Spoilers : Who saw Inception?

[SwambA]

I was going to reference this myself http://chud.com/articles/articles/24...ION/Page1.html

When I 1st saw this, I thought that the "reality" parts in the movie was in fact reality, but the more I think about it, I think that it was all a dream. There where things that happened in the reality sences that subconsciously started to bring to my attention, alert my mind or make me aware that this could be part of the dream for a split second: like the walls, his wife being on the other side of the street, things that Mol said... but only to have my attention diverted back into another sence or something that was said, that made me forget those parts at the time. Just like in the movie If you messed too much with the dream it would alert your subconscious that someting wasn't right. I think Christopher Nolan was messing with use, letting use feel something wasn't right but not to the point where we would know for sure. Here is a theory, Ellen Page is a good actress, she was awesome in Hard Candy, but in this movie she seemed out of place and I think that was done on purpose because I think she is the only character that was not a projection form Cobb's mind. I think that its Cobb's dream and she is put there to save him. Like JayB said " Ellen Page's name was Adriadne , in Greek Mythos she was the one who saved Theseus from the labyrinthe "

We will never know for sure and I would rather not know.

 

[JayB]

^ Agreed. I heard they were talking about a sequel based on the success of this one, but that would mean having to give a definitive answer on the ending to this one , which I would not like. However if anyone could make a sequel out of this it would be Nolan and his brother

 

[RemoWilliams]

I think they pulled the best "implanted idea" of the whole movie with the spinning top. Given that many signs pointed to it being reality, yet throwing in the spinning top just seemed like a little joke to plant doubt because wrapping it up would just be to logical Either way, my vote is for reality all the way.

 

[MarcusGHedwig]

That chud.com interpretation really made a ton of sense, and I too wondered why the movie never even attempted to explain how the dream sharing stuff worked (just that bit about military training). However, just for the heck of it, if we accept the movie at face value, I have a couple of questions about the progression of events - first off, it was never explicitly stated, but I guess we're meant to assume that dying in limbo brings you back out? (not like you could go any lower really)

Second, what exactly was the sequence of events that led Dom to perform the inception on Mal, and if he knew that the both of them dying would bring them back out, why didn't he just say so? (or was it that she had voluntarily forgotten that their dream world was in fact a dream, symbolized by locking up the totem, so he had to sort of trick her into coming out of it - I wasn't entirely clear on that)

And finally, who's dream was it on the plane? (since it was established that one person was having the dream in each level, I think Arthur in the first, Eames in the second, etc. ) I ask since I wasn't 100% sure how only Dom could go into Saito's dream limbo, while the rest of them came up to the first level of the dream, yet they all woke up together

 

[MarcusGHedwig]

And on a side note, waxing on about interpretations of movies (or anything else for that matter) always kinda makes me feel like I'm being played, because there's that part of me that thinks that maybe the writer had no masterplan or great explanation, so we're just inventing shit out that he never intended and giving him way more credit than he deserves Not necessarily saying this is the case with Nolan, since the chud interpretation does fit really damn well, just something that's always irked me (especially with poetry interpretations in all those boring English classes :Spin: )

 

[spioraid]

And on a side note, waxing on about interpretations of movies (or anything else for that matter) always kinda makes me feel like I'm being played, because there's that part of me that thinks that maybe the writer had no masterplan or great explanation, so we're just inventing shit out that he never intended and giving him way more credit than he deserves Not necessarily saying this is the case with Nolan, since the chud interpretation does fit really damn well, just something that's always irked me (especially with poetry interpretations in all those boring English classes :Spin: )

One of the largest aspects that Nolan tries to convey through the movie is it's humanity. Technology aside, it's a story about people relating to each other, people running from their pasts and being haunted by ghosts, falling in love and feeling betrayal. So all the conceptualizations of dream states and the dichotomy of existentialism and logic are just tools to convey those feelings and it's message.

The Matrix dealt with dystopia and Das Übermachen (the superman, essentially) and didn't come close to the subject matter Nolan covered in Inception. Not saying that is was supposed to or that it is a lesser movie, it's just two radically different stories using similar tools.

So where The Matrix asks, "How does this work?", Inception asks, "How does this effect me?"

 

[JayB]

Marcus , in the movie I think it's explained that Mal has chosen to perceive the dreamworld as reality , symbolized by locking the totem away, and then Dom has to use inception to make her believe the dreamworld is in fact a dream and they need to wake up to get back to their children. Then when she wakes up , she still believes she is in a dream , as the idea "grew in her like a cancer". So now she commits suicide in the real world , and sets up the hotel room to make it look like Dom killed her, so he would have no choice but to commit suicide as well.

