Had enough yet? Well, we hope not. We want to know what you think! I’ve had my say (and again, and again), as has Guy. But enough about us. Midnight screenings are flickering to life on the east coast right now so “Inception” has hit. If you get a chance to see it over the weekend, rifle off your thoughts here.
Comments
87 responses to “Tell us what you thought of ‘Inception’”
I saw it last night at the TV Academy Q&A with the filmmakers.
I was pretty blown away by it! It’s a real mind-bender and I still don’t fully understand everything but I always felt confident that I was in good hands, and went along for the ride. I thought it was extremely ambitious and original.
I did feel that some of the action scenes were not as well done as say, some in The Dark Knight, and I didn’t like some of the dialogue, but those are small gripes and all in all, it was a great movie that deserves multiple viewings and discussion. I think there will be lots of debate over the ending as well.
After seeing this on an IMAX screen this evening, my first impressions about “Inception” are: It is a masterpiece in that the filmmakers were left to their own devices (without obvious studio manipulation) lending themselves to the artistry they bestowed on this piece. The direction, screenplay, cinematography, lighting, production design, editing, acting are all above par.
I can’t wait to see it again.
Just got out of a midnight screening and I have to say that my mind was totally f-d. One of the best “very end”ings I’ve ever seen – right up there with Layer Cake **SPOILER** the camera cutting on the spinning top literally got a groan of amazed shock from the theater, a groan that broke into applause.
That being said, I thought it was going to be a bit sexier… probably just because the trailer is so damn sexy.
Anyway – loved it, Nolan and crew deliver like crazy and it’s certainly a movie I’m going to watch again because my mind is reeling.
I was rolling my eyes at all the “too smart for audiences” reviews but I have to say this movie is going to confuse the hell out of the masses.
watched it on tuesday in the first screening in MEXICO CITY, i loved it
i agree it has more head than heart, but how the film deals with layers, levels, the process of creating something [anything] and inception itself work both literally and metaphorically, onscreen and offscreen
every technichal aspect of the film is outstanding and works perfectly for the film
the film wasn’t exactly as good as i expected, it was as good but in a different way that i was expecting
Yeah, I totally called that last shot of the kids… and then Nolan walked off the screen and punched me in the face. Won’t try that again.
The reaction was the same – “Aww, s*** – woah!”
Compare this screenplay, that simmered in Nolan’s brain for decades, to Cameron’s. Somebody’s not content to ride the VFX’s coattails. Admittedly, it’s a bit muddled, but ambitious – and it executes and delivers.
Seeing it tomorrow in IMAX.
The kick song was Edith Piaf? Cruel and meta.
Obvious lock for one of ten Best Picture nominees. Also calling Nolan for Best Director. Don’t know who else could beat him. Don’t know about acting noms, though. Leo was great and the ladies were great (Cotillard, as always stunning and it was nice to see Page actually acting).
Loved the screenplay the most, though. It will win the Oscar. Complex enough to confuse “Twilight” fans, but completely follow-able to film lovers. Going again tomorrow night.
Daniel: It was always Piaf, too, before they cast Cotillard. They talked about changing it, but Zimmer liked the danger it seemed to convey, as did Nolan, so it stayed.
the oscar better be in Lee Smith’s hands.
Thought it was a great film that was able to engage my mind. Also thought it was entertaining and the climax of the film was very well done. I didn’t think it was too complicated and felt the ending of the movie was pretty ambigious but in a way to reinforce the point. I laughed when i left because im no critic but understood that the film deals with closure and the way we let are memories and are interpertions of our memories affect the life we lead. Atleast thats my opinion but i could be wrong
I’ve never quite felt this way about a film before. I simply cann0t find the right words at the moment. The only thing I can say is I need to see it again. I can’t tell whether it’s the phenomenal piece of pop art that my head is telling me it is or whether my brain is just reeling.
Whatever my opinion is after my next viewing, I really hope this thing makes a ton of money. We need more movies like this. My IMAX screening sold out, which stunned me, so that’s a good sign.
My crowd was packed too, which shocked me. Midnight showings are almost never that crowded around here.
