The problem with Let Me In is simple: Anything good about Let Me In already exists in Let the Right One In, and then some. There is nothing in Let Me In that is both positive AND new.



It's not so much a remake as a redo.

Surely it could also be argued that Let Me In is not a remake nor a re-do, but a re-adaptation of the book by John Ajvide Lindqvist. This can be applied to many so-called Hollywood remakes which got slated, including the up-coming David Fincher version of The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo.



As for the good doctor's best film of the year, I genuinely feel that in years to come he will look back on Inception and regret praising it so highly.

As always, the Good Doctor delivers.



However, I have to disagree with Let Me In being the most pointless remake of recent years.



Anglophones do need to get used to subtitles as the rest of the world has, but the director who needs to learn this by heart is not an American, but Michael Haneke. Surely, his "Funny Games U.S" (as imbd names it) deserves the honour of being the most pointless remake of recent years, and perhaps, of all time.

Mark,



I'm so shocked at your dislike for A Serbian Film. Whilst I agree with your assertion that any allegorical message the director wished to convey gets completely lost, I can't understand how you feel the film has no merit whatsoever.



First of all, I thought it was a beautifully made film. With no exaggeration, I found every shot to be a work of art. It's superbly edited (I speak as a videographer myself), the music is dark, sinister and flows with the movie perfectly. It is also wonderfully acted, considering the 'OTT' nature of the film.



Do you not think that if the director had not taken himself and the film so seriously that you would've appreciated it more? I say 'appreciate' as 'enjoyed' is a risky word to use in the context of this film. I feel that if he had simply done what every American horror movie director does and say, 'We wanted to make horror scary again, we want to shock the audience and make them uncomfortable all the way through', then there wouldn't be as strong a backlash to the film as there currently is. The difference is every time I hear the American horror directors and producers say that, it's alway without fail a boring uninventive piece of rubbish, A Serbian Film is not.



Finally, I really liked it mainly because it gave me that feeling of tension and discomfort that I haven't felt since the first time I saw the 'nasty' movies as a kid.



I truly believe that this film has infinitely more merit than yourself or any of it's detractors are willing to give it.



Whilst I doubt this will sway your opinion in any way, I can always hope.



Stay well,



Thanks for the autograph in Manchester, and rematch The Big Lebowski dammit!



Killian

After Kermode's Top 5 I re watched Inception again (which I loved in the cinema and put in at 3 on my top 5 of the year). Now, on second viewing, it's dropped out of my top 5 because it simply isn't as good second time around. Here's the flaws that became apparent on second viewing.



!!!!!CONTAINS SPOILERS!!!!



The most obvious flaw (and I think a lot of people picked up on this) is it's a shameless exercise in technical wizardry with no character depth or emotion. Not a single one of the characters have a back story apart from Cobb and his isn't particularly that interesting or heart felt. The fact that we never meet his children and his wife only appears as a psycho projection made me not care about him getting back to his family.

And the rest of the characters are thin professionals who are acted proficiently but I really couldn't care if they die or not. Most notably is Ellen Page's character who our link as audience members to the plot. It is her roll is solely to get everything explained to her so we understand the world, and then does very little herself. If a script wants to engage an audience it must make our representative on screen (Ellen Page's character) interesting.



Secondly there isn't much sense of jeopardy. Unlike The Matrix, where if you die in the virtual world you die in real life, this doesn't apply to Inception. Even when we find out that you'll end up in Limbo because of the "super strength sedation" I still don't care that Ken Watanabe has been shot because he turns up all fresh and bubbly when he goes into the next dream level. Even when he ends up in Limbo it does no permanent damage.



And this lack of jeopardy is highlighted by the ending when they all wake up in the plane, find and dandy, and nothing has change at all apart from Cillian Murphy looks a little bit bemused. For all the dreams upon and dream and the mind infiltration nothing in the characters have changed in the slightest. Screen writing 101 demands at least one character arc.



Overall it's got just a few too many plot ideas but not enough character development for it to be anyway satisfying.



Think about it this way: You are in an alternative reality and a film called Inception comes out. The film is a sci-fi thriller that spends lot of time with characters and fully fleshes them out with back stories. It spends more time in the "real world" and has only one level of the "dream world", until the climax when, to overcome their obstacle, the characters have to enter a second, previously unknown, level of the "dream world" (kind of like the first 20 minutes of Inception). Now this film, if it was made with the same technical finesse as Inception would probably have been hailed as a very good film. This film, in our alternate reality, would be called Inception.

Then two years later in our alternate reality, a film called Inception 2 comes out, which took all the ideas of the first film and multiplied them by 10 and removed all the character development. This new sequel had 3 levels of dream reality as well as a final "limbo" stage and spends almost no time in the real world. Everyone would hate it and say it was a sequel that added too much excess to a decent, streamline thriller. Well this is what Inception (the Inception that actually exists instead of my hypothetical Inception) actually is; It's basically an overstuffed and unsatisfying sequel to a film that was never made.

I cant belive "The last airbender" doesnt even get a mention. Possibly the worst written/directed movie ever.

I would disagree with the good Doctor's opinion that people who don't watch subtitled films are "lazy".

