Movie Review: Inception
There is only one movie I have been literally ecstatic about seeing, which is not something that happens to me very often. That movie is Inception. I can’t quite explain why, except to say that the marketing team behind Inception managed to utterly captivate me with their trailers and strong attempts at keeping secret the details of what I am calling “Nolan’s masterpiece.” Point is, the moment I heard about Inception, I was hooked, and I have spent the last three or four months waiting for what I hoped would be the best movie of the entire year, let alone the best science fiction movie in decades. And you know what Inception provided? Everything I could have ever wanted and more. It is, in my opinion, the best movie of the year and is easily in my top ten best science fiction movies of all time. Calling Inception “Nolan’s masterpiece” is an understatement. It is a tour de force, a feat of monumental cinematic proportions. For those that had doubts about Nolan’s ability to escape the brilliant success of The Dark Knight, Inception proves you wrong, because it is the one movie that I think defines Nolan as an expert filmmaker, as the kind of writer and director that can actually produce high quality original material and direct it at a level that certain other filmmakers haven’t been able to do since the beginning of their careers (I’m looking at you M. Night Shyamalan). Inception is, to put it more simply, a must see. Now for my review (after the fold): Describing Inception is difficult. I am writing this review with the intention of leaving out the specifics, partly because I think everyone should see this movie and partly because doing so could potentially ruin the experience of discovery that I received while watching it. With that in mind, I am going to steal the synopsis from IMDB to give you a better impression of the plot of the movie: Dom Cobb is a skilled thief, the absolute best in the dangerous art of extraction, stealing valuable secrets from deep within the subconscious during the dream state, when the mind is at its most vulnerable. Cobb’s rare ability has made him a coveted player in this treacherous new world of corporate espionage, but it has also made him an international fugitive and cost him everything he has ever loved. Now Cobb is being offered a chance at redemption. One last job could give him his life back but only if he can accomplish the impossible-inception. Instead of the perfect heist, Cobb and his team of specialists have to pull off the reverse: their task is not to steal an idea but to plant one. If they succeed, it could be the perfect crime. But no amount of careful planning or expertise can prepare the team for the dangerous enemy that seems to predict their every move. An enemy that only Cobb could have seen coming. Inception is one of those rare movies that makes you think while entertaining you, something that doesn’t happen all that often. Right from the start, the movie slams you head first into the complex world that Nolan has created, showing you how things work, how difficult and detailed everything is, and how much time and energy Nolan undoubtedly put into every aspect of the film, from the cast to the situation to the visuals. It becomes clear right that what is to follow (i.e. the primary narrative) will be a complicated, but thoroughly engaging event. And it is. The deeper Nolan takes us into the intricate web of his dream worlds, the more amazingly complicated, strange, and exciting things become. The progression of the primary narrative is smooth and timed perfectly (often for good reason) and the climax is probably one of the most brilliantly suspenseful moments I have seen on film (you’ll have to watch to understand what I mean). Characters “die,” even important ones, and the more complex the climax becomes, building up like a spiderweb or layering like a quantum pie, the more obvious the danger that everyone is in becomes–one wrong movie and everything will come crumbling down. The narrative, thankfully, is well-supported by two things: a fantastic cast and amazing visuals. The latter of these demonstrates precisely why only certain directors should use CG, because Nolan clearly understands where using CG is best placed and where using physical mediums is superior. Inception is a combination of both, in the sense that some action sequences are done almost entirely without CG, and others are not (the latter of these are typically scenes that simply cannot be done without CG). The appropriate lack of CG is no small feat. Entire action sequences that would likely be made easier on the actors and the director by reducing it all to a CGed mess are instead done with what we assume are expertly-handled wires and ingenious contraptions. An example of this is actually in the trailers, where we see Joseph Gordon-Levitt flying down or climbing up the walls of a hotel hallway. The entire sequence is brilliant, but even that snippet shows you just how important realism is to Nolan. He wants his vision to encapsulate the wonder of the dream, while also invoking believability; without that, the entire film would crash to the ground, because once the audience no longer suspends its disbelief, there is nothing left to tell or do but drawn one’s own inadequacies.. From an acting standpoint, the film is well cast. DeCaprio’s (Cobb) slight dislike for science fiction doesn’t show as he delivers a believable character with a troubled past and an emotional mission. Gordon-Levitt (Arthur), surprisingly, not only demonstrates his often ignored ability to do something other that “teen comedy,” but shows viewers, I think, that he is capable of pulling off action heroes. There was never a moment when I questioned whether Arthur was the right fit for Gordon-Levitt; he just seemed to fit. Ken Watanabe
