fischer (Murphy) change his mind about his father's will, so he will be able to either obtain or sabotage his inheritance.

There are dreams, and there are dreams within dreams, and one of Cobb's plans is to have three levels of dreaming going on at once to have the most persuasive power on Fisher.

Intertwined are revelations from Cobb's subconscious, revealed with Ariadne, who joins him on his subliminal journey and witnesses some of his life-changing events with his wife (Cotillard). In a partial revelation, Cobb admits he included his wife in some of his dream work with complications that has created strife in their relationship.

As you might imagine, problems develop that make the operation work less neatly and easily as planned, so discerning what level of dreaming and what level of reality are taking place also becomes blurred. The exposition and details are laid out more concretely than Lynch's worlds, but the caveats others have placed about paying attention are well founded.

Besides the mood of mind-benders like Lynch's `Mulholland Drive,' Nolan has borrowed and alchemized elements from inventive movies like the truly excellent Japanese anime' adventure `Paprika' and movies like 'The Cell,' but the results are truly new and effective.

I have to admit my biases. I love mind-benders, and it's no accident that Christopher Nolan and David Lynch are at the top of my list of favorite directors. This creates a problem because if you love mind-benders as a rule, it is sometimes difficult to separate effective works from those that don't work as well.

I was originally wavering between four and five stars for this film based on the ending. I'll give no details for that, but, I've decided, like 'Inland Empire' before it, `Inception' may seem abrupt, but its import as a surrealistic experience is nearly as mind-altering. 'Inception' deserves attention, awards, multiple viewings, and the time needed for a truly rewarding film experience. If you love Lynch's work, you will probably also love 'Inception,' but one could concede this movie isn`t as effective at playing with your noodle. On the other hand, if you find Lynch's films to be frustrating or too abstract, then Nolan's 'Inception' may give you a more satisfying sense of concreteness and closure overall.

(Tom Berenger and Ken Watanabe join an outstanding cast for a taut movie experience.)

(Some loose ends of `Inception' have been tightened from information from imdb.)

The Set: It's not totally necessary for the fan, but the shooting script and packaging is pretty cool. There's nothing new on the disc itself, you just get a booklet with this edition. I don't regret the extra pennies however, because it was definately worth the extra five bucks it was at the time.

The Movie: What can I say that hasn't already been said. It's a one of a kind film, that no one will be able to replicate. It's fantastic and it instantly became my favorite film of all time. Yes, I will say it. He topped The Dark Knight. The film is just so unique, and it has as many layers as its dreams do. I was blown away more than I have with any other film.

This edition may be way more expensive than its worth by the time you're reading this. The extra script-book is nowhere near worth an extra 20 bucks. But if you're a collector, by all means go for it. The most important thing, is that the blu-ray itself is the same as the other editions. Speaking of which, the blu-ray is pretty awesome in quality and features. It definately delivered, where The Dark Knight lacked in the behind the scenes dept. The movie looks astonishing. I encourage you to not put out the extra bucks for this set, but you must own a copy of Inception one way or another.

As far as movies go for 2010, this is a top contender for best picture. I think this movie will challenge other filmmakers to strive to give the audiences good quality films along with great stories. People want to be entertained and this movie certainly does the job. As far as combo packs goes, this is amazing because it has a whole disc of special features so there is always something new. The amazing thing is that you can analyze these behind the scenes and find something new overtime.

I would say that my only issue is that the DVD print looks cooler than the Blu ray, Other than that, it's amazing.

This is one of the best movies I saw this year. The plot is deep and very detailed. The movie can seem confusing to some but watching twice really is worth it. You'll definitely catch anything little detailed you missed the first time. Christopher Nolan's writing and directing skills have always been great and they will not disappoint in this movie. The movie is mind boggling and definitely worth the purchase.

As for the Steelbook, the packaging is great. It includes 2 Blu-ray discs, one being the Movie and the Other Special Features. Digital copy is included as a download and not on DVD. However, a DVD version of the film is included so you can watch on any DVD player.

I didn't like Inception. There, I've said it. And I realize that this sets me apart from the vast swaths of people who raved about the movie, who were enamored of its conceptualization and effects. But I am as convinced now as I was when I walked out of the theatre that the effects and concept of Inception were nothing more than a flashy veneer on a frail and impoverished film.

To begin, and to be fair, there are lots of nice things we can say about Inception (hence the three stars). The effects were stellar. The design was imaginative. The execution of effects and design was both seamless and slick. The cast was superb--DiCaprio and Watanabe are actors I truly enjoy watching perform. And the concept itself was imaginative and innovative--people who sleuth through the dreams of others to gather information. I was excited, given all these factors, when I walked into the theater. I was bored and frustrated when I left.

[Be warned, spoilers ahead.]

