'Inception' Mega Thread *SPOILERS FROM POST 292 ONWARDS*

Renn

Well the guy was on about post-Matrix period so...

speedboatchase

TheInquisitor wrote: »

I think thats how the movie will go down. If you get it you'll think its amazing , if you don't pay attention or are just plain slow it wont make any sense.

That's not true at all, and it's that irritatingly condescending tone I've noticed from people in the last few days. I paid full attention, 'got' the movie - and I thought was alright, but not brilliant. Plenty of reviewers felt the same.

Renn

If you get it Haha, brilliant. It ain't that 'deep' at all in fairness.

WesternNight

Renn wrote: »

If you get it Haha, brilliant. It ain't that 'deep' at all in fairness.

It needn't be deep. Then you try to explain any part that didn't quite fit or make sense at the time and you can come up with loads of different theories and it can basically be as deep as you want it to be

Quazzie

Ok I started to read through this thread but the spoilers annoyed me and its also a massive thread so apologies if some of these question/points were raised already.

A few theories that I thought could be possible.

1. The whole thing is a dream and Ariadne is a projection of Cobb's inner self. The architect unspoiled by all of the guilt. This is why Ariadne was always trying to get Cobb to overcome his guilt and banish Mal to the past. Araidne was the person who Cobb was afraid to be again.

2. When Cobb tries Yusuf's sedative to see how deep he can go with it, and he has a really vivid dream of his wife, he snaps out of it and goes to the bathroom, where he tries to spin the totem but never does because he drops it. What if everything after that is still a dream. We never see the totem drop from that point on.

3. A few people earlier were saying that Saito aged 50 years or so while Cobb didn't because he got there first, but thats not true. Cobb went into limbo before Saito did so he should've aged more. Also at the begining Cobb wakes up on the beacj which is what happens when you enter limbo, so Cobb must've left limbo and then gone back in again after Saito thus explaining the beach and Saito being older.

Skinfull

Inception - 1/5 :mad:

Boring, bland, predictable and not a moment of thought put into the story. Lazy half assed characters, no chemistry, and so many plot holes it was embarrassing. Repetitive inane dialogue that seemingly came from a cookie cutter machine that stopped any thoughts from forming in the audience's mind.
1 point for the zero-g fight scene (don't call spoilers on me that was in the trailer) which actually made no sense when earlier

Eames had "dreamt" up a grenade launcher to blow up the transformer...why didn't he just dream up a gun instead of fighting for the one that was there?

Shame on you Nolan for spoon feeding us.

Memnoch

I thought it was brilliant, ironic and beautiful. There is such a powerful symmetry to it, and to the way the story mirrors itself that it really blew me away and I'm sure will do so even more when I go to see it a second time.

Here's what I believe the "real" story is.

Almost everything we see in the movie actually happened. I.E. Cobb did cause his wife's death and WAS forced to flee from the U.S. He spent years doing jobs as an "idea thief," until the incident where Saito recruits him. And the mission to plant an inception in Fisher was real, but in that mission Saito get's injured and dies in the dream thus going into limbo (as we see at the end in the frozen military base).

His death means that he is stuck in limbo forever and so cannot fulfill his promise to Cobb to reunite him with his children. Since even if he wakes from it he won't be able to distinguish reality from dream. And so Saito still within his dream performs an Inception on Cobb.

The start of the inception is the start of the movie. Where Cobb lands at the beach in Saito's house.

The inception is that Cobb manages to save Saito, they both wake up in the plane together and Saito makes the call that reunites Cobb with his children.

But the idea cannot be planted, it must come from Cobb himself. At the heart of this lies Cobb's guilt over his wife's death. This is the "lure," or the idea to make Cobb take the inception, just like the will in the safe was for Fisher.

In the end, just like Fisher, he choses reconciliation. i.e. with his children, over the reality that when he wakes up he will end up in jail for the rest of his life.

The great irony of the story is that in order to save his wife, Cobb planted an inception in her mind that her reality was a dream, this idea ended up killing her. And for Cobb to get over the guilt of what he did, he has to be convinced that his dream was a reality. i.e. what was his wife's prison turned out to be his nirvana. The same thing that destroyed his wife was used to save him. The story also touches very deeply on the idea of ignorance = bliss and why we so often conceal the truth from ourselves.

I really can't wait to see this movie again because almost every single piece of dialogue has a completely different meaning once you "get" the story.

People can feel free to call me condescending, but I don't see how you can "get" the story and not be blown away, and the only conclusion I can draw is that these people don't really "get" the story to begin with, they only think they do.

