Inception

[homer]

Anyone seen it yet? I'd like to hear others thoughts on it. I thought it was terrific but maybe a bit too much exposition. Please alert others if you have spoilers. Thanks!

[Glennron]

It very well may have been the theater where I saw it, but there were certain parts of the movie where the dialogue was drowned out by the music, a couple times at pretty key points. Did you have that problem too? I'm planning on seeing it again anyway, but hopefully another theater will have better sound. Otherwise, I also thought it was pretty great. It really didn't seem like a 140+ minute movie at all.

[homer]

It very well may have been the theater where I saw it, but there were certain parts of the movie where the dialogue was drowned out by the music, a couple times at pretty key points. Did you have that problem too?

Actually I did have that problem. Although it may have been the theater I saw it in.

[Oldcity]

It really didn't seem like a 140+ minute movie at all.

This is a sure sign for me that a movie was good. I really enjoyed it.

[heresrobin]

I really enjoyed it. Very tense and engaging. Excellent cast. I particularly liked Joseph Gordon-Levitt. Pretty complex, but it you are willing to go along for the ride, I think it's a lot of fun. Gordon-Levitt's first dream within a dream altered-gravity fight is particularly memorable, as is the super-slow motion and the score.

[I Heart Brewers]

* Spoilers*

 

I had a few question/comments on it.

 

Question:

I don't understand how Cobb got from his meeting at the table with Saito (old guy version) all the way back to reality. I thought if they killed themselves they would be stuck down in their subconscious based on the fact that they were sedated? Was it different because it was Cobb's subconscious reality that he created with Mal? Or was the point that when (I'm assuming using the gun) they shot themselves Cobb went deeper forever to a place where he could be with his Father and kids? I didn't understand the lack of the kick back.

 

Comment:

Which leads to my comment. The scene where Ariadne is creating the architecture in Paris and puts the two mirrors up between her and Cobb, did anyone else think it really meant (or maybe it was obvious and I missed it) that Cobb had created so many layers of his subconscious that he could never wake up? O rthat he was just in a dream this whole time? My thought was that the end was not reality but that he would be at peace because he let go of his guilt with Mal and could 'dream' of a life with his kids. All of characters in the movie seemed to be Cobb's projections, not real people.

 

There was a ton more and I had some immediate thoughts/questions after I saw it but I forgot now. I need to see it again to process it a bit more. I love the collective sigh that everyone in the theatre had at the conclusion.

[homer]

SPOILERS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Question:

I don't understand how Cobb got from his meeting at the table with Saito (old guy version) all the way back to reality.

 

It's possible he never made it back. Remember the top kept spinning at the end.....I guess it wobbled a little right before the blackout but I'm sure that was on purpose to leave it open to debate.

[heresrobin]

Spoilers

 

 

 

Just to add on to the ending a little bit. I was in a packed theatre, and you could just feel everybody holding their breath for the top spinning at the end. When they cut to black, it was one of the coolest theatre experiences of my life. Most people gasped, some people started laughing, some were clapping, but everybody immediately turned to their friends with their mouths open - "He didn't really just end the movie that way, did he?" The ambiguity won't sit well with some, but I loved it.

[RobertR]

I enjoyed Inception a lot.

 

 

Spoilers

 

 

 

 

 

The important thing to me is not whether Cobb is in reality, stuck in dreaming, or a dreamer about to awaken after undergoing a catharsis, but the fact that Cobb has undergone a catharsis and can see his children's faces again is what is most important.

 

And, personally, I think Inception is much more a film about cinema than it is about dreams. It really doesn't have much to say about dreams, IMO. But, about cinema and movie making as a shared dream, I think it has a lot to say.

 

The various levels of dreaming all play like their own heist film. Level one is a gritty, urban film. Level two is something out of Oceans 11, an upscale caper film. Level three is flat out Bond.

 

You can very easily map it out as Ariadne is the screenwriter. She passes her test with Cobb with a pad of paper and a pencil, and really impresses him when she breaks free of the rigid, box structure.

 

Yusuf is the technical guy. Arthur the producer, who researches, finds people places to sleep, etc. Saito the money man/studio. Eames is clearly the actor, even brought home when he literally changes faces before an old school makeup mirror.

