Ashley Posted July 21, 2010 Posted July 21, 2010 Anyone else read Inception: The Cobol Job. Its a prequel comic to the film. Not bad. Although reading it reminded me of something that I was disappointed was not explored more - these people die frequently and apparently feel the pain. That must be pretty fucked up.
Will Posted July 21, 2010 Posted July 21, 2010 (edited) I really enjoyed Inception but agree that it has a good few flaws. It's very cool but I don't think it's particularly inteligent. I'd rate it very very highly but for me it would certainly miss out on a 10. Edited July 21, 2010 by Mr_Odwin
Coolness Bears Posted July 21, 2010 Posted July 21, 2010 I don't get why people say this film is confusing, several reviews have given that as a negative aspect of the film, it is very straight forward. and I'm easily confused.
chairdriver Posted July 21, 2010 Posted July 21, 2010 What annoyed me most about the film was that the dreams weren't dream-like.
Ashley Posted July 21, 2010 Posted July 21, 2010 What annoyed me most about the film was that the dreams weren't dream-like. In what way were they not dream-like?
Goron_3 Posted July 21, 2010 Posted July 21, 2010 I don't get why people say this film is confusing, several reviews have given that as a negative aspect of the film, it is very straight forward. and I'm easily confused. This REALLY annoyed me! I expected to go into the film needing/wanting to watch it again to understand it but it was pretty self-explanatory. I think people were just making more out of the ending than they should have in that sense, the film was straight forward. The anti gravity hotel fight, holy jesus that was so epic, my favourite part of the film without a doubt. Overall it was a good film, but a couple of plot holes and some seriously under developed characters (At times I thought Leo was on the set of Shutter Island!). 8/10.
tapedeck Posted July 21, 2010 Posted July 21, 2010 This was sublimely refreshing and, to me, offered more "wow" moments than most films seem to have these days. It was really refreshing due to me actually not thinking about multiple dreams before and how time can be altered in such a way. I hate how when people see stuff like this or something like The Matrix they then say stuff like "yeah, I totally think of that kind of stuff all of the time and Im cool and intellectual and you're not because you just experienced something 'us' intellectuals have been discussing for eons". Intellectual elitism is ridiculous at times and so many people I've talked to about this film have been saying this kind of stuff and then going on about it's flaws as to appear somewhat cleverer than the actual director. (Not to attack this thread, opinions are like arse holes, everyone has one). Enjoy it for bringing something different to the table. In my opinion it's a brilliant, brilliant movie that uses tech and story telling in equal measure to stand out from the crowd. We are discussing it - job done, money well spent.
Coolness Bears Posted July 21, 2010 Posted July 21, 2010 I thought it was excellent and Christopher Nolan added enough style and flair to it that I forgive a lot of the flaws since it was so exciting to watch. I personally felt it was very fast paced and enjoyed getting involved in the situation he had thrown at us. what I enjoyed more than the zero gravity hotel fight was after when he is trying to tie then up in zero gravity. Personally I liked the ending as I said before it is cheeky. I liked the audience reaction to it which made me laugh. At the moment I'd give it 9/10 It is currently the best movie I've seen this year but that hasn't been to hard yet.
Daft Posted July 21, 2010 Posted July 21, 2010 Enjoy it for bringing something different to the table. What did it bring to the table?
Hamishmash Posted July 21, 2010 Posted July 21, 2010 5 stars. Great night at the cinema. Now I'm having pizza! It just gets better!
tapedeck Posted July 21, 2010 Posted July 21, 2010 What did it bring to the table? I'd just seen Shrek 3D... In all seriousness though, to me it brought something different to the table as opposed the usual mainstream cinema fodder that I see at my local cinema. Other than this and maybe 500 days of Summer a LOT of the mainstream cinema we get here is copy-cat stuff. Same shit different clothes comes to mind. Just having something deeper and thought provoking come along more often would be nice. I've not seen anything like Inception's premise at my cinema.
James Posted July 21, 2010 Posted July 21, 2010 I've not seen anything like Inception's premise at my cinema. Neither have I, I am sure someone will find a comparison somewhere though..........