Memnoch

Skinfull wrote: »

Inception - 1/5 :mad:

Boring, bland, predictable and not a moment of thought put into the story. Lazy half assed characters, no chemistry, and so many plot holes it was embarrassing. Repetitive inane dialogue that seemingly came from a cookie cutter machine that stopped any thoughts from forming in the audience's mind.
1 point for the zero-g fight scene (don't call spoilers on me that was in the trailer) which actually made no sense when earlier

Eames had "dreamt" up a grenade launcher to blow up the transformer...why didn't he just dream up a gun instead of fighting for the one that was there?

Shame on you Nolan for spoon feeding us.

Sorry but there were no plot holes. Everything fits.

Renn

Even the van/hotel gravity thingy not making any difference to the snow scene?

krudler

Skinfull wrote: »

Inception - 1/5 :mad:

Boring, bland, predictable and not a moment of thought put into the story. Lazy half assed characters, no chemistry, and so many plot holes it was embarrassing. Repetitive inane dialogue that seemingly came from a cookie cutter machine that stopped any thoughts from forming in the audience's mind.
1 point for the zero-g fight scene (don't call spoilers on me that was in the trailer) which actually made no sense when earlier

Eames had "dreamt" up a grenade launcher to blow up the transformer...why didn't he just dream up a gun instead of fighting for the one that was there?

Shame on you Nolan for spoon feeding us.

Lol, angry backlash fail.

Eirebear

Memnoch wrote: »

Sorry but there were no plot holes. Everything fits.

Im still struggling with why the

Van crashing and rolling down a hill doesnt constitute a "Kick"

Memnoch

Renn wrote: »

Even the van/hotel gravity thingy not making any difference to the snow scene?

I don't remember the exact timing of it, i.e. the gravity shift. I'd have to watch the movie again to be sure.

My recollection is that they were weightless in the hotel (which is why they missed the first kick). And so would not feel the effect of gravity shifts in the layer below (i.e. the snow). Which is why the dude in the hotel had to tie them together and get them in a lift to make the "kick" happen, so that they WOULD feel the effect of the gravity shift and wake up.

krudler

Renn wrote: »

Even the van/hotel gravity thingy not making any difference to the snow scene?

I think it was only the initial underlayer of the dream that the outside one would affect, i.e if the plane had hit turbulence or something, then the van chase would be affected. the van chase affects the hotel, the hotel affects the snow scene etc etc. I'm going to see it again tomorrow night must keep an eye out for that.

Memnoch

Eirebear wrote: »

Im still struggling with why the

Van crashing and rolling down a hill doesnt constitute a "Kick"

I think because

a kick is to do with the very specific sensation of falling

Though it could be argued that Nolan just decided to cheat a little for the sake of the action scene. Which happens a lot more in films than you might guess.

Skinfull

Memnoch wrote: »

Sorry but there were no plot holes. Everything fits.

Plot hole 1:

as mentioned in my previous post, when Eames dreamt up the grenade launcher thing to blow up the transformer why was there any fear or lack of weaponry in the rest of the dreamscapes.

Plot Hole 2:

"When you die you wake up", yet in the 3rd dream level Saito and Fisher both died and were found in dream level 4 instead of going back to the 2nd level hotel dream

Plot Hole 3:

Physics fail...they shows us how the users in the dream can change and adapt to the physics when the two of them stepped onto the 90degree angle road..and yet in other dreams they were victims of gravity like normal.

Though is can be lazily explained by peoples dreams being different.

...that's just a few gaping plot holes.

Thought Ariadne was the worst character and I hope Ellen Page was looking at Nolan with disdain throughout filming for making her ask the "audience" questions that helped spoon feed our obvious idiocy! :mad:

maquiladora

I never understand the need to try and find "plot holes" in films thesedays. I mean, going to see a movie, a sci-fi with fantastical elements like Inception for example, is an escape from our world for a couple of hours. A chance to live in the imagination and mind of the writer/director.

It's not a news report or an exam answer sheet. Why not just enjoy the experience instead of trying to look at it from the point of view of cold hard logic?

Is an abstract painting that doesn't show realistic perspective ridiculed for not looking logical?

I wonder were people rushing home to discuss plot holes in Casablanca and Lawrence of Arabia back in the day.

*sigh*

speedboatchase

maquiladora wrote: »

I never understand the need to try and find "plot holes" in films thesedays. I mean, going to see a movie, a sci-fi with fantastical elements like Inception for example, is an escape from our world for a couple of hours. A chance to live in the imagination and mind of the writer/director.

It's not a news report or an exam answer sheet. Why not just enjoy the experience instead of trying to look at it from the point of view of cold hard logic?

