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

Nervous Wreck

blue_steel wrote: »

I was responding to a poster who'd suggusted Cobb's kids wern't even played by the same actors at that point in the film. So its far from accepted that Nolan deliberately shot both scenes to look the same.

Y'reckon it was an accident that the scenes were so similar? Giz a break.

me-skywalker

Busi_Girl08 wrote: »

I'm thinking because they never really felt it. They weren't being thrown around or anything, just gently floating.

It's kind f like if you are in a car. It's travelling at a steady speed, it starts accelerating and you feel the effects of that; but once the car continues to accelerate at a certain rate, you don't notice it; it becomes the new "steady rate".

Or something :pac:

I can understand that and probably accept it.

But to add more to the mix I would argue that the environment itself is in rotation/movement and this should directly influence the environment in the 3rd level(snow environment). Since we are already shown the mechanics of that idea already in use with the scene where Cobb first introduces himself to Fischer in the hotel bar, and the building itself is moving since in the first level in the van they are rocking and tumbling....

login1

Watched this film a few days ago thought it was huge meh

I haven't read through the thread but I'm sure you noticed last time you dreamt it was just nonsense.

I don't know what planet or species the actors were portraying but it certainly wasn't humans on earth.

mk6705

I've watched it three times now. It all makes sense, except I can't figure out the physics of the third level. Why when they're on the hospital level don't they get the same gravity effects as above? Can't figure that out. Amazing film though.

bnt

Did I see Inception ... or did I just dream I saw Inception?

Killinator

Adro947 wrote: »

except I can't figure out the physics of the third level. Why when they're on the hospital level don't they get the same gravity effects as above?

My own take on that is that while in the van its Arthur thats draming the hotel dream, hence when hes being thrown around in the van either from it sliding as it turns(when Cobb demonstrates to Fischer that its a dream) or when it crashes(resulting in the corridor fight)
but
the snow dream is Fischer's dream(becasue they tricked him into thinking they were going into Browning's sub-concious), becasue Fischers body isn't being thrown all over the place(hes basically stationary floating in the air and Arthur is very careful when moving them to the lift) there are no effects down in Fischers snow dream, so it dosn't seem to matter that hes in zero gravity becasue from his minds point of view he appears to be all but stationary anyway, given everything is slowed down in a deeper level, the minor movements that the floating bodies make would'nt have a noticable effect,
Or thats how I saw it anyway.:)

I also thought the movie was 10/10.

Edinduberdeen

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

There is alot of confusion how the kicks work. Kicks from above make no sense as Arthur wouold have been pulled from level 2 to level 1 when the van went over the bridge, kicks from below are debatable as there are a few points when people fall in lower levels (during the avalanche) and are not kicked to the level above.

The populer theory is a kick is needed on both the level above and below, but even that raises questions purely by no one ever states this during the film and they had no way to arrange a kick to reality to be in time with a kick from level 1 (in fact the issue is simply getting out of level 1 alltogether raises alot of questions.)

I personnally lean to a kick from below as aside from the avalanche segment it fits best.

I'm pretty sure it's explicitly stated in the film that you need to both die in the dream and be kicked from above to be woken up (from the current level). So Eames rigged the explosives, not as a kick, but to kill them all simultaneously in time for the kick in the hotel (it also worked as a kick for Ariadne and Fischer, who had to die in limbo to get back to the snow fortress thing). The kick in the hotel woke them from the 3rd dream and then killed them in time for the kick from the van hitting the water. There was no kick from the plane however, so they must have lived out the week there, not drawing any attention to themselves to avoid Fischer's security, before waking up when the sedative wore off on the plane.

Edinduberdeen

Sorry, a correction to the above - Fischer's kick back to level 3 is the defibrillator...

phil1nj

Really enjoyed this thread. Some absolutely fantastic theories bouncing around in it.

Have to say that on first viewing, I found the movie to be just ok, won't call it a classic just yet and figure that it will deserve a least one more viewing in the cinema to work out a few of the things I missed first time around. I walked out of it thinking that something was amiss at the end (the cut away with the spinning top confirmed that). I also figured that his kids hadn't aged since he left which adds to the whole "is he or isn't he still dreaming" debate. Regardless, I think with repeated viewings my opinion of the film will change.

Still doesn't take away from the fact that as summer blockbusters go, this one is head and shoulders above all the rest in terms of originality.:)

Benny Lava

I was disappointed with Inception.

It looked great in the ads and the overall idea of placing thoughts into a person's mind by coalescing your dreams with theirs is quite a good one.

However, there were quite a few things that I didn't like about the film:

1. Seeing Leonardo DiCaprio in a film where is character is plagued by a dead wife instantly reminded me of Shutter Island. While I know this couldn't really be avoided by Christopher Nolan, it was just a small thing that kind of annoyed me. The ambiguous ending didn't help get rid of the similarities between the films.

2. The film was too long.

3. The scenes involving the kickers were very drawn out, to the point that they became tedious.

4. There was a lot of time devoted to the characters explaining what goes on during dreams and how inception works. I can accept that some explanation is needed for a complex movie such as this one but maybe there should have been less rules.