I thought it was absolutely superb. Sure, I had a few gripes with some parts but still, just WHOA! My girlfriend thought Marion Cotillard was scary as hell during some scenes, and justifibly so. One person even screamed in the audience when Cotillard popped up once, “Oh man, it’s the crazy bitch!”
And man, what an ending. I could feel the entire auditorium gasping when it went to black.
Right now, my head is spinning like Cobb’s totem. But in short, I think it’s a masterpiece. It’s so unlike anything I’ve ever seen that I have no idea how to describe it right now. Suffice to say, I want to see it again tomorrow. If for no other reason simply to enjoy the cinematic bliss. But really, this is the kind of film that not only demands repeat viewings, it very much earns them. It’s not anywhere as confusing as people are calling it, but it’s a complex, challenging film. But really, this is one of the most extraordinary cinematic accomplishments I’ve seen in years. It may sound cliche, but the last time a film floored me like this was The Dark Knight. Anyways, it was everything I hoped for and better than I could have imagined. The IMAX theatre in Austin Texas was sold out, and the people there were actually a lot of smart yet average movie goer types. The audience gave the film a standing ovation, so I think this will do just fine in the box office.
Bizarre sidenote. A guy one row directly in front of me started having a seizure about midway through the film and was helped out by the security guards.
Kevin, where you at the Bob Bullock IMAX? I think I witnessed the same seizure. Pretty horrifying.
As for the movie itself, I’d give it a 7 out of 10. The problems I had with it:
1. I think Nolan needs to hire some other cinematographer. His action scenes always have shaky cam in them which annoys me to no end. It is really not possible to enjoy an action scene when the camera is bobbing up and down and back and forth.
2. There is too much exposition. I really got lost somewhere in the middle of the movie. While the idea of dreams withing dreams is really innovative. it ruins tension because all dreams have different time frames. While something exciting is happening at one dream, you have to jump back to a different dream.
3. Where was the imagination? Are dreams supposed to be this real and dull. I was hoping for something more surreal and fantastic, like Paprika.
4. All characters apart from Cobb’s are pretty useless. You can’t feel anything for anyone because they are so cardboard, including Cobb himself. I don’t understand the purpose of hiring so many great actors if they play such simple roles. The film was emotionally impotent. I understood Cobb was trying to get back to his children but I never really felt anything for him.
@nono
*there are spoilers throughout, so skip if you haven’t seen the movie*
i could be wrong, but i think you missed the point about the levels of fischer’s dream. for example, arthur is floating with no gravity because he’s in a more shallow level of the dream, thus he *feels* the sensation of the van in freefall, whereas dom, ariadne, eames, saito, etc. are in a deeper level, and don’t feel it. so while the first level of the dream is in freefall, the deeper levels experience time at a completely different speed. it’s no different from falling asleep for maybe 30 seconds but having a totally complex dream that *feels* much, much longer. that’s what nolan was going for there and i think he completely pulled it off.
as for the characters and the emotional aspects of them, i didn’t have any difficulty at all buying into it. cobb is a very complex character and i’m not sure you’re *supposed* to “feel” for him. he’s someone who’s basically ruined his and his family’s lives with this obsession of his. he reminds me of leonard shelby in that way. nolan has never conceived a protagonist who was a clear-cut good guy that the audience is supposed to “feel” for. the characters i *did* feel for were mal and ariadne. the latter is a stand-in for the audience, the only one who sees cobb for what he is and mal is sort of all over the place: victim, antagonist, femme fatale, etc. but ultimately a tragic figure.
as for the exposition, yes, personally i thought it was too much, but you know what? this movie is STILL going to confuse the shit out of people. my friend, who’s a teacher for fuck’s sake, was like, “wait, i don’t get why . . . ” and i had to explain some stuff to her.
lastly, “the dreams are too real . . . ” this was worrying me before i saw the movie, but now i’m scratching my head, wondering if these same people even watched the movie. did we miss the part about the dreams being designed? about there being an architect? see, people complain that there’s too much exposition, yet very basic things like this seem to fly over heads. and my dreams have been very realistic and very surreal. the unconscious does not work with words, it deals in imagery and sound. so while a dream may *seem* literal, it may in fact mean something else entirely. one location represents somewhere else, one person represents someone else, etc. if you just take the dreams at face value, then yes, they may seem to literal and “real.” but the important thing in inception is that the dreams are designed. they’re artificial dreams within dreams.
