*** Official INCEPTION Discussion Thread

*** Official INCEPTION Discussion Thread

Some of those  reviews are using rather extravagant prose to praise this film.  Makes one sit up and take notice.

*** Official INCEPTION Discussion Thread

I'm just so tired of the marketing of "Inception", so I'll be glad to finally see it this weekend, and not have any more of the footage from the commercials shown to me, and lessening its impact.

*** Official INCEPTION Discussion Thread

Very excited about this one. An original screenplay! Hollywood can still produce original screenplays that incorporate original ideas!! Rejoice....

*** Official INCEPTION Discussion Thread

Saw the extended trailer for the first time during the MLB all star game (I actually started recording the game when I realized it was the long trailer in HD, I originally had no intention to record the game). Now I'm officially pumped! It showed a lot more of the plot/premise, and I can say my anticipation has been heightened. Can't wait to see it!

*** Official INCEPTION Discussion Thread

Anybody else see the filming formats Nolan is using for this film?  I happened to check it out at IMDb.

 

It reads like a list of every format available, 35mm, 65mm, anamorphic, VistaVision, HD Video...

 

 

Quote:

 

I just thought that was interesting.

*** Official INCEPTION Discussion Thread

And still, according to Wally Pfister, the camera was on his shoulder for most of the filming:

 

http://www.cinematical.com/2010/06/24/interview-inception-cinematographer-wally-pfister/

 

Some interesting observations about post-production:

 

 

 

*** Official INCEPTION Discussion Thread

 

I haven't seen more than 2 seconds of this commercial for about a month because I want to go in fresh!(in the voice of Frank Costanza)

*** Official INCEPTION Discussion Thread

No scenes filmed in IMAX, just the 'regular' kind of 65mm film, which still is pretty exciting, if you ask me.

This thread is now designated the Official Discussion Thread for "Inception". Please, post all comments, links to outside reviews, film and box office discussion items to this thread.

All HTF member film reviews of "Inception" should be posted to the Official Review Thread.

Thank you for your consideration in this matter.


Crawdaddy

Didnt want to mention my main gripe in the review thread as this is now the discussion thread. The problem with talking about the final shot means everyone is trying to guess what it will be during the film and why :) I will spoilerize just in case.

 

 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

 

 

Otherwise flawless.

Spoilers...this is the discussion thread.

I think the final shot is a very nice ambiguous shot. It gives everybody what they want. The symbol for me, and i am not particularly interested in determing what reality is, is the age of his children. I was very surprised that they were the same age.

I love the structure of the film. It is all about the purpose of why they are where they are. The film doesn't let go, the hallmark of something special. As with his last 3 films, the craftsmanship is extraordinary. I can't wait to spend some time discussing the film and the narrative. But I want to see it again before delving into it too much. I imagine it will make for a very satisfying rewatch.

Sure its ambiguous but its also obvious and unnecessary - doesnt spoil the film for me, just a little gripe that;s all:)

 

What was undeniably gripping and tense was pretty much the entire second half of the film. From the moment, they entered the aircraft, it just didn't seem to let up and at no point was the film confusing or difficult to follow, just brilliantly done. I can't wait to see it again.

Very obvious. But my audience loved it. Most HTFers are pretty astute moviegoers...while the shot may seem overt for us, it probably worked for more casual audience members without insulting the hardcore. Just my take.

My gripes are very minor as well. So much good material, they are essentially irrelevant.

Visually, its amazing.

 

I didnt like the film.

I dreamt I saw Inception today and I dreamt I really liked it, but who knows if that is true.

 

I had high expectations going in and I was not disappointed.  Like many of you, I had a strong feeling pretty early on about what the final shot would be, but I'm not really bothered by it.  It is impressive how well the tension is sustained in the second half of the film.  It was a fast two and a half hours.

