Inception (2010)

Dave

Non Bio
Staff member
Joined
Jan 5, 2001
Messages
23,225
Location
Way on Down South, London Town
I find it hard to believe no one has seen this yet as it took $21.6 million in North America last weekend. It starts in UK cinemas this week. Directed by Christopher Nolan.

In a world where technology exists to enter the human mind through dream invasion, a single idea within one's mind can be the most dangerous weapon or the most valuable asset.
Inception (2010)

It sounds like something I'd like. I always liked the idea of the low-budget 1984 film Dreamscape but I thought it could have been done better and gone further. This seems like it is on a similar theme, however CGI has improved since then, and The Matrix undoubtedly changed everything that has come after it.

[YouTube]HilwtqaN4Gs[/YouTube]

That's not a very good trailer. I saw a better one with Killers last month.
 
A few of us have seen it, and recommended it on the 'last movie you saw' thread.

It's a good film, and you should definitely see it. The only thing I didn't like was the end. In fact, it was the very last shot.

But we can discuss that once you've seen the movie.

Oh, and the $21.7m was its take on the opening day; it would be considered a massive disappointment if it only made that in the entire weekend.

The weekend haul was $62.7 million (which is still not that great in this day and age).
 
If you are tired of the old, run of the mill, formulaic movies, give Inception a go. I saw it last night, and haven't felt this enthused about a film since the Matrix (the 1st one). The premise is about dream technology being used for espionage. This is a thinking movie, it engaged me from the begining. It's well paced with some action, romance, and believable SF. The dream environments are 'twisted' enough to be novel, yet not too unfamiliar for us gamers (Obsidian's cube ). I was thoroughly entertained.
 
As a rule, I think films over 2 hours are too long, but I can't see how anything could be cut out of this. It is extremely complex, but I went with some people who I wouldn't say were SFF fans and everyone understood the plot perfectly.

Now then, DA has a problem with the end. I'm warning you now that I'm going to dispense with any SPOILERS since I think people should only read these threads if they have seen a film. So here goes:

Concerning the final scene, I assume your problem is with the spinning top and the attempt to make us ask: Is it all still a dream? I didn’t have a problem with that because it was clear to me that they had returned back to reality. I say that for a number of reasons:

1) The top had already begun to fall if you listen to it rather than watch.
2) If it was still a dream, then who’s dream? It would have to be Cobb’s dream. So, he dreamt that everyone returned. So if they didn’t, are they all still dreaming and no one returned? That really doesn’t work.
3) If it was Cobb’s dream wouldn’t he put Mal in it, still alive?
4) But mainly because Cobb could never remember his children’s faces in his dreams, however this time he saw them both.

On the other hand, Cobb could have been in a dream from the very start of the film, and none of what we saw was ever reality at all.

I did think the whole process itself had been incredibly well thought out by Christopher Nolan; as if he had asked people to nitpick it and then gone back and made up explanations and ways around those various problems.

My only problem would be with Cobb going to see Saito in Limbo and bringing him back. The world with the derelict collapsing city was Cobb’s dream and was four dream levels down from reality. All the other times that they stepped down to a dream within a dream they had to bring out a briefcase and connect together in order to share it. I think Saito’s Limbo was an alternative four levels down from reality (that's where he died though he was actually shot one level down.) Now, it must have been Saito’s dream since he died first (and was therefore much older.) I just don’t see how it was possible for Cobb to enter Saito’s dream. However, there is the possibility that Limbo is a shared environment not limited to a single subconscious. It is only Cobb’s version of Limbo that we see because he spent 50 years there before building it; otherwise it would have been empty space. But if that is the case, Cobb should surely be older than Saito when they meet. I’m still confused!

Other problems I see are:

1) Whether Fischer Junior would remember the dream or not. He had had professional dream training just like the others, so surely he should? At the airport, he does seem to recognise Cobb for a second.
2) Why Fischer Junior does not recognise Saito from real life? The head of a rival Corporation!
3) Did they actually succeed? Did Fischer Junior actually break up the company? That was the whole major plot-line wasn’t it? But it was never shown. Obviously, Cobb seeing his kids again was more important and his own motivation, but the others did it for the money. Still, Saito seemed happy at the end.
 
Alfred Hitchcock had a word for the kind of people who criticize movies like INCEPTION for plot holes: plausiblists.
 
