PDA

View Full Version : Inception vs. Lost-spoiler alert?


EKnee08
07-23-2010, 12:18 PM
Has anyone seen the new movie Inception? What did you think of it? Interesting ending! There may be as much banter on the web as there was for the ending of Lost.

Vyse
07-23-2010, 12:22 PM
Inception was just outstanding to say the least. LOST is also my favorite show which I loved the ending to that. But back to inception, yah it seems to be pretty big. The ending was really good. I think the top was going to fall

new_tennis_player
07-23-2010, 12:30 PM
By US film industry standards, Inception is a very good film.

It does get very hokey and a bit too literal at times: for instance, the "defenses of the subconscious" being represented by soldiers for hire on snowmobiles is a bit laughable, and employed only to incorporate some hollywood style action.

Also, the CGI is outstanding, but sometimes overwhelms the storyline and ideas.

In other words, the concept is brilliant, but the execution a bit pedestrian. There is so much more that could be developed out of this simple yet highly appealing germ of an idea.

===

Now, about that ending. :neutral:

The spinning top, from what I could tell, was surely going to fall. It starts to rotate a bit off kilter, and as far as I'm concerned, he's back with his family.

There was a quick blurb on yahoo! with one interpretation being that if he was truly back at home, the kids would have aged a number of months.

When I read that, I just shook my head: how do you get kids who look exactly like another pair of kids only six months older?

Anyway, we've seen the open ended ending several times now with the Sopranos, No Country and now Inception.

I simply saw it as a quality piece of entertainment which, as is almost necessary, leaves the door open for a sequel. This could be an amazing franchise--the potential is certainly there. It could very well be threatened by all the usual suspects such as contract disputes, change in directors, and so on.

Fun stuff.

EKnee08
07-23-2010, 12:43 PM
Inception was just outstanding to say the least. LOST is also my favorite show which I loved the ending to that. But back to inception, yah it seems to be pretty big. The ending was really good. I think the top was going to fall

I loved Inception and really liked the end of Lost as well. There are so many theories about the ending (of Inception) as well as things that went on in the movie In sum, the whole movie was mind blowing and thought provoking. I want to see it again because I think I would get gain a different perspective. I want to reexamine some of the "perceptions" I had after walking out of the theater.

There are so many questions raised in this movie.

For example, Mal's totem (used by Cobb). Was it used by Cobb in the real world, only in a dream or both. Cobb unlocked it from the safe in limbo. He now uses it, etc. after the supposed death of Mal. What happened to his totem?
What effect does touching someone else's totem have on you? I seem to recall that Sato touched Cobb's (Mal's)totem in one of the beginning scenes when he invaded Sato. Did this have any effect on the ending-reality or dream, etc.

EKnee08
07-23-2010, 12:49 PM
By US film industry standards, Inception is a very good film.

It does get very hokey and a bit too literal at times: for instance, the "defenses of the subconscious" being represented by soldiers for hire on snowmobiles is a bit laughable, and employed only to incorporate some hollywood style action.

Also, the CGI is outstanding, but sometimes overwhelms the storyline and ideas.

In other words, the concept is brilliant, but the execution a bit pedestrian. There is so much more that could be developed out of this simple yet highly appealing germ of an idea.



Now, about that ending. :neutral:

The spinning top, from what I could tell, was surely going to fall. It starts to rotate a bit off kilter, and as far as I'm concerned, he's back with his family.

There was a quick blurb on yahoo! with one interpretation being that if he was truly back at home, the kids would have aged a number of months.

When I read that, I just shook my head: how do you get kids who look exactly like another pair of kids only six months older?

Anyway, we've seen the open ended ending several times now with the Sopranos, No Country and now Inception.

I simply saw it as a quality piece of entertainment which, as is almost necessary, leaves the door open for a sequel. This could be an amazing franchise--the potential is certainly there. It could very well be threatened by all the usual suspects such as contract disputes, change in directors, and so on.

Fun stuff.

No question. It can become a franchise. As one reviewer called it "James Bond and the Matrix rolled into one" However, the original Matrix was the best of the franchise. It should have been the first and last. The same may be best for Inception. One and done.
The faces and ages of the kids as well as their clothes in the final scene are three theories regarding the ending that is being debated.
===

GetBetterer
07-23-2010, 02:33 PM
Both made me go:

GIMME THE ANSWER TO THE END!!!

