|
On August 04 2010 21:53 phil.ipp wrote:
seriously you watched a movie 10 times?
no movie ever could get me to watch it ten times ..
I watched each of the original StarWars movies at least 20 times each. Back in its heyday I watched Matrix over 10 times, but that slowed down over time.
Inception? I thought it was a good movie and I watched it a second time because of some stuff I missed, but I don't think it's going to go in my repeated viewing list. To me it was just one big heist flick (albeit the heist is far more complex and sci fi) involving a protagonist with a shattered past trying to find himself again.
|
Kyrgyz Republic1462 Posts
A fun one-time movie, considerably better than the usual visual effect driven crap, but 9.2 on imdb / among the best of all time? I must be dreaming.
|
To everyone whos like "hes in a dream , or hes not"
U got incepted ! :D
|
On November 11 2010 23:17 government delta wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2010 23:10 Shockk wrote:
saying "Nolan failed as a director" simply is wrong.
do i really have to add IMHO to everything? ~_~ because you also dont do that here, so your arguments are looking as solid as mine so yeah we were actually on the exact same level, even if you wouldnt like that. dude dont be a douchebag, everything i say is for my own peace of mind. he just cant direct in my eyes, inception triggered me to boycott everything the guy has ever done and will ever do in film, yes i really felt like the movie is that bad and seeing so many positive reviews just made me have to say something lulz isnt that understandable even if you like the fucking thing
What's it like being so edgy and different from everyone else?
|
the people who didnt like this movie are crazy. I cannot understand how this movie is not your favorite
|
On November 13 2010 12:59 PeT[uK] wrote:
the people who didnt like this movie are crazy. I cannot understand how this movie is not your favorite
Your statement is crazy, but I have to agree with you.
This is the only movie that I truly enjoyed in the last few years.
You see, I am a child at heart, so I want to see awesome actions and wild things when I watch movies. However, my stupid brain has grown up and seen too many movies, so I get bored by predictable plot lines and uninteresting dialogues.
This movie, however, satisfied my boyish desire AND some intellectual stimulation.
|
On November 11 2010 23:16 Shauni wrote:
The categorization a movie for thinkers is something that entered the minds of Inception-fans, wanting to believe that this movie somehow demands more thought process than Armageddon. While it is true that you can interpret the dream-levels, reality and the movie in general in various ways, it doesn't serve any higher purpose than relating them back to the film itself. It's similar to using plot-turn devices, the audience feel that they have to be aware and conscious to appreciate the movie, but ultimately it doesn't serve any other purpose than keeping the audience entertained. By the previous-to-Inception categorization, a movie for thinkers was not anything like that at all. A movie that 'made you think' was when you could openly relate it back to your reality, direction and purpose in life, without the movie judging or determining the audience. Hollywood blockbuster cinema is a clear polar opposite.
Shauni at his best (must be tough living in his world).
You don't even need a great imagination to "relate it back to your reality"; this movie sent shivers down my spine while I was watching it thinking about how much it relates to my anxiety disorder. An idea was planted, it is deep in your subconsciousness and it doesn't go away. It grows bigger with time. People with post-traumatic experience that are unable to perform certain tasks (because their mind tries to block out something from before), people with different fears deeply rooted in their past, people with situational anxiety (afraid of driving, heights, crowds) that used to be normal - all those can relate. You don't have to be a genius to connect these dots in your imagination.
The whole concept of planting an idea in someones mind directly relates to hypnosis, where you pass different layers of ones consciousness and memory in order to access something that is not accessible to the patient himself. This movie was great, especially considering it was meant to be an action flick packed with shooting scenes and explosions. It is almost as impressive as Matrix was for its time.
I love how Shauni posted a useless Tarkovski quote. What exactly does it do for this discussion? In fact you can quote him all you want, in the end Tarkovski is just a mere artist with another opinion. "Art exists because this world is not perfect. Art would be useless if this world was perfect because we'd live in harmony instead of seeking it'" - no. Art doesn't necessarily seek harmony, more often than not it doesn't. If this world was perfect art would seek imperfection and become destructive simply because art doesn't require a purpose of being "useful" in order to exist.
|
Just saw it for the first time. That top ("totem") is sooo dropping I can tell.
