Excellent movie, it definitely is unique and definitely one of the best movies I've ever seen.
I think Shauni is just butt hurt that he's seen earlier movies with similar premises, and that we're all calling it original when he's seen DOZENS of other movies where they do the exact same shat blah blah blah, he's the original movie buff who has better tastes and doesn't follow mainstream crap and is laughing at us commoners who just watch hollywood shit with explosions blah blah blah.
Whatever. A movie is subjective, you can like it or you don't. Just because you've seen anime movies where they did similar stuff, doesn't mean the movie is crap. I think the movie executed it's meanings across a lot better than a similar anime movie, Paprika. Check it out if you want something similar (although don't go in expecting too much, it keeps its zany jap anime weirdness).
ANYWAYS
the only bad thing I can say about the movie is that the projections can't shoot for shit. and that van was in the air for waaaaaaaaaay too long. Seeing the van staying in one spot didn't create suspense, it just made you realise that they're all gonna make it through the end because they had so much time lol. 9/10 for me, but I don't think I'll ever give any movie 10/10 so that's probably the highest you'll get from me.
On July 25 2010 19:03 toadstool wrote: Excellent movie, it definitely is unique and definitely one of the best movies I've ever seen.
I think Shauni is just butt hurt that he's seen earlier movies with similar premises, and that we're all calling it original when he's seen DOZENS of other movies where they do the exact same shat blah blah blah, he's the original movie buff who has better tastes and doesn't follow mainstream crap and is laughing at us commoners who just watch hollywood shit with explosions blah blah blah.
Whatever. A movie is subjective, you can like it or you don't. Just because you've seen anime movies where they did similar stuff, doesn't mean the movie is crap. I think the movie executed it's meanings across a lot better than a similar anime movie, Paprika. Check it out if you want something similar (although don't go in expecting too much, it keeps its zany jap anime weirdness).
ANYWAYS
the only bad thing I can say about the movie is that the projections can't shoot for shit. and that van was in the air for waaaaaaaaaay too long. Seeing the van staying in one spot didn't create suspense, it just made you realise that they're all gonna make it through the end because they had so much time lol. 9/10 for me, but I don't think I'll ever give any movie 10/10 so that's probably the highest you'll get from me.
Well said, particularly since there are very very few truly original concepts anymore. Most things have been done before, in some form, but that doesn't mean new iterations of old concepts are bad. For example, Avatar was still great, despite the fact that the general story has been done many, many times.
why are people using child age as a reason that its a dream? they were older at the end. proof is in the credits when they show 2 actors for each of the children for when they were younger and when they were older. i just saw it the 2nd time.
On July 26 2010 14:14 JiYan wrote: why are people using child age as a reason that its a dream? they were older at the end. proof is in the credits when they show 2 actors for each of the children for when they were younger and when they were older. i just saw it the 2nd time.
But they were also wearing the same clothes, which could definitely be considered odd...
At least, i THINK they were wearing the same clothes
On July 25 2010 16:52 Highways wrote: That was one of the best movies I've ever seen. Will definitely watch it for a second when its out on bluray.
Can someone clarify these?
1. Why does the totem never stop spinning in a dream? What is the logic behind this?
2. What is the reason that the levels need to be a maze?
The maze thing was addressed in the film, I believe it's so that only the architect knows the true layout of the dream and the subconcious projections of the other dreamers that populate the dream will have a harder time navigating through it when the shit hits the fan.
Yer they did explain it like this but it had zero effect whatsoever?
also repeating my other question: Why doesn't the no-gravity thing go on in lair 3?
Was wrong, Gordon-Levitt's mind was in a state of free-fall in the first layer hench the anti-gravity like in the second layer (which he was hosting) then the 3rd layer wasn't being affected since it was Eames (Tom Hardy) whom was hosting the 3rd layer and was sleeping soundly
No, the 3rd dream creator's body in the 2nd dream was without gravity just like Levitt's body was in the 1st layer. Why does it affect only the latter.
