|
|
Post by DamieQue™ on Jul 19, 2010 14:50:18 GMT -5
I highly recommend it. Remember how disappointing Shutter Island was?
This movie is the exact opposite. Take everything that everyone said good about Shutter Island and apply it to this movie and it'll be right. THAT is how you make a movie.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vudu_Prince on Jul 19, 2010 14:56:46 GMT -5
I will be going to see this junt on friday night fa sho
|
|
|
|
Post by Vudu_Prince on Jul 19, 2010 14:57:13 GMT -5
Well that is if I'm not on my way to Raleigh
|
|
|
|
Post by Chal™ on Jul 19, 2010 16:03:25 GMT -5
i'll definitely be there this weekend. I've heard tooooo many good reviews from people who are total opposites from each other. i know if THEY agree, it must be something special
|
|
|
|
Post by 123Diva on Jul 20, 2010 3:01:25 GMT -5
Everyone seems to be raving about this movie and it wasn't even on my radar previously...might have to go see it.
|
|
|
|
Post by T-Rex91 on Jul 20, 2010 6:47:50 GMT -5
Despite Damie's recommendation, I've heard good things from other people. I may go see this weekend.
|
|
|
|
Post by DamieQue™ on Jul 20, 2010 9:15:42 GMT -5
On Despite Damie's recommendation, I've heard good things from other people. I may go see this weekend. |
|
|
|
Post by DamieQue™ on Jul 20, 2010 9:16:19 GMT -5
I will be going to see this junt on friday night fa sho |
|
|
|
Post by DamieQue™ on Jul 20, 2010 9:17:56 GMT -5
i'll definitely be there this weekend. I've heard tooooo many good reviews from people who are total opposites from each other. i know if THEY agree, it must be something special |
|
|
|
Post by DamieQue™ on Jul 20, 2010 9:19:18 GMT -5
Everyone seems to be raving about this movie and it wasn't even on my radar previously...might have to go see it. |
|
|
|
Post by Julie Art on Jul 20, 2010 12:09:55 GMT -5
I will be going to see this junt on friday night fa sho That is what someone else said! I was too through with Shutter Island, but I'mma have to hit up Inception. |
|
|
|
Post by Iceman on Jul 26, 2010 11:17:42 GMT -5
I saw this one. Two Words: CLASSIC MATERIAL.
It was intricately complex and had so much depth - But at the same time, was fairly easy to follow if you paid attention to all the details and rules as Leo and company laid them out.
I think with this one, Christopher Nolan surpassed his other masterpiece, "Memento". Dude just raised the bar with this one.
|
|
|
|
Post by T-Rex91 on Jul 26, 2010 11:30:34 GMT -5
I have not heard one person say this movie wasn't good. That's HIGHLY unusual. Me and Leo are still on the outs from Shutter Island so I have to build up to this.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chal™ on Jul 26, 2010 16:06:13 GMT -5
didn't get a chance to see it. when i went to the theater, all the screens for that showtime and the next showtime were sold out. That FURTHER lets me know that i need to see this movie.
|
|
|
|
Post by perroloco on Jul 27, 2010 17:31:03 GMT -5
I highly recommend it. Remember how disappointing Shutter Island was?
This movie is the exact opposite. Take everything that everyone said good about Shutter Island and apply it to this movie and it'll be right. THAT is how you make a movie. Saw it but I must have missed something. I got it but I think that it was unnecessarily complex. |
|
|
|
Post by ReignMan19 on Jul 28, 2010 8:54:04 GMT -5
Just saw it last night... Its definitely worth all the hype... I was proud I was able to stay up with the movie the whole time ( i know some people who had to watch it a second time) Great Movie and I'm a movie snob so If i'm saying its great its GREAT.