Definitely a great movie, but it fell the tiniest bit short of “masterpiece.” The characters weren’t entirely complex save Cobb (and if you really think about it Mal as a projection of Mal in Cobb’s mind… what!?!) but that definitely helped to streamline the structural elements of the film. I also thought Ariadne was near useless and not very well excited by Page. She was literally a device so that whenever the audience had a question, she would ask it – useful for the loads of (necessary) exposition, but definitely zero emotional connection.
My main problem with the movie is the ending. And no I’m not upset that Nolan left the ending a question – I have a problem with how he did it. It’s a question that I didn’t think was too hard to see coming, but Nolan has a tiny habit of adding this end-of-the-movie button questions. I just watched The Prestige and it ends very similar with the line about the illusion. (Spoiler) I wish it would have ended with Cobb spinning the totem and with him going to play with his children. That way, only a slightly more clever audience member would go, “Hey, did we ever see what happened to that top?” Nolan didn’t need to beat the audience over the head with that question.
My grievances aside, I thought it was awesome. Lee Smith deserves 8 oscars for his editing. Pfister’s cinematography was great and almost refreshingly not dark. And all together a cinematically-arresting, thought-provoking, mentally and physically acrobatic, and exciting film that will definitely be in my top 10 list come the end of the year and should be remembered for the Oscars. I’m going with 9 noms: Picture, Director, Art Direction, Cinematography, Editing, Sound Editing, Sound Mixing, Visual Effects, Original Screenplay. I think Leo is the wildcard who might get nominated for an Inception/Shutter Island combo, but Shutter Island is the stronger acting piece.
Hmm. Still processing information but I think my reaction to Inception is perhaps a step down from some of you. I thought it was good- very good, but as some other reviewers have mentioned, the emotional ties weren’t there for me.
The exposition was a bit much- I actually found myself nodding a few times, which doesn’t mean I wasn’t invested, it just means it was 1:25 am and all the talking wasn’t grabbing me. I was actually thankful when an action scene began to engage me a bit further.
I went into Inception heeding the advice of one reviewer who recommended allowing the story to simply “wash over” and not get caught up trying to “figure it out” so much. I think that was a good plan- Inception is enjoyable at a base entertainment level, but there is also a LOT of nuance, some of which I’m sure I’ll pick up at a second viewing, at a decent hour.
Kris, I thought Ellen Page was actually pretty good. Not that you said she was the weak link or gave a poor performance, but in a film with some heavy hitters, I thought she held her own.
As I mentioned, the emotional reaction wasn’t really there for me at the end with Mal. I cared, but mostly because because I wanted to see how the over-arching story would play out, not because of their love story.
Favorite line (SPOILER): after the chase in the van when The Chemist (driver) turns around and says, “Did you guys see that?” and realizes they’re all asleep. Funny stuff.
I’ll have to see it again, but I was thinking on the drive home that my initial reaction to Inception would place it 4th amongst Nolan films for me, behind BB, TDK, and The Prestige. For some reason, people seem to not like The Prestige as well as I did. I loved the whole dark, Victorian setting between the magicians and the ending floored me.
I just wasn’t as enthralled with the ending. Perhaps I was tipped off a bit by Hans Zimmer titling the score for the final scene “Time,” so I kind of figured, going in, the parameters of time would somehow play a factor and of course they did.
All in all, a very good film. I agree with those who wonder if this will be beyond mainstream audiences and how that will affect word-of-mouth. I heard the three teenage kids in front of me (in a theater probably 2/3rds full) thought it sucked, while someone else mentioned they liked how original the concept was. I think this film will probably achieve one of those love/hate things, as we’ve seen through some of the reviews.
I’d give it a sold 3 stars (out of 4) and probably add another 1/2 star just for having the cajones to put an original idea out there for public consumption. Bravo, Mr. Nolan. You’ve done it again.
I thought it was absolutely awesome and my most enjoyable film going experience of the year. That said, I don’t quite understand the ‘genius’ hype surrounding it. As far as I’m concerned it’s just a phenomenal heist movie (and there’s nothing at all wrong with that).
