The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
Please vote in the Forum Structure Poll. Polling will close at 2PM EST on January 21, 2025.
the INCEPTION thread for people who waited to see it and missed the first thread
MrMonroepassed outon the floor nowRegistered Userregular
edited July 2010
I read something several pages back by someone who was unmoved by the theory that
the top kept spinning
on the grounds that it wasn't redemptive
however, I think that's missing the point of the last shot of the film
the reason we don't see the top fall over or gracefully continue forever (how would you even film that, anyway) is because the answer is impertinent. It's impertinent to him and wouldn't have really indicated anything to us if it had fallen over. She was the one who could keep it spinning forever, and even if he could do it too, wouldn't the fall of the top at the end be equally capable of symbolizing that he is at rest finally, even if it is still a dream?
I read something several pages back by someone who was unmoved by the theory that
the top kept spinning
on the grounds that it wasn't redemptive
however, I think that's missing the point of the last shot of the film
the reason we don't see the top fall over or gracefully continue forever (how would you even film that, anyway) is because the answer is impertinent. It's impertinent to him and wouldn't have really indicated anything to us if it had fallen over. She was the one who could keep it spinning forever, and even if he could do it too, wouldn't the fall of the top at the end be equally capable of symbolizing that he is at rest finally, even if it is still a dream?
also Tom Hardy
love that voice
Where are you getting the idea that she kept it spinning forever? Not saying you're wrong, just genuinely curious.
I also thought that the fact we can't tell whether it keeps spinning or not was intentional because it leaves the question up to the viewer as to whether it is a dream. Sure even if it had fallen we could make up a thousand different theories that it's still a dream, but the fact we didn't see it fall is important. Why else would they show it like that? It's very pertinent.
Cilla Black on
0
MrMonroepassed outon the floor nowRegistered Userregular
I read something several pages back by someone who was unmoved by the theory that
the top kept spinning
on the grounds that it wasn't redemptive
however, I think that's missing the point of the last shot of the film
the reason we don't see the top fall over or gracefully continue forever (how would you even film that, anyway) is because the answer is impertinent. It's impertinent to him and wouldn't have really indicated anything to us if it had fallen over. She was the one who could keep it spinning forever, and even if he could do it too, wouldn't the fall of the top at the end be equally capable of symbolizing that he is at rest finally, even if it is still a dream?
also Tom Hardy
love that voice
Where are you getting the idea that she kept it spinning forever? Not saying you're wrong, just genuinely curious.
I also thought that the fact we can't tell whether it keeps spinning or not was intentional because it leaves the question up to the viewer as to whether it is a dream or not. Sure even if it had fallen we could make up a thousand different theories that it's still a dream, but the fact we didn't see it fall is important. Why else would they show it like that? It's very pertinent.
Cobb tells the architect at one point when they are discussing totems that the top belonged to Mal and that whenever she spun it in a dream state, it wouldn't fall over
without knowing that, I don't see how you weren't totally baffled by the last shot of the film
I read something several pages back by someone who was unmoved by the theory that
the top kept spinning
on the grounds that it wasn't redemptive
however, I think that's missing the point of the last shot of the film
the reason we don't see the top fall over or gracefully continue forever (how would you even film that, anyway) is because the answer is impertinent. It's impertinent to him and wouldn't have really indicated anything to us if it had fallen over. She was the one who could keep it spinning forever, and even if he could do it too, wouldn't the fall of the top at the end be equally capable of symbolizing that he is at rest finally, even if it is still a dream?
also Tom Hardy
love that voice
Where are you getting the idea that she kept it spinning forever? Not saying you're wrong, just genuinely curious.
I also thought that the fact we can't tell whether it keeps spinning or not was intentional because it leaves the question up to the viewer as to whether it is a dream or not. Sure even if it had fallen we could make up a thousand different theories that it's still a dream, but the fact we didn't see it fall is important. Why else would they show it like that? It's very pertinent.
Cobb tells the architect at one point when they are discussing totems that the top belonged to Mal and that whenever she spun it in a dream state, it wouldn't fall over
without knowing that, I don't see how you weren't totally baffled by the last shot of the film
Well yes, but that was when Mal had it. Mal didn't have it anymore, Cobb did, and it seems fair to assume that he's the one who is spinning it. I mean, hell, Mal's presence in Cobb's mind isn't even Mal. There is no one to spin it but him.
Cilla Black on
0
MrMonroepassed outon the floor nowRegistered Userregular
I read something several pages back by someone who was unmoved by the theory that
the top kept spinning
on the grounds that it wasn't redemptive
however, I think that's missing the point of the last shot of the film
the reason we don't see the top fall over or gracefully continue forever (how would you even film that, anyway) is because the answer is impertinent. It's impertinent to him and wouldn't have really indicated anything to us if it had fallen over. She was the one who could keep it spinning forever, and even if he could do it too, wouldn't the fall of the top at the end be equally capable of symbolizing that he is at rest finally, even if it is still a dream?
also Tom Hardy
love that voice
Where are you getting the idea that she kept it spinning forever? Not saying you're wrong, just genuinely curious.
