|
Just watched it yesterday and re-watched it today testing my parents brand new TV and soundsystem. And...
...the movie is amazing.
1. Special effects: Visually the best movie I have seen this year for sure (maybe even in the last couple of years). Truely amazing.
2. Acting: DiCaprio rarely disappoints and he doesn't disappoint in this movie. He is really an excellent actor and he proves it again. Others also deliver. Overall, I think acting was really good.
3. Plot: Pretty good. I think the whole idea of sharing dreams and using them to affect other people was really great. Props to Nolan for coming with it and developing it into movie.
5. Music: Amazing; seriously, one of the best soundtracks I have ever heard. Music in each scene is carefully chosen and it matches exactly the mood of the each scene. Music and scenes are really combined into one; music without the actual scenes wouldn't be so powerful and scenes without this music would lose most of their value.
4. Shooting/Production: I think movie was shot really well. As mentioned above, music is incorporated into movie extremely well. The camera work is great. It is dynamic but not so much that the spectator loses orientation as in some action movies. Sceneries for the movie are chosen very well.
All in all, definitely one of the best movies I have ever watched. I think the last action movie that has been so well-done was Matrix and for me that's the proper reference point. This is definitely not a philosophical movie and I don't understand people saying that it doesn't do a good job with emotion. For that check Almodovar or Afronsky movies. This is a movie that is suppose to entertain but at the same time keep the spectator focused so one follow what's going on. The fight scenes are there so one can be in a suspense if they manage to synchronize everything to get out of a dream. They are not pointless. And visually they are great.
Finally, this is a science fiction movie; made to entertain. As mentioned above, if you want a movie that makes you wonder about life and carefully analyzes human feelings that's definitely not a movie. But in its own subgenre, it simply unrivalled.
|
On January 05 2011 07:44 Rakanishu2 wrote:Show nested quote + On themes of faith, depression, and suicide, the movie offers a very confused outlook. Characters kill with little consequence to save their peers from dream states, but when the wife commits suicide, convinced her reality isn't real, she is accused of abandoning her kids. Is the lesson here that women are bad at telling apart dream from reality? I can't tell. .
Your post is a gem, I appreciate your opinions on the matter but I think you grossly misinterpreted this segment of the movie. The wife commits suicide in the real world, which had much stronger implications than waking someone up from a dream by shooting them. I don't remember an action scene in the real world in this movie... Was there one? They seemed to be shooting people that were just images from the dreams rather than real people anyway. You can make opinion posts about a movie without this type of evidence anyway, you don't need to explain why you have a certain opinion about a movie, thats the beauty of an opinion... If you choose to try to justify your opinions... Make sure you actually pay attention to the movie.
I understand Mal's suicide occurs in the real world. I guess I should've made my point clearer, which is that at the beginning of the movie and in the end when Cobb rescues Saito by bringing a gun, the implication of murder and suicide are attributed to a fantasy context where those actions have no real value or consequence, whereas in direct contrast Mal's "leap of faith" is judged as immoral, even though her justification, that her reality is fake and her kids are projections, is the same everyone else uses when they kill or abandon people in dream states.
The disparity demands an interpretation of why violence in Mal's case is not okay beyond simply, because it's reality. Why is it not okay to kill people when you are convinced reality is fiction? From a slightly philosophical perspective, Nolan created the world where ordinary values take on completely different meanings or rather have no value at all, his dream states are nihilistic, hence murder and suicide is acceptable and even desired, however upon returning to reality, Nolan suddenly injects the actions of his characters with very ordinary meaning like a pussy. Why not just go all the way? Why even attempt to dramatize the plot with conventional sentiment? It's interesting the way death is portrayed in Inception in how gigantic of a mess it is. I've no idea if Nolan intended anyone to actually interpret his movie, he seems to just make up shit for the fuck of it without considering any of its significance whatsoever. His literary ability is similar to a child who has heard about stuff grownups do like dealing with the loss of a loved one, depression, etc, but has no idea nor can imagine what actually goes on in the heads of those people so he makes up this pseudo philosophical science fiction story and pretends that's how people write literature. The other explanation is he wanted to make science fiction story that appeals to the general American audience who loves sentimental bullshit so he just packages two and two together like designing a piece of fucking furniture except he's bad at the latter. I still enjoyed the movie though it's just slightly disappointing how dumbed down the writing needs to be in order for a film make it as a Hollywood blockbuster.
