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

Richard Dower

My question is this, what was the deep dark secret that Mol locked in the safe?...and why didn't she realise like Cobb it was all a dream?

Richard Dower

c montgomery wrote: »

Thats fair enough. I just didnt think it was that good. IMO it was and still is over hyped and not as intelligent as some people make it out to be.

Tend to agree, this movie is a case of you need it see it on DVD, in the movie theatre you can't replay scenes to take it all in and digest, so people create their own ideas and perceptions because they don't have the luxury of rewind.

The basic concept is nothing new, in fact Nightmare On Elm Street had the same basic idea, dreams and reality. Same with The Matrix....Inception is well done but the basic concept is not hugely original nor that complex.

PhiloCypher

Richard Dower wrote: »

My question is this, what was the deep dark secret that Mol locked in the safe?...and why didn't she realise like Cobb it was all a dream?

I was under the impression the secret was her totem and the fact she had stoped using it to test reality and locked it away as symbolised by the dollhouse we see Cobb opening when he is telling Ariadne what happened with Mal.

Richard Dower

But that begs the question, why did she lock away the totem and stop beliving it was all a dream?...due to being there 50 years?

Hank Scorpio

didnt enjoy this movie , for some strange reason it reminded me of the da vinci code in places

Klingon Hamlet

Richard Dower wrote: »

But that begs the question, why did she lock away the totem and stop beliving it was all a dream?...due to being there 50 years?

Same reason Yusuf's clients/dwellers came every day to dream. The dream is real, for them. Real life is the dream.

Mal had let go of the real world, and locked away any doubts she had. Cobb screwed her up by sending her into an infinite existential crisis. He didn't realise that changing one's mindset whilst sleeping could have a permanent effect when woken up. In essence he made her suicidal, hence his constant need to change his own memeories, create new ones...that totem is his guilt, he carries it everywhere with him.

Richard Dower

But yet for Cobb he was able too see it was all a dream, why?....did he hold onto his own original totem (not seen in movie) and as such was able to know it was a dream?, why stay 50 years then?

PhiloCypher

Richard Dower wrote: »

But that begs the question, why did she lock away the totem and stop beliving it was all a dream?...due to being there 50 years?

Perhaps once she started creating places and people from her real life her first house, their children etc she simply lost track of reality .

RolandIRL

Watching it again for the 5/6th time and have a few questions

1) Why did Eames blow up the fortress/hospital? I thought that the kick only worked on the level above you to wake you up ie Level 2 Kick to wake up from Level 3, so why collapse the building?

2) When Mol shot Fischer in the fortress, why did he not simply wake up in Level 2, as Arthur did at the start when Cobb shot him?

3) When the truck was in freefall in Level 1, and Level 2 lost gravity, how come Level 3 and all subsequent levels lose gravity as well?

4) Was there any significance to 528491 or is it just a random number?

Feral Mutant

I figured the totem in the safe was the first inception. Mol's totem always kept spinning when she was in a dream, your mind automatically stores important information in safe places in a dream life safes or vaults. Cobb put the totem spinning in the safe to plant the idea in Mol's head that the world around her was just a dream.

Sad Professor

whiteman19 wrote: »

1) Why did Eames blow up the fortress/hospital? I thought that the kick only worked on the level above you to wake you up ie Level 2 Kick to wake up from Level 3, so why collapse the building?

We were talking about this earlier and the best explanation (which some of Arthur's dialogue earlier in the film would seem to back up) is that the kicks had to be synced. In other words, a kick from the upper level wasn't enough to wake them up. Even in the case of a two level dream, the inner ear in the upper level had to feel it, and the mind in the below level had to experience it for the person to wake up. This would explain why Ariadne jumps off the building in Limbo at the end, and it might also explain why the van going off the bridge didn't wake them up - because they missed it and had to wait for the next kick when the van hit the water.

Obviously this didn't apply to the dream that opened the film in which a kick from the above level was enough to wake the dreamers up, but I guess we have to attribute this to the stronger sedative.

2) When Mol shot Fischer in the fortress, why did he not simply wake up in Level 2, as Arthur did at the start when Cobb shot him?

