EPT[Movie] Inception - Page 34
| Forum Index > Media & Entertainment |
|
EPO
Canada341 Posts
| ||
|
toadstool
Australia421 Posts
I defintely think I have a good taste in films, to say that we're 'easily fooled' into liking a movie just because they think that it's genuinely good? It's like a Counter Strike player going into a Starcraft forum and saying "Man you guys are easily fooled by Starcraft 2's awesome graphics, it's all just 1a2a3a protoss LOL, btw I like Atrox and DDR, not any of this sht Blizzard puts out for the masses WOW LOL." See what I'm getting at here? | ||
|
PersonA
Sweden4 Posts
If you want to do a analogy to gaming, something like playing warcraft 2 for the first time after playing a lot of brood war and hearing people praise the intense multiplayer, cool units and awesome controls in warcraft seems closer too me. I mean, warcraft II will still be a good game, but since you are used to "more" your mind will not really be blown. | ||
|
Euphemism
Canada57 Posts
On August 15 2010 10:55 kohkomo wrote: Euphemism Euphemism Euphemism Euphemism! I was reading your post, maybe you can expand for me? You said it is not the viewers job to decide whether (Or determine) he is dreaming or not. But you also end your sentence with "We are." (We are watching to see if it falls or not...) Doesn't that imply that we are 'deciding' 'watching' to see if it falls or not? So it is the viewers choice to make a decision I'm lost Mm. I was on a post movie high while writing that and reading it back right now it doesn't completely make sense to me either. I think the point I was trying to make was this. Regardless of whether you decide that Cobb is dreaming or not, doesn't really 'matter'. The resolution of the movie was mostly about Cobb getting over his guilt and letting his inner (projection) Mal die. There is the question of who was right about this not being the real world, but that was only mostly thrown in at the last moment, and so isn't important. Thus, in the end, Cobb goes away, leaving it spinning, leaving it behind with us who can try to decide what reality is, but it doesn't matter to him. Arguing whether he's still dreaming or not doesn't matter. It's like... you can argue whether there was an actual King Arthur a thousand years back or so. But the impact of 'what is true' is minimal. Personally, I like the Ariadne-as-therapist theory, mutated into the following form: Mal was right, she's outside in the real world, Cobb only reached some form of level 1 dreaming and is in a coma in the real world, dream worlds are actually can be utterly illogical and Cobb's own logical mind restricts his understanding of the dream world and forces it to conform to the nature seen in the movie, but he's not perfect hence the little holes such as lack of gravity on the 3rd level despite kicks working. And as he's managed to resolve his own little issues of guilt, he's now able to wake up from the coma after the ending you see. It's a cute theory that I like, but again, whether that's actually correct or not is irrelevant. P.S. Avatar was a great looking movie, but suffered from having a poor plot and no depth. In comparison, Inception is in no way lacking - good action, good characters, good plot, good reveals. | ||
|
icystorage
Jollibee19343 Posts
| ||
|
howerpower
United States619 Posts
| ||
|
mainerd
United States347 Posts
On August 15 2010 11:09 PersonA wrote: I'm with shauni on this one, Inception was like 2,5/5 or something, I mean come on, there's a Donald Duck comic with a similar plot (the beagle boys invade Scrooge's dreams to steal the combination to his safe) that's 17 years old if you want you can look back a lot further than 20th century examples of similar ideas; the greeks had a god named morpheus who often visited kings and heroes in their dreams, by taking human forms (forger?) and giving them guidance/information (inception?). a more recent example that comes to mind is an episode of the prisoner where patrick mcgoohan is sedated and and his dreams are manipulated so that people who he formerly trusted appear to him in familiar settings to try to get him to reveal a secret. it's a very old idea, one which "paprika" recycled, as well as the comic you posted. the presentation is where people differ, shauni prefers a tripped out animation, others like nolan's action-movie presentation. honestly neither one is presenting ideas that are very new. | ||
|
toadstool
Australia421 Posts
On August 15 2010 11:32 PersonA wrote: I think what shauni is getting at is that for him, the themes and such used in this movie is not new or interesting at all, and when you can see through them what's left is mostly a decent action movie. If you want to do a analogy to gaming, something like playing warcraft 2 for the first time after playing a lot of brood war and hearing people praise the intense multiplayer, cool units and awesome controls in warcraft seems closer too me. I mean, warcraft II will still be a good game, but since you are used to "more" your mind will not really be blown. exactly, and thats his opinion. but he puts in a very condescending and obnoxious way in which he looks down on others because they havnt been watching the movies hes been watching. movies are subjective, just because some people like a movie you dont like doesnt mean that 'theyre fooled by hollywood, i feel sorry for them'. granted, some people over hype the movie, but whats the point of going into the thread and bagging out the movie continuiusly and then insulting people who like the movie over and over? | ||
|
Not_Computer
Canada2277 Posts
Warning SPOILER for the few who haven't watched the movie but are reading this thread. In the Inception storyline/universe: Do the dreamers get tired in the dream world? Do they get hungry and have to eat in their dreams? If they have to eat, do they need to use the facilities? Can they sleep in their dream? If not, so they stay awake for days/weeks/months/years on end? If the dream world is populated by projections of humans, are there animals as well? I haven't seen any pets in the movie, though I may have missed it. In the scene where they're in the garage and the guy is shooting the gunmen on the adjacent rooftop... and the other guy goes "don't be afraid to dream a little bigger" and uses a grenade launcher... ... If they're capable of having bigger/better equipment, how come they don't? At first I thought perhaps it'd alert the projections because the dreamer would realize their equipment didn't fit in... ... but (#1) the projections were already alert of them (though one could argue the equipment was pre-dreamed... but couldn't they pre-dream better equipment in storage in the endgame that they do fight projections?) (#2) If they are kidnapping such a high profile target, in real life, they'd have MUCH better equipment (like a white unmarked van? come on, get a black bullet proof SUV that the mafia would use) Oh shit though, this is a really really good theory: On July 20 2010 08:32 cava wrote: Here is a theory that throws the conventional 5 level thinking as shown above me out the window. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1375666/board/nest/167024711?p=1 | ||
