Exploding Garrmondo Weiner Interactive Swiss Army Penis

Exploding Garrmondo Weiner Interactive Swiss Army Penis (http://www.gamingforce.org/forums/index.php)
-   Media Centre (http://www.gamingforce.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=3)
-   -   [Movie] Inception (http://www.gamingforce.org/forums/showthread.php?t=41212)

Ah! Amoeba Jul 29, 2010 09:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Worm (Post 764205)
Spoiler:
Ugh, where are people getting this "the whole movie was a dream" nonsense? Faraci is just making stuff up.

He gives pretty poor evidence for this, and I haven't seen much better elsewhere online. "Hey why is his wife on the opposite ledge?" doesn't cut it (my answer: she walked along the ledge and followed the wall of the building).

There is only one question raised by the ending of the film: is Cobb still in limbo or not? That's it. You don't therefore get to question if everything was a dream; it simply doesn't follow.

I mean, sure, you can question everything, but without some basis for dream/not-dream comparison it's meaningless conjecture and can be applied to any movie (or reality, with similarly nonsensical results). This movie is great as a layered heist film and there's no need to project "deep" thoughts onto it.

Spoiler:
We are just sort of thrown into the middle of a "dream heist" already taking place when the movie starts, which fits with what is discussed in the movie about not knowing how a dream starts. Sure, this is a common way to start a movie, but perhaps it serves a purpose here?

Also, Mal straight up questions Cobb about the people out to get him, and how is that not just like a dream? Cobb could simply be dreaming about SOME CORPORATION out to find and kill him in the first place.


Point is, I don't agree that it is such an absurd stretch to view the movie this way.

Ah! Amoeba Jul 30, 2010 09:56 AM

LeHah: I started to care about Mal/Cobb after the hotel scene. Shit was sad.



Also, whether the movie is as deep as some make it out to be or not, there is nevertheless a lot of things to discuss, which is pretty fucking cool and fun. Take the theory that there is a second, HIDDEN INCEPTION taking place during the movie, for example.


Quote:

“Do you want to become an old man, filled with regret, waiting to die alone?” These words (or something close to them) are uttered three times in the film. The first time, the words are those of Saito (Ken Watanabe), in his helicopter in Kyoto, when he first approaches Cobb about the possibility of inception. The second time, it’s in the first level of Fischer’s dream, after Saito has been shot, and Cobb tries to tell him that he’s not going to die: “You’re gonna become an old man,” Cobb says, and Saito replies, “Filled with regret.” Cobb completes the thought: “Waiting to die alone.” Already, it’s clear that this dialogue has to do with more than this particular moment in the film. It’s also significant that this happens just as Eames (Tom Hardy), pretending to be Browning (Tom Berenger) is trying to plant the idea (“incept”?) into Fischer’s head that his father may have wanted to split up his company. Fischer’s and Cobb’s fates seem strangely intertwined through the film. (“The deeper we go into Fischer, the deeper we go into you,” Ariadne says to Cobb.)

The final utterance happens near the end of the film, in Limbo, as Cobb finds the aging Saito. This time, Saito begins the exchange: “I’m an old man,” he says. “Filled with regret,” Cobb replies. There’s something specially poignant about this scene, coming as it does on the heels of Cobb having told the shadow of his wife Mal (Marion Cotillard) that they did grow old together in their dream together on Limbo, many years ago, and that he has to let her go.

This may well be the real “inception.” Cobb’s character has been consumed by regret — regret at what he’s done to his wife, regret at having abandoned his children, regret at not being able to return home. In his dreams he’s built an elevator (literally!) that stops at floors, each defined by a moment he regrets and that (as Cobb himself explains to Ariadne) he has to “change.” This elevator, and its forbidden Basement floor, which opens to the hotel room where his wife leaped to her death, could be seen as the vault in which Cobb keeps his innermost thoughts, much like the hospital/hangar where Fischer imagines his father’s deathbed, or the safe in Saito’s dream-fortress from the earlier scenes of the film. Interestingly, in Nolan’s first film, Following, one of the characters is a thief named Cobb who breaks into people’s homes and likes to say, “Everybody has their box,” referring to a box into which people always place seemingly random objects that are of sentimental value to them. In Inception, too, everybody has their box — be it a safe, a fortified hangar surrounded by armed guards on skis, or a stop on an elevator on which no one is allowed. In other words, the hotel room where Cobb last saw his wife, which is the forbidden floor on his Dream Elevator of Regret, is his “box.”

Regret is the idea that defines Cobb (which makes his recurrent use of the Edith Piaf song “Non, Je Ne Regrette Rien” as a musical countdown to the end of a given dream rather ironic and touching), and in order for him to be free, he has to defeat it. The second part of the message that Cobb and Saito exchange in their final scene in Limbo — “Take a leap of faith. Come back, so we can be young men together again” — is in direct contrast to Mal’s desire to pull him further into his dream so that they can grow old together. Cobb defeats his regret by finally telling Mal that the two of them did grow old together in their shared dream. In other words, he fulfilled his wedding promise to her. This is, perhaps, the thing that Cobb once knew but had forgotten; it’s also a positive thought that trumps the negative feeling that he betrayed his wife. It seems like a realization on his part when he actually says it to her; but it’s been basically suggested to him through Saito’s repetition of the “old man, filled with regret, waiting to die alone” meme.