Haul of Books 2010: Stuff For Me v.15
A few more things have been trickling in over the last few weeks. This is an attempt on my part to play catchup. I think I’m going to spend the next week or so getting fully caught up on all the stuff that has arrived at my door. So, without further delay, here is the image for v.15 (after the fold, hopefully): And the descriptions (from left to right, top to bottom): 1. Interzone Magazine, Issue #228, May-June 2010 (subscribed) New science fiction and fantasy stories by Mario Milosevic, Jon Ingold, Melissa Yuan-Innes, Jason Sanford David D. Levine. Book reviews. Ansible Link by David Langford. Mutant Popcorn by Nick Lowe (film reviews). Laser Fodder by Tony Lee (DVD/Blu-ray reviews). Readers’ Poll results. Cover art is the third of six 2010 connected images by Warwick Fraser-Coombe. Illustrations by Dave Senecal, Jim Burns, Mark Pexton, Darren Winter, Richard Wagner. In colour! (A note from me: one of the things that I think has drastically improved this magazine, which I already love greatly, is the new interior design. It’s sleek, visually appealing, and uncluttered. If you don’t have a subscription, get one now!) 2. SFRA Review, Issue 292, Spring 2010 (subscribed) The issue contains calls for papers for journals and conferences, nonfiction reviews on a number of fascinating books (some on the Wizard of Oz world, Lovecraft, and H. G. Wells), fiction reviews (various authors, from Iain M. Banks to Ian McDonald), media reviews on Avatar, Pumzi, The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus, and others, and an article on scholarly research and writing, which I actually found quite useful. I personally would like to see more articles in future issues. 3. Animythical Tales by Sarah Totton (won) In this elegant volume, award-winning author Sarah Totton takes her readers on speculative journeys of the heart and mind that will both challenge and engage you. Within these tales, readers will learn the meaning of darkness and pain and fear. Yet they will also learn about love and happiness and laughter. Sarah Totton explores the full kaleidoscope of the human heart and peels it back, one layer at a time. She offers her readers a full palette of emotions and stories to sift through, never settling, never holding back, and never flinching. Whether she is writing about the loss of innocence through dark revelations, the point to which a human mind can be stretched before succumbing to the magic of faerie, or something as preposterous as cloud-fishing in a world with pink yaks, the stories in Animythical Tales are always told with an eye toward revealing something important about the human condition. If you have ever yearned to fall into fabulous adventures in unforgettable worlds, Animythical Tales is the collection for you. 4. Elizabeth Street: A Novel Based on True Events by Laurie Fabiano (won) In Elizabeth Street, Laurie Fabiano tells a remarkable, and previously unheard, story of the Italian immigrant experience at the start of the twentieth century. Culled from her own family history, Fabiano paints an entrancing portrait of Giovanna Costa, who, reeling from personal tragedies, tries to make a new life in a new world. Shot through with the smells and sights of Scilla, Italy, and New York’s burgeoning Little Italy, this intoxicating story follows Giovanna as she finds companionship, celebrates the birth of a baby girl, takes pride in a growing business, and feels a sense of belonging on a family outing to Coney Island. However, these modest successes are rewarded with the attention of the notorious Black Hand, a gang of brutal extortionists led by Lupo the Wolf. As the stakes grow higher and higher, readers share with Giovanna her desperate struggle to remain outside the fray, and then to fight for—and finally to save—that which is important above all other: family. 5. Starcraft II: Heaven’s Devils by William C. Dietz (won) For the poor, hardworking citizens of the Confederacy’s fringe worlds, the Guild Wars have exacted a huge toll. Swayed by the promise of financial rewards, a new batch of recruits joins the fight alongside a slew of mysteriously docile criminals — and a few dubious military leaders. Eighteen-year-old Jim Raynor, full of testosterone and eager to make things right at home, ships off to boot camp and finds his footing on the battlefield, but he soon discovers that the official mission is not what he’s really fighting for. For the first time ever, StarCraft enthusiasts will learn the origins of the enduring friendship between the young upstart Jim Raynor and the streetwise soldier Tychus Findlay. Watch as they battle on the front lines of a fierce interplanetary war and bear witness to the Confederacy’s rank corruption — corruption so reprehensible that it rains immeasurable death and destruction upon the government’s own people. 6. Extrapolation, Spring 2010, Volume 51, No. 1 Volume 51 is pretty world SF and history heavy. There are articles on Brazilian and Bengali science fiction, one article on African American SF before black power SF, some really interesting looks at theories of history, genre, and video games (specifically EVE Online), and an article by Ken MacLeod on how science fiction does and does not contribute to the public understanding of science. All in all, a well-rounded issue! There you have it. So, what have you purchased or received recently?
