As an online entertainment blogger, it’s generally agreed upon that the polite–not to mention professional– thing to do is respect the opinions of others. If a person or a group of people don’t like the same things that the blogger likes, that’s OK, and some minor ribbing is to be expected. But calling a group of people “stupid” or “Downs Syndrome-afflicted” because they don’t enjoy the same things that you do? Not cool.
That said, after month upon month of feverish hyping and endless internet speculation, Chris Nolan’s Inception has arrived, and I’m finding it difficult to accept that anyone who’s not stupid– perhaps even borderline retarded– wouldn’t recognize the film as a Great Movie (TM). Maybe the wording on that one was off; lemme try again.

If you thought Christopher Nolan’s Inception was a bad movie, you’re fucking stupid.
As far as I can tell, there’s very little wiggle room in this argument. Right off the top of my head, I can think of about a dozen other films, TV shows, books, or bands that I can imagine there being a valid difference in opinion over. Take The Dark Knight— I can kinda see how some people wouldn’t like that film, or call it a “bad movie”. Chud.com’s own Devin Faraci (in)famously didn’t care for the film, and O how the fanboys did seethe with rage over that one. Despite the fact that I’m a big fan of Nolan’s second Batman film, I get it. I can see the wiggle room for a difference in opinion there.
But Inception? Man, if you didn’t understand the greatness of that one, you’re fucking stupid.
Back in 1994, when Pulp Fiction arrived, I recall hoodwinking my folks into dropping me off at a movie theater while they went furniture shopping. Ostensibly, I was there to see Forrest Gump. In actuality, my plan was to sneak into Pulp Fiction, a film they’d refused to give me access to. It took some planning on my part– finding a showtime that would match up with Pulp Fiction‘s, not to mention give me enough time to take in the majority of the film (if I remember correctly, Gump was shorter) before my folks arrived to pick me up after completing their shopping– but I pulled it off.

I’ll never forget sitting in that theater and having Pulp Fiction happen to me. I’d been a fan of film and going to the movies before that, but Pulp Fiction‘s the movie– as it is for so many others– that really kick-started my film geekery. The script, the images, the performances, the violence: it all gelled to form something that was immediately epic to my 14 year old eyes, and there was simply no turning back after that. Watching Inception this past week, I sat there thinking that Chris Nolan’s new film would work in the same way for a whole new generation of film geeks. About twenty years from now (and probably even less), new directors and screenwriters are going to be dropping the film’s title as the reason they got started in the industry. It’s not a simple piece of summer entertainment: it’s the beginning of a whole new crop of filmmakers– mark my words.
What Nolan’s done is nothing short of breathtaking. There were sequences in Inception where my jaw hung open for minutes at a time, where the theater was utterly silent (which is notable considering the sheer amount of teenage douchebaggery that attended the same showing I did) as the film unspooled before the audience. The film isn’t confusing, but it is dense, and I don’t think I caught everything the film had to offer on that first showing. I’ll be seeing the film again tonight (thankfully at the glorious Alamo Drafthouse rather than a Cinemark hellhole), and I expect to catch more of what the film’s saying this time around. But it’s important to make that distinction: Inception isn’t confusing, it’s just challenging.
It’s the stupid people that aren’t going to be able to deal with that challenge, and they’re the ones that will call the film “bad”. Reviews by Armond White and Rex Reed have revealed what we already knew about both those critics– they’re fucking idiots– and support my hypothesis. Like Pulp Fiction before it, I can understand how someone might be able to say it wasn’t their “cup of tea”, but I absolutely refuse to believe that anyone who isn’t a complete imbecile would call the film a “bad movie”. Not polite, not professional, but this is the internet, so fuck your face.
Well, that’s when you buy your associate a drink and let the arguing begin.





59 comments
thank you so much for your post. i just don't understand why it's so popular to be a contrarian for critics like reed & white rather than just review the film objectively.
I hated the movie, I could hardly sit through it. I think it is a boring and a rather silly movie.
Can't understand the hype, kind of like the crap movie Paranormal… my wife and I walked out of Inception an hour and a half in, she hated it, I was meh, kind of boring and lost in it's plot. However, I loved Nolan's Batman movies.
