Inception

[scarlett210]

Loved it. Going to see it again to catch the details I missed the first time. I actually bought the soundtrack, which I rarely do with instrumentals. However, in this case, the music was so beautiful and haunting, I had to make an exception.

It made $60 million this weekend, which just goes to show, if you make quality movies, people will go see them!

[regencydrama]

Off-topic - If you guys like Hardy, you should check him out in Wuthering Heights. He does batshit crazy pretty damned well. Plus, his chemistry with Charlotte Riley is hot. I'm totally not surprised they hooked up in real life.

[huntergrayson]

Jul 18, 2010 19:43:56 GMT -4 @littleediebeale said:

Plus, I kept getting distracted by how linear all their dreams were. Why was it just buildings and cities folding in on themselves and things exploding--where were the the random appearances of celebrities they've never met, flying cars, and unicorns? They're dreams, people...live it up.

Seriously[/I]. There wasn't much "dreaminess" about the dream-states at all, for the most part. Salon's reviewer put it perfectly - "Christopher Nolan's dreams are apparently directed by Michael Bay."

I was underwhelmed, for sure. It would have greatly benefitted from being shorter and less-expositiony -- or at least, get a huge chunk of the "rules"/exposition spat out early on so that characters wouldn't have to stop dead-center in their tracks in order to tell the audience Ellen Page what was happening.

Also, I'm either going deaf at 29 or coupling a heavily-bombastic score with a heavily-accented cast was a bad idea, because I seriously was straining to properly hear/understand a good third of Watanabe and Cotillaird's lines.

[sjankis630]

Also, I'm either going deaf at 29 or coupling a heavily-bombastic score with a heavily-accented cast was a bad idea, because I seriously was straining to properly hear/understand a good third of Watanabe and Cotillaird's lines.

it was the same in my theater. They should have used subtitles in some scenes. I thought it was because of the mixing locally but it sounds like it happened where you were too.

[robneville]

Jul 19, 2010 4:20:58 GMT -4 @huntergrayson said:

Jul 18, 2010 19:43:56 GMT -4 @littleediebeale said:

Plus, I kept getting distracted by how linear all their dreams were. Why was it just buildings and cities folding in on themselves and things exploding--where were the the random appearances of celebrities they've never met, flying cars, and unicorns? They're dreams, people...live it up.

Seriously

[/I]. There wasn't much "dreaminess" about the dream-states at all, for the most part. Salon's reviewer put it perfectly - "Christopher Nolan's dreams are apparently directed by Michael Bay."

I was underwhelmed, for sure. It would have greatly benefitted from being shorter and less-expositiony -- or at least, get a huge chunk of the "rules"/exposition spat out early on so that characters wouldn't have to stop dead-center in their tracks in order to tell the audience Ellen Page what was happening.


[/quote]

For a movie ( besides Dreamscape ) about someone who enters peoples' dreams ( ones that are really dream like ) check out the anime PAPRIKA, it's awesome.

I haven't seen Inception yet but the last trailer showed a scene with reality breaking like glass in front of Page and that is right out of PAPRIKA. And from what I've read in the reviews it seems Nolan really doesn't exploit the possibility of dreams very much, something PAPRIKA does in spades.

[Baby Fish Mouth]

Maybe my expectations were too high, but I was "meh" on it too.

It was a very creative and risk-taking film, but it didn't always work. There was a ton of information to process. And it was really difficult to tell what was going on during some of the action sequences. None of it really resonated with me emotionally.

I will definitely see it again on DVD - perhaps I'll like it better the second time.

[addison]

Saw this last night with the bf and we both loved it. It was slow going in the beginning for me - I agree, lots of exposition - but then picked up speed incredibly for the last half. it was just a thrill ride and I love having a movie to talk about and analyze and think about. the cast was great - EP didn't bug me like usual. I'm glad I saw it on the big screen, some of the shots were pretty incredible. I'll definitely be getting the DVD.

[Malle Babbe]

Jul 19, 2010 4:20:58 GMT -4 @huntergrayson said:

Also, I'm either going deaf at 29 or coupling a heavily-bombastic score with a heavily-accented cast was a bad idea, because I seriously was straining to properly hear/understand a good third of Watanabe and Cotillaird's lines.

I'm pushing 35, and I also had problems catching what Watanabe was saying. Was the boom mike guy nodding off?

Still, I wonder if the fact that the dreaming that was going on was lucid dreaming is what made thing more "plotty". Still, given that my dreams have moments where I can hover around, and spaces get weird made the dream sequences believable.

[bklynred]

I had problems with Watanabe's dialogue too. I never had before which either means he was forcing his accent or the mixing was off.

ETA: Even after reading every spoiler and theory out there, I want to see it again. The production notes on the official site talk about Nolan's view of creating the dreamscape (which I've seen defined as different than a dreamworld). I think he took an ambitious risk and nailed it, though I understand the thoughts about exposition. cinemablend[/color] talks out the plot in a lot of detail.

[GoldenFleece]

I don't mind that the dreams weren't "dreamy" in a typical movie way, because my own dreams never really look like that, with the colorful fields and picturesque landscapes or mythical creatures. I'm pretty much always in a world that looks more or less the one I've inhabited when awake.

I like the theories that Inception is really about Christopher Nolan examining his own process as a filmmaker. Here's one editorial about it, but the tl;dr version: dreams = movies, where nothing is "real" but that's beside the point, Cobb = director, Arthur = producer, Ariadne = screenwriter, Eames = actor, Yusuf = effects/tech director, Saito = money guy who wants in on the creative side, Fischer = audience, Mal = the director's inner impulse to bring his/her own issues into a film.