Cannes Film Festival 2013

A continued revisit of Christopher Nolan's 'Inception': One Last Kick

Yes, it's true, we're going even deeper into Christopher Nolan's dream thriller

<p>Leonardo Di Caprio is lost within a dream within a dream within a dream in Christopher Nolan's brain-bending thriller 'Inception,' still sparking heated conversations among audiences</p>

Leonardo Di Caprio is lost within a dream within a dream within a dream in Christopher Nolan's brain-bending thriller 'Inception,' still sparking heated conversations among audiences

Credit: Warner/Legendary

Would you believe me if I said that the delay between part one of this article and part two was a way of demonstrating a story point about limbo in the context of how it's used in Christopher Nolan's "Inception"?

Would you pretend you believe me for the sake of our friendship?  How about if I promise to make this article better than the first one?

I will apologize for taking so long with this.  My vacation (the single longest stretch of time I've taken away from work in the past four years, according to my wife) was certainly responsible for some of the delay, but it was more than that.  It seems like it's been forever since the first review I wrote for the film.  Which I liked.

But, honestly, I don't think I did a very good job with the first half of this revisit article.  I was working too hard to impress, and I think I sort of cocked it up.  Summary is fine, and I really was trying to lay all the pieces on the chess board so we could talk about the moves Nolan makes in the film, but it's not analysis, and what a re-review should be on the rare opportunity that I write one is a chance to dig deeper into a film once spoilers don't matter anymore.  So instead of calling this part two of the earlier article, let's take a cue from Hollywood and call this a reboot instead.

INTO THE LABYRINTH

Over my vacation, my five-year-old son Toshi decided that he wants to know more about Greek mythology, fueled in large part by his new-found love of "Jason and the Argonauts" and "Clash Of The Titans."  He wanted to know more about Hercules and Medusa and Perseus and all the other characters appropriated by Harryhausen for his work.  One of the books we got from the library for our nightly story time was a retelling of "Theseus and the Minotaur."  That, of course, is the story of the young man who defeats the monster at the center of a maze with the help of the monster's sister.

Her name?  Ariadne.

Christopher Nolan is not what I would call a subtle filmmaker.  That's not an insult, either, just an observation.  He seems to be mostly concerned when building his films with the grand gesture, the trick structure, the big blinking neon metaphor.  The notion of having to defeat the memories and the guilt that come from losing a spouse is really what drives Dom Cobb (Leonardo Di Caprio) in the film, and that guilt made physical is the monster lurking at the center of his subconscious, ready to sabotage him and his team over and over again unless he defeats it.  One of the reasons his work connects to the mainstream despite the way he constantly manipulates conventional form is because he embraces the unsubtle.  It takes a lot to cut through all the noise and static of the media landscape these days, and an image like Paris folding in on itself or omnipresent pop culture characters like Batman and the Joker can cut right through all of that and get a viewer's attention.

"Inception" may well end up being the film that every conversation begins with when discussing Nolan in the future because so much of who he is as an artist is built into the DNA of the film.  Naming Ellen Page's character "Ariadne" is a perfect example of the way Nolan lays his intentions right out in plain view.  She is, after all, the one who is hired to lead Dom out of the maze of his own making where he's become lost, constantly reopening old wounds, punishing himself on an endless loop.  Nolan is as interested in the techniques of storytelling as he is in the stories that he tells, and in this case, the film can even be read as an attempt to express his feelings about the work he does.

Forget all the dream technology and the science-fiction elements of the story.  What is the act of inception as he defines it in the film?  It's simply the transmission of an idea in a way that makes the person it has been passed to feel like it is their own.  And what's the most effective real-world way to do that?  Art, of course, and one might argue that since movies are perhaps the most-shared art form on the planet, then movies are the most popular form of inception.

