I thought that the top kept spinning at the end so dicaprio was wrong all along and his wife was actually right.

I'll prolly see it again this PM, you'll probably notice more next time around.

Stunning film though that everyone should see in the cinema.

if that is the case, then his wife can try to wake him up since she has gone to the one level lower.

it seemed to me that it was going to stop spinning at the end.

So it either wasn't a dream, or the director just leaves it open. I guess is the 2nd, since it was slowing down, but the movie finished before it actually stopped.

It cut out intentionally just to fuck with people.

Yeah, I was backwards and forwards with it TBH.
luckily, I know that they did that to fuck with people, so it doesn't have an effect on me:)

I'll probably draw my own conclusion the next time I see it.

My opinion all depends on the time between running away and when he returned home as the kids looked the same age.

Apparently in all the scenes set in the real world he does not have his wedding ring on his finger. He has it in all the dreams. In the final scene, he doesn't have it.

okay thats a decent clue. However inception does not rule out consistent dreams, everything can be consistent but it can still be a dream.

then it seems that enemy at the gates is a sf movie too

lol

This is like the only movie that you can't spoil. It's fucking impossible to explain what the plot is and how the story unfolds. :D

True. I like the Roger Ebert quote on this aspect

"Here is a movie immune to spoilers: If you knew how it ended, that would tell you nothing unless you knew how it got there. And telling you how it got there would produce bafflement. The movie is all about process, about fighting our way through enveloping sheets of reality and dream, reality within dreams, dreams without reality."

did not watch the movie yet but I find a bit boring the idea of creating an uber-complicated plot just for the sake of... whatever

dual metaphorical sh1t it's been put on the film at least in Persona, at the time it was kinda innovative and it was good implemented sh1t

good sh1t idd

an uber complicated plot ... for the sake of whatever?

Perhaps the plot was complicated because that was the way the story was intended to be told. I don't understand the position of anyone who criticizes a script (or even a book) for being overly 'complicated'.

Yes it is true that the film requires an attention span that can remain alert for two hours, but so do a lot of things, especially well written books. I'm keen to see it again for the sake of reference, especially the beginning scenes, because I'm sure there is too much going on at the surface level for the first time viewer not to be distracted from deeper themes.

you go ahead an spoil primer for me

So there's this machine...

yeah, thats about all i can grasp after watching it 3 times aswell

I got it after 20 mins of thinking and then my brain melt.

the xkcd one is probably more accurate

Ariadne, wife of King Minos, had an affair with a Bull and had a child who was Half-Bull Half-Man (Minotaur) who was kept in a Labyrinth.

In the film she was the "Architect" whose jobs was to create complex mazes.

Cobb and Eames are surnames.

how about Dom and Mal ?

Dom = Dominic?
Mal = Mary? (It's a rare short form)

The only name that stuck out for me was Ariadne and I wondered why they chose that, I'd forgot all about the labyrinth though, so :D

Maybe Mal comes from the Latin adverb "male": http://wordinfo.info/words/index/info/view_un...p;letter=M

Possibly.

as is the case with all mythology, bestiality seems a common theme.

Well, she had been put under a spell of lust for the bull :)

Accidental plus. She was the daughter of Minos who led Theseus out of the labyrinth, which is also more relevant to the movie. It was her mother who slept with the bull.

Yeah, whatever, wasn't that important :D

plus well diserved!

Accidental justice if u ask me

is that the film with the yellow submarin in the beginning played by Antônio Rodrigo Nogueira Minotauro? I've seen it completely backwards

Mal: evil or sickness in French
Cobb: spider (as in cobweb)

cant wait to see this

Obvious ambiguous ending is ambiguous

saw the film in imax this evening, so it's still fresh in my mind.

1) I don't think so.

2) I didn't notice Saito getting older. He is obviously much older when Cobb goes to rescue him from limbo, as a very long time has elapsed in limbo since he died in the snow level. are you certain he gets older before that? he might just appear older due to him being wounded for most of the dream.

3) they deliberately cut to credits before you get to see the top fall over, just to leave the posibility that cobb isn't back in the real world, but is perhaps still in his own limbo. it's a bit of an obvious move, but i think it's just to provoke the audience rather than to hint at anything.

Agreed for 2) and 3). For 1) the names could probably be references like iNkind pointed out for Ariadne, but it's not really important.
Regarding 3), I'm sure he's in the real world.

all these debates really makes me wish to not watcha movie

My initial conclusions regarding the end are informed by what Cobb tells Ariadne when they confront Mal in the deepest level.

Remember he explains that he knows inception works because he performed it successfully on Mal to get her out of the dream world. The unforeseen consequence was that her incepted (sp lol?) idea was like a 'virus, incredibly resilient'. You know the rest.