Huh? Not really if I understand what your question is. The first layer is the chemist's dream, the second layer Arthur's, and the third Eames'. Since the second level is Arthur's, he is directly affected by the first layer (the car one). When the car is experiencing a free fall, so does Arthur. But the rest of people in the second layer are sleeping and in Eames' third level of dream. Therefore they don't experience the no gravity effect in the third level.
I saw this the other night so I would like to rant on a little on my take on it all, sorry if its been repeated.
> Cobb's reality was actually a layer of dream, the same thing he did to fischer has been done to him. > Cobb is the target and he is the 1 being extracted. > The defense projection are not fisher's, they are in fact Cobb's own defenses trying to stop him from falling in deeper. Only problem is he does not realize it. Fisher has never had extraction training hence the reason Aurthur never found out in his background checks. > Mal is actually Cobb's Totem, Cobb distinguishes when his dreaming whenever Mal appears, once he finally believes he has lost Mal, he has lost his concept of reality and finally lets his guards down. > The 'secret' they are trying to extract from Cobb is actually his children's face/identify and who is extracting it? His father. Hence the final scene where Cobb finally believes everything is right and fine and lets his guards down to reveal his children's face and the only person there is his father, the old man finally gets what he was after.
On July 27 2010 22:31 fearus wrote: I saw this the other night so I would like to rant on a little on my take on it all, sorry if its been repeated.
> Cobb's reality was actually a layer of dream, the same thing he did to fischer has been done to him. > Cobb is the target and he is the 1 being extracted. > The defense projection are not fisher's, they are in fact Cobb's own defenses trying to stop him from falling in deeper. Only problem is he does not realize it. Fisher has never had extraction training hence the reason Aurthur never found out in his background checks. > Mal is actually Cobb's Totem, Cobb distinguishes when his dreaming whenever Mal appears, once he finally believes he has lost Mal, he has lost his concept of reality and finally lets his guards down. > The 'secret' they are trying to extract from Cobb is actually his children's face/identify and who is extracting it? His father. Hence the final scene where Cobb finally believes everything is right and fine and lets his guards down to reveal his children's face and the only person there is his father, the old man finally gets what he was after.
Interesting points really. But why does his father want to get that information?
And the movie was fucking great by the way. I'm going to tell my friends who haven't seen it yet to go see it asap! And I'm definitely going to watch it a second time.
I'll give it a 9/10 because I think a 10/10 means absolute perfection, and I don't think any movie will get that from me ever. It's like saying, "no one can ever create a movie better than this".
On July 25 2010 16:52 Highways wrote: That was one of the best movies I've ever seen. Will definitely watch it for a second when its out on bluray.
Can someone clarify these?
1. Why does the totem never stop spinning in a dream? What is the logic behind this?
2. What is the reason that the levels need to be a maze?
The maze thing was addressed in the film, I believe it's so that only the architect knows the true layout of the dream and the subconcious projections of the other dreamers that populate the dream will have a harder time navigating through it when the shit hits the fan.
Yer they did explain it like this but it had zero effect whatsoever?
also repeating my other question: Why doesn't the no-gravity thing go on in lair 3?
This was my biggest problem upon leaving the cinema as well. It's a hierarchy, right?
Also, if your subconcious would like you to stay at some particular level, why doesn't it just drop the totem? You 'learnt' your subconcious to not drop the totem in a dream? What about the die and the bishop? Surely Ariadne had no such training so her totem was useless?
Also, Ariadne was originally not coming along on the mission at all. How did she transfer her 'designs' to the mind of the victim, or how would she have? All people are plugged into 1 dream, but all of them can import their own things (like Leo did). That is, if you know you're in a dream. Had Leo not come along, the mission would have been a piece of cake, right? He could have explained the others what to do with no problem at all.
Awesome movie for the concept, the characters, and the production, but technically I think a lot of things were unclear. And i'm not talking about the ending or anything, i'm totally fine with mindfucks/open endings.