My only question is why couldn't Leonardo Di Caprio just go into Mal's mind again and reverse what he had done in terms of start the top spinning (in her little dream safe). But I suppose once they were back in reality that landscape was no longer accessible.
I really enjoyed it. The only problem is that if Leo was shaping his own dream, the totem would be useless because he could just make it drop even if its a dream since he is the creator.
|
The movie was solid but I think it is getting way too much praise.
It reminds me of when the matrix came out....
I think south park summed it up nicely.
To me movies like inception are what I call "light weight fluff" my definition probably being a lot different than most. It's a movie you kick back and watch, but you are fully aware the whole time it is trying too hard to seem "complex".
In the end it is worth the price of admission, but it is not some epic movie that is going to leave some major impression on me.
|
On November 11 2010 23:53 BisuDagger wrote:
Just saw winception! That was awesome!
You didn't by chance see it at UNCW, did you?
|
in all the megahit movie threads there are so many vehemently expressing their elite tastes in disdain for the movie
i dont think they get it (im not talking about the concept of inception)
|
i thought this movie was freakin awesom
|
On November 13 2010 13:46 News wrote:Show nested quote +On November 11 2010 23:16 Shauni wrote:
The categorization a movie for thinkers is something that entered the minds of Inception-fans, wanting to believe that this movie somehow demands more thought process than Armageddon. While it is true that you can interpret the dream-levels, reality and the movie in general in various ways, it doesn't serve any higher purpose than relating them back to the film itself. It's similar to using plot-turn devices, the audience feel that they have to be aware and conscious to appreciate the movie, but ultimately it doesn't serve any other purpose than keeping the audience entertained. By the previous-to-Inception categorization, a movie for thinkers was not anything like that at all. A movie that 'made you think' was when you could openly relate it back to your reality, direction and purpose in life, without the movie judging or determining the audience. Hollywood blockbuster cinema is a clear polar opposite. Shauni at his best (must be tough living in his world). You don't even need a great imagination to "relate it back to your reality"; this movie sent shivers down my spine while I was watching it thinking about how much it relates to my anxiety disorder. An idea was planted, it is deep in your subconsciousness and it doesn't go away. It grows bigger with time. People with post-traumatic experience that are unable to perform certain tasks (because their mind tries to block out something from before), people with different fears deeply rooted in their past, people with situational anxiety (afraid of driving, heights, crowds) that used to be normal - all those can relate. You don't have to be a genius to connect these dots in your imagination. The whole concept of planting an idea in someones mind directly relates to hypnosis, where you pass different layers of ones consciousness and memory in order to access something that is not accessible to the patient himself. This movie was great, especially considering it was meant to be an action flick packed with shooting scenes and explosions. It is almost as impressive as Matrix was for its time. I love how Shauni posted a useless Tarkovski quote. What exactly does it do for this discussion? In fact you can quote him all you want, in the end Tarkovski is just a mere artist with another opinion. "Art exists because this world is not perfect. Art would be useless if this world was perfect because we'd live in harmony instead of seeking it'" - no. Art doesn't necessarily seek harmony, more often than not it doesn't. If this world was perfect art would seek imperfection and become destructive simply because art doesn't require a purpose of being "useful" in order to exist.
You can relate any movie to real life if you try hard enough and obviously each human being has his own way of interpreting a movie. I can't say your experience is wrong but since the movie is quite shallow in both character and dialogue-department, it isn't what most people would define a thought-provoking movie in any way. Even the most die-hard fans aren't delusional enough to categorize it like that because even if it's possible, there are many movies which doesn't do this poor of a job portraying fear and subconsciousness. The first objective is to entertain, which was the same for The Matrix as well, even though that movie used more unique dialogues, references and surrealism to distinguish itself in action-entertainment.