Vyse
07-24-2010, 01:18 PM
I think that is stupid about the kids, I don't see how they would have aged that noticably

Xenakis
07-24-2010, 01:41 PM
Lost: Almost brilliantly stupid. Watchable but only while doing something else like stringing a racquet or practicing your scales.

Inception: Far too much praise for this film. Most of the dialogue is telling you how the 'dream' world functions instead of showing you how it works, this gets pretty tiresome after a while.

That might be ok if this alternate reality was itself interesting, but it isn't. It's just a vehicle for the usual Hollywood action hijinks. It doesn't leave you thinking about anything other than elements of the plot, which isn't much to concern yourself with (is it a happy ending or not? Not very interesting really).

More demanding than most blockbusters definitely and for that I pat it on the back, but a long way from a 'classic' film.

Thomas Crown
07-25-2010, 12:25 PM
i can't watch Inception. seems soo artsy and all "complex." reminds of how some of my friends feel about vanilla sky. i hate movies that you have to "get." movies that revolve around complex science and "philosophies" just **** me off, like The Matrix. i hate when people say "didn't you get it??"

i go to movies to kill time, not try to absorb knowledge and come out smarter or compete with my friends over who understood the "true" meaning behind the "symbolism." movies should be simple and to the point. bad guys. good guys. build suspense, bad guys die. and good guys live. period.

enough of this pretentious philosophical and scientific crap put togther by hollywood producers.

Xenakis
07-25-2010, 01:09 PM
i can't watch Inception. seems soo artsy and all "complex." reminds of how some of my friends feel about vanilla sky. i hate movies that you have to "get." movies that revolve around complex science and "philosophies" just **** me off, like The Matrix. i hate when people say "didn't you get it??"

i go to movies to kill time, not try to absorb knowledge and come out smarter or compete with my friends over who understood the "true" meaning behind the "symbolism." movies should be simple and to the point. bad guys. good guys. build suspense, bad guys die. and good guys live. period.

enough of this pretentious philosophical and scientific crap put togther by hollywood producers.

Thing is, it isn't artsy or complex. It's the usual Hollywood explosion-fest set in some farcical dream world which they make up as they go along (most of the dialogue seems to be explanation about the 'rules', there's no deeper meaning or philosophical insight).

About as intellectually engaging as a rollercoaster ride.

If you want to complain about arsty or complex films try Tarkovsky or Bresson etc.

Rippy
07-25-2010, 01:11 PM
It makes me sound like a moron, but I never really enjoy movies you have to "think" about a lot. They have their place, but I watch a movie to relax, so I'd rather it wasn't too taxing on the brain cells...

Xenakis
07-25-2010, 01:14 PM
It makes me sound like a moron, but I never really enjoy movies you have to "think" about a lot. They have their place, but I watch a movie to relax, so I'd rather it wasn't too taxing on the brain cells...

Not really. At least you know what you like. No reason to watch 'serious' cinema unless you want to.

ollinger
07-25-2010, 01:16 PM
Seems idiotic to complain that some films are too artsy or complex, just as it's idiotic to complain about "Porky's VII" not being artsy enough. There are plenty of films and theatres to go around, and we're so bombarded by trailers and previews that if you haven't figured out whether a film is for you or not by the time it opens, it's YOU that needs to be a bit more complex.

OKUSA
07-25-2010, 06:39 PM
Inception has to be one of the most original movies I've seen since In Bruges

new_tennis_player
07-25-2010, 08:34 PM
I hear ya. I agree with both points. Nonetheless, there is so much potential there. This could become a trilogy, and/or spawn off superior films inspired by the same theme.

At least that's what I'm hoping. It's blockbuster though, so some (or a lot of) hokiness is almost mandatory. :)

Most of the dialogue is telling you how the 'dream' world functions instead of showing you how it works, this gets pretty tiresome after a while.

That might be ok if this alternate reality was itself interesting, but it isn't. It's just a vehicle for the usual Hollywood action hijinks.

More demanding than most blockbusters definitely and for that I pat it on the back, but a long way from a 'classic' film.

Thomas Crown
07-26-2010, 11:54 AM
It makes me sound like a moron, but I never really enjoy movies you have to "think" about a lot. They have their place, but I watch a movie to relax, so I'd rather it wasn't too taxing on the brain cells...
makes the two of us.