|
|
|
|
Post by Iceman on Jul 28, 2010 9:10:38 GMT -5
Just saw it last night... Its definitely worth all the hype... I was proud I was able to stay up with the movie the whole time ( i know some people who had to watch it a second time) Great Movie and I'm a movie snob so If i'm saying its great its GREAT. No doubt. I got it the first time, but my second viewing not only confirmed some things I questioned, but opened my eyes to some other facets of the movie. It's funny, someone could actually be spoiled and know how the movie ends, but the most interesting thing is unravelling the journey of HOW they got to the end. I read it took Chris Nolan 10 years of writing and perfecting this script and you can tell. The only reason they gave him an opportunity to make it was due to the success of Batman Begins & The Dark Knight. I love those movies, but I want more "Memento" & "Inception" from this guy. Dude is hitting on all cylinders right about now. |
|
|
|
Post by ReignMan19 on Jul 28, 2010 9:41:11 GMT -5
Can I have another Batman too... His version shit on all others in my book..
|
|
|
|
Post by DamieQue™ on Jul 29, 2010 9:18:35 GMT -5
I highly recommend it. Remember how disappointing Shutter Island was?
This movie is the exact opposite. Take everything that everyone said good about Shutter Island and apply it to this movie and it'll be right. THAT is how you make a movie. Saw it but I must have missed something. I got it but I think that it was unnecessarily complex.  What parts could they have left out? It all seemed to work to me. |
|
|
|
Post by Coldfront06 on Jul 29, 2010 14:46:55 GMT -5
I gotta see this for myself...I've either heard people say it was great, or hot garbage (I heard this twice this weekend).
|
|
|
|
Post by ReignMan19 on Jul 29, 2010 14:54:28 GMT -5
I have yet to hear one negative review... trust this movie is great...
|
|
|
|
Post by huey on Jul 30, 2010 23:11:59 GMT -5
Seriously, wtf was so complex about this? I keep hearing people had to see 2 or 3 times to understand?
Am i really that smart i understood in 1 viewing or am i missing something?
Please from here on out label your posts with ****spoiler alert*****
|
|
|
|
Post by Julie Art on Jul 31, 2010 0:20:55 GMT -5
Just saw it and it is great! Like someone said, it's the journey and not necessarily the destination that makes the movie. Folks were literally sitting on the edge of their seats. It's a must see.
|
|
|
|
Post by DamieQue™ on Aug 4, 2010 12:30:23 GMT -5
Seriously, wtf was so complex about this? I keep hearing people had to see 2 or 3 times to understand? Am i really that smart i understood in 1 viewing or am i missing something? Please from here on out label your posts with ****spoiler alert*****
*SPOILER ALERT*
The movie doesn't take 2 times to see to understand. But it might take 2 times to consider the arguments for the last question they leave you with... is he still dreaming?
I watched the movie twice (once by myself and the 2nd time with someone I recommended it to) and this time I watched for holes in the plot and/or clues to answer the final question.
There were 2 things that made it obvious to me that he was not dreaming despite all the circumstantial stuff that was inserted in the movie to suggest that he was. |
|
|
|
Post by huey on Aug 4, 2010 18:28:30 GMT -5
Seriously, wtf was so complex about this? I keep hearing people had to see 2 or 3 times to understand? Am i really that smart i understood in 1 viewing or am i missing something? Please from here on out label your posts with ****spoiler alert*****
*SPOILER ALERT*
The movie doesn't take 2 times to see to understand. But it might take 2 times to consider the arguments for the last question they leave you with... is he still dreaming?
I watched the movie twice (once by myself and the 2nd time with someone I recommended it to) and this time I watched for holes in the plot and/or clues to answer the final question.
There were 2 things that made it obvious to me that he was not dreaming despite all the circumstantial stuff that was inserted in the movie to suggest that he was. and what were those 2 things |
|
|
|
Post by DamieQue™ on Aug 5, 2010 9:42:44 GMT -5
We haven't needed the spoiler alert tags because we haven't discussed details yet. But now we will (to answer your question)
*SPOILER ALERT*
The movie doesn't take 2 times to see to understand. But it might take 2 times to consider the arguments for the last question they leave you with... is he still dreaming?
