Nov. 6, 2010, 4:59 p.m. CST
Nice to see some practical effects in this day and age
Nov. 6, 2010, 5:02 p.m. CST
It'd be cool if more filmmakers didn't depend so heavily on cg.
Nov. 6, 2010, 5:07 p.m. CST
........ second pic
Nov. 6, 2010, 5:16 p.m. CST
be cool to see one of these set explosions in person
Nov. 6, 2010, 5:20 p.m. CST
And falling, and falling, and falling--sort of reminds me of that Dawson's Creek gag about how they keep slowing moving in for a kiss to the music for an eternity. <p> Very overrated film.
Nov. 6, 2010, 5:21 p.m. CST
by andrew coleman
Nolan is the man. Picture proof haha.
Nov. 6, 2010, 5:25 p.m. CST
Nov. 6, 2010, 5:26 p.m. CST
Nov. 6, 2010, 5:28 p.m. CST
by Bruce of all Trades
-- Harry Knowles <p><p>P.S. Your movies SUCK!!!
Nov. 6, 2010, 5:35 p.m. CST
... in an OK movie. I wanted to LOVE Inception, but came out somewhat indifferent. Nolan is great, and I love DiCaprio/Murphy, but the movie was too clean and cold. <p> A movie that is so emotionally distant has a huge disadvantage if it wants you to actually give a damn about the characters in it. <p> Plus, when he dropped the totem after testing the sedative he never bothered to TRY IT AGAIN. The man who is obsessed with knowing he isn't dreaming, who'll spin the fucking totem after he's already confirmed he's awake, doesn't bother to spin it again after dropping it? <p> Cheap move on Nolan's part, totally out of character, and it stuck in my head for the entirety of the film, further removing any sense of excitement or danger that may have been had otherwise. <p> The "twist" ending was just a joke, though. You see, twist endings only work if you're actually invested into the movie you're watching, and if the audience hasn't seen it coming from a mile away. <p> Still better than Scott Pilgrim, though, that movie was about 30% awesomeness diluted in 70% shit.
Nov. 6, 2010, 5:38 p.m. CST
Nov. 6, 2010, 5:41 p.m. CST
I loved both Inception & Scott Pilgrim, they made my summer. Using the word absurd in reference to Inception when your handle refers to a movie about a post grunge waif boy who kicks the fuck out of other kitschy cool dudes who turn into coins in an attempt to impress his new girlfriend and rid himself of her baggage is in and of itself absurd.
Nov. 6, 2010, 5:42 p.m. CST
it's called an open ended ending you clowns...there was no twist
Nov. 6, 2010, 5:45 p.m. CST
It's not a twist ending. It's open to interpretation and discussion like most good art Pop or otherwise is. It might not be BRILLIANT like everyone was screaming, but it made you think a bit and it did it with style and class. Not such a bad thing for a summer movie.
Nov. 6, 2010, 5:47 p.m. CST
The ending clearly shows that the top stops, so that he is not dreaming. What don't you morons get?
Nov. 6, 2010, 5:49 p.m. CST
It looks like it falters it doesn't clearly stop. It's likely that it topples but not certain. If it clearly fell over there wouldn't be a global debate on the fucking matter.
Nov. 6, 2010, 5:52 p.m. CST
What a dumbass. I'm all "Gee, I'd like to visit that place someday."
Nov. 6, 2010, 5:52 p.m. CST
the dumb masses.FACT.and this comes from someone who is a fan of Nolan's work,loved TDK and had hight expectations from Inception,especially after all that over-hype.<br /> <p>Cool BTS,yeah Nolan is very skillful in the technicality stuff of film-making.its a pity though his insistence (or inability?) to understand and use the wonderful 3D technology and its advantages,will eventually leave him behind in the evolution of the film-making process and the cinematic art.<br /> <p>anyway.
Nov. 6, 2010, 5:55 p.m. CST
by Bruce of all Trades
It faltering at the end of the movie was 1) a hint that he was no longer in the dream world, in case some people were still wondering and 2) a little wink and smile from Nolan who probably wanted to avoid flat out showing the top stop spinning. <p><p>Oh, and Michael Caine revealed in an interview that it was the real world. Fuck the global debate.
Nov. 6, 2010, 5:59 p.m. CST
Period. Partly because he actually MAKES films by building real sets whenever he can, not hiring a bunch of nerds to sit in front of a goddamn computer for two years like the Camerons and the Lucas's and the Abrams. As for the spinning top ...there is NO twist, there is NO open ending, its a conclusive ending and cutting to black was just a cinematic technique from a director who understands cinema.
Nov. 6, 2010, 6 p.m. CST
I have no problem with people saying they like or don't like a movie. But when you sit there and call everyone who liked the movies the "dumb masses", then you've crossed over into being a "dumb masses" yourself. Is it so hard to simply say why you disliked or liked a movie..instead of trying to convince everyone who they were wrong to like it? What a loser.
Nov. 6, 2010, 6:10 p.m. CST
Worthy of envy. Schmuck.
Nov. 6, 2010, 6:13 p.m. CST
and carefully walks you through his movie ,explaining to you every second in the movie,in the most analytical and detailed way what is going on so that your poor brain can comprehend and you wont be lost in the movie,then my dear talkbacker it is the director and not me,who thinks of his audience to be too dumb to understand his movie.am i wrong?
Nov. 6, 2010, 6:14 p.m. CST
makes engagingly thoughtful movies, but there's a distinct lack of 'warmth' in his body of work. They don't engage you emotionally. I admire Memento but can't love it. The same for The Prestige, Insomnia and The Dark Knight. Very Cronenbergian in terms of emotional involvement. Go figure. Still waiting for Inception...where I live the nearest English-language movie house is like hours away, so it'll have to be the DVD.
Nov. 6, 2010, 6:17 p.m. CST
by TV's Frank
didn't feel like dreams. Watch a David Lynch movie if you want to see how to make a movie feel like a dream. Still, Inception was decent enough. An original idea, at least. My favorite Nolan film is The Prestige.
Nov. 6, 2010, 6:19 p.m. CST
Oh I forgot. You're just a hateful internet fanboy who has never done anything creative in his life other than slam good films from the comfort of his annonymous computer screen. My mistake.
Nov. 6, 2010, 6:23 p.m. CST
seen the guy on bottom wake up for a split second and see the ceiling splats. Any of you nerds smart enough to know what the fuck I just said? Harry isn't. And I really think it's cool that DiCaprios now grown kids are the ones trying to pull him out of the dreamworld the whole movie. He still sees them unaged at the end and we know that its a fucking dream and Kane is about to finally get through to him.
Nov. 6, 2010, 6:24 p.m. CST
what is a good movie,and which perfectly describes the major problem with Inception:<br /> <br /> <p>"The mediocre movie explains everything twice and always means exactly what it says. It waves its sincerity aloft like a truce flag. It leaves no questions unanswered. It tells you exactly where you should stand in relation to its characters and its subject matter. It is frequently soothing because it tells you that you are right. Then, too, it can be like an unrelenting host who holds you captive until you finish every last morsel on the plate. But it tends not to stick in the memory because there's nothing there to wonder about."<br /> <br /> <p>as i said,only the passage of time will show how much of a classic,Inception really is.
Nov. 6, 2010, 6:25 p.m. CST
Nov. 6, 2010, 6:26 p.m. CST
*sigh* Why does it escape so many people that this is the point, despite the fact that it is discussed explicitly in the film more than once? Cobb and his crew are attempting to trick the dreamer into thinking they are awake.
Nov. 6, 2010, 6:27 p.m. CST
just goes to show you how awesome Nolan is and how CGI sucks
Nov. 6, 2010, 6:30 p.m. CST
going to pick on any one of the myriad techniques used to create movies. I would say the tit stunt double is severely underused and therefore sucks by default. Tit stunt doubles suck.
Nov. 6, 2010, 6:31 p.m. CST
its a con
Nov. 6, 2010, 6:35 p.m. CST
I've watched it a couple of times this week. I think it's a movie I will rewatch for years. That makes it a classic for me, much as the first Matrix movie would have been, if the sequels had never been made.
Nov. 6, 2010, 6:40 p.m. CST
<br>This is the problem about worrying too much about special effects, or making everything in the script work completely, or any other demand that films be absolutely positively real: They aren't and can never be.</br> <br>The truth is, that if you think hard enough about any movie, look closely enough at any frame, compare it strictly enough to reality, not only will no film survive, no film will be FUN!</br> <br>It's all complete bullshit, and I pity the person who feels it necessary to do everything they can, whether it's obsessing over how the effects are done, or microanalyzing every frame, every sentence for defects, when they watch a movie.</br> <br>Storytelling is about communicating complex feelings and ideas, our experience of the world. Being a creation of man, with man's limited mental abilities, it will always fall short of reality. So don't worry too much about it. If it smacks you in the face, fine, I understand. But if it doesn't, just let it go, and admit that much about how you look at films depends on a standard that you can't force on another person: what you like, and how you look at the world. So folks, just relax.</br>
Nov. 6, 2010, 6:41 p.m. CST
the van falling sequence? Even people who hate Inception must surely realize what a bravura piece of filmmaking that was. Probably the most brilliant use of cross-cutting we've seen in decades. These pictures are awesome, btw. Terrific miniatures. The person who said Bay would have just used CGI is right on. A lazy filmmaker is a cynical filmmaker, which is probably why Bay's films are cold-hearted douchebaggery. A Wesleyan grad should know better!
Nov. 6, 2010, 6:43 p.m. CST
our future children and their children will watch for many years to come. thank you Nolan for restoring our faith in movies again.
Nov. 6, 2010, 6:45 p.m. CST
how could it be fake?
Nov. 6, 2010, 6:47 p.m. CST
one of the best parts of the film and i am sure it will be duplicated a lot in future flicks,like they did with the Matrix bullet-time effect.Although that's more that effect,it's an amazing work of movie editing.<br /> <p>its a pity though that after that scene,we got the fucked-up,retarded action scene in the snow which failed even to be a modernized tribute to the similar ITMSS Bond movie snow scene.wtf was Nolan thinking with that?
Nov. 6, 2010, 6:51 p.m. CST
as some reviewers foolishly called it. But as blockbusters go these days it was way above par. Looking forward to catching it again on DVD.
