INCEPTION Review Thread (SPOILERS!!)

[DeeChizzle]

Originally Posted by Foggy

He did the research on the target!

Cool thanks for the answer.

[Dreemworx]

Originally Posted by mjbethancourt

I think it was a good decision not to get too mired up in the details of how the technology works. As it is, many viewers have gotten too hung up on that, anyway. That's a distraction away from the story. They explained just enough:

[Show spoiler]The technology lets people share dreams. The dreams are structured the way they are, according to specifications dictated by the technology (i.e. weird and surreal dreams will result in the subconsciouses "attacking" each other, time-perception is specifically tailored by the chemical compound, etc.). The "rules" are really guidelines derived from research and experience using the technology. If one goes deeply enough into the subconscious, one enters an unconstructed "dream space" that apparently is shared by all people, because it is at such a low, basic level, that it taps into a primitive area of the brain that is essentially the same for everybody, the "reptile brain" level, so-to-speak.

They tell you enough to let you take the details for granted, since it's fiction anyway.

Yeah I hear you, I didnt want the nitty gritty but, it just seemed a high leap of faith here, not unlike Dune with the Spice unfolding time and space.

It didn't kill it for me in either film, it's just a big *gulp!*....ok lets go now!

Once again I enjoyed the film. I'm going to see by renting it if there is going to be replay value for me. My SO didnt see it so I will rent it.

[DragonSarc]

Yup this is one of the kind movie that will be in the bass / waterfalls test disc category!!!
cant wait for it to come out on blu!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Petra_Kalbrain]

Originally Posted by repete66211

What movie were you watching? The entire premise of Inception was magic.

HAHAHAHA.... so far from anything remotely applicable to the film. There was no magic whatsoever. There is an entire scientific field devoted to the study of dreams. There was not one moment of conjuring or anything magic related in the film whatsoever. You are thinking of The Prestige, not Inception.

Originally Posted by repete66211

Limbo can be a state as well as a place.

[Show spoiler]I have a real problem with two people occupying the same limbo. Unless the magical suitcase is a "server" for all of those hooked up to it, the participants must have a common "meeting place" for the dream, right? Once the host wakes up or dies, is the shared dream not over for all of them?

My real issue with the movie were the arbitrary rules and paradoxes. Who says you wake up when you die? And who says you go to limbo if you die in a dream within a dream? If the entire dream world is the creation of the conscious and subconscious, why can't you just dream that bullets don't kill you? Why would being shot in one dream level affect you in another? If one person can dream a security team, why can't you also? And so on...

"Arbitrary rules and paradoxes."

[Show spoiler]You weren't listening to the dialogue if you didn't hear that nobody in a dream sharing state can do anything that wouldn't happen in real life. If so, the dreamer would become aware of the truth and the dream would collapse. So, the rules and paradoxes are used as tools in order to keep the dreamer thinking that they are, in fact, awake. Otherwise, the team cannot accomplish their mission. THAT is why bullets have to kill people in the dreams. If they didn't, their missions would fail almost instantly. So, everyone must accept these rules for the sake of the mission. The only person able to use a "security team" is the person whose dream it is... and only if they've been trained to protect themselves in the dream state. That is why the architect is so crucial. Their design of the dream space keeps problems to a minimum.

Too many people are getting hung up on the notion of "being able to do whatever you can imagine within a dream."

[Show spoiler]This film works on the premise that they have to keep people from discovering that they are in a dream. Hence the reason the team makes sure to keep everything logically viable within the dream spaces. It's a completely controlled endeavour to keep the dreamer from knowing that it's a dream. And, you can't keep someone from knowing it must be a dream if you have someone flying or taking a full clip of bullets in the head without dying. They must follow the rules of reality to be successful.

Originally Posted by doctorD

So one scene in the movie had me scratching my head

[Show spoiler]when Leo's character near the end of the movie was at the table with his wife, did she or did she not stab him twice in the chest with that knife? I thought she did but he didn't seem injured nor did he appear to have blood on his cloths when he got up.

[Show spoiler]Oh yeah, she definitely stabbed him. That is how he manages to fall into limbo with Saito. His connection with the kick back chain was severed and therefore he became lost in the unconstructed dream space with Saito.

