INCEPTION Review Thread (SPOILERS!!)

[Petra_Kalbrain]

Originally Posted by Jumpman

What about the idea that this is one big, long con therapy session constructed by Michael Caine's character?

The only reason I purpose this theory is because of how specific his scenes are and how they're shot and edited. On top of that, think about SPECIFICALLY what Ariadne does through out the entire film.

In my opinion, she's Miles' extractor for this particular assignment....

It's true that Ariadne plays a key role in Cobb coming to terms with his guilt, yes. However, I can't see it all being a ruse by Caine's character. In ancient mythology (Greek I think), Ariadne was a goddess that fell in love with a warrior who had to travel through a maze in order to defeat a Minotaur. She gave him a ball of yarn he could unravel while travelling through the maze so that he could find his way back to her easily. Likewise, Ariadne in Nolan's film becomes the guide for Cobb to return to a balanced state of being where he can be happy again. I don't think there is any pre-ordained intention behind either her character or Caine's. She just happens to discover the danger that lurks within Cobb's subconscious and understands how it could put the entire mission and the crew at serious risk. She genuinely wants to help Cobb in order to protect everyone... including herself.

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by Josh

She may not of needed them, but it would have been necessary for her to need training if she had never done it before - which was implied by Milies. Remember she was a "fast learner".



I feel that by presenting a reality and dream world separate, the act of showing the top spinning at the end is a shallow attempt to pull the audience away from a theory that you have been perpetuating for 2+ hours in 10 seconds. That feels cheap to me, now. Why not just show the top fall and conclude what you have been driving towards for 2+ hours? Its like being led down a long road with no exists, only to come to a fork at the very end, right before the destation.

Caine has admitted himself that he is never in any of the dreaming, Nolan has debunked the theory that it was all a dream and besides, the children age. Those 3 things should be more than enough to convince anyone that the movie actually happened and was not just a dream.

[menaceuk]

Originally Posted by Josh

She may not of needed them, but it would have been necessary for her to need training if she had never done it before - which was implied by Milies. Remember she was a "fast learner".



I feel that by presenting a reality and dream world separate, the act of showing the top spinning at the end is a shallow attempt to pull the audience away from a theory that you have been perpetuating for 2+ hours in 10 seconds. That feels cheap to me, now. Why not just show the top fall and conclude what you have been driving towards for 2+ hours? Its like being led down a long road with no exists, only to come to a fork at the very end, right before the destation.

But then you don't get a 100+ pages of opinions and interpretations.

I think the final bit of the spinner shows it will fall and that it is reality.

[assydingo]

Originally Posted by Gandalf Stormcrow

Caine has admitted himself that he is never in any of the dreaming, Nolan has debunked the theory that it was all a dream and besides, the children age. Those 3 things should be more than enough to convince anyone that the movie actually happened and was not just a dream.

They aged? I couldn't tell. I did think when he calls them early in the movie that the little girl sounds older.

[Jumpman]

Josh,

Because, Nolan's performed an inception on the audience. Remember, after we cut to black, the title shows up. That's not by accident. Think about Batman Begins and The Dark Knight. The titles showing up at the very end, after cutting to black, is a specific thematic point that goes in conjunction with both films.

It's the same with Inception. Once it cuts to black with no definitive answer and "Inception" appears on the screen, Nolan's making a point with the way that's handled. He's done to the audience what Cobb did to Fischer.

He's planted an idea of what this film really is...and this thread is the evidence of that. All the threads across the net about this particular film for the last 6 months is the point he's making. He implanted an idea and like a virus, it can define or destroy. It's like a cancer. It's spread. That's one of the genius moments of the film and of Nolan as a director.

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by assydingo

They aged? I couldn't tell. I did think when he calls them early in the movie that the little girl sounds older.

[Show spoiler]Two different sets of actors for the kids, with their ages clearly listed on IMDb, second set is about 2 years older than first set.

[Jumpman]

Petra,

Totally agree with you. But, again, Miles is too specific for me. In a sense, I agree with all the theories of this film, but the Miles character has never, ever added up...(in a good way).

Again, just the way Michael Caine plays the whole thing and how specific it is. There's no coincidences in this film....

[Josh]

Originally Posted by Jumpman

Josh,

My whole thing with Miles is his dialogue scene with Cobb in the classroom. It's too specific. Plus, how does he know to pick up Cobb from the airport? Cobb tells him to give the presents to the kids when he gets a chance to go and see them in the states. That just so happens to be the same time that Cobb finishes this job.

Not to mention the one shot at the very end of the film after Cobb is reunited with his children...Caine gives a very subtle smile and EXITS stage left.

For the life of me, that shot is way too specific to just be a simple shot. It's freaking Michael Caine.

I agree. Way too coincidental - especial for Nolan. Its as if Miles is knowledgale of the entire situtation, and is just enjoying his success.

[Petra_Kalbrain]

Originally Posted by Josh

I feel that by presenting a reality and dream world separate, the act of showing the top spinning at the end is a shallow attempt to pull the audience away from a theory that you have been perpetuating for 2+ hours in 10 seconds. That feels cheap to me, now. Why not just show the top fall and conclude what you have been driving towards for 2+ hours? Its like being led down a long road with no exists, only to come to a fork at the very end, right before the destation.