I bet Newsweek wishes they had put Nolan on the Next Spielberg cover instead of Shamalamadingdong.
The first 6 films of Nolan’s career went like this for me: Great film, masterpiece, great film, masterpiece, great film and masterpiece.
He breaks the cycle here with his 2nd straight masterpiece and his most thought provoking film since his breakout film Memento.
I didn’t have a problem following the story at all. I liked how Nolan explains how extraction/inception works and then leaves it up to us to remember it when the characters descend into the labyrinth of the mind in the third act.
I’m still trying to figure out the ending. Did Cobb get to go home or was that all a dream. The top spinning on the table makes me wonder. I’ll have to go back and watch the movie a couple more times at least.
As far as Oscars are concerned, I can see it grabbing a bunch of technical nominations, particularly Wally Pfister’s cinematography and Lee Smith’s editing. Major nomination possibilities is Picture, Director, Original Screenplay and Actor.
From a theater report, I was a little surprised to find the theatre maybe 2/3rds full. I left the house at 11:15 to make sure I secured a good seat and found there was no line, a sparse, late-arriving crowd, and not a lot of buzz.
I guess I was thinking the Inception midnight show might at least be in the ballpark of the TDK experience. Not so.
Really the only crowd reaction was at the end. As mentioned in my previous post. I heard mixed reactions.
Nikke Finke says $3 million for midnight showings. That good?
Avatar only did about 3 or 4 million midnight show, and 77 million its opening weekend. Modest, considering how that all turned out.
3 million at midnight shows for a non-franchise, non-sequel, non-adaptation, etc. For a completely new IP, that’s very strong. I’m predicting something in the ballpark of 50-60 million opening weekend, with strong word of mouth success making it a long-running hit.
When you look closer at the numbers, Avatar’s $3-4 million midnight is boosted 30% by 3D, which actually means, that Inception was the higher ticket seller, and upon checking on the records, makes it the most attended original film at midnight in history.
I mean, it SOUNDS very good. I just have no idea in the grand scheme of things. Perhaps world of mouth (which seems positive) will make it take-off.
twitter reactions have been through the roof, and my crowd of average movie goers, mostly students, gave it a standing ovation. It’s going to get a lot of repeat customers.
It was only playing on 1600 locations for this midnight showings.
I can’t get this movie out of my head. I’ve never seen anything like it. I need to see it again right now.
I loved this movie. Thanks for the great birthday present Nolan.
Despite being a Nolan fan and somewhat of a Nolan apologist, I had guards up going in. Then was blown away. I am drunk on “Inception” kool-aid.
I am placing it alongside “Memento” and “Dark Knight” as Nolan’s best and it is a visual spectacle in many ways unlike anything I have ever seen. Michael Caine made a comment that Nolan gets back to making movies the way they ought to be made and I wholeheartedly agree. Somewhere, James Cameron is seething over that remark I bet.
No film is perfect 100%. I, for one, was mesmerized by the ideas and while I get the criticisms of the lack of emotional connectivity to the supporting ensemble, I felt DiCaprio’s pain and desperation, bought into Cotillard’s take on Mal, and had no problem with Ellen Page as the outsider’s voice of reason.
Would the movie have been better served having more exposition and time spent on Joseph Gordon-Leavitt’s character? Sure. Tom Hardy’s, Ken Watanabe’s or Michael Caine’s? I’m not so sure. (And Hardy almost steals the whole movie in my opinion.)
It’s a heist film first and foremost and a pretty incredible one at that. Christopher Nolan should be heralded for consistently pushing the envelope with bigger and grander schemes and ideas on the big stage he now resides on.
I mean after what we have seen this summer from Turteltaub, Shyamalan, Tim Burton (in the Spring), and other big-name directors – I mean…the alternative to not having Christopher Nolan directing $200M films is not all to enticing…
A part of me wonders how this would have played out on a smaller scale, with less A-listers, and a rudimentary budget. I bet if pressed, Nolan could have pulled off this idea on that scale also.
Ok here goes.
Incredible major spoilers throughout, not just of Inception.