Originally Posted by radagast

[Show spoiler]
But were they referring specifically to the Catholic conception of limbo, or was that just a convenient name for being lost with no hope of return? They couldn't be in limbo forever, because their true physical bodies would eventually die, unless their existence in limbo was separate, as a spirit. However, if the spirit is trapped in such a place, then the physical body would die.

Limbo, in the Catholic sense, is a place of purification before being able to enter Heaven. It is supposed to be unpleasant and even painful, to burn away any evil so that no sin can enter Heaven. It is a place where those who are the faithful, can only have to experience a "little bit of Hell" instead of eternally being in Hell.

An interesting parallel, however I don't believe that it is meant to be as direct a comparison as you are making it out to be. I believe that Nolan is trying to stay within the realm of the human psyche and not trying to delve into religious spirituality. I think this because

[Show spoiler]they make reference a couple of times to being comatose as a respective side effect of falling into limbo. If Nolan is trying to be literal with his use of the term "limbo," then he is saying that everyone who goes into a coma is being judged by a deity figure of some sort. Sure, the term definitely has some preconceived notions associated with it though that apply directly to Cobb's case. His guilt is trying to draw him into limbo where it can make him suffer for, what would seem like, an eternity. However, I doubt that Nolan is trying to say anything about heaven and hell. The film is a study of the psychology of humans beings and how we deal with guilt/remorse/trauma on a deeper level within ourselves.

As for your comment about "They couldn't be in limbo forever, because their true physical bodies would eventually die, unless their existence in limbo was separate, as a spirit." You have to remember the notion of how time works at different levels of the subconscious state. In limbo, you can experience an entire lifetime in just a matter of minutes in the waking world. This is shown through the use of Cobb & Mal living for 50 years together in limbo while they were only asleep for a very short time. So, therefore, being stuck in limbo for the rest of your physical life would seem like an eternity in your minds eye as you'd live thousands of years during that time it takes for your physical body to die.

Originally Posted by Dreemworx

Saw it in IMAX Saturday.

I enjoyed it for the most part.
Going in, based on the trailors, I was actually thinking i would not like it.
The film changed my mind and it was a pleasant distraction after rebuilding my back deck during the hot day.

I think the cast is superb, the acting was fine, the cinematography was super and the CGFX was exactly what the movie required.
I followed the premise the entire way.

Still, I couldn't help walking away thinking it was "just an above average flick'.
The entire reason of all that energy was to accomplish something that I really didn't care about, the inception. I thought the "dream machine" was arbitrary and could have used more explanation as to it's origin and workings but, I understand it is just a movie and we take alot of things on face value to move on.

I have to credit the film for brave new concepts and well used budget by all means.

Im thinking Matrix + Dark City + Oceans 11 here.

7/10

You really got hung up on the

[Show spoiler]dream machine

that much? When you take into account what the film is really about, that detail is so inconsequential.

[Show spoiler]The film is about a man overcoming his psychological trauma while working within the realm of the subconscious where his own psychological problems can manifest themselves. In real life, our subconscious tries to communicate our deepest thoughts (problems or not) with us through the dream state. It can't say "Hey! You need to deal with this right away!" while we are awake, so it tries to do so through dreams. And that is really what this film is about. A man having to deal with his issues.

Originally Posted by mjbethancourt

It's symbolic, not literal:

[Show spoiler]Purgatory is an unpleasant place where you go to "purge" yourself of your sins, and you can be stuck there a long time, just as Cobb had to go to "limbo" to purge himself of his sins, his guilt, and his regret, and once he had done so, he was pretty much free to leave.

[Show spoiler] He just chose to stay behind to help Saito get out, too. They were not "lost with no hope of return". Cobb does get to "paradise" after finally purging his sins, he gets to "go home", that's his paradise, his "dream", made into reality... who knows if he is still dreaming? If his "dream" is his "reality", then, as the dream room attendant in Mombasa said, "who are you to say otherwise?" It reverts back to what I said many pages ago, about 'Inception' making references to Dante's 'Divine Comedy', which explores the cosmology of the Catholic afterlife in the form of a dream of the main character, but also implies that heaven and hell are places in the mind, rather than places out in the cosmos.

