What it sounds like to me, is it was really good. It just, could've been changed some, in your opinion. To make you guess more about what everything. This movie seems similar in structure to say minority report... (atleast what I got from your description and IMO obviously)

Would the difference be similar to what you wanted to do lets say, for you lets compare this to blade runner.

The theatrical release. Which had harrison ford narrating everything. The Unicorn Dream was removed. (Because of the Studio)

To the directors cut/final cut.

Yeah, Blade Runner Directors cut and theatrical release are like 2 different movies cause of the ending...lol. I wouldn't say the difference for this movie is that simple. I think it really has to do with Nolans writing/Directing style. He is great at what he does, but its all very...JJ Abrams-ish. Very precise, clean and intellect based.

Its really hard to explain as I dont want to give away any plot points or events.

hopefully Ill be able to go see it soon

One cliche I'm really starting to get annoyed by is the explanation. They try their best to help the audience understand with the "audience character", a character that represents a typical member of the audience, ie; Ellen Paige.

Everything is explained to her with rules... I'm so sick of the rules explanation... it really wasn't a problem in this movie, it is ust cliche.

haha, yeah that was kind of unnecessary. I think my girlfreind appreciated it though cause before that part she was constantly asking "What the hell is going on?" lol 

I was surprised that Paige held her own acting wise to be honest.

I think the fact that everyone is such an expert on the dream world takes away from the viewers discovery... Every problem is dealt with so fast as everyone knows the "dream world rules" and how to solve every issue they encounter.

I'm really happy the explain things and don't leave people with a wtf assassin creed 2 vibe.

@flyinglotus

Don't get me wrong, explanations are necessary in movies... but this movie deals with jacking in to other peoples dreams for christs sake...do you really need to know all the logistics on how this is done? It sounds rediculous no matter what... Id much rather have a movie like this deal with the dangers and misteries of getting lost in dreams than the technicality of it. 

I read the New York Times review of this and its bang on.

http://movies.nytimes.com/2010/07/16/movies/16inception.html?ref=movies&pagewanted=all

"It trades in crafty puzzles rather than profound mysteries, and gestures in the direction of mighty philosophical questions that Mr. Nolan is finally too tactful, too timid or perhaps just too busy to engage."

"Mr. Nolan’s idea of the mind is too literal, too logical, too rule-bound to allow the full measure of madness — the risk of real confusion, of delirium, of ineffable ambiguity — that this subject requires."

A. O. Scott didn't like it? Awesome, I know I'll love it for sure now! Just about all of my favorite movies have him thumbing his nose at them.

He liked it...gave it 3 stars. Just saying its not all it should be.

Browsing rottentomatoes.com, one can see that all reviews which are negative are saying that the movie has the problem I described in the op.

Below are 3 summary quotes.

"Inception becomes its own nightmare by trying to be "too" smart"

"(S)tories should show, not tell, and Nolan keeps telling us that he can't tell this story."

"Wrapped up in the logistics of various dreamscapes and the technical details of dream sharing and inception, the picture all but abandons its most essential thread."

The movie is good, but I have a feeling its going to be vastly overrated, just like Dark Knight.

Now now.. can;t we discuss a movie without bashing the other.