I’m not kidding…
Last chance…
I don’t know where else to post this, but this is an attempted explanation of the film. Of course, it’s IMHO, but I have a pretty good track record of figuring out Nolan (Memento’s six frame shot of Leonard where Sammy Jenkis should be, Johannson’s line to Bale in The Prestige “it’s inhuman to be this cruel” – thus proving Bale has no twin, it’s a clone)
Alright. There is no fourth level of dreams. All the characters pretty much admit that getting to a third level is almost impossible. So that should be ruled out.
It isn’t just Fischer’s dream. It’s Cobb’s too. Fischer and Saito’s industrial espionage plot is the MacGuffin here. Nice to look at, doesn’t really matter.
Let’s ask ourselves, why would Michael Caine show up for a two scener? Because he has everything to do with the plot. Who does he handpick for the assignment? Ariadne. Could it be that she has more to do in this than design the dreams? And her role as dream architect would allow her access to a lot of places others couldn’t go.
Theory: Caine hires Ariadne not just as an architect, but as a spy. Her mission, to plant an inception on Cobb while he plants one on Fischer. Should’ve been called “Double Inception.”
Cobb is in the same level as Fischer and can be incepted upon (if you will) at the same time. The idea for Cobb is to let Mal go. Caine wants him to “come back to reality” so he can see his kids. The safe for Cobb isn’t locked up, it’s in the dialogue etween him and Mal on the ledge. This dialogue is repeated almost word for word between Cobb and Saito in the final scene. Cobb realizes he’s dreaming, realizes the idea’s origin and is kicked back to reality on the airplane. The reason why none of his team talks to him at the airport, but seem to be watching over him, is that they were all in on it, and they were successful. He’s free of Mal. He can finally see his kids faces (proving it’s no dream).
Nolan loves to toy with his audiences. Mal says earlier that dreams always leave a little doubt to them, making the dreamer question reality. This is what Nolan does to the audience when he cuts from the top spinning before it falls. He leaves us with that doubt. Have we been dreaming for 2h30m? Nolan doesn’t let us off.
I’m still trying to figure other things out, but I’m pretty satisfied with the explanation. I welcome others to debate. Editors, please feel free to post wherever you feel this is most suited.
Awesome job, Nolan. Oh, and as a working editor in Hollywood…Lee Smith deserves it all this year.
Spirithunter,
Very interesting theory but I went another way with it all —
MAJOR SPOILERS
Cobb actually performed inception on Saito so he would come to him with the job and promise him a return home. It was all a master plan of Cobb’s to rid his self conscious of Mal and lose himself in it again so he could be with his kids. So in the end, he never wakes up. He needed the job and needed to be convinced he was successful and that Saito made good on his agreement so he wouldn’t think he was dreaming when he saw his kids.
Funny how so many people can have so many different takes on the ending.
It’s like Nolan is sitting in a dark room somewhere, laughing at us trying to sort it all out.
My take on the ending was entirely different. I think Nolan pulled inception on the audience.
I thought it was visually astounding, but much like the “Matrix” trilogy, I also found it to be much ado about not much at all. The film isn’t nearly as smart as it thinks it is (logical holes abound and I can’t get past them), and the idea that’s being planted is a trivial, simple-minded cop-out that isn’t worth all the trouble of watching the movie.
Also, I thought it was cold to the touch, but not in the astounding, organic way a Kubrick or Lynch film is. (Speaking of Lynch, this movie is about half the film that “Inland Empire” was.) The characters simply weren’t well-developed in any sense, and it definitely does relate (as Kris says) to a Michael Mann film in its cumulative effect, or lack thereof.
As pure spectacle, there are better movies out there. The action wasn’t well-filmed in my estimation, and each of the climactic set-pieces were laggard and disappointing when looked at separately. The zero-G fight, for instance, was done better in the similarly negligent “The Matrix Reloaded.”
Sorry, guys. I guess I’m the only one disappointed through and through. There’s only so far that the visceral, visual quality could take me, and it wasn’t very far. I simply couldn’t buy into it.
I think your theory seems to forget the subconscious “level,” spirithunter. The rest sounds good, but I’m not sure it fully computes.
Now, I have considered the idea that Cobb was “incepted,” and it kind of fits, especially if you consider the final shot’s implications. But I’ve wondered if the idea being planted in Cobb’s mind was that getting back to his children was possible, and so a rather elaborate scheme is constructed to get him from A to B. It would certainly explain things like the thin nature of the Saito/Fischer thing.
