Inception - Chris Nolan + Leo DiCaprio = best movie of the summer?

[Guest acknowledgeandproceed]

Major complaint I've heard concerning this film is that it wasn't surreal or trippy enough in the dream sequences, but so far as the film's set up was concerned, that's irrelevant. The target's subconscious would attack you if you constructed a mad visual masterpiece. Sure, it wasn't completely congruent with real dreams, but what is?

 

Remember, this was a Hollywood film that was mostly designed to appeal to the broadest audience possible starring big names. If you were going into this film expecting some high-tech Godard or Felinni, then yeah, you're gonna be disappointed.

 

Also, at one point a character DOES explain the entire plot of the film in a single sentence. People I know laughed at this, but its absolutely required for the mass audience, ie: lowest common denominator...

 

The point of the film is to question reality, yes? Well Christ, it's recently been determined that consciousness is an epiphenomenon. If that goes over your head, then by all means lean towards a more malignant criticism.

 

It's not a masterpiece, but it was extremely well-made, a rarity in the mass market, for some reason. It was a solid action flick that makes stupid people confused and smart people hypercritical. Put me in the middle category, wherein I knew it was going to be Shutter Island meets The Matrix, and I enjoyed it for what it was. Chris Nolan has gotten my attention.

 

Also, more bass farts would have been appreciated.

[awepittance]

re: what Chris Moss said earlier, i was wondering the same thing about the part where Cobb first tries the sedation drug combo. i kept expecting him to wake-up again but it never happened.

 

 

a couple more complaints i have about the film is that they seemed to all have the perfect ability to be 100% sober within minutes after waking up from sleep from heavy intoxication.

there was a funny season 6 X-files episode called 'field trip' where mulder and scully are trapped in a giant hallucinogenic fungus that is slowly eating them alive. They both think they escape and as they are explaining the adventure to Skinner Mulder asks Scully 'something isn't right...have you ever heard of a drug where it's effects wear off on the subject once he realizes that he is intoxicated?'.

 

I think Christopher Nolan is a much bigger fan of Freddy Krueger than he's willing to admit.

 

what did i say earlier? i havnt seen the film yet. (or posted in this post//untill now)

 

whoops somehow confused you with Gary C

[Alcofribas]

i don't think it requires mad trippy visuals to treat dreams with more sensitivity. i feel like the whole "dream" element was unnecessarily naive. i also think it's annoying that people keep saying that this was a big hollywood movie with famous actors so we shouldn't expect it to be, you know, good. why not?

[Guest Z_B_Z]

i also think it's annoying that people keep saying that this was a big hollywood movie with famous actors so we shouldn't expect it to be, you know, good.

 

whos saying this?

[Guest Benedict Cumberbatch]

chris moss said it

[Alcofribas]

i also think it's annoying that people keep saying that this was a big hollywood movie with famous actors so we shouldn't expect it to be, you know, good.

 

whos saying this?

 

 

Remember, this was a Hollywood film that was mostly designed to appeal to the broadest audience possible starring big names. If you were going into this film expecting some high-tech Godard or Felinni, then yeah, you're gonna be disappointed.

 

also chris moss said this

[Redruth]

fuck i need to see this

[karmakramer]

Major complaint I've heard concerning this film is that it wasn't surreal or trippy enough in the dream sequences, but so far as the film's set up was concerned, that's irrelevant. The target's subconscious would attack you if you constructed a mad visual masterpiece. Sure, it wasn't completely congruent with real dreams, but what is?

 

Remember, this was a Hollywood film that was mostly designed to appeal to the broadest audience possible starring big names. If you were going into this film expecting some high-tech Godard or Felinni, then yeah, you're gonna be disappointed.

 

Also, at one point a character DOES explain the entire plot of the film in a single sentence. People I know laughed at this, but its absolutely required for the mass audience, ie: lowest common denominator...

 

The point of the film is to question reality, yes? Well Christ, it's recently been determined that consciousness is an epiphenomenon. If that goes over your head, then by all means lean towards a more malignant criticism.