If Nolan showed the top fall over, then the film would have been about a man trying to get home to his kids. Nolan purposely leaves it ambiguous to tell us that the film isn't about that. It doesn't matter IN THE END if he is STILL dreaming (from the moment he goes under ON THE PLANE). There is a big difference between equating the end shot of the film with the entire state of consciousness/subconsciousness presented throughout the whole film and equating the final shot to the state of consciousness/subconsciousness presented from the plane onwards.

[Josh]

Originally Posted by Petra_Kalbrain

If Nolan showed the top fall over, then the film would have been about a man trying to get home to his kids. Nolan purposely leaves it ambiguous to tell us that the film isn't about that. It doesn't matter IN THE END if he is STILL dreaming (from the moment he goes under ON THE PLANE). There is a big difference between equating the end shot of the film with the entire state of consciousness/subconsciousness presented throughout and equating the final shot to the state of consciousness/subconsciousness presented from the plane onwards.

I think the act of him walking away while it was spinning shows he doesn't care anymore. Showing the top falling after that would just confirm the happy ending. Leaving it spinning just makes the audience question what they have just witnessed. It makes good discussion, but adds nothing material to the film, IMHO.

[Petra_Kalbrain]

Originally Posted by Josh

I think the act of him walking away while it was spinning shows he doesn't care anymore. Showing the top falling after that would just confirm the happy ending. Leaving it spinning just makes the audience question what they have just witnessed. It makes good discussion, but adds nothing material to the film, IMHO.

It adds EVERYTHING of material to the film. Without that ambiguity then Nolan wouldn't be telling his story... which is a character study. Having a concretely defined moment at the end would have destroyed his intentions with the film. The viewer would ultimately feel empty. The only satisfaction that should come from the viewer is the moment when Cobb denies his guilt and allows it (the projection of Mal) to die. To give the audience that moment at the very end of the film would defeat his own artistic intent. It would tell the audience that the film was about him getting back to his kids, when it's not.

As for him walking away from the spinning top? It's not enough that Cobb not care anymore. It's much more important to establish that it doesn't matter whether he is still dreaming or not. A very big difference from a viewer perspective.

[assydingo]

Originally Posted by Gandalf Stormcrow

[Show spoiler]Two different sets of actors for the kids, with their ages clearly listed on IMDb, second set is about 2 years older than first set.

I've seen it three times and didn't notice. Might be that the first set never shows their face.

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by assydingo

I've seen it three times and didn't notice. Might be that the first set never shows their face.

That was done intentionally of course, to make it harder to tell that they change, you have to look for subtle differences that even I still haven't picked up on.

[Q?]

I don't think it matters if they age, they can still age in dreams.

[radagast]

Originally Posted by Josh

The effect of washing ashore is the result of entering limbo. If he was already there (with Mal), why would he have to re-enter to meet Saito? He should have just had to find him there already.

I'll admit that the ring is an issue. It is an obvious materialization of his emotional tie to his wife. However, it is possible that it too is a red herring - only making appearances when Mal does. Its difficult because of the way Nolan framed the shots - we never really see his left hand in every scene. I'm going through some screenshots now trying to find a lapse, but its hard to even see his hand most of time.

The children, I will agree are real at the very end. Though, I'm not sure they are the same children when he looks at them immediately after spinning the top (spin top, shot of children, back to Cobb, and then back to children). I need to watch it again.

Think about it. If washing up on shore indicates Limbo, then Ariadne and Cobb washing up on shore, when going to rescue Fisher, indicates that they were in Limbo. Why Cobb washed up on shore again is uncertain. Maybe because he was entering Saito's Limbo.

[radagast]

Originally Posted by Jumpman

Josh,

My whole thing with Miles is his dialogue scene with Cobb in the classroom. It's too specific. Plus, how does he know to pick up Cobb from the airport? Cobb tells him to give the presents to the kids when he gets a chance to go and see them in the states. That just so happens to be the same time that Cobb finishes this job.

Not to mention the one shot at the very end of the film after Cobb is reunited with his children...Caine gives a very subtle smile and EXITS stage left.

For the life of me, that shot is way too specific to just be a simple shot. It's freaking Michael Caine.

The movie doesn't have to show everything that happens. Since Cobb was accepting the job from Saito, and he was going to be flying into the U.S. (trusting that Saito would keep his end of the bargain) he could have contacted Miles to tell him what was up. Of course if he was successful, he would want his father-in-law to come get him, so there was no need to show that Cobb asked him to be there. If he was arrested, he would have wanted Miles to know what happened, also.

The movie has been out for months and the BD has been out for weeks and we are still discussing it. Says something about the quality of the movie.

[Batman1980]

SPOILER: Not counting flashbacks, Cobb's wedding ring only appears in scenes where he is dreaming.

Source - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1375666/trivia

[Q?]

He could still be dreaming in the end because he had no more guilt in the end, he finally let go of Mal, no more wedding ring, to me anyways.

[Marcus Wright]

Hi everyone.

Following the example of the above thread, I decided to open this one.

I, for one, enjoyed Inception to certain extent but thought that it was overhyped to tremendous degree.

In particular, I think the movie overall fel too generic and tecnical, there was very litle emotions in the movie. It felt like a lecture.
On the good side, it was very unique and that is quiet appreciated by me.

[octagon]

I'll let you know once it hits Redbox.