Inception - How freakin weird and secretive is this movie

  • Thread starter Thread starter brinks1123
  • Start date Start date
Did they? I thought the lead character had pretty much run his arc and there wasn't much more to say about him. His not looking at the totem shows he's now happy with whatever reality he's ended up in.

I could see a spin-off series with different characters using similar technology. Although I'm seeing it as a bit like early Dollhouse episodes; tailored, exciting but safe dreams for rich people.

But the problem with dreams is that they raise the issue of what's real and what's not, and once you've explored that - as Inception did - what more is there to say? Even if you explore other areas it's going to be the elephant in the room. Inception puts the sequence of "dreaming about waking up" at the start partly just to get it out there, rather than pretend its novel.

But maybe this is why I'm not a writer.
 
Yes the two events contradicted each other.

I guess the rules are that the projections - eg the security people - can only be summoned by the person who's subconcious is filling the dream world they're in. If you're not that person you can't summon folks to your aid but you can think up a gun. It's still a fun line brining levity to an otherwise intense film..
 
Where indeed, but you could do a Google and see what turns up.



A silly, broad assumption, no? And why is it bizarre to bracket LIT and Inception together? Two films giving the impression of being more substantial than they actually are, and perhaps knowingly tailored that way (yes, a bit cynical, I know). That's all I was touching on.

I didn't actually compare them and I didn't say Brainstorm was about dreams either. I was reminded of Brainstorm because both films use a science fiction concept/narrative to explore and affect emotional terrain. Inception brought this to mind, nothing more. Brainstorm gelled better, btw.
 
Agreed.

I really don't get the whole Bond comparison thing. If anything it was more reminiscent of scenes from 'Cliffhanger', although only barely. Never once did i think "where's Roger Moore going to come from?". I think some people are just trying to find reasons to dislike the film now it's become so popular, regardless of how thin the complaint is.
 
Anyone seen it twice? I am planning on seeing it again.

I love the soundtrack as well. Hans Zimmer did a really good theme to this. I am thinking of buying the soundtrack CD.
 
finally saw it, thought it was brilliant, best sci fi movie ive seen in a long time, much better than other big blockbusters like star trek etc. Ranks up there with blade runner and the like for me.

One thing i wasnt understanding was how Mal was in fischers dreams? How was cobb's memories entering into his dreams? just because he was there?
 
Or just tosses it a bad review without seeing it, as he clearly did with Toy Story 3. Idiot couldn't even get basic plot details right.
 
I saw the film last night. It is quite complicated(and I'm not quite sure that I've got it all yet). At the highest level, it's about people going into other people's minRAB to steal information via their dreams. Then, whilst in the dream, going into another dream. This actually goes down to four levels.
Leonardo's character has some memories that he's trying to suppress and a disturbing his ability to infiltrate other people's dreams.

What it basically hinges on is if real life is a dream or vice versa. And this is what the last scene hinges on...

If anyone can shed any further light on the plot then please let us all know.
 
So the casting was VERY VERY lazy?

I think saying Di Caprio was poor is a bit over the top, he played a solid lead role in my opinion and conveyed all the emotions necessary, how exactly was he poor? Tom Hardy was good as usual but saying he acted him off the screen is daft, Hardy was effective but he didn
 
One trailer came out months ago, this has been one of my must seen films of next year since! can't wait. Shutter Island also should be good, based on a fantastic book.

Speaking of books, when I clicked on the link for that poster, as soon as I saw it I thought of The Raw Shark Texts, similar direction.
 
Wern't they supposed to be in some foreign/middle eastern country that have buildings built in all sorts of shapes and sizes. It's quite possible that there is a small gap between two buildings that you could squeeze through. I don't think think that was anything to do with being in a dream.
 
SounRAB like where you are is a PROPER dark place.

Dont just sit on your throne of elitism and tell me to do my own research. I've done my own research. Clearly your are more enlightened. What's wrong with spreading some of the knowledge? Make us sheep wake up. Help us.

I threw some suggestions out there. Fire me back some of yours.
 
Literally on the edge of my seat the entire time. You literally have no idea how it is going to pan out, havent experienced that in a long while. That may actually reducde your enjoyability of it, which makes it ever so slightly less than perfect, you can never just sit back and enjoy the visuals because the entire time your sooo tense, but its an imperfections i can deal with, Ill see it again to enjoy the visuals. but everyone was great in it, and the ending is perfect and you'll definately be talking about it afterwarRAB!
 
Thinking Nolan is nearly as good as, as good as, or better than Kubrick isn't the concern. That's purely down to taste, and how you merit both. The foolishness is in comparing them with regarRAB to the 'new Kubrick' tag that emerged with Inception's release. It suggests they, as artists, occupy similar space, something I much more disagree with than agree with. It is, indeed, very daft, especially when you consider Nolan's creative arc is still being formed, as you rightly point out.

Admittedly, much of Nolan's work does have a clinical, Kubrick-like detatched feel to it (see also Michael Mann, and to a degree David Fincher), but that's pure surface stuff - the likeness, to me, doesn't stretch much further. There's more to chew on contemplating their differences, frankly. Kubrick opted for clear, almost plodding narratives of a slower tempo, but he kept you spellbound with it. Nolan is generally more fleet-footed, and favours labyrinthine plotting, and so on and so forth.

I understand Nolan's next film is Batman 3. You couldn't picture Stan doing that. Or could you?
 
But in that particular scene I mentioned Fischer is handcuffed to a generator or similar. He's not actually in the same room as the guys firing. So it wouldn't matter what they did because he wouldn't see it and thus it wouldn't affect his reality.

Ok the nuke was an extreme example as the explosion would rock the building and impact on Fischer but the point is you could use whatever you wanted; crossbow, lazer rifle, an angry peregrine falcon...

When Fischer and the others were sleeping in the hotel room, why would the bloke protecting them have to remain within the 'boundaries' of Fischer's dream? He's technically not in it because he's asleep.
 
That's a great price. Though there aren't any Cineworld's where I live.

Yeah, the only food/drink item I buy at my cinema is their chips. They are actually chips (as oppose to fries) and only cost
 
Back
Top