I am in a minority of people who aren't in love with this film. Despite my criticism, I think everyone should go to see it. There's a good chance you will love it and it's the type of film you can put your own spin on and debate with your friends about it until the cows come home.

clived2

Benny Lava wrote: »

I was disappointed with Inception.

It looked great in the ads and the overall idea of placing thoughts into a person's mind by coalescing your dreams with theirs is quite a good one.

However, there were quite a few things that I didn't like about the film:

1. Seeing Leonardo DiCaprio in a film where is character is plagued by a dead wife instantly reminded me of Shutter Island. While I know this couldn't really be avoided by Christopher Nolan, it was just a small thing that kind of annoyed me. The ambiguous ending didn't help get rid of the similarities between the films.
I cant be sure, however if felt as if their were alot of movie references,
throughout the whole film, maybe this could insinuate a deeper meaning,

2. The film was too long.
The snow scene was very drawn out to me, apart from that, anything that questions the mind can never be long enough

3. The scenes involving the kickers were very drawn out, to the point that they became tedious.
same as above


4. There was a lot of time devoted to the characters explaining what goes on during dreams and how inception works. I can accept that some explanation is needed for a complex movie such as this one but maybe there should have been less rules.
these rules are required to test your theories to inception protocol

I am in a minority of people who aren't in love with this film. Despite my criticism, I think everyone should go to see it. There's a good chance you will love it and it's the type of film you can put your own spin on and debate with your friends about it until the cows come home.

,

blue_steel

Nervous Wreck wrote: »

Y'reckon it was an accident that the scenes were so similar? Giz a break.

No I don't. I think he was dreaming.

login1

Benny Lava wrote: »

I am in a minority of people who aren't in love with this film

You are in the majority , it's just that those who love the film are more vocal, most who see it and say meh just forget about it, the fanboys will always shout and scream.

L'prof

login1 wrote: »

You are in the majority , it's just that those who love the film are more vocal, most who see it and say meh just forget about it, the fanboys will always shout and scream.

I think you're very wrong to be honest. The majority of people I've spoken to have liked-loved it, not very many nay-sayers to be found at all!

login1

L'prof wrote: »

I think you're very wrong to be honest. The majority of people I've spoken to have liked-loved it, not very many nay-sayers to be found at all!

I liked it myself and I wouldn't shout it down in any way, it was fun and enjoyable and definately one of the better flics i've seen recently and i go every week,

but just not one that I'd still be thinking about 7 days later

L'prof

login1 wrote: »

I liked it myself and I wouldn't shout it down in any way, it was fun and enjoyable and definately one of the better flics i've seen recently and i go every week,

but just not one that I'd still be thinking about 7 days later

I've been thinking about it ever since I've seen it...not quite 7 days yet, but not much less. I can't wait to see it again/buy it on bluray. While I don't think it's Nolan's best film, it's still very good.

FrostyJack

Average film at best, where was the intelligence and the mind funk I was told of? Colour by numbers film, which was more like Oceans Eleven than the Matrix. I dodged all trailers and conversation of it, all I knew is it was to do with dreams and will blow my mind, yet 10 minutes in I knew what was going to happen in the end. 7 out of 10 is generous. Very disappointed.

humanji

I honestly thought this was a terrible movie. I felt it was a piss poor heist movie that tried too hard to seem clever. I know not many feel it was as bad as I thought it was, but I don't really see any redeeming features in it. It seemed really obvious what was going to happen throughout. There seemed like there were side stories that were started and then abandoned. And the ending;Jesus, talk about going out of your way to make things ambiguous. I'd never of expected something so ham fisted from Nolan. That was just shocking.

But as much as I hated it, I'm kind of glad people liked it. Nolan's done plenty of great films and I'd hate for him to do a flop that might destroy his credibility and ability to make some more great films.

niallon

First things first, I enjoyed Inception. No, I don't think it's the best film ever made nor do I think it is Nolan's best. What I do think however is that Nolan is one of the few consistently great director's around, six major features, six great films. What really has me sold on Nolan is that, similar to a certain tosspot ego driven director, Inception has been his baby for eight years now but in the meantime he went on to make more cracking films, one of which became one of the highest grossing films ever made.

Let me explain what the point to this rant is. To Nolan, Inception is just another film in his catalogue. Not that he doesn't give it the care and detail he gives others but what I mean is that being a follow up to The Dark Knight and being so shrouded in mystery there has been inevitable Avater-esque pre release hype and whispers of an intricatly written and complex film that presents the viewer with multiple questions long after seeing it. The reality however is that Nolan simply made a summer blockbuster but he happens to be one of the more intelligent director's who understands how to make these popcorn films exist on a higher level than the likes of say Transformers.

In my honest opinion, the majority of the problems with Inception lie in how much people expected from it and how much the hype train created. Take it as it is, yet another summer blockbuster but one that contains the type of intelligence only a true masterclass director like Nolan can deliver.

