Jeph Jacques's comics discussion forums

  • 23 Jan 2022, 23:44
  • Welcome, Guest
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Down

Author Topic: Inception  (Read 19365 times)

Gemmwah

  • Scrabble hacker
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,253
  • fffffffffffffffffff
Re: Inception
« Reply #100 on: 02 Aug 2010, 04:11 »

i saw this on saturday OH MY GOD it was awesome :D
Logged
oh good god 4lko jaeger bomb. Holy goood god what have I done.
 :psyduck: psyduck is the most appropriate right now. FUUUUKC

Cartilage Head

  • Only pretending to work
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,207
  • Do Me Baby
Re: Inception
« Reply #101 on: 02 Aug 2010, 22:06 »

It was really, really good. My only complaint was that the characters were a little bland; not in that they were poorly written, just unexplored.
Logged
Hate, rain on me

Scandanavian War Machine

  • Older than Moses
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4,236
  • zzzzzzzz
Re: Inception
« Reply #102 on: 03 Aug 2010, 15:41 »

spoilers ahead, yo

It was really, really good. My only complaint was that the characters were a little bland; not in that they were poorly written, just unexplored.

but that's because every single one of them was just a projection of what's-his-face's subconsious! depending on which version of the ending you prefer, I guess. I think either ending works so in the context of this discussion, it was all a dream and, as such, the characters weren't really real people. Then again, I didn't think the characters weren't explored enough. Most of them didn't really matter anyway, and the ones that did were explored plenty.

I would have liked to know more about the young guy, Joseph Gordon-Levitt (or whatever his name is), he was awesome but you never really learn anything about him.
Logged
Quote from: KvP
Also I would like to point out that the combination of Sailor Moon and faux-Kerouac / Sonic Youth spelling is perhaps the purest distillation of what this forum is that we have yet been presented with.

Liz

Re: Inception
« Reply #103 on: 07 Aug 2010, 19:16 »

Fucking hell. It might be even worse than I thought.

http://dijinn.deviantart.com/art/Inception-Dream-Layer-Map-172001314
Logged
Quote from: John
Liz is touching me.
Quote from: Bryan
Fuck you, I want him so bad.

StaedlerMars

  • Lovecraftian nightmare
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,903
  • hallelujah!
    • a WebSite
Re: Inception
« Reply #104 on: 07 Aug 2010, 19:28 »

I loved this movie, but you guys have seen this right? http://boingboing.net/2010/08/03/inception-ripped-off.html
Logged
Expect lots of screaming, perversely fast computer drums and guitars tuned to FUCK

Quote from: Michael McDonald
Dear God, I hope it's smooth.

Ozymandias

Re: Inception
« Reply #105 on: 22 Aug 2010, 09:02 »

I finally saw this. Aside from all the discussion about the ending, I came away feeling like this movie was the fulfillment of a promise made 11 years ago by The Matrix: that you can have a fun, reality-bending action movie without sacrificing plot or characters. The Wachowskis raised the possibility really well but, until now, no one could truly make it real- especially not them.
Logged
You are 9/11.
You are the terrorist.

KvP

  • WoW gold miner on break
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6,720
  • COME DOWN NOW
Re: Inception
« Reply #106 on: 22 Aug 2010, 12:48 »

The more I thought about the movie, though, the more I did feel like it sacrificed a lot of its characters. Aside from Cobb and to a lesser extent Ariadne the bulk of the lifting for the characters is the acting, not the writing. The tricky thing is that you can make an argument that it's more intentional dream logic than weak writing. And like a dream the film really moves too fast for you to really notice how little you know about Joseph Gordon-Levitt or the Chemist or whoever.
Logged
I review, sometimes.
Quote from: Andy
I love this vagina store!
Quote from: Andy
SNEAKY
I sneak that shit
And liek
OMG DICK JERK

scarred

Re: Inception
« Reply #107 on: 22 Aug 2010, 12:55 »

It was hard to notice at first, because they all seem so realized as characters (both in the acting and in the dialogue) that backstory would seem weighty and unnecessary.
Logged
tumblr | wordpress | last.fm

Quote from: De_El
nick is a dick so you don't have to be!