I watched the movie twice (once by myself and the 2nd time with someone I recommended it to) and this time I watched for holes in the plot and/or clues to answer the final question.
There were 2 things that made it obvious to me that he was not dreaming despite all the circumstantial stuff that was inserted in the movie to suggest that he was. and what were those 2 things
Consider the environment, in the dream sequences (as is the case in most dreams) there are random occurences, sometimes random architectures... there are none in the reality that he believes is reality. No random gravity (as was experienced in the multi-layered dream) - no random sounds/music etc. everything appears constant.
Also in the reality that he believes is reality, if there are agents entering his dream attempting to wake him up, they somehow fail to attract the attention of his projections. No one stares at anyone in the reality that he thinks is reality.
One of the undercurrents of the film is supposed to be that Mol is actually right... that they weren't out of the dream and that their kids were waiting for them if they killed themselves and woke up. During the movie he and Mol actually get into an argument (in a flashback) where he is arguing with her that he isn't dreaming. He specifically says, "If I'm dreaming how come I can't control what's going on?" and her reply is, "becauses you don't know that you're dreaming"
She wanted him to wake up. The Mol in his dream layers (particularly in the last sequence) wanted him to stay there with her IN the dream. They couldn't both be Mol.
Also, consider when Mol shows up. If she was truly trying to get him out, why doesn't she EVER show up in the reality that he believes is reality? She only shows up in dream sequences - no place else.
To me it seems obvious that he wasn't in the dream any longer. |
|
|
|
Post by huey on Aug 5, 2010 10:15:00 GMT -5
I think theres alot of holes in your reasoning or maybe i'm interpreting wat you said wrong. But i'm not the type to play devil advocate.
This doesn't prove a thing. I play music all the time, this music isn't always incorporated into my or your dreams. Same goes for random sounds you may hear or motions you may feel do not always appear in your dreams. The absence of these occurences does not define reality.
To me Mol was an absolute indicator of his being dreaming, but not the only indicator. My father,grandfather, uncle, and grandmother have all passed away. Early after their deaths i would have dreams where they were still included. In my dreams i realized i must be dreaming because they were not alive in the real world, and i was able to dream lucid. But i also was able to dream lucid without seeing them. The absence of them didn't mean i wasn't dreaming.
|
|
|
|
Post by nsync on Aug 5, 2010 10:17:04 GMT -5
****SPOILER*****
I saw the movie with my husband. Right away his theory was that Cobb woke up. My theory was that he was always dreaming in every state. Isn't that the deeper meaning of the plot? The only reality is the reality that we perceive. This was Cobb's struggle the entire time, but eventually he realized that he could see his children again. The power was within him not within the control of some higher force beyond his perceptions.
Anyhow, as we often do when we get into a huge debate and there is no one around to be the third voice--we went to the net(s) lol.
An interesting theory floating around the web is that whenever Cobb is dreaming he wears his wedding ring. Out of the dream...he doesn't. In the last sequence he has no wedding ring on. I thought that was really interesting and deep if it's accurate.
I countered that since his subconscious finally got rid of Mal by confronting her and the guilt ----Cobb no longer saw himself as married. Therefore if he was waking up into another dream he would project that he was no longer married...and therefore he would not see himself wearing his ring.
However, I think the ring is a great clue which opens up an even wider debate.
It was a good movie. I definitely want to get it for our home collection.
|
|
|
|
Post by DamieQue™ on Aug 5, 2010 10:48:38 GMT -5
I think theres alot of holes in your reasoning or maybe i'm interpreting wat you said wrong. But i'm not the type to play devil advocate. This doesn't prove a thing. I play music all the time, this music isn't always incorporated into my or your dreams. Same goes for random sounds you may hear or motions you may feel do not always appear in your dreams. The absence of these occurences does not define reality. To me Mol was an absolute indicator of his being dreaming, but not the only indicator. My father,grandfather, uncle, and grandmother have all passed away. Early after their deaths i would have dreams where they were still included. In my dreams i realized i must be dreaming because they were not alive in the real world, and i was able to dream lucid. But i also was able to dream lucid without seeing them. The absence of them didn't mean i wasn't dreaming.