Debug Mode Posted July 21, 2010 Posted July 21, 2010 I was blown away by it. It however poses a massive problem to a movie that's currently being planned to be released within the next 2 years.. Ghost in the Shell. Although Inception had it's own version and went into it's own unique rules regarding shared dreams, replace the act of infiltrating dreams with 'diving' and dreams with 'electronic consciousness', and you have Ghost in the Shell. Although their premise is similar, I do feel many will look at GiTS as basically an Inception with elements of ethical problems in a society integrated with machinery.
James Posted July 21, 2010 Posted July 21, 2010 I was blown away by it. It however poses a massive problem to a movie that's currently being planned to be released within the next 2 years.. Ghost in the Shell. Although Inception had it's own version and went into it's own unique rules regarding shared dreams, replace the act of infiltrating dreams with 'diving' and dreams with 'electronic consciousness', and you have Ghost in the Shell. Although their premise is similar, I do feel many will look at GiTS as basically an Inception with elements of ethical problems in a society integrated with machinery. Bingo
Tissue Town Posted July 21, 2010 Posted July 21, 2010 (edited) What did it bring to the table? Summer Blockbuster that's not a sequel/prequel/franchise/remake/adaptation etc. Provoking loads of loads of discussion regarding the plot and so on. Of course this isn't anything new, but then what is? But it is refreshing. But you know. When there's one Armond White, more will follow. Edited July 21, 2010 by Tissue Town
Daft Posted July 21, 2010 Posted July 21, 2010 (edited) Summer Blockbuster that's not a sequel/prequel/franchise/remake/adaptation etc. Provoking loads of loads of discussion regarding the plot and so on. Of course this isn't anything new, but then what is? But it is refreshing. But you know. When there's one Armond White, more will follow. How does it affect you that it's a summer blockbuster? That's a complete non-issue. There are plenty of other films that are so much deeper (or actually well written) but if you can't be bothered to look past blockbusters then, quite frankly, that's your loss. Inception is watered down, poorly written, spectacular tosh, that's entertaining but ultimately weak. Try The Fountain, Solaris (Amazingly both these films were panned by the critics. Then again, I don't understand Tarkovsky. Soderbergh did a stunning job. Coincidentally the soundtrack to both these films are also amazing [Solaris + The Fountain] and thankfully not done by Hans "TURN THE VOLUME DOWN!" Zimmer), Cypher, Pi, Gattaca, Dark City, Primer, The Machinist etc, etc. These are great films that shit all over Inception, but they're not blockbusters. I enjoyed Inception but saying it's good/refreshing because every other blockbuster is crap is just utterly stupid. If you have a problem with the poor quality of films, you're not looking hard enough. Seriously, you want a story that's about dreams within dreams that's deep and poetic? Watch The Fountain. I've lost count of the times I've seen it and never fail to get something new from it. Edited July 21, 2010 by Daft
dan-likes-trees Posted July 21, 2010 Posted July 21, 2010 So I finally got around to seeing it! Not a massive wow, and suffered from over-hype, but I'm still convinced that Nolan's the best director working in Hollywood right now. As for his best film? Memento, by quite a long way. As people have said it wasn't actually massively original; kept reminding me of ideas from other things I'd watched.. plus I called the ending from about twenty minutes in. Perhaps the only story where a 'and it was all a dream' ending might have been fitting. Overall it was a good film, but a couple of plot holes and some seriously under developed characters (At times I thought Leo was on the set of Shutter Island!).8/10. Really though? Ain't seen Shutter Island but Leo's character was the one character that they did actually flesh out. Didn't bother me whilst watching but more in depth on the others would have been nice. Page's character seemed to be there for the sole purpose of exposition and chatting to Leo. Somewhat wasted A-list cast. Leo's ex wife was really good though (I remember no character names) How does it affect you that it's a summer blockbuster? That's a complete non-issue. There are plenty of other films that are so much deeper (or actually well written) but if you can't be bothered to look past blockbusters then, quite frankly, that's your loss. Inception is watered down, poorly written, spectacular tosh, that's entertaining but ultimately weak. Seriously, you want a story that's about dreams within dreams that's deep and poetic? Watch The Fountain. I've lost count of the times I've seen it and never fail to get something new from it. Yeah but to be honest, sometimes you do want to watch a film that's got blockbuster production values combined with interesting, if flawed ideas. I have the fountain on DVD and have yet to watch it, this may make me at last. Also I agree on the soundtrack. Very forgettable. Ending As Nolan seemed to be begging for people to discuss it, what was everyone's thoughts? Oh and for the record Id give it 8.5