Jimmy the Squid

  • Vulcan 3-D Chess Master
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,589
  • Feminist Killjoy
Re: Inception
« Reply #108 on: 22 Aug 2010, 15:19 »

Also you can make the parallel with that line about how in a dream you start in the middle of the action, already right in the thick of it and you don't really know how you got there.
Logged
Once I got drunk and threw up in the vegetable drawer of an old disused fridge while dressed as a cat

Ozymandias

Re: Inception
« Reply #109 on: 22 Aug 2010, 17:24 »

So Nolan also wrote a story that uses its own logic to justify any flaws in the story.

Which is also pretty impressive.

Suck it, haters.
Logged
You are 9/11.
You are the terrorist.

KvP

  • WoW gold miner on break
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6,720
  • COME DOWN NOW
Re: Inception
« Reply #110 on: 22 Aug 2010, 19:01 »

So Nolan also wrote a story that uses its own logic to justify any flaws in the story.
It's not good logic. It's affirming the consequent, which is a common formal fallacy. It goes

If X then Y.
Y,
therefore X.

If a story uses dream logic it is inconsistent. The movie is inconsistent, therefore it uses dream logic. Inconsistency is a plot weakness whereas dream logic (presumably) is not, so "dream logic" within a film can be used to insulate inconsistency from examination. The problem is that it's (arguably) unresolved whether or not the "reality layer" of the film is a dream or not. If it is a dream, then the vagueness of character details and the like is actually consistent, since there can't be a lack of something if it doesn't exist. The "dropping in the middle of the action" explanation is an ostensibly clever thematic trick but it's not very good insulation. Think of it this way: If I'm making a film that's really a broad political allegory and all of my characters are really just simple mouthpieces for political ideas, then I've executed my goals as a polemicist but my movie is still likely to be a slog even if all my decisions are consistent with the framework I've made for my movie.
« Last Edit: 22 Aug 2010, 19:07 by KvP »
Logged
I review, sometimes.
Quote from: Andy
I love this vagina store!
Quote from: Andy
SNEAKY
I sneak that shit
And liek
OMG DICK JERK

Ozymandias

Re: Inception
« Reply #111 on: 22 Aug 2010, 20:20 »

I don't know what you just said.

Shut up and suck a horse dick.
Logged
You are 9/11.
You are the terrorist.

TheFuriousWombat

  • GET ON THE NIGHT TRAIN
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,551
    • WXBC Bard College Radio Online
Re: Inception
« Reply #112 on: 22 Aug 2010, 21:47 »

I think it's pretty obvious what he said but the implication that I'm getting from it (i.e. that Inception is poorly made and hides behind some gimmicky shield to protect itself from being criticized as such) isn't one that I agree with. It certainly isn't a "slog" in any case and, at its very worst, it's still a hell of a fun movie if you ask me.
Logged
I punched all the girls in the face on the way to the booth to vote for Hitler.

Hollow Press (my blog)

KvP

  • WoW gold miner on break
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6,720
  • COME DOWN NOW
Re: Inception
« Reply #113 on: 22 Aug 2010, 22:14 »

I liked Inception a lot, it was probably the best film of the Summer. Using the word "slog" was a poor choice on my part (the film I described, which is pretty much an adaptation of Atlas Shrugged, would most definitely be a slog. As I wrote earlier, Inception is very fast paced), but the point was that if somebody were to criticize the film for poor characterization, "It's a movie about dreams" wouldn't be a counterpoint to that gripe. And I think there could be some pretty valid criticisms in that vein. A good (but rough) measure for how well a show or film presents its characters is the ease with which you can remember their names after you see it (moreso for shows than films, obviously). I could remember all of the names of The Big Lebowski's main characters after I saw it for the first time, and after the first three episodes of The Wire I had down everyone who had been introduced up to that point. By contrast, outside of Cobb and Saito I couldn't remember any of the main characters' names from Inception. Ariadne was pointed out to me afterward and it's a fairly unique one. I can't remember the names of Tom Hardy or Joseph Gordon-Levitt's characters. Likewise I'm three episodes into Rubicon and I only know the central character's name, which is worrying.
Logged
I review, sometimes.
Quote from: Andy
I love this vagina store!
Quote from: Andy
SNEAKY
I sneak that shit
And liek
OMG DICK JERK

scarred

Re: Inception
« Reply #114 on: 22 Aug 2010, 23:33 »

I don't know what you just said.