Nov. 6, 2010, 6:52 p.m. CST
by Stifler's Mom
from MASTERPIECE! BEST MOVIE EVER!to MEDIOCRE. BEST MOVIE OF MID-JULY. Yeah, sit up and take your medicine all you gushing Nolan fanboys. INCEPTION is cool in parts but was wayyy overrated upon initial release. Eat me.
Nov. 6, 2010, 6:56 p.m. CST
Incredible movie. Can't wait for the BD. Don't like the movie? I feel sorry for you. Not in a negative way, but there are so few movies that get me pumped up so much. Maybe Tron will rank up there...
Nov. 6, 2010, 6:57 p.m. CST
it is very well-crafted,noone denies that.but as content goes,it is a very shallow,indifferent and ultimately a very boring movie.and that imho is even a worse thing for a movie,to be mediocre than purely bad.at least with TF2 and the other garbages of its kind,you can cannibalize it and laugh at,but with Inception there is nothing to talk about.no questions,no debates,no personal interpretations,nothing at all.only boredom.YAAWWWN.
Nov. 6, 2010, 7:04 p.m. CST
Some of my dumber high school students thought that it was boring too. Are you a dumb high school student? My smarter ones loved it and in fact argued that it was not boring. I know it's a matter of opinion. Just saying, great minds (or not) think alike.
Nov. 6, 2010, 7:06 p.m. CST
Nov. 6, 2010, 7:11 p.m. CST
by jimmy rabbitte
I couldn't care less, if anyone agrees with me. When the blu-ray comes out, it's going into my library. Trying to explain the greatness, of this movie to its' detractors, is akin to casting ones pearls before swine.
Nov. 6, 2010, 7:11 p.m. CST
I was thinking about whether or not to leave the theater the whole time so I was on the edge of the seat to make it a quicker exit. No. I actually absorbed every second and got it the first time. Haven't seen it again but it's all bullshit and his kids don't age. He's still in the dream and kane's character is finally getting him to come out of it with all that elaborate crap we just had to watch.
Nov. 6, 2010, 7:12 p.m. CST
... in EMPIRE I think, where the reporter visited the snow fortress in Colorado or someplace and watched them blow it up. Am I delusional? Does anyone else remember this?
Nov. 6, 2010, 7:16 p.m. CST
The ‘twist’ (if it can even be described as a twist - it was more of a resolution) is that Cobb knew Inception would work as hed already done it with his wife - planted the idea the world isn’t real so when she came out the dream she sill believed it - and killed herself as a result<p> and of course we are meant to think at the end with the spinning top that Cobb may still be in Z land (like the end of Total Recall) - although thats more of a fun thing for the audience - not a 'twist' <p> But basically it was just a straight forward heist movie (set in dreams) - it was basically an Mission Impossible film set in the mind (in fact it wouldnt be totally out of place as an MI film - just a little bit more freaky than usual)<p> as a Sci Fi junkie who worshipped The Matrix back in 99 i was expecting it to be a tad more...sci fi i.e. a cool twist like one of these (after the actual mission to get the idea into Scarecrows mind is completed and then gets sidelined as they have to somehow deal with this new thing ):<p> -they find out that they are actually passing into alternate realities and are inhabiting their alternate reality bodies... <p> -Cobb comes to realise that the reality of the human mind is just a dream itself (when Cobb talked of 'going home' i figured itd be revealed that he was in a dream the whole time ) e.g. at the end when the kids finally turned around they wouldn’t have faces - and that would mean Cobb was stuck in limbo<p> -by delving deeper and deeper (dream within a dream) past limbo Cobb uncovers heaven (i.e. death) <p> sue me but id have liked something twilight zoney like one of those
Nov. 6, 2010, 7:17 p.m. CST
The fact that Nolan could not only come up with this idea, but be able to get it into a screenplay and coherently get it on the screen still baffles me. Wonderful film.
Nov. 6, 2010, 7:20 p.m. CST
Inception and The Social Network. Nice BTS pic.
Nov. 6, 2010, 7:21 p.m. CST
The problem I have with Vincent's definition of what makes a good movie vs. what makes a mediocre movie is that it's <i>his</i> definition, and not a universal standard. I happen to agree with him. I like movies that stick in my head and make me think...sometimes. However, there are other times that I see a movie because I'm tired, and I want to shut my brain off (or at least cut it back to 50%) and just be entertained. Of course I still want things to make sense, but I don't want to have to work my brain. In those times, a movie like, say, POTC: Curse of the Black Pearl fits the bill nicely. It's fun and entertaining, and there are no glaring examples of illogical moments (according to the rules of that universe). For that reason, although I'd never for a minute think it should win Best Picture, I still think it's a good film. </br> Still, I'm a little cautious when I hear someone trying to assert a universal standard for something that exists more in the realm of subjectivity...even if I agree with the gist of their statement.
Nov. 6, 2010, 7:21 p.m. CST
it has scifi elements,but it does not belong in the scifi genre.FACT.
Nov. 6, 2010, 7:30 p.m. CST
the absurdity of Inception's concept:<br /> <p>http://bit.ly/cMz9y9<br /> <p>http://bit.ly/99zfLX<br /> <br /> <p>and South Park ripped them off.
Nov. 6, 2010, 7:34 p.m. CST
is pretty explicitly stated by George Wendt to Dennis Quaid in the movie Dreamscape.
Nov. 6, 2010, 7:35 p.m. CST
It is definitely science fiction. It is set in the near future, involving tech that does not exist, and explores that particular tech's influence on a group of characters. How is that not science fiction? It's basically cyberpunk - information theft, rogue information extraction agents who fight countermeasures, engineering company hit squads, etc.
Nov. 6, 2010, 7:36 p.m. CST
by Anything But Tangerines
too spoilery? still better, though
Nov. 6, 2010, 7:36 p.m. CST
Dom Cobb - Harrison Ford<p> Arthur - Michael Biehn<p> Eames - Rutger Hauer<p> Ariadne - Heather Locklear<p> Mal - Sigoney Weaver<p> Saito - George Takei<p> Robert Fischer - William Hurt<p> Peter Browning - Charlton Heston<p> Miles - Alec Guinness<p> directed by Ridley Scott
Nov. 6, 2010, 7:55 p.m. CST
How could you guys say Bay would have just used CG-- isn't he the same guy that actually shot at the pyramids in Egypt, and is currently holding Chicago hostage to more jive talking robot shenanigans? Not to say it's done to any great effect, TF2 was the worst pile of s---, but at least be less lazy in your nerdy "Bay sucks" sheepisms.
Nov. 6, 2010, 8:02 p.m. CST
I didn't even make it to the scene in the "picture of the day". Doesn't look like I missed much...
Nov. 6, 2010, 8:03 p.m. CST
I thought it was neato!
Nov. 6, 2010, 8:13 p.m. CST
Just after the Matrix came out I surfed the web looking for clues as to what the Matrix sequel would be like. I stubble on a blog that supposidly gave away spoilers to Matrix Reloaded. Almost everything I saw in inception I remember reading on this blog in 2000. <p> Needless to say the real Matrix Reloaded was just a good action movie with no real plot and nothing in Inception resembles Reloaded. <p> But in the blog the writer told how there would be a Matrix with-in the matrix and that Neo and Trinity and the team would travel down many levels of the matrix. The further they would travel, the more time would phase in between levels of the matricies. Neo, Trinity and the team learned to have more power in the lower levels and trinity learns how to fold space with her mind. Just like how Ellen Page foldered the city in Inception. The team learn to walk among agents and fool them into thinking they were in pods in the power plants. But certain actions would awaken agents and make them suspicious. Just like the people projections in Inception. <p> One other thing. In this blog it stated that Trinity was actually an agent would occupied a body in the real world. And Trinity was leading Neo and the team to their doom. --- the situation with Mal is a little similar...
Nov. 6, 2010, 8:20 p.m. CST
including twice in a row last night. One of the top 5 films that came out this year. You hipster douchebags who think it's over-rated should actually take a screen writing class and create something better. Can't be that hard after all, right? Twats.
Nov. 6, 2010, 8:25 p.m. CST
by Anything But Tangerines
it's about Edith Piaf. watch it again. won't hurt
Nov. 6, 2010, 8:30 p.m. CST
Can't believe I'm having to state the obvious on this site of all sites. The reason it's brilliant is that I didn't pick up on it until halfway thru the 2nd viewing. It's called subtext and subtlety. View it again. Learn.
Nov. 6, 2010, 8:38 p.m. CST
I coincidently rented Shutter island just 1 week before Inception came out in the theater. While watching inception, I did get hints that possibly the same thing was going on, but that quickly faded... I mean come on... other than being Leo DiCaprio, they're not really similar much at all, are they? ( can't go into more detail without major spoilers for Shutter Island, which I hope everyone in the TB will appreciate needs more spoiler protection than Inception )
Nov. 6, 2010, 8:43 p.m. CST
The TOP was not his totem! There is no twist. The top i( and the noise ) is there as a red herring of sorts to reach the people who don't completely understand. His totem was his children. His immediate and complete shift away from the top without ever caring what the outcome is is the proof that he absolutely knew he was in the real world. <BR><BR>That's the moral to the story... you think you know what love is and what you can depend on in your life until you finally experience true love and the love of your children. And you know it is real, and its so obvious you never need to think twice about it.
Nov. 6, 2010, 8:45 p.m. CST
I agree with what most people are saying..it's certainly not a bad movie but mediocre at best. Had enough cool parts and great cinematgraphy that can't give it too bad of a grade.
Nov. 6, 2010, 8:47 p.m. CST
I have to admit, that is pretty badass. I actually thought it was a real location (dressed up of course ) in the movie, so this is sort of a mind fuck for me.
Nov. 6, 2010, 8:53 p.m. CST
Inception is the most overrated film I've seen in a long time. The acting was blah, the visuals were even more blah and the entire script was nothing but exposition. Almost every line was a character explaining something. There was no character development at all. I can't believe this movie was so successful.
Nov. 6, 2010, 9:09 p.m. CST
within inception it just felt like a tacked on action set piece to me.
Nov. 6, 2010, 9:23 p.m. CST
horrible movie about boring characters I never cared about. Likeable characters simply dont matter any more, it seems.
Nov. 6, 2010, 9:28 p.m. CST
basic concept of the Matrix2,with Neo and co discovering a new Matrix inside the Matrix etc and Jet Li was approached to play a very bad-ass character with super-powers like Neo but eventually that character turned into that asian protector-program of the Oracle.i guess they canned it because they were afraid that the audience might got confused and instead we two garbage sequels.
