Who's going to run out and see "Inception", "

aristide1 · Post by **aristide1** » Fri Jul 16, 2010 12:49 pm

You've probably have already seen trailers for Inception, a sort of intellectual property theft via dreams. The visuals are quite stunning.

Devil on the other hand is sort of picking up where "Phone Booth" left off. It's one thing to be trapped in an elevator with other people, it's something else when one of them happens to be the devil. Which one is it? Well I would say it's the banker, but I don't think the devil used such an obvious disguise this time. Still if one of them offers the others a really geat credit card deal then we'll know for sure.

m1st · Post by **m1st** » Fri Jul 16, 2010 1:32 pm

Got lost in that last paragraph, but I'm definitely seeing Inception tomorrow. Roger Ebert (with whom I usually agree) gave it a good review, so we'll see how it is. Does seem refreshingly original.

...but with 'original' and 'new' comes 'really hard to tell in a story', so I hope for the best.

croddie · Post by **croddie** » Fri Jul 16, 2010 1:57 pm

Not exactly original (drawing from Paprika and Matrix). Or deep. But clever, well executed and exiting.

aristide1 · Post by **aristide1** » Fri Jul 16, 2010 2:06 pm

There's a thread on IMDB, people went to see Inception, and it started with a trailer for Devil. From the mind of "Shamalamadingdong" or something like that. He's made many a dud in the past. The audience actually laughs when they see his name. He's that bad.

OK, back to Inception then.

spookmineer · Post by **spookmineer** » Fri Jul 16, 2010 6:17 pm

aristide1 wrote:From the mind of "Shamalamadingdong" or something like that. He's made many a dud in the past. The audience actually laughs when they see his name. He's that bad.

That's pretty degrading.

What duds did he make in the past? Certainly not Unbreakable or The sixth sense.

Ok, The happening wasn't very strong maybe, but it's not like he's Uwe Boll.

aristide1 · Post by **aristide1** » Fri Jul 16, 2010 7:15 pm

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0796117/

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0796117/board

Meanwhile look at these comments for Inception:

http://www.imdb.com/news/ni3342786/

aristide1 · Post by **aristide1** » Sat Jul 17, 2010 12:15 pm

Yikes, I walked into Inception 3-5 minutes late, the thing was essentially already at full throttle, I refused to believe that for another 30 minutes, then I had to agree it was the beginning.

I'm glad this was not 3D, the visuals are practically overwhelming so as it is, 3D would have been too much.

This movie may not be so bad for computer programmers, who are used to calling subroutines from subroutines from subroutines. The level of nesting doesn't appear to be overwhelming.

I have noted in some dreams I was not convinced I was awake, so I would try to focus clearly on something small, like newspaper print. It never happens, and I wake up at that point. Once I had a lucid dream, that was freaky, watching it like watching TV with your eyes closed. I've never had a sense that the time passage in a dream was all that long, certainly not days or weeks. But not just a couple of minutes either.

danimal · Post by **danimal** » Sun Jul 18, 2010 12:59 pm

aristide1 wrote:
Meanwhile look at these comments for Inception:

http://www.imdb.com/news/ni3342786/

9.4/10 20,248 votes

Top 250: #3

spookmineer · Post by **spookmineer** » Sun Jul 18, 2010 1:13 pm

aristide1 wrote:http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0796117/

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0796117/board

Meanwhile look at these comments for Inception:

http://www.imdb.com/news/ni3342786/

As a writer and director, the lowest score he gets is a 4.3, the highest is a 8.2.

Steven Spielberg, as a director, gets a lowest score of 3.2 and a highest score of 8.9.

F.F. Coppola: 3.1 and 9.2.

Looks like after a few more movies, he will reach the same lowest and highest scores as these 2 examples.

psyopper · Post by **psyopper** » Sun Jul 18, 2010 2:41 pm

The Last Airbender (2010) - generally panned by most viewers

The Happening (2008) - forgettable, I haven't even heard of it

Lady in the Water (2006) - forgettable, I haven't even heard of it. Wasn't this supposed to be some sort of Arthurian thing?

The Village (2004) - Great first half with an utterly predictable ending and underwhelming "twist"

Signs (2002) - Could have been good but umm really? Aliens that are destroyed by water try to invade a planet 70% water, plus another 20% in the atmosphere? Good first half though.