This is a pretty good post. I specifically like the part that I bolded. However, I again state that I doubt Nolan was making specific reference to religious elements, but instead wanted to try and focus on the study of human psychology.

[jj5206]

finally saw this today, and i can sum it up into one word...Amazing....i am very tempted to go give it another view in theaters....

[He-Man]

2nd viewing really cleared up a lot of questions I had, I mean my first viewer was horrible - very late at night, theatre was severly packed, I was sitting right on the side, person behind me keep kicking my seat....etc, ruined everything.

That's why I appreciated my 2nd viewing so much, it is the most intriguing movie I've ever seen, and the most thought provoking since The Matrix.

And the entire soundtrack is just mind-blowing! Can Hans Zimmer do any wrong??!!! I mean wow, am I the only one that noticed when watching the movie that the soundtrack was absolutely hypnotizing?

Simply put, this movie delivered on all levels.

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by He-Man

2nd viewer really cleared up a lot of questions I had, I mean my first viewer was horrible - very late at night, theatre was severly packed, I was sitting right on the side, person behind me keep kicking my seat....etc, ruined everything.

That's why I appreciated my 2nd viewing so much, it is the most intriguing movie I've ever seen, and the most thought provoking since The Matrix.

And the entire soundtrack is just mind-blowing! Can Hans Zimmer do any wrong??!!! I mean wow, am I the only one that noticed when watching the movie that the soundtrack was absolutely hypnotizing?

Simply put, this movie delivered on all levels.

I had no idea the Matrix was thought-provoking!

[mjbethancourt]

Originally Posted by Petra_Kalbrain

[Show spoiler]Oh yeah, she definitely stabbed him. That is how he manages to fall into limbo with Saito. His connection with the kick back chain was severed and therefore he became lost in the unconstructed dream space with Saito.

I think he meant when

[Show spoiler]she stabbed him after he was already in limbo. That one's a little bit of a head scratcher. Perhaps it didn't effect him because confronting Mal broke the power of that illusion?

An interesting parallel, however I don't believe that it is meant to be as direct a comparison as you are making it out to be. I believe that Nolan is trying to stay within the realm of the human psyche and not trying to delve into religious spirituality.

Many religious people would argue that they are one and the same.

[Show spoiler]they make reference a couple of times to being comatose as a respective side effect of falling into limbo. If Nolan is trying to be literal with his use of the term "limbo," then he is saying that everyone who goes into a coma is being judged by a deity figure of some sort.

Now that would be too literal.

[Show spoiler]Sure, the term definitely has some preconceived notions associated with it though that apply directly to Cobb's case

.

It only needs to apply to Cobb. He is the central character, and the story is his journey.

[Show spoiler] His guilt is trying to draw him into limbo where it can make him suffer for, what would seem like, an eternity.

BINGO!

[Show spoiler]However, I doubt that Nolan is trying to say anything about heaven and hell. The film is a study of the psychology of humans beings and how we deal with guilt/remorse/trauma on a deeper level within ourselves.

[Show spoiler]Why do the two discussions have to be mutually exclusive? Aren't most references to "heaven and hell" figurative and personal references rather than literal ones? "Heaven and hell" IS a figurative discussion of "how we deal with guilt/remorse/trauma". Haven't you ever referred to your own personal, emotional misery as "being in hell"? I sure have, it's the only "hell" I believe in. If you accept the idea of religion as being a collection of metaphors for the sake of exploring the human experience, instead of the unimaginative view that it's just a bunch of rules and explanations for how the world was made, then it's the same discussion. Just look at how religion has influenced the arts over the ages: get past the glowering statues on French cathedrals, and it's all about metaphor and human experience. You shouldn't let a personal hostility toward religion retard your experience of art, literature, and film. If religion wasn't useful to exploring human psychology, then it would have no value at all. (disclaimer: this is not an endorsement of any religious belief, I'm an atheist... but that doesn't mean I have to be closed-minded about what religion is saying, what it's all about. Joseph Campbell was an atheist, too, and I don't think anybody understood or appreciated religion better than him.)

I again state that I doubt Nolan was making specific reference to religious elements, but instead wanted to try and focus on the study of human psychology.