Nov. 6, 2010, 9:48 p.m. CST
The first half of The Matrix was guilty of the same - just Morpheus explaining all kinds of stuff to Neo. Any semi-complex genre film has that, so why is Inception singled out? Even Avatar - which was a very DUMB POS film and THE most overrated film of the last ten years - had plenty of scenes of Sigourney Weaver explaining a lot of dumb science to move the plot forward. Avatar was much, much more awkward and stilted than Inception in explaining scientific principles, and Avatar was a DUMB movie. Inception was a borderline masterpiece and don't be surprised if Nolan wins Best Director in a few months time.
Nov. 6, 2010, 9:58 p.m. CST
explain stuff in its second half.that's fucking why.i am not kidding when i say that i got a big headache while watching the movie,because of its unprecedented over-exposition.Dear mr Nolan the movies are made to watch them,NOT to read them.ok?
Nov. 6, 2010, 10:04 p.m. CST
explaining a lot of dumb science to move the plot forward. Avatar was much"<br /> <br /> <p>BWAHAHAHAHAHA.oh fuck it i am too bored to reply even to that,i am going to get some sleep.i hope Turd will make an appearance here and kick some pathetic Avatar-hater ass as he usually does.cheerio.
Nov. 6, 2010, 11:12 p.m. CST
It was hyped up in Empire as Bond meets the Matrix, which to me wasn't really the case with the exception of DiCaprio having on gloves and a silencer and Inception taking place in a dream world. And freaqin Ellen Page said she liked the charaqter because it added something to the story instead of just being a chiq, but imo she was pretty annoying as f%@^ and all she did was be nosy and go further into DiCaprio's dreams than what was allowed. Maybe on further viewings I'll like it more but as it stands the only thing Inception did was give me a hint as to who would be in The Dark Knight Rises.
Nov. 6, 2010, 11:21 p.m. CST
Caine said SPOILER that Christopher Nolan told him any time his charaqter was onscreen was the real world, that he never appeared in the dreams. I can't find the link but it's out there. That aside I'm enjoying reading some of the posts here about the totems and theories and stuff.
Nov. 6, 2010, 11:25 p.m. CST
Enter The Void. That is a serious new genre movie with tons of effects, and a true Kubrick-ian accomplished work. Inception was cool and packed a nice resonant punch in it's ending, but there's a lot in it that's schlocky and forced and on the nose. And the only great things for me in Dark Knight were the villians... Batman's character was weak... and sounded CORNY.
Nov. 6, 2010, 11:37 p.m. CST
has one sorry ass future ahead of him. I think we all knew people like him at one point. Or you'll meet some. Its sad really. People so damned stupid they can't even understand their own stupidity. <P> Inception was genius...FILM MAKING. If you want legit complex scientific/psychological theory you're in for some boring ass shit. Like Scott Pilgrim vs. anyone who isn't a hippy faggot.
Nov. 7, 2010, 12:04 a.m. CST
you sir are a stupid fuck. Go jack off to Step Up 3D or any other shitty 3D fare that you love.
Nov. 7, 2010, 12:12 a.m. CST
Avatar had the most researched and well done Science of any big name movie of the 21st century so far. Your post is a complete and utter joke. Theres more interesting science and concepts in the space ship that is seen for less than a minute in Avatar, than there is in the entirety of Inception.
Nov. 7, 2010, 12:22 a.m. CST
Its that Nolan builds his movies around Gimmicks. The Joker is the Gimmick of TDK. Look beyond him and the plot completely falls apart. The movie has no replay value whatsoever. Same with Inception. Its ending is its Gimmick. A cheap way to generate discussion. But when you get past that you realize Inception is an absolutely empty movie with nothing worth talking about. Nolan is a charlatan. hes great at tricking audiences into thinking his movies have substance. But at heart hes a follower. Hes a wannabe Ridley Scott, or a wannabe Micheal Mann, or a wannabe whatever director he desperately tries to emulate while making Batman 3.
Nov. 7, 2010, 1:11 a.m. CST
at least his flicks still have substance rather than a m. night nowadays. given the choice id go with him cuz at least its a halfassed attempt and you kinda knew what he was goin for.
Nov. 7, 2010, 1:19 a.m. CST
by Cosmo Nautilus
At least it wasn't Avatar. Fuck you, James Cameron.
Nov. 7, 2010, 1:23 a.m. CST
I honestly question the test and intelligence of anyone who thought Inception was boring or a bad movie. It sounds like hipster wanna be douchebaggery to me(big surprise on here where people try to be cool by hating on things that either make money or are interesting....). I'm a friggin Mensa member and I thought it was fascinating. Besides, it's a movie!!! Just because you dig around and find some sort of error in the concept doesn't mean it wasn't entertaining and thought provoking. IMO, that's what cinema is for!!!! It's to entertain and make us think. In fact I would make the argument that any film that stirs up such a broad spectrum of opinions also leads to heated discussion of it's concepts, themes and characterizations is by default a great movie....
Nov. 7, 2010, 1:23 a.m. CST
damn we need an edit button
Nov. 7, 2010, 1:24 a.m. CST
While the rest of us just laugh
Nov. 7, 2010, 1:26 a.m. CST
Ahahahaha, thanks youve shown me the light. Inception is BRILLIANT
Nov. 7, 2010, 1:43 a.m. CST
but i will buy Inception next month.
Nov. 7, 2010, 1:48 a.m. CST
what a meaningless empty life you must lead......... So much anger and self loathing that you feel you must project it out onto talkback land where you can anoint yourself as some sort of king speaking down to your subjects.... If you think that Inception was empty and gimmicky, then I must say that your ability to have a good time at the movies is depressingly awful. Good day sir...
Nov. 7, 2010, 1:48 a.m. CST
Nov. 7, 2010, 1:50 a.m. CST
The only imaginationative explosion I need this weekend!
Nov. 7, 2010, 1:03 a.m. CST
by Cosmo Nautilus
inception iz 2 hi brow 4 u tards lolz go study
Nov. 7, 2010, 1:11 a.m. CST
Unlike the other totems, its default behavior as imagined by a would-be deceiver (spin then topple) would work perfectly well in convincing the target. The chess piece and weighted die make perfect sense as totems; the top does not. <p> The movie's logic is full of holes and inconsistencies. It's a pseud's playground.
Nov. 7, 2010, 1:21 a.m. CST
Is that the rules get changed as you go along, or at least asserted on the fly after the movie has taken its latest left turn. A really good script establishes rules and then has its characters use them consistently but in a surprising, satisfying manner. In Inception I felt like Nolan was just making shit up as he went along: the consequences of death, the way that kicks worked, the nature and consequences of limbo. <p> It was audacious and had some nice ideas and visuals, but I didn't think it managed to hang together as a coherent logical edifice. It felt like Nolan was throwing a load of shit at me that was designed to have a convincing veneer of smartness and sophistication, and hoping that I was so bamboozled that I didn't look behind the curtain. Ultimately even dream narratives need rules that you can trust. You're faced with a typical Cartesian problem: if you can't trust that anything is real, you lack an anchor and you can't really ascribe meaning or consequence to anything. Hey, maybe the whole story is just some bloke dreaming after falling asleep at the beach! That would certainly explain the lack of consistent logic, right? Well, yeah, and...(shrugs)...is that interesting?
Nov. 7, 2010, 1:27 a.m. CST
"POTC: Curse of the Black Pearl fits the bill nicely. It's fun and entertaining, and there are no glaring examples of illogical moments (according to the rules of that universe)" <p> I can think of at least one scene that made no sense for me: <p> Barbossa has an extended swordfight with Jack Sparrow that goes on for ages. <p> What exactly is each one trying to achieve? They are both under the curse at the time, therefore both immortal. What is at stake? What is Sparrow trying to do, and what is Barbossa trying to do? It's not even as though they're fighting on behalf of other people, to get to X or to prevent someone from getting to X. They're just fighting. They might as well have sat down and had a game of chess with each other. Pointless.
Nov. 7, 2010, 1:28 a.m. CST
Nov. 7, 2010, 1:29 a.m. CST
But instead it sucked my balls. And went on sucked them for too long. Why?
Nov. 7, 2010, 1:30 a.m. CST
Nov. 7, 2010, 1:31 a.m. CST
Belgian beer. Sorry. Blame the delicious monks.
Nov. 7, 2010, 2:22 a.m. CST
Nolan told a very simple dumbed down story which everyone could follow and did. Yet to meet anyone who was "confused" by what was going on. If any, you could say Nolan was guilty of over simplifying things, explaining every single beat to audience.<p> In the end, important is not if top toppled or not, but Leo's reaction. The moment he sees his kids, he ignores the top and goes on. Goes to show, it doesn't matter. He doesn't care.
Nov. 7, 2010, 3 a.m. CST
It might be an idea to check your spelling and grammar before you rush to call other people dumb. You come across as a semiliterate fool.
