The Saphead : A Hearty Introduction to Buster Keaton

Long before Buster Keaton became a household name during the 1920’s, Douglas Fairbanks recommended Keaton to play the leading role in this film, which Fairbanks had played on the stage previously (where it was originally titled The Lamb). The idea of movie stars was just coming into fruition throughout the past five years as cinema made its stride, and Fairbanks was certainly one of those stars. Thanks to Fairbanks’ suggestion, Buster Keaton became one of those stars as well.

Herbert Blaché’s The Saphead follows Keaton as Bertie, the titular “saphead” – purely innocent and oblivious – as he strives to marry a long-time family acquaintance, Agnes, while trying to impress his powerful financier father who believes he should make something of himself out in the world. Like any good Keaton film (even though this was not directed by Keaton himself), things do not go his way outright. On the side, there is Mark Turner, his brother-in-law, who is trying to keep secret the details of his affair with a woman named Henrietta from Bertie’s sister, Rose (Mark’s wife). If it doesn’t sound messy just yet, don’t worry, it will. Meanwhile, Bertie’s father is currently living well-off thanks to his new investment with the Henrietta mine – literally striking gold. All of these details converge at a climax equal parts hilarious, thrilling, and touching.

Long before Billy Wilder ever put that bittersweet touch on his films that made them so memorable, relatable, and classics in every sense of the word, The Saphead sure serves as an inspiration to that type of cleverly written, gently handled film that Wilder was known to do so well. At the heart of it all is Keaton’s adorable portrayal of a gullible, but kindly pure man who only lives as a “free spirit” with the best of intentions – to win the heart of his one true love, Agnes. In the hands of a lesser actor, the absent-minded character of Bertie might have been handled a little too inanely and made his character simply seem stupid rather than likable. But the power of Keaton is he always had a way to make his character likable, the same way Chaplin managed for many years as his famous “Tramp” character, even without using clever words or suave faces. Though he was not a household name at the point of this film, and his signature stunt work in silent films was yet to be renown to the world, his slapstick humor and creative stunt work during the climax at the Stock Exchange was certainly enough evidence of what was to come.

However, the film does not solely work due to Keaton’s delightful performance – as well as the decent performances of his supporting cast – but the writing is what puts it above the other films of the year or decade. Adapted from a play, it certainly has all the aspects of a good play with clever, whimsical dialogue which dashes off the tongue to make for many humorous moments as well as setting up many elements that would come together for an explosive climax. Thanks to director Herbert Blaché’s wonderfully light touch, it actually manages to work outside of the stage as it almost feels ripe for a film straight out of the 1950’s during Wilder’s reign where clever dialogue reigned supreme.

All in all, the film has several elements going for it and very few going against it, which makes it an instant crowd-pleaser for me. The one element that sets it apart, however, is Buster Keaton which was in a league only occupied by him and Chaplin for the next decade which made audiences hearts soar with delight, but feel with the utmost sincerity. For this, it easily pushes itself above many other films of the decade, and only excites me more to watch many more films from his repertoire and for the hopes that I can manage to find many other small gems such as this throughout the next few years. Hopefully quite a few more audiences will do the same regarding this film, as it would have been well worth the 27 cents to see it in theaters during 1920 (many times over, might I add), but now we even get to watch it for free on YouTube. Should count ourselves lucky.

9/10

What the World Needs Now: Fighting Prejudice Through Art

I want to say that watching Oscar Micheaux’s film, Within Our Gates (1920), after suffering through D.W. Griffith’s racist masterwork, The Birth of a Nation (1915), helps to subside my anger for the treatment of African-Americans during the early 1900s, but really this film only builds upon it – albeit for an entirely different reason. Within Our Gates earns a spot in the cinematic hall of fame for being the oldest living print of an American film written and directed by an African-American – the legendary Oscar Micheaux. The film depicts the troubling life of Sylvia Landry (played with great innocence by Evelyn Preer) as she attempts to rebuild a Southern school following her fiancé’s abandonment. Though the times have long changed from the late 1800’s when men, women, and children were forced into labor, she and many other African-Americans still face unfair and unwarranted prejudice from those who claim them to be “inferior” beings (ugh, just typing that boils my blood…). Despite these prejudices, Sylvia remains true to her cause to garner enough money to save a school in the South for uneducated children who want to better themselves and contribute to society.