Tissue Town Posted July 21, 2010 Posted July 21, 2010 How does it affect you that it's a summer blockbuster? That's a complete non-issue. There are plenty of other films that are so much deeper (or actually well written) but if you can't be bothered to look past blockbusters then, quite frankly, that's your loss. Inception is watered down, poorly written, spectacular tosh, that's entertaining but ultimately weak. Try The Fountain, Solaris (Amazingly both these films were panned by the critics. Then again, I don't understand Tarkovsky. Soderbergh did a stunning job. Coincidentally the soundtrack to both these films are also amazing [Solaris + The Fountain] and thankfully not done by Hans "TURN THE VOLUME DOWN!" Zimmer), Cypher, Pi, Gattaca, Dark City, Primer, The Machinist etc, etc. These are great films that shit all over Inception, but they're not blockbusters. I enjoyed Inception but saying it's good/refreshing because every other blockbuster is crap is just utterly stupid. If you have a problem with the poor quality of films, you're not looking hard enough. Seriously, you want a story that's about dreams within dreams that's deep and poetic? Watch The Fountain. I've lost count of the times I've seen it and never fail to get something new from it. Well firstly, I didn't say it being a Summer blockbuster affected me. So I dunno where you got that from. I was merely pointing out that it is a Summer Blockbuster (it is marketed as one). What it's bringing "New" to the table is originality, thought provoking topics etcetera. People are talking about it, they are discussing the themes, the plot, the characters and so on. I'm merely pointing out facts. As far as movies that are marketed as summer blockbusters, this is new and refreshing. It seems to be a bit futile to argue against that.. Secondly, I have already seen both The Fountain and Solaris. I am amused that you assume I haven't. But then I know perfectly why you assume I haven't. You have already labelled me as a particular type of movie goer. That's ok. By the way, for someone who enjoyed the film, you do seem to post with an air of vendetta towards the film and practically every other part of it's production. Tell me, when you say you enjoy the film, do you mean in the same way you enjoy taking a shit? As Nolan seemed to be begging for people to discuss it, what was everyone's thoughts? Yes. Nolan is on his knees, hands in the sky, employing people to tweet away their thoughts on the movie so it can remain in the top 10 trendy topics.
Daft Posted July 21, 2010 Posted July 21, 2010 (edited) Well firstly, I didn't say it being a Summer blockbuster affected me. So I dunno where you got that from. I was merely pointing out that it is a Summer Blockbuster (it is marketed as one). What it's bringing "New" to the table is originality, thought provoking topics etcetera. People are talking about it, they are discussing the themes, the plot, the characters and so on. I'm merely pointing out facts. As far as movies that are marketed as summer blockbusters, this is new and refreshing. It seems to be a bit futile to argue against that.. Secondly, I have already seen both The Fountain and Solaris. I am amused that you assume I haven't. But then I know perfectly why you assume I haven't. You have already labelled me as a particular type of movie goer. That's ok. By the way, for someone who enjoyed the film, you do seem to post with an air of vendetta towards the film and practically every other part of it's production. Tell me, when you say you enjoy the film, do you mean in the same way you enjoy taking a shit? You're the one who brought up the point it was a summer blockbuster and compared it to others. No? Summer Blockbuster that's not a sequel/prequel/franchise/remake/adaptation etc. Provoking loads of loads of discussion regarding the plot and so on. Why even bring that up at all? I was critical of the film as a film, not as a summer blockbuster. I actually don't think it's that great that this film is the cause for discussion when there are other much better films that are overlooked because they don't have a marketing budget the size of a small nation's GDP. Whatever, we obviously looking at this from completely different angles. I think Inception is watered down. I didn't assume you hadn't seen them, I'm not telepathic, so I listed quite a few films. I'd be surprised if you hadn't seen any of them. If I assumed you were an idiot I wouldn't have mentioned Tarkovsky. I don't have a problem with the film. I have a problem with people giving it praise in areas it quite clearly doesn't deserve. I've already explained this a couple time, I'll do it again just for you, you can enjoy a film and be critical of it. For example, Tron is actually a pretty hilariously crap film carrying a bizarre messianic message - doesn't stop me loving it. Edited July 21, 2010 by Daft
dan-likes-trees Posted July 22, 2010 Posted July 22, 2010 Just like to throw out an alternate viewing - If you take the ending to suggest that the entirety of the movie was all simply one long dream dreamt up by Leo (still don't know character names) then everything get's turned upon it's head. The various flaws in the film would be explainable, perhaps even intentional; the prominence of Leo's character in contrast to the rest of the group due to him being the one dreaming, the others perhaps projections of himself, Cillian Murphy's character perhaps as representative, again, of himself. And the vague grasp of the physics of time in the last section could be due to the entire concept of the dream machines being merely something dreamt up by Leo himself It's certainly a viable, if somewhat cheap reading of the film and one that Nolan fairly obviously puts forward as a plausible reading in the final shot. In any case, an interesting idea, and again a nice rebuck against the idea of 'it was all a dream' being a worthless ending to a film.