I also thought that the fact we can't tell whether it keeps spinning or not was intentional because it leaves the question up to the viewer as to whether it is a dream or not. Sure even if it had fallen we could make up a thousand different theories that it's still a dream, but the fact we didn't see it fall is important. Why else would they show it like that? It's very pertinent.
Cobb tells the architect at one point when they are discussing totems that the top belonged to Mal and that whenever she spun it in a dream state, it wouldn't fall over
without knowing that, I don't see how you weren't totally baffled by the last shot of the film
Well yes, but that was when Mal had it. Mal didn't have it anymore, Cobb did, and it seems fair to assume that he's the one who is spinning it. I mean, hell, Mal's presence in Cobb's mind isn't even Mal. There is no one to spin it but him.
that is my point
we're clearly supposed to interpret the last shot as ambiguous as to whether he was still in a dream state or not
I am saying I think the ambiguity is exactly the way it should be
I read something several pages back by someone who was unmoved by the theory that
the top kept spinning
on the grounds that it wasn't redemptive
however, I think that's missing the point of the last shot of the film
the reason we don't see the top fall over or gracefully continue forever (how would you even film that, anyway) is because the answer is impertinent. It's impertinent to him and wouldn't have really indicated anything to us if it had fallen over. She was the one who could keep it spinning forever, and even if he could do it too, wouldn't the fall of the top at the end be equally capable of symbolizing that he is at rest finally, even if it is still a dream?
also Tom Hardy
love that voice
Where are you getting the idea that she kept it spinning forever? Not saying you're wrong, just genuinely curious.
I also thought that the fact we can't tell whether it keeps spinning or not was intentional because it leaves the question up to the viewer as to whether it is a dream or not. Sure even if it had fallen we could make up a thousand different theories that it's still a dream, but the fact we didn't see it fall is important. Why else would they show it like that? It's very pertinent.
Cobb tells the architect at one point when they are discussing totems that the top belonged to Mal and that whenever she spun it in a dream state, it wouldn't fall over
without knowing that, I don't see how you weren't totally baffled by the last shot of the film
Well yes, but that was when Mal had it. Mal didn't have it anymore, Cobb did, and it seems fair to assume that he's the one who is spinning it. I mean, hell, Mal's presence in Cobb's mind isn't even Mal. There is no one to spin it but him.
that is my point
we're clearly supposed to interpret the last shot as ambiguous as to whether he was still in a dream state or not
I am saying I think the ambiguity is exactly the way it should be
So, we're not really disagreeing at all. Carry on then! I think my impression was that you were saying the scene wasn't pertinent rather than the answer as to whether or not it falls being impertinent.
I read something several pages back by someone who was unmoved by the theory that
the top kept spinning
on the grounds that it wasn't redemptive
however, I think that's missing the point of the last shot of the film
the reason we don't see the top fall over or gracefully continue forever (how would you even film that, anyway) is because the answer is impertinent. It's impertinent to him and wouldn't have really indicated anything to us if it had fallen over. She was the one who could keep it spinning forever, and even if he could do it too, wouldn't the fall of the top at the end be equally capable of symbolizing that he is at rest finally, even if it is still a dream?
also Tom Hardy
love that voice
That might've been something I was sort of saying.
I touched on redemption, but only to say that redemption isn't guaranteed by choosing his children, not that redemption is necessary. I think if they're just dream kids, their value as an emotional change is about as empty as the emotional stagnation that Mal represents. I don't think Leo's character would actually be changing if it's still a dream.
But I'm not saying he needs to change or that the movie needs to redeem him to make its point.
Aneurhythmia on
0
thorgotthere is special providencein the fall of a sparrowRegistered Userregular
I mean a fully militarized subconcious? That's pretty fucking intimidating. Hell during the scene with Eames wrestling that projection I actually thought "oh shit he might not actually make it in time."
I read something several pages back by someone who was unmoved by the theory that
the top kept spinning
on the grounds that it wasn't redemptive
however, I think that's missing the point of the last shot of the film
the reason we don't see the top fall over or gracefully continue forever (how would you even film that, anyway) is because the answer is impertinent. It's impertinent to him and wouldn't have really indicated anything to us if it had fallen over. She was the one who could keep it spinning forever, and even if he could do it too, wouldn't the fall of the top at the end be equally capable of symbolizing that he is at rest finally, even if it is still a dream?
also Tom Hardy
love that voice
Where are you getting the idea that she kept it spinning forever? Not saying you're wrong, just genuinely curious.