Though she faces many obstacles along the way, this is not a film about tragedy or the evil of white people. In fact, despite its disturbingly honest portrayal of the treatment of African-Americans over the years (even having the guts to show lynching and attempted rape), Micheaux never ignorantly accuses white people of being evil or impure – simply the ones whose evil is necessary for the story. And he certainly never painted certain races certain colors or outright discriminatorily slammed another race like a certain director whose film I’ve reviewed…

Instead, Micheaux paints a picture of a woman brought up through tragedy and still wanting to bring some good to the world. She wants to help children in need, she loves fully and purely and does not give in to every romantic whim that comes her way, and she even steps in front of a moving vehicle to save a small, white child. Without even trying, Micheaux creates a character we are born to care for as long as we are not ignorant enough to step in her shoes.

Aside from the social and racial implications the film offers, the film still serves as an enthralling drama about Sylvia’s struggle to both find money to build the school as well as love. Micheaux has an eye for creating rich characters and wants his audiences to really invest time in each and every one. Even though it’s a simple story, the film allows the audience to think deeply about the issues at hand for not only the characters, but all African-Americans post-Civil War era. Sylvia is just one simple woman in a world filled with many tragic stories just like hers, but Michaeux demonstrates the heartbreaking plight of many through the witnessing of her one story. Yes, sometimes film is meant to entertain, but I believe the real purpose of film is to force an audience to think about their own lives as well as the lives of others. In this case, I would say Michaeux crafted a landmark of black cinema that perfectly captures this idea clearly, especially at a time in which the world – just as it was back in 1920 – really needs to see all sides to the story of every person’s life.
7.5/10

Ignorance and the Re-Birth of the Klan: D.W. Griffith’s “Masterpiece”

It is really, really difficult to not hate D.W. Griffith’s The Birth of a Nation. A film made by a man so ignorant and blatantly racist that it took me about nine different attempts of pausing and taking a break from the film to finally finish it over the course of two days. I’m sure the controversy this film stirred has been talked to death among countless reviews, essays, and more, but it’s simply too difficult to ignore the fact: this film is as unflinchingly bigoted and racist as it gets. Yet, simultaneously, it’s difficult to ignore just what this film did to the art of cinema – and that’s what I’ll do my very best to focus on in this review.

The film follows two families on opposing sides of the American lines during the 1860’s when America was on the verge of a national war and racism was alive and well. Comprised of two parts (one focusing on the calm before the Civil War storm and its extensive battle, and the second focusing on the subsequent Reconstruction Era), the film was the longest and most extensive American audiences had witnessed before. In fact, the film was the highest grossing for many years following its release and spawned sequels (that’s right, sequels! So, if you didn’t get enough racism the first time, come on down and get you some more!). However, the reason this film was such a massive hit was not due to its content (despite popular belief, not everyone was on the same wave-length as Griffith in 1915; in fact, it stirred up quite a controversy and he had to make Intolerance as a result of the backlash due to his own intolerance); rather, the film was a hit due to its never-before-seen use of camera movement, close-ups (particularly with the "iris effect" shown below), its own original music score (though borrowing from the classics as well), parallel editing techniques, wide-ranging narrative scope, and many other story-telling devices that are now used as common practice in many of today’s films.

Attempting to ignore the blatant discriminatory attitudes the film portrays, it’s easy to see why this film is still held in such high regard. In fact, if it weren’t for Griffith’s intolerant behavior, historians, critics, and film fans alike would celebrate this film for giving birth to the art of cinema. Unfortunately, not only did it inspire countless filmmakers and artists alike, but it also rejuvenated the spirit of the notorious Ku Klux Klan – hence why they still remain to this day.