Now I'm a bit hazy with the rest, but I'll do my best.

To me it seemed that after losing Saito to the bullet wound, Cobb decides to call it off, but before he does completely Ariadne suggests that they keep going deeper to rescue him. Remembering at this point that they are already in the 3rd (correction necessary?) world and therefore I believe it was mentioned that they are more susceptible to mental distortion (therefore: susceptible to inception).

So my conclusion regarding the end is that it is possible, if my observations are accurate, that Cobb is indeed still within a dream after being tricked into thinking (by Ariadne) that it was possible to descend further one level and rescue both Saito and himself.

I like the wedding ring observation!

Nolan is the best director in the last 25 years and it's not close.

lol, ever hrd of the guy who maed transformers?

u maed?

haha good one, this joke made my day xD

saw trailer, nice movie o_O , my taste.
Waiting in cinemas.

lol, stop waiting and buy the tickets already :P

I didn't have a problem with Ellen Page in the movie. I thought she was right for the part.

I didn't like Marion Cotillard however. It seems Americans are all crazy about her but to me she looks like a French woman from the 50's. Edith Piaf in a sci-fi movie is a bit weird.

I liked the movie but imo it could have been better. The whole concept with the different layers of dreams is really cool but what the characters do in them is not that exciting.

Marion Cotillard was pretty impressive if you ask me.

Everytime she appeared it made me sort of nervous. I think that's good work fromt he director and actor :)

yeah same here, her look as they went up in the elevator the first time Ariadne follows Cobb into his dream chilled my spine.

and that blaring trumpet sound, all out of tune. Quite popular these days, but I love it.

this image puts things in order:

image

cooolllller =p

I saw it on imdb but I think they got the "kicks" part wrong. A kick is supposed to bring you back to the level where the kick is happening. At the beginning of the movie, the kick of having Cobb fall back from his chair into the bath brought him back to the room, in the bath. Likewise, when they were doing the testing on Arthur, it's the kick in the real world (the chair falling) that brought him back to the real world. Therefore a kick technically does not have the effect of "sending" you back one level, it has the effect of _bringing_ you back one level.

This means that Eames and Ariadne went from the snow level to the hotel level because of the elevator falling down, then having the van fall in the water brought Ariadne, Eames and Arthur back to the van level.

If the kicks had the effect of sending you down to the level below the one where the kick is happening, then you wouldn't see the characters swim out of the river. The only confusing part is that when a kick happens it somehow is "pictured" in the level above, such as the wind and Ariadne's fall.

edit: maybe that's what they actually mean in the pic but they should have edited differently to make it less confusing then.

edit: now that I think about it, maybe a better explanation is actually that a kick in, say, level 1, creates an "impression"/"feeling" in level 2 that will bring you back to level 1.

I don't think that's right in regards to Saito. In the very beginning scene, Cobb is talking with Saito who is VERY old. What I'm thinking is that Cobb experienced Limbo in level 5, his limbo ran out, and went to level 4. He went to level 4, where Saito died. Basically, since Cobb is one level below Saito, he lives his limbo, then goes to the one above, level 4. Saito already is living that limbo, hence why he's super old.

At least, that's what I think. I don't even know anymore :(

ok so I have this nice movie screenplay
-one player is accused of cheating then he is saying to a friend that he is not cheating and then to another friend he is saying the opposite (that he cheats)
-then he enters the arena and he pretty sure cheats (we see him cheating) -this is THE BEGINNING
-then we see him writing up a letter with these words: I am not aq cheater but I will cheat this time just for the lulz and for the e-drama
conclusion would be that even if he did prepare before it it does not demonstrate that he was not cheating before, but you are not sure whether he was writing the letter before or after he cheated
tip: the answer is his keyboard -he did not clean his kb for some long time ago so watch very carefull on the state of his kb

love "deepening the story" procedures

You make Jamerio look like a Nobel awarded novelist. Although he's probably won one Nobel for gaming.

french movie 101

it was ok n all but the whole snow section felt like an bad bond movie. i felt the bang bang violence was over-played

movie was decent but highly overrated by fanboys. i personally think it's one of nolan's weaker films although he doesn't have any bad ones.

http://9gag.com/gag/30013

for me, it's best this year movie, so I'm fine with it. It's not TOTAL epic, but it's realy realy good movie!
And about last sciene, i think we didn't saw any tips on movie, that can tell us, it was just his dream or real world, becoz the end showed as 2 possibilitys.
ps. when I was watching it, I thought it's was all his dream and in the end he will wakeup and will meat his wife and kids (but it's not logical, becoz wife could wakeup him in real world).

clearly where matrix guys got the idea of phone booth :D

I watched it last night.. came out the cinema thinking it was a very impressive film which i gave an 8.5/10.

