EPT[Movie] Inception - Page 24
| Forum Index > Media & Entertainment |
|
Spenguin
Australia3316 Posts
| ||
|
Stratos_speAr
United States6959 Posts
You think it was a great movie that made you think. I watched it because you hyped up the movie. And you think I'm not allowed to offer my criticism because I'm in the minority here? Why don't you go take a leap of faith. The reason I'm criticizing is not just because I didn't think it was the 'most amazing movie ever!', it's because the viewers disguise it as something it's not. You're allowed to offer your criticism, and you did. You've gone beyond that and now you're just spreading your condescending and overly-critical attitude. | ||
|
JiYan
United States3668 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + Signs show that it should fall and be real. I say this because 1, how did he get there? If you were to ask dicaprio how he got there, he could tell you, he woke up from his dream on the plane, went through customs, met up with his dad and then went home to see his kids. he knew how he got there and therefore passes that test. Second, he saw his kids' faces which he could never see in any of his other dreams. the only counter-argument would be that his subconscious tricked him and theyre just projections of his memories, but that would therefore ruin all the laws of the movie. it would defeat the purpose of a totem as well, let me explain. IF he is still dreaming at the end, that would mean that all the other levels we saw throughout the movie were just deeper levels of dream states. In those deeper levels, we saw the top constantly fall. having the top fall in dreams but spin forever in reality doesnt make sense. so if the top stays spinning it creates a loophole in the plot. the top must fall. may be wrong though who knows xDD great movie though seriously. | ||
|
MangoTango
United States3670 Posts
On July 23 2010 05:27 MangoTango wrote: Incidentally, if anyone cares about what Chris Nolan actually meant by the film, check this spoiler out. + Show Spoiler + It's about making movies. Everything makes total sense in this light. http://www.theawl.com/2010/07/the-key-to-inception-its-a-movie-about-making-movies I've gotten no responses about this. Disappointed by this. | ||
|
Archaic
United States4024 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + So I followed the movie just find until the people started to enter limbo. Cobb + Adriadne go to limbo to get Fischer. Then Saito dies. Adriadne kills Fischer and herself to leave limbo while Cobb stays behind, dealing with his wife, and to find Saito. Then the scene abruptly changes to Saito's dream world (maybe limbo?) like in the opening scene, Cobb being found in the ocean. How did Cobb get there? What dream level are they currently at? Why is limbo so dangerous if you can simply kill yourself to get out? It says if you are stuck there for many many years it will wipe your mind, but all of them escaped simply by killing themselves (assuming they aren't under heavy sedation). | ||
|
Stratos_speAr
United States6959 Posts
On July 25 2010 01:30 Archaic wrote: Anyone care to explain: + Show Spoiler + So I followed the movie just find until the people started to enter limbo. Cobb + Adriadne go to limbo to get Fischer. Then Saito dies. Adriadne kills Fischer and herself to leave limbo while Cobb stays behind, dealing with his wife, and to find Saito. Then the scene abruptly changes to Saito's dream world (maybe limbo?) like in the opening scene, Cobb being found in the ocean. How did Cobb get there? What dream level are they currently at? Why is limbo so dangerous if you can simply kill yourself to get out? It says if you are stuck there for many many years it will wipe your mind, but all of them escaped simply by killing themselves (assuming they aren't under heavy sedation). + Show Spoiler + It's not 100% clear how he got there. It's assumed by most that he just spent a long time searching for Saito and got lost. Limbo is dangerous because knowing that you're in Limbo and knowing how to get out are the difficult part. If you don't know, you're essentially trapped in a little fantasy world where you can build anything and you go more or less crazy from isolation. | ||
|
raybasto
United States151 Posts
On July 25 2010 00:42 JiYan wrote: what i thought about the ending with support from the movie + Show Spoiler + Signs show that it should fall and be real. I say this because 1, how did he get there? If you were to ask dicaprio how he got there, he could tell you, he woke up from his dream on the plane, went through customs, met up with his dad and then went home to see his kids. he knew how he got there and therefore passes that test. Second, he saw his kids' faces which he could never see in any of his other dreams. the only counter-argument would be that his subconscious tricked him and theyre just projections of his memories, but that would therefore ruin all the laws of the movie. it would defeat the purpose of a totem as well, let me explain. IF he is still dreaming at the end, that would mean that all the other levels we saw throughout the movie were just deeper levels of dream states. In those deeper levels, we saw the top constantly fall. having the top fall in dreams but spin forever in reality doesnt make sense. so if the top stays spinning it creates a loophole in the plot. the top must fall. may be wrong though who knows xDD great movie though seriously. + Show Spoiler + If the ending of the movie is in fact real, how do you explain his kids being the same age as they were in his dreams? Also, why did Saito reach for the gun, at the end when he was an old man? Saying that, it seemed to me like the top was slowing down at the end and in dreams, the top never slowed down like that. | ||
OneOther
United States10774 Posts