But isn’t that the power of film? Trying to put aside my personal feelings about the situation, the influence this one film had on so many others – the effects of which we still feel now and forever – only further demonstrates the incredible power of cinema and why it remains such a celebrated art form to this day. Imagine the year is 1915 and you walk into the theater to see this film and you are simply blown away by the technical achievement at hand. It’s almost like a night out at the opera, but instead the actors are simply pasted onto hundreds of photographs rolling by at light-speed. And there’s a story that spans years with countless characters to become attached to and empathize with (depending on which side you’re on). And the battle sequences almost feel like you’re right there on the field. And the camera gallops along with the horses, and the camera closes in on the actors’ faces and it feels so intimate and real. What a wondrous treat the cinema must have been on that opening night!

Sadly, the film’s regrettably positive representation of such a racist culture nearly makes any admiration for the technical achievement feel like an afterthought. Aside from each of these technical accomplishments, the only positive remark I can make about the film is that it spawned countless others to command the screen just as D.W. Griffith did even better – and far less narrow-minded. For that, I am grateful as I’m not sure where I would be today without my love of film and I couldn’t imagine a world without its existence, and I am equally grateful to live in a world that no longer allows films like The Birth of a Nation to get made… unless it’s title is borrowed by a non-white with a proper focus on the trials and tribulations of his culture.

6.5/10 -- Rating based off the film's quality; with personal feelings, an easy 1/10.

The Roots of Passion: A Film Odyssey Begins

Due to my lack of passion and drive for film the past two years, I have decided to set a goal of watching at least five films from each year beginning with 1920 and working my way down to 2016 (or 2017, depending on when I complete my journey). In doing so, I hope to not only learn and appreciate the art of film over its formidable years as well as introduce myself to some of the many celebrated filmmakers I’ve yet to embrace thus far (i.e. Ingmar Bergman, Luis Bunuel, etc.), but also to reignite that love for film I’ve so dearly missed the past couple years of my life.

Before I begin that trip into the heart of cinema, though, I wanted to start back where it all began. At a time when film was only seen behind curtains at carnivals where the idea of moving images was boxed into the same category as magic tricks and circus clowns, some dared to dream about what wondrous things could be made from these images. Two filmmakers in particular, from the very early 1900’s, introduced the world to the idea of visual narrative story-telling: George Méliès with A Trip to the Moon and Edwin S. Porter with The Great Train Robbery. These films would eventually catapult cinema as an art form to be reckoned with throughout the next century and still a major economic, social, and creative force to this day.

Beginning with the later film, Edwin Porter’s The Great Train Robbery (1903) would seem to the casual moviegoer of today as the most basic of plot lines. The short 12-minute film (the longest of its time) follows a group of bandits as they rob a train and subsequently flee from the law (or a version of it anyway…). The film is widely considered a milestone for the film industry because it was essentially one of the first to introduce the capability of film as a tool for telling stories, but also the first “action” or “Western” film of its kind.

The film was so influential, in fact, that Martin Scorsese borrowed its closing shot of a man shooting a pistol at the camera, toward the audience, in his 1990 film Goodfellas (which you can see to the right). Not to mention, it’s even been borrowed for the opening titles of every James Bond film as well. However, while the modern movie lover, such as myself, can find little merit as filmic entertainment compared to those who perfected the craft of the Western genre years later, such as Sergio Leone, it’s difficult to deny its influence on the audiences and – more importantly – the artists of the day. Feeling thrilled by the action on the screen and wanting to ignite the same reaction in others by pursuing the endless possibilities film had to offer, The Great Train Robbery inspired many future filmmakers to entertain audiences for many years to come.

However, the film that truly captured my attention and even personally inspired me was George Méliès’ A Trip to the Moon (1902). Once again, another film that inspired many future filmmakers (most prominently Jonathan Dayton & Valerie Faris, who paid homage to the film for their Smashing Pumpkins music video, “Tonight, Tonight”) and illustrated the possibilities of cinema and how it could transport audiences to whole new worlds, quite literally even. In fact, Scorsese (again) was so inspired by Méliès that he dedicated an entire film to his life’s work (as well as a salute to the great pioneers of cinema). The film’s basic premise is this: a group of wizards decide to create a rocket ship (remember, this was long before anyone ever traveled into space), fly to the moon, and beat up aliens. I’m pretty sure if Méliès had pitched that idea to me back in 1902, I would have called him crazy and say it was impossible to do. Of course, back then there were no studios breathing down anyone’s necks and nearly all filmmakers worked purely out of passion for the art. Méliès and this film deserve careful consideration though because of the visual mastery that went into it (not just in the sets, costumes, and props themselves,

but in the idea of hand-drawing his film reels to bring to life vibrant, luscious moving images for audiences to revel in). For this, I give Méliès my full respect as a film lover and an aspiring filmmaker because to stand in the face of insurmountable odds and having very little idea of how the public could potentially respond to a film about wizards in space is brave and admirable if anything else. But it worked and many filmmakers tried for many years to replicate its genius and innovative eye. Even though very few ever came close, the film itself still managed to inspire both artists and audiences alike to believe in the power film could have both on the heart and the mind.

