@vitor said:
I think Inception is vastly overrated but still think the comparison to Sucker Punch is laughable hyperbole. Inception is morally questionable and overly self-satisfied but at no point is it poorly directed, shot badly or a fucking mess of a film. Sucker Punch is all of the above.
Then again, you seem to think Man of Steel, Watchmen and 300 are decent films so your yardstick for film reviews isn't exactly in line with most critical thought.
You're absolutely right. I should lash myself for enjoying popcorn movies as popcorn movies. Every film I like doesn't have to be Citizen Kane, man. There's no problem with liking a popcorn movie like Pacific Rim or 300. I can enjoy Lethal Weapon and still like Rashomon. There's no law that says I can't and this idea that because I do enjoy popcorn movies I can't have a worthwhile critical opinion of films is fucking juvenile. Maybe that's not what you meant by that critical thought comment, but the insinuation remains, all the same.
Anyway.
Inception isn't a good movie because it has a plot that makes no sense. It's a bad movie because it's ultimately a heist film with a clever hook that feels like it should probably say something poignant about reality and dreams and people in general. It's, as you said, self-satisfied and I think it's probably the biggest insight into Nolan's opinion of his own work. It's smug, pretentious, and ultimately rambling. Is it shot well? Sure, it's shot well. That doesn't make it a good movie, or any less of a bad movie than Sucker Punch, however.
And as for Sucker Punch, it's a fucking mess. I don't think I've ever defended that movie. It may be visually distinct, but when you've got a director who knows visual art and doesn't understand story telling, that's what happens. Like Inception, Sucker Punch tried to be something more than it is. It tried to be poignant, and yet it fell flat because its author isn't equipped with the experience or the tools to tackle subjects like child abuse, rape, misogyny, and mental health with any degree of tact. It's taking a sledgehammer to a nail. It's a film wrapped up in allegory and blunt analogies that smack the poor viewer upside the head repeatedly. Whether Snyder made the film like that on purpose, not trusting his audience, or he made it because he's really that blunt I don't know.
Ultimately, I dislike this idea that because one movie is a good looking mess, and one movie is a weird looking mess, that means the weird looking mess must be worse. It's bullshit. They're both bad movies for different reasons. That doesn't make them anything more than bad movies.
Log in to comment