Discussion in 'Community' started by Coruscant, Jul 14, 2010.
It's the same scene.
That video is pure gold. Especially the Batman at the end.
I ****ing love CollegeHumor!
Has anyone checked to see if the kids are wearing the same clothes when they run up to greet Cobb as when they turn around? That shot could just be a bit of artistic merit.
BTW, I couldn't help but notice that guy's review talked about Hans Zimmer's "great music" and how much it lent to the film. And while there are some truly awesome pieces, especially the "happy ending," I still just can't get over the fact that the music playing in the film's freaking climax is MUSIC FROM THE DARK ****ING KNIGHT!!!!
They are wearing the same clothes doing the same thing throughout the film.
[link=http://www.salon.com/entertainment/movies/film_salon/2010/07/19/inception_explainer/index.html#Inception]As good an explanation as any[/link]
There are game controllers that can read your brainwaves and after a learning curve you can think your way through a video game. We already have MMO's. Adavance the tech 10 years...20?
Just want to say Inception is the best movie I have ever seen.
I just saw it earlier today, and while I thought it was visually stunning, there were some parts that moved very slow. The ending was outstanding though. I love the cliff-hanger feel of the ending.
It was amazing, and we had no idea over 2 hours had gone by while we watched the movie, which is always a good sign.
The only thing that was a problem, is that the editing sucked the first time they walked onto the wall. Not sure why they screwed that up when they did a great job with all the other transitions.
Advance the tech a lot more than that but yes, this is exactly the approach I think viewers should use towards the technology. Dreaming is just a very convenient analogy they use for what they're doing.
It's not. There's a difference in the dialogue. IIRC, the second time around Cobb finishes Saito's sentence about a 'half-remembered dream' (whereas in the opening scene, Saito says that sentence without interruption). No idea what that means, except maybe that Saito has been performing some sort of inception upon Cobb himself.
Someone here HAD to have seen this week's episode of South Park, right?
So, I have finally seen this film. A few concerns popped up for me about what was presented.
1. Cost/Benefit- So this was supposed to be a tool for corporate espionage. Fine. But it can't be done remotely, so the person would have to have opportunity to accost their target unconscious. As we saw in the film (and could imagine ourselves), this involves, variably, tailing people, kidnapping them, infiltrating their trusted circles, and/or breaking and entering into their private residences. At this point, though, haven't you pretty much done everything that would be required of conventional corporate analysis? Why add the additional task of psychoanalysis using a dangerous, difficult to access, expensive technology on top of it?
2. Secrets- People's minds will insert things they're trying to hide into "secure" locations in the dream world. Again, not an unreasonable suggestion. What makes it odd is what they defined as secret. Would most people even classify themselves as "trying to hide" corporate secrets? I mean, they're merely privileged discussions. Otherwise, though (especially in the case of plans for an expansion, say) they'd be constantly meeting, thinking, and talking about these issues on a regular basis. If we are to understand that in the ideal extraction, a person doesn't know that their mind is being invaded, why would this then register as the most important thing to protect? Logically, wouldn't it be something that had a smaller circulation? Say, something personal or embarrassing that the person actually doesn't want revealed to anyone at all? And how would you sift through all that? And even if you could, why would you want to? It would seem that the blackmail potential of being invited into someone's inner thoughts would quite easily be worth more than their immediate plans for a product roll-out.
3. Limbo- This one is probably my biggest issue, as it's critical to the movie itself. In the film, there's explicit discussion that the protagonists are in danger of being thrown into limbo because of their usage of heavy sedation. Yet, we're also told that Limbo is a collective unconscious colored by everyone who goes their. It is therefore strange and inconceivable that apparently, until the film itself, the only people to have suffered this fate are DiCaprio and his wife. Even though there are private dealers who experiment with things like sedation and special formulations for the technology. Even though, initially, this was developed and tested by the government (apparently without any accidents of this sort?). Even though, as we already mentioned, one of the easiest ways to use this technology would be to sedate someone and the use the technology on them to invade their mind. I don't see how anyone is expected to believe that.
4. Proliferation- How exactly did this technology spread? It's supposed to have originated with private military use, then moved to the corporate sphere. However, we then see a group impoverished, destitute Third World citizens using it. Some have put forward that they were test subjects. That's fine, except it doesn't explain their continuing usage. If it was really so exclusive, it can't have been cheap technology to acquire. Are we to accept that those who did just cater to them out of some sort of altruism? Did they, like Ebenezer Scrooge, get their dreams invaded by Jacob Marley, and resolve next Christmas to share their wealth? Also, if it's that restricted, shouldn't governments still be able to track it quite easily? After all, there should be only a handful of the machines, probably all from one factory, and all the known operators would have had to emerge from the original government program. How difficult could it conceivably be to track this activity?
But it at least had no war rhinos, right?
Wocky, art is not meant to be taken literally. Especially when it is about invading people's dreams.
Also, to dispel a common misconception I see a bit up the page, there are in fact two sets of kids in the film, and the kids at the end of the movie are older than the ones seen in the dreams.
Well, more to the point, when a film has a fantastic premise, it's really gauche to say "but this wouldn't work in real life!1!!1" This is akin to saying Star Wars is stupid because lasers travel at light speed and there is no sound in space. No. That's a really shallow criticism. Philistines.
You suspend your disbelief and take the premise as it is. Then, if you still find flaws, that's all fair game.
silly, silly film. great score.
Well said. I hate when people defend criticisms of Star Wars(or other movies) by saying stuff like "It's a movie with lightsabers and you're complaining about (random plot hole)?"
So, what, anything goes in Toy Story because toys can't really talk?
That's what I did, though. You'll notice I didn't make a criticism of how the movie chose to build a model of dream worlds around a flawed synthesis of Freudian and Jungian concepts, and how, further, both of their contributions in this area are regarded as pretty dubious to begin with. I'm perfectly happy to accept the movie on its own terms. But, particularly with the Limbo thing, I was using the rules that they defined. It's the internal logic of the film that was being attacked, not the quality of its premise. This is much less saying "sound doesn't work in space" and more saying "Why didn't the Trade Federation just make Amidala sign the treaty when they captured her initially?"
Well, the point was that DiCaprio was in a dream the whole time, obviously, so of course nothing makes sense.
As for the Trade Federation: they're aliens. Aliens are stupid.
that was my favorite post ever.
that just happened.
While I get the humor thing- and I haven't seen this film but once- your actual contention is that the entire movie was a dream?
Of Leonard DiCaprio himself???
Why didn't they just send back the T-1000 to kill Sarah Connor the first time?
What do the machines plan to do once they actually take over the world and eliminate the human race?
They do. But not around us.
I purchased this movie today. I wasn't going to but then I saw it in a steelbook edition so I did anyway because I'm a sucker.
But it sure is pretty.
I can't be bothered to read through the thread, but has the possibility [hl=black]that Cobb's wedding ring is his true totem[/hl] been discussed?
[hl=black]This might be a dumb question but if that's the case, are you saying he doesn't know it's his totem? Because if he knows what his real one is than those scenes of him spinning the top make no sense.[/hl]