To me, being able to take some words on a page and a few moving frames and create an experience that resonates, inspires, and captivates audiences is what film is all about to me. Being able to start my journey with these two films has both opened up my eyes to the trials and tribulations of early filmmakers, but also sparked a bit more passion in my heart for the art of cinema once more. Though Porter and Méliès are not filmmakers who got the opportunity to excel during the prime years of cinema’s inception, they are most certainly to be commended for spawning the art form and demonstrating to the world its endless potential. In particular, the artistry on display in A Trip to the Moon is still astounding to this day and only inspires me to offer as much dedication to the craft as he did. Hopefully throughout my own journey through over a century of film, I’ll find even more inspiration and knowledge to aid me in my own efforts that I can pass on to many others like me who dare to dream of traveling to other worlds (literal or otherwise).

Drive: A Modern-Day Superhero’s Chronicle

When Peter Parker – the geeky kid from high school who fantasizes about his next-door neighbor Mary Jane Watson – has to save the day, he does it as his alter-ego, Spider Man. When Bruce Wayne – the famous billionaire of Gotham City – leaves the Wayne manor at night, he becomes Batman, the even more famous hero of Gotham City. When Ryan Gosling’s character in Drive, known only as the Driver, drives a car or fights crime in order to protect a boy and his mother, he sports a jacket with a scorpion design on the back. Just as M. Night Shyamalan did eleven years ago with his film Unbreakable, Nicolas Winding Refn has created a modern-day superhero in the character of Driver.

The story centers on Driver (Ryan Gosling), who is a stunt driver and car repairman for his friend and mentor Shannon (Bryan Cranston) by day and moonlights as a getaway driver by night. His life is steady and ready for big things, with the new investment in him as a stock car driver by Bernie Rose (Albert Brooks) and Nino (Ron Perlman) – two men with connections to the mob. Things begin to shake up, however, once he gets close to his Mary Jane Watson – Irene (Carey Mulligan) and her son Benicio (Kaden Leos). As he begins to fall for her and her son, Irene’s husband Standard (Oscar Isaac) is released from prison and forced into doing a job. Driver decides to help Standard for the sake of Irene and Benicio, but when things go wrong, he must do what’s necessary to keep Irene and Benicio safe.

Slow, methodical, careful, composed, rhythmic, stylish, colorful, heartfelt, sweet, and violent: these are words to accurately describe Drive. Not since The Dark Knight back in 2008 have I been this excited to see a movie immediately after I finished it. It’s not flashy like The Dark Knight, it’s not fast-paced, it hardly has a lot of pure gun-slinging violence, and has more in common with David Cronenberg’s A History of Violence than say something like Fast Five. And the film for the most part is very calm and collected, but then violence bursts through those calm walls and so effectively disrupts you as a viewer – it never feels out of place, and feels as though the violence has a purpose to the story rather than just being there. Every ounce of it feels absolutely real, but at the same time, like an otherworldly nightmare.

After the first pulse-pounding, lip-biting, thrills-fueled fifteen minutes which says way more without any words than it could if it had any to say, the romance between Driver and Irene begins to take a front to the story. There’s no doubt that while this film is far from a romance, this will go down as one of my favorites, if not my favorite romance of the year. It’s mainly due to the powerfully subdued performances by both Ryan Gosling and Carey Mulligan. The film then moves into the main story of the whole robbery gone wrong and Driver’s attempt to protect Irene and Benicio from the bad guys. While the thrilling opening scene was astounding, my personal favorite scene of the film is the elevator scene – which people will understand who have seen it.

