"The Dark Knight Rises" is basically "Inception." And I'm okay with that.

Okay, it's not REALLY. But the cast of the third Christopher Nolan Batman movie is largely the same as the cast of "Inception." Tom Hardy and Joseph Gordon-Levitt signed on earlier, and today the news came out that Marion Cotillard is also onboard. I'm thrilled to see her cast. I think she didn't get enough credit for her role in "Inception." Try to imagine anyone else in her role, and see if they could pull it off - her haunting beauty alone made that role unique, but she was also sympathetic despite being the buzzkill in every dream. I can only hope they give her a meaty role in "The Dark Knight Rises." If she didn't impress you in "Inception," go watch her Academy Award winning performance in "La Vie En Rose" and see if you're still unimpressed.

Now we have two strong female leads. I've been unsure about Anne Hathaway being cast in a lead role, but after the dullsville that was Katie Holmes and Maggie Gyllenhaal in the previous two films, I'm just relieved to see some quality actresses cast. Not that Gyllenhaal isn't talented, but she was not right for the role and, to be entirely shallow for a moment, she's not pretty. Hathaway is a coin toss. She absolutely can act, but she's more well known for lighter roles. Or maybe I'm ambiguous because I can't seem to get rid of the taste of the Academy Awards this year.

I'm very happy the backlash against Nolan hasn't started yet for hiring the same team of actors. I'm sure one will come eventually, and all the "Inception 2" jokes will get passed around, but directors reusing actors is nothing new. If it's not broke, don't fix it. Just look at the frequent collaborators section on Wikipedia for Martin Scorsese - if you get the chance to work with a brilliant director once, why not do it again?

I praised "Inception" before it came out because the cast was amazing and it felt like Nolan had read my mind and cast people I love. Well, once again, I'll get to see all these great actors together onscreen. Now if only we could bring Cillian Murphy back somehow!

First look at "Spiderman" reboot

Being a girl and a proud nerd, I have to say that this picture is all kinds of awesome. (Grabbed from Entertainment Weekly, if you want to see it even bigger and better quality). Like I mentioned in a previous post, although I think the Sam Raimi movies are, for the most part, great movies, I am really looking forward to the reboot. I do hope they avoid going too into the recent dark "Batman" territory. "Batman" fits nicely into the gritty, post-modern superhero genre. But what I like about the first two "Spiderman" movies is how much fun they are. They're light, summer blockbuster, rip-roarin' good times at the theater. Also, "Spiderman" is still kind of a campy story. You still have the origin story about the spider bite and wacky weird villains. I would hate to see the new movie take a fun comic book premise and take it way too seriously when it absolutely does not have to.

Some people were apparently concerned about Andrew Garfield's ability to play a high schooler. I think he can definitely pull it off. Tobey Maguire wasn't exactly a kid when he took on the role. I liked Maguire just fine, but he was never my favorite part of those movies. Not to mention the fact that, unlike Maguire, Garfield is actually cute. Emma Stone is playing the new love interest. Once again, Kirsten Dunst was never my favorite part of the movies, but I didn't hate her. Between "The Social Network" and "Easy A," Garfield and Stone generated a lot of positive buzz in 2010. I'm more concerned about who will be writing and who will be directing. Director Marc Webb's big claim to fame is "(500) Days of Summer," but aside from that, he just has a ton of music videos on his resume. The people behind the screenplay are likewise pretty unknown. The previous "Spiderman" flicks had a screenwriter and a director with solid, well-known bodies of work behind them. Let's hope the newbies can prove themselves worthy of Spidey.

I guess the last big question for die-hard fans is this - to organically web-shoot or not to organically web-shoot? I'm a nerd in many ways but I'm no comic book nerd so I have no strong opinion one way or the other. I like the look of organic web-shooters, but if it's such a big deal, cede to the fanboys on this point.

"Inception" - All you need to know is that you should see it

I've been seeing trailers for "Inception" for a while now and I still have no idea what this movie is about. It took me a while to figure out that that's intentional to stir up intrigue and mystery; they're letting the star power sell the film Initially, I figured the trailers were just baffling to make us wonder in awe at the visuals. After all, in a world where "Avatar" makes more money than anything else, of course Hollywood is going to embrace the visual splendor of a film, oftentimes over solid narrative. I was afraid that this movie would be all neat images and nothing else - a beautifully wrapped box ultimately filled with nothing. I also assumed the trailers weren't being purposefully vague because many films are marketed poorly. Case in point? The recent Tom Cruise film "Knight & Day." I still have no idea what that movie is about after seeing multiple trailers. Some of the trailers differed greatly in tone from the others, some emphasizing drama and others emphasizing comedy. Match that with two past-their-prime actors, (except in the case of "Mission Impossible" movies. The third film in that series was actually really great, but I give more credit to JJ Abrams and the other onscreen talent Cruise was working with) and you have very little pre-release buzz. I was also concerned that we might have another "Paranormal Activity" or "Snakes on a Plane" scenario, where you get tons of manufactured hype and you end up with the most boring excuse for a horror movie ever or the dullest example of cheese and camp ever.

But a movie like "Inception" has the right to be vague. The marketing team knows what it's doing. I, like many other people, still want to see this movie and here's why: the people involved. First off, it was written, produced, and directed by Christopher Nolan. He's the man who pulled off the impressive feat of reviving the "Batman" movies with some depth and class. "Batman Begins" and "The Dark Knight" paved the way for grittier, more realistic, less campy comic book/superhero movies. Second, and probably the most important factor, is the cast. Leonardo DiCaprio is always a strong choice as a lead. I'm not sure if he's right for the role, but since I don't know what the role really is and I haven't seen enough of the movie to know, I'll trust that he can handle it. Ellen Page also stars, and while she is best known for her role as the titular character in "Juno," she has received praise for numerous other smaller or lesser known performances. "Batman Begins" alum Cillian Murphy is in it as well, which thrills me to no end. I haven't seen him in anything lately which makes me sad because he's a fine actor when given a good role and he's one of my personal favorites. Oscar winner Marion Cotillard and Michael Caine also star, but I have to admit that the one I'm most looking forward to seeing is Joseph Gordon-Levitt. He's not quite in the public consciousness yet as he's done a lot of indie movies, but he's been fantastic in those indie movies. He's probably best known for "(500) Days of Summer" lately, but I think he is superb in "Brick" and "The Lookout."

With an all-star cast and skilled writer/director at the helm, how on earth could this movie possibly suck? Well, I'm sure it's possible. It'll probably suck just so I feel like an idiot for writing this article in defense of the film prior to its release. But at least I'll feel like an idiot with plenty of other entertainment news outlets. Entertainment Weekly just posted a story that cites defenses for the vague trailers that give away nothing. The plot about the power of dreaming gave me pause in the beginning, but I'm hoping it's just crazy enough to work. I'm ready for a quality, thought-provoking film. I'm ready for something that isn't a sequel or a remake. I'm ready for something new and daring. Who said the summer was only allowed to have mindless fluff that would only interest preteen girls? ("Toy Story 3" aside, of course).