Movie was stupid (mostly). There were some "cool" parts, but that didn't make the movie good. A good movie should have a good story- this one did not. Somehow, even a movie with no words, such as "Man with a Movie Camera," can be emotionally compelling. This movie failed to touch the heart and mind simultaneously. Therefore=mediocre.
'Lost in its plot'? Moron.
Its a shame the story was one giant hole. And the story was amongst the most contrived out there. Also all the psychology stuff must have been written by a 15 year old stoner. Very well made however.
Remember kids, you aren't allowed to have an opinion. Stop questioning the majority!
All of the above posters are stupid. Sit there quietly for a minute, maybe a day if it takes you that long, and realize it. You. Are. Stupid.
Now go away, and don't come back.
Get a fucking life. It was a fucking bad movie.
Doesn't swearing make me look like douche to?
Haha, I love how every commenter basically facilitates Scott's article more and more. If you were remotely intelligent, you would have realized that nothing you said could have pointed to the contrary and chosen not to comment at all. Instead, you opened you're putrid little mouths and to your own resolve, nothing but shit came out.
I agree with the "litmus test" idea and am frankly astounded that anyone could call the movie boring or mediocre, even if they didn't care for it. Certainly there were some unanswered questions about characters and plotlines, but it was obvious that some details needed to be left open for a sequel. Also, the characters were more developed than many plot-driven stories, and the plot was more layered than most character-driven stories. I thought the balance was good. It was the first time in a long time that I REALLY wanted to see what would happen next, how things would turn out. It was also the first time in a long time that I didn't know within the first 15 minutes how the movie would turn out. The only thing I can think of to explain the extremely negative comments about it is that most movies these days are so cookie cutter and require so little thought, that some people can't deal with something different that requires using braincells to figure out. At the same time, it wasn't THAT hard to understand…
I agree.
WOW!!! I need to take dive like Cobb's wife because I am so completely out of touch with this world that a good permanent sleep is the only answer (perchance to dream). Inception was not a good movie….and no, I'm not fucking stupid. I watched the movie, I understood it, I appreciated certain elements of it, but it left me wanting. Not just the ending. That was one of the apexes of the film that I appreciated (the truth of you reality is unknown, you have to take a "leap of faith"). The first half of the movie was a too-fast paced planning sequence involving th unrealistic hiring of a college student to go on a international trip of espionage with a known felon. We get rules. You can get a "kick" in the real world/dream world that one is dreaming in to wake up. You die in a dream, you wake up…that is, unless you've bee given a compound by some dude in a herbal store who can make the only general anesthetic I've ever heard of capable of putting some one in a comatose like sleep but allows them to wake up by falling (and yes I have a doctorate in pharmacology/medicinal chemistry). At some point in the movie, the rules change. You don't have to get a kick to wake up, you can just jump out of a building at the same time you happen to get shocked by defibrillator. And evidently in back in the old days you could plant an idea in your wife's head without going through 3 layers of consciousness. Also, in that case, it's cool if you die, you won't get trapped in brain limbo, you just wake on your living room floor.
This movie had complex layers. So did Memento, and unlike Inception, that shit made sense. If your somebody who doesn't care that a movie is properly explained and you just appreciate the overall message theme, acting and cinematoraphy…ok. But if you claim to understand all the elements a details that weren't there,w then you a fucking liar and you're fucking stupid.
….excuse the typos, I've been drinking and I'm on my IPad.
ThIs message has been brought to you by B Reesey, reminding you to drink responsibly.
Inception is shit.
Nolan makes blockbusters that make the slightly above averagely intelligent, politically aware, and fairly well-read think that they're thinking. They're not. It's not one of the things they're capable of doing.
Not a single part/shot/sequence of Inception looked like a dream. Fantasy yes, dream no. Sci-fi…. barely. Is this visual thing a failing? I think it has to be – the film is littered with talk of dreams, dream this dream that, yet at no point did I feel like it in bore any resemblance to my own dreamworld, or what I think of dreams as looking like or feeling like. Everything David Lynch makes seems like a nightmare. Everything – Lost Highway, Mulholland Drive etc.
Therefore, the point must be that Nolan is telling us to notice this lack of dreamlike appearance. The movie is about people who don't know when they're dreaming, they can't distinguish between dream and waking life. Fine, I get it. That's why she killed herself. That's why he's guilty. Got it.
This film is about a man getting over his guilt for driving his wife to suicide. It is about that. It's obviously about that, it smacks you over the head with that. From Juno's psychobabble rant before she even really knows Leo to Michael Caine's pep-talk, this film is NOT SUBTLE.