A person might be interested in watching Let the Right One In (or any foreign language film) but unable to cope with the speed of the subtitles due to problems with their sight or dyslexia. They might just be a slow reader.



It's also worth pointing out that Let Me In, though banking on the success of the original adaption, was simply an english language adaption of the original book.



I wasn't a huge fan of Let Me In because of what it did to the source material, scrapping the people from the bar; prettying up the cast and dropping the castration story line simply to make the film "more accessible for an American audience"

The film, despite these things, did have a lot of strengths, and it is simply unfair to judge it as a remake of the Swedish film when it's simply an adaption of the original novel.

Actually I enjoyed your Fred impression it sounded like Father Merrin was in the 5 live room performing an exorcism on you, as far as movies go that one definately had an unclean spirit.



No mention of The Last Airbender? Wow either you haven't seen it yet or it didn't register as a true stinker like your other choices.

Here, Here BillPaxtonsSecondBiggestFan - It's good to know there's someone on the same page as me. I feel the same about Inception as I did The Matrix when it came out: Visually impressive, but devoid of anything that you can subscribe to not only emotionally but dramatically. Plus I was expecting Roger Moore to pop up in the skiing scene.

Your 'Fred' impression was hilarious, why is everyone so bitter and upset by it? Do it again some time, even if its just to annoy Mayo.

I was using nail clippers at the time of the infamous impression and laughed so hard a clipped the end of my finger rather than the nail. There was quite a bit of blood, but luckily there wasn't much pain, as after years of playing guitar and bass and obtaining multiple blisters along the way, I have no feeling at the tips of my fingers.



'The Killer Inside Me' - left the biggest impression on me last year and I thoroughly enjoyed it

Dr K



I say again - in the hope you'll actually take it in eventually - COP OUT was NOT "Un Film De Kevin Smith". Had he actually written it, then it would've been. And it would've been immeasurably better. Even he cannot make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. Besides, I have it on good authority that Mr Willis soured the production with his behaviour. And I confidently predict that you'll be blown away by RED STATE this year. It's at Sundance, if Auntie Beeb can afford to send you.

Truth be told, I was only a touch disappointed, but everybody else had already started complaining so I had to throw in /something/. ;)



But really, I mean, what can you say in response to a top and bottom five? I agree with some of it, I disagree with some of it, but then one of the real charms of talking to different people is their different opinions. I listen to the reviews and read the opinions on this blog and get to consider other people's perspectives and sometimes come away with a fresh way to look at things. Other times I find that I just don't agree. But, you know, that's just life. If everybody had just agreed on the best film of the year in the comments and left it at that, I would have been even more disappointed!



That being said, FriskyDingo above me is a real cool guy for digging The Killer Inside Me the mostest. I just watched it again two nights ago and stand by the opinion that it's the best film I saw last year.



The last comment you read out made me laugh - you pinned that up there like a badge of honor. Guess your self-esteem isn't taking blows any time soon.

I too am one of thse slightly bemused that Dr Kermode could watch Inception a second time and not feel diminished by the experience. It is, without doubt, a great technical achievement where even the massive effects worked, but it has no soul. You simply aren't interested in the characters at all. Compare that with, e.g. Nolan's adaptation of The Prestige (which was based on someone else's material, incidentally.) Sure the characters were all dislikable, but at least they had understandable motivations and the moral dilemma was unusual to say the least.



Or compare it to The King's Speech (which I saw last night) which was a beautiful character study that utterly absorbed me from start to finish, despite it not "surprising" me in any way because, after all, it was based largely on historical fact.



Now I realise that comparing the two is entirely unfair, since they might as well exist in different universes, but whereas Colin Firth - and, indeed, Rush and Bonham-Carter - made me believe in the characters, DiCaprio et al had nothing going on behind the curtain.

I loved Inception. I thought it was great but what has surprised me is that I have met many people who have said they did not like it. Some saying it was simply OK and others finding it boring. I know movies cannot be too everyone’s taste but it was such a great movie with a complicated idea told in the most simplest manner as possible in the most accessible way possible with great direction and wonderful acting that many people not liking it has surprised me.



However, although I sing the praises of Inception for me it would only reach #2. My favourite movie of 2010 was Buried. A fantastic movie that was really experienced…every second was felt and I was hooked throughout. Buried, for me, demonstrates the power of the cinematic experience.



Oh, and although I have not seen the movie nor do I wish to, your Fred impression I found very funny. Shame on those that don't.

As always, Dr K delivers wit in spades. I love his thick skin, one of the prerequisites to being a critic, I suppose. Nice to know he can roll with the punches provided by the people who comment here, whether good or bad.



As for movies with subtitles, I'm thankful we have a tv station here in Oz specifically for multicultural programs from around the world. Recently recorded and watched at my leisure The Diving Bell and the Butterfly and La Blonde Aux Seins Nus.



Can't wait to see what great reviews and rants we'll receive in 2011.



Thanks Dr K, what would we do without you?

@BillPaxtonsGreatestFan:



Whilst I don't entirely agree with you about Inception, I loved your description of it as a poor sequel to a hypothetical masterpiece :-) Genius.