DiCaprio also needs to stop saying everything with the same serious face.
|
|
On January 05 2011 08:00 MiniRoman wrote: I was driving the other day and this hit me.
SOMEONE EXPLAIN THIS PLOTHOLE.
All the dream levels have diff times, the kid from angels in the outfield's inital cue during the first dream was the music right? He heard music then broadcasted other music to the rest of them in the dreams.
However
If time is distorted like that, then either the person hearing the music in the previous levels where time moves faster SHOULD NOT be able to comprehend the entire song. Either it would go by in a flash or come in broken pieces of however the fuck timetravel works, Either way, 3 minutes of song does not = an hour or whatever the fuck in the snow level from Bond.
This movie was alright and it is very visually impressive but the amount of "brilliance" is lackluster and pretty fucking stupid. It's like if I said 2+2=7 and then made a cool 2 hour movie explaning how it did indeed = 7 by adding in ATVs and snowcommandos my movie would only be entertaining and not mindblowingly brilliant because I just decided to make a universe where whatever the fuck I wanted to do was done.
the way they explained it, it would go very slowly, almost a warble-ly errie sound but they missed the jump, thats why they heard it normally, i guess. lol
likewise in the last part where it went well, obviously the had different cues, lightening from defibb not the music, etc.
dude if you don't like this movie what movies do you like, because your standards are fucking high id probably want to see those.
|
For mind benders the best I can think of would be The Game and Tweleve Monkeys. Donnie Darko's time paradox perplexed me more than Inception. I thought Inception was pretty clear cut and well explained but kinda hollow. Just another business transaction useing a completly fabricated scenario.
I think Hitchhikers Guide To The Galaxy is a better example of how creative an imagined universe can be (and cool). What Dreams May Come was pretty bold I thought how they portrayed heaven. Resevoir Dogs for the climax of the movie. A confusing storyline isn't everything. Character and story development, tension and twists all add to the greatness of movies.
Definitely if u want mind benders the first two I said are my answers and hey just a few I that I think are better than Inception: Snatch, Resevoir Dogs, Pi, The Departed,
|
Oh inception was really easy to follow, but it was still a great action movie, and the plot twists were good enough for me to be me interested all 140 ~ ? mins. i've actually never watched any of those. O:
|
They are both crazy in different ways. 12 Monkeys actually crazy and The Game crazy in a woah sort of way. checkkk em out.
|
On January 05 2011 11:53 zulu_nation8 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2011 07:44 Rakanishu2 wrote: On themes of faith, depression, and suicide, the movie offers a very confused outlook. Characters kill with little consequence to save their peers from dream states, but when the wife commits suicide, convinced her reality isn't real, she is accused of abandoning her kids. Is the lesson here that women are bad at telling apart dream from reality? I can't tell. .
Your post is a gem, I appreciate your opinions on the matter but I think you grossly misinterpreted this segment of the movie. The wife commits suicide in the real world, which had much stronger implications than waking someone up from a dream by shooting them. I don't remember an action scene in the real world in this movie... Was there one? They seemed to be shooting people that were just images from the dreams rather than real people anyway. You can make opinion posts about a movie without this type of evidence anyway, you don't need to explain why you have a certain opinion about a movie, thats the beauty of an opinion... If you choose to try to justify your opinions... Make sure you actually pay attention to the movie. I understand Mal's suicide occurs in the real world. I guess I should've made my point clearer, which is that at the beginning of the movie and in the end when Cobb rescues Saito by bringing a gun, the implication of murder and suicide are attributed to a fantasy context where those actions have no real value or consequence, whereas in direct contrast Mal's "leap of faith" is judged as immoral, even though her justification, that her reality is fake and her kids are projections, is the same everyone else uses when they kill or abandon people in dream states. The disparity demands an interpretation of why violence in Mal's case is not okay beyond simply, because it's reality. Why is it not okay to kill people when you are convinced reality is fiction? From a slightly philosophical perspective, Nolan created the world where ordinary values take on completely different meanings or rather have no value at all, his dream states are nihilistic, hence murder and suicide is acceptable and even desired, however upon returning to reality, Nolan suddenly injects the actions of his characters with very ordinary meaning like a pussy. Why not just go all the way? Why even attempt to dramatize the plot with conventional sentiment? It's interesting the way death is portrayed in Inception in how gigantic of a mess it is. I've no idea if Nolan intended anyone to actually interpret his movie, he seems to just make up shit for the fuck of it without considering any of its significance whatsoever. His literary ability is similar to a child who has heard about stuff grownups do like dealing with the loss of a loved one, depression, etc, but has no idea nor can imagine what actually goes on in the heads of those people so he makes up this pseudo philosophical science fiction story and pretends that's how people write literature. The other explanation is he wanted to make science fiction story that appeals to the general American audience who loves sentimental bullshit so he just packages two and two together like designing a piece of fucking furniture except he's bad at the latter. I still enjoyed the movie though it's just slightly disappointing how dumbed down the writing needs to be in order for a film make it as a Hollywood blockbuster. DiCaprio also needs to stop saying everything with the same serious face.