Seems idiotic to complain that some films are too artsy or complex, just as it's idiotic to complain about "Porky's VII" not being artsy enough. There are plenty of films and theatres to go around, and we're so bombarded by trailers and previews that if you haven't figured out whether a film is for you or not by the time it opens, it's YOU that needs to be a bit more complex.

yeah, i know about the trailers. . . how did you think i came to the conclusion that it wasn't for me, i.e,. too 'artsy and complex'..???

it's idiotic only to the folks who want to "discuss" the movie at the end and outsmart each other with facts that only they picked up.. this usually happens at a coffee shop where other intellectuals are solving the middle east crisis and smartypants who really don't know better are teaching other people what market cap means and what a hedge fund does.

Sandwichman
07-26-2010, 02:05 PM
Never watched and episode of lost, but inception was amazing! Best movie I've seen since the departed, which I watched on dvd earlier this year, but it was very good once you wrapped your head around it, loved the ending, too.

aceX
07-26-2010, 02:35 PM
It doesn't leave you thinking about anything other than elements of the plot, which isn't much to concern yourself with (is it a happy ending or not? Not very interesting really).

Then I fear you may have missed the point, friend :)

Xenakis
07-26-2010, 02:37 PM
Then I fear you may have missed the point, friend :)

'Enlighten' me :-)

What's the 'point'?

aceX
07-26-2010, 02:53 PM
'Enlighten' me :-)

What's the 'point'?

Ah but enlightenment cannot be given, it must be earned.

This (http://chud.com/articles/articles/24477/1/NEVER-WAKE-UP-THE-MEANING-AND-SECRET-OF-INCEPTION/Page1.html) while not perfect may facilitate some reflection on the deeper meaning of the film.

Also, Nolan entered big-budget hollywood doing Batman Begins and The Dark Knight to gain experience to be able to do Inception, the script he worked on for 10 years. You can be sure that there's some deeper levels of meaning than just the plot and visuals.

Xenakis
07-26-2010, 03:22 PM
Ah but enlightenment cannot be given, it must be earned.

This (http://chud.com/articles/articles/24477/1/NEVER-WAKE-UP-THE-MEANING-AND-SECRET-OF-INCEPTION/Page1.html) while not perfect may facilitate some reflection on the deeper meaning of the film.

Also, Nolan entered big-budget hollywood doing Batman Begins and The Dark Knight to gain experience to be able to do Inception, the script he worked on for 10 years. You can be sure that there's some deeper levels of meaning than just the plot and visuals.

Firstly, I thought the new Batman films were not good at all, even in mainstream terms. Some usual Hollywood whizz bang effects and CGI etc etc (etc) but it took itself far too seriously for a film about a man in a batsuit who fights crime (it's a childrens story, the Tim Burton take was better, not great either but credible at least).

Second, that article you posted is just speculation, and even if you read all of that into the film (and you have to read it in, because it's not self-evident) it's still a stunningly boring 'insight'.

Every single moment of Inception is a dream. I think that in a couple of years this will become the accepted reading of the film, and differing interpretations will have to be skillfully argued to be even remotely considered. The film makes this clear, and it never holds back the truth from audiences. Some find this idea to be narratively repugnant, since they think that a movie where everything is a dream is a movie without stakes, a movie where the audience is wasting their time.

Except that this is exactly what Nolan is arguing against. The film is a metaphor for the way that Nolan as a director works, and what he's ultimately saying is that the catharsis found in a dream is as real as the catharsis found in a movie is as real as the catharsis found in life. Inception is about making movies, and cinema is the shared dream that truly interests the director.

Pseudo-profound would be a compliment. Inception is about making movies and the catharsis found in a movie is a real as the catharsis found in life?, wow, I wonder why Nolan hasn't written an influential philosophical treatise on the subject it's so deep and previously unconsidered.

If infact that's what it's about as previously stated this is all inferred from what's ostensibly a Hollywood action blockbuster. (you could infer all manner of hidden metaphor in films like Mystic Pizza or Showgirls if you wanted to, there are probably PHDs on the subject, doesn't mean the films actually contain this content).

There's more [please spare me ffs. Ed], but I would have to watch the film again with a notebook to get all the evidence (all of it in plain sight).

I think the writer has been smoking a few too many jazz cigarettes, 'evidenced' in part by his indolent attitude to research (watch it all again with a notebook? Sounds a bit like hard work, think I'll have another toke on my doobie and make up the rest of this 'article' I as go along before watching Star Wars, again).

