Comments on: Review: ‘Inception’ Is the Visionary Thrill-Ride We’ve Been Waiting For All Summer Long

By: Coat Fish

Coat Fish — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 21:40:08 +0000

I hated the cliched dead beautiful wife and the adorable children playing in the sun thing that is in every other Hollywood movie/Mel Gibson revenge flick.

A bit two dimensional characters. It was too much concerned about the action and the mechanics of the plot to really delve into the emotional issues of Cobb. I didn't like Cotillard in it, and thought her character wasn't written very well (I know it's just his projection etc. but still), and the final confrontation with her was lame.

Also the surrealism of the dreams was really textbookish (the paradoxical stairs etc.) and not really imaginative on the level that for instance Fellini or Lynch operates. I suppose Nolan's dreams are James Bond movies mixed with some Escher lite.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 20:54:49 +0000

I loved every single bit, except for two minor things. I really wish he would've closed the ending, and I feel Ariadne was a little bit quick to follow these two men into a warehouse and let them hook her up to a machine.

By: ejaz14357

ejaz14357 — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 13:14:38 +0000

Neither did it make me ponder phillosophically about the nature of existence, dreams, memories and so on.

By: frecl

frecl — Tue, 20 Jul 2010 00:37:23 +0000

And why couldn't Leo have just shot her or pushed her off a building? Why'd he have to incept her?

By: frecl

frecl — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 06:34:23 +0000

Saw it again. I didn't pick up the first time around that they (Leo and Mal) are in the the final, 4th, "subconscious," "limbo," level of dreaming when they are in their sandbox world - the same place Ken Watanabe goes when he dies in-dream. I didn't understand how Leo's subconscious limbo and Watanabe's subconscious limbo were linked. How did Leo get to Watanabe's beach? Furthermore, doesn't it seem weird that, if you die in a dream while sedated, you go to limbo, but in order to get out of limbo, all you have to do is die? Perhaps I'm missing something.

I think my concerns are with the mechanics of how dream-layering works, but maybe it's with Mal. Maybe I've missed something. My understanding of Mal is that she is Leo's subconscious unspoken guilt for incepting his wife with her suicidal notion. Am I off there? Or is there something deeper?

By: kevinjagernauth

kevinjagernauth — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 01:43:53 +0000

@frecl — there are some things about Mal you don't understand on a fundamental level, hence your confusion regarding the plot. Watch closer.

By: rodrigoperez

rodrigoperez — Sun, 18 Jul 2010 20:56:16 +0000

"Why don't they just give Ken Watanabe a kick to wake him up after he gets shot?"

The people on the plan presumably don't know he's been shot in the dream so can't administer a kick to wake him, but yeah, one of them or an extra person shoulda been awake on the plane as one of them was awake every level down.

By: rodrigoperez

rodrigoperez — Sun, 18 Jul 2010 20:54:19 +0000

The exposition works cause it's in teaching sessions. its smart that Nolan creates a character that has to learn the logic of the world and therefore is the eyes of the audience.

But yeah, the exposition makes you raise an eyebrow at first cause it's not the easiest thing to hear initially.

By: frecl

frecl — Sun, 18 Jul 2010 18:21:33 +0000

VERY SPECIFIC SPOILERS HEREIN. DO NOT READ THIS IF YOU DO NOT WANT TO BE SPOILED.

How can Ken Watanabe and Cobb share a dream space, but when they wake up they are no longer hooked up to the machine?

How can Leo and his wife be three or four dreams deep if they're not sedated? And if they are sedated, why does dying not send them to limbo?

Why don't they just give Ken Watanabe a kick to wake him up after he gets shot?

I am not nit-picked (well, maybe I am). I am looking for answers to these questions because I am genuinely perplexed. Lemme know, somebody.

By: christopherbell

christopherbell — Fri, 16 Jul 2010 20:18:45 +0000

I noticed all the obvious exposition too, but it really isn't that big a part of the film. And best to get that out of the way, even if it sounds terribly unnatural.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 17:14:25 +0000

The sex thing is clearly just a small observation to temper the review. Why do fanboys latch on to even the most casual comment?

By: Bruna

Bruna — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 15:16:00 +0000

Saw it today. Yes it is impressive and smart and worth every penny. I don't mind the absense of sex in dreams but i don't find it emotionally engaging enough as some critics have praised it for. Neither did it make me ponder phillosophically about the nature of existence, dreams, memories and so on.

I thought Memento was better on those fronts.

Maybe the lack of sex and intimacy is what makes it hard to buy the 'love' bit in the movie and prevent not just me but a lot of people I talked to from being emotionally engaged to the storyline between Cobb and his wife.

The first half was quite 'dry' as a lot of setup and expositions and explanations were shown. In fact in my screening, quite a few people walked out midway. Had they sat through to the second half where the pace and the action picked up, they would have been handsomely rewarded.

By: kevinjagernauth

kevinjagernauth — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 12:30:35 +0000

Yes, they are universal, but you are right, they obviously differ greatly from person to person. However, they are a very prevalent part of a person's subconscious….

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 04:50:45 +0000

don't you think that's a personal thing? i dont disagree with you, but i dont think sexual natured dreams are universal.

By: kevinjagernauth

kevinjagernauth — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 03:14:01 +0000

It's about dreams; we're merely noting that the sexual nature of dreams and fantasies aren't explored. It's a minor quibble that ultimately wouldn't have had much bearing on the plot, but an interesting omission (probably would've been too distracting anyway).

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 03:10:20 +0000

"there's a conspicuous lack of sexuality in the movie"

care to elaborate at all since you singleddess this out?

By: Cory

Cory — Wed, 14 Jul 2010 20:56:24 +0000

I loved it too, but you said it better than I could have.