Nov. 7, 2010, 3:52 a.m. CST
Nov. 7, 2010, 4:32 a.m. CST
like many I was a huge fan of Matrix 1 when it came out in 99- not for the bullet time or action etc..but for the story and the Twilight Zone/Outer Limitsness of it all...at times it really did feel like a mega budget Twilight Zone or even some far off sequel to Terminator (which itself was heavily inspired by a couple of eps of Outer Limits). I particularly like all the stuff BEFORE he gets out of the matrix - the mystery of it all...the eeriness...the WTF is going on uneasy feeling....then we find out the ingenious twist (it was great that they managed to keep that under wraps in the trailers etc) in fact id have liked it had that been the entire movie and the end had been him waking up in the pod...and thatd be the end of movie - sequel would be the 2nd part of the movie - all the action - training, saving Morpheous etc <p> Anyway like many i was severely let down by the sequels as i was hoping for some startling revelations about who built the matrix and big Twilight Zone style twists etc - but they never came. Instead there was just nonsensical pompous dialogue and boring action with bad CGI. Perhaps itd have been better had Reloaded and Revolutions been one 2 hour film - cutting out all the crap like Zion, the rave, French guy, Indian family, Trinity dying about 27 times etc (plus had some better resolution to it all than Revolutions managned)... So youd have The Matrix in 1999 and The Matrix II in 2003 and then maybe had a prequel in 2006 (live action version of the great ‘Second Renaissance’ - not done as an anime) <p> Reloaded wasnt too bad (although no where [i]near[/i] in the same league as part 1 and the Zion scenes and the frenchman scenes were stupid) - but the 3rd was terrible...all was not lost after Reloaded - everyone was expecting and hoping for something great in the 3rd movie so it could be one great trilogy - but it never came <p> And regarding the end to Revolutions - Id have liked it if something crazy had been revealed - e.g. if itd had all been revealed to be a drug induced hallucination from when he swallowed the red pill from Morpehous in part 1... A new mind drug that targets your secret fantasys and makes them seem real to you - in this case a boring office geek think hes kung fu kicking saviour of mankind in a Terminator-esque future...a wishful fantasy that many a Sci Fi obsessed geek secretly yearns for (wouldve tied in with all the Anderson asleep scenes in the first part of the movie) <p> or maybe - at the end we find out that the real world was also a matrix within the matrix (hence why he could use his powers outside the matrix at the end of part 2) - last scene of the 3rd film is Neo asleep in another pod....he never left the matrix <p> Anything twisty and Twilight Zoney like that really - id have liked that instead of the stupid Aliens rip off playing everything straight like a typical boring action movie - starring Mrs Will Smith (cos along with Link and his wife that’s who were were REALLY interested in seeing right?)<p> The Matrix sequels are up there with the Highlander sequels for completely ruining the original movie and making you think it wasn’t as good as it was (which it was)<p> some of the stuff and ideas in Inception was along the lines of what i was hoping to see in the matrix sequels....maybe the success of Inception will make Warner think to relaunch the Matrix franchise (with different directors of course)<p>
Nov. 7, 2010, 5:13 a.m. CST
Thought this was a dead ringer for the Al Ghul temple.
Nov. 7, 2010, 5:29 a.m. CST
and Im not kidding, if that movie didnt move you then just keep smoking pot cuz thats what youre good for.
Nov. 7, 2010, 5:31 a.m. CST
Nolan made an intelligent, well crafted blockbuster and Cameron made a shiny cartoon for retarded hicks. If you want a comparison, Inception was as good as the first Matrix film, and Avatar was a sticky turd like The Phantom Menace.<P>BTW it always makes me chuckle when people say Avatar is "well researched". The film is brimming with hokey science. What is the scientific mechanism behind the "link" that controls the Avatars? Surely there must be somekind of a signal going from the link to the avatar? If that is the case, shouldn't the Avatar's have an aerial coming out of their brain and protruding out the top of their skull like a remote controlled vehicle? Even then any kind of interference with the signal (atmospheric, mountainous terrain) would make the avatars collapse or go into uncontrolled spasms. The whole plugging in your neural hair stalk into any organism...uh, no. It was completely retarded. Anyone who's taken a Neuroscience 101 lesson knows that is complete crap. It assumed that every living organism on Pandora evolved at exactly the same pace and share compatable physiology, neural pathways and neurotransmitter chemicals. Its one of the most retarded and hokey scientific "cocepts" of the last forty years.<P>Also...waterfalls on floating mountains? Where did all that water come from ? Even if there was continual torrential rain there would never be enough water to sustain a waterfall. Cameron committed a cardinal sin of sci-fi - he did bullshit science because it LOOKS PRETTY.<p>Eywa was a painfully bad concept. Like what Shyamamlan was doing with The Happening. If it was something subtle like a new virus killing the human aliens that would have been believable. But somehow co-ordinating species to attack was Disney level hokum. Again Cameron committed a cardinal sin of sci-fi - bullshit science to go for an audience pleasing result. Avatar was hokum from beginning to end. It made Inception look like a PhD dissertation.
Nov. 7, 2010, 5:37 a.m. CST
And I believe Nolan is still getting warmed up, he'll come up with another masterpiece in the future. I'm just glad Nolan didnt stick to fantasy and does sci-fi instead.
Nov. 7, 2010, 5:37 a.m. CST
Way too clinical and literal. Dreams are far more bizarre, random & ever changing. David Lynch is indeed the king of dreamlike flicks and Nolan laid a big fat sterile turd. I HATED this movie.
Nov. 7, 2010, 5:51 a.m. CST
...so we could tell which posters are being stupid because they're childish kids...and who are the truly fully formed adult moron douchebags who like to declare with such superiority how a movie is a piece of shit and everyone who likes it is has no filmic taste.<p>It's gotta be pretty sad living in your world where no movie can possibly compare to the failed ideas in your head that will never make it to the screen.
Nov. 7, 2010, 5:55 a.m. CST
But you can't do anything about it: Inception was an awesome movie.
Nov. 7, 2010, 5:56 a.m. CST
Quint, this and the ALIEN pic might just be my fave bts pics of the day thus far.<p> Shots showing actors or directors on set aren't half as exciting to me as shots showing fx and model work... and this one for INCEPTION is superb.<p> Lot's of people blowing off steam saying the movie was terrible (riiight - you guys must have REALLY high standards if that's your definition of terrible).. but I doubt anyone could say the model pictured is anything short of epic. That's some Ken Adams James Bond style shit right there! Bravo to the builders.
Nov. 7, 2010, 5:58 a.m. CST
...complain that the movie explained too much, while the other half nitpick about plot points (such as why the dreams are literal and not fantastical) that they didn't get even though they were explained over and over again. Amazingly entertaining.
Nov. 7, 2010, 6:35 a.m. CST
Nov. 7, 2010, 7:30 a.m. CST
-On Her Majesty's Secret Service (1969) <p> -The mountain headquarters in the third level dream is modelled on the one from OHMSS<p> -2001 Space Odyssey vibe when Cobb meeets Saito on the 4th level. Also when Cillian Murphy's character approaches the vault and then sees his father, for some reason felt 2001-ish.<p> -Batman Begins (2005) - In the first level dream when Robert Fischer is bundled into the van, a bag is placed over his head, referencing The Scarecrow character <p> -the whole Edith Pieff thing (the same actress as La Vie En Rose)<p> -The Quiet Earth - Cobb waking up on the beach - abit similar to the final scene of Quiet Earth
Nov. 7, 2010, 7:42 a.m. CST
only in your dreams.HA.<br />
Nov. 7, 2010, 7:46 a.m. CST
But yet to see the Social Network, Toy Story 3 in second. <p><br />I have seen a lot of movies this year but would struggle to come up with a worthy top 10.
Nov. 7, 2010, 8:06 a.m. CST
i had great expectations for the Matrix sequels,the W bro had established their universe,they had a great concept in their hands and there were numerous ways to expand their story from there.But at the end of the day,they fucked up royally creating two disappointing sequels which retcon-ed and recycled the first movie and were aimed mostly as fan-service,pop-corn movies heavily filled with a lot of unnecessary eye-candy vfxs and superficial philosophical bumbling to please their young fanbase.<br /> <p>at first i blamed their producer Ron Silver for the sequels fiasco,but after a bunch of mediocre films from the W bro,i came to terms with the fact that the whole blame for the M sequels was on the W and that the original Matrix was nothing more than just lighting in a bottle.<br /> <p>now they are trying to be relevant again by making a hard r-rated,iraq war movie about gay soldiers falling in love.right.
Nov. 7, 2010, 8:42 a.m. CST
and all of humanity
Nov. 7, 2010, 10:14 a.m. CST
is generally this: An intellectually and artisticly average person with a compelling need to construct and maintain a belief that they are actually above average. One of the simplest ways to do this, is to observe something that many people like, and then assert claims that it is beneath you. This is most commonly observed in conversations about music. There is an awesome pie chart floating around, divided into sections for 'Music I like' and 'Music you like'. Where the two sections overlap is labelled 'Music I used to like'. The sad thing about the Hipster Douchebag is that since his intellect is actually average, or below average, he is unable to realize that his efforts are actually having the opposite effect of what he intended. There are a great many Hipster Douchebags on this site, and in this thread.<br><br> ***To clarify, you are not a Hipster Douchebag because you don't like Inception. Art is subjective and everyone has different tastes, no one expects or requires you to like the same things they do. You are a Hipster Douchebag because you *needed to point out to people* that like Inception that it, and it's creator, did not meet your personal standards of quality.
Nov. 7, 2010, 10:16 a.m. CST
Yup. Still falling. Very, very slowly.
Nov. 7, 2010, 10:27 a.m. CST
by Thunderbolt Ross
Nov. 7, 2010, 10:33 a.m. CST
It's not a cerebral movie, but it's a movie that LOOKS and FEELS cerebral. Sorry, INCEPTION fans, but I was very disappointed by this movie. Nolan had a cool gimmick for this tale, but a cool gimmick does not a great film make. Nolan is just not that gifted at the craft of storytelling. I think we can agree that MEMENTO was well done, but I haven't seen any other Nolan film that didn't look like it could have been so much better in the hands of a more gifted storyteller/director. With BB and TDK, he had the advantage of having a built-in audience desperate to see another BATMAN movie under pretty much any circumstances. Nolan got a free pass and people tended to overlook the many, many flaws in those films. You know this to be true -- were it not for Ledger's untimely death and his stellar performance in TDK, that film would have been much less fascinating. Nolan has such a rabid fanbase now it almost amounts to "bad manners" to criticize his films. Are we even ALLOWED to disagree about Nolan nowadays? Hey, if you liked INCEPTION, then by all means enjoy the film all you can. Buy the DVD, watch it over and over and enjoy yourself. But I suspect that the overwhelming love-fest for INCEPTION and all-things-Nolan will fade and settle down to a more objective and reasonable level soon enough.
Nov. 7, 2010, 10:36 a.m. CST
you do realize that the van was falling in slow-mo because we were seeing it move on that level of the dream in relation to how the people were experiencing time on the lower level of the dream, right? I mean I would totally agree on the slow-mo van being a douchebaggy filmmaking move if it were not for the fact that it actually had relevance to the scene? <br><br> I mean it's literally one of the only times slow-mo has been used for an actual purpose, to illustrate one of the key ideas of the narrative, instead of just being there as a cheap way of building dramatic tension, which is how it is used in just about every other film in existence, and THIS is the film your dogging for using a slow-mo scene? Irony?
Nov. 7, 2010, 10:52 a.m. CST
...which was an on-set report describing them watching them blow up the full-size version of that set on the mountain for real. Apparently the whole thing just fell the wrong way so they decided to pick up the explosion as a model shot later... So that's what this must be. Cool to see the 'end' of that story!
