While I'm at it, here's a brief interview thing with Zimmer and Johnny Marr about the film's score - http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/herocomplex/2010/07/inception-christopher-nolan-the-smiths-johnny-marr-hans-zimmer-and-johnny-marr-on-the-sound-of-inception-its-about-sadness.html
Originally posted by jaden101
Anyone with any knowledge of films can rattle off other films about dreams as an argument that Inception isn't original.Case in point
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dreamscape_%28film%29
It's not claiming to be original. It's just ignorant idiots that are claiming it is.
I do find it odd that people think claiming it's not original is somehow a valid critique of it yet still claim The Dark Knight as being the pinnacle of Nolan's career when any comic book based film is as far from original as it's possible to get in film making (Batman even more so given that it's a sequel and the 6th main Batman film, not including older ones)
Originally posted by shokosugi
i dont think the last scene was a DREAM. because MAL doesn't appear in any of the "real world" scenes. including the last scene. Even if they killed MAL in limbo, MAL really can't die because shes just a PROJECTION.
However, every level closer to being awake is less in the subconscious. So, the deeper Leo goes, the more Mal shows up. In the world Leo believes is real, that reality deals less with the subconscious, therefore if he consciously believes she is dead, she may not show up even if it is a dream.
By the way, when watching Inception I thought it felt like a perfect blend of the Matrix, the 13th Floor (false reality within a false reality), and Mission Impossible. There was also similarities between Inception and Shutter Island regarding issues of struggling with guilt over the loss of his wife (ironic that both had Leo).
Originally posted by Myth
However, every level closer to being awake is less in the subconscious. So, the deeper Leo goes, the more Mal shows up. In the world Leo believes is real, that reality deals less with the subconscious, therefore if he consciously believes she is dead, she may not show up even if it is a dream.
But MAL or his kids NEVER shows up in Cobbs "reality" EVER.
except in the last scene. (Cobb spoke to them on the phone however).
Originally posted by shokosugi
But MAL or his kids NEVER shows up in Cobbs "reality" EVER.except in the last scene. (Cobb spoke to them on the phone however).
And then there's also the part where he day dreams about them...and then the phone call.
So basically, your first line is wrong. 🙂
And, yeah, I'm still really busy. I'll post up a more in-depth review, later.
Originally posted by shokosugi
But MAL or his kids NEVER shows up in Cobbs "reality" EVER.except in the last scene. (Cobb spoke to them on the phone however).
I've had dreams where it felt like years without seeing loved ones, so I don't think that disproves the idea that he could be dreaming still. I'm not arguing that it is one way or another, just that either interpretation are possible.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Imma get a lot of trouble for this...but...concept was very creative, but not original, even in the slightest. It was fun, though. I thought the depiction and creativity in the dreams was unrealistic and bland. It was far too real world. The "dream" state in Shutter Island was a lot closer to being closer to what a dream would really be like.
Failure to be original is not necessarily a bad thing. If you take a concept that has been approached with some success and do it really, really well that's a good thing.
I actually liked the groundedness of the movie, although I agree it was a bit more normal that was really needed. Exploring extremely surreal dreamscapes would have been easy but to me that would have upset the tone and character focus. I wish they had gotten more mileage out of the optical trickery, though, a nice subtle way of showing how utterly weird dream worlds can be.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Also, the math was horribly wrong for time for each dream level. We go from 5 mintues being 60 minutes to 10 hours being ten years.It could be explained with a geometric function where the power is also increased by a similar number to the "iteration". (think x^(n+n) or something)
1*20=20
20*20=400
400*20=8000
10 hours * 8000 = 80000 hours = 9.13 years
Their math wasn't that bad, "ten hours becomes ten years" is much more evocative than "ten hours becomes a little over nine years".
Originally posted by dadudemon
Imma get a lot of trouble for this...but...concept was very creative, but not original, even in the slightest. It was fun, though. I thought the depiction and creativity in the dreams was unrealistic and bland. It was far too real world. The "dream" state in Shutter Island was a lot closer to being closer to what a dream would really be like.