Wouldn't that make a good topic? Hypothetical prequels to actual films...

"A Serbian Film" was pretentious tosh, I saw it at a screening where the director was present and there was a Q&A afterwards where he went on about how the film was one big metaphor for Serbian censorship.



It reminded me of "The Great Ecstasy of Robert Carmichael" (another ""beautifully" shot film), and the director defended a very graphic and prolonged rape scene by saying it was all a metaphor for the war in Iraq.



Talk about being heavy-handed...



BTW - "Inception" is ace and will still be in 20 years time (and beyond that)

I liked Inception - up to a point (I've watched it twice and will watch it again).



Nolan's films tend to be emotionally cold, focus on anti-heroes and he also likes to deal with intellectual puzzles (e.g. Memento) or Big Moral Choices e.g. Dark Knight (Strip out Ledger's standout performance as Joker [the ultimate pantomime villain] from Dark Knight and what are you left with? Big Moral Dilemma's and an unconvincing turning of Dent into Two-Face.) or both e.g. The Prestige.



Just how clever Inception is I can't decide. It has been argued that everything we see in Inception is a dream by Cobb, that nothing we see (even the 'awake' scenes) is 'real' or happens. Reality (for Cobb and the audience) is what we choose it to be. That could be one explanation for why most characters, even Mal, are just ciphers (Forger, Architect, Financier, Chemist, Shade etc).



The point about the ending isn't whether the top stops spinning, rather that Cobb stops caring whether it stops or not and steps into an alternate 'reality'.



Nolan isn't a great action director (good at thinking [dreaming] up a big set-piece, bad at executing it); he's pointedly acknowledged that his ski chase scenes are derived from the Bond movies (boy, does it show) whilst the Tangiers' chase is done Bourne style. Perhaps Inception is just sharing with us one of Chris Nolan's dreams?



Without doubt though, Nolan is one of the more consistently interesting directors working today ("Don't be afraid to dream a little bigger darling") and I imagine most of us will pay some attention when his forthcoming The Dark Knight Rises appears.



However, Social Network was (IMO) the better movie overall from last year; I also rate Bad Lieutenant PoC above Inception too.

Excellent review, BillPaxtonsSecondBiggestFan, with additional worthy comment by Scurra. For me, declaring Inception best picture is like declaring a physics textbook to be a greater work of literature than War and Peace. Yes, a physics textbook might be very well executed but unless I care about how it turns out in the end it's not going to leave much of an impression.

I think I might be going crazy! Definitley the most pleasing and surprising thing I will see on youtube this week is the sight of Dr. K rocking out on double bass and harmonica - brilliant!

Sycophantic rant over: In regards to Miracle Mile's comment I feel I must defend Michael Haneke, his U.S. version of Funny Games was in no-way belittling to or outstripped by his original - it was a personal exercise in transfering exactly the same peice of art to a different cultural form, purposefully identical it felt like a rigorously uncompromising meditation on the ideals and practices of individual artistic creation. I think Naomi Watts and Tim Roth deliver career best performances and both films stand as layers of one, rather than just a pointless rehashing.

Inception is not exceptional. ;)

I'm still very surprised 'Leap Year' didn't make it in.



As far as the Fred impression goes, I adored it, it was wonderful.

PS on that matter, please post that review on YouTube, the Podcast had me in tears but I would kill to see Simon's reaction opposed to just hearing it.



What upset that last commenter I wonder, the Fred impression or is he part of that rare breed of people who defend Danny Dyer? Poor, misguided souls.

My top and bottom five films wouldnt match anyone elses, why should the good Doctor have to justify his lists. Get a life

Is it just me or is Dr K beginning to believe the God-like status that has been put upon him by some of the mortals on this site? He is, after all, just a man with an opinion. As am I.

Not having seen Let Me In, I'm less qualified on this point(happy to be enlightened), but from its trailer some of the shots and look of it seemed very close to the Right one. Also IMDB shows the credits on Me In for both the novel and the screenplay of "Låt den rätte komma in"), this would point to it more definitively as being a remake. As unnecessary as an English language remake is, I am looking forward to the comedy fake swedish language remake The Muppets Let the Right One In, prominently featuring the Swedish Chef.



Surely the most unnecessary remake was Van Sant's Psycho (shot for shot but in color and with a pointless signature cloud shot inserted into the shower scene). The Haneke Funny Games, as has been pointed out, at least is from the same author, ostensibly an artistic choice (although I'd hate to apply that logic to The Vanishing).



@dunkah, thanks for your Inception/Roger Moore quip, it cheered me up.

I think the worst film of the year should of been sex and the city 2, but I think what should have been in the bottom 5 should have been the remake of clash of the titans, I think it's the most stupidest piece of crap I've ever seen. Clearly someone of your cleverness should of thought this deserved a bottom five place.

@Tom Jacobson



As one or two others have pointed out, the good doctor's lists are opinions and nothing else. To suggest that "someone of [his] cleverness should of (sic) thought this deserved a bottom five place" is, while arguable (Clash Of The Titans was indeed, rubbish), a waste of type.