 

It's not a masterpiece, but it was extremely well-made, a rarity in the mass market, for some reason. It was a solid action flick that makes stupid people confused and smart people hypercritical. Put me in the middle category, wherein I knew it was going to be Shutter Island meets The Matrix, and I enjoyed it for what it was. Chris Nolan has gotten my attention.

 

Also, more bass farts would have been appreciated.

 

The film has some major direction flaws, and I think it fails as a hollywood blockbuster unlike say Avatar which I know people love to hate here. Not saying Avatar is better, but just saying Inception isn't really a blockbuster, I'm honestly not sure where is falls, it kind of tried to be a bit of everything, maybe thats its problem. Going into this film I wasn't sure what I was expecting, though I was definitely expecting some more original stealthy action sequences. Had this been filmed in the style of say "Children of Men" in the action sequences, I think the dreams would have felt a lot more like dreams and less like a bourne/bond movie. By framing the dreams like any Nolan film, we lose the sense of perspective. If this is one person's dream we should get that sensation. Thats not to say the cinematography wasn't gorgeous (those kids were sooo BOC) but everything kind of washed together, and I think letting the camera roll more would have given the dreams a more in the moment sensation. Especially once the dreams started collapsing etc...

 

Some variation in how things collapse would have also been nice. Just things blowing up, while cool at first, got very old and felt overused by the end. Kind of like 2012.

[Guest iamabe]

i don't think it requires mad trippy visuals to treat dreams with more sensitivity. i feel like the whole "dream" element was unnecessarily naive. i also think it's annoying that people keep saying that this was a big hollywood movie with famous actors so we shouldn't expect it to be, you know, good. why not?

 

Agreed. It's less that I wanted inventive visuals than a dream plot that moved into more unpredictable territory the way real dreams do. I wanted David Lynch, and got Michael Bay, you know? Not to knock Nolan - he's awesome. And I don't think it's an excuse that it's a hollywood blockbuster. Regardless of what audience it was meant for, it underdelivers in some aspects.

 

Major complaint I've heard concerning this film is that it wasn't surreal or trippy enough in the dream sequences, but so far as the film's set up was concerned, that's irrelevant. The target's subconscious would attack you if you constructed a mad visual masterpiece. Sure, it wasn't completely congruent with real dreams, but what is?

 

Remember, this was a Hollywood film that was mostly designed to appeal to the broadest audience possible starring big names. If you were going into this film expecting some high-tech Godard or Felinni, then yeah, you're gonna be disappointed.

 

Also, at one point a character DOES explain the entire plot of the film in a single sentence. People I know laughed at this, but its absolutely required for the mass audience, ie: lowest common denominator...

 

The point of the film is to question reality, yes? Well Christ, it's recently been determined that consciousness is an epiphenomenon. If that goes over your head, then by all means lean towards a more malignant criticism.

 

It's not a masterpiece, but it was extremely well-made, a rarity in the mass market, for some reason. It was a solid action flick that makes stupid people confused and smart people hypercritical. Put me in the middle category, wherein I knew it was going to be Shutter Island meets The Matrix, and I enjoyed it for what it was. Chris Nolan has gotten my attention.

 

Also, more bass farts would have been appreciated.

 

The film has some major direction flaws, and I think it fails as a hollywood blockbuster unlike say Avatar which I know people love to hate here. Not saying Avatar is better, but just saying Inception isn't really a blockbuster, I'm honestly not sure where is falls, it kind of tried to be a bit of everything, maybe thats its problem. Going into this film I wasn't sure what I was expecting, though I was definitely expecting some more original stealthy action sequences. Had this been filmed in the style of say "Children of Men" in the action sequences, I think the dreams would have felt a lot more like dreams and less like a bourne/bond movie. By framing the dreams like any Nolan film, we lose the sense of perspective. If this is one person's dream we should get that sensation. Thats not to say the cinematography wasn't gorgeous (those kids were sooo BOC) but everything kind of washed together, and I think letting the camera roll more would have given the dreams a more in the moment sensation. Especially once the dreams started collapsing etc...