Watched in on IMAX, it was pretty excellent move I think. I definitely enjoyed it very much- and props to TL for this thread, because if I had not seen such wide acclamations from everyone here I would probably have dismissed as another generic action thriller >.> (which in a way it is but still)
I watched this movie again for a second time, still debating on whether it's a dream or not. The kids are def wearing the same clothes, which is just very unrealistic, also his kids were doing the exact same thing (digging for worms or whatever) throughout the entire movie.
Also, the plane just happened to land near where his house was?
I don't know... either way this was an amazing movie.
On July 27 2010 22:31 fearus wrote: I saw this the other night so I would like to rant on a little on my take on it all, sorry if its been repeated.
> Cobb's reality was actually a layer of dream, the same thing he did to fischer has been done to him. > Cobb is the target and he is the 1 being extracted. > The defense projection are not fisher's, they are in fact Cobb's own defenses trying to stop him from falling in deeper. Only problem is he does not realize it. Fisher has never had extraction training hence the reason Aurthur never found out in his background checks. > Mal is actually Cobb's Totem, Cobb distinguishes when his dreaming whenever Mal appears, once he finally believes he has lost Mal, he has lost his concept of reality and finally lets his guards down. > The 'secret' they are trying to extract from Cobb is actually his children's face/identify and who is extracting it? His father. Hence the final scene where Cobb finally believes everything is right and fine and lets his guards down to reveal his children's face and the only person there is his father, the old man finally gets what he was after.
I just saw the movie, and it was good. However, I definitely think its overrated. So many people said that it was mind-blowing but I felt it wasn't really mind-blowing at all. Pretty much everything was explained and the plot was rather linear. If I want to watch a movie about dreams, I'll watch Vanilla Sky.
On July 27 2010 22:31 fearus wrote: I saw this the other night so I would like to rant on a little on my take on it all, sorry if its been repeated.
> Cobb's reality was actually a layer of dream, the same thing he did to fischer has been done to him. > Cobb is the target and he is the 1 being extracted. > The defense projection are not fisher's, they are in fact Cobb's own defenses trying to stop him from falling in deeper. Only problem is he does not realize it. Fisher has never had extraction training hence the reason Aurthur never found out in his background checks. > Mal is actually Cobb's Totem, Cobb distinguishes when his dreaming whenever Mal appears, once he finally believes he has lost Mal, he has lost his concept of reality and finally lets his guards down. > The 'secret' they are trying to extract from Cobb is actually his children's face/identify and who is extracting it? His father. Hence the final scene where Cobb finally believes everything is right and fine and lets his guards down to reveal his children's face and the only person there is his father, the old man finally gets what he was after.
The director left a very subtle but very solid clue that completely damns any of these reality/nonreality theories. In every scene that is in "reality", Cobb is not wearing a ring. In every scenes in "dreams", Cobb is wearing a wedding ring.
The movie was extremely simple and straight forward. There were no tricks with hidden levels of dreams or anything. I honestly think that everyone that are trying to come up with these theories are completely missing the point of the movie.
The movie was good, but it wasn't good for what I thought it would be good at, which is the concept of dreams upon dreams that was supposed to be the central theme of the movie. The whole movie was simply a story of the main character. The entirety of the film and all of its plot devices were simply tools that were used to delve into the repression of the main character and the consequences of neurosis. Each level of dreaming that the characters jumped into wasn't really about jumping deeper into the man that they were pulling their heist on, but rather about delving deeper into Cobb. This becomes painfully obvious early on with the multiple reminders of how jumping into higher levels of dreams will bring out more of Cobb's subconscious, and finally culminates into the highest level of dream jumping being Cobb's ground of being, not the young heir that their job is about. The appearance of Cobb's wife when he dives into the dreams of other persons is representative of how the neurosis of a repressed individual not only harms the self but also the others that have contact. The success of the inception mission primarily shows the successful acceptance and defeat of Cobb's repression, not the successful dream jumping and inserting of an idea and belief into the heir (the heir really just becomes an afterthought and along with it, the whole inception concept).
If the movie's plot and central theme was simply just about the dreams-upon-dreams concept and "inception", the movie would have been boring as when it comes to those concepts they could have been expanded a lot more. The movie wasn't really about those much though. They were simply tools to aid in the actual center of the plot, which was the exploration of Cobb's repression and neurosis.