Unbreakable (2000) A pretty good "super hero" movie. The only decent super hero movie not based on a comic book from a main stream publisher.

Stuart Little (1999) Really M. Night? Next we need to get Chris Nolan to take on Curious George.

The Sixth Sense (1999) Generally accepted as a masterpiece film, and the film that gave Shyamalan "carte blanche" to do... Stuart Little.

Wide Awake
Praying with Anger

Other than Sixth Sense and Unbreakable, M Nights track record is pretty laughable. I have the feeling most people flocked to see him after he hit it out the park twice with the two I mentioned, only to be grossly let down by The Village which only served to make him a "1 hit wonder."

josephclemente · Post by **josephclemente** » Sun Jul 18, 2010 3:02 pm

Inception looks like another Matrix inspired movie according to the trailers. Maybe I'll see it since it scored well on Rotten Tomatoes.

I very clearly remember The Happening, only because it was so bad. I took my coworker to see it and I apologized. A few parts were so stupid they were laugh-out-loud funny, although they weren't meant to be. The trailers were advertising the movie as "his first R-Rated film!" like that was something special.

I saw The Village. Not as offensively stupid as The Happening but forgettable.

The Sixth Sense was pretty good. I saw it once.

I'd like to see Unbreakable. People say that one is good.

aristide1 · Post by **aristide1** » Sun Jul 18, 2010 7:21 pm

psyopper wrote: The Sixth Sense (1999) Generally accepted as a masterpiece film, and the film that gave Shyamalan "carte blanche" to do... Stuart Little.

Way to stretch your wings and your limits there big Shyamalan.

aristide1 · Post by **aristide1** » Tue Jul 20, 2010 3:20 pm

After second viewing:

Don't be late, no opening credits, movie starts at full throttle.
Don't go to the bathroom.
Background score is in the foreground, it's way too loud.
For me they mumbled because of it.
Marion Cotillard got the best role, or really, roles.
She should be nominated for best supporting actress.
She looks stunning in this movie, she's 35.

No spoilers, but if you want send a PM and decide what the last 3 seconds of the movie signify. It's easily dismissed or overlooked.

At 30K votes it was still 9.4,
at 40K it had gone to 9.3.

It's good, but .....

aristide1 · Post by **aristide1** » Thu Jul 22, 2010 11:22 am

This is really getting out of hand, the ads for this movie.

By definition special effects in Hollywood are stunning visual displays that are not real. Given this definition and the advertising for this movie the biggest special effect about Inception is now - the hype.

aristide1 · Post by **aristide1** » Thu Jul 22, 2010 8:52 pm

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/inception/

Somebody was waiting for this.

The question I have is how did Hans Zimmer take just 2 notes and turn them into this incredible music?

I need the CD much more than I will ever need the DVD.

psyopper · Post by **psyopper** » Fri Jul 23, 2010 11:42 pm

I just got back from watching this movie. I agree with all of the "criticism" of the movie - score was too loud, etc. I like to use The Matrix as a foundation movie to compare others against. Overall against it I would rate this movie as an 8/10.

I would purchase The Matrix on BD before I purchased this. I would definitely purchase Inception before I purchased PeeWee's Playhouse on BD. Caveat: I already own The Matrix, Memento, and The Prestige in DVD. I still think Memento was Nolan's best film so far.

johnniecache7 · Post by **johnniecache7** » Sat Jul 24, 2010 12:16 pm

croddie wrote:Not exactly original (drawing from Paprika and Matrix). Or deep. But clever, well executed and exiting.

That's what I said Nolan did the same with Dark Knight it's ripped for Frank Millers Comic.

aristide1 · Post by **aristide1** » Wed Jul 28, 2010 1:10 pm

MikeC,

I know we need to be PC and all that but I just had to laugh. I put the word devil in the title twice and it's been removed twice. Hey, it's just the name of a movie. Yes I realize it was probably an automated process. Well horse hockey!

The Last Airbender (2010) - generally panned by most viewers

I though it was OK, partially because I never read the book. It was however very predictable.

A

m1st · Post by **m1st** » Wed Jul 28, 2010 4:49 pm

**Personal opinion alert: What is to follow is my personal opinion. Abandon hope all ye who enter here. Also, somewhat of a spoiler...**

I think that it is unfair and kind of misleading to compare Inception to The Matrix or any 'anti-reality' movies. Yes, they are diving into a 'virtual world', but that's basically the only place that the comparison goes.