I don't quite understand your argument here. There's a pretty clear distinction between dreaming of killing somebody and actually killing somebody. Are you implying that the standards by which you live in real life should also apply to your dreams?
|
finally saw this last night, i really wanted to see it in theatres but didnt happen cuz my gf always wanted to see shit like toy story 3 or despicable me.
quite simply one of the greatest movies ever
|
The best movie i watched!
|
Finally saw this thing. I didn't really have huge expectations but I was pleasantly surprised. Really loved the plot in this one.
|
I saw this awhile back, but just saw this video of some kid reviewing Inception and gives it a measly C.
http://tv.gawker.com/5610641/this-kid-is-the-most-annoying-movie-critic-ever
Any opinions on this? I was a bi bothered to be honest.
Here's my review I wrote when I first saw it. Feedback on it would be appreciated :3 Inception
This review may contain spoilers
I just watched a dream. I just watched an idea, like many viewers around me, we just watched a creation of a dream that is inception.
Inception is sexist, it's witty, it's charismatic and the birth of Memento and the Twilight Zone. This is the matrix of the Matrix, of the Matrix of our reality, which, in turn, is the convoluted form of reality.
Inception is only needed to be seen once and only once. Inception breaks all laws and forms of narrative commonly found in cinema and details blurred boundaries to its viewers of what can be perceived, understood and seen. Inception only needs to be seen once between recalling what it is, is the whole aspect of the movie. Do you remember the beginning? Middle and end as vividly as you recall days or hours later after seeing it? This may be just me, but I don't quite recall. Inception is a fleeting dream, an idea planted inside you as you, arbitrarily, are asleep [so to speak]. Go figure: while in the movie, you are calm, the lights are off and everything you see projected in front of you seems real [you know you're watching a movie, just like you know you are dreaming] and you are taken through an adventure, rushed through passion and emotion like a vivid dream you want to wake up, but you want to see it through the end. You can't recall quite where you started and you can't recall quite where you ended, but at that present moment, where it seems like time has slowed down [this part may be anecdotal, but whenever I entered a movie theater and leave, it's always dark and I go: "Huh... dark already?"] all your focus is on one thing and one thing only...
Inception is a love story, an underlying nature a la Chuck Palaniuk. Everything is symbolic in this movie and yet, clash heavily with obnoxiousness. The music was subtle, hidden, but at key moments, it would yell and cover the voices of the actors [I saw it in Imax, so it could be purely just me] where you could barely hear them, much like music would in the dreams during the film. The explanation of paradox illusions like Penrose Stairs? Anyone feel like the narrative and editing was similar? I may be digging too far into this film, but then again, interpretation, the gray area of reality, illusion, projection and the sub-conscious is equally as convoluted as this review may appear.
The acting was superb. Nothing says jackpot like a diverse cast of members representing many nationalities and ethnic groups: Christopher Nolan takes Leonardo DiCaprio, someone who can easily pull of a guilty-minded fellow and slips him with a cool and grown Joseph Gordon-Levitt, a young Ellen Page, Ken Watanabe [a personally favourite of mine] and Cillian Murphy and clashes them in an intricate description and baffling ride of dreams, reality, truth and logic.