Murr Posted July 22, 2010 Posted July 22, 2010 I loved that film. totally brilliant. the ending... heh... alot of sighs and groans in the cinema when that happened. awesome movie!
Sheikah Posted July 22, 2010 Posted July 22, 2010 (edited) I remember the explanation but that doesn't explain why. I'd love to see a sequel where they actually dig into everything much more. Call it 'Extraction'. Bring some new elements in. They seemed to completely brush aside any ethical issues, too. He did affectively kill his wife. They also changed the life of this one man, taking away his free will. I can't believe you are satisfied with that limbo idea not being covered. It seems almost a key part of the overall idea that you love. I think Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind definitely dealt with pretty much exactly the same thing, albeit not as visually spectacular as this, a lot better. So much for originality. Except!! They explain the time structure (5 minutes in real life equates to 40 minutes in a dream), then he totally abandons the idea that drilling down into sub-dreams exponentially increases the time shift. We are told that a dream within a dream happens even slower than the original dream. The further down you go (they go 4 dreams deep), the slower time gets. But in the final heist, the only thing happening in slow motion is the van falling into the river. Everything else is happening in real time. Arthur is wrapping people up in the elevator, there's the gun battle in the snow, and then there's the kitchen showdown between Leo and his dead wife. In all 3 of those sub-dreams, things are just happening in the same time frame. We are told that Leo spent 50 years in the deepest layer of dreams, and then woke up as a young man. Yet, the team kept burrowing deeper into theoretically slower time frames and nothing happened any slower. According to Nolan, what happened in the snow gunfight should have unraveled over the course of days, and the kitchen scene should've taken weeks. So that failed, utterly. Few things I spotted that I don't agree with there: the truck has to be slowed down because time moves so quickly compared to the other layers that they simply can't show it in real time. The snow area goes on for much longer than anywhere else, thus it can be shown as snippets of scenes in real time. And the lift scene was clearly drawn out and shown pretty much with few gaps, indicating that the whole thing didn't really go on for that long but not watching that in slow motion made for more enjoyable viewing. I think he had 2 minutes (they said), or maybe less/more. I'm sure they figured out how much time they had in the snow area and it was definitely a lot longer than the what the guy in the lift scene had. All in all, the 3 things were not happening in the same time frame, as some clearly took a lot more time for people than others. Someone else explained the totem thing quite well; it's for protection so that you know you're in the real world and not a dream. I don't think he killed his wife; he tried to help her as she was clearly unable to cope with the altered world. And he had no idea how to escape so for all he knew he wouldn't be going back. He didn't really remove the guy's free will; he manipulated the people he believed in for him to make his own choice. Although this was clearly unethical, it made the guy believe his father loved him which somewhat adds a nice edge to what they did. Why was Ariadne naturally gifted? How exactly was she so brilliant?When they convinced Fischer he was in a dream why couldn't they just fly around shooting laser beams out of their eyes? Why couldn't they revive Saito the same way they did Fischer? How exactly is limbo shared between everyone who's been there? (My God, the most interesting question and completely ignored.) Why is Tiger Woods gifted? :p Something you can't really explain. And you don't really need to explain, it's just talent. I don't think he can really control his dream, and doing things out of the ordinary like laser beams made all projections lock onto them. And since they went into limbo in the same person's dream, that's likely what connected them. It's like another layer/dimension. Edited July 22, 2010 by Sheikah
Recommended Posts