The sedative - it was much stronger than the one used in the first dream at the start of the film. They couldn't wake up until it wore off. So being killed sent them into Limbo.

Rabidlamb

whiteman19 wrote: »

Watching it again for the 5/6th time and have a few questions

1) Why did Eames blow up the fortress/hospital? I thought that the kick only worked on the level above you to wake you up ie Level 2 Kick to wake up from Level 3, so why collapse the building?

The kicks had to be sync'd on every level.

2) When Mol shot Fischer in the fortress, why did he not simply wake up in Level 2, as Arthur did at the start when Cobb shot him?

Still too heavily sedated, same situation as Saito.
That's why both ended up in limbo after dying.

3) When the truck was in freefall in Level 1, and Level 2 lost gravity, how come Level 3 and all subsequent levels lose gravity as well?

That's not made clear, perhaps the effect dissipates further down the levels.
I remember an avalanche being caused but that may have been the missed kick.

4) Was there any significance to 528491 or is it just a random number?

No but Fischer's subconscious then uses it to open the safe at the end.
They just need the first numbers that came into his head.

Don Juan DeMagoo

Watched this last night.

This movie could have been epic but alas the ending was very naff altogether

As Cobb said
" Well dreams, they feel real while we're in them, right? It's only when we wake up that we realize how things are actually strange. Let me ask you a question, you, you never really remember the beginning of a dream do you?"

Well mister Cobb, I don't really remember the ending.

Still worth the watch though, all two and a half hours of it:rolleyes:

Wait a minute if Five minutes of real time = one hour of dream time, so therefore this film has required 26 dream hours

krudler

Don Juan DeMagoo wrote: »

Watched this last night.

This movie could have been epic but alas the ending was very naff altogether

As Cobb said
" Well dreams, they feel real while we're in them, right? It's only when we wake up that we realize how things are actually strange. Let me ask you a question, you, you never really remember the beginning of a dream do you?"

Well mister Cobb, I don't really remember the ending.

Still worth the watch though, all two and a half hours of it:rolleyes:

Wait a minute if Five minutes of real time = one hour of dream time, so therefore this film has required 26 dream hours

Really? the most debated part of the whole movie?

Suspiria79

Trying to figure out what all the fuss is about. Made it through about 45 minutes of it, couldn't be bothered with the rest.
Dreams my arse, I guess it's trendy to like these movies, though.

johnny_ultimate

Suspiria79 wrote: »

Dreams my arse, I guess it's trendy to like these movies, though.

Yeah, appreciating a Hollywood blockbuster with fun ideas, innovative action, enjoyable storytelling and inspired direction / acting / delivery etc... is so passé. We all only enjoyed Inception because we were told too, not because it transpired to be an unusually competent and entertaining blockbuster.

I apologise for the sarcasm, but accusations of people liking films to be 'trendy' is one of the most infuriating arguments around (in fact, at the risk of invalidating my own argument, I've come across far more people who dislike films just to be different and hip). Inception is a good - actually, close to great - film IMO for many of the reasons stated throughout this lengthy thread. If I'm trendy as a completely random side effect to me having enjoyed this for a plethora of reasons: awesome.

Suspiria79

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Yeah, appreciating a Hollywood blockbuster with fun ideas, innovative action, enjoyable storytelling and inspired direction / acting / delivery etc... is so passé. We all only enjoyed Inception because we were told too, not because it transpired to be an unusually competent and entertaining blockbuster.

I apologise for the sarcasm, but accusations of people liking films to be 'trendy' is one of the most infuriating arguments around (in fact, at the risk of invalidating my own argument, I've come across far more people who dislike films just to be different and hip). Inception is a good - actually, close to great - film IMO for many of the reasons stated throughout this lengthy thread. If I'm trendy as a completely random side effect to me having enjoyed this for a plethora of reasons: awesome.

I understand it's a movie for "certain" personalities.
A moderators wet dream, in fact. I can see where you're coming from.
Just not my cup of tea, I guess going into the movie you need to know what's going on upon viewing.

johnny_ultimate

Suspiria79 wrote: »

I understand it's a movie for "certain" personalities.
A moderators wet dream, in fact. I can see where you're coming from.
Just not my cup of tea, I guess going into the movie you need to know what's going on upon viewing.