@loads of other people



It's nice to see that after all this time, Inception is still creating debate. How many opinions have I read that start off with "Inception is okay, but I didn't care for any of the characters/no emotional depth" etc etc and then proceed to dissect the story and concept AT LENGTH? In other words, these people don't much care for the film, but care enough to spend a great deal of time formulating complex arguments about the nature of the story, what was actually happening and what it might mean. This to me is one of the reasons that it will be an all-time classic a la 2001 (a film where the biggest character is an emotionless computer trying to defend itself).



To a lesser extent, Black Swan will acheive something similar - it's a fantastic movie that will polarise audiences. I urge everyone to see it as soon as they can!!!!

Given time to reflect I'm going to take out Wall Street 2 as it was more disappointing than awful.



In it's place goes Frozen. Why I decided to watch it I'll never know.

I missed Let The Right One In, so went to see Let Me In when it came out as I prefer seeing films on the big screen. I thought it was great, so, although I can appreciate Mark's point of view, for me it wasn't a pointless remake.



And much as I love science fiction, Inception left me feeling cold. It was like watching a 3 hour aftershave commercial. Just full of people striding around looking flash. I still have no idea why Ellen Page was in the film other than being a token Young Female.



Loved Kick Ass and The Social Network, always love listening to the Good Doctor, and will always try to watch the live feed so I can see his weekly performance. Keep up the good work!

I have to say, I completely agree with Billpaxtonsbiggestfan. Though I thoroughly enjoyed Inception and I would easily have it in my top 5 of last year. It could have been so much more. It is a great original screenplay. Although it's far from the masterpiece most people make it out to be. Style over substance? I think so.



Just watched 127 Hours yesterday. It was absolutely breathtaking. I didn't realise James Franco had so much potential in his acting ability. If Darren Aronofsky's Black Swan is anywhere near as good as 127 Hours, then 2011's a great start for cinema-goers in the UK.

Let Me In or Gus Van Sant's Psycho?

I watched Sex in the City on your recommendation - I like a good cringe now and again! It didn't disappoint - cheers!



Inception - didn't like, and I really tried



Let me in/Right one in - watched neither, liked the book too much



Sarah.

@ Nick_KingoftheRoad_Buggey - Not MY comments on Funny Games, I made no mention of Haneke's film(s).

@Touchfinder:



"It's nice to see that after all this time, Inception is still creating debate. How many opinions have I read that start off with "Inception is okay, but I didn't care for any of the characters/no emotional depth" etc etc and then proceed to dissect the story and concept AT LENGTH? (...)"



That's an interesting point and one that I considered as well before writing off the film entirely. If I'm discussing the film at length and trying to come up with a decent theory on it, surely it's a great film and not a boring one as I had thought?



Putting aside the complaints about the poor writing, flat characters, bad structuring, logic holes, etc., here's my problem with Inception: it's a film you can talk about, theorize about for donkey's years, but at the end of the day no good actually comes of it. There's no POINT to the puzzle. You just put it together and put it together and squeeze this bit in here and reason out this plot hole and it gives you nothing. It doesn't make the characters any more interesting, it doesn't make the plot any better and it doesn't give the film any more purpose. The only purpose is to stick bits of things together.



Some people like these sorts of films and that's great. I'm fond of them myself when I enjoy the journey they take me on, but I didn't find that with Inception. Inception was like taking a bunch of tiny puzzle pieces out of a box and spending a weekend fitting them together to complete a photo of a kitten, looking at it for a minute, taking it apart, putting the box in the top of the closet and forgetting about it until the summer yard sales.



Comparing Inception to 2001 because they both confused people is like comparing a Magic Eye painting to Goya. There is a very spiritual, transcendent quality to 2001 that Inception simply lacks and THAT'S what made Kubrick's film special, at least in my eyes. It's worth noting too that Hal, a computer, alone was both much more fascinating and had far more pathos and personality than all of the characters in Inception combined. The characters in Inception are so utterly lacking in actual personalities that it's nearly impossible to describe them outside of their physical appearances and job descriptions. The one guy was sort of cocky, I guess?

I bought Inception on the basis of your review and liked it. I should not like it because I my academic background is filled with warnings about Cartesian dualism and theological hangover concepts such as 'mind', and this is these things writ large and then stuffed into a number of Russian dolls. Even so I am going to watch it again. Thank you for the review.

I went to see Blue Valentine last night and really enjoyed it – the central two performances by Ryan Gosling and Michelle Williams were excellent and I was really impressed by how movingly the well-worn story of 'marriage-in-crisis' was told through the film. I found the use of hand-held camera in the scenes looking back at the past refreshing and effective. I thought this film was much better in dealing with the themes of couples drifting apart than Revolutionary Road – the latter in hindsight reminds me of Who Is Afraid Of Virginia Woolf which is NEVER a good sign! As the credits rolled, I still felt firmly attached to the characters, and wishing that somehow they will find happiness with each other again...

(Sarah Morgan) You realy ought to watch Let The Right One In. I loved to book too however it is important to know that the script for the original was written by John Ajvide Lindqvist the writer of the book. It realy captured the book and the young actors (Kåre Hedebrant and Lina Leandersson) are so good that i cannot can only ever think of them when Oskar and Eli come to mind.