 

[JayB]

As an aside , I actually like when everything is not spoonfed to me , which is probably why I was one of the minority that enjoyed the ending of Lost. Nolan had a lot of very thought provoking ideas in the movie , and if he had tried to answer them all definitively , some people would have been disappointed with the answer. For instance if they had shown the totem topple at the end , I would have been pissed as I want to believe he has finally escaped his (maybe 100+ years?!) in the dreamworld and can finally have happiness with his children

 

[Josh Burgess]

As an aside , I actually like when everything is not spoonfed to me , which is probably why I was one of the minority that enjoyed the ending of Lost. Nolan had a lot of very thought provoking ideas in the movie , and if he had tried to answer them all definitively , some people would have been disappointed with the answer. For instance if they had shown the totem topple at the end , I would have been pissed as I want to believe he has finally escaped his (maybe 100+ years?!) in the dreamworld and can finally have happiness with his children

??? If it toppled over, that means he wasn't dreaming... why would you be pissed if that's what you want the ending to be?

 

[Josh Burgess]

And on a side note, waxing on about interpretations of movies (or anything else for that matter) always kinda makes me feel like I'm being played, because there's that part of me that thinks that maybe the writer had no masterplan or great explanation, so we're just inventing shit out that he never intended and giving him way more credit than he deserves Not necessarily saying this is the case with Nolan, since the chud interpretation does fit really damn well, just something that's always irked me (especially with poetry interpretations in all those boring English classes :Spin: )

Yeah... there are probably a number of plot holes he has no explanation for... but that gives people reasons to keep talking about it...

 

[JayB]

^Yeah sorry man I was really tired last night when I wrote that , I meant the other way around lol

 

[Williamn]

Brilliant movie !

I can buy into the whole everything was a dream as the article made some interesting points.
When I saw it I did notice how every time the scene changed, you kinda were just thrown into the middle of it all without really any transitions.

IMO at the end he was checking to see if it was real or a dream but when he saw his kids he decided that it dident matter and he would rather live in a "lie" then finding out the truth (memento anyone?)

Still a part of me also still believes that some of the things in the movie was reality and that Nolan just wanted to leave the ending open so you could decide yourself if he finally came home.
but I must admit the kids being the same age, same cloth and the location/scene exactly the same, only that this time he saw the faces of the kids more supports the he-accepting-the-dream-as-a-reality theory to be correct.

 

[JayB]

The second time I saw it I tried for a bit to look for things I didn't see the first time , but I got totally wrapped up in all the awesomeness that was going on all over again

 

[wiiii]

Some people say that the kids are wearing the same clothes/didn't age but in the credits, there are his two children credited twice. Different actors. One pair is (Age 3) and another is (Age 5).

Also, if you're audience doesn't gasp when the credits roll, you can hear the top wobble quite apparently.

I doubt Nolan would give you Leo's back story/reasoning for everything for 2:30 hours and make you care about him so much to just have the whole thing in the end be a dream.

 

[JayB]

Some people say that the kids are wearing the same clothes/didn't age but in the credits, there are his two children credited twice. Different actors. One pair is (Age 3) and another is (Age 5).

Also, if you're audience doesn't gasp when the credits roll, you can hear the top wobble quite apparently.

I doubt Nolan would give you Leo's back story/reasoning for everything for 2:30 hours and make you care about him so much to just have the whole thing in the end be a dream.

Whoa , didn't know about the different actors , interesting! I feel the same way about why would you build up such great characters and story and have it all be a dream. That's really dumb to me but to each their own

 

[roy22341]

Whoa , didn't know about the different actors , interesting! I feel the same way about why would you build up such great characters and story and have it all be a dream. That's really dumb to me but to each their own

The ending to Lost must have REALLY disappointed you then.

edit: Never mind, just read your earlier post.

 

[JayB]

The ending to Lost must have REALLY disappointed you then.

edit: Never mind, just read your earlier post.

? The ending to Lost wasn't that they were all in purgatory the whole time if that is what you're referring to. For some reason this is what a lot of people got from the ending , even though they never said anything like that. I think the scene they showed at the end of the plane crash confused people , but the producers said they just threw that in there as a bookend , since that was the first test footage they ever shot .Everything that happened on the island happened , and they all met up later in the afterlife after everyone died (some of them much much later after they got off the island and lived out their life).

 

[arv_foh]

mobile post failure

 

[JayB]

^haha that's fuckin awesome

 

[Keregioz]

I saw inception yesterday and I'm still trying to recover from the experience. I can't wait to watch it again.
Anyway, I came upon this interesting trivia on IMDB and thought I should share it:

The slow, gloomy, blaring trombones in the main theme of the film score are actually based on an extremely slowed down version of the fast, high pitched trumpets in the beginning of the Édith Piaf song "Non, je ne regrette rien," which is used as a plot device in the film. Furthermore, when music is heard by someone who is currently within a dream, the music is perceived as slowed down. Thus, the main theme of the film score is almost exactly what the beginning of "Non, je ne regrette rien" would sound like to a dreamer. This thematic device is brought to its logical conclusion when the song plays at the end of the credits, signaling that the audience is about to 'wake up' from the film.

edit: Thought I should try it out of curiosity...

original

slowed down