I'm glad you can see where I'm coming from, as I certainly can't see where you're coming from :pac: The generalisation of 'certain' (?) personalities is one I just can't agree with. I've met all sorts of film fans - from casual to more 'hardcore' cinephiles - who've liked Inception, and a fair few of both groups who didn't. Barring a very few, most have had perfectly valid reasons for their opinions. It's far from my favourite film of the year - I only had one wet dream about it, compared to several after viewing several others, to borrow your odd turn of phrase. But **** it, I enjoyed the hell out of Inception bar a handful of minor issues. If everyone agreed on every film cinema would be far more boring. But I really wish the debates were more about the positive and negatives of the film itself as opposed to the perceived hipness of those who choose to like / dislike it. And going once again by this thread, both parties do indeed seem to have perfectly valid reasons as to why they reached their own opinions on this.

Orizio

Suspiria79 wrote: »

A moderators wet dream, in fact. I can see where you're coming from.

...what?

Bacchus

Richard Dower wrote: »

That's the direction i was HOPINg the movie would go!, i thought when Mol killed herself she went back to reality and everything that happened to Cobb in the movie was about him getting back to reality, i was hoping this was the case...i thought the end scene with the kids was the point where Mol would show up, thus proving it was all Cobb's dream...but she didn't so you have to accept it was the real reality.

That doesn't make sense to me though for a simple reason (if anything can be "simple" with this movie). We know that when you are in someones dream, that persons subconscious will eventually notice you and try to reject you. That rule doesn't apply to Limbo which is an empty level and a shared "reality". Therefore, in Limbo, Cobb and Mol were able to create a world and forget they were in a dream. When Cobb realized the truth, he performed inception on Mol to help her realize. They then woke up from the dream. Ok, it didn't show them going up through each level of the dream but I don't that was necessary. Also, if they still were in Level 1/2/3 of (for sake of argument) Cobb's dream, his subconscious would eventually notice Mol and reject her. This didn't happen.

I believe that it was the real world. His original inception made Mol suicidal and he carries that guilt with him forever. As someone pointed out, quite literally the totem is his guilt. Actually as an extension of that thought, you could consider that final scene as Cobb letting go of that guilt by leaving it spin on the table (whether or not it was in a dream or not is still debatable though).

krudler

Suspiria79 wrote: »

I understand it's a movie for "certain" personalities.
A moderators wet dream, in fact. I can see where you're coming from.
Just not my cup of tea, I guess going into the movie you need to know what's going on upon viewing.

If you dont know whats going on thats your fault, not the films, its very clearly explained, maybe if you watched more than 45 mins of it you'd have gotten it.

Richard Dower

^ tend to agree....it's not mindbendingly complicated, it just requires concentration, second or third viewing a must. I admited i replyed numerous scenes multiple times to take it in...but once you grasp it's not actually that complex and pretty well explained in the movie.

Nolan in his wisdom gave you the answers, it's not a riddle....you just need to engage your brain, the genius (if you will) is that his dialogue is such that people went back to the theatre a second or third time.

TheDoc

Just watched this over the weekend and find it to be probably the best film I've ever seen, the most enjoyable, and most notibly, the only film to really **** with my head.


Forgive me as I skipped reading the thread as alot of it is " trend hating" which mentioned above is pretty annoying, to dislike something simply because alot of people like it, but if infact how I came away from the film, is true to others, I cant really comprahend how everyone was absolutely astonished.

I realise a few of the last posts arnt tagged in spoilers but I'll do so anyway just incase.

Feel free to correct me, it might be a case that I simply wasnt intellegent enough to catch the whole thing right at first , but i may have got extra enjoyment from being a dope

I gather the point of the film is about dreams, but ideas, and how an idea works, how it can take you over and become all your reality. The film is long, and twists and I think its intentional. When Tom Hardies character quotes " To achieve inception you must start the idea at its most simplistic form ,then let the subconcious do the rest". This is so so so true.

When the film began jumping into deeper layers and dreams I was found trying to get my head around whats happening and keep up on screen, and it made me forget, the simple idea at the start. Make the subject disolve the company.