Now then, DA has a problem with the end. I'm warning you now that I'm going to dispense with any SPOILERS since I think people should only read these threads if they have seen a film. So here goes:

Concerning the final scene, I assume your problem is with the spinning top and the attempt to make us ask: Is it all still a dream?
Quite right. My assumption is the same as yours (that they were 'back'); what I resented was the attempt to create that little 'mystery'. I would be fine with it if it the mystery was a natural result of the story, but that scene seemed forced to me. It just wasn't needed. I think people would have wondered "Is it real or not?" anyway, since the nature of the plot lends itself to such questions. But that scene seemed like Nolan making a conscious effort to make us wonder, and he didn't need to because the movie was plenty clever as it is. Don't force it.

1) The top had already begun to fall if you listen to it rather than watch.
I heard it, too. Definitely wobbling.

2) If it was still a dream, then who’s dream? It would have to be Cobb’s dream. So, he dreamt that everyone returned. So if they didn’t, are they all still dreaming and no one returned? That really doesn’t work.
Not all of them would be dreaming. If it all, the possibility is that all the rest returned, but Cobb didn't make it out.

3) If it was Cobb’s dream wouldn’t he put Mal in it, still alive?
Not necessarily. A dream in which she was alive might be too unrealistic for his subconcious to accept, so it's possible the dream he would create would be one that is more 'believable'.

4) But mainly because Cobb could never remember his children’s faces in his dreams, however this time he saw them both.
I don't think it's that he couldn't remember. I mean, they're his kids. Surely, he wouldn't forget what they look like in such a short period of time. I think it was basically guilt.

He left without saying goodbye to his children, without looking at their faces one last time. So now, that's how he remembers them. It's not that he can't remember; it's that he won't. Notice that when he's in Limbo with Mal, and she's convincing him to stay, she points out the kids to him, and Cobb deliberately looks away. Why did he see them in the end, then? I guess he's finally forgiven himself.

On the other hand, Cobb could have been in a dream from the very start of the film, and none of what we saw was ever reality at all.
I've heard that theory. Personally, it's my least favourite possibility, because if it was all a dream, then the events have no meaning. None of it mattered. And that's just lame.

I did think the whole process itself had been incredibly well thought out by Christopher Nolan; as if he had asked people to nitpick it and then gone back and made up explanations and ways around those various problems.
Oh, definitely well thought. I read somewhere that Nolan apparently first thought of the script before he made Memento, and has basically been fine-tuning it since. That's remarkable.

However, there is the possibility that Limbo is a shared environment not limited to a single subconscious.
I think so.

But if that is the case, Cobb should surely be older than Saito when they meet. I’m still confused!
I don't think Cobb should be older, because Saito did die before him so he's been in Limbo longer. Cobb was there years ago, and then came out. He wasn't in there this whole time.

1) Whether Fischer Junior would remember the dream or not. He had had professional dream training just like the others, so surely he should? At the airport, he does seem to recognise Cobb for a second.
He might retain enough to get some deja vu, but I don't think he'll remember much of it. Keep in mind, they weren't his dreams; they were Cobb's teammates'.

2) Why Fischer Junior does not recognise Saito from real life? The head of a rival Corporation!
He's an ignorant buffoon.

3) Did they actually succeed? Did Fischer Junior actually break up the company? That was the whole major plot-line wasn’t it?
I think we can assume they did succeed. They 'inceptioned' him, and the idea is now in Fischer's head. Notice him looking all thoughtful and pondersome at the end.

But that wasn't really the point of the movie. It was an excuse to get the plot moving, but ultimately the story was about Cobb, and his road to recovery/redemption.
 
Thanks DA

Tygersmovies, I think you will find the term "plausiblists" actually applied to those people who say something is impossible or implausible on historical or scientific grounds. Since I believe that entering someone else's dream is still total fantasy, then it hardly applies. What I was nitpicking was the implausibility within the world Nolan had himself created, and as I already said, I believe that he did a fantastic job answering most of these nits. But I do like my Narrative Logic to be strong.

Nitpicking is part of what we do here. This is an intellectual film and demands intellectually reviewing it. If you visited other websites and forums you will see a number of posts alternatively gushing and downing films. That gets rather boring after a while. I prefer to ask intelligent questions.
 
Just seen it. Brilliant. Brilliant. Horribly brilliant (for a budding scriptwriter).

The anti-gravity fights - excellent!

The whole plot, the whole idea - Argh! Excellent!


And the ending. It fell. It fell, I tells ya. It was wobbling, thus, it fell. But much better that it ended like that because it keeps people talking after they leave (and my, were they). You could feel the tension of the entire audience in those final moments (and it was pretty packed tonight) and half of them groaned out loud when it ended without a final conclusion. A very well done ending, if absolutely infuriating.

Exactly how a film should be -- we hit the ground running, hurry to catch up, we enjoy all that we see and then we still have a thousand things to consider and talk about after wards.
 
Extra:

Dave said:
However, there is the possibility that Limbo is a shared environment not limited to a single subconscious.