Is an abstract painting that doesn't show realistic perspective ridiculed for not looking logical?

I wonder were people rushing home to discuss plot holes in Casablanca and Lawrence of Arabia back in the day.

*sigh*

In fairness, he was responding to somebody saying there were no plot holes and offered 3 perfectly valid ones

Renn

Ha, we're not allowed criticise movies these days? Look, he's obviously put a lot of thought into writing this and has probably tried his very best to make it all fit or whatever, so it's perfectly normal for people to question some of the things they see in front of them. That's what cinema is all about.

Memnoch

Skinfull wrote: »

Plot hole 1:

as mentioned in my previous post, when Eames dreamt up the grenade launcher thing to blow up the transformer why was there any fear or lack of weaponry in the rest of the dreamscapes.

Well

Someone does say earlier that the character fighting in the hotel room has no sense of imagination. So this might just be a manifestation of that. Alternatively it might have to do with the person who is dreaming. Only the dreamer can create within the dream, and since everyone but one person was going a level down that wasn't an option for the person left behind

On the other hand it could also be that Nolan was cheating to keep the action scenes grounded and realistic.

TBH tiny discrepancies like this don't bother me and I never get why people get so hung up on little details but I'll keep an eye out on the 2nd viewing for this.

Plot Hole 2:

"When you die you wake up", yet in the 3rd dream level Saito and Fisher both died and were found in dream level 4 instead of going back to the 2nd level hotel dream

This was explained in the movie.

If sedation is used death in the dream can result in limbo rather than waking. And they were using sedation on fisher

Plot Hole 3:

Physics fail...they shows us how the users in the dream can change and adapt to the physics when the two of them stepped onto the 90degree angle road..and yet in other dreams they were victims of gravity like normal.

Though is can be lazily explained by peoples dreams being different.

Actually it's not about dreams being different and was quite deliberate.

In the 90 degree road Ariadne was deliberately manipulating the physics and messing with them in order to experiment. In the Fisher inception they had to keep the physics as realistic as possible so that his subconscious didn't realise he was dreaming. I could spell this out in more detail but this is enough of an explanation really

...that's just a few gaping plot holes.

It just seems more to me like you're looking to pick holes where they aren't there. And I'd also echo what maquiladora said above. It's like your trying to prove to yourself how clever you are by looking for the smallest discrepancy and in the process you are inventing some that weren't even there to begin with.

veXual

Skinfull re the plot holes:

Plot Hole One:

Maybe the weakest one but didn't Eames have the special ability to disguise himself that no-one else had thus meaning he can affect other peoples dreams i.e. produce the Grenade Launcher himself, thats my take on it anyway :pac:

Plot Hole Two:

When the were that far in i.e. 3rd level it was explained that if they died there was no guarantee they would wake up and would instead end up in limbo because they were that far gone

Plot Hole Three:

The whole 90 degree thing was created by the architect. However if you continue to do this people within the dream will notice and attempt to attack you (can't remember what they were specifically called). They had to keep ordinary gravity in the following dreams as Fischer was involved and would become suspicious because his sub-conscious had been trained to fight off attack.

Beaten to it.....

Skinfull

Memnoch wrote: »

Well

Someone does say earlier that the character fighting in the hotel room has no sense of imagination. So this might just be a manifestation of that. Alternatively it might have to do with the person who is dreaming.Only the dreamer can create within the dream, and since everyone but one person was going a level down that wasn't an option for the person left behind

On the other hand it could also be that Nolan was cheating to keep the action scenes grounded and realistic.

TBH tiny discrepancies like this don't bother me and I never get why people get so hung up on little details but I'll keep an eye out on the 2nd viewing for this.

Doesn't wash as it wasn't Eames who was draming in the "Rainy" level when he dreamt up the grenade launcher.

This was explained in the movie.

If sedation is used death in the dream can result in limbo rather than waking. And they were using sedation on fisher

So another level down was limbo? So how did Ariadne and Cobb get into limbo by falling asleep?

Actually it's not about dreams being different and was quite deliberate.

In the 90 degree road Ariadne was deliberately manipulating the physics and messing with them in order to experiment. In the Fisher inception they had to keep the physics as realistic as possible so that his subconscious didn't realise he was dreaming. I could spell this out in more detail but this is enough of an explanation really

This works, though feels like laziness for the sake of action.

It just seems more to me like you're looking to pick holes where they aren't there.

Swear to god I'm not. Walked in blind to this having only watched the trailer once and was geeking out before the flick! I thought it would be so much better and instead it was bland and boring. The only thought provocation was from the ridiculous dialogue! Who wrote this!!!

