Inception (2010) is Christopher Nolan’s latest entry in the “plastic reality” subgenre, which encompasses both virtual reality worlds like The Matrix (1999) and shared dreaming scenarios like Dreamscape (1983). Also, there are flashbacks; I did mention it was Christopher Nolan, right?
#1 by rjschwarz on December 3, 2010 - 11:00 am
Quote
Seems to me that if you wanted to create an idea in someones head so that they thought they’d thought it up themselves there are easier ways. Such as going into the dream as the characters father and arguing against the idea as if the target had already decided on it. If you did so carefully the target would put together what the idea is on their own and be predisposed to accept it. Or the same trick going in as the target, but through a one-way mirror so the target thinks its themselves giving them the inception. There has to be a dozen ways that don’t require such an overly complicated scenerio.
Oh, and the twist that they can’t simply wake up out of the dream if killed (this time) because of some thing or other and that Leo knew it but didn’t tell anyone seemed a bit amateurish to me.
Beautiful film but highly overrated in my book.
#2 by Nathan Shumate on December 3, 2010 - 11:12 am
Quote
Yeah, Leo’s character turned out to be the team’s worst enemy — a loose cannon, obsessed with his own objectives, and willing to break his own rules for his personal goals.
#3 by Jen S on December 3, 2010 - 12:29 pm
Quote
It’s funny, but I had no problem following the story. A lot of people I know complained about how confusing it was, but to me it was a single (Aradne’s) thread weaving throughout the entire film–you could sight back along the thread to them in the car, or in the hotel, and use those markers to remember why you’re here in the mountains.
Mal was chilling, but her appearances became another marker–you knew when she showed up Leo was on the verge of touching his personal truth so she (he) was sabatoging his chances on the job he was doing–so even her “randomness” served the plot.
#4 by Nathan Shumate on December 3, 2010 - 1:38 pm
Quote
I had no problem following the story, but I had problems swallowing it. like rjschwarz points out, the three-level dream seemed Rube Goldbergian to me, and the fact that it all required immaculate coordination between the precise timeframes of three solid-seeming worlds worked against it being dream-like.
#5 by rjschwarz on December 3, 2010 - 12:33 pm
Quote
I had no problem following the story either, but I suspect if someone went to get popcorn at the wrong time they might get hopelessly lost. My point is that it didn’t need to be so complex, not that it was too complex. A subtle difference I know.
#6 by jason farrell on December 3, 2010 - 2:40 pm
Quote
Look, if Nolan want to make an expensive sequel to DREAMSCAPE, why didn’t he just do that?
I just wish Nolan would have been enough of a good sport to allow a guest appearence froma certain sweater-wearing janitor with a burnt-weenie complexion.
#7 by Penne Dreadful on December 4, 2010 - 4:16 am
Quote
Seems like a pretty good way of pumping subversive messages into third world dictatorships, though. Kind of an anti-Avatar, I suppose. Part of why I think it’s important for the world to continue to produce things which are self-evidently ridiculous.
Plus, you know – there are people out there who regularly attempt that sort of crazy shit for a living.
The world would be a must less annoying place if they just made kids read The Master & Margarita in schools. It has a talking cat!
#8 by Read MacGuirtose on December 4, 2010 - 12:07 pm
Quote
I actually did have to read The Master and Margarita in school. Well, in college, anyway.
It was for a class called Russian Science Fiction. Which I took because it satisfied the general educational “ethics” requirement.
I am not sure which part of that, if any, makes sense.
#9 by matt on December 4, 2010 - 1:43 pm
Quote
nice zhuangzhi reference