After all, Dom Cobb's team in the film may build these elaborate scenarios and traverse these amazing dreamscapes, but in the case of their supposed target Robert Fischer (Cillian Murphy), all of these amazing things are simply in service of one idea:  convincing Robert that his father loved him.  And they can't tell him that... they need him to reach that moment as an epiphany.  So often, the most elaborate and structurally complex films are in service of simple thematic ideas.  Those core ideas are the seeds that these films grow from, and it's amazing how powerful that drive to communicate these ideas can be.  Within the context of the film, Robert's eventual realization is symbolized by the contents of his father's private safe, and they have to make him work for it, or he won't believe it.  He won't feel it.  You can make the case that Fischer's realization is not the point, that it's a diversion from the real mission in the movie.

Want More...

Inception?
  • Inc-17745_thumbnail
    Check out everything there is including photos, reviews, videos.

If you pay close attention to Ariadne and Arthur and their relationship in the film, there's a lot of things left unsaid.  Everything she does in the film is designed to get Dom to explain himself to her and then to exploit the things she learned to help Dom.  She barely does anything involving Fischer at all.  She's always chipping away at Dom and Mal.  She's steering him out of the wilderness and towards home.  It was canny casting Page and Cotillard as Ariadne and Mal, Dom's wife.  In the moment the two women come face to face in a very important hotel room in Dom's subconscious, the physical disparity between them is almost shocking.  Mal looms over Ariadne like a beast, and when they meet later, Ariadne comes ready for a fight with Mal.  This is her target.  Dom can't fight Mal by himself, no matter how aware he is that she's only a shadow of the woman he loved, and that's precisely why she takes that form.  Her whole existence is to punish him, over and over and over forever.

Suicide isn't used in this film as a lark, or as a throwaway.  It is an expression of existential dread, profound and final and awful.  Finding someone you love who has killed themselves... or seeing it happen and being powerless to stop it... those are some of the most trying experiences anyone can have.  Talk about a test of your basic abilities to bear sorrow.  It is little wonder Dom, expert in lucid dreaming, retreated into the world that he knew he could control when the real world betrayed him.  When reality failed his wife, she died.  That much of Nolan's film, I believe.  That memory is the most painful place Dom has, the memory he can't bear, and when you discuss what in the film is "real," it's sort of a tricky thing.  There is a "real" narrative playing out in the film, but much of it takes place in an "unreal" world.  Mal is everything Dom fears wrapped up behind the face of his greatest failure, and his love for her, complicated by guilt and sorrow, paralyzes him when he has to act.  That's why Ariadne has to save him in that final confrontation in Limbo.

CHASING THE KICK

 I've gone out of my way to not read other people's theories on the film, because it's hard enough to articulate my own thoughts on this one in an organized manner.  Nolan's film is fractured from the start, told in accordance to the film's own description of dream narrative, so talking about it in A-B-C terms doesn't really work.  I have had many face-to-face conversations about the film, the most recent of which took place on a set visit this past weekend where everyone else was a sports or general news writer.  No movie guys like on typical visits.  We were talking about movies in general and this one in particular, and one of the guys said, "Can't you just watch a movie and enjoy it?"  And of course.  No one "has" to read a film beyond the surface level.  I think a film that intentionally punishes or confuses the audience is a failure, and "Inception" is built in a way that is meant to really reward the audience if they're just going for a ride.  The cross-cutting of that final major sequence is symphonic.  It's a pleasure to watch the movie unfold.  Nolan's built an elegant rollercoaster.  But a film that invites you to dig deeper, though... that's a best-case scenario.

Nolan built "Inception" around one major set-piece that dominates the film's running time.  The whole film is either setting it up, planning it, or executing it, and everything before the main event is exposition and preamble and warm-up, and everything after is just to wrap things up and bring the audience to a place of rest.  The movie's main event is the four-level ride into the dream world, the Inception, and it serves as a summary of everything that Nolan's done in his career so far.  He's been refining certain techniques and motifs and signatures from film to film, and it feels like it all comes into play when building this prolonged series of action scenes.