Shut up and suck a horse dick.
Logged
tumblr | wordpress | last.fm

Quote from: De_El
nick is a dick so you don't have to be!

KvP

  • WoW gold miner on break
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6,720
  • COME DOWN NOW
Re: Inception
« Reply #115 on: 22 Aug 2010, 23:35 »

Y'all need to read some fuckin' books.
Logged
I review, sometimes.
Quote from: Andy
I love this vagina store!
Quote from: Andy
SNEAKY
I sneak that shit
And liek
OMG DICK JERK

TheFuriousWombat

  • GET ON THE NIGHT TRAIN
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,551
    • WXBC Bard College Radio Online
Re: Inception
« Reply #116 on: 23 Aug 2010, 07:24 »

Interesting point though about the names. As far as characterization goes, Inception was undeniably weak. My question is, would it have been better if we had gotten backstory or exposition or a deeper examination of the main figures (i.e. what it is they do exactly as part of the dream heist team and why and how they met and how they got into that line of work...the list goes on), or if they had at least been a little less unidimensional? I'm not sure I know the answer to that question, to be honest. I'm not entirely sure how necessary it would have been and if an extra, say, 20-25 minutes was spent expanding upon the characters (who, I must admit, are nameless in my head right now so good call on that one), would I really have enjoyed the movie more? It's a summer movie, as you said, and I went into it and came out of it with that mentality. To me, that actually does excuse it from some of the standards I might apply to something I expected to be more serious. Maybe Nolan had some pretensions to depth and provocation with Inception and, if so, he fell short, but if you look at it like an action movie (which is how I approached it), underdevelopment of characters kinda ceases to be an issue in a critique of the film, to be replaced by a sort of "gee wiz!" excitement at the things he did pull of well (the visuals, the fight scenes, the playing with layers of time thing (that van falling for half the movie was damn cool)).

The names though, I'm actually in the same boat as you with Rubicon (a show I like less and less the more I see it) while in something like Mad Men for example I could easily name the entire main cast and several of the secondary characters as well without even seeing their faces.
Logged
I punched all the girls in the face on the way to the booth to vote for Hitler.

Hollow Press (my blog)

Blyss

  • 1-800-SCABIES
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 822
  • I got skillz with the plastic motherfucker. SKILLZ
    • Gamers like games
Re: Inception
« Reply #117 on: 24 Aug 2010, 07:45 »

I've waited a bit before posting in here, because I've been trying to figure out my feelings on this movie.

To be honest, I still don't have what I'd call a final assessment.  I've seen this twice now, and I do enjoy it.  I have some problems with the actual happenings in what is supposed to be the 'REAL' world, but that doesn't mean that I can't like the movie.  I have problems with flow in a lot of movies, and it doesn't take away from my ability to enjoy them.  I look past it, and just try to take the story for what it is.

There are two things that stand out quite a bit to me, or rather, there's two sides of the same coin - because really they are very connected.

It seems fairly obvious to me that a lot of the information is very vague, especially concerning characters, and how they do what they do.  Now, some have stated that this is a genius stroke by Nolan, because that's how it would be in a dream.  Point taken - BUT - I'm not completely convinced.  It's been the case many many more times that this is simply a product of a writer that gets into a corner and isn't sure how to get out.  One of the major problems with writing something that is so new, so original, is that as a writer you can get lost.  I know.  I've done it myself.  I always look at a story that I've done this to myself in, and go, "Wow, I have just completely fucked myself, my characters, and my plot right into this corner, and there is no fucking way out.  At all."  I'm wrong about this though.  There is an easy way out, and that is to be vague.  The problem with this solution is that before this, you were likely being very specific, and there are parts of Inception that are VERY specific.  Then it goes back to being vague.  That's kind of where I start to fall off with how much I like it.