It's a bit sad how you guys were fooled once with Avatar, and then you buy into the PR the second time with this movie. The characters were flat, story recycled and it followed the simple Hollywood mixture of corny jokes, quick paced dialogue and cool explosions. I don't understand how people can be excited over and over again just because they're supposed to like something. What makes you think that people bought in to the PR? Why couldn't it be that people watched the movie, and genuinely liked as it was and thought it was an great movie? Because that's how it was for me. I could care less what those guys at Rotten Tomatoes say. It looked different and I went to go see it. And it was a really good movie in my eyes. So I came back and wrote some good things about it here. Can I go ahead and say that nobody really cares about how you didn't like this movie? People who praised it loved it, and thought the exact opposite of everything that you did. I thought it was original, creative, thought-provoking, and just good overall. Apparently a lot of other people did too. Get over it, man. Not really sure how you can even argue that "viewers disguise it" as something it's not. Praises are now disguised because you disagree with them? For the last time, everyone who thought it was great and awesome said it was great and awesome. I hope you realize there's a difference between offering criticism and what you're doing right now. You are entitled to your opinion. But don't shit on others' in the process. | ||
|
jalstar
United States8198 Posts
| ||
|
PeT[uK]
United States412 Posts
On July 25 2010 02:56 raybasto wrote: + Show Spoiler + If the ending of the movie is in fact real, how do you explain his kids being the same age as they were in his dreams? Also, why did Saito reach for the gun, at the end when he was an old man? Saying that, it seemed to me like the top was slowing down at the end and in dreams, the top never slowed down like that. + Show Spoiler + It's because Cobb reminded Saito that he was in a dream, and Saito was then able to kill himself in order to return back o reality and follow through with his promise. He couldn't kill himself without first seeing Cobb | ||
|
jalstar
United States8198 Posts
There were 2 endings, really, which was a bit indecisive or postmodern for my tastes. Ending 1 is that the top stopped spinning. Implications are that Saito will eventually kill himself because he, like Mal, will think the world isn't real, and that Mal is actually dead. Ending 2 is that the top keeps spinning because Mal was right and Cobb is in a first level dream state, and he'll eventually jump off a building and wake up and be with Mal. Cobb is able to return to the US because he believes he's able to return to the US, Saito never had to do anything. Also there was a scene where Mal says "You don't know your real children" and the camera cuts to Ariadne... Both endings are happy for Cobb though since he's reunited with his family either way. There's closure for the character and not the audience. | ||
Pholon
Netherlands6142 Posts
I don't understand how the no gravitation doesn't work on the 3rd level | ||
|
tonight
United States11130 Posts
On July 25 2010 03:16 OneOther wrote: What makes you think that people bought in to the PR? Why couldn't it be that people watched the movie, and genuinely liked as it was and thought it was an great movie? Because that's how it was for me. I could care less what those guys at Rotten Tomatoes say. It looked different and I went to go see it. And it was a really good movie in my eyes. So I came back and wrote some good things about it here. Can I go ahead and say that nobody really cares about how you didn't like this movie? People who praised it loved it, and thought the exact opposite of everything that you did. I thought it was original, creative, thought-provoking, and just good overall. Apparently a lot of other people did too. Get over it, man. Not really sure how you can even argue that "viewers disguise it" as something it's not. Praises are now disguised because you disagree with them? For the last time, everyone who thought it was great and awesome said it was great and awesome. I hope you realize there's a difference between offering criticism and what you're doing right now. You are entitled to your opinion. But don't shit on others' in the process. Yeah, this movie was no where NEAR as hyped up as Avatar. Not even close. I went to see it because I thought it looked interesting and from word of mouth I heard it was a very good movie. So, being that I'm not a mindless robot, I went to the movie and formed my own opinions of the movie. Needless to say I ended up enjoying it thoroughly. Don't know what people expected. What did you want the subconscious conflict to be like? A game of chess in which it is a pure battle of will and wit? That would edge on pretentious with how the movie was, but it's the sort of movie that people will read way too deep into and the type where people will see it and say it is over hyped and is not thought provoking at all. It is what it is and I like what it is. | ||
|
Shauni
4077 Posts
On July 25 2010 03:16 OneOther wrote: People who praised it loved it, and thought the exact opposite of everything that you did. I thought it was original, creative, thought-provoking, and just good overall. I don't think it depends on subjective taste, it just depends on what you compare with. I don't think anyone could argue that this movie is original in its concept. It might feel refreshing in comparison to Hollywood blockbusters, if that's what you mean. And what was so thought-provoking about the movie? That the ending was slightly ambiguous? Or that mr Nolan wanted us to follow several layers of dream levels at once? Or that we're forced to question reality through Cobb's love story? Where was the thought-provoking part? It should be telling when Nolan and the Warners PR team keep coming out with new stories for the general public, to put Nolan's movie above scrutiny, such as: Before Nolan was touting this as a totally original mind-bender -- once Warners realized this wasn't so, they started issuing press releases where Nolan claimed the film as an "homage" to films of this genre, and "gets a kick out of seeing what films people see in the film." | ||
|
mainerd
United States347 Posts