A TRUE SPOILER HERE, READ ONLY IF YOU’VE SEEN THE FILM: [spoiler]The second he steps into that elevator with Irene and notices the tan-suited man with the gun in there with them he knows that he’ll never be able to see Irene again, whether it be because he’s dead or because he’ll never be looked at the same way again. So he gives Irene that one, first and last, hugely romantic and intimate kiss before taking the tan-suited man’s head and turning it into absolute mush. The cinematography shows the beauty of a kiss so well. The light in the elevator turns into a spotlight over Mulligan’s face as she becomes stunned by the sudden advance by Gosling, then as their eyes close and their lips meet, the light begins to darken to give it the intimacy of a warm kiss, followed by the aftermath when your eyes open and you stare at each other, the lights become brighter and full of recognition and divinity and all put to the tune of Cliff Martinez’s ambient sound. Without a doubt the single most romantic scene in any film this year, followed by possibly the bloodiest and most vile of the year as Driver turns and kicks the tan-suited man’s head in so many times it turns into squishy brain. Then he turns to see Irene staring at him with fright and disgust, as he stares back with intensity and disappointment in himself that she had to be there to see him do what he needed to do. He knows from thereon, things will never be the same, and even if the two love each other, he could never raise Benicio to be like him for the world. If you love something, let it go… absolutely romantic in the most vile way possible.[/spoiler]

Back on topic…

Ryan Gosling plays his character with absolute perfect attention to detail. This is not something you have seen from him yet. Whether we’ve realized it or not, we’ve come to expect something talky, wild, nervous, and most of all emotional from him. Whether it be his drug-addicted, incredibly likable school teacher in Half Nelson or it be his timid and suppressed Lars in Lars and the Real Girl (which happens to be one of my all-time favorite performances), you have not seen anything like what he has done here.

Whether it is better than his previous performances is up to interpretations, but there’s no denying that his extraordinarily methodical performance as Driver is different from anything he has done. He has begun to show his true professionalism as an actor. With every expression on his face, every blink of his eye, there is an attention to detail and an emotion waiting to breach the surface. While he manages to stay innocent and childlike around Irene and Benicio, he can switch gears with a snap when it comes to killing or intimidating a bad guy, but his personality never changes. He’s fearless and ready for the kill if need be, but he’s not a psychopath (allegedly) like Robert De Niro’s character in Taxi Driver. He’s worse – he’s a hero with a clear goal in mind and not willing to back out of it.

The rest of the cast is a great compliment to Gosling as well. Carey Mulligan is absolutely stunning as the incredibly underwritten Irene. Every quiet moment that she shares with Ryan Gosling’s character, you can feel the love emanating from her, just from her eyes and her hard breaths. She plays Irene so innocently and so sweetly, that you can see exactly why Driver would want to do anything to protect her. Albert Brooks also does a pretty good job as Bernie Rose, the tough and hard-nosed ex-movie producer who now has turned to a life of crime. He’s ruthless and unpredictable, but like Driver, he’s incredibly methodical and on-edge – the perfect arch nemesis, his Lex Luthor. Bryan Cranston gives possibly the most sympathetic performance of the film, taking a slightly underwritten character and turning him into a body of emotion and personality. He and Brooks are neck-and-neck as my favorite supporting players, after Mulligan. Oscar Isaac does a solid enough job as Standard Gabriel, and manages to create one of the most intense scenes when he first meets Driver. See it, you’ll understand. Ron Perlman does a pretty good job as the hard-ass gangster/ pizzeria owner Nino, but gets a little overshadowed by the rest of the cast. Christina Hendricks is a bit wasted in her role, but is nonetheless still good.

The stand-out of this film though is the puppet master himself, Nicolas Winding Refn. There’s a reason he won the Best Director’s award at the Cannes Film Festival this year. Every single shot, every little fiber of this film is so perfectly executed and flawlessly composed. From the use of songs such as College’s “A Real Hero” (which will no doubt become legendary after this film) or Kavinsky’s “Nightcall” as the opening credits song to the tranquil, lingering shots that are sprinkled throughout the film, Refn has created a modern-day masterpiece without a doubt. When you deconstruct the film itself, you’ll get a tense, thriller film, a romance film, an action-y film, and a crime drama wrapped up into a neat hour-and-forty-minute film. While that seems inconsistent, Refn blends the genres so well that it hardly gets noticed, I could not see this film being made any other way. Not another second should be added on or taken away; it is absolute excellence in how it stands.