[Show spoiler]He could have chosen any name for unconstructed dream space, yet he chose "limbo". None of the names in this movie are accidents, they are all references: Ariadne, who showed Theseus how to solve The Labyrinth; Yusuf (Joseph), the "interpreter of dreams"; Mal, needs no explanation; Eames refers to architect/interior designer Charles Eames; Cobb refers to Henry Cobb, American architect; Robert Fischer refers to Bobby Fisher, the child-prodigy bitterly estranged from his parents, who was more connected to his several godfathers, and forfeited his title as chess champion and spent much of his adult life condemning his roots; etc.

You doubt Nolan was making a specific reference... well, I doubt that Nolan "accidentally" named such a central element of his story without making a specific reference.

[mjbethancourt]

Originally Posted by repete66211

Limbo can be a state as well as a place.

[Show spoiler]I have a real problem with two people occupying the same limbo. Unless the magical suitcase is a "server" for all of those hooked up to it, the participants must have a common "meeting place" for the dream, right? Once the host wakes up or dies, is the shared dream not over for all of them?

My real issue with the movie were the arbitrary rules and paradoxes. Who says you wake up when you die? And who says you go to limbo if you die in a dream within a dream? If the entire dream world is the creation of the conscious and subconscious, why can't you just dream that bullets don't kill you? Why would being shot in one dream level affect you in another? If one person can dream a security team, why can't you also? And so on...

The most annoying thing about rhetorical questions, is that no matter how good your answer is, the questioner is going to refuse to accept it because he has already made up his mind that the question was rhetorical and so does not really have an answer.

... every single one of those observations is flat-out wrong, and they have already all been explained.

[Show spoiler]1. The host dreamer waking up does not end the dream. We saw that in the very first dream sequence: Arthur was the dreamer, and the dream didn't end when he died.

2. Yes, that is exactly what the "magical suitcase" is, a "server". The technology is for shared, controlled dreaming.

3. Radagast, as well as many others, have already explained all those "arbitrary rules and paradoxes".

4. Nobody said you go to limbo if you die in a dream within a dream. Again, that observation would be contradicted by the very first dream sequence. What they said was that dying in a dream while you are too heavily sedated to wake up would drop you deeper into the dreams, into limbo.

The rest has also all been explained ad nauseum, but I suppose if you can't be bothered to pay attention through a 2-and-a-half hour movie, it would be absurd to expect you to pay much attention in a 100+ page discussion thread.

[LordCrumb]

Righto, just saw Inception. I really enjoyed it, thought it was a brilliant concept. Casting was great, and the script was complex but not too difficult to understand.

[Show spoiler]The one big bug I had was the Old Age makeup on Ken Watanbe... Hollywood still has not managed to make people look old in my opinion, the only film I have seen where someone look legitimately old, was in The Exorcist. Ken looked exactly like he was just wearing a latex mask, very badly done, should have used a different actor and got Ken to do ADR.

Loved the hallway fight between Arthur and the projections, the whole anti-gravity scene was so awesome. The whole movie was awesome apart from Kens makeup.

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by KaiGusto

Righto, just saw Inception. I really enjoyed it, thought it was a brilliant concept. Casting was great, and the script was complex but not too difficult to understand.

[Show spoiler]The one big bug I had was the Old Age makeup on Ken Watanbe... Hollywood still has not managed to make people look old in my opinion, the only film I have seen where someone look legitimately old, was in The Exorcist. Ken looked exactly like he was just wearing a latex mask, very badly done, should have used a different actor and got Ken to do ADR.

Loved the hallway fight between Arthur and the projections, the whole anti-gravity scene was so awesome. The whole movie was awesome apart from Kens makeup.

LOL it still fooled people like my father who thought

[Show spoiler]it was someone else.

Glad to hear you liked it, though.

[radagast]

Originally Posted by Petra_Kalbrain

An interesting parallel, however I don't believe that it is meant to be as direct a comparison as you are making it out to be. I believe that Nolan is trying to stay within the realm of the human psyche and not trying to delve into religious spirituality. I think this because

[Show spoiler]they make reference a couple of times to being comatose as a respective side effect of falling into limbo. If Nolan is trying to be literal with his use of the term "limbo," then he is saying that everyone who goes into a coma is being judged by a deity figure of some sort. Sure, the term definitely has some preconceived notions associated with it though that apply directly to Cobb's case. His guilt is trying to draw him into limbo where it can make him suffer for, what would seem like, an eternity. However, I doubt that Nolan is trying to say anything about heaven and hell. The film is a study of the psychology of humans beings and how we deal with guilt/remorse/trauma on a deeper level within ourselves.