And how about the EXPOSITION???This film delivers some exposition after some more exposition after even more exposition…. FUCK THE EXPOSITION. I don't need the rules explained to me again and again. The explanations are fucking inadequate, would be considered cop-outs in Scooby Doo and… worst of all, they're there not to deliver meaning or because they're ingenious or analogous or allegorical but merely to explain the absolute stupidity of the set pieces, ie. now we're going to explain why something totally dumb is about to happen, now we're going to explain why something dumb has just happened.
The rest of the dialogue is also simplistic and without charm. I cheered internally when the kid from Third Rock kissed Juno and wisecracked about it being 'worth a shot'. That was the only moment I actually enjoyed.
And……… I couldn't stand Dicaprio's performance or even find his character to be sympathetic at all. He's a thief, manipulative, willing to risk the lives of everyone around him without warning them, drove his own wife to suicide, robbing his children of their mother. From the opening scene I felt that his character was just a self-aggrandizing twat. Who turns out to have no backbone. I know plenty of weak-willed, immoral twats in real life. I have no respect for them, why the fuck should I give a shit about a fictional version twat? Who betrays his wife and children. And no, he's no tragic hero, this is not Shakespeare.
Inception is to The Matrix or Waking life what Phantom Menace is to A New Hope, Entourage is to Swingers, Jaws 3-D is to Jaws – I was going to say 'Jaws 4 to Jaws' but I realise it not's quite that bad….
I quite enjoyed the movie. Oh, and monstergarden, you're wife's a fucking stupid whore.
It was just like the matrix if the matrix was made by a dick.
This movie was boring, lacked intellectual depth, shit story, horrible soundtrack, acting was ok, spfx werent even anything spectacular, cool concept though. Watch Memento, much better nolan film
I can see scott is right, there are many stupid dont like the move. Not really they are actually trying to convience themselves that they are not confused at all.
Saw all of Nolan's films. Yes, I did see Memento. I am a Batman fanatic. Preferred Inception over all of them. Thank you.
I think Inception was pretentious,it was interesting enough at first then became boring,we all dream much more imaginativly than was shown and the end was made confusing just for the sake of it.
Cris nolan is good but he screwed this one up and yeah it's a movie thats made to make you afraid to say its a bad movie or else people may say your dumb,The Matrix(part one) is a smart movie, Inceptions just daft.
inception was daft,now matrix (part one) thats a smart film.
Nolan has made epic films, apart from this. its unoriginal, overly long, over indulgent, and the script writing and plot hasn't got a pot to piss in as we english say. Cinematically awesome, but then i could look at my desktop background for 2 hours and get the same effect (btw my desktop background is a van falling off a bridge – its so awesome)
"Probably" being the key word.
I understood it all but was seriously disappointed and cringed at some of the lines like "Pain is all in the mind". Any why wasn't the student girl amazed and hobsmacked about being aware in the dream for the first time?
And why did snow continue to fall at normal rate whilst the van was hardly moving at all when it cam off the bridge?
I'm so glad I have like minded people here like buford and pharmacist.
It's aimed squarely at slightly above average intelligence.
If thinking a lazy, clichéd movie with buttock-clenchingly embarassing lines is shit makes me "stupid", then file me under stupid.
"There is another way". "It's worth a shot!". Jeeeezus, I've not heard anything that original since almsot every B-rate movie ever written.
And "we need something more unique". What? WHAT? Did the scriptwrite not attend elementary English lessons? Something is either unique or it is not.
And yes, snow falling at usual speed while van moves at slow motion is comically bad.
As for the constantly-ramming-the-plot-down-your-throat problem, I find it hard to understand how an intelligent person would not get riled by this.
Some good visual effects, but apart from that if you can't find something better than this drivel to do with 2 hours of your life you have lead a sheltered life indeed.
Jeez, I hate people like you. Just because you don't like a film it makes you stupid? What if I were to say that all people who like Inception are stupid? And too scared to admit that it's not actually that great.
The last thing Inception is dumb, most people are lost in the first few minutes and hate it. It's a Sci-fi flick and the machine they use to connect in the dream regulates it thus the "Architect" so the world which is created is stable. Again a sci-fi people, I could list a slew of reasons why this film is great but I won't, like a IQ test it's a puzzle within a puzzle and you failed.