 

Some variation in how things collapse would have also been nice. Just things blowing up, while cool at first, got very old and felt overused by the end. Kind of like 2012.

 

Spot on - Inception tries to be too many things. And some great scenes cut too quickly, while some dull scenes dragged. This would be forgivable if the movie wasn't so taxing - it demands you pay attention to every second of it, so it feels like punishment when we have to sit there watching the same footage of Cobb's kids' backs 5 times. (I know you said you liked those scenes, but I was pretty bored with the cobb/mal plot.)

 

seriously though, does anyone else want to cause bodily harm to Ellen Paige?

[Guest Mirezzi]

seriously though, does anyone else want to cause bodily harm to Ellen Paige?

Yes, very badly, which is one of my hugest concerns going in...even the Cisco commercials with her make me really want to kill.

[kcinsu]

going tonight with the lady... will report back in the morning...

[Guest iamabe]

seriously though, does anyone else want to cause bodily harm to Ellen Paige?

Yes, very badly, which is one of my hugest concerns going in...even the Cisco commercials with her make me really want to kill.

 

oh god. "when I was a kid...we would just go to the farm..."

 

KILL

[Vergas buey]

I was really skeptical of this film. I cannot stand leo dicrapio and ellen page for one, for two i generally shy away from hype.

 

Some notes i have about this film: it should have been at least 3 hours longer.

 

2. Whats his face from third rock from the sun was trying to do his best neo impression and it was taxing for me to bear witness to such a canned performance.

 

2. Great fuckin movie. I wont spoil the end but lets just say it has a predictable ending. All i have to know about a film about dreams is that i already know the ending.

[Guest Blanket Fort Collapse]

I too wish it was longer, there's a lot more details they could have gone in with the concept, too bad there probably wont be a sequel to go deeper into the dynamics of dreaming.

 

I don't see how you think joseph gordon levetts or whatever was trying to act like neo/keanu or anything.

[eh Speedy]

I don't see how you think joseph gordon levetts or whatever was trying to act like neo/keanu or anything.

 

anybody notice how he looks just like the pigmy version of Heath Ledger.

[MAXIMUS MISCHIEF]

no no no and no.

[Guest bigs]

saw this the other day and thought it was absolutely fantastic. one of the best films i've seen in the last five years, easy.

[J3FF3R00]

saw it tonight.

pretty pretty pretty good.

Definitely original and entertaining. Quite a refreshment after seeing so much junk lately. I always dig a movie that makes you think.

 

I really liked the whole dream within a dream within a dream bit and was happy to see they took it one step further. the time shift element was awesome too! I did start to get a bit bored with all of the shooting and blowing things up in the snowy mountain fort dream.

also, I didn't really buy the relationship between dicaprio and cotilard. I kept thinking that they didn't have much chemistry and if I was him I would fucking stab her in my dream just to get her to leave me alone. everything else was pretty cool by me. It was actually the first movie I've seen with Juno girl in it where I didn't want to punch her in the head. The Indian actor from Drag Me To Hell kinda bugs me a tad though.

The British actor who played the forgery artist was awesome. JGL was solid as always.

 

My take on the ending was that Cobb and Saito are still asleep on the plane. It leaves a good opportunity for a sequel. "Can they get out?"

 

My gf really liked it too but was wondering if the whole movie was a dream because of the beginning with Saito as an old man saying how he thought he knew dicaprio or something like that. You know what i mean.

What do you think? Could the whole thing have been a dream?

 

 

[Guest Blanket Fort Collapse]

my whole nutsack could have been a dream

 

I dunno, the pin may have wound up out the wobble and started spinning infinitely, I gotta see it again to try and see if I can find anymore details that would lead me to naturally thinking the less obvious possibilities but I'm kind of impatient and want to read something official that sheds more light on the film

[vamos scorcho]

a decent movie, i felt

 

 

 

i also thought it was pretty horrible, beyond the usual hollywood retardation, terrible acting, writing, standard "direction"

 

there were a few cool actors in it that i enjoyed watching but for the most part it was ... bad

 

also there were parts that were really cool, like when they wake up on the plane at the end. but those parts didn't make me forget the complete lack of logic that the movie had. as a lucid dreamer it was an insult to my intelligence, i've never felt this way about a movie but with a concept that cool it's just sort of frustrating that the movie turned out so .. standard.