I wish the movie went much deeper into the dream and inception concepts because the implications can be really intriguing and it's something that grants the director and writers a lot of freedom of creativity. The central theme of the character of Cobb is absolute though, and since the movie chose to focus around Cobb instead of the dream and inception concept it can only be that the inception concept falls short on depth; a little more than two hours is just not enough time to really delve into both the character of Cobb and the inception concept.
Pretty much everything was explained and the plot was rather linear. If I want to watch a movie about dreams, I'll watch Vanilla Sky.
I don't understand how you can complain about everything being explained and then use Vanilla Sky as a counter example. They basically turned to the fourth wall and explain the entire movie, like a sci-fi movie panning to each creature to make sure you know how clever they were being.
I'm probably just mad at that movie for giving me nightmares about cameron diaz.
On July 27 2010 22:31 fearus wrote: I saw this the other night so I would like to rant on a little on my take on it all, sorry if its been repeated.
> Cobb's reality was actually a layer of dream, the same thing he did to fischer has been done to him. > Cobb is the target and he is the 1 being extracted. > The defense projection are not fisher's, they are in fact Cobb's own defenses trying to stop him from falling in deeper. Only problem is he does not realize it. Fisher has never had extraction training hence the reason Aurthur never found out in his background checks. > Mal is actually Cobb's Totem, Cobb distinguishes when his dreaming whenever Mal appears, once he finally believes he has lost Mal, he has lost his concept of reality and finally lets his guards down. > The 'secret' they are trying to extract from Cobb is actually his children's face/identify and who is extracting it? His father. Hence the final scene where Cobb finally believes everything is right and fine and lets his guards down to reveal his children's face and the only person there is his father, the old man finally gets what he was after.
The director left a very subtle but very solid clue that completely damns any of these reality/nonreality theories. In every scene that is in "reality", Cobb is not wearing a ring. In every scenes in "dreams", Cobb is wearing a wedding ring.
The movie was extremely simple and straight forward. There were no tricks with hidden levels of dreams or anything. I honestly think that everyone that are trying to come up with these theories are completely missing the point of the movie.
Using same logic:
In every scene where Cobb sees his children = he was in a dream.
Therefore in the last scene he sees his children = a dream.
I wish the movie went much deeper into the dream and inception concepts because the implications can be really intriguing and it's something that grants the director and writers a lot of freedom of creativity. The central theme of the character of Cobb is absolute though, and since the movie chose to focus around Cobb instead of the dream and inception concept it can only be that the inception concept falls short on depth; a little more than two hours is just not enough time to really delve into Last edit: 2010-07-29 15:28:13 both the character of Cobb and the inception concept
The movie was extremely simple and straight forward. There were no tricks with hidden levels of dreams or anything. I honestly think that everyone that are trying to come up with these theories are completely missing the point of the movie.
Using same logic:
In every scene where Cobb sees his children = he was in a dream.
Therefore in the last scene he sees his children = a dream.
I was a bit disappointed by those 2 things but besides for that the movie was insane! the music, characters and the CG that didnt seem fake at all but blended seamlessly into the larger world just watch the scene at the cafè and watch everything explode again, you will watch in awe especially in IMAX if you are lucky enough
true that the "depth" was fairly see-through, but there was so much 'candy' that wasn't just sugar water, there was nougat, butterscotch, taffy, and the most creamy and delicious caramels... sometimes thats all you need to be happy everyone who hates on this movie is just wasting their time, you can never argue about candy even a little child knows that, just relax and let your mind drift away...
The movie was extremely simple and straight forward. There were no tricks with hidden levels of dreams or anything. I honestly think that everyone that are trying to come up with these theories are completely missing the point of the movie.
I think the movie works on the simplistic level. But its also fun to "what if" the inconsistencies to ponder if they're just plot holes or hinting at some other interpretation.
On one level the audience is the dreamer being inceptioned. And while movie as dream is not a novel concept, I found this treatment highly entertaining.
EPT