Inception is nothing short but superb, meaningful and symbolic beyond our own comprehension. It is sexist, yet truthful and uses everyone to represent the personalities and traits of our mind. Marion Cotillard [Mal] is french actress, much like her character's name which, if direct translated, means evil or bad, harmful or deep. She is Cobb's emotions; the contrary common view of logic and rationality. Emotion [Mal] disregards all understanding to the wind and just devotes itself to a place where nothing changes, so long as it has someone it clings to. Joseph Gordon-Levitt [Arthur] is Cobb's rationality, he dislikes Mal, but knows damn well she is "lovely", she is everything to Cobb, but goes against the nature and intelligent mind. He warns Cobb about her, how she sabotages all ideas and plans; a form of guilt? Maybe she is the conscience of Cobb, a sort of restraint or prevention from proceeding onto something that is forbidden, that is disliked and just to stay with her, together, some place ideal and redundant: Limbo.
Can there be a limbo within the limbo? Quite possibly. Paradox Illusions surely dictates that something can be unknowingly different unless the person falling for the trick comes to reality, or the realization that this is simply a loop. Notice the children never age? Notice how they are doing the exact same thing they did when we first saw them? Their faces are reveal, but how do we know that's not just the final projection, an illusion of reality created to appear as if he's returned from the abyssal lop-sided form of love and death as he finally let's go of his wife to achieve the whole [the children] that is created by the two halves [Cobb and Mal]. The totem doesn't stop and so we wonder if it ever will, or if it should. What would his reality be? A spur of ideas might just be floating through your head, a tangent created in the end by Nolan as the credits roll...
This is so much more to say, but as I write this, I start to forget and things start to blur, the camera work toys with us, intentionally blurring small scenes before kicking us back into action. The action is equally censored by shaky and awkward angles, a la Bourne Identity, a common trick seen a lot in films nowadays.
Overall, this movie is a 10/10 for me. There is literally no complaints. The movie was intentionally long, or time may feel long because so much as happened, you decide.
|
I was very disappointed after watching this movie, cuz it's full of stuff that doesn't make any sense at all. I was really wondering why ppl actually like this Movie so much....
The Plot as a whole didn't make much sense, too much stuff was just totally mindboggingly wrong (okay, it's Sci-Fi, but It annoyed me nonetheless), like time going slower when dreaming, stuff that happens when awake directly affecting the way you dream (like when the car was shaking, the dream-world shook too etc.)
A lot of stuff was just stupid, like the new Architect being smarter then everyone else after a few days of getting thrown in this completely new world and the fact that they went on such a dangerous mission with a newb like this. Why didn't they just simply convinced this dude to sell his fathers company or whatever in the real world? I mean - stuff like that has worked before without going into someone elses dreams... -.-°
There are a bunch of other things that made no sense to me and so far, even the hardcore-fans couldn't answer me properly...
But I guess it's just another Sci-Fi-Movie that makes ppl think that the plot is incredibly good, just because it's so complex that they don't really understand it...
The visuals and directing was pretty awesome though - too bad the story sucked.
|
One huge mindfuck. Although not as much overrated as Avatar is :/
|
+ Show Spoiler +On January 19 2011 23:55 kickinhead wrote: I was very disappointed after watching this movie, cuz it's full of stuff that doesn't make any sense at all. I was really wondering why ppl actually like this Movie so much....
The Plot as a whole didn't make much sense, too much stuff was just totally mindboggingly wrong (okay, it's Sci-Fi, but It annoyed me nonetheless), like time going slower when dreaming, stuff that happens when awake directly affecting the way you dream (like when the car was shaking, the dream-world shook too etc.)
A lot of stuff was just stupid, like the new Architect being smarter then everyone else after a few days of getting thrown in this completely new world and the fact that they went on such a dangerous mission with a newb like this. Why didn't they just simply convinced this dude to sell his fathers company or whatever in the real world? I mean - stuff like that has worked before without going into someone elses dreams... -.-°
There are a bunch of other things that made no sense to me and so far, even the hardcore-fans couldn't answer me properly...
But I guess it's just another Sci-Fi-Movie that makes ppl think that the plot is incredibly good, just because it's so complex that they don't really understand it...
The visuals and directing was pretty awesome though - too bad the story sucked. Hm, is it correct to say something is "wrong" when we're talking about the sci-fi genre here? The "time going slower when dreaming" and real-world-affecting-dream-world notion are just elements that the Nolan chose to use. I mean by that logic, I guess Star Wars is also "wrong" for using light sabers and gigantic space stations that can destroy planets. I suppose you mean some of these story elements feel too contrived, which I can somewhat agree with. The multiple dream layers in the latter half of the movie felt almost ridiculously humorous, but accepting the fact that I was watching an intentionally fictional movie and immersing myself in the sci-fi genre made the movie a great experience.