 

Hello guys. It's been awhile. :) Just returned from seeing Inception. I really liked it. Lots to absorb and like Chuck, want another viewing & some more time to chew on it b4 I go on....but quickly I loved the ending shot. IDK...the film earned it and it's a nice touch. More later after a 2nd viewing. 

 

Nice to be back on the HTF. 

I think this is a higher budget version of ...

 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

Did anyone else see this movie on a 4K projector?  It looked really good, can someone confirm this was not an upscale but a 4k transfer?  It had to been because grain was so small and felt non existent.

Nice to see you back, Tim!

One of the supporting performances I really liked was Tom Hardy. I expected great work from Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Cillian Murphy, and frankly, everyone else. Hardy was a great surprise.

I do not think the film is a mind-fuck. It seems a bit too gentle and clear for that. I do think it is a puzzle box with a variety of solutions. I have already read several great ones.

As usual, I am less concerned with the narrative truth and more interested in the emotional purpose. But I appreciate the layers. And I thought the film was very sadly romantic, thanks in large part to Moll. I was very struck by the depth of feeling in the scene where Cobb first explains their 50 years together, in their own world. That really established the power of that plot.

Some of the dream rules were a bit too precise (5 minutes = 1 hour), but I understand the filmmaking needs.

 

Hey, Tim! Good to see you here. I'm not on these boards as much as I'd like to be either. But a Nolan movie is just the thing to bring the old gang back together.

 

 

 Amen, Chuck. I don't get the criticisms of this film being "cold". It has more emotion packed into a few moments that most films have in their entire running time.

 

I think the lack of emotion could be Cobb trying to see his kids.  Since we don't understand a lot in the first half of the movie and based on his actions it was not conveyed how much Cobb missed them or how much he wanted to see them.
 

I don't see the film as cold at all. Quite contrary. I believe the purpose of the film, the purpose of examining dreams, is deeply emotional. The lead character is certainly repressed, but that is the point. I think the Cotillard-DiCaprio scenes are intensely intimate. That is part of the fear in them. We've all woken up from dreams feeling emotionally fulfilled (or drained). For me, it isn't often, but it always leaves an impression.

And major props to DiCaprio. Not an easy balancing act in the least, being closed-off and likable. He's done it twice in a row now (with similar roles).

Been a long time since I've posted too, but a film like this will do it, I guess~

 

 

Nolan takes the "one last job" framework
of a noir and jumps off that springboard and expands it into so much
more. One could compare it to the Matrix for its heady ideas, but
that film didn't delve too much into the emotional aspect of the
human condition, whereas that's this film's locus. I found myself
thinking that a work like this, in its involving seriousness and
thought-provoking worldview, can only be valuable for someone to
experience.

As great as Dark Knight is, this is better because he's not confined
by genre expectations or the need to adhere to source material- it's
its own entity, self-contained, without sequel or spinoff
possibilities. Dicaprio's perf is superb- all those years working
with Scorsese have paid off. Nolan's camerawork and compositions are
classical yet muscular, very strongly balanced compositions, rule of
thirds everywhere, and a lighting scheme that emphasizes a full
gradation of light to dark, especially on people's faces. A lot of
attention to color too- at times deep and saturated, elsewhere muted
and subtle, as befitting the narrative. Editing is razor sharp,
splicing in shots of memories here and there, shifting between
realities. And his use of slow motion, my goodness...

 

There'll be a backlash, I'm sure, depending on how successful the film is.
But I doubt there will be a better studio movie- of comparable size-
made in the forseeable future. The film is massive, in scope and
depth- made with all the care we expect from the auteurs, but on a
subject that necessitates immense size, and by a director lucky
enough to have carte blanche, for however short a time, in his
career. A unique and unrepeatable high point in mainstream cinema,
and a slap in the face to those who would denigrate American films
for lack of intelligence. As bad as so many studio tentpoles are,
there will always at least be this.