Just the intercutting of four totally different realities, each with a different relationship to time, each with a different narrative arc, each one built in the mind of a different character, each one building to a different kick... that's Nolan.  That's what he does.  This is, after all, the same director who has a sequence in "The Presige" where someone is reading a journal about a letter about a journal within a flashback at one point.  He loves to twist you up in time, and the nature of filmmaking itself is all about playing with time and perception for specific effect.  Here, Nolan sets up some very clear rules about the way time changes the deeper you push into the subconscious, and he sets up challenges that force the characters to keep pushing further in, unable to use the easy exits established earlier in the film.  By spending so much time on exposition and then almost immediately breaking the rules and craking up the complications, Nolan is able to carefully build the film to a sustained crescendo that really should win his editor, Lee "Dead End Drive-In" Smith an Oscar next year.

And even so, what I found most engrossing wasn't the visual thrill of the stuff with Arthur in the zero gravity hotel on the second level or the "On Her Majesty's Secret Service"-style snow combat of the third level.  That's fun, it's great to watch, but it's not what really mattered to me.  No, it was watching the other story, Ariadne chasing Dom chasing Mal chasing the way home.  That kept me riveted both times.  The film builds to the moment where the only logical choice is to drop into Limbo, the place that we were warned never to go.  That's when the three-level dream-within-within jumps to a suicide run, when it actually has stakes.  Up till then, I'm not scared for anyone in the movie.  Saito is shot, slowly bleeding out across dreams, but the worst case-scenario comes to pass for him, and Dom still manages to rescue him.  Which makes me think that Saito is not the client, but is instead part of the team.

Remember way back at the start of the film, when Dom is trying to sell Saito on letting him teach him how to protect his dreams?  Dom tells Saito how he'll need full access to his mind, to his secrets, to his information, in order to "protect him."  And Saito doesn't buy it.

Well, Saito is the rabbit that Dom chases down the hole to Limbo in the film, the "real" person he's trying to rescue.  And Ariadne is supposedly helping Dom do that... rescue Saito.  Only the way Dom has to save Saito is by first facing and defeating Mal.  It's all about him.  And in order to make the defeat stick... in order for the idea of forgiving himself and moving on and waking up seem like it's his idea... he needs to believe that Robert Fischer is healed.  He needs to see that hyper-theatrical moment between father and son, where Fischer opens the safe and finds the sled called Rosebud waiting there, and he needs to believe that he did his job.  Everything else that happens is incidental, an organic digression, and not a game being played, a con being run.  That's what Dom has to believe when he wakes up.  And then Saito makes his phone call.

"It worked.  He's back."

His passport works.  As it would always have worked.  Dom was never a fugitive of justice.  He was a fugitive of his own feelings of responsibility in Mal's death.  His recurrent dream of not being able to see his children's faces is symbolic of not being able to face them because of the shame he feels.  When he wakes up whole on that plane, shaken but finally strong enough to get off the plane, he's ready to pick his life back up, ready to be there for his children again, ready to step back into the world.

And sure enough... he finally is able to look them in the face, and take them in his arms.  And because I believe Nolan's a human being and not a heartless monster, I believe that Dom is home.  I believe that he is free.

And, yes, the top falls.

And, no, totems don't ultimately matter.  That's all shuffle.

Can't get enough of Motion/Captured? Don't miss a post with daily HitFix Blog Alerts. Sign up now.

Don't miss out. Add Motion/Captured to your iGoogle, My Yahoo or My MSN experience by clicking here.

Not part of the HitFix Nation yet? Take 90 seconds and sign up today.

Become a fan of HitFix on Facebook.

You can e-mail me at drew@hitfix.com or follow me on Twitter, where I'm DrewAtHitFix.

Comments

  • Option 1

    Comment instantly as a guest Guest
  • Option 2

    Connect
  • Option 3

    Login or create a HitFix account Login Signup
  • Default-avatar

    PJ

    Now thats more like. A terrific write up, which goes someway towards my own feelings on the movie.
    The only digression is that I think the Fischer job is real too. Ariadne working to fix Dom is part of a 2 for one deal. Dom is too good on the job to be taken while only on an inception against him, so it plays out incidentally to him as background to the case. I feel that this still allows Saito to be the client, but he also has a vested interest in fixing Dom, maybe for future work. The man may now own everything, but as a true capitalist he will always want more.
    Please note these are only “my” interpretations of it. I may well be wrong, and that’s the beauty of it.
    I cant wait to see it again, to probably blow my own current thoughts on the movie out of the water.
    The idea that he couldn’t return home purely down to his own guilt rings very true to me. It doesn’t mean there weren’t some agencies chasing him, as in his line of work some will want retribution, but it doesn’t mean they were the government wanting to lock him away.
    Im gonna stop rambling now until I get another chance to see it.

    August 19, 2010 at 6:16AM EST Reply to Comment


  • Nice work, Drew. It's one of the lovely characteristics of the film that I can agree with you about everything except the top falling and at the same time believe in the straight Fischer-Inception plot as well. The reason Nolan doesn't show us whether or not the top falls is because it doesn't really matter: any dream in which all of the people are sharing the dream would be indistinguishable from the kind of world we are actually living in right now; and I think that's a theme Nolan's presenting (incepting?) throughout.

    August 19, 2010 at 6:36AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    GKLondon

    Write a comment...

    August 19, 2010 at 6:39AM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      GKLondon Cheers Drew, saw it for a third time on Saturday with the wife, was relieved when she loved it, frustrated when she wanted to wait a few days to digest before dissecting. Thanks for the additional notions to chew on.

      August 19, 2010 at 6:43AM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Romoehlio

    2 small mistakes:
    - The first meting between Ariadne and Mal is not in the hotel room but in "Paris" (Mal stabs/kills Ariadne)
    - Cobb does not see Fisher go into the room, as he is not awake, he stays in Limbo

    Otherwise a fine written article but not your best. I do not know what I expected...but not your best :-)

    August 19, 2010 at 6:40AM EST Reply to Comment
    • All_purpose_icon_talkback_profile

      drew You are right about Ariadne and Mal. Forgot that. Obviously I need to see it again. The point stands about the way that hotel room scene is staged, though.

      And about Cobb and Fischer, I know Cobb's not in the room, but I don't "trust" Nolan to be showing me something that is literal at certain points here. I feel like the Fischer story is what Cobb needs to believe to forgive himself... that he is healing someone else, not himself. And I think there's an omniscence to the story we see unfold onscreen, a sense that it's all Dom's dream on the plane.

      August 19, 2010 at 6:46AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Chrissy I don't know - Cobb not seeing Fischer's epiphany is the biggest reason I have trouble believing the job is really about him. As you say, Nolan is not particularly subtle, and he goes to great lengths to provide the audience with the rules of dreamworld. The idea that you could be cognizant of something going on in a higher level while in Limbo seems to defeat the whole point of Limbo, which is to make you forget what is real and dissolve into the dream. It would not have been impossible to stage the scene so that Cobb sees at least some of Fischer's moment with his father, but Nolan didn't do that, despite laying out the rest of the movie in such an intricate manner.

      I think I prefer the idea that Fischer is a mark completely, and not a part of any plan to fix Cobb. The team could be working on Cobb simultaneously, but too much of the narrative is about Fischer and his father for all of that to be meaningless.

      August 19, 2010 at 10:53AM EST
  • Default-avatar

    GKLondon

    And this is my first time commenting here, so if I seem a little all over the place, like replying to my own empty comment for instance, apologies, I got it now.

    August 19, 2010 at 6:44AM EST Reply to Comment
    • All_purpose_icon_talkback_profile

      drew No worries.

      August 19, 2010 at 6:47AM EST
  • Default-avatar

    GKLondon

    Had an interesting notion watching it again: Dom uses his guilt and it's embodiment in Mal as his diving rod when navigating the subconscious of his target. This is why he is so good at his job, he is able to exact more control over his subconscious as it is completely overrun by his guilt. He uses this inescapable guilt to help him find whatever he is after. Mal is always at the centre of things, whether it be the beginning where she latches onto Saito immediately, or most explicitly at the end when Fischer is found with her in Limbo.