Thank for your positive feedback on my Inception rant guys. I'm often worried when I'm typing out long winded posts that no one is going to end up reading them so it's nice to know people are taking the time to read peoples comments. It once again shows that this community is head and shoulders above the rest of the online communities that I am part of.



However rereading my post I'm shocked by how many grammatically oddities there are. I really think that the BBC needs to introduce an edit feature on their message boards. Every other BBS on the internet has them so I don't know why the BBC is lacking behind.



Anyway

@Touchfinder

It's an interesting point that the constant raging debate about Inception must mean it must have merit as a film. And I agree it's certainly a conversation starter, but I don't necessarily think this makes it a great film. I still like the Inception, however after watching it for the second time so many flaws became apparent to me that I missed the first time and hence my demi-essay. Pointing out flaws in a film is part of what I think film criticism and debate is about. I could write an essay on all the flaws of Attack of the Clones but this doesn't make it a redeeming film in anyway (I'm not saying Inception is anywhere near as bad as AOTCs).



Finally, went to see Uncle Boonmee Who Can Remember His Past Lives tonight. What an overrated bunch of fluff. Slow paced, languid, vapid, nonsensically and annoying. Apart from the brilliant costume design of the monkey ghosts and the occasional piece of inspired dialogue, it really had nothing to offer apart from the possibility of sending you to sleep. It reminded me of Certified Copy; wordy and odd but with very little substance behind the surrealism.

@Amber_



Thanks for proving my point.

Maybe Dr Mark likes it because it's another film about getting back home.



I've just watched this and I'm with the people that didn't put this as the top film for 2010.



I like Paxton's idea that this this was a sequel to a film that hasn't been made. This is the 2nd film of Nolan's recently that has seemed a bit disjointed. IMVHO The Dark Knight reached a logical conclusion about 3/4s of the way in and then tried to shoehorn half a new film into the last 1/4.



*May Contain spoilers*



There was a lot of things I liked in it. The bit towards the end happening at three speeds was done well. As were the different video game style zones.



I'm not sure if I feel like it was an action film either. There didn't really seem like there was much peril or justification for anyone to be fighting or firing guns, hostile projections aside. Also most of the actual on screen action was shown in the trailer.



And yes, the skiing scenes were very Roger Moore.



All the way through I was looking for the twist. The real world in it seemed slightly surreal, It sort of flitted between slightly fake locations and sequences [Mombassa] without that all important Indiana Jones line-on-a-map so I was almost hoping that it would end with the 747 flight being another veneer in Cobb's perpetual dream state. Maybe that would've been too similar to another film? It would've also explained the other characters' lack of, erm, character. Perhaps it didn't have a darker ending as that would harm it's takings accross the pond.



Anyway, it was a good idea and pretty enjoyable.

@Amber: The debate over Inception puts me in mind with the conversations I've had with people about "Donnie Darko" and "Primer" - in the former case, I can't help but feeling that maybe (like your you say above) it didn't really have a point but I found the characters so rounded and sympathetic that perhaps I forgave it - contrast this with the abominable "Southland Tales" which was similarly opaque but was utterly soulless.



Primer, on the other hand, I personally think is a masterpiece but I don't trust myself - do I think it's good just because it was difficult to understand? Does that also explain my love of "Twin Peaks: Fire Walk with Me" and Lynch's other more outre work?

Mark. Have you seen 'Amer' yet? Don't recall you ever mentioning it. A film I absolutely loved.

Joel gets it.



Twin Peaks: Fire Walk With Me is actually a perfect example. That is a very convoluted film that I love with complete earnestness. But in Fire Walk With Me's case, it's because I love the characters, I love the relationships, it's funny and sad, the direction is spellbinding and the world it inhabits is wonderful. That in turn hooks me into the mystery and makes me excited to know the details because I feel like they will reveal something. It's very rewarding to come up with ideas and spot details.



Inception, I honest to god gave my best shot and was flaky on it for a long time because I felt like this was something I needed to appreciate. Smart audiences, blah, blah, etc. The idea of Inception being a great film sent me back and forth far more than the film did. But, ultimately, watching the film and sorting it out just feels like busy-work. Technically, it's got stuff in it you can organize, but it's not something I want to do or find rewarding in any way so much as it's just a compulsive reaction from a neat freak to organize things.



It makes me mad now that I think about it. I wasted a lot of time spinning my wheels on that movie when I could have moved on to so many other films that would actually hold some satisfaction.

@Touchfinder



Amber thoroughly disproved your point. Maybe you are trapped in weird dream.

@Miracle Mile: Apologies! My beef, I now realise, is with @Ali Ates

I initially signed in here to talk about Inception and 3d but now all I can think about is the first part of DrK's opening line: "Such was the magnificence of your response to my bottom".

@ BillPaxtonsSecondBiggestFan



Inception SPOILER ALERT!



Not to enrage a cultural argument here but I believe you may have missed something that I seemed to tune into when viewing Inception.



Cobb is the only one that exists, all the other characters in the movie are facets of his personality; hence they are not fully formed characters with backgrounds etc.