Inception is a good movie, and with Hollywood churning out so many sequels, and remakes of old 70's tv series, and conglomerating 80's action heroes (Yes, I like 'The Expendables too, but come on...) Inception is actually a breath of fresh air comparatively.  Is it the greatest story ever told?  Not to me, but I'd be hard pressed to make a choice on what is, so take it for what  it's worth.  Is it the worst story ever told?  Hell no.  Not by a long shot.

It's a good movie, that I will probably enjoy watching a few more times for one simple reason.  It makes me think about things from different perspectives.  That's my particular cup of tea, and I like it.  If it's not yours, you'll probably either find it bitter, or bland, but you're not likely to enjoy it as much as me.
Logged
"Psychos?!  Did they look like psychos?  They were vampires!  Psychos DO NOT explode when sunlight hits them, I don't give a fuck how crazy they are!"  Seth Gecko

My blog

SonofZ3

  • The German Chancellory building
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 495
Re: Inception
« Reply #118 on: 24 Aug 2010, 10:10 »

While I certainly won't deny the one dimensional nature of the film's characters, it didn't really bother me. After seeing Inception I felt like I had seen a film that was essentially the same in most ways (as far as plot, character motivation) as the simple fantasy stories and fairy tales I had read as a kid. The hero is on a quest to reach a morally friendly goal (reach his children to take care of them), he has a loyal sidekick, and needs to assemble a team to attain the goal of his quest because this time things are harder than they have been in the past. Theres nothing wrong with that at all, that basic formula is one that we're so used to that using it in a film that has potentially confusing concepts makes sense. We don't really have to question why all these people will help the hero, they will simply because thats what happens in stories/movies/video games/books like this. Given how visually stunning the film was, and that the audience had a lot to take in and understand in relation to the "rules" of the dream world, using an age old formula for the characters makes perfect sense. Let the audience focus on the visual elements and wrap their heads around the different levels of dreaming and accept that Arthur helps Cobb because Arthus is Cobb's sidekick.

Thats just what I thought though.
Logged
I've gained nothing from Zen.

beat mouse

  • The German Chancellory building
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 488
  • HEADACHE
Re: Inception
« Reply #119 on: 24 Aug 2010, 11:18 »

My biggest argument against the "lazy" writing comments is that at no point do they leave out information you need. How the dream machines work doesn't matter, aside from the nerdy fanboys that want to know so they can write stories about Cobb and Ariadne. The fact that you see them in use lets you fill in all of the little blanks you want, but it changes nothing in regards to narrative. Would you have really preferred another half hour of expository conversation about the physical world or allow the focus to remain on the emotional and psychological levels of the film, which has been the entire focus all along. The characters can go either way, on one side the lack of development can be percolated into an argument that it is all a dream, or simply again, that they aren't required to have depth as the film is not about them. The first portion of the film is spent talking about all of the different jobs they are required to do, which when you are given someone's job description, and you watch them fulfill that job, you can start filling in the little blanks yourself. It is mentioned throughout the movie that when you are put into someone's dream (or film) that your subconscious will fill in the small details to allow your brain to accept it as real. This is what makes Inception feel much more deliberate than lazy to me.
Logged
you could have been fine, you could have made it, you could licked the lips of god but you chose the pavement.

RallyMonkey

  • FIGHT YOU
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 377
Re: Inception
« Reply #120 on: 24 Aug 2010, 13:53 »

When it comes to characterization, I think it's really a matter of length. Christopher Nolan is able to write great characters. All of the actors are able to portray a good amount of depth in their characterization. But the movie already runs near the three hour mark. I can't think of a single scene that I would want to be taken out of the film, so to really add any deeper characterization, you'd have to make a long movie much longer. When it's a choice between an excellent movie with some shallow characters that can also make a lot of bucks at the box office and give studios incentive to start making large budget original films again, or have an excellent movie with deep characters that runs so long you'd only be able to show it three times a day and have it bomb at the box office, I'd take the shallow characters.
Logged

Be My Head

  • Psychopath in a hockey mask
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 641
Re: Inception
« Reply #121 on: 04 Sep 2010, 19:58 »

I lol'd hearing some guy talk about how complicated it was in the movie theatre lobby.

