DarthLowBudget, have you read the explanation put up over at CHUD? You sound in line with it a bit. It's an interesting read for anyone that's seen the movie, located here
Yeah, chud is the other board I frequent. I'm not sure I fall 100% in line with Devin's assertion that every frame of the movie is a dream. I think it could be read that way, but I don't think its necessary or essential to an appreciation of the film, which I think is just as strong if taken literally. Another viewing is definitely needed though, and it might change the way I think about the film.
Mmm I will also need to do that. Definitely should see it again. And Billy, I think your explanation about the real importance of the ending is an extremely good point. Yeah, we're not supposed to know. But not just because it's a fun puzzle. But because the emotion is real no matter what.
But it was the whole time, wasn't it? I mean, arguably the important resolution is that he gets over his guilt--but... There are just so many characters that say things. For example, his dad tells him to get back to reality. That random old guy in the pharmacy says "for them their dreams are reality, who are you to judge otherwise, Mr. Cobb?" I don't think his story is that famous. It's just things like that, impossible to really notice on the first viewing, that make me wonder.
Isn't it kind of lame for the whole movie to be a dream? It seems like the most obvious "twist" to do.
I don't disagree. And it doesn't necessarily have to be--I mean, it could just be the *end* that was a dream. But unless these things are all weird, inexplicable red-herrings (how would the random guy know anything about Cobb?)... I don't know, I just found myself unable to escape the dream idea the second go around.
It makes infinitely more sense, both creatively and logically, for only the end to be a dream than for the whole thing to be. I agree I think that would be a silly cop out. However I don't view it that way at all so it doesn't matter to me
I don't think the whole thing was a dream, even if it could have been. The end, maybe, and I think there is some evidence to support that, but I found the infinite mirrors concept to be really telling with regard to "What we know is real vs. a dream"--or that it starts to ask, "does it matter?" Row row row your boat...
I will say this, Inception is the only movie I can think that isn't really harmed as an experience if it is all a dream.
Question: Why was space not effected in the third layer of the dream? Or was that the avalanche? Is it that time and space ended up to be evened out in the third layer?
I think the sense of free fall in the first level creates the zero gravity environment of the second level, but because in zero gravity they don't experience the same physical sensation of movement it doesn't effect the third level as much. I think the avalanche is basically all that they feel of the kick in the third level.
Well, the other thing to keep in mind with that is that as I recall, there's a few spots where the same things reappear. Like the phrase "leap of faith" and I think even the train speech.
Yeah, I didn't know what to make of that, tbh. Like, the train thing makes sense since it notionally happened already. The thing about leaps of faith did repeat itself with Saito, which is why it makes sense when he's old--but then why would he use that exact turn of phrase to begin with? And the whole thing about dying alone, filled with regret seems too knowing the first time he says it, in the helicopter.
I mean more that Mal uses the phrase leap of faith as well, as I recall, in the scene where she jumps. I think is where that came in. I'd have to recheck.
No, Saito uses it first--when he's in the helicopter trying to get Cobb to do the mission, as well as the old man with regrets thing. The latter comes back twice--once when Saito is shot, and then at the end. The leap of faith thing is used by Mal, certainly--but that's what I mean, though, it's curious that Saito repeatedly uses things that would seem to resonate with what happened with Mal. Admittedly in any other work I'd call it thematic unity but...
New interpretation for fun, and cuz I don't think I saw this.... was Saito a victim of inception to begin with, as Cobb planted the idea of inception in his head in the beginning to then get Saito to come hire Cobb to use inception on someone else because Cobb knew that Saito had the right connections to get his charges to disappear?
I'm not sure that's really supported in the text. I mean, its possible, but I think at that point we're talking about hypothetical movies.
It does require an interpretation that the stuff that looks like reality is, indeed, reality, I'll grant. However, it was a vibe I got very early on while watching, since Cobb describes the idea of inception to Saito in the first bit.
Yeah, when Cobb see's his children at the end of the film...are they crouched on the ground just as they always were in the dreams, before they turn around? Were the dreams prophetic...or, was something going on there?
I don't know. The clothes are actually different, and the credits list two sets of actors for the kids at two different ages, 3 years apart (I think). Actually, I'm starting to see some of the logic in the idea that the whole film is a dream from frame one and never touches reality, but I'm not sure how much I like it yet. Hasn't quite settled into my brain.