Also, after seeing him act for Nolan up against yet another fantastic Zimmer score, sould the Joker be written into Batman 3, Joesph Gordon Levitt for the role all the way, if alone for the physical resemblance to Heath Ledger!

kearneybobs

Here's a rather interesting video about the booming music from the film

http://gawker.com/5597049/the-awesome-secret-behind-the-music-in-inception

clived2

FrostyJack wrote: »

Average film at best, where was the intelligence and the mind funk I was told of? Colour by numbers film, which was more like Oceans Eleven than the Matrix. I dodged all trailers and conversation of it, all I knew is it was to do with dreams and will blow my mind, yet 10 minutes in I knew what was going to happen in the end. 7 out of 10 is generous. Very disappointed.

I think the beauty of the film, is that it takes a relativlely complicated storyline and translates it into a film which as you stated is very easy to understand,
credit has to go to the director for achieving such a feat.

I think the character development was awful and the snow scene to be
drawn out.

However as you stated above, ten minutes in, you knew they were going
to leave on, was it or wasnt a dream cliffhanger, WOW...

I am sick of people complaining about the ending, was it or wasn`t a dream, Its is a pretty childish attiude, A fresh thought provoking film which is a hell of a lot better than most of the crap they release out there

clived2

humanji wrote: »

I honestly thought this was a terrible movie. I felt it was a piss poor heist movie that tried too hard to seem clever..

A piss poor heist movie is oceans twelve or thirteen or whatever version is out now...

tried too hard to seem clever...... I let Jef give you a quote so you can insert some reason behind this opinion

An opinion should be the result of thought, not a substitute for it.
- Jef Mallett

nosco

FrostyJack wrote: »

I knew is it was to do with dreams and will blow my mind, yet 10 minutes in I knew what was going to happen in the end. .

No you didn't.

sprinkles

FrostyJack wrote: »

Average film at best, where was the intelligence and the mind funk I was told of? Colour by numbers film, which was more like Oceans Eleven than the Matrix. I dodged all trailers and conversation of it, all I knew is it was to do with dreams and will blow my mind, yet 10 minutes in I knew what was going to happen in the end. 7 out of 10 is generous. Very disappointed.

7 out of 10 and you were very disappointed? How much did you pay for the ticket if you don't find a 7/10 movie worth it? Perhaps you did know what would happen at the end after 10 minutes but I'd hazard a guess that out of the entire audience in the cinema with you, you were the only one.

FrostyJack

I think the beauty of the film, is that it takes a relativlely complicated storyline and translates it into a film which as you stated is very easy to understand,
credit has to go to the director for achieving such a feat.

I fail to see what was complicated, it was a dream within a dream within a dream, I didn't see anyone in the cinema struggling at the end.

No you didn't.

When I saw the Asian guy in the "real world" I knew that was the guy at the start (because of the crappy make up you know it was just a young guy done up) so at the end I knew Leo had to end up there, and after explaining limbo it was so obvious, when that guy got shot in the level 1 dream I let a huge sigh, couple with that "is it all dream" being a cliche and you get the ending.

How much did you pay for the ticket if you don't find a 7/10 movie worth it?

I didn't say it wasn't worth it, it was an ok film but nothing to get too excited about. I kept waiting on a twist that never happened. The hype did help ruin it for me though.

Renn

The hype did help ruin it?

I dodged all trailers and conversation of it

lolz.

FrostyJack

Renn wrote: »

The hype did help ruin it?



lolz.

I didn't say I didn't hear anything about, I said I didn't converse in it or know anything about the plot, I saw it was getting 10/10 in the reviews. LoLz back at you mate

Renn

Nah, when you say you dodged all conversation of it etc I'm throwing in ratings and what not there too. I did the same as you, only better. I didn't check any scores or anything like that, just went in and watched it. But even if I did hear of it getting great reviews it shouldn't affect your viewing experience.

So yeah, lolz.

clived2

FrostyJack wrote: »

I fail to see what was complicated, it was a dream within a dream within a dream, I didn't see anyone in the cinema struggling at the end.
Did you even read what I wrote? It wasnt complicated, however I could see some other director making it impossible to follow.



When I saw the Asian guy in the "real world" I knew that was the guy at the start (because of the crappy make up you know it was just a young guy done up) so at the end I knew Leo had to end up there, and after explaining limbo it was so obvious, when that guy got shot in the level 1 dream I let a huge sigh, couple with that "is it all dream" being a cliche and you get the ending.
Yes because that all happened in the first ten minutes, Your story does not add up. So have a little think about it and come back to me.

.

humanji

clived2 wrote: »

A piss poor heist movie is oceans twelve or thirteen or whatever version is out now...

And now Inception can be added to the list. Seriously, what made this any better? It was a standard caper: they trick the mark into doing the hard part for them (ironically enough the same thing done in Ocean's 11, 12 and 13). This film just rehashed an old idea. Dressing it up with dreams was a good attempt, but didn't impress me.

tried too hard to seem clever...... I let Jef give you a quote so you can insert some reason behind this opinion

An opinion should be the result of thought, not a substitute for it.
- Jef Mallett

Resorting to personal abuse just because I didn't like a film that you did?