Inception

Mark INCEPTION

6/6
2
33%
5/6
3
50%
4/6
0
No votes
3/6
1
17%
2/6
0
No votes
1/6
0
No votes
0/6
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 6
User avatar
Nau of Sands
marquess
marquess
Posts: 2993
Joined: Tue 19 Aug, 2003 20:26
Location: Locked inside a suitcase
Contact:

Re: Inception

Postby Nau of Sands » Wed 06 Oct, 2010 14:34

Chevalier Bayard wrote:
DO NOT READ IF YOU'VE NOT SEEN THE MOVIE YET!!!

I was very troubled by the fact the images we see when Cobb retrieves his children are exactly the ones of his memories. I'm quite sure they're exactly the same images. Even if they're not, the children are exactly the same ones. At their young age they change fast physically speaking and even if there are no precisions at all regarding the delay between Miss Cobb's death and the beginning of the movie, some time have obviously passed so the children should have aged!

When he meets his wife in the limbos, he doesn't want to see his children's face as he is convinced it won't be the real ones but the fruit of his or another dreamer's imagination and therefore not the reality. When he sees them at the end he is convinced to be in the reality and so watch them ... OR ... he decides he doesn't care. He lets the toupee turning and doesn't care it it is going to fall or not because he wants to find back his children, whatever they are the real ones or projections, he accepts this as the reality. And as he accepts this as a reality I'm convinced the toupee will fall anyway. I think Mall had found that the toupee was only efficient if you expected it would work and that's why she doubt about ever having returned to reality. As it is much explained the you can play with physics in the dream but if you can curve a city, why won't you be able to make a toupee fall if you wanted it to ?

Even if the movie ends in the reality, another thing troubles me: I'm not sure about the real goal of the mission: is it to incept Fischer in disbanding his heritage ? or is it to incept Cobb in accepting that his wife is gone ? Ariane's role is really not clear in this. She is obviously more focused on the second mission than on the first one and she is designated by the grand-father of the children. I've not understood if Miles was Cobb's father or Mall's one (any idea ?). Whatever he is obviously someone very close to Cobb, someone who wants him to recover from this tragedy.

What do you think ?



For the children, I don t now.

The spinning-top thing is doomed with a logic flaw anyway.

The purpose of this item is double, if I understood it correctly : 1) proof that Cobb is in a dream or in reality 2) proof that Cobb is in one of his own dreams, not in a dream provoked by someone else’s who ignores the item specificity.

So, if the spinning-top falls, it means either that he is in reality or has been summoned in a dream provoked by someone else.

The problem is that Cobb’s subconscious can manifest itself without warning and without control, like Mall for example -or the train- in anyone’s dream where Cobb has been summoned. So why shouldn’t a never ending spinning-top appear in any dream, since the item is certainly part of Cobb’s subconscious as well ? (all the more that at the origin, this item was Mall’s one, therefore probably associated with Mall in Cobb’s mind).

So, the spinning-top trick appears rather useless.

Regarding Miles (Michael Caine), he is the father of Mall, Cobb’s father in law, so that would sustain your theory of an ambiguity in inception's real target.

Anyway, these dreaming world rules are quite random, whatever Chris Nolan sense of logic pretends to be. At some point, we are told that if someone is killed in the limbos, he directly goes back to reality, and so it does work for Mall killed by the train and Cobb at the end of the movie. But when Ariadne kills Fischer in the same limbos, he doesn’t wake-up in reality but goes back in his dream's third level (or fourth, now I m not sure...) in the “snow mountain hospital”. It is a good thing for the mission since it allows the team to fulfil the Fischer’s inception successfully, but was Ariadne lucky, or did she control the way she killed Fischer, or is it nonsense ?

All of these are probably more or less on purpose, I have the feeling that Chris Nolan wants to play with ambiguity in his plot, logics here are far from flawless. So I guess he wanted ambiguity in dreaming world rules, ambiguity on who does an inception on who and ambiguity on the movie ending in reality or dream.

And ambiguity on the script being good or not :idea: :absinthe:

User avatar
xdeathknightx
earl
earl
Posts: 2211
Joined: Thu 24 Jul, 2003 15:03
Location: Tilburg, Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Inception

Postby xdeathknightx » Thu 07 Oct, 2010 01:02

I think the spinning top is a sham (next to the fact that you can hear it almost toppling. It was the thing his wife used to see if it was a dream or not, not his. I think his kids became his, and thus he knew he was out. Plus his father (or was it father in law) was there, and he wasn't in the memories. And I believe there were mild differences to the kids.

User avatar
Nau of Sands
marquess
marquess
Posts: 2993
Joined: Tue 19 Aug, 2003 20:26
Location: Locked inside a suitcase
Contact:

Re: Inception

Postby Nau of Sands » Thu 07 Oct, 2010 01:50

I had a look on Imdb to see how many actors are credited for the kids.

Seems that Philipa 3 years and James 20 months are Claire Geare and Magnus Nolan,

Philipa 5 years and James 3 years are Taylor Geare and Jonathan Geare.

I don t see other kids credited, so I think regarding the two scenes of kids playing in the garden, must be the two same actors, 3 & 5 years old.
Image


Return to “North America”



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests