only thing that i saw as a weakness in the film was a lack of imagination in the dream sequences. of course there's plenty of imagination in all the plotting and this and that, but the dreams themselves are very staid and seemingly grounded in reality (which i suppose is explained by the landscape of the dreams being actually constructed and laid out by an architect).
i've only got my own dreams to go on, but nothing ever goes in such a linear fashion as things go in the movie. in the film, one thing leads to another, things don't appear/disappear for no reason, everything works the way it's supposed to, etc., and that's just not how i've experienced dreams. the sopranos dream sequences (particularly the long one in the episode "the test dream") handle these things about as well as possible in this format. i'm thinking particularly of tony trying to put bullets in his gun only to have the bullets turn to mush in his fingers and a scene with his daughter and her fiance at a dinner party, annette benning is there for some reason and for a moment the fiance is actually AJ, tony's son, before it's the fiance again. none of this strange, loopy, dreamlike stuff happens, unless someone wills it to happen (such as the ellen page character having the city fold in on itself), or an outside force changes the way the dreamer perceives things (gravity after the van backs off the bridge).
the exception is leo's character, whose subconscious does leak into the dream sequences, with his wife and children appearing over and over, and the wife even involving herself in the action. but why is it only leo's subconscious having an effect? why doesn't joseph gordon levitt's peak in and fuck things up?
i wasn't bothered by any of this during the movie, but it'd be Cool if someone could tell me what they think