*seriously do I still need to mark spoilers, it says in the thread header *spoilers ahead*

Mr. K

Skinfull wrote: »

Plot Hole 2:

"When you die you wake up", yet in the 3rd dream level Saito and Fisher both died and were found in dream level 4 instead of going back to the 2nd level hotel dream

Yusuf's sedative put them in too deep a sleep, only the kick would wake them up. Dying while under the effects of the sedative would send them to limbo.

This is mentioned several times!

Memnoch

Yeah I don't think we need spoilers.

Like I said in a previous post, I thought it was a beautiful and powerful story. And I'm talking about the overall story and the whole irony of what happens to Cobbs, of how the dream he forced his wife out from in order to save her ended up being the place he had to end up in order to get over his guilt of how she died.

The dialogue was genius, because it all has a double meaning, so so many clever touches and hints to what was really going on.

Also you made this claim about how they over-explained things and then you ask questions like the stuff about the 90 degree angle or the limbo, which were clearly explained and defined rules in the story.

veXual

Eirebear wrote: »

Im still struggling with why the

Van crashing and rolling down a hill doesnt constitute a "Kick"

Think they said the first one failed but the impact i.e. the second should work.

opr

Lads you don't need to use spoilers tags. Look at the thread title.

I had to laugh reading those plot holes by Skinfull as its pretty clear he didn't follow the film very closely. Picking holes for the sake of it just shows your only looking for a bit of attention. I am sure plot holes exist but all of the ones you mention were explained in the film.

Opr

Quazzie

If death in Limbo wakes you up why does it take so long?

opr

Quazzie wrote: »

If death in Limbo wakes you up why does it take so long?

This is from an interview with with Dileep Rao (Yusuf) which explains the Limbo state pretty well.

Let's get the easy stuff out of the way first. Can you go over the rules of dreaming?
When you dream normally, you can use a drug to share the dream with other people. You can enter another person's dream. It's just the dream-sharing drug, so if you die in that dream, you just wake up — no problem. It's frightening for a second, but up you come. The problem arises when you want to go deeper. To go deeper, we have to use a much stronger version of the drug, one that my character customizes, that is combined with a very powerful sedative. It's like weights to keep you under when you are scuba diving. But in this situation, if you die in the dream, you go deeper and deeper until you hit limbo.

Limbo is unconstructed dream space, unless one of the dreamers has been there — which in our movie's case, someone has. And while you're in limbo, your brain can be destroyed. Like, you would be in a coma, or you could just leave your mind behind.

Also, you can be in limbo for years and years, subjective limbo time, but in reality only moments have passed.
Yes, a lifetime can go by, because each layer is 10 times dilated by going into a dream within a dream within a dream. Um, within a dream.

Any thoughts on how Cobb and Mal ended up in limbo way back when?
Personal experimentation, to test the limits of the art, and I think that's kind of the interesting and haunting thing about it, is that they stretched their full limits and found a material weakness in the process, and his way of fixing it ended up snapping back up from the benthic depths with her, into reality, and had her utterly flummoxed. She lost her mind, her touch with reality, and she did the unthinkable. Because, remember, she's been dealing with the passage of levels the whole time, so reality just felt like another, since she spent her whole life down there with Leo. They grew old together.

I used to have this dream, or rather, this idea, that I'd just wake up at some point and I would be four years old again. And this life was just one trajectory my life could have gone on. But that's the thing that Mal got messed up by, because she lived so long on the lower level. Like, for me, how could waking up as a four-year-old seem real — jibe with what I've experienced as real? How do you believe in it, right?

Taken from this interview. Obviously he is just giving personal opinion but he seems like a smart guy who would have had more inside knowledge that most about the film.

http://www.nolanfans.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=34&t=2363

Opr

opr

I have seen people go deep but this is just fantastic.

http://chud.com/articles/articles/24477/1/NEVER-WAKE-UP-THE-MEANING-AND-SECRET-OF-INCEPTION/Page1.html

Opr

Renn

Did Nolan not already state that the whole thing is definitely NOT a dream?

Memnoch

I think the film is BOTH it is BOTH dream AND reality.

As in all the events that happened really did happen (except the ending). And within those events is the dream in which Cobb is left stuck at the end.

That is the "inception": i.e. That even though Saito dies in the dream, Cobb is able to bring him back and out of limbo so that he can ring the authorities and Cobb can go home to his kids.

But because Cobb fails in the mission (and we see him trying to find Saito at the beginning) Saito creates the inception to fulfill the promise he made.