|
Warrior Madness
Canada3791 Posts
I thought it was boring the first 30 minutes but it eventually piqued my interest. I counted many eye roll moments but I still liked it in the end. I think at the end he's dreaming because the scene just cut from one to another so jarringly it seemed almost dreamlike. AND the fact that his kids don't seem to have aged one bit from the way he remembered them in his dreams. Also, where was the grandmother? Not only that but the way in which he woke up in the first place. Every one else was seen waking up from each layer of the dreams seperately except for him. He jumped immediately to the plane scene. Plus he didn't get jolted out of his dream, like everybody else did. How did he wake him and Saito up? By killing each other? And didn't they mention that killing someone that deep into a dream would throw them in a limbo forever? I don't know if it was sloppy writing or if it was intended but certain things definitely hinted that Leonardo DiCaprio was already in a dream within a dream before their mission had even started. Unknown agents chasing him in a fantastic sequence in that city, with Saito just coming in at the nick of time? The fact that he never actually did get to see if he had awoken from the dream induced by the serum he was testing (Because Saito had interrupted him yet again). | ||
|
Kutar_FOX
Korea (South)67 Posts
This movie got so good scores on websites. | ||
|
SwaY-
Dominican Republic463 Posts
Edit: Even if you didnt like the movie you have to admit it was decent :/ Stop hatin' just cause you can. | ||
|
Shauni
4077 Posts
On August 15 2010 11:11 toadstool wrote: The thing that made me angry was that you generalise EVERYONE who likes the movie was 'easily fooled', as if we got conned just because we like the movie. I defintely think I have a good taste in films, to say that we're 'easily fooled' into liking a movie just because they think that it's genuinely good? It's like a Counter Strike player going into a Starcraft forum and saying "Man you guys are easily fooled by Starcraft 2's awesome graphics, it's all just 1a2a3a protoss LOL, btw I like Atrox and DDR, not any of this sht Blizzard puts out for the masses WOW LOL." See what I'm getting at here? The reason why they are easily fooled is because they believe it's genuinely good. But it's impossible for me to convince you otherwise, it's something you have to experience yourself while exploring the medium of cinema. I do not think movies are just entertainment, and I don't think anyone with a taste in movies can say he watches them for entertainment solely. While you were admiring the world turning and the numerous gunfights and explosions I was busy looking for a single hint of substance in the movie. I couldn't find much, and it makes it look like Nolan took the easy directing route and gave the audience what they wanted. There is no passion, there is no enthusiasm, no vision or goal. There's just this bland directing that doesn't dare thread outside the normative areas. And to clarify, I didn't like Paprika in particular either, I just think it's interesting to compare how the big anime studios of Japan execute the same concept to how Hollywood does it. 'I like artsy movies too, 500 days of summer is great!!1 Fuck yeah Zooey!' Should I even take you seriously? | ||
|
Warrior Madness
Canada3791 Posts
![[image loading]](http://thejosevilson.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/biggie.jpg) "It was all a dream..." | ||
|
Scorcher2k
United States802 Posts
On August 15 2010 19:03 Shauni wrote: The reason why they are easily fooled is because they believe it's genuinely good. But it's impossible for me to convince you otherwise, it's something you have to experience yourself while exploring the medium of cinema. I do not think movies are just entertainment, and I don't think anyone with a taste in movies can say he watches them for entertainment solely. While you were admiring the world turning and the numerous gunfights and explosions I was busy looking for a single hint of substance in the movie. I couldn't find much, and it makes it look like Nolan took the easy directing route and gave the audience what they wanted. There is no passion, there is no enthusiasm, no vision or goal. There's just this bland directing that doesn't dare thread outside the normative areas. And to clarify, I didn't like Paprika in particular either, I just think it's interesting to compare how the big anime studios of Japan execute the same concept to how Hollywood does it. 'I like artsy movies too, 500 days of summer is great!!1 Fuck yeah Zooey!' Should I even take you seriously? Seriously? A hollywood movie is made to be entertaining and nothing more. No matter what methods they use to get there that is what it is meant to be. A movie doesn't have to have a goal or some secret moral lesson in it in order to be good. All it has to do is be entertaining for its viewers. BTW, "I couldn't find much, and it makes it look like Nolan took the easy directing route and gave the audience what they wanted." is like the dumbest thing I've heard from an 'elitest' in a long time. | ||
|
mav451
United States1596 Posts
| ||
|
XDawn
Canada4040 Posts
In the end, it is a 'movie'.It's entertainment, not real life. Of course all the common sense stuff is going to be as real as it can get but when it branches off into things that the majority of people don't really know about, of course there are going to be flaws in it. Why? Because it's a movie, it's meant for people to reflect upon after watching it, and also have a good experience coming out of watching it. | ||
|
All Quiet
United States62 Posts
It alos takes Total Recall's final sequence, where the viewer has to decide if the hero is dreaming or not. However, the argument can be made that we are all dreaming, by the movie's definition. I cannot remember how I got here. I can remember back to age four, but no further. IS that a message that they are tryingto send us?  | ||
|
RA
Latvia791 Posts
| ||
|
zizou21
United States3683 Posts
One question: How did Leo get out of Limbo? (when him and his wife got stuck there for delving too deep) | ||
| ||