As for your comment about "They couldn't be in limbo forever, because their true physical bodies would eventually die, unless their existence in limbo was separate, as a spirit." You have to remember the notion of how time works at different levels of the subconscious state. In limbo, you can experience an entire lifetime in just a matter of minutes in the waking world. This is shown through the use of Cobb & Mal living for 50 years together in limbo while they were only asleep for a very short time. So, therefore, being stuck in limbo for the rest of your physical life would seem like an eternity in your minds eye as you'd live thousands of years during that time it takes for your physical body to die.

Please note that I was bringing that up because mjbethancourt was getting hung up on the word limbo and associating it with the Catholic conception of purgatory. I do NOT believe that Cobb and associates were talking about anything religious. Limbo was "unconstructed dreamspace".

[Show spoiler] And Cobb, who knew more about limbo than anyone else, believed he could get out. It is stated in the movie that Cobb had been in limbo before.


Mal stabbing Cobb was Cobb stabbing himself, after all.

[radagast]

Originally Posted by He-Man

And the entire soundtrack is just mind-blowing! Can Hans Zimmer do any wrong??!!! I mean wow, am I the only one that noticed when watching the movie that the soundtrack was absolutely hypnotizing?

Simply put, this movie delivered on all levels.

Then go out and buy the soundtrack CD. I'm going to.

[repete66211]

Originally Posted by mjbethancourt

I don't believe I can state this any more explicitly:

[Show spoiler]Limbo = Purgatory.

Doesn't anybody read books anymore?

Doesn't anyone read dictionaries anymore? A word can have multiple meanings.

[ScarredLungs]

Originally Posted by repete66211

Doesn't anyone read dictionaries anymore? A word can have multiple meanings.

I do not read dictionaries. It is too boring

[repete66211]

Originally Posted by radagast

There were no "arbitrary rules and paradoxes" as you put it. Cobb and his team had done this many times before and as with any case where you use technology over and over, you learn the rules on how it operates. In this case the "rules" or scientific facts were in how the brain responds to the technology. And as for your example of the

[Show spoiler] dreaming of the security guards, you obviously didn't hear that Robert Fischer had been trained to project an assault team to protect him from people attempting extractions from his mind.

Post 2016

[repete66211]

Originally Posted by cvm

I do not read dictionaries. It is too boring

Boring indeed--horrible story characters, choppy narrative and poorly developed story arc.

[Dreemworx]

Originally Posted by Petra_Kalbrain

HAHAHAHA.... so far from anything remotely applicable to the film. There was no magic whatsoever. There is an entire scientific field devoted to the study of dreams. There was not one moment of conjuring or anything magic related in the film whatsoever. You are thinking of The Prestige, not Inception.



"Arbitrary rules and paradoxes."

[Show spoiler]You weren't listening to the dialogue if you didn't hear that nobody in a dream sharing state can do anything that wouldn't happen in real life. If so, the dreamer would become aware of the truth and the dream would collapse. So, the rules and paradoxes are used as tools in order to keep the dreamer thinking that they are, in fact, awake. Otherwise, the team cannot accomplish their mission. THAT is why bullets have to kill people in the dreams. If they didn't, their missions would fail almost instantly. So, everyone must accept these rules for the sake of the mission. The only person able to use a "security team" is the person whose dream it is... and only if they've been trained to protect themselves in the dream state. That is why the architect is so crucial. Their design of the dream space keeps problems to a minimum.

Too many people are getting hung up on the notion of "being able to do whatever you can imagine within a dream."

[Show spoiler]This film works on the premise that they have to keep people from discovering that they are in a dream. Hence the reason the team makes sure to keep everything logically viable within the dream spaces. It's a completely controlled endeavour to keep the dreamer from knowing that it's a dream. And, you can't keep someone from knowing it must be a dream if you have someone flying or taking a full clip of bullets in the head without dying. They must follow the rules of reality to be successful.

