INCEPTION Review Thread (SPOILERS!!)

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by GreenScar

This has been out now for 3 weeks. I am removing the spoiler tag warning on the thread. Feel free to not use spoiler tags.

[Show spoiler]Sounds good to me, thanks for the heads-up. Are you going to see it again?

[GreenScar]

Not sure if I'll see it again before blu ray

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by GreenScar

Not sure if I'll see it again before blu ray

[Show spoiler]I'm not sure either, NFL season is pretty much here and there are other movies coming out soon that I want to watch. Still trying to get my sister to see it.

[Buddy Christ]

Yipee!

He was not dreaming the whole time!

It was never really HIS totem!

When you have to pee while you sleep it will rain in your dreamss!

I love spoiler free!

[Buddy Christ]

Originally Posted by Gandalf Stormcrow

[Show spoiler]I'm not sure either, NFL season is pretty much here and there are other movies coming out soon that I want to watch. Still trying to get my sister to see it.

HA ha Funny!!

[Show spoiler] now that we are spoiler free, you spoiler tag everything

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by Buddy Christ

Yipee!

He was not dreaming the whole time!

It was never really HIS totem!

When you have to pee while you sleep it will rain in your dreamss!

I love spoiler free!

Dude you realize there are still a lot of people who haven't seen this, right? Just because the mods are lifting the need to use spoiler tags doesn't mean we should stop.

[makaveli21]

Originally Posted by Gandalf Stormcrow

Dude you realize there are still a lot of people who haven't seen this, right? Just because the mods are lifting the need to use spoiler tags doesn't mean we should stop.

well considering the first two things he said are just conjecture I don't think it's really a big deal.

[ScarredLungs]

Originally Posted by RocShemp

Because he

[Show spoiler]only wears his wedding ring in the dream world. In the real world he never has a wedding ring.

Just to be safe:

[Show spoiler]I've been told that (I keep forgetting to check when I saw it the 2nd/3rd/4th time) Does he have his ring on in the last scene? Also, if that is his totem, why does he use the top?

[Mahatma]

Writer-director Nolan is an elegant Hollywood hack from London whose movies are a colossal waste of time, money and I.Q. points. "Elegant" because his work always has a crisp use of color, shading and shadows, and "hack" because he always takes an expensive germ of an idea, reduces it to a series of cheap gimmicks and shreds it through a Cuisinart until it looks and sounds like every other incoherent empty B-movie made by people who haven't got a clue about plot, character development or narrative trajectory. Like other Christopher Nolan head scratchers-the brainless Memento, the perilously inert Insomnia, the contrived illusionist thriller The Prestige, the idiotic Batman Begins and the mechanical, maniacally baffling and laughably overrated The Dark Knight-this latest deadly exercise in smart-aleck filmmaking without purpose from Mr. Nolan's scrambled eggs for brains makes no sense whatsoever. Is it clear that I have consistently hated his movies without exception, and I have yet to see one of them that makes one lick of sense. It's difficult to believe he didn't also write, direct and produce the unthinkable Synecdoche, New York. But as usual, like bottom feeder Charlie Kaufman, Mr. Nolan's reputation as an arrogant maverick draws a first-rate cast of players, none of whom have an inkling of what they're doing or what this movie is about in the first place, and all of whom have been seen to better advantage elsewhere. Especially Leonardo DiCaprio, who remains one of the screen's most gullible talents. After his recent debacle in Shutter Island, Martin Scorsese's dopey insane-asylum bomb, one hoped for something more substantial from the easily misled Leo, not another deranged turkey like Inception. He should have stayed in bed.

I completely agree with Rex Reed at the new york observer.Saw it today,and thought it was very over-rated.The actors looked like they were going through the motions,the story was just a collage of other movies (Total recall,Matrix,Jacob's ladder and name-any-shooter-here).Felt dissconnected with the movie as well.In the cinema here in norway (a big one),when the movie ended it sounded like over half the audience erupted in laughter.The end was really that bad

Just mine and the one I went with's opinions mind

[Blu-Malibu2009]

Originally Posted by Mahatma

In the cinema here in norway (a big one),when the movie ended it sounded like over half the audience erupted in laughter.The end was really that bad

In my theater, people laughed because the end is basically a wink to the audience from the director. I laughed myself and I assure you it wasn't because I thought it was bad. On the contrary, it was a brilliant ending IMHO.