And again, some of the most useful information is in what you don't see or don't hear. Mol was clearly in his dream layers. EVEN when she died in various layers of the dreams she showed up in other dreams unharmed. The only place where this doesn't happen is the reality that he thought was reality - she dies there and NEVER shows up there again. |
|
|
|
Post by Gee-Are on Aug 7, 2010 9:16:32 GMT -5
Yeah but I'm talking about within the context of the movie. When they were in the dream and there was outside gravity it manifested in the dream. When they were in the dream and there was outside noise it manifested in the dream. In the reality that he believed that was reality it never happened - not even once. No random occurences, no random manifestations, no impossible or changing architecture, none of the things that the movie establishes happens when you dream, happen when he considers himself awake. If they had had him seeing things or hallucinating in the reality he thought was reality I think it would be up for debate. But it never happened. If you actually believe the idea of the totem, he spun it twice in the movie where it did come to a stop - establishing that at least twice he was awake (but I honestly don't put a lot of stock in the totem idea - afterall it was Mol's idea, and the totem that he was using was hers first).
And again, some of the most useful information is in what you don't see or don't hear. Mol was clearly in his dream layers. EVEN when she died in various layers of the dreams she showed up in other dreams unharmed. The only place where this doesn't happen is the reality that he thought was reality - she dies there and NEVER shows up there again. Pretty good movie. I just saw it for the first time. It was definitely better than Shutter Island, but I don't think it was as good as Memento. It was just okay. I do have a lot of questions some spoiler, some just general questions... ****SPOILER ALERT****Why were there no black people in the movie? When they were in limbo, or the extended dream state, did they sleep there? Or, do you have to suffer the 50 or so years with no mental rest? Wonders if the sedative ol' boy used was Propofol or Diprivan...? too soon? Comment: With this concept, you could live 50 lifetimes with 50 different women wake up and move on, interesting. Okay spoiler questions... If Cobb went under before Saito did, why did Saito age so much more than Cobb by the time he'd found him? Shouldn't Cobb have been the older one? How long had it been since the death, because the kids NEVER aged? I assumed at least a year or few had passed, but I acknwoledge that may not be right. How were they able to control Fischer's subconscious projection of Browning in the 1st level? Remember he came through the hotel door then Eames came in after him... Cobb or Mal, who was right? Damie, I understand your arguments as to why you believe Cobb was right, but there's also a case to be made for Mal and a few holes in your reasoning. First, I'll state a scenario where Mal could be right. Cobb is laying on the floor at home, or in a hospital in a coma. You say there was no outside stimuli in the "Cobb reality." Well neither was there in the "Fischer militarized 1st level." They were on a plane, yet there was no movement in accordance with a plane banking or turbulence. Also, the deeper into the levels you got, the less you were affected by the gravity changes. That song, it was always the same, never different music, even before the "Inception" project started. I would like to go back and see if the music played at regular intervals throughout the movie. That would tell me that it was a trigger that Mal or someone from "reality" was playing to attempt to wake up Cobb. Regarding Mal's non-appearance in Cobb's "reality." She also didn't reappear in the various levels after death. Think about it. He killed her in the snow zone, but she didn't rise back up like Jesus. He also was obviously in the limbo a long time if Saito had aged that much, but after he killed her there, she didn't show back up to try to persuade him again. All of that to say, if he registered on a certain level that she had died, she didn't return. Same in his "reality." If his reality was reality, why were there no black people in this movie? ***ETA: I forgot about the Mombasa scene, so disregard black people comments... However, there is still something to be said about only seeing black people in Africa. |
|
{=}http://s2.images.proboards.com/cool.gif{/=}
