Originally posted by Myth
I just rewatched Inception, and something didn't seem to make sense regarding Cobb, Saito, and Limbo. Cobb went into Limbo BEFORE Saito. So why was Saito an old man while Cobb did not appear to be old? Was it just a perception thing? Because Timewise Cobb was in Limbo first and therefore should have been as old if not older than Saito. Anybody have an answer for me on that?
cobb was able to escape limbo with mal.. i guess when you go back to limbo, you don't revert back to whatever age you were when you escaped.. and it was saito's limbo then.. yes, there were remnants of cobb's limbo, but that's just how limbo works.. it could be molded by the "dreamer" endlessly if they are able to, or it could just ne nothingness.. i think that was mentioned in the movie.. i've only seen it once so.. yeah..
Originally posted by super pr*xy
i guess when you go back to limbo, you don't revert back to whatever age you were when you escaped.. and it was saito's limbo then..
Thats the best I could come up with too, but it is unclear. We can try to make a reason why he is young and Saito is old (such as Cobb didn't die to get there while Saito did), but the time would work the same either way, and even Cobb was confused why he was there, suggesting that even he lost his ways and lost the sense of what is real. I think this may simply be a part that was overlooked when editing the movie (meaning they may have meant to kill off Saito first but then didn't when editing the movie), because it wasn't made clear like some of the other parts and thus we are left to guessing why it would make sense. You yourself even started with "i guess..."
Originally posted by Myth
I just rewatched Inception, and something didn't seem to make sense regarding Cobb, Saito, and Limbo. Cobb went into Limbo BEFORE Saito. So why was Saito an old man while Cobb did not appear to be old? Was it just a perception thing? Because Timewise Cobb was in Limbo first and therefore should have been as old if not older than Saito. Anybody have an answer for me on that?
Spoiler:
The deeper you go the longer time passes, Saito went to limbo when he was "killed". Cobb entered "Saito´s Limb" when he was washed ashore, he must have left his dream world where he and his wife had built the world by "kicking himself" somehow. By the time he had arrived in Saito´s Limbo, Saito had aged.
That´s how I see it anyway🙂
Originally posted by BicnarokSpoiler:
The deeper you go the longer time passes, Saito went to limbo when he was "killed". Cobb entered "Saito´s Limb" when he was washed ashore, he must have left his dream world where he and his wife had built the world by "kicking himself" somehow. By the time he had arrived in Saito´s Limbo, Saito had aged.That´s how I see it anyway🙂
One significant problem with that way of looking at that.
Spoiler:
Wasn't Cobb in Limbo before washing up on the beach? If you remember, Cobb went down to Limbo to get Fisher (he was on the balcony when Cobb talked with Mal) who had got shot and killed at the snow level, and this happened BEFORE Saito died. So, if Cobb wasn't already in Limbo, why then was Fisher not in Limbo when he died?
Well, since Limbo seems to be shared dreamspace (the stuff of 60s and 70s drug research (something I posted on, earlier)), it is a writing error the Saito is old and Cobbs is not because they both arrived in Limbo at nearly the same time. (Saito died a bit before Cobbs entered limbo.) Music would also be 20x slower when played from the level up, brain 'capacity' being at 100% and then deeper levels having no where else to improve (destroying the explanation of 20x, each level), etc.
There are multiple plot and logic errors in the film. It's whether or not the errors are tolerable or "overlookable" enough to make the movie enjoyable. I think the movie does that.
I think this theory on Saito being older than Cobb is correct personally: You are how you perceive yourself in a dream. Cobb knew he was in limbo, thus he still saw himself as being young. Saito died and went to Limbo....Which would explain him "Aging".
Best guess I could make anyway. Either that or he kicked up to where he was in the Van and drowned then died and went back to the shore he washed up on.