Yes, I'm pretty sure it's explained that way in the film. That it's a shared space, and the layout of it takes shape of the person who's been there to most (yes, I remember now, in the film someone says "that's Cobb". And we do indeed find out that he's been there for fifty years before).

Last night I dreamt I was talking to a guy and then suddenly everyone else in the room with us looked over -- all of them at me. And my dream self asked just who's dream I was in. It wasn't until I started having a totally inane conversation with the guy that everyone looked away and went back to what they were doing.
 
Exactly how a film should be -- we hit the ground running, hurry to catch up, we enjoy all that we see and then we still have a thousand things to consider and talk about after wards.
That's all true. It begins with an Earthquake and just goes up from there. And I definitely like films that I can discuss later - Matrix, Vanilla Sky, Total Recall.

I forgot to say earlier that I really liked this. Best film this year, possibly last year too. Will certainly buy the DVD.
 
I think it fell. all the times we saw it spinning in the dreams it was perfectly spinning. dead straight. It wasn't like that on the table.

I loved the sound effects in the movie too. They weren't your typical 'batman style' sound effects. When the dude's skull hit the windscreen it sounded like a skull hitting a windscreen (Something which I have unfortunately heard in real life).

I dreamt like that last night too HoopyFrood. Don't think I'll ever dream the same again.
 
Inception was very good, not one of the best movies in a long while. But the best blockbuster type hollywood in recent years. I liked that you had to actual think to understand the story. Quality characters,idea of dreams. I can only compare it to the best superhero movies in quality of blockbuster films.

Only thing that could have been better was that he should have explained the ability of controling dreams better early in the film. Where did it came from ? How ? When ?

A refereshing film where you had to think of new things. I have respect for Chris Nolan again i lost alot for him after his Dark Knight that was too much realism,too dumbed down story,writing.
 
I liked this part of your review best:
here is also the chemist. The chemist, who is for some reason as skilled at driving as your average stunt driver, can hold his own with a pistol, and doesn’t panic in high-pressure situations.
:D

What I want to know is why there haven't been more films about entering other people's dreams. I mentioned Dreamscape (1984) earlier, but can't think of anything else about dreams. The other films I mentioned are about false memories and virtual realities.
 
Is that sarcasm about the chemist ?

You saw Cobb handled himself better with shooting,punching than he did in the real world chase. Heh maybe like Matrix the dream world added skills to them.

Or they were just theifs who actually knew their buisness like shooting,driving.
 
True, in a dream, you could dream that you could do anything, but it wasn't Yusuf's dream, so does that make any difference?

Ariadne was able to roll up those streets inside Cobb's dream, so maybe it is only dependent on how good you are at entering other people's dreams. When (Arthur or Eames) was shooting at the men on the electricty transformer, I was myself thinking, "This is a dream, why can't he just blow up the transformer?" Then one of them brought out the Bazooka. I thought, "That's more like it!" I don't think there was enough of that 'Neo controlling the Matrix'-type of thinking in this. Maybe they were deliberately meant to be novices at this business. It seemed like only Cobb and Arthur did it on a regular basis.
 
True, in a dream, you could dream that you could do anything, but it wasn't Yusuf's dream, so does that make any difference?

Ariadne was able to roll up those streets inside Cobb's dream, so maybe it is only dependent on how good you are at entering other people's dreams. When (Arthur or Eames) was shooting at the men on the electricty transformer, I was myself thinking, "This is a dream, why can't he just blow up the transformer?" Then one of them brought out the Bazooka. I thought, "That's more like it!" I don't think there was enough of that 'Neo controlling the Matrix'-type of thinking in this. Maybe they were deliberately meant to be novices at this business. It seemed like only Cobb and Arthur did it on a regular basis.

Everyone was handling themselves like fighting,shooting experts in others dreams. I think they could do alot even in some else dream. Eames showed that,Arthur in that hotel too.

I thought it was refereshing they werent still perfect . They were theifs and not super martial artist,super soldiers like Virtual programs made Neo and co in Matrix.
 
I watch it last week and find it quite enjoyable but not that great. There are many loops in the story and about the sci-fi stuff. The movie is like combining sci-fi and action together but not as good as blockbuster's ones.

I really like them to explain how the dream machine work or what theory is it based on. In the movie they just click and plug, that's really annoying. And connecting people into other's dream and start dreaming together is far beyond from today's technology not to mention extracting someone's dream into reality first. So how did those guys have this cutting-edge technology while the rest of the world still looks like present day?

And about the ending part. It is quite popular nowadays that these kinds of movies like to end with a little twist to give the audience someting to talk about.
 

Similar threads


Back
Top