 

Reading over this I realize how much I sound like a dithering fanboy, but I really feel like this is something special. I don't have any need to force my opinion on everyone else, but boy, for me, everything worked. I had a terrifi time, and can't stop thinking about it. Last time I felt this great about a film was Departed, There Will Be Blood, New World, perhaps Slumdog.

 

Regards,

Nathan

I'm kind of torn on this movie. 

 

There were things I liked, but others that I thought were really out there. 

 

Essentially in a way, I'd describe it as a science fiction bank heist movie (something Nolan seems to be obsessed with) ... but the most convoluted bank heist movie ever made. It's such a complicated plot, that at times it almost became a tad comical to me. 

 

The story line dissolves into a train wreck at some points ... albeit a gorgeous looking train wreck. There seemed to be honestly a lot of mindless action scenes with random characters and random things happening all over the place. It was kinda like The Matrix .... but with no tension (ie: if the agents were just kinda random video game like fodder to be beaten up or shot at). 

 

The other thing is Ellen Page's character is introduced at the beginning as a central character and then she basically .... does ..... nothing ... for the last 2/3rds of the movie. She's supposed to be this great 

 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

 

 

And the movie does drag ... the pacing is all over the place. 

 

All that said .... this is a gorgeous movie. It is worth seeing for that alone. And in an odd way, there are times when it clicks and works, and it's really high concept, well above anything any other movie has attempted this summer. The cast is likable even though there isn't one really great character in the movie. DiCaprio is good, but his performance is kind of like a "Diet Shutter Island" here, his character is in a lot of ways the same guy in that movie, just not quite as disturbed. 

 

Watching this movie also made me appreciate the first "Matrix" movie a lot more. Looking back on it now, they really did a tremendous job with that movie in establishing the rules and keeping things from getting too convoluted with a similiarily high concept sci-fi idea. 

Hey folks, it's been a while since I've posted here too. Unfortunately, many of the film blogs I subscribe to are currently rife with commenters tearing this movie apart. Since I've given up defending my personal tastes in movies to others, I thought I'd seek refuge here instead. (EDIT: And by "refuge," I'm in no way suggesting I'm only interested in groupthink. I'm saying I like the way that HTF harbors a whole array of opinions.)

 

Saw the movie yesterday morning, and have been thinking about it ever since. I do understand on one side how some are claiming that Inception is a "cold" movie. I had The Prestige in the back of my mind during much of the running time, because I was concerned that Inception would be very similar: a thoughtful examination of dreams, memories, ideas, and the workings of the subconscious, but no likable or relatable characters (like Borden/Angier in The Prestige). This is probably what caused the movie's few purely emotional moments to hit me really hard. I just wasn't expecting them.

 

I did not see the end of the movie coming, because I expected it to end like Nolan's other features (i.e., not "happy"). So my heart was leaping when we saw Cobb awake on the plane, walk through the airport, return to his home, and (would he? yes!) see the faces of his children again.

 

And then the final shot. Some audiences members groaned because we didn't see the totem stop spinning. I'm sure they felt that meant everything that came before was just a long con. But I didn't see it that way.

 

First of all, leaving aside the question of whether or not the totem keeps spinning after the camera cuts to black (I think there are subtle hints that it will stop, but anyway), I think the issue is largely irrelevant. It doesn't matter if Cobb is in the real world or not. The key is that he made a choice to accept that reality as his. He stopped looking to the totem to determine it for him.

 

In a way, I see a strong thematic connection to both Memento and The Dark Knight. Leonard comes to a true realization of what actually happened to his wife, and by whom, and makes a conscious decision to embrace a different reality, one in which he will continue to look for the killer. Batman sees the reality of what Harvey Dent did, and chooses to shoulder all the blame himself. There's a very strong element of free will present in Nolan's films, of characters choosing their reality and being at peace with it, at least at the end.

 

Anyway, these are my early formative thoughts. 

After a second viewing, I'm even more convinced that Michael Caine's character performed an "inception" on Cobb.

 

Ariadne was his "extractor".

