Movie Review Inception

Movie Review Essay Inception is a 2010 science fiction summer blockbuster filmed in sundry(a) locations, such as Tokyo, France, Los Angeles, the United Kingdom, and Canada. The box get rid ofice hit was tell by London-born Christopher Jonathan James Nolan, who is well-known for the cult classic, Memento, and his Dark horse cavalry films. Along with Ameri throne cinematographer, Walter W tout ensembley Pfister, equally well-known in his bea of expertise, the trend picture has received critical acclaim. Nolans interest in noir and abstract apprehension is apparent in many of his films, and Inception is no exclusion.As it is a film well-nigh dreams and cons, Nolans style is incredibly fitting. Pfister, who has solveed as the cinematographer for go uply all of Nolans films, adds to the mental pictures juicy quality with his characteristic use of dark tones and lighting, which but increases the movies intrigue. Together, the two powerhouses team up once again to produce an d umb rearing move picture which has won numerous awards, such as the honorary society Award for Best Cinematography. Inception is the story of a corporate tell apart by the foretell of Dom Cobb (played by Leonardo DiCaprio, who came to fame in the movie, Titanic).How eer, what is particular(prenominal)(prenominal) about Cobb is that he doesnt merely enter a companys building in search of commercial secrets. He actually enters the minds of his targets art object they are somnolent and extracts the data he wants via conning and deceiving. But now, wanted for murder and unable to discriminate his children callable to his circumstances, he is offered the opportunity to regain his old life if he manages to accomplish the impossible lineage, the planting of an idea into a targets mind, which then takes grow and grows.Gathering a group of specialist to assist him, Cobb begins to plan inception into the mind of a wealthy businessman. The tv camera angles of the movie were quite a simple. closely of the shots were so that the characters face was directed at the viewer while tell character talked to a nonher. On a screen, the eyes of the actor would be level with that of the earshot. However, at that place are some scenes that are completely opposite, especially near the latter half of the movie, where more action tended to be focused upon. Although non as common, but highly interesting, oud follow aerial shots of the surroundings. It gave a very(prenominal) desolate, mysterious have to the film, while also informing the viewer about where the characters are. I found that the camera angles were okay, with a few that exceeded my expectations. Continuity was smooth, with talk scenes being fluid and dramatic and action scenes being erratic and ever changing, as how I interchangeable my movies to be. It was what youd expect out of the typical talk of the town and action scenes. The long moments of talking or silence between characters created a sense of depth.The short moments of running or fighting al pitifuled you to lean send on in anticipation. I felt up like the continuity did what it was suppose to do. Although, there were some moments, particularly in the first half, which I felt were sooner awkward. The talking scenes in the beginning were rather quick and keep changing from one character to the next, and I was so caught in trying to soma out the plotline, that I didnt even figure out the main characters name until the credits. Cutting, I noticed, was very prominent in the latter half of the motion picture.It made sense, as with the plotline and story the way it is, it definitely made the movie better as the whole. It added to the tension and sense of heart pounding Oh-my-word-come-on-you-only-have-5-seconds-to-do-that-gah. non only is that, but it allowed the viewer to keep up with the characters actions, which is very beautiful if you have a particular character you think is cool. I like Eames, the smart-aleck of the group, so I liked to know what was happening to him and seeing that he wasnt going to die and all that.Close-ups were generally seen in talking scenes, allowing the audience to focus on the emotions and reactions of the character. There was rarely a moment where the camera zoomed in on something that wasnt an organism, something that lived and breathed. In this aspect of the movie, I found it to be either boring or heart-breaking. In my opinion, how good the close-ups were was completely subordinate on the actress and actors ability to perform. If I became aware that they were trying to look sad, rather than felt that the character was distraught, I felt like the close-up wasnt a particularly mart move. I noticed that the composition of Inception was rather dark. light-headed was played with and created shadows that revealed parts of the characters body, while the other was engulfed in darkness. Objects were ever so put far away as to create a feeling of isolation, while man aging to focus in on the character the camera was directed at. I really, really enjoyed the composition. I believed it worked wonders for the storys overall feeling. It allowed for dark and desolate tone to be even more pronounced. Inception really loves its slow motion scenes.However, considering that it can be a rather fast-moving movie, it does have its uses. Although there was one particular scene near the beginning that made me raise an eyebrow, I found that most of them were rather cool-looking. Considering that the characters were essentially stepping into a dream world, where everything is possible, the slow motions displayed all the strange and exciting so your eyes could feast in the admirableness of it all. The color scheme tended to lean towards neutral, yet somehow gave off a very sharp feel to it.There was also a low contrast, although it was most apparent near the end, with a particularly monochromatic feel to it. Textures were interesting to see when things began to lead towards the rising action. As for space, I felt like there was always a foreground and background, but not so much a middle ground. I suppose this was due to the incredible amount of talking. Shape was super incredibly awesome. Then again, its a plotline about going into the dream world, so obviously the minds behind the work would take advantage of the ability to play around with the world they created. each way, your mouth would drop at some of the things they twisted, the architecture in particular. In fact, the architecture is one of the most interesting things in the whole movie. As stated before, the movie played around with shadows a lot. There were a lot of highlights in Inception, particularly on the face. The characters are always slightly off center on the screen and there are generally only one or two characters in a single shot. I like to think it just furthers the idea of the isolated feel to the movie. Buildings are towering and rather rectangle in shape, giving off a feel of aloofness.The special effects are in high gear when the characters enter the mind of the wealthy businessman. Things explode, crumble apart, and all that bed The essentials for any type of action movie. Its fantastic. My particular favorite is when they do these anti-gravity shots and you see the characters walking upside down and floating in mid-air. Although I found some aspects of the cinematography to be average or lacking, it fully makes up in other ways. The composition and special effects are grave awesome and I could see why the film won an honorary society Award in Cinematography.