the case for INCEPTION.

Next week, my most anticipated film of 2010 will be released. This post is meant to convince anyone who reads it to go and see the movie--in the theater--during the next month.

First, if you haven't seen these spots, please give them a look.

Here's the trailer:



And the Featurette:




I am not just shamelessly plugging a favorite filmmaker; I have a vested interest in this type of filmmaking, and its continued funding by major studios.

There are 3 reasons why I am asking everyone to see this film:

1. The "RE" factor.

We are living in a cinematic world of remakes, retools, revamps and regurgitations. Among the major studios, it is all but impossible for a new, original idea to surface on the other side of this current gauntlet--and if it's a tentpole film (one of the few main films of a given year that actually keeps a studio afloat through massive profit), then you can absolutely forget about singularities. So, in a real way, it makes a big-budget film like INCEPTION quite a gamble for a studio.

2. 2D over 3D:

And that's a perfect segue into why the fact that INCEPTION is not a 3D film is also exceptional. Studios love 3D for two reasons: One, you pay several more dollars per ticket to see 3D. Second, 3D is (for the time being) is not subject to piracy in the way 2D films are.

And it is being shoved down our throats--whether it works or not (mostly not); whether it's motivated by the type of movie (the STORY) or not; whether you want it or not.

I shouldn't have to search the entire city of LA to find TOY STORY in 2D so that I can take my 3-year-old son. That's a demographic they haven't considered: kids who hate to wear glasses--or adults that hate to wear glasses on top of their glasses (me).

STORY. Story is what matters, and 3D is being used to disguise bad storytelling--just like dazzling special effects are often employed to do the same (cough--TRANSFORMERS--cough). And while INCEPTION may appear to be an obvious candidate for 3D, it relies on in-camera effects and the power of storytelling to carry the audience.

One last thought on "3D." I have never seen a 3D film that felt more realistic to me. In fact, quite the opposite: I am constantly reminded that I'm in a movie, and I feel myself completely inhibited, when all I want to do is lose myself in the story, in the characters, in the world of that film. Even AVATAR, with its impressive technology--after watching it, I firmly believed I would have enjoyed it in 2D every ounce as much.

I am not anti-3D. I've enjoyed films in 3D. But to me, it feels like a novelty, and it's not the way I want to experience 9.9 out of every 10 films I see.

3. FILM:

The highest resolution imagery; the highest latitude ratio from highlights to shadows; the most organic and realistic mode of capturing an image. FILM.

Amid the pressures to "go digital" there is a camp of filmmakers that know that film capture is the still the best way to make a movie. INCEPTION is captured on a variety of cameras and formats, but mostly on anamorphic 35mm and large-format 70mm film.

And you will see the difference.

What digital can offer in post is truly incredible. It's my belief that the most potential comes from the hybrid of what capturing on film offers, and the amazing possibilities of utilizing digital in post.

Bless Chris Nolan and Wally Pfister for refusing to compromise. And Warner Brothers will thank them in 25 years, when all the hard drives have crashed, and the original negative is still sitting cozy in its vault--ready to be scanned in 12K resolution for the latest BLURAY/GREENRAY/REDRAY/whatever system is around at that time.

Please see this film--IN THE THEATER. There really is nothing like the silver screen.

I think it's going to be the best film of the year.

wes.