INCEPTION (spoilers)

[sawyer]

i think the surreal dream stuff has already been done with what dreams may come, the cell, vanilla sky and probably some other movies i haven't seen

nolan engages a certain level of cognition (more than most, especially for a summer blockbuster), and in order for this movie to succeed on a number of levels i can see why it was necessary to forgo artistic indulgence. i thought the movie was pretty slick, considering.

can't expect to have david lynch, john woo and kubrick all rolled into one film.

[kidaradio]

here is a good diagram of the 5 different levels:

http://www.cinemablend.com/new/An-Illustrated-Guide-To-The-5-Levels-Of-Inception-19643.html

[panicnation]

Also, as for the part of major movies not having realistic situations... it probably would've turned out better if they stuck to the real definition of what a dream is. I think the article YMFY linked said it best.

And I think people are analyzing this movie too deeply. It's not even deeply thought provoking movie, the concept was pretty interesting, but the execution was so bland and boring that it's undeserving of all the credit and praise people give it. I think I wanted to like it much more than I actually liked it. Don't get me wrong, it was a good movie.. just not great.

Dear sir, please see below:

i think the surreal dream stuff has already been done with what dreams may come, the cell, vanilla sky and probably some other movies i haven't seen

nolan engages a certain level of cognition (more than most, especially for a summer blockbuster), and in order for this movie to succeed on a number of levels i can see why it was necessary to forgo artistic indulgence. i thought the movie was pretty slick, considering.

can't expect to have david lynch, john woo and kubrick all rolled into one film.

[zenii]

Dear sir, please see below:

Dear sir, thank you for linking me that quote or else I would have missed it entirely. (10) I'm entitled to my own opinion just like you are yours.

What I was trying to say is that the movie depended mostly on the technological marvels (zero-gravity fight, scene where Ariadne is first introduced to dream world), but there was no emotional connection at all, regardless of how real/surreal it was.

Because who cares if Cobb gets back to two kids we don't know? And why would we root for one energy company over another? There's no spiritual meaning or social resonance to any of this, no critique of power in the dream-world struggle between CEOs. There was nothing at the heart of the story to stir the audience's heart. I really could not care less whether Cobb was still in the dream world at the end, because what difference does it make? If your dreams are the same (or extremely close) to your reality does it really matter if you're dreaming or not?

Putting it a little harshly, it was just another movie that relied too heavily on CGI and missing the things that actually make a movie good, which is to tell a story which compels the audience to actually care, and feel like they either lost or gained something by the end of the movie. Not just "Wow, those were some crazy ass fight scenes" or "Dude that guy/chick was totally HOT".

Gonna end here with a quote from one of my favorite directors, Quentin Tarantino; "This CGI bullshit is the death knell of cinema. If I'd wanted all that computer game bullshit, I'd have stuck my dick in a Nintendo."

[luxurybucket]

they did actually make a sequel to american psycho. it's called American Psycho II: All American Girl. starring Mila Kunis.

[panicnation]

What I was trying to say is that the movie depended mostly on the technological marvels (zero-gravity fight, scene where Ariadne is first introduced to dream world), but there was no emotional connection at all, regardless of how real/surreal it was.

Because who cares if Cobb gets back to two kids we don't know? And why would we root for one energy company over another? There's no spiritual meaning or social resonance to any of this, no critique of power in the dream-world struggle between CEOs. There was nothing at the heart of the story to stir the audience's heart. I really could not care less whether Cobb was still in the dream world at the end, because what difference does it make? If your dreams are the same (or extremely close) to your reality does it really matter if you're dreaming or not?

Hmmm with all due respect i don't think u're judging the film on its merits, but rather on your own set of criteria for what you think makes a film good. All those factors you mentioned: emotional connection, stirring the audience's heart, etc, can certainly make a film great, but they are by far not the only factors that make cinema great.

Just take Inception for what it is - a summer blockbuster with a creative plot and a very cool premise, pulled off with much aplomb - and not the next Into the Wild.

[iamundying]

^ It all depends on perspective imo. If you see Saito and his offer to Dom as the main plot of this movie, it'll be hard to have an emotional connection to the film. However, if you really care for Dicaprio's character and sympathize with his wife's death - especially how tragic and ironic it was - and want to see him reunite with his kids then the ending, or rather the scene leading up to the ending, will make you just as happy as Dom.

[panicnation]

Gonna end here with a quote from one of my favorite directors, Quentin Tarantino; "This CGI bullshit is the death knell of cinema. If I'd wanted all that computer game bullshit, I'd have stuck my dick in a Nintendo."

It's also interesting that you chose to use this quote because some of Tarantino's favourite films are The Matrix and The Host, both of which make extensive use of CGI.

Incidentally, he's also a big fan of Speed.