So it’s kind of along the same line, but much less convoluted as theories go. Still, it’s wonderful that multiple interpretations can be pieced together.
Also, I think you got carried away with yourself on “The Prestige” thing (certainly a popular theory for many). I’m not sure that one line is enough to draw the conclusion that Falon was a clone. Nolan goes to some lengths to make it clear he is not (the nod at “a twin?,” the fact that Borden wouldn’t have had enough money for such a thing, “this is the performance,” etc.). And really, it would somewhat negate the point the film is making about the danger of obsession and competition, vis a vis Angier. My two cents, anyway.
The Leonard/Sammy thing in “Memento” is a rather obvious bit, though. But I do find it fascinating that Nolan keeps coming back to the nature of reality vs. perception, and that he succeeds at extending that theme to audience participation so consistently.
Your a brave man movieman but I ultimately agree with. Good summer movie with some great effects and certainly interesting and entertaining but nothing really more than that.
Not so random thoughts about Inception –
-Leonardo Dicaprio, please make a comedy soon! (The Academy doesn’t hate you like they do Tom Cruise.)
-Joseph Gordon-Levitt’s face is so attractive! (I was embarrassed by the first half hour of his close-ups.)
-The zero gravity portion of the film is the overall personal highlight. (In an alternate reality this would be the whole movie.)
-This is Nolan’s best use of actresses.
-The ending caused an instant Annie Wilkes reaction of “What you’ve written just isn’t fair!”
MORE SPOILERS
Kris,
Interesting points all. Absolutely works on numerous levels. Back to my original theory, I’m thinking of the first Caine/DiCaprio scene. Cobb tells his father-in-law, “You taught me all the tricks.” “I didn’t teach you to go into thievery.” This places Caine in a great position to pull all the strings behind the scenes. I keep thinking of the airport scene at the end, where everyone (including Fischer himself) give Cobb a little look-see, as if verifying that the mission was successful. But they do not attempt to talk to him. Ariadne and Arthur both have satisfied smiles on their lips in the airplane when Cobb wakes.
Antoher scene to consider is the first time Ariadne “sleeps” with Cobb. He takes her into the deepest regions of his subconscious right there. Why is this scene necessary? So that Ariadne can design the inception maze from Cobb’s memory (which up to that point, she had no access to). She is able to rebuild the hotel for the climactic fall from the ledge. I agree this is rather elaborate for a father-in-law to rescue his son from himself, but it appears that the entire team was in on it. (This is why Arthur and the chemist are the ones to remain at upper levels. Ariadne has to continue on down with Cobb, not to protect him as she suggests, but rather to keep him on track to receive the inception completely.)
We’ll save our Prestige differences for another day, after I’ve seen it again.
Nice to have a good debate for a change.
Spoilers
By the way, there is another interesting theory out there that states Cobb had to incept himself, and come up with an elaborate way of distracting himself from the inception by concocting the whole industrial espionage scenario. In this theory, Saito represents the inception idea (or good self) in the helicopter, whereas Mal tries to sabotage any efforts for the inception to plant, because as his subconscious, she realizes this new idea as a threat. This is why Saito’s first words are, “Are you here to kill me?” Another interesting theory with some holes, but you gotta love this type of movie coming out right now. Thanks Chris Nolan.
Spirit,
as much as I want to go where you’re headed–as Kris says it tidies up that one sticking point–I have major problems with the Ariadne character if you claim she’s the one performing inception. Actually, I had major problems with her anyway. How is she so perceptive in understanding Cobb’s psychology after just one dip in (how does she not know that everyone isn’t this messed up if this is her first time? An answer going along with your theory is that it isn’t her first time). She’s very astute and too good of a judge of character, and that bothered me when watching the film because I didn’t really believe that she could be so right so quickly, and I first thought that it might be due to her youth. But those problems would be explained by your theory.
However, the audience is never given any hint (ambiguous or otherwise) that Ariadne is more than she appears (to Cobb). In order for your theory to work we’d have to at least feel that there’s more going on, but I didn’t. Maybe that’s the screenplay, maybe it’s Page. It just doesn’t fit comfortably with what I saw.