 

But, there is also another interpretation of the ending and the film and it's that Nolan performed an "inception" on the audience with the last shot.

 

I'm of two minds about it.

I'm surprised to see a number of people saying that this movie felt long. I thought for 2 and a half hours, it moved really well (especially compared to Nolan's Batman movies which felt to me like they were each 7 hours long).

Ok, I have a lot of different feelings about this, and pretty much, as this is a discussion thread, if someone wants to add spoilers they can, but you should have seen this if you're in the thread discussing it (per rules!)

 

So here goes:

 

I think there are a million ways to view this.  I've seen it twice now.  

 

Interpretation 1:  When they go to meet the chemist, he puts him "under" and he wakes up, goes to the bathroom to check his totem, and it gets swept off the table so he can't check.  Did he ever come out of that?  Was the entirety after that a construct of his own mind?

 

Interpretation 2: This is the one a lot of the people near me thought; while we see the totem at the end spin seemingly too long, it also did appear to wobble.  Is it up to us to decide whether or not it eventually fell over?  Is it real, is it a dream?  Does it matter?  (Lady/Tiger) ?  This is the one I think is the most baffling but interesting.. do we propose that it was going to fall.. or that it would right itself and continue to spin?

 

Interpretation 3:  Everyone got out but Cobb.. but where did they go, or does that even matter?  How did they explain the comatose Cobb upon arrival at LA if that happened?  Does it matter?

 

Interpretation 4:  Aradine, the greek mythological name for a maze builder was picked as "better then" to help extract him.. was Moll really still alive, and she had it right from the beginning, that he was always living in limbo and couldn't escape and he had conned himself all along?

 

Interpretation 5: Nolan conned us himself, and the ending is an inception, inviting people to take his ideas an assemble them as their own (as a matter of filmmaking, I take it as a given this is true, and this is a brilliant part of the film).

If they were to divert into limbo, inside the subconcious of the target, why did his subconcious supplant that?  It wasn't designed by the architect, so wouldn't the push pull favor the one controlling the dream (either Aradine or the target?)  Why revisit Cobb's? 

 

I think this is one of those films that has an almost Blade Runner type ending that means there can be infinite debate and almost no assured answers.  And even if you told someone shot by shot the ending, could you really explain it in such a way that ruined anything about the film?   Or even anything that mattered at all about whether or not the ending was real or not?

 

That's what helps sell the film, I think.  It invites you to debate so many levels of it.  When they chased around before the finding the chemist, and the walls of the city seemingly "pinched" in to hold him.. were those merely the forces of a subconcious after him, and the maze was geared to trap him?

 

I think this is brilliant filmmaking because it is a puzzle inside a puzzle inside a puzzle.  And no one will convince me that they "for sure" know the correct answer.  Because I don't think we're meant to know that.

Im going with interpretation 2 in that I dont think in the end it matters as Cobb has accepted this reality anyway. Whether it is or not is entirely up to the individual audience member to decide.

As much as I hate sad endings, I think it's likely that he is still dreaming at the end.  I will watch a second time, that way I can pay better attention to the beginning, but here's my understanding of the beginning ... They're under the impression they've been hired by Cobol Engineering to steal information from Saito, yet we find out that Saito is actually auditioning them.

 

So wouldn't this mean that they were actually hired by Saito and not Cobol Engineering?  And if this is the case, then that means they didn't "fail" Cobol by failing to retrieve that information, and so there shouldn't be any reason that the Cobol guys would be chasing them (and that Nash, their first architect, would have no reason to be turned over to Cobol).

 

Of course there's the idea that a business man can make a single phone call and get you off the hook for murder.  Seems a bit of a stretch.  And also, when he was on the phone earlier with his kids, the grandmother was watching over them.  Where was she when he returned home at the end?  And unless she is divorced, why is she in the States with the kids with the grandfather teaching in France?

Edited by Fender85 - 7/17/10 at 7:07pm