I think you misinterpreted the quote in sheer Tarkovsky-disgust, since your last sentence is correct. The pursuit of happiness and harmony drives us to create things which would not otherwise be possible. The art doesn't need a purpose, it doesn't need to be constructive, it is merely used to display our own imperfection as human beings.
|
On November 13 2010 15:19 ShaperofDreams wrote:
in all the megahit movie threads there are so many vehemently expressing their elite tastes in disdain for the movie
i dont think they get it (im not talking about the concept of inception)
Exactly. The 'coolness' to be different than other people, even if it means you have to deny credit to an excellently done piece of work. The elitist urge; not a healthy thing in extreme doses 
|
On November 14 2010 08:23 mikado wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2010 15:19 ShaperofDreams wrote:
in all the megahit movie threads there are so many vehemently expressing their elite tastes in disdain for the movie
i dont think they get it (im not talking about the concept of inception) Exactly. The 'coolness' to be different than other people, even if it means you have to deny credit to an excellently done piece of work. The elitist urge; not a healthy thing in extreme doses
Nor is the "coolness" people feel by jumping on the bandwagon and hyping the movie like it's some sort of masterpiece that they alone have the privilege of understanding. That's not just as elitist?
Sure, the whole thing could have been a dream in itself, but what significance would that actually have? You could just as easily say that the "real world" in The Matrix could have easily been played out within the Matrix itself, which just goes about as far as making you question how deep the rabbit hole actually goes, but is ultimately inconsequential, much like most of the "deep", "thought-provoking" stuff in Inception. That's not "deep", it's just pretentious.
If there's anything that frustrated me more than all of the extraneous conceptual nonsense they spewed, it was the heavy reliance on shooting sequences and outlandish special effects (near action-movie levels) to move the story along and keep the viewer engaged. It really just cheapened the movie and made it feel like it had no idea what direction it was trying to go.
I'll go ahead and admit that despite all these things I found this movie much more enjoyable than some other "classic masterpiece" movies like The Godfather (a dreadful movie that people hype to death) so perhaps it may deserve that status, but I've definitely seen better movies. Chalk it up to personal taste or go on with the typical "You just aren't smart enough to understand how awesome it is." argument, but I don't think "elitist" describes me or many others that just genuinely weren't impressed.
|
I agree with Shauni actually. I think people are reacting defensively because his tone is condescending. Christopher Nolan is real good with smoke and mirrors... giving this appearance of depth with little substance beneath it. All the characters just seem like props to hold up the overwrought plot and non stop special effects. If you compare it to The Matrix, the latter is more cartoonish and lighter yet the characters are engaging.
|
The best parts of Inception were the things it hinted at, not the things it talked about.
It dealt with eternity, immortality, and the purpose of life. I feel like a lot of people had most of it go right over their head, including my friends whom I saw it in theatres with. This movie was soooo sooo sooooo much more than a heist movie. My god. The heist and its related special effects is the pretty packaging ontop of a very deep and emotional movie. If you saw inception and didn't think it was intricate and brilliant, odds are it went over your head (though that isnt necessarily the case, obviously, for some with very different opinions. I just feel like most critics of the movie simply didn't catch everything being thrown at them).
|
I think the main issue with Inception was that 2 hours just wasn't enough to really flesh out everything that was set out. This is the reason why so many people were underwhelmed by the movie. The issue that people had wasn't really with the concepts and themes that were presented in the movie but rather that the movie failed to really do a thorough job with everything that it touched upon. I think the movie could have been incredibly better but it would have had to be a lot longer and perhaps the directer didn't want to make a 3+ hour movie.
|
On November 13 2010 14:49 robertdinh wrote:
The movie was solid but I think it is getting way too much praise.
It reminds me of when the matrix came out....
I think south park summed it up nicely.
To me movies like inception are what I call "light weight fluff" my definition probably being a lot different than most. It's a movie you kick back and watch, but you are fully aware the whole time it is trying too hard to seem "complex".
In the end it is worth the price of admission, but it is not some epic movie that is going to leave some major impression on me.
The Matrix is The Movie (yes with capital letters) that defined the 90ies.
|
On November 14 2010 10:39 SyyRaaaN wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2010 14:49 robertdinh wrote:
The movie was solid but I think it is getting way too much praise.
It reminds me of when the matrix came out....
I think south park summed it up nicely.
To me movies like inception are what I call "light weight fluff" my definition probably being a lot different than most. It's a movie you kick back and watch, but you are fully aware the whole time it is trying too hard to seem "complex".
In the end it is worth the price of admission, but it is not some epic movie that is going to leave some major impression on me. The Matrix is The Movie (yes with capital letters) that defined the 90ies.
Terminator 2... Don't even... -_-
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