On July 24 2010 21:11 Shauni wrote: It doesn't offer anything new, original or even vaguely artistic to the genre of artificial reality. Christopher Nolan is not a genius director, he makes entertaining films for the masses but that's how far it goes. It's a bit sad how you guys were fooled once with Avatar, and then you buy into the PR the second time with this movie. The characters were flat, story recycled and it followed the simple Hollywood mixture of corny jokes, quick paced dialogue and cool explosions. I don't understand how people can be excited over and over again just because they're supposed to like something. I don't understand why you would pay money to go see a big budget Hollywood film expecting that, maybe THIS time, your sensibilities won't be so offended. Especially considering your opinion of Nolan, and it receiving overwhelmingly good reviews - that should have been a red flag for you right there Shauni. Studios don't drop $200 million on wildly different ideas/scripts, that would be a poor business decision I think you'd agree - like you said, it seems that those critical of Inception are in the minority, which you are a part of. Why would they move away from the business model that makes money? To pander to the minority of film goers, and lose a bunch of money on their investment? Big screen names, special effects, and patterned dialogue are what makes major Hollywood studios their profit. That said, I thought Inception was a great movie with an interesting premise and a good execution, but it's not like I didn't know what I was getting into when I went to the cinema... You seem to like independent, lower budget films, perhaps you should stick to them instead of wasting your money? Or did you decide to see this one so you could contribute some overwhelming negativity to this thread, by criticizing not only the movie but questioning the intelligence of those who liked it? Do everyone a favor and save us the grief of reading your condescending critiques the next time a studio rolls out another blockbuster. | ||
|
Shauni
4077 Posts
Well there are certain areas when you are talking about dreams – the analysis of dreams, how you might examine those in the film – that you do want to avoid because they’d probably be either too disturbing for the sort action film genre that we are working in Doesn't this imply that he couldn't portray dream worlds realistically because it would be too demanding or difficult for him to handle? Or rather, he wouldn't be catering to his blockbuster-watching action audience anymore. I think for me, when you look at the idea of being able to create a limitless world and use it as almost a playground for action and adventure, I naturally gravitate towards cinematic worlds whether it’s the Bond films or things like that, so without being too self-conscious about it or without too much intention as I was writing it I certainly allowed my mind to wander where it would naturally. I think a lot the tropes from different genres of movies – heist films, spy films…that kind of thing – they therefore set up naturally. He was inspired by Bond and other spy movies. No wonder we had several explosions in every scene... The skiing with guns was especially reminiscent of Bond movies, I thought. On July 25 2010 04:42 mainerd wrote: I don't understand why you would pay money to go see a big budget Hollywood film expecting that, maybe THIS time, your sensibilities won't be so offended. Especially considering your opinion of Nolan, and it receiving overwhelmingly good reviews - that should have been a red flag for you right there Shauni. Studios don't drop $200 million on wildly different ideas/scripts, that would be a poor business decision I think you'd agree - like you said, it seems that those critical of Inception are in the minority, which you are a part of. Why would they move away from the business model that makes money? To pander to the minority of film goers, and lose a bunch of money on their investment? Big screen names, special effects, and patterned dialogue are what makes major Hollywood studios their profit. That said, I thought Inception was a great movie with an interesting premise and a good execution, but it's not like I didn't know what I was getting into when I went to the cinema... You seem to like independent, lower budget films, perhaps you should stick to them instead of wasting your money? Or did you decide to see this one so you could contribute some overwhelming negativity to this thread, by criticizing not only the movie but questioning the intelligence of those who liked it? Do everyone a favor and save us the grief of reading your condescending critiques the next time a studio rolls out another blockbuster. I agree with whole your post, but the reason why I wanted to try it out was that people advertised it as an intelligent and complex movie, obviously I had some scepticism in me beforehand - but I didn't expect everyone to be so wrong. | ||
|
iNcontroL
USA29055 Posts
Inception as a typical hollywood film? I fucking wish roflfl | ||
|
tonight
United States11130 Posts
| ||
|
Stratos_speAr
United States6959 Posts
On July 25 2010 04:43 Shauni wrote: Oh and some Nolan quotes for mr stratosspear Doesn't this imply that he couldn't portray dream worlds realistically because it would be too demanding or difficult for him to handle? Or rather, he wouldn't be catering to his blockbuster-watching action audience anymore. He was inspired by Bond and other spy movies. No wonder we had several explosions in every scene... The skiing with guns was especially reminiscent of Bond movies, I thought. I agree with whole your post, but the reason why I wanted to try it out was that people advertised it as an intelligent and complex movie, obviously I had some scepticism in me beforehand - but I didn't expect everyone to be so wrong. No shit it was inspired by Bond. He's said this countless times. The point of it is that the actions fits. It isn't completely random and unnecessary explosions. Oh, and I feel like a "Haters gonna hate" pic would fit perfectly here, but I feel like that's against the TL rules.  | ||
|
tonight
United States11130 Posts
| ||
| ||