Nov. 7, 2010, 10:52 a.m. CST
was how he handled the subconscious limbo. When DiCaprio first described it, they made it sound like a fate worse than death, being trapped in infinity. It reminded me of Stephen Kings 'The Jaunt' where the disembodied consciousness literally experiences billions of years in the few moments that it is disembodied. A truly terrifying idea. Then when they revealed that 'limbo' was the place where Cobb and his wife lived for 50 years, I was like wait, that doesn't sound that bad. I mean on the scale of limbos, being stuck in a place where you have Godlike control over a self-made reality for a few decades isn't really that bad. You could flesh out and explore every creative idea you've ever had, and then a few decades later, as in Dicaprio's case was just about the exact amount of time it takes to get bored of it, you're out and back into the real world. <br><br>Something else that didn't quite make sense to me, was how getting shot in the head would drop you into Limbo with the amount of sedatives they had in them, yet blowing up their bodies in the dream merely acted as a kick? Wouldn't blowing up their bodies in the snowfort kill them on that level and drop them into limbo?
Nov. 7, 2010, 10:59 a.m. CST
good writers.He and his brother have great ideas,Nolan is a very skillful director but he has to start making or using better,more engaging scripts.<br /> <p>Yeah i know, at the end of the day for most film-makers, what it really matters to them is how much successful their movies turn out to be and Nolan doesnt give a fuck with the very valid criticism against him.no problem with that,but on the other hand he should realize that after 20 years people will keep mentioning more often his Memento masterpiece than his Inception bubble..<br /> <p>FACT? you bet your ass it's a fact.
Nov. 7, 2010, 11:02 a.m. CST
Allow me to clarify some things for you stupid folks: "Anyway like many i was severely let down by the sequels as i was hoping for some startling revelations about who built the matrix and big Twilight Zone style twists etc - but they never came. Instead there was just nonsensical pompous dialogue and boring action wi": Actually the architect of the matrix and the oracle are the 2 programs who were responsible for creating the matrix- as explained in more depth than any movie ever made has attempted to explain something. It will be really embarrassing for many of you to re-read your posts as you get older and more cognizant thoughts begin to creep in. The only thing wrong with the entire matrix saga is the black guy who abruptly reacts to shit we just saw. Edit him out and the films are breathlessly paced and have a sentient program so advanced he likes getting his dick sucked. And Roy Jones junior. As for inception- it's pretty duel-edged. I say that from having seen it only once but I think it's designed to be a straight forward heist but there's the notion throughout that it's an elaborate ruse to get Leo to wake up. The clues are things Kane and his wife says and his kids which have apparently not aged. Oh and the dreams feel real because they're designed that way for the heist. Also Harry is borderline retarded but it's no surprise when he didn't understand matrix 2 either. Beyond these simple things that I have said here I would like to add.. FUCK YOU FUUUCKING stupid fucking basement dwelling cunts with no business calling yourself nerds- you do not qualify. Nerds do things with their minds like invent digital hair. You guys jerkoff, rant and grow into even stupider people who now have no hard-R blockbusters like matrix because you were too fucking stupid to appreciate them when they happened. Not to even mention the greatest most extensive and elaborate superhero battles of all time are in the matrix trilogy. Ok so not one of you even understood my elevator kicker post. It was a test and you all failed. My theory about his kids was a joke that none of you challenged me on either. Let's just face it. Avatar is the #1 movie of all time and it's because it's fucking magnificent. It's not because the majority of Americans are dumb. It's because you are fringe retards with your thumbs up your ass. Are there 15 year old chicks you are trying to bang who are impressed when you try to make yourselves sound smart by bashing matrix 2&3? Is that the playground consensus? Do you guys give each other tips like- dude,don't tell her you liked when Neo flew several times the speed of sound and dragged semi-trucks in the wake of his vapor trails to save the woman he loved-killing thousands of hapless idiots who were still plugged into the matrix- or that chick will think you're a nerd and won't fuck you? I think all of you need to revisit the matrix saga in it's entirety as you get older and see what you now think about it. Be sure to watch it in a real theater with a beyond the sun level of audio and video presentation. Oh and GO GET YOUR FUCKING SHINE BOX! Everytime I see a fucking transformers or some pathetic pg13 bullshit I think of what could have been had more people been intelligent enough to see matrix 2&3. We haven't seen an R with starwars level budget since. Fuck you again!
Nov. 7, 2010, 11:22 a.m. CST
Nov. 7, 2010, 11:26 a.m. CST
I think few people would ever argue against Memento being Nolans masterpiece. But I think that when the common criticism against a filmmaker is that he is falling frustratingly short of creating masterpieces, or even arguing about whether or not his films are masterpieces or overrated, he's doing pretty well as a filmmaker. I mean, we're all still talking about it right now, and this is not a short thread. I can name about a hundred movies that came out this year that no one is talking about. Nolan is not the second coming of Christ. But he's definitely, and obviously, an above par filmmaker. The vitriol people have for him is puzzling, when you compare him to his competition. I mean, what other sci-fi movies came out this year? Predators? Iron Man 2? Legion? Inception, whether 'masterpiece' or 'overrated', is very obviously the best, most imaginative, and well crafted science fiction movie brought to us in 2010. So it's strange when people feel compelled to complain about it, and Nolan. Why are people complaining so much about Inception over the other movies that you would admit were far worse and not even close to the same level as Inception? I think people's need to insist that people who are obviously good at what they do, are not, is more than anything indicative of their own lack of perspective.
Nov. 7, 2010, 11:27 a.m. CST
theres no need for that level of sheer agression and hate in a post<p> go on out and get a burger king or something
Nov. 7, 2010, 11:32 a.m. CST
Everyone please ignore this pathetic troll. He has nothing better to do but haunt any Nolan realted TB and troll away. He is a human whiff of no significance. Maybe Nolan's Maybach ran over his pussy, who knows. And by "pussy" I mean the one between his legs.
Nov. 7, 2010, 11:46 a.m. CST
was that Keanu appeared out of breath in the fight scenes. It really took me out of the movie, and annoyed me. I mean the entire concept is that to beat the Agents you need to realize that you're not moving muscles, or breathing air, that it's all in your head. And they illustrated this very believably in the first film, and by the end Neo was capable of movement so fast you needed bullet time to follow him, and he was yawning while doing it. Now here we are in Matrix Reloaded, and Neo's mental projection of himself has neck fat for some reason and he's huffing and puffing like he just ran up 6 flights of stairs. Keanu should have prepared more, and the Wachowskis shouldn't have been too lazy to yell cut and reshoot a scene.<br><br>For me, the one thing I really appreciate about the Matrix Reloaded was the amazing amount of subtext the conversation with Colonel Sanders generated. Simultaneously the movies greatest flaw and achievement, was leaving such a mindblowing revelation buried in subtext, that The One was actually a 'pruning' device used purposely by the machines as a way of removing the people who were becoming conscious and destabilizing their structured system, gathering them into one place, and then killing them all at once. Pure fucking genius. And probably 5% of the moviegoers actually got it at the time. For all it's flaws, the Matrix Reloaded was still smarter than most people who saw it.
Nov. 7, 2010, 11:50 a.m. CST
Inception is only a sensation of the 2010.nothing more than that.You can say it's better than a lot of other movies released in 2010 but that does not make it a lasting classic as a lot of moronic Nolanoids claim to be,because at the end it is only a shallow,popcorn flick for the masses which wont stand the testing the time.<br /> <p>The same is already happening with TDK,a movie which was released only 3 years ago.a lot of people who worshiped it when it came out,i was one of them,now are starting to realize that beyong Ledger's amazing performance,what remains is a movie with some strong visual scenes but with a very flawed story.<br /> <p>and that ultimately hurts more the reliability of Nolan as a great film-maker and reduces him into a one-trick pony who knows how to manipulate the masses into over-praising his mainstream flicks.<br /> <p>to sum up,i want more small movies like Memento from Nolan and less big movies like Inception,unless he is willing to use good scripts from other, more talented than him, writers.<br /> <p>ps.and Inception is not science fiction.FACT,oh yes.
Nov. 7, 2010, 11:56 a.m. CST
because you know that makes sense,to flush them into the sewer and let the other humans come and get them and allow the chance to become a major threat,instead of killing them on sight whenever they wake up helpless in their pods.very smart indeed...sigh...
Nov. 7, 2010, 12:14 p.m. CST
was that it sucked
Nov. 7, 2010, 1 p.m. CST
because out of all the crap filmmakers, they find enjoyment in berating the one director who actually delivers and then some.