 

Cobb is the director, the guy who's ultimately in charge, who plans, and who's demons threaten to derail everything.

 

Fischer is the audience. And, in this case, he's asked to be an active participant, to let down his defenses, and participate in the story being told for him.

 

And, arguably, Inception is a film planting an idea in th audience. Even if it's from an outside influence, the catharsis and journey are no less meaningful. And it's more difficult to plant an idea that changes the way we perceive ourselves or the world, than to simply extract money.

 

At least that's my armchair reading.

 

Robert

[DHonks]

I thought it was a cool adaptation of the themes from movies like the Matrix and the Thirteenth Floor. It took a little while to get past the lead actor being Leo, but he did a very good job. They did a good job with developing the plot and introducing characters.

 

Perhaps I had a different understanding from most...I assumed the top was on the verge of falling at the end. But, like others said, it makes it interesting that they don't show what happens after the gun is used.

 

Oh yeah, and mad props for using Jake Taylor in the flick

[Katuluu]

but there were certain parts of the movie where the dialogue was drowned out by the music, a couple times at pretty key points.

 

This is supposed to be this way. The sound design is actually pretty gutsy in this respect.

[heresrobin]

That's an interesting idea Robert. Thanks for sharing. I agree though that Inception doesn't really capture what dreams are really like or even attempt to. Dreams are much more surreal, random, blurry, crazy and less structured.

 

One of my criticisms is the Snow Base level. In particular, the gun fighting. It became monotonous and a little boring. You could have taken out about 3/4 of the gun battles, and I think that would have helped. Just something about that whole level seemed off to me - can't quite put my finger on it. Maybe it was the pacing or the logic of how they approached the base - I don't get how they thought they had time to climb the face of that cliff.

 

I could probably blast a bunch of holes in the logic or the rules of the dreamworld, but I worry if I do that I would just end up overthinking it and detracting from my personal enjoyment of the movie.

[DHonks]

interesting about the audio issues, as I thought it was very clear and easy to understand the entire time. Neither my girlfriend nor I ever asked what was said.

[thebruce44]

interesting about the audio issues, as I thought it was very clear and easy to understand the entire time. Neither my girlfriend nor I ever asked what was said.

 

There was a line by Ken Watanabe I couldn't make out where my friend turned to me to ask what he said and I shruged. Then I noticed nearly everyone in the theater was asking the person next to them what was just said. I could see it being intentional. I think Nolan did a lot of little things during the movie to make it seem more like a dream, and confusion could be one of them. His directing style really fits well with what he was trying to acomplish here.

[homer]

I think there was a line while Ken Watanabe was lying on the carpet near the beginning. I assume Nolan was trying to show the muddled nature of dreams/reality. I agree it was a gutsy choice if intentional......but then again, the whole film was pretty gutsy from an intellectual perspective. You get that kind of leeway when you make a film as successful as Dark Knight.

[thebruce44]

I assume Nolan was trying to show the muddled nature of dreams/reality.

The cutting of the action during the snow scene was extremely hard to follow for me, especially with the skiing/snowmobiles and them all being split up wearing similar clothing. Then as someone else mentioned, the over the top gun fighting around the hospital. It could have been poor editing or directing on Nolan's part, but I am inclined to think it was on purpose similar to the muddled lines. I know I have had dreams where it seems like you are fighting or moving past endless waves of people/bad guys/objects. It struck me as very dream-like.

The only reason I don't know for sure if it was intentional is that Nolan uses a similar style in most of his other movies. It works for Batman movies because he is essentially a ninja, moving in and out of shadows with gorilla tactics to take out superior numbers. You see the action sequences from a similar vantage point as the baddies, wondering how exactly how the rest of the group is being taken out one by one. And while it works very well here, its less effective in a movie like the Prestige.

It will be very interesting to see what happens to Nolan after Batman 3. I think he is a great story teller and a very creative writer. He does an excelent job of bringing advanced themes to the masses and running consistently through a film with an important big picture idea. I don't think he is really meant to create blockbuster after blockbuster though despite how fantastic he has been at it recently. Those particular movies fit him very well but I don't know if he can do that forever.