I also thought that the fact we can't tell whether it keeps spinning or not was intentional because it leaves the question up to the viewer as to whether it is a dream or not. Sure even if it had fallen we could make up a thousand different theories that it's still a dream, but the fact we didn't see it fall is important. Why else would they show it like that? It's very pertinent.
Cobb tells the architect at one point when they are discussing totems that the top belonged to Mal and that whenever she spun it in a dream state, it wouldn't fall over
without knowing that, I don't see how you weren't totally baffled by the last shot of the film
Well yes, but that was when Mal had it. Mal didn't have it anymore, Cobb did, and it seems fair to assume that he's the one who is spinning it. I mean, hell, Mal's presence in Cobb's mind isn't even Mal. There is no one to spin it but him.
Cobb sets it into an infinite spin when he performs inception on Mal. He's capable of making it spin forever if he's in a dream.
Slortex on
0
MrMonroepassed outon the floor nowRegistered Userregular
I read something several pages back by someone who was unmoved by the theory that
the top kept spinning
on the grounds that it wasn't redemptive
however, I think that's missing the point of the last shot of the film
the reason we don't see the top fall over or gracefully continue forever (how would you even film that, anyway) is because the answer is impertinent. It's impertinent to him and wouldn't have really indicated anything to us if it had fallen over. She was the one who could keep it spinning forever, and even if he could do it too, wouldn't the fall of the top at the end be equally capable of symbolizing that he is at rest finally, even if it is still a dream?
also Tom Hardy
love that voice
Where are you getting the idea that she kept it spinning forever? Not saying you're wrong, just genuinely curious.
I also thought that the fact we can't tell whether it keeps spinning or not was intentional because it leaves the question up to the viewer as to whether it is a dream or not. Sure even if it had fallen we could make up a thousand different theories that it's still a dream, but the fact we didn't see it fall is important. Why else would they show it like that? It's very pertinent.
Cobb tells the architect at one point when they are discussing totems that the top belonged to Mal and that whenever she spun it in a dream state, it wouldn't fall over
without knowing that, I don't see how you weren't totally baffled by the last shot of the film
Well yes, but that was when Mal had it. Mal didn't have it anymore, Cobb did, and it seems fair to assume that he's the one who is spinning it. I mean, hell, Mal's presence in Cobb's mind isn't even Mal. There is no one to spin it but him.
Cobb sets it into an infinite spin when he performs inception on Mal. He's capable of making it spin forever if he's in a dream.
yes, but
wouldn't he be capable of making it stop spinning if he is in a dream and believes that he has redeemed himself?
My point is that even if he had stopped it in the last shot of the film, we wouldn't necessarily learn anything. We would be having the same conversation about whether it was all a dream or not had the top fallen over
That's why the last shot is so brilliant; we're not given a resolution of the issue because the answer to the question of "is it all a dream" is supposed to be irrelevant.
Posts
see if I ever back you up again
i don't need anybody
you get out
on the grounds that it wasn't redemptive
however, I think that's missing the point of the last shot of the film
also
love that voice
this movie
I also thought that the fact we can't tell whether it keeps spinning or not was intentional because it leaves the question up to the viewer as to whether it is a dream. Sure even if it had fallen we could make up a thousand different theories that it's still a dream, but the fact we didn't see it fall is important. Why else would they show it like that? It's very pertinent.
without knowing that, I don't see how you weren't totally baffled by the last shot of the film
that is my point
I am saying I think the ambiguity is exactly the way it should be
That might've been something I was sort of saying.
But I'm not saying he needs to change or that the movie needs to redeem him to make its point.
so gooood
Go watch it while wearing a three piece suit
That's what I did, makes you feel like a new man.
FUCK YES. I can vouch for this. Wearing a three piece suit during Inception makes you want to wear one all the damn time.
Steam ID
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVkQ0C4qDvM
Awesome.
my only complaint about this movie. okay man we get it, hella projections lets move it along
SO GOOD
I mean I love it but it wasn't shot using Patented IMAX Technology like Dark Knight was or anything
I dunnononononononono bbbbsssssssss
Also dear god the sound- BRRROOOOOOWWWWWWW
the dark knight only had a few shots that used imax cameras.
this movie is borderline, I got just as much enjoyment out of the normal viewing
I noticed this while watching the movie, I thought it was pretty cool how they did that.
yes, but
My point is that even if he had stopped it in the last shot of the film, we wouldn't necessarily learn anything. We would be having the same conversation about whether it was all a dream or not had the top fallen over
That's why the last shot is so brilliant; we're not given a resolution of the issue because the answer to the question of "is it all a dream" is supposed to be irrelevant.