Nov. 7, 2010, 1:04 p.m. CST
Yes, gathering them into one place. I'm sorry to say, but sadly you are one of the people who still don't 'get' what was going on in the Matrix.<br><br> Here is the process spelled out. The first couple of attempts to maintain the Matrix failed. The machines came to the conclusion that the only way for it to work, is for the humans trapped within it to maintain the choice, whether conscious or subconscious, to accept or deny it as reality. This system however, has an inherent flaw - it's a computer program, built on the pure logic and strict structure that every program is built on. Human choices cannot be predicted or accounted for by the program, therefore the program is fundamentally unstable. As more and more people 'wake up' and realize it isn't real, but remain in the program, the more choices they assert and the more they deviate from the structured, planned, predicted life the system laid out for them. Hence, the program becomes more and more unstable the more conscious, choice making people remain in it. Eventually the program will become so unstable it ceases to operate properly, and it crashes, killing everyone connected to the Matrix.<br><br> So here is what the machines did to solve this: They either created, or chose an existing place, perhaps created by humans during the original war..Zion. At any rate, they know exactly where it is, and can get to it at any time. They created The One code, and here's what it did the first time, and what it does subsequently: when humans begin waking up within the Matrix and destabilizing it, the One code is activated within one of the humans connected to it. This person, The One, goes around disconnecting some people who have 'woken up' and leads them to Zion, tasks them with 'saving humanity' by waking up people and assembling them in Zion for the inevitable 'strike back' then disappears. (this was described by Morphius as their experience with the first 'One'...he showed up, started disconnecting people, and lead them to Zion. But The One is designed by the machines, so you realize that obviously this process isn't what it appears to be...right? because logically, the machines aren't going to facilitate their own downfall) The remaining 'resistance' then goes around unplugging woken up people and taking them to Zion. Again, very obviously, this is beneficial to the machines for two reasons...the people who's presence are destabilizing the Matrix program are being removed from it, hence no longer contributing to it's destabilization - and they're all being led to one spot, that the machines already know about, because they had their own program, the One, lead them there.<br><br>Eventually, the people-waking-up problem becomes exponential, because the more people that wake up, go on to wake more people up, and so on. This becomes the crisis point, where the Matrix is now in a downward spiral to an inevitable crash. So the One code reactivates within a random human, only it doesn't know it's a 'bad guy' and part of the system. It believes it's part of a prophecy to save humanity, and this 'prophecy' is given to them by the machines, namely the Oracle. Once awakened, this 'hero' now embarks on a mission (also given to him by the machines, the Oracle) to go save Zion from the impending Machine invasion (as they now cleanse their fake Zion haven of it's collection of humans) and save humanity. Only (as actually explained in the Matrix Reloaded and Revolutions in direct exposition) this mission is a trick, it's a very structured set of hoops the machines setup for the One to jump through, that eventually leads him to his final destination and true purpose, to make one of two choices. He can either choose to 1) abandon his mission to save Zion from the machine invasion, reboot the Matrix with the source code he carries, then select and wake up a bunch of people to repopulate Zion, and start the whole process over again. or 2) he can refuse, and continue on his fake mission to save humanity. <br><br> The choice is designed to predispose the One to choose option #1, as it the lesser or two evils. This way, Zion dies, but the human race continues to exist, both 'free' in Zion, and enslaved inside the Matrix, and the machines continue to exist. Win-win. Because if the One chooses option #2, very shortly after, the Matrix will crash from the choice-destabilization, killing every human connected to it. By this time Zion will also have been wiped out by the machines, so the human race is effectively ended. Also, shortly after the machines all almost all die off without their human power source. What would you do? The 'choice' is really a choice in the most techncial sense, it's no choice at all. Either do what we say, or the world ends. <br><br>BUT, this time around, The One is madly in love with a very hot, tightly wound lady. So he makes the irrational choice to risk dooming humanity to save his lady from falling to her death. And eventually he does find a way to save humanity by helping the machines with their unforseen Smith problem, thus earning their respect and ending the war. The One's code reboots the Matrix just as he dies, and all the people are saved. The Oracle and the Architect agree that the new Matrix will no longer hold people against their will. The End.
Nov. 7, 2010, 1:14 p.m. CST
by Nerd Rage
You suckers think Inception was some deep masterpiece but it's just convoluted exposition mixed with constant chase scenes. Your mind is the scene of the crime, like a Nigerian bank scam...Suckers.
Nov. 7, 2010, 1:15 p.m. CST
the Matrix Reloaded contained hidden genius, is because at no point did any one character turn to another character and explain all this in a vomit of ham fisted exposition. The information was revealed in small bits of exposition throughout the first and second films, and left to the viewer to gleen and assemble it. The Matrix series was smarter than the overwhelming majority of it's audience, and the overwhelming majority will never even realize it.
Nov. 7, 2010, 1:26 p.m. CST
As I haven't seen the damn thing yet. But I do have a question for Killik. What is your first language and do you not use punctuation in that language? All I'm saying is that you might want to space it out a little bit after the commas and periods, because otherwise all your sentences read like a jumbled mess and make you look kinda foolish. And that really doesn't help when you're trying to convince everyone of your superior intelligence, now does it? As it stands, you're giving ol' AsimovLives a run for his money in the butchery of the English language department. Besides, one Asimov is way fucking more than enough.  ‍<br>FACT!
Nov. 7, 2010, 1:27 p.m. CST
because you know that makes sense,to flush them into the sewer and let the other humans come and get them and allow them the chance to become a major threat,instead of killing them on sight whenever they wake up helpless in their pods.very smart machines indeed.who designed them? Bill Gates to run Windows?<br /> <br /> <p>smackfu just let it go mate,however you dress a turd,it will remain a turd.and the M sequels big turds.
Nov. 7, 2010, 1:31 p.m. CST
whether you like the film or not, please just read my post so for once you actually *understand* it, because if really need ham fisted exposition to tell you what's going on in a movie, you have no place criticizing movies for having too much exposition.
Nov. 7, 2010, 1:51 p.m. CST
is because you've made an incorrect assumption. You assumed that when the Machines made references to the 'threat to the matrix' that they meant they were afraid that the unplugged humans would destroy it. That is an understandable mistake. What they were actually referring to, was that the presence of free will within the matrix will eventually crash the program. The entire 'One' process is meant to remove the threatening components (free will) from the Matrix, keep all the unplugged, but temporarily necessary humans located in one area, Zion, then in one simultaneous action, kill all the unplugged humans, have the One reboot the Matrix, and start the process all over again with a nice, fresh, stable Matrix. It's an ongoing, necessary cycle that has already occurred six times, as was stated in the film.
Nov. 7, 2010, 2:19 p.m. CST
You are wasting your time trying to make KilliK see sense. He is the Talkback equivelent of an autistic brat, he is completely unable to see any point of view other than his own narrow perspective even when all the facts are laid bare in front of him. He is another goat licker like AsimovLives.<P>PLEASE EVERYONE JUST IGNORE HIM AND EVENTUALLY HE WILL GET BORED AND KILLIK HIMSELF.
Nov. 7, 2010, 2:28 p.m. CST
by Shaner Jedi
and then not giving examples why you think it's overrated is overrated.
Nov. 7, 2010, 3:56 p.m. CST
by Mr. Waturi
http://www.kpbs.org/news/2010/aug/11/geisel-library-shows-kind-inception/ Assume you guys know this, but in case you don't.
Nov. 7, 2010, 4:37 p.m. CST
"Enter the Void" is the best! INTENSE
Nov. 7, 2010, 6:06 p.m. CST
Nov. 7, 2010, 6:10 p.m. CST
It's also ripped off the same designer's own work in X-Men 2 - the bunker, the glass and steel...
Nov. 7, 2010, 6:22 p.m. CST
Can't wait for the Blu-ray. I can't see why everyone hates it now. I think Nolan is pretty skillfull when it comes to making movies. And on the whole CGI thing, I think filmmakers have the right to use what ever tools they have at their disposal to make the best possible movie they can. Sure some people go a little nuts with the CGI, but there's no reason why they can't. Personally I prefer practical effects. I think they just look so much more real than CGI.
Nov. 7, 2010, 6:26 p.m. CST
i mean really, this is not even debatable. after the well deserved success of the first movie the W's concocted some pseudo religious bullshit of the highest order and slathered it all over the next two movies winking and nodding and congratulating themselves for all of their creative 'genius' which turned out to be the most incestuous raping of a franchise ever made that no one outside the W's understood let alone enjoyed but some fanboys who want to be hipper than thou nod their heads and say 'yeah i get it' bull-fucking-shit. you can throw shit on a wall and i guarantee you someone will tell you it has deeper meaning, but it is still just shit
Nov. 7, 2010, 6:26 p.m. CST
baffles me...people seem to fucking revile this movie with a passion...jesus, i thought it was great, but even if you didn't like it, i don't see how it deserves all the venom...people seem to either love it or hate it. bizarre. it was a well crafted movie.
Nov. 7, 2010, 6:30 p.m. CST
well it was ok, absolutely nothing memorable about it though, speaks to the poor quality of movies in general that some feel the need to praise it when it was just a decent popcorn movie that has no meaning or lasting impact, but i dont hate it
Nov. 7, 2010, 6:55 p.m. CST
The fat fuck's alergic to quality cinema.
Nov. 7, 2010, 7:18 p.m. CST
Nov. 7, 2010, 7:45 p.m. CST
(as a 2 part B&W Twilight Zone or Outer Limits) Dom Cobb - William Shatner<p> Arthur - Roy Thinnes<p> Eames - Patrick McGoohan<p> Ariadne - Sherry Jackson<p> Mal - Joan Collins<p> Saito - Richardo Montoban<p> Robert Fischer - guy who played Charile X in Star Trek<p> Peter Browning - Richard Baseheart<p> Miles - Burgess Meredith
Nov. 7, 2010, 7:49 p.m. CST
Dom Cobb - Robert Redford <p> Arthur - OJ Simpson<p> Eames - Malcolm McDowell<p> Ariadne - Carrie Fisher<p> Mal - Faye Dunaway<p> Saito - George Takei<p> Robert Fischer - Keir Dullea<p> Peter Browning - William Holden<p> Miles - Laurence Olivier<p> directed by Stanley Kubrick
Nov. 7, 2010, 7:54 p.m. CST
I'm willing to bet money on this, but I know we'll never find out for sure... but I am almost positive that Nolan hit a point in writing the script where he could have gone one of two ways - 1) Pull back, simplify, and explain his dream world efficiently during the first 30-45 minutes of the film. 2) Say fuck it and go with the convoluted one he had probably arrived at in a second or third draft. Needless to say, he chose the latter. I think that when he made that decision, he realized that he'd need to lean as heavily on his bravura style as he ever has in order to get over those expository bumps... that's confidence ladies and gentleman. Point aside, I'm sorry, but whomever said the movie makes up its rules as it goes along is 100% right. Even people who say the movie is genius cannot deny this... and no matter what, this takes away from the quality of the film somewhat because it means the consequences/goals/rules can change at any moment or be relayed to you only AFTER some significant event has taken place... at times it feels like a choose your own adventure book. <p>Having said that, I still think it's an amazing movie... I think it's both better than and not as good as The Matrix if that makes any sense. Better than in that Nolan is a much better filmmaker than the Wachowski's, but not as good in that the Matrix felt like a more cohesive, well thought out world than Inception did. So in The Matrix, as others have already stated, they set it up and then we all get to play around in that world and get emotionally involved for the second half of the movie. Not so much in Inception... during the fucking climax, for chrissakes, they're still shouting out rules and instructions to each other... you cannot tell me that is not sloppy filmmaking. It only gets covered up by Nolan's style and panache with the camera, actors, and, as is evidenced this absolutely insane model, the production design. On top of that, I only felt somewhat emotionally involved in the story of Mal. Only when he said something like, "I could never contain all the complexities that make up who you are," did I actually feel something, because that was a strong emotional truth and Leo just keeps getting better and better as an actor. He sold the shit out of that scene. Like I said, I think it's a great movie but the fact that Nolan chose to pump his chest as a director and try to navigate us through the more convoluted dream world with endless expository dialogue kind of ruined it for me a bit... YMMV. At some point in writing the script, he could have pulled back and simplified so that the emotional aspect would have more resonance... or he could have done away with that altogether and I probably wouldn't have minded. For fuck's sake, why does EVERY story nowadays have to have a lead character with a deep, dark secret past? Someone in another TB said it best, that if Alien were made today Ripley and Dallas would be estranged lovers, Ash would have to be redeemed somehow, and Parker would be a struggling rapper on the Nostromo to finance his first record... they can't just create a backstory so the actors can create a lived in, realistic character and then leave the backstory OFF THE FUCKING SCREEN.. <p>As for the Shutter Island comparisons... come on, man, there are scenes that feel exactly the same. The wife is dangerous, appears in his dreams/fantasies, and she did something he couldn't forgive himself for. And there's CHILDREN involved in the denouement... but who cares? They're both good films that tell similar stories that also just happen to have the same lead actor. I'm sure Nolan had this story knocking around since long before Shutter Island was even written. He probably read the book and was like... "Ohhh, fuck it, a good movie is a good movie." And he's 100% right. Except I still think the scene in Dreamscape planted the idea for Inception!