"and like, you get it for a second, then it starts to not make sense, then you kinda get it again"

How is this movie "complicated" at all? I've been hearing the same thing from other people.

One thing that was a plot hole: If "real life" events such as movement and noise affect your dream, why do they only affect one *level* of the dream? That just makes no sense whatsoever. The entire thing is a fucking dream, so you hearing music or whatever in real life should affect the whole dream!
Logged

october1983

  • Cthulhu f'tagn
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 535
  • It is a foreign country!
Re: Inception
« Reply #122 on: 05 Sep 2010, 00:35 »

It does affect all levels, but with each subsequent level it becomes less pronounced. So as the van falls from the bridge, in Arthur's dream there is zero-gravity, whereas in Eames' snow fortress dream within that, there are avalanches. Similarly, when the chemist starts playing music to Authur, everyone in Eames' dream can vaguely hear some music in the "distance".
Logged
Quote from: Jens in Meebo
"MY SON JUST WANTED TO COME LIKE A THUNDERSTORM"
"AND YOU ROBBED HIM OF HIS LIFE"

Be My Head

  • Psychopath in a hockey mask
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 641
Re: Inception
« Reply #123 on: 05 Sep 2010, 10:58 »

Fair enough, I didn't notice that.
Logged

Nodaisho

  • Vulcan 3-D Chess Master
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,738
Re: Inception
« Reply #124 on: 06 Sep 2010, 00:09 »

The ending really reminded me of Stalker's ending. You know, the somewhat-ambiguous, but when you think about it, one of them makes a lot more sense than the other type of ending? For comparison (Stalker spoilers here), in Stalker, the stalker's daughter possibly telekinetically pushes glasses off of the table, or it is possibly a train that runs right by their house causing them to fall off. Except that a train wouldn't move one glass at a time, and they start moving before the train comes close enough to shake the house (as I recall, I can't find a clip of that part right now). In Inception, the top spins for quite a while without tipping, but near the end the base starts to wobble like before it falls over (we haven't seen that particular one fall over, but we all have spun tops as a kid, right? They do the same thing). On top of that, the kids are older and their clothes are slightly different.
Logged
I took a duck in the face at two hundred and fifty knots

Dimmukane

  • Vulcan 3-D Chess Master
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,734
  • juicer
Re: Inception
« Reply #125 on: 06 Sep 2010, 08:30 »

I definitely made the same comparison the first time I saw it. 
Logged
Quote from: Johnny C
all clothes reflect identity constructs, destroy these constructs by shedding your clothes and sending pictures of the process to the e-mail address linked under my avatar

est

  • this is a test
  • Admin emeritus
  • Older than Moses
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4,294
  • V O L L E Y B A L L
Re: Inception
« Reply #126 on: 28 Dec 2010, 04:04 »

The first thing I thought when there was the flashback scene of them waking up from the limbo world where they got old together was "ok so that's one level, what about the next one/others?"
Logged

est

  • this is a test
  • Admin emeritus
  • Older than Moses
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4,294
  • V O L L E Y B A L L
Re: Inception
« Reply #127 on: 29 Dec 2010, 00:26 »

(Sorry for the necro btw, Han & I only just got to see this last night)

But yeah, my prev post plus a few of the things that you guys have already said, like the strange clunkiness of the phonecall with his kids (like it was a facsimile of a phonecall) his unrealistic job/the shadowy corporation chasing after him, that the guys coming after him in India (?) were the same guys as in the first layer of the inception job, that his father in law was there waiting for him at the airport without knowing anything about him travelling on such short notice, all point toward "reality" being another layer of Cobb's dream.  Also, the little spinner thing was Molly's, not his, so I'm not even sure if it'll work properly for him.  Either way, I believe that he is stuck in his own dream, so it would work exactly the way he'd expect it to anyway.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Up