[Show spoiler]Oh yeah, she definitely stabbed him. That is how he manages to fall into limbo with Saito. His connection with the kick back chain was severed and therefore he became lost in the unconstructed dream space with Saito.

An interesting parallel, however I don't believe that it is meant to be as direct a comparison as you are making it out to be. I believe that Nolan is trying to stay within the realm of the human psyche and not trying to delve into religious spirituality. I think this because

[Show spoiler]they make reference a couple of times to being comatose as a respective side effect of falling into limbo. If Nolan is trying to be literal with his use of the term "limbo," then he is saying that everyone who goes into a coma is being judged by a deity figure of some sort. Sure, the term definitely has some preconceived notions associated with it though that apply directly to Cobb's case. His guilt is trying to draw him into limbo where it can make him suffer for, what would seem like, an eternity. However, I doubt that Nolan is trying to say anything about heaven and hell. The film is a study of the psychology of humans beings and how we deal with guilt/remorse/trauma on a deeper level within ourselves.

As for your comment about "They couldn't be in limbo forever, because their true physical bodies would eventually die, unless their existence in limbo was separate, as a spirit." You have to remember the notion of how time works at different levels of the subconscious state. In limbo, you can experience an entire lifetime in just a matter of minutes in the waking world. This is shown through the use of Cobb & Mal living for 50 years together in limbo while they were only asleep for a very short time. So, therefore, being stuck in limbo for the rest of your physical life would seem like an eternity in your minds eye as you'd live thousands of years during that time it takes for your physical body to die.

You really got hung up on the

[Show spoiler]dream machine

that much? When you take into account what the film is really about, that detail is so inconsequential.

[Show spoiler]The film is about a man overcoming his psychological trauma while working within the realm of the subconscious where his own psychological problems can manifest themselves. In real life, our subconscious tries to communicate our deepest thoughts (problems or not) with us through the dream state. It can't say "Hey! You need to deal with this right away!" while we are awake, so it tries to do so through dreams. And that is really what this film is about. A man having to deal with his issues.

This is a pretty good post. I specifically like the part that I bolded. However, I again state that I doubt Nolan was making specific reference to religious elements, but instead wanted to try and focus on the study of human psychology.

I'm just sayin Raimi put more time, albeit brief, in discussing the Book of the Dead in his Evil Dead series, than I was made aware of this dream machine thingamabobby.

[radagast]

Originally Posted by Dreemworx

I'm just sayin Raimi put more time, albeit brief, in discussing the Book of the Dead in his Evil Dead series, than I was made aware of this dream machine thingamabobby.

Maybe so, but why care about how it works? It's just a McGuffin.

[repete66211]

Originally Posted by mjbethancourt

The most annoying thing about rhetorical questions, is that no matter how good your answer is, the questioner is going to refuse to accept it because he has already made up his mind that the question was rhetorical and so does not really have an answer.

... every single one of those observations is flat-out wrong, and they have already all been explained.

[Show spoiler]1. The host dreamer waking up does not end the dream. We saw that in the very first dream sequence: Arthur was the dreamer, and the dream didn't end when he died.

2. Yes, that is exactly what the "magical suitcase" is, a "server". The technology is for shared, controlled dreaming.

3. Radagast, as well as many others, have already explained all those "arbitrary rules and paradoxes".

4. Nobody said you go to limbo if you die in a dream within a dream. Again, that observation would be contradicted by the very first dream sequence. What they said was that dying in a dream while you are too heavily sedated to wake up would drop you deeper into the dreams, into limbo.

The rest has also all been explained ad nauseum, but I suppose if you can't be bothered to pay attention through a 2-and-a-half hour movie, it would be absurd to expect you to pay much attention in a 100+ page discussion thread.

Those aren't rhetorical questions. I would really like to know.

[Show spoiler]1.) Then the host dreamer's presence isn't required? Or is it required only long enough to upload the set to the server?

4.) Dying in a dream doesn't send you to limbo, only when you're sedated. That is what I mean by arbitrary.

I did pay attention to the movie. Have you obtained all of your knowledge from the movie itself? Is there a primer out there somewhere? Are you speculating at all?