[tommyboy81]

Originally Posted by Blu-Malibu2009

In my theater, people laughed because the end is basically a wink to the audience from the director. I laughed myself and I assure you it wasn't because I thought it was bad. On the contrary, it was a brilliant ending IMHO.

yep. you here that and ahhhh's

They didn't laugh because the movie was stupid.

[Blu-Malibu2009]

Originally Posted by tommyboy81

yep. you here that and ahhhh's

They didn't laugh because the movie was stupid.

I was doing a combination of three things:

"Ahhh..." followed by laughter and then clapping when I started to realize what Nolan had done. I didn't fully realize it until I started seeing some of the insane theories on the Internet.

[RudyC]

to the experts out there.. how far off am i on the ending...

the movie is about two things..
1. michael cain recommends that girl to help leo conquer his Mal dreams.. she is successful as evident when leo himself realizes this when he wakes up and the architect and and that guy from 3rd rock are smiling at him.

2. leo earns the right to go back to the states by helping saito.
at the end when he was in limbo with saito they both realized that they were dreaming and woke up without having to use a jump reaction..

over course the ending is real but he leaves the top spinning for suspense..

how far am i?

[mjbethancourt]

Originally Posted by tommyboy81

yep. you here that and ahhhh's

They didn't laugh because the movie was stupid.

I don't know, I think a lot of that is people reacting in bad taste... I heard a lot of people snorting things like "oh jeez" or "come on". The ending shot is great, people snorting and groaning because

[Show spoiler]he didn't show if the top tipped

, are just a bunch of thickheads who should stick with Michael Bay movies.

[RocShemp]

Originally Posted by RudyC

to the experts out there.. how far off am i on the ending...

the movie is about two things..
1. michael cain recommends that girl to help leo conquer his Mal dreams.. she is successful as evident when leo himself realizes this when he wakes up and the architect and and that guy from 3rd rock are smiling at him.

2. leo earns the right to go back to the states by helping saito.
at the end when he was in limbo with saito they both realized that they were dreaming and woke up without having to use a jump reaction..

over course the ending is real but he leaves the top spinning for suspense..

how far am i?

I believe you've got it.

After my second viewing, I'm convinced there are two simultanous inceptions being carried out through the course of the film. What makes me think that is Ariadne. At one point, she insists to Arthur that she refuses to open her mind "to someone like that" when speaking of Cobb's issues. Why should this concern her if she was only to design the maze and relate its design to the dreamer. Prior to the scene in the memory elevator, Ariadne was not supposed to even be on the flight nor in any of the dreams. She forces Cobb's hand to let her in.

Afterward, there's a conversation between Ariadne and Arthur about limbo. Arthur told Ariadne that limbo was unconstructed dreamspace where you'd find nothing but whatever was placed there by someone who was there before. So limbo in its current state is filled with Mal and Cobb's creations (which are seen falling appart due to neglect).

This of course brings up the question, is all subconcious thought shared? Because it seems that limbo is not an individual "bottom of the barrel" of an individual's subconcious if what you find down there was created by a "previous resident".

But I suppose this is why many (myself included) believe that the true subject of inception is Cobb and that Fischer is just used to distract Cobb into not realizing that he's being pushed to let go of Mal and "come back to reality".

Of course, Fischer would have to also be a mark because, if not, his final conversation with not-Browning (a.k.a. Eames) wouldn't make a lick of sense. If Fischer was just a distraction for Cobb, he wouldn't be having a staged conversation that Cobb couldn't witness. So it seems possible that Ariadne was hired by Miles and Arthur in order to carry out their own inceptions whilst Cobb was orchestrating one on Fischer.

[Blu-Curry]

Originally Posted by Gandalf Stormcrow

Yup and I now agree with those that think Cobb's

[Show spoiler]totem was his wedding ring, even if you never see the guy check it. He's always wearing it in dreams but doesn't have it on in real life.

What about having

[Show spoiler]two totems

then? lol

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by Blu-Curry

What about having

[Show spoiler]two totems

then? lol

[Show spoiler]They never said it's not possible but I doubt it. I now think the ring was his totem and he kept Mal's for sentimental reasons.