This morning I'm not so sure.. It's more like an 7.5 atm.. I will definately need to watch it again to decide exactly what i would rate it.

After reading toms comment, i agree that snow part of the movie was poor. Every other level was alot better.

Also the end when he met his kids was real life as he didn't have his wedding ring on.. (he did in all other dreams). So his spinny thing would of fallen over, hence the wobble. (it didn't wobble when he found that old chinese guy)

Seems appropriate.

I don't get the hype over this movie. I guess a summer of bad movies makes decent ones seem like they are brilliant.

you mean a decade?

you like the stalone one, isn't it?

hell ya! good old fashion shoot'em up 80's action movie :D needed more one liners and a pumped up arnold though. but i like the way stallone does the bodies getting shot and limbs flying.

page looks like a dork in the office suit.
the music during action scenes sound repetitive and cliche...tada...tadaaa...TADA....TADAA...TADADAAAA.

other than that, i would rate it in the upper 70's

she looked hot to me, but i always had a crush on her :P

Some people need to see cleavage in order to know if it's a woman or not ;)

If anyone is looking for more mind-fuck movies then I suggest you see Primer. It starts out a bit slow but when you realize what the fuck has been going on for majority of the movie your brain will melt.

http://www.capcom-unity.com/s-kill/blog/2010/...mmy_fallon

Haha, awesome

haha i like him alot more now!

I stumbled upon a quote from Liddell Hart which takes a new meaning after Inception:

"The only thing more difficult than getting an old idea out of the military mind is getting a new one in"

:D

while i dont really agree with this explanation i think it has some interesting thoughts anyway:
http://chud.com/articles/articles/24477/1/NEV...Page1.html

I think it's pretty bad, he has absolutely no ground to stand on to claim that the entire movie is a dream, except what he interprets as "unlikely things". He's even mistaken when he claims the kids are "in the exact same clothes" at the end, since it's not the case.

Absolutely no ground huh? Interesting.

Which solid signs that would indicate it's all a dream can you find in what he wrote?

This will never be an issue of definite facts. Even if Nolan himself said one of the possibilities were the intended one it still wouldnt matter, it can and will be interpreted both ways.

I prefer the *hes stuck in a dream* interpretation, it just fits better for me. The ring thing is a non issue to me since he thinks that the highest level we witness is the reality and thus it would make sense that he made that world a little different. Its a good movie and it leaves both options open, claiming that either solution is definitely the right one is pointless.

You can always say that everything is a dream. The hard part is actually coming up with legitimate reasons :p I don't see anything that would indicate it was all a dream.

Ok.

During the chase in Mombasa, Cobb tries to escape down an alleyway, and the two buildings between which he's running begin closing in on him - a classic anxiety dream moment. When he finally pulls himself free he finds Ken Watanabe's character waiting for him, against all logic. Except dream logic.

Even that tiny detail does it for me. It is a very very weird scene and I kind of doubt it wasn’t purposely created like that.

... also

But the thing that makes me want to believe that the entire movie is in a dream is because if I don't beleive that then I think this movie sucked. There were so many silly things - Saito buying the airline, Saito appearing as if by magic in the streets of Mumbassa, there being an alleyway in Mumbassa that is too skiny for a single person to pass through, Saito landing on Cobb's roof in a helicopter, Cobb accepting a complete novice as his architect, etc. etc. But all these sillynesses disappear under my interpretation

The two buildings don't move, it's simply a tight passage. Even if the director put it as a reference to a typical dream moment it doesn't mean they're actually in a dream (besides, you can find walls actually moving to crush someone in plenty of movies). And that list of details is ridiculous... How is Saito buying the airline even remotely an indication that they're in a dream? It's put there both to indicate that they'll be able to do their thing freely and as comic relief. The same goes for the other stuff with Saito, how the hell is him finding where Cobb is staying an indication that they're in a dream? Or that he decides to keep track of him? In fact he decides to actually go with them in the dreams to make sure all goes well, so that gives you an idea of how important this is to him... It would have been weird if he had decided not to keep track of Cobb. Situations where people arrive in the nick of time happen in so many movies it's not even funny, yet you decide that in this particular movie it automatically means they're in a dream, simply because the movie is about dreams. That's flawed logic.
In fact this guy's entire reasoning is completely flawed since the reason he thinks it's a dream is that HE disagrees with some plot elements and tries to explain them with the convenient "it's a dream" explanation. There is nothing to actually support that hypothesis.