[albinolove]

I won't even attempt a philosophical analysis of Inception because I'm still wrapping my head around it, trying to decide if the movie actually contains enough substance to analyze. That's a good thing, I guess.

What really stands out (or doesn't, depending on how you look at it) is the ambiguity of time period. There was minimal product placement, and things that date fast like laptops and cell phones were mostly absent. I suppose the cars that they use could be seen as an anachronism in a few decades, but what else really places this movie in any specific time? Even the outfits were pretty timeless with the exception of Juno girl who was out of place in this entire movie anyway.

[Quiver]

if you believe in totems, then what was shown to us as reality was reality, in that cobb's totem stopped spinning in the layer above yusuf's dream

in which case theoretically, the ending was reality as we saw everyone awake on the plane, one layer above yusuf's dream

someone asked earlier why mal and cobb was ran over by the train in limbo when they were young yet there are memories of them growing old together... anyone got any ideas on that?

[phen3N]

correct me if im wrong: they were in a heavily sedated dream and decided to spend a lifetime together by killing themselves and going to limbo

[TPR950H]

if you believe in totems, then what was shown to us as reality was reality, in that cobb's totem stopped spinning in the layer above yusuf's dream

in which case theoretically, the ending was reality as we saw everyone awake on the plane, one layer above yusuf's dream

someone asked earlier why mal and cobb was ran over by the train in limbo when they were young yet there are memories of them growing old together... anyone got any ideas on that?

i think in the movie it showed them being actually old when they get run over by the train-- faces and hands. so the depiction of them being young and run over is just his memory or whatever.

[icandunkonu]

i think in the movie it showed them being actually old when they get run over by the train-- faces and hands. so the depiction of them being young and run over is just his memory or whatever.

exactly, it happened or rather, they dreamt it happened as they were old but i figure cobb remembers it as they were young

[TPR950H]

holy shit TOM BERENGER is that other guy?

sniper got fat.

[madapaka]

i don't know if this has been brought up, but my friend noted that the top cobb spins is not really his own totem but mal's; would this make a difference in being able to tell if he was in reality or not?

[Kev07]

To contribute to the discussion with something new:

1. I have never been so freaked out, yet could not stop myself, from ogling at an attractive woman until now. Mal had al the features of an attractive woman, but cotdamn she looks freaky.

2. Zenii got me thinking about the whole emotional connection thing. I only just realized that the movie failed to create a sense of care in the audience. Which is fine imo, cause it was still a great movie and already pretty long. An emotional connection woud have made it even better, but it definetely was not a necessity.

3. From 2, If you really think about it, the debate about the ending and whether it was actually reality or a dream, it doesn't even matter, which sucks. If Mal was wrong (meaning the very surface layer was reality), then cool, Leo goes back to his kids and all is fine and dandy. On the other hand, if Mal was right all along and Leo was still in a dream at the end, then what happens? He lives out to old age and dies and then he will wake up in reality where Mal is still alive. The kicker here is that Mal wouldn't have even waited more than a day for him to wake up because of the time distortion of dreamworlds. Or she could have just pulled the plug on whatever is sedating them.

[eggshell]

1. agree that movie definitely didn't do justice to the idea. the dreams devolved into 'excuse for exotic action scenes' but then again it's a movie, you have to realize that they have people to pay and people to please and a movie is always going to be a compromise. once you jump past that hurdle you can enjoy a movie for what it is

2. so many arguments on the web about whether it was real or not. with this as with all 'existential' stories, i think it's best to leave it at 'perception is reality' or whatever that quote is

3. i saw it with two friends who have also done ketamine and one of them who i've k-holed with. we shit a dick during a lot of it because it was so similar to a k-hole, and especially when leo and watanabe look at each other on the plane at the end it's like you guys both came out of a k-hole and you're like 'holy fuck that wasn't real here we are in your basement'

[zenii]

Hmmm with all due respect i don't think u're judging the film on its merits, but rather on your own set of criteria for what you think makes a film good. All those factors you mentioned: emotional connection, stirring the audience's heart, etc, can certainly make a film great, but they are by far not the only factors that make cinema great.

Just take Inception for what it is - a summer blockbuster with a creative plot and a very cool premise, pulled off with much aplomb - and not the next Into the Wild.

Again, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, if you liked it, good for you, I'm just giving my take on it, nothing wrong with a little dissenting opinion right? I'm not saying the movie was bad, just saying it wasn't as good as everyone says it was.

It's also interesting that you chose to use this quote because some of Tarantino's favourite films are The Matrix and The Host, both of which make extensive use of CGI.

Incidentally, he's also a big fan of Speed.

That doesn't prove he didn't say it. Just because he enjoyed those films doesn't necessarily mean he thought they were good. Or maybe he did, you'd have to ask him. That's how I feel about this movie. I enjoyed it, but it wasn't really that great.