I mean, dreaming is still a very big mystery in today's world with many unanswered questions. It seems like the perfect topic for a director to get creative with this type of thing. I wouldn't say some of his notions about dreams are far off either. Like the real-world-affecting-dream-world-element doesn't hold even the slightest bit of truth to you? I've had plenty of experiences where someone is talking to me in my dream and when I wake up, a family member or someone was saying those exact words in real life. Or when I was younger and someone in my dream grabbed me and was madly shaking me, it was my family member in real life shaking me awake for school.
I've only seen the movie fully once and bits and pieces a second time, but I don't ever remember the Architect (I'm assuming you mean the girl?) ever being portrayed as smarter than the other characters. There was a scene where she seems to harp on Di Caprio for not telling the others about Mal and the potential dangers of the mission, but that's the only scene where I've ever seen her in a superior position.
Well you asked why couldn't they simply convince Cillian Murphy's character to sell (I believe you mean split?) his father's company instead of going into his dreams. My question is, how would you suggest they do that? How is a group of essentially "nobodies" going persuade the heir of the largest energy company in the world not to monopolize his industry? Sure, you could argue that Ken Watanabe's rich character could fund Di Caprio and his team to somehow infiltrate and get close to Murphy's character and somehow persuade him by "conventional" means to split his father's company, which at that point we are shown that Murphy is portrayed as being distraught at having "disappointed" his father and splitting his father's business is probably the last thing on his mind. Well then I think you've missed the premise entirely. This film is about dreams and dream invasion, or inception as the film calls it.
I'm also curious to what these questions are that you asked these "hardcore" fans. I apologize in advance if my post was too long or if my tone seems too combative. That's not my intent at all; just trying to have a good discussion with fellow TL users. Also, apologies to the people who actually understood the plot entirely if I've made errors in my post and hopefully you can excuse me for not reading the entirety of a 47 page thread.
|
On January 19 2011 23:55 kickinhead wrote:+ Show Spoiler +I was very disappointed after watching this movie, cuz it's full of stuff that doesn't make any sense at all. I was really wondering why ppl actually like this Movie so much....
The Plot as a whole didn't make much sense, too much stuff was just totally mindboggingly wrong (okay, it's Sci-Fi, but It annoyed me nonetheless), like time going slower when dreaming, stuff that happens when awake directly affecting the way you dream (like when the car was shaking, the dream-world shook too etc.)
A lot of stuff was just stupid, like the new Architect being smarter then everyone else after a few days of getting thrown in this completely new world and the fact that they went on such a dangerous mission with a newb like this. Why didn't they just simply convinced this dude to sell his fathers company or whatever in the real world? I mean - stuff like that has worked before without going into someone elses dreams... -.-°
There are a bunch of other things that made no sense to me and so far, even the hardcore-fans couldn't answer me properly...
But I guess it's just another Sci-Fi-Movie that makes ppl think that the plot is incredibly good, just because it's so complex that they don't really understand it...
The visuals and directing was pretty awesome though - too bad the story sucked.
I'd be really curious to know what these questions are that you found unanswered. I personally had no problem putting every little detail together that originally wasn't clear after seeing it a second and third time.
Did you see it more than once? A large portion of this movie was intentionally kept from being elaborated on too much. It gives the movie more of a mind-boggling effect while you watch and a greater replay value.
I'm not understanding the merit of a lot of your concerns. You said, why didn't they convince the guy to break up his fathers empire instead of... make the movie? I mean, come on. It's fiction. You are supposed to let yourself be taken away with what the author builds the movie on.
|
You have to be really stupid to think this movie is really smart.
|
Who exactly was implying that?
And could you be as vague as humanly possible please, I can still almost make a coherent comment toward your post.
|
i think most ppl are like "when i say inception was just another bad action movie ppl will call me stupid so i better say that it was great".
sorry guys, but inception was just another bad action movie. + Show Spoiler +hell, it even had a vin-diesel-snow-mobile scene without vin-diesel!
|
No, I think people are calling you stupid because you're calling it an action movie. It's a science fiction film. If you go into a movie with preconceived expectations, you are just setting yourself up to be disappointed.
|
|
|
|