Of course this is just one theory, people will probably get angry and shout it down in favour of their own theories but beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Personally, Inception blew my mind and does deserve to be up there if not 2010's best flick.

Inception: Good film? Yes. Masterpiece? Not on your nelly. I have to say Dr K went down a few 'levels' in my estimation when he made that claim (although it's reassuring to see that he's so thick skinned such criticism won't affect him in the least).



One point I've not seen made about Inception is how the costume design on the snow level really counteracts the levels of excitement, tension and sense of jeopardy the scene's trying to create. In what's meant to be the film's dramatic all action set piece finale, in all the wide action shots it's just a bunch of white figures running around blowing stuff up - you can't tell who is who. How can we worry about the fate of a character if we don't know which character it is we're looking at?



I don't really rate Christopher Nolan as an action director anyway, but is it only me who had this problem? For a film that (in my opinion) already struggles to involve the audience with its characters, this is just another alienating aspect and one that could have been easily remedied with a bit of thought. For me this is just another example of the film's overemphasis on the technical rather than the personal - a problem I have with a lot of Nolan's work. Having said that, this problem isn't exclusive to Nolan as lots of recent action / heist films have fallen into this same trap.

It's interesting to see how Inception manages to polarize opinion. Film is entirely subjective on its visceral level; it'll either twang your yang, drive you nuts, leave you unmoved or fall between all these stools. On a 'product' level (forgive the dispassionate perspective) there's much more meat there for the critic or the individual to judge.



1. Visuals - original, arresting and daring blend of CGI and ambitious in-camera.

2. Script/screenplay/story - imaginative and thoughtful that challenges the audience and challenges the Hollywood status quo.

3. Characterisation - cold but carried, unlike Avatar, by the sheer brio and clout of an exceptionally able cast.

4. Score - by any critical and musical analysis an astounding piece of dramatic work and one that adds a genuine extra dimension to the film. By most critical analysis, it appears to be up there with the best scores of all time.



Four simple key performance indicators that you can be quite objective about. No other film of 2010 takes all four creative ingredients and so clearly and confidently delivers against all of them. Like it or not, it is a movie of colossal imagination that shows every likelihood of re-calibrating audience and studio expectations. And because of that, it has that rare power: a legacy beyond merely itself.



Yup, Dr Kermode is bang on with this as No.1. And for all the right reasons.

Inception was soul-less. Compare it to a film like Blade Runner and it is maybe half as good.

I have to take issue with the idea that not wanting to read subtitles is in some way lazy.



Subtitle are Ok if your reading speed is high or its a mad Korean film, where everybody speaks a lot but utter(s) few words.



My reading speed is really slow bordering on the why bother.

Weird but I have no problem with Korean film's being Subtitled. But any other language and I turn off. It gives me a headache.



Is there a reason Korean films seem to translate better in the Subtitle?

I had the misfortune to see "Fred the Movie" over the chrismas holidays with my 9 yr old daughter. I asked her would she like to see HP7A instead, but no Fred was the choice. So off we went to the local cinema and sat down. Within 1 minute of the start I lost the will to live. If there is a more annoying person in the world Iam yet to see them.



How anyone would find that load of rubbish entertaining is beyond me, even my daughter said as we came out of the cinema said "That was rubbish dad"



So out of the mouth of babes does the best tagline for "Fred the Movie" come "THAT WAS RUBBISH DAD"!!!



P.S



Went to see King's Speech last night, Geoffrey Rush - sublime acting

I had the good sense to avoid all the films that ended up in Mark's Bottom 5. I too don't get those who hated upon Iron Man 2 or Book of Eli - both films that were very solid and entertaining.



Inception was a little disappointing, I too would have had Social Network up there instead BUT not as my number one. Oh no, THAT would have been the gloriously enjoyable Piranha 3D - ticking all the boxes it had to and delivering EXACTLY what I wanted from the film. It says it all that it was the ONLY film I went back to the cinema to see again with others.

@Deckard82 re: 50 -



One of the criticisms aimed at "Bladerunner" upon its original release was that it was "style of substance" - beautiful to look at but soulless and cold. Fast forward 28 years...

Ach... "style OVER substance"... even with the preview option I still muck it up!

@Amber: Yay me! :-)



TP:FWWM (to give it the proper geeky title) suffers as a film precisely because of its ties to the original TV series - I wonder if it would be less over-looked had it been made as an entirely stand-alone film? I think it merits a critical re-appraisal.

@BLee

Tyler Durten was a figment of Ed Nortan's imagination in Fight Club. Harvey is a figment of Jimmy Stewart's imagination in Harvey. Doesn't mean either of these characters are devoid of characterization or depth. Just they aren't real - if we take the hypothesis that everything in Inception is just in Cobb's mind - doesn't mean that the character's can't be more than just plot points and extras.



@Joel_Cooney

Blade Runner was met with either dislike or muted ambivalence on it's release with the only praise reserved for it's outstanding special effects. However as it was watched over and over again on VHS and cable a very devoted audience emerged who saw that there was a huge amount of subtext, emotion and character depth behind the flashy visuals.