[icandunkonu]

you schmucks are really putting too much into this, yall strike me as the type to question porn dialogue. do us a favor and stfu

[AstroWolf]

This movie is either amazing or terrible and i cant decide yet.

As with most Nolan work, i think you need to see it quite a few times before you even start to see everything, he uses so much editing and non traditional narrative its amazing. The Prestige really is a prime example of a film that just gets better the more you watch it.

That being said, i think this movie could have been made for peanuts and been just as good.

[Dijonnaise]

i could discuss this movie for days and im sure you all could too. the concept of inception and extraction, the dreamlike nature of the movie itself, the constant allusions to dante's inferno... lets analyze this shit

first order of business: were those raf x eastpak jawns in the snow level??

I honestly can't remember a single allusion, whether literal or figurative, to anything from the Commedia, let alone to the inferno only. Did you read the poem? I'd like to hear your views on it, could be interesting

[sawyer]

What I was trying to say is that the movie depended mostly on the technological marvels (zero-gravity fight, scene where Ariadne is first introduced to dream world), but there was no emotional connection at all, regardless of how real/surreal it was.

There was nothing at the heart of the story to stir the audience's heart.

Putting it a little harshly, it was just another movie that relied too heavily on CGI and missing the things that actually make a movie good, which is to tell a story which compels the audience to actually care, and feel like they either lost or gained something by the end of the movie.

"This CGI bullshit is the death knell of cinema. If I'd wanted all that computer game bullshit, I'd have stuck my dick in a Nintendo."

CGI here wasn't a compensation for drama, kiddo. you saw an action movie, the focus of the film was the action and it was cool to see nolan use a novel concept (at least to a wide american audience), fill seats and have his audience question the nature of reality and perception.

if youre looking for human drama, good writing and good acting you should know better than to watch nolan

[bencap]

Couldn't help thinking about philosophy the whole time I saw the movie, it's wonderfully open ended and leaves a lot of room for questioning that can't be answered - which is it's greatest strength, conceptually.

What I took away from it, on a personal level, was its exploration of subjective reality: in a world where we constantly search for meaning, and answers are never given, the creation of one's own meaning becomes crucial. For me, the ending scene, as well as Mal's whole existential crisis(resolved in suicide), represented the affirmation that an objective reality is not as important as the individual's personal reality.

And I could go on, but I'll spare you from my opinions and leave you to decide for yourself (since I think that was the whole point of the movie)!

[bencap]

2. Zenii got me thinking about the whole emotional connection thing. I only just realized that the movie failed to create a sense of care in the audience. Which is fine imo, cause it was still a great movie and already pretty long. An emotional connection woud have made it even better, but it definetely was not a necessity.

My mom cried at several points in the movie, and I definitely cared about Cobb resolving his guilt issues. Just sayin!

[Kev07]

hrmm, for me, i was continually suspended, i wanted to know what happened next and my hands were clenched throughout most of the movie. not saying i wasnt emotionally connected at all, but i think there could have definetely been better character development.

maybe part of the issue was that i saw too much of a resemblance in leo's wife issues to the character he played in shutter island

[zenii]

CGI here wasn't a compensation for drama, kiddo. you saw an action movie, the focus of the film was the action and it was cool to see nolan use a novel concept (at least to a wide american audience), fill seats and have his audience question the nature of reality and perception.

if youre looking for human drama, good writing and good acting you should know better than to watch nolan

what are you talking about? have you seen any of his early movies, like memento and following? both were great human dramas, it was only after he started working on the batman series that it went downhill and he sacrificed his creative integrity for big buxx.

[okonomi]

I'm generally strongly against CGI-dependent movies myself (I haven't even seen Avatar) but I really didn't think that Inception was one of them. I probably enjoyed the first half more than the second, which was much less CGI heavy. The film concept was very clever and well told - the effects, which were admittedly extremely fucking cool, were definitely only a supplement.

edit: considering especially that apart from Following, Inception was Nolan's only entirely original film, you certainly can't label it a sacrifice of his creative integrity.

[Quiver]

"...sacrificed his creative integrity ..."

big call. don't agree. but then who are we to say.

[panicnation]

yeah that is indeed a big call and i would love to hear that claim being substantiated...

anyway quick question:

why is there this fear of going into limbo after saito gets shot? from what i gathered, the solution to waking up from limbo is just to kill yourself while down there (leo+mal on traintracks; ariadne falling off the balcony?).

so if you're in limbo just kill yourself and u'll wake up no? If the fear is that you won't even know that you're IN limbo, then how did cobb and mal eventually figure it out?

[syed]

Saito was going to go into limbo if he died because the sedative they used to be able to do three layers of dreams was so strong that he wouldn't wake up.

Not sure about the second bit though.

My movie experience was slightly ruined by some guy behind me deciding to start beating off half way through the movie. F*ck cinemas in South London.