The whole point of the dreaming in this film though was that the characters were controlling the dream state to an extent, so they could accomplish their goals/mission, extract and implant information, etc. The dreams weren't meant to be the kind of dreams you or I have.
Also, I thought the film was very original. Sure, it's not the first film to enter the realm of dreams obviously, but I've never seen another film do it like this.
I've just heard people saying it was a ripoff of others movies and found it to be idiotic.
It can very well be...as Nolan himself acknowledge he was inspired by films such as The Matrix and Dark City.
[long pause]
Props to QM for mentioning the Cell. 👆
For those that love me (Up yours haters) What happens when you cross The Cell with David Finch's The Game?
You get Inception.
Okay, nuff of this mind shifting to another world shit. Go read Huxley's Brave New World and STFU.
As I said before...Nolan stop wasting your time and get to Batman 3.
Inception is not about a dream within a dream, etc.IF THAT's WHAT YOU THINK OF INCEPTION YOU GOT IT ALL WRONG.
Inception is about an inception within an inception.
the real person who had an inception was COBB, and the whole thing about Fisher was all a charade to get COBB to forget about MAL.
who did the inception? MILES (Michael Caine) and ARIADNE. who was the extractor and architect? ARIADNE. think about it.
who recommended Ariadne to Cobb ? MILES
who recommended Cobb to follow Fisher and Saito in Limbo? ARIADNE
who witnessed Cobb's inception (when MAL died)? ARIADNE
ARIADNE was putting thoughts into Cobbs mind throughout the movie.
Why was MILES in LA to pickup Cobb from the Airport? he was supposed to be in FRANCE.
Originally posted by SnakeEyes
The whole point of the dreaming in this film though was that the characters were controlling the dream state to an extent, so they could accomplish their goals/mission, extract and implant information, etc. The dreams weren't meant to be the kind of dreams you or I have.
Actually, no, you are almost completely wrong. They were meant to be so close to their real dreams that they individuals being "invaded" would not know the difference OR get suspicious and the suspicions being realized as abstract "dream-state" projections that eliminate the "intruders."
The REAL goal is to make things as much like their dreams as possible and avoid deviating too much to keep the guise up.
Originally posted by SnakeEyes
Also, I thought the film was very original. Sure, it's not the first film to enter the realm of dreams obviously, but I've never seen another film do it like this.
Psychology + dreams + information gathering from dreams. (Insert "bla bla bla" about inserting information and not just gathering. Nah, that'd miss my point entirely and give the movie too much credit. The vast majority of the film, when they are in the dreams, is all about gathering information with very very very very little time spent on the actual inception portion.)
No, not an original formula, at all. In fact, the dreams were not even that artistically creative/original. Let's not go overboard and give the film too much credit as being "original." The story itself is not even that original.
What REALLY makes it better is not this false idea of originality. IMO, that's a very lame reason to consider a movie good or great. What REALLY the movie great was the execution of that formula, the acting, the story's execution, etc. etc. etc.
Originally posted by shokosugi
Inception is not about a dream within a dream, etc.IF THAT's WHAT YOU THINK OF INCEPTION YOU GOT IT ALL WRONG.Inception is about an inception within an inception.
the real person who had an inception was COBB, and the whole thing about Fisher was all a charade to get COBB to forget about MAL.
who did the inception? MILES (Michael Caine) and ARIADNE. who was the extractor and architect? ARIADNE. think about it.
who recommended Ariadne to Cobb ? MILES
who recommended Cobb to follow Fisher and Saito in Limbo? ARIADNE
who witnessed Cobb's inception (when MAL died)? ARIADNE
ARIADNE was putting thoughts into Cobbs mind throughout the movie.
Why was MILES in LA to pickup Cobb from the Airport? he was supposed to be in FRANCE.
Where did you gleen this "Miles did the inception on Cobb" from?
Originally posted by dadudemon
What REALLY makes it better is not this false idea of originality. IMO, that's a very lame reason to consider a movie good or great. What REALLY the movie great was the execution of that formula, the acting, the story's execution, etc. etc. etc.