The Matrix can be seen as a struggle between humans and what we had wrought. It was a struggle between humans and something artificial yet seemingly alive. It was a struggle of classes: the natural versus the created living. It was a struggle of humanity vs cold, calculated precision. Yes, there were some nice philosophical curveballs thrown in (Plato's cave, anyone? Questions about free will, computational theory of the mind, qualia, choice, rights?), but at the end of the day the action boils down to humans trying to deal with what they created. And there were a lot of explosions.

Inception isn't that kind of movie. Yes, cool special effects and diving into a virtual world, but at the end of the day the main story was one of redemption for DiCaprio as he tries to get over his guilt, as he feels responsible for Mal's death. It's a story about his trying to see his children again. It's a story about self-doubt, loathing, second chances, and learning to move on. It is a very human story -- one that happens to have a fascinating way of telling that human story. Perhaps that is one of my criticisms with the movie (especially the last scene). People get so caught up in the small details (Does he see his children's faces? Does the totem drop? Why is he now wearing a wedding ring? Mal's not here! What does it mean?!?!) that they forget the actual action of the story. At the beginning, he is so consumed by doubt and guilt that it quasi-literally invades his mind. In the end, he is at peace.

And another question I could ask: suppose he is still in a dream world (which I won't argue since I have my own opinions on the matter). What does it change in the story arc that I described? The action is still resolved; He no longer feels guilt towards Mal's death. That is the action of the story and I wish that is what most people focused on, not how good it was because of how many different pieces of the story could support a dream argument or not.

aristide1 · Post by **aristide1** » Wed Jul 28, 2010 7:11 pm

humanity vs cold, calculated precision

Substitute corporations for machinery and you have the real life battle going on now.

I had a question about the last 3 seconds of the movie, but after considering both scenarios I had to eventually agree with another person's view of the ending.

I didn't care for the beginning, the "we're at full throttle" display, there are no opening credits, nor scenes that explain the story line. There are conversations where the storyline is explained, but both parties already know all these details, which means the conversation is only for the audience's benefit. That made it seem somewhat silly, and could have been dispensed with with a small narration in the beginning or like the beginning of Star Wars IV, which is the first movie.

One other thing - If you have seen any of the commercials there are several moments in the commercial that may seem like they are part of a larger scene, but in actuality they are the complete scene. So the commercial shows every aspect of the scene, however brief, leaving nothing to look forward to. You have to wonder if these little dabs of eye candy weren't created just so they could make a better commercial.

josephclemente · Post by **josephclemente** » Wed Jul 28, 2010 8:34 pm

I finally saw Inception. I found it to be entertaining, but that's about it. I guess that's all I can add to the discussion. The end.

psyopper · Post by **psyopper** » Thu Jul 29, 2010 7:13 am

m1st wrote: I think that it is unfair and kind of misleading to compare Inception to The Matrix or any 'anti-reality' movies. Yes, they are diving into a 'virtual world', but that's basically the only place that the comparison goes.

I don't use it for plot-to-plot comparatives. I use The Matrix for a comparison of production quality...

Editing
Special Effects
Screenplay
Pace
Music
"Audience Participation"

Each of those has a few sub sets. Other than the Special Effects which I would compare generally 1:1 with The Matrix, the rest of these I would compare at between 0.7 and 0.8:1 with it. In other words, if The Matrix and Inception went head to head at The Oscars, The Matrix would win hands down in most categories.

Sad that it's >10 years old, sadder that Hollywood really hasn't progressed much in 10 years.

spookmineer · Post by **spookmineer** » Thu Jul 29, 2010 2:07 pm

psyopper wrote:In other words, if The Matrix and Inception went head to head at The Oscars, The Matrix would win hands down in most categories.

Sad that it's >10 years old, sadder that Hollywood really hasn't progressed much in 10 years.

I don't know... When the matrix was released, people said "bullet time" filming would be in a lot of high budget action movies.

As far as I know, it hasn't. Some of the effects are a one-off deal, they are so recognisable and have such an impact that they stepped away from it, I guess.

Personally I like it that special effects aren't as in your face anymore. This way, they reinforce the story/experience. They blend in more with the rest of the movie, that's at least some progress.