Amph INCEPTION- Christopher Nolan's new film (SPOILERS)

Discussion in 'Community' started by Coruscant, Jul 14, 2010.

  1. AaylaSecurOWNED Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 19, 2005
    star 6
    Okay, I just got back from seeing it, FINALLY. I accidentally went to a babies-allowed showing, but there were only like 3 babies and they behaved for the most part. Bullet dodged!

    I hate spoiler text, it makes reading these things so hard. Anyway, I think the important thing about the top, and Rachel touched on this, is that it wasn't Cobb's totem, it was Mal's. And not only that, we're never told or shown what Cobb's own totem is - perhaps because if he had one it would quash any discussion about whether the movie was a dream from the beginning, and/or whether just the end was a dream, and all things in between. And although he seems to use the top as a totem (to tell whether he's dreaming), I think the fact that it was originally Mal's and not his casts at least a little suspicion on its accuracy at predicting his own state at any given time.

    That said, I don't think it was clear either way whether it was a dream or not - and I don't think there is or should be a definitive answer (I like ambiguity sometimes!) - and I think there was enough evidence to argue either way. BUT I don't think that idea that it could have been a dream is an "obvious twist" - even if a twist is predictable, if it doesn't get definitively answered you can't call that a stupid or predictable twist. That doesn't make sense for an ambiguous movie.

    I also didn't have a problem with the dreams not being very scientifically accurate. I guess I would have been disappointed if I went in hoping for a hard sci-fi kind of psychological thriller, but it seemed to me from the trailers that this was going to be fantasy or handwave-y sci-fi at best, not super sciencey. That said, I'm not 100% sure the mythology/fake science itself was consistent. I probably won't go see it again, but I felt like some things were either badly explained or at least seemed to conflict originally. I agree with Rachel that there was some "Hey this is exposition" dialogue but it didn't bother me either, some movies kind of need that, see: Primer.

    OH, and I do like the theory about it all being Mal's dream.

    Also, I love Joseph Gordon-Levitt like candy. I hope he gets the Riddler role.
  2. Spider-Fan Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 15, 2008
    star 4
    I would have preferred him as Peter Parker.
  3. AaylaSecurOWNED Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 19, 2005
    star 6
    Eh, when Spiderman 1 was cast I think he was still 'that dorky kid from 3rd Rock from the Sun.' He needed some time to grow into his hipster charm.
  4. Everton Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jul 18, 2003
    star 10
    I actually would've preferred a less ambiguous ending - to be told he either was stuck in a dream, or was not. The film relies so much on the audience to keep up, to put the film together without a great deal of advice. Things progress, and because one has paid attention, it gradually makes sense, gradually pulls together. There's a great deal of joy to be had from that process. Audience satisfaction. By the time Fisher reveals his new path to Browning, I'm feeling the story has run it's course, that we have closure. When Cobb goes through customs, even more so. So when they left it on a question mark, I felt slightly betrayed. I hadn't come all that way, and put a lot of thought into figuring all this out, to be left saddled with a whole new level of uncertainty. I want to work when I watch a film... but I want job satisfaction, too.
  5. AaylaSecurOWNED Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 19, 2005
    star 6
    Haha, job satisfaction. Yeah, I think most people don't like ambiguity, and sometimes it's either a result of the movie/book/show being badly-executed or lazily written, but I feel like it's occasionally appropriate and well-done, and I think it was particularly appropriate considering the whole theme of this movie.
  6. Spider-Fan Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 15, 2008
    star 4
    I was referring to the recent reboot casting.
  7. TiniTinyTony Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Mar 9, 2003
    star 5
    I thought the movie was fantastic, and people who hated it are thinking about it way too much.
  8. AaylaSecurOWNED Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 19, 2005
    star 6
    Oh. Wut? Did they recast it already?