    August 19, 2010 at 6:55AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    GKLondon

    One of my favourite elements of the film is it's mutability: one's reaction to the film seems, in general from the many, many reviews I've read, to be inextricably linked to one's own concerns and view of the world.

    I disagree with a few of the thoughts or details above, but cannot discredit them, as the film is designed to produce a multitude of reactions. The spinning top at the end is as blunt a declaration of this as anything in the film.

    That the film is based around the central notion that artificial emotional experiences can be as profound as 'real' emotional experiences feeds directly into this idea of adaptability. The film itself is guiding the viewer to construct their own epiphany. For me, it has it's cake and eats it, as I was stimulated and moved by the film each time, while also able to read the film as a dissection of this desire to be moved, to be willingly manipulated and genuinely affected by "unreal" events.

    August 19, 2010 at 7:22AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Bucky Bantam

    I have a grip, or an interpretation of the film that works for me. But there's one element that bothers me that maybe other readers can clear up so that all the dots join up for me.

    It's established early in the film that the "kick" is done to the sleeper to pull them out of the level below (Dom in the bath pulls him out of Saito's mansion, the examples of Arthur's chair being tipped to pull him out of his dream in the exposition bits). So why does Eamms go about setting charges on the ice dream? And it can't be to pull Dom and Ariadne out of limbo, because the plan to set explosives is mentioned before Dom decides to go down that further level.

    August 19, 2010 at 8:54AM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      Temmink I might be wrong, it's been a while since I have seen it but I thought that Eamms was just trying to buy them time and cause havoc. That's my recollection but as I said, I'm not really clear.

      August 19, 2010 at 9:28AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Loren I think you're one level off, Bucky. Ariadne and Fischer fall off a building to kick up from Limbo to Level 3; Eames sets the charges to kick them all (except Arthur & Yusuf) from Level 3 to Level 2; Arthur blows the elevator into the end of the shaft to kick them all (except Yusuf) from Level 2 to Level 1; and Yusuf backs the van off the bridge to kick them all from Level 1 back up to 'reality.'

      August 19, 2010 at 11:19AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Bucky Bantam Loren, that lie of logic doesn't work for two reasons. It contradicts the rule set earlier (Dom tipped in bath to kick him out of Saito's mansion) and by your logic the van drop should kick them to the plane. It doesn't - they have to escape the sinking van and swim to shore. Therefore, as per the previous rule established, the van is to kick them out of the hotel, the elevator drop is to kick them out of the arctic, and the explosive charges are for... what? The plan was to set them for a "kick" before Dom and Ariadne decided to head into limbo. You see the disconnect?

      August 19, 2010 at 11:28AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Bucky Bantam Apologies, I meant "line of logic".

      August 19, 2010 at 11:31AM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Kelsey I think the reason why they blow up the ice fortress has to do with the sedative they took. Since the sedative is so strong a simple kick won't wake them up so they have to die and be kicked at the same time.
      What I don't understand is what the rest of the team does after the van hits the water. I thought that dream was suppose to last for a week. So how do they outrun Fisher's armed subconscious for another six days?

      August 19, 2010 at 12:13PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Bucky Bantam Kelsey - Yes, before they dive into the deeper levels, it is explicitly stated that "they'll never last a week" in the "van level", and that the only way forward is to go deeper. There's much shouting and frowning as everyone acknowledges that staying in this level is extremely dangerous. However, no one seems to mind when the job is done. They just sit on the shore looking smug. There's still an awful lot of time to eat up between swimming out the sinking van and waking naturally in the plane when the sedative wears off i. And that time is never accounted for.

      This all sounds narky and nit-picky, but let me be clear i LOVED this film. I just really want the logic to work flawlessly for me to truly embrace it

      August 19, 2010 at 12:59PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Loren Hmmm . . . and here I thought I had it down. I can't really argue your points, Bucky, without seeing it yet again. I'm absolutely positive Nolan's not cheating, so either you or I just aren't getting it. (Or we both are, or we both aren't.) Love that about this film . . .