Inception on the other hand was met with almost universal praise when it was released, critics wowed by its "intellectual" plot and impressive visuals. However I think, it is a film that wont stand up to repeated viewing. I loved it the first time but on second viewing far too many faults became apparent.

I think there is a big different from how BR will age and Inception will age.

I think it's extra funny that someone took the time to comment that they were never going to watch Kermode ever again like the doctor or anyone else in the world actually cares.

BillPaxtonsSecondBiggestFan - thank you! thank you. Inception was my biggest disappointment of 2010. Yes, the special effects were impressive. Yes, the idea of breaking into somebody's dreams to steal their secrets is a great idea - as is the layering of dreams within dreams. However, while Nolan delivered a great technical achievement, that is what it remains. Like a well-designed sewer system.



Let's be clear: I was really looking forward to this film. The first 10 minutes were fantastic; I remember sitting in the cinema thinking, "Oh god, this is going to be good."



And then? Over an hour of turgid, pompous, achingly slow plodding, where we're introduced to characters with utterly no substance for no apparent reason, some of whom appear only to serve to supply cues for what feels like endless (ENDLESS!) exposition (*coughellenpagecough*), drumming the conceit of the film into our heads with the condescension of a man who thinks his audience is too stupid to wrap their heads around the idea. And yet, the many issues I didn't understand were never touched upon. An example: In what way is a student architect best suited to create a dream world? A civil engineer is more used to large scale planning, surely, and an artist more likely to create something with sufficient richness and depth. A musician, maybe? someone with talent involving the intangible? If I'll grant Nolan a pass on that one point, then how is Ellen Page in particular the best candidate? What evidence do we have? How does she do it?



Also: the dream worlds. These are meant to be dream worlds! Where is the fantastic, the surreal, the impossible? Aside from the folding city (and even that was remarkably anticlimactic), there appeared to be no imagination involved. A city, a hotel, and an alpine bunker. Really? As flawed as The Imaginarium Of Doctor Parnassus was, at least its alternate realities showed some creativity. Don't think I didn't notice Nolan's feeble attempt to explain this away by claiming that too much wierdness would force the dreamer to freak out; that's just an arbitrary excuse to cover his bases - something I noticed him doing throughout the film.



By the time the action kicked in Nolan had succeeded in making me utterly uninterested in the outcome. Not only had he failed to provide me with any emotional investment in any of the characters, but as BillPaxtonsSecondBiggestFan makes the point, there's no real sense of jeopardy. How does Nolan try to overcome this? With an ear-shreddingly loud and invasive soundtrack. A film score is meant to enhance onscreen emotion or tension, not distract from a lack of it.



I left feeling robbed of two hours of my life. Inception is a bloated mess, with no regard to pacing, no depth to the cardboard cutout characters, and a lecturing, smug tone that left a bad taste in the mouth. Awful. A film for the Apollonians of this world, and the worse for it.

@BillPaxtonsSecondBiggestFan



Was Harvey a figment of James Stewarts' imagination? I'd argue that point but maybe another time...



Tyler Durden was, absolutely no argument there. However he was, every thing the Narrator wasn't. A projection of how he would like to be, behave etc. The characters in Inception were individual facets of Cobb personality (in my view) Arthur/caution, Ariadne/creativity etc and that is why they lack depth because they are personality traits.



We can debate on this for years though and probably get nowhere, I'll leave it at that...great points from you and well made though!

I'm going to predicate Mr Kermodes, most pointless remake of 2011 : Girl with a Dragon tattoo. There is absolutely no need for Hollywood to touch this piece, but they had to. Again down to subtitles?



If the on location shots of Daniel Craig that have been released are of him in costume, the fight has already been lost.

Decided to sign up to post this comment as it had been niggling at me from your best film list til now.



As you've mentioned several times you can't fit all the good films into a 5-spaced 'best' list. That being said you have given out numerous honorable mentions be it on the show or in this film blog.



I just feel it's a shame that through the year and your blog The Illusionist (the Chomet animated film)was never mentioned. This immediately stole my place for the best film of 2010, if not for the past few years, upon exiting the cinema. While Belleville Rendez-vous was quirky and humerous this film is a clear evolution of the style and with that comes a real emotional punch. For a film without a legible word of spoken dialogue it sings praises for the direction and the animators that you still make the links to the characters.



I found it odd that this did not get a mention yet you described a similiar reaction to mine in regards to a different animated flick. If you didn't manage to see the film then it's a shame a gets a hearty reccomendation.



On a different note I strongly disliked Inception but that was more of an incensed backlash to it's association with words like 'original' and 'complex'. The film has many flaws but to list them the post would drag on and morph into a rant of 10 on the Kermodian scale.



Cheers, Tweed.

I'm intrigued that none of the defenders of Inception ever address the central problem raised by critics of the film of the lack of emotional engagement with the characters.



Compare to Toy Story 3. There is not one scene in Inception that compares to the emotional power of the scene where the toys contemplate their firey death or the poignancy of the toys finding a new home and leaving their past behind.