    Okay, I checked IMDB, who is this guy and why was he in the two worst ever episodes of Doctor Who?
    But omg, Anton Yelchin.
  9. Boba_Fett_2001 Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Dec 11, 2000
    star 8
    I thought thinking about it is exactly what people are supposed to do.
  10. Spider-Fan Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 15, 2008
    star 4
    Yeah Yelchin would have been great...not sure about the new guy. Still feel Levitt would have been better.
  11. Jobo Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 14, 2000
    star 5
    Woooooooooooow caught a late show of this last night. Soooo good. If not for the fact that visual effects pretty much impress nobody anymore, I think this would be as big as the Matrix was. Color me a Nolan fanboy. I should go back and rewatch Memento, I haven't seen it in 8 years.
    _jOBO
  12. Everton Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jul 18, 2003
    star 10
    In theory it's particularly appropriate, but in practice I felt it was extending the theme a step too far. I don't think the film is ambiguous throughout - I think it's a puzzle that fits together given enough audience tlc. To leave something so significant dangling, to just drop it in there, something that could possibly shift the significance of everything that's gone before it, felt like an undermining of my effort. One has to consider is the ending satisfying (and an open ending can be).
  13. Boba_Fett_2001 Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Dec 11, 2000
    star 8
    Seriously? I was impresssed by all the visuals during Adriane's training.
  14. GrandAdmiralJello Moderator Communitatis Litterarumque

    Manager
    Member Since:
    Nov 28, 2000
    star 10
    Ariadne. It's Ariadne. :mad:


    I rather liked the bit where they seemlessly walk up the street/wall. That was rather impressively done. The fighting, yes, we've seen all that before, but the warping of the scenery and stuff was quite good.

    Anyway, speaking of HTR, shall we just go ahead and add a spoiler warning to the thread title at this point and go from there?
  15. Everton Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jul 18, 2003
    star 10
  16. Boba_Fett_2001 Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Dec 11, 2000
    star 8
    lol wtf? I had no idea....is it pronounced the same at least? :p
  17. AaylaSecurOWNED Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 19, 2005
    star 6
    Agreed, please!

    I meant to look this up, how did they film the zero-gravity stuff? Part of that fight scene you could tell was in a spinning room, but there were definitely parts that appeared to be in free-fall. Did they rig up some kind of free-falling set like those things they use to train astronauts?
  18. Everton Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jul 18, 2003
    star 10
    Dunno how they did it, but the zero-g combat in that corridor was the most impressive and fluid I've ever seen.
  19. Everton Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jul 18, 2003
    star 10
    Oh yeah, it took my two thirds of the film to clock that it was JGL. [face_blush]
  20. YodaKenobi VIP

    VIP
    Member Since:
    May 27, 2003
    star 6
    I was wondering this as well. If it's just invisible wire work or something, it's amazing because I walked away thinking it looked like they were in a zero-g environment of some kind because it was so smooth.
  21. Jobo Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 14, 2000
    star 5
    Fair enough. I'm just thinking back to when the Matrix came out, the general sentiment among the people I knew was, "omg HOW DID THEY DO ALL OF THIS? THIS IS BASICALLY MAGIKS." Whereas with Inception, while an effect can be impressive, I don't really see anyone coming out of this just mindblown (over the effects, anyway).
    _jOBO
  22. Everton Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jul 18, 2003
    star 10
    I think it's good that a film with such great effects can get away with them not being the watercooler topics. People are talking about the story.

    The Matrix is wonderful, and we have ****loads to thank it for, but I'm pleased to be taking that sort of great SFX work for granted rather than seeing it as a tentpole attraction.
  23. GrandAdmiralJello Moderator Communitatis Litterarumque

    Manager
    Member Since:
    Nov 28, 2000
    star 10
    Well, almost the same--if you'd move the d down to where it should be. Also the final e is pronounced. So it's air-ee-ad-knee (the first syallable can also be "ar" and the last syllable can be "nay" depending on who said it) in the movie and in English. In Greek it'd be pretty similar, ahr-ee-ahd-neh.
  24. Jobo Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Aug 14, 2000
    star 5
    I agree, my point was more than if not for the fact that SFX is so taken for granted today, this movie would be as huge as the Matrix, as it deserves to be. Not because the Matrix was only loved for its effects--just that Inception has everything that movie had in spades.

    My point is, this movie deserves to be a big deal. I don't think it's become as big a deal as it ought to be, though.
    _jOBO
  25. Everton Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Jul 18, 2003
    star 10
    It's like a double-edged sword, then. :p