      August 19, 2010 at 1:00PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Bucky Bantam The idea that the sedative is so strong that they need to be kicked in both a sleeping state, and the level they need to kick out of works as a post-rationalisation. But I was listening out for it on my second viewing, and can't recall it being explicitly stated. Having said that, it makes me feel better to think about it that way.

      Kelsey's point about hanging around the "van level" for a week after the job is done opens up a whole new can of worms though...

      August 19, 2010 at 1:08PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      John Becky, I had the same issue. While I loved the movie (best I've seen in years), that little inconsistency about whether the "kicks" were pulling you from the level below, or "kicking" you to the level above, bothered me.

      I like the explanations given in responses to you, but another way I've started looking at it is this: both types of kicks work. Obviously, if your asleep and someone pushes you over, you'll wake up. But if YOU fall WITHIN the dream, you usually wake up as well. So I'm thinking either type of kick will work, but it's much easier to have control of the kicks in the real world, b/c they are being controled by someone who is conscious. The dreamer might not even realize he's dreaming, so he wouldn't remember to give himself the kick. That's why they usually set up the kicks one level up. But b/c they were going to be so deep (in the 3rd level) and b/c of the heavy sedative, they used both kicks (one in the 3rd level kicking them up and another in the second level pulling them up). I obviosly could be wrong but it helps it make logical sense to me.

      My current opinion (which will likely change each time I watch it) is that we never saw the kicks from Level 1 to reality. The last time we saw Ariade, Arthur, etc was on the side of the river. Everything after that (including when we saw them wake up on the plane and Saito makes the phone call) was Dom's subconscious still in Limbo. But I'm still certainly open to the belief that it all DID happen and the top fell (which is what I believed after the first viewing). The only theory I still can't get behind is that the whole movie wasn't real. I think the only debate should be whether Dom ever woke up from the mission at the end.

      August 29, 2010 at 12:44PM EST
    • Default-avatar

      Rad9RK I'd just like to tell everyone that there is no kick to take them from the bridge to reality. The timer on the dreaming device (the suitcase with the sedative) goes off, and they wake up. I believe that the way of identifying reality is Cobb's wedding ring, and that Cobb and his team did pull off the job. There's only two things I don't understand, or rather, that I'm doubtful about-
      Saito using the same phrase as Mal, 'take a leap of faith', but that just may be directorial tool used by Nolan.
      The absence of the device when Saito and Cobb wake up in the plane. They may have slept it off in any one of the levels (I think its got to be either Limbo or the rainy bridge in L.A.), AFTER the device had been unhooked. Now, this, along with Yusuf and Arthur's comments about Limbo may imply that limbo is a shared dream state, as many have said, and that they (Cobb and Saito) could remain in it, perhaps, 'wirelessly'. :)
      Oh, and if you're wondering why the kids haven't aged, I'd like to tell you that there were twoo pairs of kids cast for the roles, one older than the other, and that, if you look closely, their clothes ARE different.
      And in the end, I'd like to offer a slight something of my own about the kicks. I believe a kick, say, a dip in a bathtub, would flood the level immediately below with water, which would kill the person being kicked. A drop from a chair is something I find hard to explain, seeing as how the gravity being messed up in the hotel didn't wake them up, but that may be because of the sedative's strength.
      All in all, I'm satisfied because I know what matters, that Cobb did get back to reality, and that Nolan is really good enough to structure it all in a way so neat, that he performs inception on us, he plants a seed of doubt in our minds about the reality of his film. I wish Nolan lives forever, or at least passes his genius to his kid, maybe.