 

very good at best, standard shit at worst.

[vamos scorcho]

Pretty good movie, but I feel slightly disappointed that such an interesting premise took such a traditional path. The action was the most boring aspect of the film for the most part, aside from a few excellent scenes. A little long and a little to safe, Nolan is amazing but he's a tad too straight, Jonze/Kaufman could have added some real depth to it I think.

 

agreed. this is not my favorite Nolan movie.

 

 

I also had no emotional connection to any of the characters, so I didn't really give a fuck whether Cobb was living in reality or his limbo-induced dream state. I also didn't care about the entire plot with his wife. It seems like Fischer is the actual emotional core of the movie. Their manipulation of his relationship with his dad was probably the closest I felt to being emotionally invested in anyone. Also, I want to punch Ellen Paige in the fucking head.

 

Definitely not enough surreal imagery and the action was pretty weak.

 

Did anyone else have trouble understanding most of things things Ken Watanabe says? And it seems like the audio mixing is poor in some scenes, like when Cobb and Mal are kicking themselves out of their dream world by lying on the train tracks, and Cobb goes: "What's the most important thing?" Then a train comes, really fucking loud, and Mal replies: "kjdfopIJklWJENSHFWOinviwfg". I mean, seriously. Did anyone actually hear what she said there? I also saw the movie twice and couldn't hear it either time. Maybe it was the theater.

 

 

Those complaints aside, Cillian Murphy and Gordon-Levitt are perfectly cast and they are both great actors I love watching. And the movie isn't bad, just nowhere near the mindfuck or groundbreaking experience it was purported to be.

 

 

 

agree with all this

 

it was good, don't get me wrong. just ... my disappointment outweighs my actual enjoyment

 

there were many times during the movie that i was facepalming - it's just standard shit with a cool concept and some cool parts and some RETARDED stuff that doesn't make any sense

 

 

 

if your film doesn't follow the rules of nature, reality, science, etc AT ALL, then you have no right to fucking make it confusing to the point where people think they're witnessing something that actually has depth when in reality it has none.

[MAXIMUS MISCHIEF]

a decent movie, i felt

 

 

 

i also thought it was pretty horrible, beyond the usual hollywood retardation, terrible acting, writing, standard "direction"

 

there were a few cool actors in it that i enjoyed watching but for the most part it was ... bad

 

also there were parts that were really cool, like when they wake up on the plane at the end. but those parts didn't make me forget the complete lack of logic that the movie had. as a lucid dreamer it was an insult to my intelligence, i've never felt this way about a movie but with a concept that cool it's just sort of frustrating that the movie turned out so .. standard.

 

very good at best, standard shit at worst.

 

i felt the same way with the dream logic they had. you can tell it was made by someone who has never lucid dreamed in their life.

i still thought it was a great movie though, for what it was.

[vamos scorcho]

i agree, for what it was it was an enjoyable viewing.

 

i'm a snobby movie goer i guess, i like movies that come across more as art, they trip me out more and --- well i really do think they're much more fun to watch

 

i don't like nolan's style at this point, he is basically "michael bayesque" with a hint of creativity and risk taking.

[awepittance]

you can tell it was made by someone who has never lucid dreamed in their life.

 

interesting, i got quite the opposite impression. Especially the whole 'kick' setup reminded me a lot of a dreaming mask i once owned made by Stephen Laberge called the Nova Dreamer

 

The NovaDreamer detects when you’re in REM sleep, then gives you a cue (flashing lights or sounds) to remind you to recognize you are dreaming. Cues enter your dream, becoming incorporated just like an alarm or radio will sometimes work its way into a dream.

[Guest Blanket Fort Collapse]

how do they go lucid instantly upon being thrown into the dream world whilst being heavily sedated?