the INCEPTION thread for people who waited to see it and missed the first thread

TheySlashThem

well fine

see if I ever back you up again

Snowbeat

i don't need you

i don't need anybody

TheySlashThem

not that you could get anybody

Snowbeat

i got you, baby

TheySlashThem

not anymore

Snowbeat

tdot get out of my house

TheySlashThem

this is my house

you get out

MrMonroe

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

ZeroFill

this movie guys


this movie

Cilla Black

MrMonroe wrote: »

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.

MrMonroe

Cilla Black wrote: »

MrMonroe wrote: »

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

Cilla Black

MrMonroe wrote: »

Cilla Black wrote: »

MrMonroe wrote: »

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.

MrMonroe

Cilla Black wrote: »

MrMonroe wrote: »

Cilla Black wrote: »

MrMonroe wrote: »

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

Cilla Black

MrMonroe wrote: »

Cilla Black wrote: »

MrMonroe wrote: »

Cilla Black wrote: »

MrMonroe wrote: »

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.

Aneurhythmia

MrMonroe wrote: »

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.

thorgot

i just saw this a second time, in imax

so gooood

Gatsby

ThatDudeOverThere wrote: »

I'd actually like to see this a third time but the old-timey single-screen theater by my apartment has already stopped showing it

Go watch it while wearing a three piece suit

That's what I did, makes you feel like a new man.

TheySlashThem

I do not own a suit

Saaruto

Gatsby wrote: »

ThatDudeOverThere wrote: »

I'd actually like to see this a third time but the old-timey single-screen theater by my apartment has already stopped showing it

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.

Grey Ghost

People thought JGL might be evil because of the hair. Plain and simple. Slicked-back hair very rarely indicates a good guy.

GreasyKidsStuff

Reposting this from the D&D discussion:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVkQ0C4qDvM

Cilla Black

JGL

I never got the impression he'd backstab anyone. It just didn't ever strike me as that type of movie.

Grey Ghost

GreasyKidsStuff wrote: »

Reposting this from the D&D discussion:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVkQ0C4qDvM

Awesome.

Cilla Black

That's really neat, actually.

Gatsby

Holy fuck there are too many layers to this film

I Win Swordfights

I am seeing this tomorrow. I am so excited to see it and be able to open these spoilers!

Meissnerd

BoredGamer wrote: »

Cosmic Sombrero wrote: »

I think maybe people are reading a bit too much into this film!

It's a Christopher Nolan film. Of course people are gonna look into it too much.

EDIT: There was not enough shots of projection henchmen getting shot and strangled in the snow.

Not nearly enough.

my only complaint about this movie. okay man we get it, hella projections lets move it along

Gatsby

That added a real sense of danger to me

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."

Sal

This movie was so good

SO GOOD

Gatsby

Shut it down

I Win Swordfights

This is worth IMAXing right?

Charles Kinbote

nein

I mean I love it but it wasn't shot using Patented IMAX Technology like Dark Knight was or anything

I dunnononononononono bbbbsssssssss

Gatsby

I saw it in IMAX, for me it added a bit to some of the epic scenes.

Also dear god the sound- BRRROOOOOOWWWWWWW

Angry

Charles Kinbote wrote: »

nein

I mean I love it but it wasn't shot using Patented IMAX Technology like Dark Knight was or anything

I dunnononononononono bbbbsssssssss

the dark knight only had a few shots that used imax cameras.

thorgot

i watched it in a normal theater and then in IMAX

this movie is borderline, I got just as much enjoyment out of the normal viewing

Sara Lynn

Grey Ghost wrote: »

GreasyKidsStuff wrote: »

Reposting this from the D&D discussion:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVkQ0C4qDvM

Awesome.

I noticed this while watching the movie, I thought it was pretty cool how they did that.

Sara Lynn

also this image is spoilery but images help people understand things so

Slortex

Cilla Black wrote: »

MrMonroe wrote: »

Cilla Black wrote: »

MrMonroe wrote: »

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.

MrMonroe

Slortex wrote: »

Cilla Black wrote: »

MrMonroe wrote: »

Cilla Black wrote: »

MrMonroe wrote: »

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.

Cilla Black

Well

The answer isn't supposed to be irrelevant. But it's supposed to be made by us. We decide whether or not it's a dream.