If you thought this movie was stupid you should went to see To Story 3.
What kind of a moron arranged soundtrack for that movie? Did he ever heard about dynamics? low-high points? – it was two hours of constant stream of annoying bombastics shit, obscuring the dialogue. Same for pacing. Acting was horrible. Dream "rules" – overblown, pretentious, stupid and plain wrong (unlike what this dumb movie claims, 1 hour in dream = 1 hour of real time; see for example a research work of this guy http://med.stanford.edu/profiles/William_Dement/ ). This was one of the worst movies I've seen. And I am a sci-fi fan.
No I'm afraid it is you who is an idot. The movie is riddles with plot holes and ambiguity. There is no relationship between ambiguity and factuality. There, however, a relationship between factuality and godness. Following the logic, which in all likelihood your feble brain cannot compehend, the movie is not good. Try again next time. Failure.
riddled* Don't even try to correct it, you moron.
'Inception', like all of its ilk, was made to appeal to as wide an audience as possible, and obviously it's done that. However, when you look at the premise of it, the philosophical and ethical questions that it raises, and its plot, it can't be held to be especially original. Sure the hordes of pretentious teens will be amazed by the simple, elementary philosophical questions that it raises, but it's really, really, really nothing new.
This movie was designed to profit off of people who find themselves at an intelligence level slightly above (or arrogantly assumed) that of par.
People of real intelligence don't find excuses as to why those around them are stupid. They do things like cure cancer. Fail post is fail.
I didn't like Inception. Stiff characterisation, dull acting, tediously bombastic soundtrack, relentless exposition, no sense of fun or humanity or warmth……but i don't go around calling others 'fucking stupid' for liking it.
It says at the top of the page that you're a stand up comedian. I'm heavily inclined to disagree with the 'comedian' bit but i'm sure you can stand up if you put your mind to it you pathetic moron.
You sir are a tasteless retard, and hey, I wouldn't normally flame but you pulled the first punch. Your taste sounds despicable considering that you loved the movie Inception and then call everyone else that doesn't agree with you "fucking retarded". considering that you liked Pulp Fiction surprises me since that is a great film, but hey even a juvenile 6 year old likes blood and guts, so that solves that question. The movie Inception had disgustingly horrible character development, many unnecessary plot holes, their set physics constantly contradicted themselves, there were way too many plot conveniences to help the story when it stumbled, and the overall ending made me ask, "why should I care, what was your point?" The fact that you think that this is such a great film and then degrade others because they would disagree, just shows that you have little to no taste in films, have the maturity of a juvenile, and wouldn't know a truly good film if it bit you in the ass.
"There were sequences in Inception where my jaw hung open for minutes at a time" uhmm, which ones if the movie was soooo intelligent – explain what part / premise / idea was so genius. The movie was a POS and it sounds like you don't want to explain why you liked it except that it was "smart" – Laughable.
Your self written bio – "Scott has persevered to become one of the leading experts in the field of being a sarcastic asshole online" LOL, you surely are not going for a Maddox thing here are you? Beacuse if so — fail, epic fail and your opinion on the movie is an emotionally charge shit rant that resembles the "Leave Britney Alone" video we all want to forget exists…
If you think it Inception was good you have taken to many drugs. Yes, it is an original idea, but that does not mean it was a good one. Yes, the movie makes you think, however if you like thinking about complete shit, I guess it's ok. The fucknut who done the review is one of these fuckheads who is a pretend intellectual type who thinks that if you didn't enjoy the movie then you are stupid. That is one of the stupidest things anyone has ever said. I mean I am pretty sure that everybody could understand something like big momma's house but that doesn't make it a great film. Apparently understanding is enjoying according to dickless who wrote the review. It is a fucking bad idea for a movie in my opinion and it drags on for too fucking long. I almost walked out on it. I guarantee nobody will be talking about inception in 2 years, however people still talk about classics like Jaws 35 years later. If it is such a masterpiece I would expect to be hearing about inception in converstaions when I am in my 60's, though I am quite certain this will not happen.