Why was I bored? Well, I was bored with Inception because I felt that the movie completely lacked jeopardy. The climax of the film is three sets of actions that have to occur at the same moment within three separate dream realities (the dream, within a dream, within a dream). We watch as a van careens toward the water. We watch as a group of people float in an elevator shaft. We watch as a group infiltrates a sealed compound. And what happened for me, while watching these three things unfold (in degrees of slow motion), was that suddenly I stopped caring about what happened for the characters. Suddenly, I felt like I was observing a watch unwind, rather than a story unfold. And an unwinding watch, though interesting in its complexity, is not a very good story. Because I knew what was going to happen all the tension of the film drained from it in a flash. It was as if the movie attained a critical mass of complexity and, as an aftereffect of its own climax, suddenly lost the tension it so desperately needed to keep its audience enrapt. It was like watching a Rube Goldberg machine that had gone on for about one-and-a-half hours too long. Mind you, now, a Rube Goldberg machine is utterly fascinating to watch, but after a couple of hours even the most avid fan of them is going to grow weary. And in weariness the viewer is going to lose interest in the novelty of the thing and start waiting for it to end. How fascinating the mechanics are is largely irrelevant. Consider, as an example, other movies that fall into the same trap, such as Transformers 2, which was certainly 'interesting' to watch, but nobody thought it was a good movie. Pirates of the Caribbean 2 and 3 were 'interesting' to watch, but nobody thought those were good movies either. A preponderance of effects do not make a movie good, and this is because the more a film focuses on effects and complexity--that is, the more like a watch or a Rube Goldberg machine it becomes--the more the story seems to suffer along with it.

If you are bristling in your seat right now, reading this, muttering to yourself something like: "But the story was awesome!" then I have to ask you this. What was the story of Inception? A group of men are hired to invade the dreams of a young man to convince him to break up his father's financial empire. Did you care, at any point, if they succeeded? Did it matter in any way whether or not the story was accomplished? Did you really care if DiCaprio escaped or not? Or was the story merely an excuse to share the idea of 'inception'? The latter question hints at the truth, because there was no meaningful story in Inception--just a great deal of smoke and mirrors. Did it look cool? Of course. Did it matter or, more importantly, was it meaningful? Not at all.

This brings me to why I was frustrated with Inception, and this criticism is (to me) far more serious. Most of the people who exited the theatre and raved about Inception sung very similar songs about what they liked--they thought the movie was 'smart' and 'intelligent'; people talked about how they went to see it more than once, maybe twice more, in order to 'get' it. Ask them further what they liked about it, saying something like, "What made it such a good movie to you?" and they would respond by saying, "It was about dreams"--with special emphasis on the word 'dreams' as if it signified deeper ramifications of meaning than could be imagined, and as if to say that it was about 'dreams' was an answer to the question of the intelligence of the film itself.

I suspect, in fact, that a significant portion of the popularity of Inception is based upon its self-styled intelligence. It presents itself as a smart movie, and then creates the impression that 'smart' people will 'get' the movie. If you want to feel smart--to join the elite, smart-club--then you need to see Inception. If you saw it and didn't get it, you need to go and see it again. The problem, if there is one, isn't with the movie, but with you as the viewer.

My deep concern here has to do with the belief, seemingly so prevalent, that intelligent things are also confusing; that people who watched Inception were confused, and deduced not that Inception was confusing, but rather that the film was more intelligent than they were; that if only they watched it again they would be better able to understand it. But this is clearly a flawed epistemology, because we each know that the best, and most intelligent, teachers are not the people who confuse all their students, but the people who instruct their students best. And in the same way, intelligence in any media--be it cinema, literary, musical, theatrical--is in no way coequal with being confusing. Quite the opposite, the most intelligent art of all communicates easily to a broad range of people and on a broad range of levels.

Let me put this another way: if a movie were truly brilliant, you would 'get' it on the first run through. Then you would want to watch it again, not because it was unclear the first time, but because by watching again you would see and appreciate things you hadn't seen before--you would pick up nuance, and parallels, and depth, and a host of brilliant things that were there already. I believe firmly that a second watching in film should never be necessary to understand a film, while it may be completely warranted to better appreciate a film. And in the end, the viewer who returns to Inception for a second viewing may appreciate the Rube Goldberg--design, execution, and whatnot else--but ultimately what he is returning chiefly to find, what the cultural impulse it teaching him to return for, that is, understanding, is a thing he will never attain. Ultimately, when it comes to Inception there was nothing to understand at all.

This, then, is the deception of Inception, because in its complexity, the movie created the impression that it was doing something very intelligent, that there was something 'worth understanding' about it. But this is the trick of the magician, who diverts your eyes to one place while he does something with the coin somewhere else. And Inception diverted our attention in its Goldbergian complexity; it diverted our attention by making us think that its subject matter of 'dreams' was somehow meaningful--an implication without basis. And then, just to top things off, Inception concluded with an ambiguous ending that makes us leave the theatre asking: "Did DiCaprio escape, or not?" But this final flair of the magician was like the flash of light and smoke we watch while the magician escapes with our money; by making us muse about the ending (what amounts to an act of authorial laziness), we're no longer thinking about what didn't just happen in the film. The deception is complete.

In the end, the need--the cultural impulse--to view Inception more than once in order to 'get' it doesn't signal that it was a good movie, but rather that it had communicated poorly. If you were confused, it wasn't because Inception was smart, but because it was a bad movie. And as a last word it is terribly important that I tell you that I don't think all films need to be meaningful to be entertaining--far from it. But when a movie markets itself as both intelligent and meaningful, then it better have meaning to back up its claims. After all, if you go to a film which has been billed as an action movie, but it turns out to be mostly romantic comedy, you'll be frustrated. Inception's payments on the promises it makes are utterly flimsy and, in the end, as meaningless as most dreams.