Not a shalow response as I expected :). Credit for that. I still find the scene in the tight passage really weird. I even felt awkward when I watched that scene and it is true that nowadays u see crazy shit in movies, but I don¡¦t find them strange (maybe funny, but not strange). That scene is bizarre.

Also, what about post 93. Major flow or a perfect fit for a dream?

Yes I agree that it is likely that the scene was included by Nolan because it is a nod to a feeling you often get in dreams. Regarding what's in post #93, it's been addressed on the imdb forums and some people argue for example that judging by the phone call the kids' grandmother was distrustful of Cobb, that taking them to him would have been reported to US authorities and would have placed them in a situation of illegality which would have made their life on foreign soil complicated, etc.

i imagine being in a city with buildings built 50+years ago, or with a generally weak infrastructure, as the typical middle-eastern city might have, two houses being built too closely to one another, or having their walls not perfectly parallel to one another might not be such a strange occurance.

interesting and clever

Pretty good movie.

the only movie within last 7 or 8 years that justified the hype around it.

Alright, I've seen it aswell and have to say it was bleh :/
Of course the idea was nice and the effects been awesome but it had to many "!?!" moments. For example: The scene where they been in fishers dream and the guys were shooting at them (forgot their names) 1 was shooting with a gun at the enemy guy without success, then the other came around with a huge gun and shot the enemy down saying something like: You gotta dream of bigger things! If they could dream whatever they want they could also sit behind a wall and dream someone else killing the enemy... how much of my dream is possible in his dream, stuff like that just didnt make sense to me or have no limits.
There been some more of those situations that I already forgot.
I'll watch it again tho.

For example: The scene where they been in fishers dream and the guys were shooting at them (forgot their names) 1 was shooting with a gun at the enemy guy without success, then the other came around with a huge gun and shot the enemy down saying something like: You gotta dream of bigger things! If they could dream whatever they want they could also sit behind a wall and dream someone else killing the enemy... how much of my dream is possible in his dream, stuff like that just didnt make sense to me or have no limits.

The dreamer dreams the area and the others populate it with their subconscious. So one explanation here is that he simply brought a grenade launcher with him.

An alternate explanation is that he is more capable of controlling things in dreams since he is able to pretend he is someone else afterall...

ye okay, could be, that leaves quite alot of possibilities tho. Overall it just felt a bit 'over the top' to me.

The reason why the movie is shit for you is because german nobheads synchronise everything. Thats why its shit.

thank you, now the movie makes sense to me. <3

so if you're a stuck up nerd you only get an m16 and if you're a creative guy you get a grenade launcher? makes sense.

Creative would be to have a trained rabid attackbadger to dispatch your enemies!

thought it was just ok. probably went to the movies with too much expectations, really, this was hyped more than avatar.

A question has been raised about why the gravity in the snow world doesn’t go haywire when Eames’ body starts floating in the zero-gravity hotel.

ha! any takes on this?

my take on it was this:

Each layer is primarily affected from a layer above it, but if it were 2 or even 3 layers below it would only affect it in minor way, or perhaps even none. Guess I can call it something like subconcious awareness by layers.

I thought back on the movie again and I can't remember a situtation that violated this theory.

i think this is the best explanation of the movie:

At some point, Cobb developed guilt over something to do with the death of his wife. It might be related to the 50-year limbo thing or not. In any case, he really loved Mal and she really died and he really felt responsible. Miles thought Cobb needed to move on. So he put Cobb into a dream state, possibly against his own will like they did with Fischer. He then entered that dream state with a team to plant the idea of letting go of Mal. The movie is the subtle sequence of events required to make Cobb think he came up with it all himself.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1375666/board/thr...#168461045

thats a nice setup but need to ask nolan that whether he was that clever :P

wow what an amazing plot. totally never seen before.

5 of 7 red bananas

apparently america is an impenetrable fortress... and so is the stupidity of anyone who rated this movie 9.1 on imdb.

he was dreaming though in the whole movie. So this nonsense makes totally sense

so any random plot hole or nonsense can easily be explained with : hey it's a dream. the guy apparently has logistics to get to any other part of the world in his dream state and organize supercomplex plots but apparently can't send his own kids from the states? makes sense.

tell me more

yeah he's not batman bro

but the other guy's the scarecrow

the first thing I thought when I saw this movie was "jesus this has to be directed by the same jerkoffs who directed lost" . apparently it is also enjoyed by the same type of drone who likes other random shit with no point.

tough decision between this movie being pointless and you being an idiot

help me out here!

the movie is pointless and you're an idiot.
glad to be of assistance

thank you :D

welcome

Still haven't even seen the movie, but these parodies are so great. <3