What caught my eye to catch this movie yesterday (the first day of public screening in Singapore) was ST Life’s 5-star review.

Is it that good?

Well, let’s just say that I was mentally prepared that this movie would be extremely mind-boggling, so I really concentrated on catching every word and sentence in the dialogue to grasp the concept of stealing information from dreams. At the end of the movie, I felt like as if I had completed reading an academic school book.

Indeed, the movie is visually intriguing, the idea is original, the soundtrack (by Hans Zimmer) draws you into the emotions.

But to me, it lacks the entertainment factor. It felt kindda like an art film with a big budget for visual effects.

You know there are some movies that you would like to watch over and over again to enjoy some great moments? For instance, I love to watch The Matrix Trilogy, those bullet-time scenes are so out-of-the-world, the fight sequences with hundreds of Smith is entertaining.

Compare to Inception. I can recall only a few scenes that are visually mind-blowing. But you won’t see those scenes playing as demo tracks in electronic stores. Personally, I felt that the pace is too slow, although that is precisely the intention of Chris Nolan. Some of the scenes were shown in slow-mo, understandably intended to let the audience to “enjoy the visual-effects moment”. Unfortunately, it becomes rather repetitive, as if he wants to keep reminding the audience that time and gravity behaves differently in dreams. The early part of the movie already prepares you by explaining the “rules” of how things happen, so when you watch the dreams unfold in strange ways, you don’t get the kick at all.

I’m glad to have watched Inception and appreciates the effort Chris Nolan goes to conjure this strangeness in the world of dreams. But I don’t think it deserves a 5-star rating. Some movies are driven by the great acting, while others are driven by loud effects. To me, Inception is dominated by “the idea”, so much so that I don’t really appreciate the acting that much and I don’t quite get wowed by the effects.

Seriously, I don’t know why I felt so negative about the movie. Maybe because I’m trying to justify why it’s not worth the 5-star rating. Well, if the ST Life reviewer had given a 2-star, maybe I would be writing more positive stuff, talking about how original and mind-bending the movie is.

I guess that makes my review a little different. Is there anyone out there who felt similarly that the movie is overrated?


  1. When you say "It felt kindda like an art film with a big budget for visual effects" i say in return it feels like a Nolan film and everything that's derived from it

Share your comments

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.