I had forgotten this someway through, and felt that the idea was to have the son realise how much his father hated him, and the son to disolve the company in spite. But I think anyway, that was the point to the audience, to make you foget what the idea was.

Cause at the end when Cillian Murphys character is crying a this fathers deadthbed, and in the safe he doesnt see the will ( which we were told contains the documentation to disolve the company) instead contained a little wind blowing mill on a stick, his character realised his father wanted him to forge his own destiny.

In a matter of minutes I went from " ****, its failed, he thinks his father loves him" to " haha it worked anyway, his father wanted him to disolve the company"

To the day after I watched the film remembering, that he was told what the will in the safe contained, but that there was no "second will", he was just told " There is a second will for you".

The point being they planted a simple idea, and let his mind run wild with it, and he created his own explanation to disolve the company as such, that his father wanted him to be his own man.

The fact it took me a day after watching to remember " For an inception to work, the idea needs to start at its most basic form" I only then copped on that it was his own subconcious that led him to disolve the company, and although we dont know what his father though, in his mind, his father loved him and wanted him to build his own empire

Besides the great action scenes, the terrific acting ( i felt) and an immersive storyline of something new and unique, the above was what just dropped my jaw, and it took me a day to realise.

And whats funnier still is the above is my interpretation of it, but I might be completely, and utterly, incorrect.

Richard Dower

^ you've made valid points about the windmill, the picture he had in his wallet was of him as a child blowing the windmill, as such the Inception was not created by Cobb or the others but Cilliam Murphy's subconscious....he wanted the windmill in the safe, he wanted his father to love him, and as such his own mind planted the windmill in the safe, which then planted the idea to break up the company.

The point of Inception is that the trick is to let the subject create his own Inception, so that the mind accepts it and dosen't seem foreign, this was what Cobb failed to do with Mol, the inception he planet wasn't accepted by Mol's mind and led her to kill herself. He (Cobb) failed to understand the subtle nuiances of the human mind.

Cillian's Inception was different in that by level 3 he was a willing participent in implant the inception, his own subconscious was actually creating the conditions to allow for a sucessful and very simple idea to take hold.

PhiloCypher

Richard Dower wrote: »

Cillian's Inception was different in that by level 3 he was a willing participent in implant the inception, his own subconscious was actually creating the conditions to allow for a sucessful and very simple idea to take hold.

Well strictly speaking he was a willing participant in a recon mission into what he thought was Brownings subconcious to find out what he wasn't telling them about the will

Rabidlamb

Richard Dower wrote: »

The point of Inception is that the trick is to let the subject create his own Inception, so that the mind accepts it and dosen't seem foreign, this was what Cobb failed to do with Mol, the inception he planet wasn't accepted by Mol's mind and led her to kill herself. He (Cobb) failed to understand the subtle nuiances of the human mind.

Cillian's Inception was different in that by level 3 he was a willing participent in implant the inception, his own subconscious was actually creating the conditions to allow for a sucessful and very simple idea to take hold.

That's the perfect explanation right there.
The combination numbers for the safe also came randomly from Fischer back on Level 1.

LighterGuy

Amazing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkvNmb9tMII

Don Juan DeMagoo

Liking Hans Zimmers Soundtrack a lot too:D

Bacchus

Richard Dower wrote: »

The point of Inception is that the trick is to let the subject create his own Inception, so that the mind accepts it and dosen't seem foreign, this was what Cobb failed to do with Mol, the inception he planet wasn't accepted by Mol's mind and led her to kill herself. He (Cobb) failed to understand the subtle nuiances of the human mind.

Was it not that the inception worked perfectly on Mol and accepted on such a root level that she wasn't able to escape the belief that she was still dreaming. This led to her to kill herself so she could "wake up".

expectationlost

and was the point when he rushed into the bathroom to check he wasn't still dreaming and sato came in and he didn't finish checking as he dropped his spinner the point he lost himself in his dream? is that what the argument of the film is, when did he lose it? that point seemed a bit obviously if that was the point but maybe it was earlier then that.

does anyone feel that the snow base scene was leftover bond script that nolan didn't get to make? or was this a fantasy of the cobol guy to be bond?