Race and Not Thinking About It: Why That’s B.S.
In this day and age, it seems like we (and by “we” I mean mostly white people) make a big deal about not thinking about race. Perhaps we do this out some sort of subconscious regret about the past (white guilt, if you will) or perhaps because we actually believe that we don’t think about race. The problem is that we (and here I mean all of us of all races) often do think about race, regardless of where we come from. We can pretend that racism is over, and some of us do a fine job of sticking our heads in the sand and trying to maintain the illusion of a world of Neapolitan ice cream, with all the colors hanging out together in the same place as if there never was a time when they were all in separate boxes. But the reality is that racism never ended and that we still live in a society that thinks in racial terms (for good and for bad) and still allows people to get away with actions that are, by all accounts, about as racist as you can get, at least for a short time. Why do I bring this up? I recently made the mistake of attempting to have a rational discussion with some politically motivated individuals on YouTube about the Shirley Sherrod fiasco (which is still going on). At one point I made the argument that I am making here (specifically that “everybody makes race a part of everything, even if they say they don’t”), which set a couple of people off, who quickly acted to deny that this actually applied to them. Notice that I didn’t say that race plays a part in how we act, just that we all make it a part of everything. Looking back, I probably would phrase it differently to say this: “we all think about race, even if we say we don’t.” But the interesting thing for me about this discussion was the way these folks reacted. They spend more time trying to deny that they actually thought in racial terms than they did trying to think about whether or not race actually factored into their thought processes, an action that would, most likely, prove my point far better than to have them stick their feet in their mouths. However, instead of simply saying they were wrong or hypocritical, I’d like to illustrate the point by example (specifically, two examples from two individuals). ReligionOfNice said: That’s the worst case of projection I’ve heard yet. So when I made friends with the black kid next door because we liked to do the same things that was because of race? I don’t think so. I didn’t make friends because he was black. I pick this example because there was an obvious racial angle to be played and yet race played zero part in the decision. He was my best friend because he was. And Txbertie said: Race is only “a part of everything” to people who make it so. I don’t. I try to be sensitive to feelings and wouldn’t say things I know might be misunderstood. I certainly wouldn’t refer to “them” or “their own kind.” There was a time in my life when I could have saved myself a great deal of trouble it I’d treated a black man like a “black man” instead of treating him like a man – but even looking back at that, I could never have done it. The racists could but I couldn’t and wouldn’t. There are some subtleties of language here that you’ll likely miss without having seen the YouTube video in question, but I won’t be talking about those points here, because they aren’t relevant to what I’m arguing. If you read the above comments, two things become perfectly clear: both individuals have come at this from an entirely defensive position and both have immediately reduced their conversion to the discourse of race. It’s ironic that both individuals claim that race is not something that they think about (or isn’t something that governs their actions), yet they also immediately refer to people by the color of their skin or provide examples in which race clearly plays a role in what they have done in the past. They each assume that I’m talking about action, rather than simply constituent elements, and their words basically make my point for me: if we don’t make race a part of everything, then why is it that the color of someone’s skin is something that needs to be mentioned in a conversation or plays a role in how we decide to act in our day to day lives? The other problem I see that they both seem to take what I said to mean that to think about race is somehow racist. But I’m not talking about an issue of subconscious racism. Noticing the color of someone’s skin isn’t necessarily a racist act (though it can be, depending on who you are and how you react). The reality is that we are all differently colored, ad when you are faced with something different, you’re going to notice, much the same way that you might notice a hair style or the color of someone’s eyes or the shape of a nose or what have you. We are always thinking in terms of that (i.e. difference). It’s inescapable. These two individuals are essentially putting their feet in their mouths by trying to pretend that somehow race never figured into their assessments of the people around them. The first has already reduced his or her friend to skin color and the latter essentially admits to making decisions based on race (a good decision, sure, but the decision was clearly about race). But the denial is still there. Race never figured into their existence, or so they say. The reality? It did, and intimately so. The same has happened for all of us. The fact of the matter is, we all