That's like, exactly what I said! Get an original opinion 😠
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Failure to be original is not necessarily a bad thing. If you take a concept that has been approached with some success and do it really, really well that's a good thing.
Lol, that's basically the same point I just made in my other reply.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I actually liked the groundedness of the movie, although I agree it was a bit more normal that was really needed. Exploring extremely surreal dreamscapes would have been easy but to me that would have upset the tone and character focus. I wish they had gotten more mileage out of the optical trickery, though, a nice subtle way of showing how utterly weird dream worlds can be.
Dreams can be very weird and the movie gives this idea of "iron-glad" worlds, which is highly unrealistic. On top of that, the "worlds" of our dreams are much much much much more tumultuous and random. The idea that target would get suspicious if some “weird-sh*t” were to start to happen, is definitely wrong as dreams are so varied that it wouldn’t even alarm the person, especially if the dream was very “sensorly” satisfying for the person. They could have focused more on the psychology of the target and the “architect” could work more on matching both something that is appealing to the person as well as creating the optimal environment for getting information from the individual. Instead, we get something that is less than satisfying, visually and acoustically, than what you should expect from a dream. It would still have worked really well for the plot, had it been done differently, while also keeping things more like “dreams.” There was no need, at all, for the plot device of “iron-clad” dream-worlds and, in fact, hindered the movie from really making a large impact in its particular genre.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
1*20=20
20*20=400
400*20=800010 hours * 8000 = 80000 hours = 9.13 years
Their math wasn't that bad, "ten hours becomes ten years" is much more evocative than "ten hours becomes a little over nine years".
Actuall, here's the real math:
5 minutes is one hour.
So that's a ratio of 1/12. 10 hours would be 120 hours. That's good. Makes sense. I feel it there. 🙂
Three levels down, where are we?
12*12*12*10 = 144*12*10 = 1440*12 = 17280 hours = 720 days = a little less than 2 years.
That wasn't hard, at all, to do in my head, so why is it so difficult for someone to just pause and spend 14 seconds on a calculator if they sucked at elementary multiplication? It's not that it was a bad thing that they really mess up on being even remotely close on their math (assuming no complex geometric functions apply (where a complex fraction is the power for each iteration in each "dream level", with one or two variables used in the complex fraction to arrive at the correct number of less than 2 years...but I HIGHLY doubt that they were thinking that complex about it.)
And, actually, they jumped from 120 hours on the first level to something like a year or two...or three (I don't remember what they said) on the second level, which also throws the time thingie completely off (unless my idea of a complex geometric growth function is correct...which I doubt.)
edit -
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
That's like, exactly what I said! Get an original opinion 😠
lol. I read from the bottom up, most of the time. It's made Robard PO'd at me because it ruined a joke that he made toward me and it partially relied on the sequence of posts.
But, your point was basically my point and it was where I was going with it, so, technically, I started on the point first.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Actuall, here's the real math:5 minutes is one hour.
So that's a ratio of 1/12. 10 hours would be 120 hours. That's good. Makes sense. I feel it there. 🙂
Three levels down, where are we?
12*12*12*10 = 144*12*10 = 1440*12 = 17280 hours = 720 days = a little less than 2 years.
Except that they specifically say that things run at 20x the normal rate. All else is rounding errors and dialogue choices. This isn't Heinlen or Weber writing the script. Nolan is gong to chose what makes a good line in favor of a decimal point of accuracy every time.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Except that they specifically say that things run at 20x the normal rate. All else is rounding errors and dialogue choices. This isn't Heinlen or Weber writing the script. Nolan is gong to chose what makes a good line in favor of a decimal point of accuracy every time.
Except they also said that 5 minutes = an hour and then proceeded to prove it.
I'll go with that one, instead. 🙂
Originally posted by shokosugi
I have just performed an inception on you. ROFL.seriously. think about it.
Miles taught Cobbs everything he knew. Miles WAS the original extractor. He was better than Cobbs.
That's also all over the net, on various sites; it a decent theory on the film. Which site did you take it from to post here?