Not a single scene in the emotionally arid Inception can compare to the many scenes in Toy Story 3 that deal with confronting mortality and our essential aloneness in the Universe, coming to terms with loss, moving on to new stages of development, relying on others to support us when it most counts, tolerating the quirks of others, etc. in spades.



If Mark had declared Toy Story 3 to be his number one then I wouldn't have a problem in accepting it. This is a movie that teaches us lessons about how to deal with the emotional challenges in life that confront us all.



The lessons we learn from Inception are...? Literally nothing. As others have commented, Inception has no soul. It's an exercise in showing off its cleverness.

@BLee

I see your point with the various different characteristics of Cobb's mind. It's an interesting idea and maybe if I watch the film again in a few years time I'll consider this and see if it changes my perspective.



@hedonist86

While I agree with much of your criticism I can't muster the venom to hate Inception like you do. I think it still has many positive points that makes it a commendable, if not extraordinary, film. One thing you mentioned was the score and how much you hated it and I disagree completely. I wouldn't say it was invasive but rather quite thrilling, making the film a little bit more exciting every time it kicked in.



I'd think a lot of Inceptions other merits are going unnoticed by people as well. Some of my favourite bits were the scenes featuring Tom Hardy's Eames. He brought a few nice comical touches to proceedings and I wish his relationship with Arther had been developed a bit more. They were funny on screen together and it'd be nice to know a little about their past working together.



I also think Joseph Gorden Levitt's gravity defying Hallway fight was absolutely gobsmacking. A brilliant idea and well executed.



And maybe, because we're all still discussing this, we're all just proving Touchfinder's point.

@ifimay



If it's the David Fincher from Se7en and The Game then I'd be interested to see what he does with the remake

If it's the David Fincher from Benjamin Button then I'll wait until I'm stuck on a plane.



The Swedish film of Dragon Tatoo wan't exactly a masterpeice. It was a pretty mundane dramatisation of what was in hidisight a pretty average book (for me anyway).



This is not like Let Me In vs Let The Right One In which was superb as a film regardless of it's interpretation of the source material.

@Nick_KingoftheRoad_Buggey



Good points, and yes, the acting is brilliant in Funny Games U.S. However, I'm not really a fan of the point of the film being "meta" in the sense that the experiment that is the film itself conveys some message that is above and beyond the content of the piece. It's feels kinda gimmicky, in the sense that just as you see Duchamp's urinal and go "aha!" and question what art is etc it gets old instantly, having seen the original funny games, when I saw the FG U.S., I got the point about Americanizing art & violence rather quickly (with respect to Haneke's mastery of his craft, can't say he's that subtle about driving the point home, flushing money and all).



But hey, if you enjoyed it even after seeing the original version, my arguments have been refuted.

@BillPaxtonsSecondBiggestFan



I would high five you right now (If it was the 90's) That comment on Inception was better that watching the actual film!

@every one who has commented that they think Let Me Is Just a re-adaption of the book rather that a Hollywood re-make of Let the Right One In:



What!!!! Are you all mad? ‘Let Me In’ has clearly gone to great lengths to copy certain elements of the original film, and to create a similar feeling to the original. If it was a re-adaption of the book I would expect it to take a very different take on the whole story from a visual perspective.



Watch both trailers with the sound of and you will see what I mean. They are very similar stylistically except for the fact that one is more American and one is more European.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjavOLdPk1c



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sZJUgsZ56vQ



And on the subject of subtitles, as a slow reader myself I do sympathise with others who find it difficult to keep up the often fast pace of subtitles, but to suggest that the only alternative is to spend millions on completely re-making films in the English (instead of using the money to make other original and interesting films) is ludicrous.



Foreign language DVD’s often come with dubbed versions of the film, (not ideal but better than a kick in the teeth) or audio description tracks.

@MrTweed I applaud you for raising the Illusionist. I couldn't see it anywhere here and finally saw it in the French cinema on the south corner of Central Park last week. It was magical and wonderful.

You are my favorte film critic, and the only one i watch.

I think BillPaxtonsSecondBiggestFan has said all there is too say about Inseption, but I would urge you to watch South Park's Insheeption, genius. As for my faves, a toss up between Kick-Ass & Social Network, oh, & maybe The Road. So many to choose from!

As for the worst. Your all wrong. Only one film deserves that title. Pointless beyond belief & awful in every way, I wanted to shower after watching it so I could scrub my eyeballs clean. If you want proof that there is no God, then it is because somebody gave Tom Six money to make The Human Centipede, & there's talk of more!!

This isn't scraping the barrel, this is digging halfway to the center of the Earth, & when they get there I hope they drop every single copy of this pile of manure down the hole.

Actually, that is a disservice to manure as it does (as every gardener knows) serve a purpose. The Human Centipede does not. Hated it. Sorry. Rant over.

Apologies, just realised that I can't spell Inception.

59. hedonist86



That is the most accurate review of Inception that I have read.



Self-indulgent, pretentious tosh. My own view is that its success is due to the "complicated" plot helping thick people feel intelligent, as they come out of the cinema all knowing.

P.S. Kick-Ass was my favourite film of the year.

Inception is like Quantum Mechanics



If you say you understand Quantum Mechanics, you don't understand Quantum Mechanics