Nov. 7, 2010, 8:24 p.m. CST
I'm not arguing, the Matrix sequels *were* pretentious, and not particularly enjoyable. I was merely explaining the plot of them to a very dumb talkbacker who somehow watched managed to watch 5+ hours worth of Matrix sequels without actually understanding what they were about. Which really doesn't say much for his intelligence considering that the plot wasn't that complicated to begin with. I agree though, they were big letdowns compared to what the first one set up. And for the record, the pseudo religious gnosticism crap was in the first one too.
Nov. 7, 2010, 9:01 p.m. CST
thats cool i was not singling you out, and you explained yourself and what you understood of the convoluted plot very well. i understood the movie insofar as what the W's were trying to do, i just did not like it nor how they fucked up the follow up to an awesome debut. what they should have done to explain neo's weakening was to simply say 'the program kicked in and de-powered you' and that would have explained how the machines were always in control and the humans never had a chance, but that would have meant no long winded smirking creator mono/dialogue to show how 'brilliant' the W's are. and that fucking french guy truly pissed me off with his accent and his unnecessary blathering - and they did not even show any monica's titties. yeah pretentious bull-fucking-shit
Nov. 7, 2010, 9:03 p.m. CST
your post was deeper than the movie, but i aint hatin the movie
Nov. 7, 2010, 9:04 p.m. CST
by frank cotton
the missing axles on the trucks. once you notice it, it almost ruins the whole chase (i will forgive a lot in films i like). REVOLUTIONS was the big disappointment. anyone know where i can get one of those tops?
Nov. 7, 2010, 9:36 p.m. CST
Absolutely hilarious. Idiots swayed by "bright lights" and fancy imagery. Avatar is one of the biggest scams perpetrated on the film going public since fucking ISHTAR. Avatar a madterpiece. What a friggin' JOKE. LOL TO INFINITY. JESUS GOD ALMIGHTY, really?? morons.
Nov. 7, 2010, 9:44 p.m. CST
That's about it. As far as a unique, compelling piece of filmmaking Avatar is nothing more than a Frankenstein's bitch. a slap-together fart in the wind. Creative? Compelling? Avatar is 300 MILLION DOLLARS WORTH OF VAPID SPARKLY NOTHINGNESS. It isn't even worthy of wiping Inception's ASS.
Nov. 7, 2010, 9:57 p.m. CST
by TV's Frank
*Sigh* Our own dreams seem real to us while we are asleep even when outlandish things are happening. A movie about dreams, like inception, should have this quality. It is a cop out for you to say that they were making them not seem like dreams on purpose. What this means is that Nolan didn't know how to make a scene dreamlike. I'm not talking about having people flying around and random shit happening either. Like I said before, watch a movie by David Lynch, a master filmmaker. He can make even a mundane scene, where nothing out of the ordinary is occuring, feel like a dream using lighting, editing, music etc. This is what we should have gotten from Inception, a journey into the subconscious, instead of just an action movie. It had no atmosphere. It didn't create a world for us to inhabit.<p>Also, fuck you and your exasperated sighs. Prick.
Nov. 7, 2010, 10:03 p.m. CST
Agree broadly with your analysis of Inception.
Nov. 7, 2010, 10:26 p.m. CST
I think you need to increase the dosage of your meds, but more importantly, you need to get back to 'the home' for check-in or...<p>no pudding!
Nov. 7, 2010, 11:29 p.m. CST
by frank cotton
Nov. 8, 2010, 2:49 a.m. CST
Only a retard would think INCEPTION was shit.
Nov. 8, 2010, 2:59 a.m. CST
We agree with a lot of things about a lot of matters, but on INCEPTION you are wrong, man, dead wrong. The movie is as good as they say it is. And then some.
Nov. 8, 2010, 7:01 a.m. CST
Transformers? Iron Man? Give me a fucking break. Idiots. Inception is a VERY good film. Best film ever? No. Best film of the year? Probably not. But it's an excelent film, and should not be over analyzed. You guys take it too seriously...
Nov. 8, 2010, 9:26 a.m. CST
TWO BEST MOVIES OF THE PAST DECADE.<P> Pull my finger.
Nov. 8, 2010, 9:28 a.m. CST
What part of "not tipping off the mark that it's a dream" do you not fucking get? Fuckign idiots I swear.
Nov. 8, 2010, 9:47 a.m. CST
Listen, no matter WHAT you argue, people have a point when they say it's a flaw. He'd only have to have put in one or two 'wtf?' moments that would be UNCONTROLLABLE by the inception crew and created by the mark just because that's dream logic. I'll give you a perfect example... in a dream, sometimes you look back and realize that from your POV at a certain time, you can see things you shouldn't be able to see if you were in reality. Last night I had a dream I was driving a car and when I went to look in the rear view mirror on the passenger side, the point-of-view was as if I was SITTING on the passenger side even though I knew I was still driving. Also, things you were talking about just before you go to sleep inevitably wind up in your dream. Your wife could be telling you you need to floss more or 'remember to turn the coffee pot on if you wake up first' and the next thing you know you're flossing until your teeth fall out and the damn coffee pot just WILL NOT TURN ON in your dream. That kind of stuff is inextricable from dreams and Nolan took too big of a risk not including at least some of it. No matter how you slice it, it's seen as a flaw in an otherwise excellent movie because dreams are something the audience is all too familiar with.
Nov. 8, 2010, 10:26 a.m. CST
Don't you think Nolan thought about adding a few "WTF moments"? Of course he did. He researched the shit out of dreams and dream imagery. He made the right call - adding those kind of moments would have taken the audience out of the film and fucked with the narrative. Nolan is way smarter than any of of nitpicking loser talkbackers that dwell here (I don't mean you personally).
Agreed if the film were full of 'surreal' dream imagery and moments then it would have been a totally different movie - quite possibly/probably not as good as the one we got.<p> The SUCKER PUNCH trailer tb was brimming with people saying it looked like stupid over-the-top videogame nonsense - the same people are now saying they wanted INCEPTION filled with exactly that kind of CG surrealism.<p> Accept INCEPTION for what it is. Either you don't like it or you do, but don't go on about how 'your version' of it would have been better than Nolan's because it makes you look like a right plonker.
The main offender being Harry himself, who infamously wanted 'vampires and werewolves' in THE MATRIX and was bitter that Nolan didn't dream bigger.<p> Meanwhile the fat man was snoring and dreaming himself about how AWESOME the Nightmare On Elm Street remake was...<p> Aw fuck, why do I come to this site? Just for the talkbacks man.. just the talkbacks...
Nov. 8, 2010, 10:49 a.m. CST
A freightrain coming out of nowhere, the city of Paris folding on iself, Ariadne creating a new passway by using mirror reflections, the Penrose stair, and Marion Coutilard popping up out of the blue whenever it was harmful to the heroes, those weren't WTF moments enough for you? What you would had prefered, gravity defying flying pink elephants? Those would make the dream more cool and dream-like? Had Nolan do that, he would had been accused of going for the obvious dream imagery that everybody has been doing for 50 years already in movies with dream sequences. complain whatever you want, but nolan presented a different dream world then it's mostly seen in movies. By going more "realistic", he presented an original way to present dreams in movies. beside,s you are forgetting one important element in the movie, which was pointed out quite veheremently: The dreams we see in the movie are ARTIFICIAL CONSTRUCTS, this is why they had an architect, you know? Also, as cobb said, it's very dangerous to have the dreamer be aware of the dream, because protections in the shape of projections will pop out and chase the dream invaders. In the movie, Cobb mannages to play into the awareness of the dreamer (something they had to improvise on the spot, i might add, because it wasn't the original plan) becuase Fischer knew about dream theaft and had been trained, so the Mr Charles strategem worked in that instance, contrary to whatever happened before in another subject when it failed spectaculary. But then again, Cobb Team was attempting an inception and not a theaft, a whole different game.<br><br>What Nolan and his fellow filmmakers did in INCEPTION is brillant, nothing short of brillance. This movie will be talked for years to come, and much admired. To piss on it just to be cool is foolhardy.
Nov. 8, 2010, 10:50 a.m. CST
Don't go away! NOOOO!!
Nov. 8, 2010, 11:37 a.m. CST
haha i thought they blew up the actual fortress that they built in canada or wherever... man thats good modelling.