So, is Cobb being pulled back to reality by this thought, or is he being prodded further into his dream? That depends, perhaps, on how you view the very end of the film: At this point, Cobb seems to be finally freed of his regret and of his memory of Mal, and has been reunited with his children. The final shot seems to indicate that he may be still dreaming (because his totem keeps spinning). If so, then he has either lost himself in Limbo entirely, or Mal was right all along, and his world was always a dream.

But whether he's still dreaming may ultimately be irrelevant: The important thing is that Cobb has been freed of his demons, and can now be reunited with what to him appear to be his real children — be they a projection or reality. Or, as the old man in Mombassa puts it, referring to the opium den of dreamers in Yusuf’s basement: “They come here to be woken up. Their dream has become their reality. Who are you to say otherwise?”
Full article here

Zip Aug 4, 2010 06:07 PM

good stuff, good movie.
Spoiler:
Dont really know which way to lean, what i do know is that most of the movie seemed very choppy. Which i first thought was bad editing but later realized it might have been on purpose. that whole blury effect adds something too. The whole dreamreading itself is very vauge and barely touched upon.

But at the same time it would really be a cliché if it was all a dream, I told my brother early that it is one (but i expected a clear answer by the end). I really like the idea that it's a metaphore for movie making, but that's only the method used to read the dreams and the rest of the story is a seperate thing.
The last scene was weird too, how did Cobb end in the water like that? And why was the dialouge so choppy (and didnt Saiko say the line "from someone in a dream long time ago" (something like that) in the begining of the movie? Cobb said it in the last scene..), was that supposed to represent "bad acting" and that gets used as a kick?


Better then i expected.

Congle line of abuse. Or is that conga-line. Or congaline. Aug 5, 2010 02:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DieSeLFueLeD (Post 763941)
This is a pretty insightful article:

NEVER WAKE UP: THE MEANING AND SECRET OF INCEPTION

Spoiler:
Also now that I've thought about it, it's plausible that the parts of the movie we assume as reality might not be. The totem is kind of red-herring if it's Cobb's own dream. He knows how it's supposed to work.

Spoiler:

Great article, first of all. I really like this theory and I'm almost half convinced by it. When a theory becomes ultra meta like that it becomes really hard to prove anything. All clues point to yes, but it's still a bunch of clues. I like that.

Either way, I really appreciate the open ending now. A person can leave having seen a great action flick or a super meta alegory, or anything in between. A good movie needs to catch a wide audience, right? So when you catch people who love action and those who love deeper meanings I think you've done something interesting.

Unfortunately you always end up with a group of people that feel like it's self indulgent or trite. Too bad for them. After a second viewing, A fucking +.

WolfDemon Aug 5, 2010 04:10 AM

I thought the movie was great, but I kinda wish it gave some sort of explanation about
Spoiler:
how they were all able to link up in the same dream. I know those machines have something to do with it, but I'd like to know what exactly happens to cause that.

Unless it was in there and I just completely didn't catch it.

Edit: So I just read that article, and I can kind of see now why it wasn't explained more. Or at least a possibility of why, if the movie is meant to be taken that way.

Congle line of abuse. Or is that conga-line. Or congaline. Aug 6, 2010 10:40 PM

Spoiler:
I appreciated them cutting that explanation. The movie was long enough and a half-baked reasoning behind what you're talking about would have been dangerous. Suspension of disbelief only goes so far and it would have, perhaps, taken the viewer out of it.

Just know that it works, that's all. Plus the lack of explanation does lend a tremendous hand to the previously mentioned meta-theory.


In other news, I'm going to go see this movie for the THIRD TIME this week, tonight.

Dark Nation Aug 6, 2010 11:31 PM

I saw this last Friday, was going to go see it again tonight but my friend wasn't feeling well. Perhaps tomorrow night. At any rate, I LOVED the movie.

Misogynyst Gynecologist Aug 7, 2010 10:20 AM

Spoiler:
Anyone start wondering if the whole thing isn't just a sloppy "turtles all the way down" explaination? I've only seen the movie once so maybe I missed something critical but when you build a movie based on "Is this a dream or isnt it" and then remove the narrative structure that the question sits on - doesn't that become an utterly meaningless exercise?

Again, I'm just throwing that out there. I'm not sure if it holds much water but I still get the feeling that theres something to it.

CloudNine Aug 18, 2010 07:00 PM

Say it ain't so: 'Inception' rips off Scrooge McDuck

Ramenbetsu Aug 20, 2010 11:54 AM

http://i.imgur.com/JiPqw.jpg

slessman Aug 20, 2010 11:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WolfDemon (Post 765310)
I thought the movie was great, but I kinda wish it gave some sort of explanation about
Spoiler:
how they were all able to link up in the same dream. I know those machines have something to do with it, but I'd like to know what exactly happens to cause that.

Unless it was in there and I just completely didn't catch it.

Edit: So I just read that article, and I can kind of see now why it wasn't explained more. Or at least a possibility of why, if the movie is meant to be taken that way.

I dunno, if you think you missed it then they didn't do a good enough job of explaining in my opinion. I think that a lot of us feel as though there wasn't adequate enough explanation in the film. I definitely could have used more. But it was enjoyable regardless. Just left me kinda stumped as far as answers to some very valid questions are concerned.

quazi Aug 21, 2010 05:42 PM

The movie didn't advertise itself as a documentary on the technology. It was explained well enough to support the plot and the bullshit science involved was glossed over. I don't think Nolan was that interested in explaining how a completely implausible machine was able to work its magic.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:13 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.