Only seen it once. Will reassess after multiple viewings.
Either way, it really is something, one of the best movie experiences–you’re completely sucked in. And I agree with Anne, this is not that complicated. Accept the premises given and pay attention and it’s not that difficult to follow.
Question. How does Saito get into Cobb’s subconscious?
“But they do not attempt to talk to him. Ariadne and Arthur both have satisfied smiles on their lips in the airplane when Cobb wakes. ”
I think you’re reading too much into them not talking to him,actually. After all, they are supposed to be strangers. They didn’t speak to each other on the plane, either. I imagine that was to make sure the job went smoothly so that Fischer didn’t see them talking or something like that.
Great film. Simply great. I would say more, but I just finished writing up a review for my blog, so I’m kind of burned out.
I loved “Toy Story 3”, but this… I don’t think anything else is going to beat it this year (for me at least).
“Antoher scene to consider is the first time Ariadne “sleeps” with Cobb. He takes her into the deepest regions of his subconscious right there. Why is this scene necessary? So that Ariadne can design the inception maze from Cobb’s memory (which up to that point, she had no access to).”
That’s an interesting point, though.
Kris,
That is, if Fischer is who we think he is. It’s just as possible that Fischer was in on it too. Look at the way he glances at Cobb in the airport. Modest recognition. Not a glare (as if he was still part of the subconscious) and not a “hey wait a minute, he looks totally familiar from my recent dream (as if he were a stranger), but more a sidelong glance of interest. Could it be? He’s an actor who just finished his part in the inception for Cobb? And you’re right. I’m thinking way too much about this.
Also, the first subconscious attack during Level 1 (the first shootout) is disrupted by a train barreling down the middle of the street. Since this is directly taken from Cobb’s attempt to wake him and Mal up, it’s interesting to note that it’s Cobb’s subconscious that is already attacking them, not Fischer’s. This would also explain why Arthur backs down immediately when Cobb gets angry about him not doing his homework. He did do it. They all know it’s Cobb’s subsconscious fighting against them, not Fischer, who is ineffect still playing a part for Cobb.
“Since this is directly taken from Cobb’s attempt to wake him and Mal up, it’s interesting to note that it’s Cobb’s subconscious that is already attacking them, not Fischer’s. This would also explain why Arthur backs down immediately when Cobb gets angry about him not doing his homework. He did do it. They all know it’s Cobb’s subsconscious fighting against them, not Fischer, who is in effect still playing a part for Cobb.”
Another brilliant point.
The problem with “the heist was an absolute ruse” theory is the vast amount of capital and resources needed to execute the plan. To pull this off, you needed a motivated industrialist (Saito) with much to gain, not a professor trying to get his son to face reality.
Another thing, in the end scene, I believe the children are wearing the same clothes and have not aged. Of course, it could be that Mal’s death isn’t that far into the past, which would make both ok (hey the kids could be wearing the same clothes, it’s possible), but it makes you wonder.
I would just like to add that the ending was not at all ambiguous. The reason for this is simple. Saito died in the dream, but when he woke up he was uninjured. By the movie’s own rules, that means that Cobb’s world was “real”, does it not?
As amazing as this movie was (and it was amazing), I think Nolan was a bit too clever for his own good there.
Another good point. They abound. Though I wouldn’t say the ending was “not at all ambiguous.” Nolan is clearly having a bit of fun.
Ok well I need to clear some things up so help me out people. I am sure a lot of these questions were answered during the movie but I have only seen it once.
Why do Cobb and Mal share a dream in the first place? Was it to share a better life than they had in reality? Also how did they get stuck in limbo? Was that planned by Cobb or was it an accident?
In the fourth level (Cobb’s dream) Cobb tells Mal that they did grow old together in their dream. Yet he explained to Ariadne that they both committed suicide via train and they both looked young. Which one is it? Did they grow old in their shared dream or did they kill themselves early on?
Also in the fourth level doesn’t Mal stab Cobb multiple times in the chest? How does he recover from that? Not to mention we never see him getting saved from the van underwater in level one. Perhaps that top really does not fall and Cobb is truly stuck in limbo?