One final comment to make is how Refn also managed to create a modern-day superhero, which also gives importance to the use of the song “A Real Hero”. The lyrics basically describe Driver as “a real hero… a real human being.” It is like, when he wears his garage clothes, like his stained white tee or his blue denim jacket, he is his Peter Parker, and he only ever really does it around Irene and Benicio or Shannon, his mentor and partner in crime. But when he puts on that scorpion sports jacket, it’s time for crime fighting, or rather crime creating – the anti-hero of his own Gotham City. It’s an interesting thing to go in and watch the film with the mindset of a superhero film rather than an action/ crime drama. All the key points made in superhero films are made within the film. The villain, the love interest, the obstacles, the fighting style – drives, never uses a gun, but does enjoy a good hammer bangin’. This is just one of the many, many ways to interpret the film, as well as the ending (if you think of him as a superhero that is). I’ve heard other theories about how he views his life as a movie, which is why he is a part-time driver for films, and why his personality and acts of violence are so theatrical. Or you could say he is a myth, like the Scorpion and the Frog story that he brings up in the film (which makes sense given the jacket he wears). He comes and goes, like the Man with No Name in The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly or Harmonica in Once Upon a Time in the West. And just like those Western anti-heroes, they manage to create this natural aura of mystery around themselves that makes you want to delve deeper into their character and their lives and the story that unfolds around them.

A perfect film, a modern masterpiece.

10/10

Inception: More Than a Mind Game

Jaws, Star Wars, Indiana Jones, Jurassic Park, Back to the Future, E.T., The Dark Knight, Inception. What do these films have in common? A release date. What is this release date, you idiotic mammal? Summer. The summer blockbuster has been a traditional movie-going experience that brings in the dough and brings together film lovers and non-film lovers alike since 1975 when Jaws was released. But there’s more than just a release date that make these films so cohesive. They’re also films that shook the world of cinema. By no means are they all equal when it comes to quality, but they’re equal in the sense that they forever (or will forever) be studied and discussed, but most of all remembered. If you’re a summer blockbuster, word of mouth is key. You’ll gain or lose big bucks depending on the feedback your film gets. In this case, I think it’s safe to say Christopher Nolan’s mind-bending masterpiece will live among the ranks of these big money-makers.

Beginning with a complicated triple narrative that delicately explains the method of which subconscious security works, this is enough to show what type of film the audience will be watching. Writer and director Christopher Nolan (The Dark Knight, Memento) takes the first twenty minutes to give a demonstration of the “dream team’s” skill and job description, which includes going in and stealing secrets from someone’s own mind. We’re also given a brief glimpse into Dominic Cobb’s (Leonardo DiCaprio) struggle with his own subconscious, which continues to be the film’s central antagonist.

This is a lot to place on an audience within the first twenty minutes, and without any blatant explanation whatsoever, but Nolan’s direction proves that there is no explanation necessary. This is, however, just a demonstration-before-explanation scenario.

Once Cobb and his partner, Arthur (played stylishly by Joseph Gordon-Levitt) – who mostly does a lot of the menial tasks – complete their work with the head of an oil company, Saito (Ken Watanabe), Saito then offers Cobb an opportunity to go home; a final job. This job involves infiltrating the dreams of an heir (Cillian Murphy) to a rival oil company of Saito’s in order to crush the competition, so to speak. But it’s no ordinary nor legal procedure, it’s “inception” – which means planting an idea, a seed, deep into the mind of another person. In order to pull off this job though, Cobb and Arthur need to assemble their expert “dream team” which include an architect (Ellen Page), a forger (Tom Hardy), and a chemist (Dileep Rao).

I won’t reveal anything else about the plot, but I will say this – Nolan indeed has created a masterpiece. It’s not perfect, but it’s near-perfect and it’s a thousand times more entertaining than a 2 and a half hour Michael Bay explosion film. Original ideas are hard to come by, and this one triumphs over all other movies out this year or will be out this year in terms of originality. Being in the works for ten years and working without his brother Jonathan Nolan, Christopher Nolan was able to create a script and a completely original idea that will change the way we view dreams forever. Some compare it to Mulholland Dr. and others compare it to The Matrix, but this film is in a realm entirely of its own.