This isn't a great work of art which asks philosophical questions about the nature of our existence or mortality and so on, it's just Hollywood guff which teenagers think is clever, like Tarantino films and the Matrix (a triology which for better or worse will be remembered long after Inception).

Regards 'enlightenment being earned', on current evidence I couldn't say whether you'd be able to tell the difference between enlightenment and a potato salad (in this context it sounds more like a line from Inception, or the Matrix, or Batman, or a comic, etc)

dak95_00
07-26-2010, 04:58 PM
I saw this movie last Friday after reading some fantastic reviews and all I have to say is, "It was alright."

It wasn't original. I found it to be a cross of The Wizard of Oz and Dreamscape (1984 w/ Dennis Quaid). Some of my friends also mentioned Vanilla Sky but I don't recall that movie like I do the other two. I went back and watched Dreamscape again just last night and Inception could've been a sequel to Dreamscape with obviously better cinematic improvements made in the last 26 years.

My questions when I finished.....
1) Why didn't they make their characters' Rambo/superhero like? I know when I dream, I am a bad SOB that can't be stopped. I won the tennis grand slam on multiple occasions along with the golf grand slam too! Sure. I've fallen in my dreams and woken up. Who hasn't? But still. I have amazing powers too.

2) If you can enter someones dream, why can't you kill them in their dream leading to death on the outside? That is where Dreamscape differed. I liked the Dreamscape story better and it was only 90 minutes long.

I'll watch it again. Maybe I missed something. I just wasn't that impressed.

dave333
07-30-2010, 10:59 AM
http://27.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_l5zhtx5z8F1qzpkvyo1_500.jpg

http://30.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_l5xdkfwlYe1qahs88o1_400.jpg

[I]http://img717.imageshack.us/img717/848/n2moy7110820.jpg (http://img717.imageshack.us/i/n2moy7110820.jpg/)

http://i27.tinypic.com/4iy9md.jpg

dave333
07-30-2010, 11:00 AM
[/I] http://i31.tinypic.com/9gerrt.png

[I] http://i27.tinypic.com/33ju243.jpg

http://i31.tinypic.com/r768fl.jpg

http://i29.tinypic.com/2ighax5.jpg

dave333
07-30-2010, 11:02 AM
http://i30.tinypic.com/24bj3hj.jpg

http://i26.tinypic.com/8wf8ko.png

http://i27.tinypic.com/2eyfby9.jpg

[/I]http://i28.tinypic.com/8wctgz.jpg

Bertie B
07-31-2010, 11:13 AM
2) If you can enter someones dream, why can't you kill them in their dream leading to death on the outside?

Freddie Kruger did this, no?

... Maybe I missed something. I just wasn't that impressed.

Same here. I was lured to the cinema by the concept, but felt like I was watching another action movie.

aimr75
07-31-2010, 06:51 PM
There was a quick blurb on yahoo! with one interpretation being that if he was truly back at home, the kids would have aged a number of months.

When I read that, I just shook my head: how do you get kids who look exactly like another pair of kids only six months older?

was the time line six months? i didnt catch that.. also the son somewhat sounded older when cobb was talking on the phone to them.. also it seemed as though the kids wore the same outfits through out the movie, including the reconciliation at the end.. which may hint at it being a dream still

ttbrowne
08-02-2010, 07:31 AM
One of the worst movies I've ever seen. C'mon...without CGI, It's nothing but people walking around saying nonsense.

new_tennis_player
08-02-2010, 10:43 PM
I saw Inception again: couldn't help myself he he. :)

Here's a question I have: why does Mal decide to go into, or allow herself to be brought into, her husband's dream world?

Being taken into a world which could potentially threaten one's sense of reality and sanity is not a decision taken lightly, yet apparently she voluntarily decides to go along with her husband into a dream world?

There's never a sufficient explanation as to why Mal would take this risk. It's not just Mal who's taking the risk: it's her entire family that's threatened as well.

Wouldn't she be prudent enough to weigh the possible consequences and not allow herself to go under? She is apparently very concerned about getting back to her "real" children, so she has strong morals. Where were those same morals BEFORE she decided to go under?

---

edit: second question: how are minds of all the dreaming subjects linked? Some sort of mass neural network is created so that one dream space is created. How is this achieved? There's never an explanation for it, it simply serves as a premise or foundation for the entire film.

Seems interesting enough to explain, eh?