Nov. 8, 2010, 11:44 a.m. CST
but more of that almost indefinable confusion of a real dream. Believe me, if anyone did not want pink flying elephants, it's me. I think that kind of stuff is cliched in dreams and not at all what dreams are actually like. I would have disliked the movie intensely had he gone in that direction. But I feel the way the train and other dream elements were used just didn't feel dream-like, if that makes any sense. It felt like a Christopher Nolan visual device to me at times. I did LOVE the fact that it was raining, though, because Yousef drank too much champagne. That's just my opinion, you're welcome to see the movie as genius, I just felt it went just short of that mark and I think it has to do with the way the rules/constructs worked and the lack of incorporating the way the mark's own subconscious would have inserted some elements that only the mark understands here and there and the Inception crew would have to react to those things in a way that didn't alert the dreamer. For me, that would have closed what felt like a plot hole. <p>Look, we can argue endlessly about this, and that's what great movies are about. I've only see this movie once and look forward to seeing it again... I may come back here with a totally different point-of-view, but these are my current impressions. In fact, I'll admit that I'm probably doing the movie a disservice because it was surely meant to be seen more than twice, let alone once. The difference between what I'm saying and what people who like to rag on this movie for no reason other than to 'seem cool', like you said, is that I can still come away recognizing that it was bold if not totally brilliant. I still enjoyed the movie and felt that I'd seen something pretty damn good. It's just that I'm articulating what took me out of the movie a bit. For me, the biggest problem wasn't the dream stuff at all, but the sometimes endless expository dialogue and the way Mal's story got layered into the plot in order to make it 'personal'. I think Leo and Marion Cottilard did as much as they could have with that story, but it also felt just a tad clunky and, hopefully this makes sense, but 'Hitchcockian' at times. Whenever Hitchcock needed to add that kind of dramatic stuff to a story, you could always feel that he only did it because he knew he had to and wasn't totally comfortable with it, with two notable exceptions that I'm aware of - The Wrong Man and Vertigo. OR, Inception could have done without the back-story altogether, but that's probably something only I would enjoy watching. Asimov, ole buddy... you of all people cannot tell me that we seem to be seeing this 'lost wife/children/former life' pattern in nearly every sci-fi and horror movie that comes out now. Moon, District 9, and Inception just to name a few. And they're all excellent movies, definitely my favorites of the past two or three years, it's just that it's starting to feel a little cliched and shoehorned in so that there's a human element to the sci-fi. So the sci-fi concept always comes first, then it's like... 'Ok, now what can we do to make this a well-rounded, empathetic character?' To me, it's just the growing pains of a new movement towards intelligent, extremely well made genre films that I welcome. At some point we'll probably get some brilliant collision between One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest or Taxi Driver and 2001/Blade Runner. I also get why it's there, because that stuff isn't front-and-center in Blade Runner, or it doesn't hit you over the head with it, and look how that turned out in the short-term, right? Even Ivor Powell and some of the people involved still think the movie doesn't involve you enough emotionally, to which I disagree. The more I go back to it, the more I enjoy the subtleties... whatever empathetic human elements in that movie that exist, it feels more like a whisper than a shout... which is what makes Batty's 'Tears in Rain' speech all the more poignant, because it truly feels like the first bit of real humanity in the whole movie. <p>Bottom line - I'm a pain-in-the-ass and difficult to please... don't let that rain on your parade : )
"I'm a pain-in-the-ass and difficult to please"<p> ...and that my friends sums up 'the aicn talkbacker' in a nutshell. Tho sadly 99.9% of us aren't as self-aware as SK229 here...
Nov. 8, 2010, 12:44 p.m. CST
thats how "mind-blowing" it was.
Nov. 8, 2010, 1:05 p.m. CST
Ok, aside from the point that's been mentioned, the very obvious, and even explained in direct exposition point, that they are trying to guarantee that the mark doesn't realize he's dreaming...Cobb's crew is IN CONTROL OF ALMOST EVERY ASPECT OF THE DREAM. It's a carefully constructed world and narrative, that as demonstrated is only occasionally interrupted by one of the crews subconscious projections. And it's not even the mark's dream! It's one of the crews dream, and they are totally lucid within that dream. So the only way crazy wacky dreamy things are going to happen, is if the crew decide to purposely put them there. Which would be pointless and stupid.
Nov. 8, 2010, 1:09 p.m. CST
by Surround Sound
Someone tell me. I never understood the significance of most everything in that movie. What did the snowy action scenes have to do with the dude's mind? Who understood the Japanese dude's accent? What's a kick? Pfft. Too much effort to watch it again to find out.
Nov. 8, 2010, 1:11 p.m. CST
Yet here you are talking about it in a forum thread. That's basically like calling up your ex girlfriend at 2 in the morning to tell her you're over her.
Nov. 8, 2010, 1:29 p.m. CST
Haha, I'll take that as a compliment. I am really looking forward to seeing the movie again, though. Like I said, it was clearly meant to be seen at least two or three times.
Nov. 8, 2010, 2:06 p.m. CST
..best movie. At least I think so. And inception was pretty decent in the sea of mediocrity which is film today.
Nov. 8, 2010, 2:59 p.m. CST
Blu-ray. December 7th. Be there.
Nov. 8, 2010, 3:42 p.m. CST
by Nerd Rage
One the subconscious is aware it is being invaded why can't the dream become imaginative. You no longer need to keep the dream secret to avoid detection. You've already been detected. Bring on the trippy dream world.
Nov. 8, 2010, 5:07 p.m. CST
by TV's Frank
Inception had such a cool premise, that I think in the hands of a better director we could have had a classic on the order of Blade Runner, but instead what we got was something more along the lines of Minority Report. It's a good action/sci-fi movie, but not a classic. I actually agree with Harry Knowles (at least I agree with what people are saying he said - I never actually bothered to read his review) that Nolan should have been more ambitious with Inception. If he is a truly great director, he could have proven it with that movie. But he didn't. <p> And Inception is not difficult to understand. The average sixth grader would have little difficulty understanding Inception, so the argument that people who are critical of the film just didn't understand it is invalid. (Wait, you mean to tell me they were controlling the dreams and they wanted them to appear mundane so as not to alert the dreamer? Sorry, that is just too far above my head. I'll contact Stephen Hawking and see if maybe he can explain it to me.) If anything, the film needed to be more confusing. I wanted it to fuck with my mind and it did not. I'm not saying it's a bad movie, it just didn't live up to my hopes for it. I love the premise, and especially the fact that it wasn't a remake, sequel, prequel, or even an adaptation. That is very rare these days.
Nov. 8, 2010, 5:37 p.m. CST
by TV's Frank
I think it is more that Nolan couldn't have pulled off a more creative, ambitious version of Inception, so what he went with was the simple heist movie you mention. Indeed, it is a good heist movie, and I agree that it was wise of Nolan not to have the hubris to try and produce something great, as it would likely have been a failure. You are also right that I had set my expectations too high, and I think I won't make that mistake again in the future, as I am more aware of Nolan's limitations as a director.
Nov. 8, 2010, 7:05 p.m. CST
Neo bringing Trinity back to life from WITHIN the matrix. As cute as it was to restart her heart int he matrix, that just doesn't fit the "none of this is real" ideal. <BR> I expected him to do the ultimate "the one" thing and actually bring himself out of the matrix, shocking the whole crew, and then walking over to Trinity and yanking her out too ( and she survives due to his power ). This would fit beautifully with the later scene where Neo stops the Sentinel in the real world as well. The audience will be given further reason to suspect that we're still in the matrix, or to believe even more so in Neo's power. <BR><BR> Unfortunately what the Whathefuckski bros wanted to do instead was concentrated on MIlli Vanilli and the French dance club morons. <BR><BR> In the end I think I enjoyed the 2nd and 3rd movies more than most people, though. <BR><BR> Oh I also wish the Oracle switched to being someone completely different when the actress died and Neo explicitly notices and no one else does. <BR> Stuff like that would have been a nice touch.
Nov. 8, 2010, 10:09 p.m. CST
Its more that - connecting to the beggining when Cobb says he needs someone as good to replace him and Miles says he has someone better - you have to remember the whole espionage business their in reresents a new frontier or threashhold in human exploration/understanding relative to the entire kniown history of human existence... but Cobb etc could understand enough it to the best of their learned grasp, and Arieenne would represent the next atep in evolved learning, being able to reconscruct and layer/expand the identification of 'rules' & 'laws' (precariously in the moment as a last ditch theory-into-practice attempt anyway) by realising them as being limited to the characters and their emotional/psychological afflictions/states:<p> If Cobb had not had this happen with his Wife for whatever reason (as opposed to his inherant flawed nature leading to it, but lets not go into a over-reading where Cobb is a psycho/sociopath) he may have understood far more and been much more adept with the rules and possibilities of the dream reality by this point. Adrienne (I'll call her what i like) also, presumably like Arthur, has the benfit of a blank slate emotionally & psychologically relative to her entire 'field' & real life experience (this is why Arthur is such a badass/pro, at least we/i presume), in addition to possessing a similar natural grasp of the dreamworld as Cobb. Or shes just destined to naturally be so much better than him. Who knows?>.<p> I guess this brings me to my next point, which is that what Inception cunningly does is ensure that 'exposition' isnt really that on repeat viewings, well at least not asbout 80% of it anyway; its characters expressing themselves in their emotional/psychological/philosophical mindest or 'scene', if only in a very minor or subtle way. Ass opposed to Thr Matrix sequels. Your not just watching a character remind you again of how Nolans logic all makes sense & where itrs going next <p> Like so many folk have pointed out, its not aiming to be high art of the biggest precident somehow laid over Matrix or Darkcity like subject matter. Its aiming to be counted among those films as one of Nolans own. Although i do think its pushes things furthur than the Matrix etc. in terms of exploring the use of cinematic form & its audio-visual depth of commentary on a mass 'blockbuster' scale thaat people will consume & enjoy...in this respect (only) I would place his entire work now up to 'Inception' on a social-cultural-industrial level, much closer to Hitchcock in comparison, than Kubrick for example....Inception feels like a movie you could slot right next to Vertigo & Rear Window as much as The Matrix etc. rather than your Kubrick. Fassbinder, Godard etc.. Although hell it is kind of like Aplhaville turned inside out through the Wizard of Oz if you think it....<p> Maybe i sound like a pretentious rambling jackass just trying to explain & making things worse but i'm sorry only a total douche thinks that people who love this movie are under the delusion its like Bergman or Michael Haneke got away with making....Brave New World, or his adaptation of Iassac Asimov novels.... although you can't deny, if that were the case: no shameles &s bare-thread Nike Sneakers product placement would be taking up precious screen space or time there! No wank sauce in that department or on that helping/serving. Inception got the balance just right.
Nov. 8, 2010, 10:22 p.m. CST
Nov. 9, 2010, 5:56 a.m. CST
It's kinda funny with all the people calling it mediocre, bad etc. Stating that they "got it" but still, if you read all the different interpretations there are not one single interpretations that these people share. So, they probably think that all the others who "got the" movie and thought it was dumb must be wrong, and only their interpretation must be right. I really, really enjoyed this movie, had no high expectations before I saw which might have helped. And I liked the ending, when it went black and the Piaf song started again, prompting me to wake up from the dreamworld that a movie is. Nice touch.