While it’s not per se an actor’s film, it is indeed a vehicle that showcases the aptitude of every actor in this film. Nearly every actor in this film is talented and has outshone in many films before this one, but not all of them are either legendary or perfect actors yet (with the exception of Michael Caine, Pete Posthelwaite, and Tom Berenger, who are all kind of wasted talent here, but friendly faces indeed). I’ll take it one by one, starting from the bottom of the pack. Dileep Rao (Drag Me to Hell) once again, in only his third feature film, shows that he has some acting chops and a hell of a lot of charm. Ken Watanabe (Letters from Iwo Jima, The Last Samurai) is good, but doesn’t do much after the first half hour. Tom Hardy, whose performance in last year’s Bronson I still have yet to see, adds some nice comic relief and a lot of badassery throughout the film. Joseph Gordon-Levitt ((500) Days of Summer, Brick), becoming an instant favorite of mine, puts on his sunglasses and plays cool in this one and also adds some nice comic relief as well as partaking in the coolest fight scene since The Matrix's lobby gunfight scene eleven years ago. Marion Cotillard, whose Oscar-winning and nominated performances in 2006's La Vie en Rose and last year's Nine - respectively - I still have yet to see, shows some nice, insane acting chops here, but still feels a little forced at times – especially from an actress I always hear such good things about. Nonetheless, she does well in her more subtle scenes. Cillian Murphy is quickly becoming Nolan’s new Mark Boone Junior (the equivalent of John Ratzenberger & Pixar), and in the screen time he has does more than the script calls for in showing a lot of emotion and depth to his character. And those eyes… are unforgettable (in a no homo way). Ellen Page comes out of her Juno shell and shows the audience she has more to offer than playing vulnerable, quirky teenage girls. She feels very natural and very mature in her role and is a perfect foil to Dom Cobb. Finally, Leonardo DiCaprio (The Departed, Shutter Island) gives another remarkable turn as the troubled, emotional core of the film, Dominic Cobb. The only issue I have with the acting is that none of the actors get their chance to shine with the questionable exception of DiCaprio, but they do well with how much they're given and there’s not a single bad performance in the film. There’s plenty of room for these actors to grow though, and this film is a big stepping stone for a lot of them.

To get into the technical achievements now, I must say that I feel Nolan has done what a lot of directors fail to do when it comes to visual effects – properly incorporate them into the film. The visual effects are not here to show off any masterful artistic talents Nolan or his visual effects team may have (*cough*James Cameron*cough*), but rather he makes the visual effects part of the story. This doesn’t go without saying that these are truly some amazing and unique visual effects that Nolan has utilized, because they are. The editing is well-done too, making the two and a half hour film fast-paced, fun, and never feel long at any point in the film. The sound effects, too, are wonderfully edited and created, the cinematography by Wally Pfister (Batman Begins, The Dark Knight) is once again astounding and fits the tone of the film perfectly (in ALL of its diverse settings), the score by Hans Zimmer (The Thin Red Line, Sherlock Holmes) is brilliantly composed and it makes your heart pound to the beat of the drum in its intense moments and feel your heart flutter in the sweet ones. The only issue with the score is that it bangs a little too heavy and overflows into the next scene without any sort of reason for it – but this isn’t Zimmer’s fault more than it is Nolan’s.

All in all, this film isn’t perfect, but by God it’s close. There’s no way Nolan could ever dethrone Stanley Kubrick as the king of mindfuck films, but he’s certainly created a strong impact on filmmakers and film-goers. The entire experience of the film is ethereal, making the audience feel like they’re in a dream (but not in a What Dreams May Come way) and it’s all about putting the audience on a two and a half hour thrill ride. Some may view this film as a well-directed, successful, and fun summer blockbuster, but most will view this as a mind-bending and mind-infiltrating masterpiece. No matter what their opinion of it is, one thing is for sure: this film will be remembered for many years to come.

9.5/10