[RudyC]

Originally Posted by RocShemp

Of course, Fischer would have to also be a mark because, if not, his final conversation with not-Browning (a.k.a. Eames) wouldn't make a lick of sense..

yup alot of things wouldnt make sense unless there were 2 inceptions.

[mjbethancourt]

Originally Posted by RocShemp

I believe you've got it.

After my second viewing, I'm convinced there are two simultanous inceptions being carried out through the course of the film. What makes me think that is Ariadne. At one point, she insists to Arthur that she refuses to open her mind "to someone like that" when speaking of Cobb's issues. Why should this concern her if she was only to design the maze and relate its design to the dreamer. Prior to the scene in the memory elevator, Ariadne was not supposed to even be on the flight nor in any of the dreams. She forces Cobb's hand to let her in.

Afterward, there's a conversation between Ariadne and Arthur about limbo. Arthur told Ariadne that limbo was unconstructed dreamspace where you'd find nothing but whatever was placed there by someone who was there before. So limbo in its current state is filled with Mal and Cobb's creations (which are seen falling appart due to neglect).

This of course brings up the question, is all subconcious thought shared? Because it seems that limbo is not an individual "bottom of the barrel" of an individual's subconcious if what you find down there was created by a "previous resident".

But I suppose this is why many (myself included) believe that the true subject of inception is Cobb and that Fischer is just used to distract Cobb into not realizing that he's being pushed to let go of Mal and "come back to reality".

Of course, Fischer would have to also be a mark because, if not, his final conversation with not-Browning (a.k.a. Eames) wouldn't make a lick of sense. If Fischer was just a distraction for Cobb, he wouldn't be having a staged conversation that Cobb couldn't witness. So it seems possible that Ariadne was hired by Miles and Arthur in order to carry out their own inceptions whilst Cobb was orchestrating one on Fischer.

While all of that may or may not be the intended purpose, it was the result.

I'd have to say that you're probably reading a little too far into some characters' intentions. There's a lot of exposition along the way to invalidate some of those inferences. I do think there's something to the idea that Prof. Miles (Michael Caine) referred Ariadne because he believed she could help Cobb with his problems, he probably knew her well enough as a student to think that she would appoint herself to that task. The Fischer inception isn't an intended distraction for Cobb, it's an intended misdirection for the audience. Cobb came to Miles, not vice versa, and he was already on the Fischer job by then.

Also, whether Ariadne was originally intended to go on the mission or not, she was nonetheless doing a lot of shared dreaming with Cobb and the others during their training exercises. She had that basis for objection the very first time they shared dreams... who wants to share dreams with somebody who is going to bring violence and madness with them?

I guess where I really disagree is that I don't think that Miles was staging an Inception on Cobb, I think that Cobb was living the result of performing an inception on himself. An idea is like a virus, it can grow and spread out of control, and define who a person becomes. He didn't predict that the idea he planted in Mal's head would grow into an action that eventually would consume his own mind with guilt and doubt. I think the "Miles staging an inception on Cobb" inference is congruent with the inference that Cobb was dreaming the whole time, and I don't buy either one... I think that is a train of thought that the director deliberately wanted to mislead people into. Just like with 'The Prestige', he gets the audience caught up in trying to solve riddles prematurely, only to have you realize at the end that you were barking up all the wrong trees.

As for the shared nature of limbo, there may be something to that, but if you pay attention, I think what Arthur said was that what was "down there" is whatever was left behind by anybody who is now there with you. That's an important difference.

[RocShemp]

I certainly don't think it was all a dream. And I stated in my previous post that Fischer wasn't planned as misdirection for Cobb. If the inception Fischer wasn't real, he wouldn't be having a final conversation with Eames that Cobb couldn't witness.

Originally Posted by mjbethancourt

As for the shared nature of limbo, there may be something to that, but if you pay attention, I think what Arthur said was that what was "down there" is whatever was left behind by anybody who is now there with you. That's an important difference.

No. He said "nothing's down there except for whatever's left behing by someone who's been there before". Ariadne pushes the subject and that's how she (and the audience) learn that Cobb was once in limbo. However, Arthur never says the person who'd been there before would have to be there with you for you to see what they created there. Instead it's that limbo retains what was left their by a previous visitor. The only two are Cobb and Mal.