Personally I realised at about 30 mins in this was a "by numbers" heist movie with a load of Phillip K Dick overtones simplified so amoebas could continue unconfused to ingest a crumbs of popcorn in cinema bought diet sodas the world over – after this realisation I found it hard to keep my eyes open. I don't know if anyone else hear actually has dreams but mine are generally fuzzy and nonsensical. I hardly think it necessary to design a dream world so detailed – whole cities full of people and places. The dream world presented is not something I bought and in fact I found extremely irritating. Other gripes include – introducing the idea of a dream within a dream, the stupid ex-wife sub-plot and the overused "I'm just trying to see my kids" nonsense you see in very average and lazy scripts.
Hey, but what do I know I'm just an idiot and definitely didn't get it
The concept was awesome but that's it. The rest was shit piled on top of shit within shit that was hiding inside more shit which turned out to be fake shit. There was a reoccurring stench of real shit that presented the possibility of an actual shit. 3 windows and a door at the end was opened to get rid of the shitty stench, but there was a twist as the shit was inside as well as OUTSIDE! The shit was everywhere and as a result there was no reasonable way to discern between the real shit and the fake shit! the main character had a shit detector which he used at the end of the movie but chose to walk away from before getting the answer. He was to stupid as a result of shitty emotional state brought on by the stench. Had he stayed to see the result he would not have got the answer he was looking for because the shit detector would have detected him… that's right >>>He WAS SHIT
oh man! This is a very dumb piece by a very dumb fellow! comparing trash like inception to pulp fiction? pulp fiction was a cult film. it will remain the greatest celebration of cinema. inception is just a dumb film inspired by a video game rule! shit!
why dont the dreams look like dreams?
why do they look exactly like real life?
is it because the writer/director is stupid ™
if thier in a dream and they know they are in a dream, why dont they just create things out of thier imagination at will?
because the writer/director is stupid ™
wow dude, your article was unbelievably bad, you didnt state points to why the film was good you just talked crap about why pulp fiction was good, seriously man the film is really fucking bad, the dreams are nothing like real dreams which is where the failings begin, and the failings end when we have retarded ™ people like you claiming it was good
Please the concept could of been insanely brilliant. But when you get uninteresting actors explain it over and over again and then do pretty cgi with some gun fight scenes. you lose the concept. hollywood ruined the movie.
THIS POST HAS BEEN REMOVED
I didnt find the movie confusing, nor challenging. I understood it, and ultimately thought that it was utter bollocks – unless of course, you are an autistic 15-year old boy who particularly likes special effects.
OMFG comparing Pulp Fiction with shitty Inception movie.
Pulp Fiction dont need "Modern Warfare Snow Level" with no fucking sense in the movie to have "pretty nice action scene"
Inception is a failure for real dumb people that thing they´re smart enough to "understand it"
Inception is movie that alludes to complexity but it in reality is shallow Hollywood trite that does nothing to explore the subject. It's is a movie that makes stupid people feel clever.
Read this review – http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/cinema/2010/07/26/100726crci_cinema_denby
This is how intelligent people saw the movie, you're deluded of your own stupidity you conceited twirp.
Brilliant movie. Whoever says The Matrix is better is stupid also.
Great write-up. I absolutely agree with everything you wrote. It is a intelligent film which most of the stupids don't get. It is a masterpiece and will be discussed for years to come.
It is sad to see that it is not making to the many of top 10 lists from the so-called critics but anyways I am happy that it has exposed them.
Bollocks! Inception is an awful movie. Boring, pretentious, ridiculous, confusing. And don't call me stupid.
I watched the first hour and a half and fell asleep. This movie lacks in character development as I witnessed new ones approaching. It is not recommended to watch this after midnight; not only will your mind questiom the actions in the movie but you will loose sense in its setting and fall asleep. This is the worst DiCaprio film. I am glad I did not pay any money watching this movie.
Above all, this appears to be the most over rated movie of 2010. I am not a fan of over rated entertainment, therefore, I do not intend to speak to anyone about this movie or recommand it to human society in general.
This movie was so bad that it made me realise that DiCaprio is stupid enough to make Titanic 2 where he turns into a fish monster jumps out of the Atlantic Ocean and attacks the second ship coming to America from Europe. This is going to be "Titanic 2: the monster under the Atlantic"
Wow, bad review. Bad movie. Great comments.
James Bond + Ocean's Eleven + The Matrix + psychobabble + incessant trombones – sympathetic characters – correct pacing = Inception
if you thought this movie was good, you're easily impressed by intentionally complex plotlines, cgi, and famous actors. this was neither intellectual nor artistic. it was not hard to follow. just another mind fuck movie for the masses – like yourself.