I wrote something about Inception that I figured I'd share with you guys (SPOILERS):
" When I saw Christopher Nolan’s “Inception” for the first time (a midnight showing in IMAX), I was blown away by the spectacle, Hans Zimmer’s booming score, the brilliant execution of “levels” of dreaming, Joseph Gordon-Levitt’s gravity-defying hallway fight sequence, and solid acting; I walked out of the theater in a satisfied daze – knowing that I’d just finished watching the movie I’d been eagerly anticipating since it was announced (after Nolan finished “The Dark Knight,” which I loved).
But as time passed, I started questioning my feelings toward the film. The first thing that became apparent to me was that “Inception” wasn’t the puzzle-box/mystery film (ala “Memento” or “The Prestige”) on a grand scale that the marketing led me and countless other people to believe. The scale may have been grand indeed, but the narrative was fairly straightforward. Leonardo DiCaprio plays a skilled, but grief-stricken, dream thief named Cobb who takes on “one last job” in order to reunite with his children back in the United States (which, legally, he is prohibited from). Simple, right? So why was I still confused about the movie, days later and even after a second viewing? The answer is this – copious, perhaps even needless, amounts of ambiguity. The most obvious example of ambiguity in the film is the ending. Debate surrounding the ending erupted after the film was released; people all over the place were arguing “is it a dream or not?”
Almost everyone has their own theory as to what happened and many people use hints or examples to support their argument. And, unless your theory is simply ridiculous, nobody’s really wrong. The movie is so ambiguous that anyone can interpret it however they want; but the film doesn’t strongly support any singular interpretation, therefore I’m left emotionally and narratively unsatisfied by the end of the film. A lot of people say that “it doesn’t matter if it’s a dream or not, because Cobb [Leo] no longer cares, he’s just happy to be with his children; whether they are real or not, they’re real to him, the ending is his reality.” That reasoning leaves me cold and kind of depressed; I mean, let’s say it is a dream and Leo’s character has just decided to be oblivious and live happily ever after with his dream-children, that’s got to be one of the saddest endings of all time to me… Maybe that’s just because I seek some sort of objective reality/truth, but if the ending is a dream then it loses whatever impact it’s meant to have for me. Especially since, in the preceding scene with dream-Mal, Cobb has a long monologue about how the dream version of her could never replace or come close to the real thing.
Many say that the Cobb’s totem wobbles right before the screen cuts to black, implying that it isn’t a dream and all is well. This would be satisfying to me, if it were made clear – if it’s real then why haven’t his children aged? Why are they wearing the same clothing as in his dreams? Why does that whole sequence feel like a dream if it’s real?. Also, if the ending is real then that doesn’t explain the “real” (or dream?) sequences earlier in the film – such as that scene in Mombasa in which Cobb is outrunning the company he failed at the beginning of the film and how he travels down a narrowing alleyway and conveniently gets picked up by Saito who just happens to be there. Ambiguity permeates the majority of this film and if I’d seen it more than just twice, I’m sure I could come up with additional specific examples.
I love ambiguous endings, such as in “The Wrestler,” “Before Sunset,” or “Manhattan,” but that’s because those films executed them brilliantly. They didn’t spell everything out, but it was clear what they were saying. “Inception” wanted you very strongly to feel something, but I’m not sure what. If it was happiness then the screen wouldn’t have cut to black like it did. If it was acceptance via Cobb accepting his dream as reality, it didn’t make that clear enough.
So, sadly, I’m left with a film that’s really awesome, with a few very effective emotional beats, but ultimately disappointing.
Other things that hindered my enjoyment of the film and kind of let me down:
- The whole emotional core of the film is that Cobb wants to return to America to be reunited with his children. Essentially, that’s the point of this whole journey. Why then aren’t Cobb’s kids just flown overseas to meet Cobb? The movie’s main problem could be resolved in 2 seconds. Cobb is banned from America, and wanted in some places due to failing the company (as seen in the opening dream sequence), but surely there are tons of places where is safe – such as France where he meets with his father (Michael Caine). If he wants to see his children that badly, he should’ve made a few phone calls and had someone escort them to somewhere outside of the U.S.
- With the exception of Cobb, the characters were very two-dimensional and flat.