The movie is ridiculously boring, it's not confusing – it simply doesn't make any sense. Nolan attempted to procreate the world in future where you can enter dreams, but it is simply ridiculous. The whole cast aside from Tom Hardy playing Eames is insanely boring, with Leonardo yet again proving how much of a boring actor he is.
The movie could have been good if the plot was much more simple and it focused on people being in a conflict – doing dreams in dreams in dreams in dreams made the movie shit.
I didn't like Inception. I thought it was a bad movie. This was not because it wasn't 'my cup of tea'. Given the films I usually enjoy, this should have been *exactly* my cup of tea. And it certainly wasn't because I didn't understand it. I thought Inception was a bad movie because for all its layers, it was disappointingly shallow. I thought the dreams were visually gripping (if not at all dreamlike) and didn't mind the occasional logistical inconsistency. What I minded was being repetitively hit in the head with boring, talky anvils. Now if those anvils had actually had something worthwhile to say… But this film failed to make me care about any of the characters at all. DiCaprio's acting was wooden, and Mal was little more than a plot device. For all the time spent waxing about Mal's pain, Cobb's loss, the meaning of… auugh! Get on with it! Stop telling me and show me. If you want to make a film about a tortured mind lost between dreams and reality, then by all means, please do. If you want to make a cool summer movie with cgi sidewalks, car chases, and truly awesome ceiling fights, I'll enjoy that, too. But in trying so hard… so mind-numbingly hard… to accomplish both, it managed neither as well as it could have, and that's why I was so disappointed.
1) No explanation or basis for the dream machine concept. Just plug into the machine and we can all share dreams. Like tying a string to empty cans to play telephone.
2) No basis for being a "architect" of dreams or what makes someone good at it.
3) Then because Juno can draw a circular maze that's kinda hard on her third or fourth try she is suddenly a master designer of dreams.
4) Arbitrary terms and rules based on nothing:
– the "kick" that wakes you
– that using the same device inside a dream can create a dream within a dream which correlates to "deeper subconscious" and slower, but proportional, passage of time.
– that someone has to/needs to stay behind on each level to coordinate the kick (but not when Leo and his freakish mate were lovingly exploring together)
– that you die to wake, but not if you are on this magic sedative that the "chemist" just happens to have created which leaves your inner ear unaffected so that the kick will wake you but death sends you into "limbo"
– fucking "limbo"? This is all reminding me of the unexplained "red matter" from the last Star Trek. Whenever this fuckhead needs a solution to a plot issue he creates some new red matter.
– contrived device to have your "projections" become lethal and attack a visitor that "changes" the dream of the dreamer too conspicuously.
5) Who the fuck cares about Leo's character or his twisted love relationship. It's all poorly developed to the point I don't even care if his kids live or die but actually prefer that HE not get to go parent them again.
6) Invoked some Matrix-like control without the mechanism for why it could be done (such as the ability to alter someone elses dream).
7) everyone was over acting uber-intense even when nothing particularly intense was going on. This was also a little Matrix-like except that the Matrix was supposed to be comic book genre style so it fit in that movie.
8) The "employer" and the "target or victim" were not developed so who gives a fuck about who "wins or loses or succeeds or fails". They effectively made sure that everyone in the film was one dimensional with no reason to care about them so nothing matters.
If you thought this movie was "complex" you were fooled. You are confusing unexplained and fast paced with complex. Just because they thrust you into the action and started to use their dream jargon before you were really ready for it (though they then go on to overuse and over explain it all for those who couldn't keep up) doesn't make it complex or deep.
One day you will go back and rewatch this film and wonder why you thought it was so complex and why you gave a shit about any of the characters and why it was on your list of great movies.
Not in the same league with the Matrix, Pulp Fiction, Memento or even Dark Knight.
It's awesome to see so many Inception-bashing comments, especially after reading that idiotic article.
A truly shit film, alternating between sixth form philosophising and tired gunfighting. Like a narcoleptic bond movie.
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind explores a similar concept with much greater finesse. It's visually spellbinding, and much more reminiscent of the world of dreams than Inception.
Unless of course ABSOLUTELY ALL your dreams consist of is people shooting at you in the locales from Jason Statham films.
Comments are shown as archived from the original site; new comments are closed.