- The first third of the film is almost entirely exposition. At first I thought this was necessary in order to establish the rules of the world/film. And to an extent it is; but they also spend a lot of time breaking those rules, so why bother spending so much time explaining them?
- Ariadne (Ellen Page) exists solely to provide other characters the opportunity to explain things to the audience.
- With the exception of Joseph Gordon-Levitt’s hallway sequences, the action scenes are very underwhelming. In my opinion, the film should have taken advantage of the fact that these characters are in dreams and done something more intense in the third level of dreaming (the snow one). Instead of doing that, Nolan just creates a James Bond-esque action sequence, in which nothing interesting (visually or narratively) happens and the characters are almost indistinguishable since they’re all wearing the same outfits.
- How does Cobb get out of limbo at the end of the movie? Seriously, I don’t remember any explanation whatsoever. Also, why is Saito old and Cobb young when Cobb arrived in limbo first? Why are they in the same limbo?
- The relationship between Cobb and his father is never developed; it’s just referenced and then kinda there. I wish Nolan spent more time on their relationship. Also, they reference who is taking care of Cobb’s children, but I don’t remember and I don’t think Nolan really did a good job of establishing what the kids’ living conditions were. Maybe that’s nitpicky, but it was something I wondered about afterwards that bugged me a little.
- The availability/public’s knowledge of dream extraction/inception is never made clear. They reference that the whole technique was established in the military and that Cobb/his team perform illegal extractions, etc. But is there a law that’s enforced to stop people from doing this? How do average people learn how to do this? Do average, everyday citizens even know about dream thievery? The world-building in this movie is lacking a lot; unlike say – “The Matrix,” which efficiently establishes all of these things.
That’s all I can think of off the top of my head. I hope this was somewhat coherent considering I just wrote it up on a whim. I know it sounds like I hate the movie, but I assure you that’s not the case; I just thought it had the potential to be far better.
In terms of Nolan’s overall filmography, I’d rank his flicks like this:
1) The Dark Knight
2) The Prestige
3) Memento
4) Inception
5) Batman Begins
6) Insomnia
7) Following
Feel like you can answer some of my questions? Is there something I missed (which could very well be the case for some of this, I've only seen it twice and that was months ago)? Agree? Disagree? Have any additional complaints or praise you’d like to share? Do you think this movie has been overrated and do you think the general audiences who love it so much even get it?
I think a lot of Nolan fans are afraid to admit that he's not perfect and that he makes mistakes. I know I was for a while there. He may be one of my favorite directors, but flawless he is not. I feel like his reach exceeded his grasp this time.
Another interesting write-up on the film (there are countless on the Internet) - http://etheriel.wordpress.com/2010/07/21/the-inception-of-inception/
Again, I’d love to hear some responses, thanks."
Originally posted by SnakeEyes
This would be satisfying to me, if it were made clear – if it’s real then why haven’t his children aged? Why are they wearing the same clothing as in his dreams?
I don't disagree with much of what you said, but this part is wrong. The kids have aged, and in fact were played by different child actors (the actors at the end are approximately 2 years older than the actors shown earlier). Their clothing was also different, although very very similar. The costume designer revealed this info in some interview that was floating around the net.
Originally posted by nevadaexile
Terrible film w/ no moral center and rather drab dream imagery.
I wouldn't recommend this film to anybody who isn't a Chris Nolan fan.
I agree that the dream-stuff was rather...lacking. This was one of my complaints.
It was too realistic and not "dream-like."
Someone pointed out that that was necessary becaues you don't want the "victim" to know that they are in a dream.
I disagree. When people dream, there's something turned off that prevents us, usually, from recognizing it as a dream. When you DO recognize it as a dream, it becomes a lucid dream and you might be able to control aspects of your dream. In the mean time, our dreams are still wack booty almost every single time, compared to reality: super fast "point" switches (meaning, we'll be dreaming about a situation and "BAM" it changes over to something completely different), extreme scenery, special abilities inside the dream, and so forth.