      August 31, 2010 at 5:59PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    durban73

    Drew, are you saying that Dom was in the "real world" (ie: awake) when he saw his kids and when they were on the trans pacific flight? In my mind the entire movie is a dream. Therefore we don't really know anything about Dom or Mal, or even if there is a Mal. All Nolan tells us is that Dom is most alive in his dream world, but he needs to overcome his demons to feel whole. This movie is a wonderful metaphor for how Nolan feels about his own life and his work. He is happiest when he is making movies and creating stories but it is also a difficult process for him and there is always some "thing" he needs to overcome in order to fulfill his dream and see the movie to completion. Like your reboot, but Devin's review at Chud was spot on.

    August 19, 2010 at 10:15AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Annie8bit_talkback_profile

    Stormshadow4life

    thanks for finally getting this up! I'll be reading in a sec

    August 19, 2010 at 10:24AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    kabak

    much better drew. glad u realized how boring a straight recap n summary are

    August 19, 2010 at 10:26AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Not Andre

    If anyone is interested in another write-up of Inception as Nolan's thesis on filmmaking, Devin at Chud wrote a great piece:

    http://chud.com/articles/articles/24477/1/NEVER-WAKE-UP-THE-MEANING-AND-SECRET-OF-INCEPTION/Page1.html

    August 19, 2010 at 11:12AM EST Reply to Comment


  • Drew, you should send these articles to your old boss. I don't think he understood the film...

    August 19, 2010 at 11:20AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Annie8bit_talkback_profile

    Stormshadow4life

    OK, Finally had a chance to read it....I think you hit the nail on the head Drew. A perfect write up that makes absolute sense! great read!

    August 19, 2010 at 11:54AM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    waughca

    Great article Drew... You need to do another podcast and have a discussion about this with one of your guests. I'd like to hear an actual back and forth between you and another individual. I'm also glad that you took up the largely ignored opinion of Nolan not being a heartless monster. It's encouraging that you see him that way, even though the evidence might unfortunately point to the other end of the spectrum in my eye.

    August 19, 2010 at 1:00PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Pradeep

    OMG Drew, Its really wonderful.. Hats off to you.. You made me read the whole review :) Awesome movie and an awesome last kick by you.. Looking forward to your next writing works..

    August 19, 2010 at 1:20PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Liz

    "He needs to see that hyper-theatrical moment between father and son, where Fischer opens the safe and finds the sled called Rosebud waiting there, and he needs to believe that he did his job."
    Question to anyone reading this because I have only seen the movie once: does Dom actually "see" this moment? I thought he was not awake to witness it.
    Aside from that, I'm so happy to finally read this "reboot" :-)

    August 19, 2010 at 2:16PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      Liz Nevermind, I saw someone answered this after I had posted

      August 19, 2010 at 2:21PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    Cory G.

    Saito = Redemption. Nothing more. After Dom's initial failure to properly 'save' Mal he's able to rectify his past mistake by successfully 'saving' Saito.

    At least that's how I saw it all paying off.

    Excellent article Drew!

    August 19, 2010 at 2:24PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    JDR22

    It was said before, but I'll repeat it: this is more like it. Great write-up. Very insightful and relevant.

    I also like to think that Cobb goes home, and that the top falls; it's the only satisfying conclusion.

    Many people say that Inception lacks emotion, but I don't get that at all. It was very emotional, and not only did I care, but I was overwhelmed by how well everything came together.

    A great film that will live on long after the hate bandwagon rides off into obscurity.

    August 19, 2010 at 2:45PM EST Reply to Comment


  • I still have to watch the movie again, which I know I will do, but, if I am to trust my memory, I could almost swear that the impression I got when Dom wakes up in the plane is that Nolan plays then and there with our expectations and what we've been lead to believe throught the movie, so we assume that those around him are his comrades and his employer/client, the same team we've been watching at work for the past two hours, but... there is really no definite sign that they do know each other, or that they acknowledge some shared dream experience. Somehow, I would say they really are just some anonymous passengers with no actual relation to Dom, and he simply put their faces to his dream's characters because they were the last ones he saw before falling asleep.
    So there were really never a "team" to begin with, just mental constructions within Dom's dream arc.
    The whole movie up to that point (and maybe beyond that) has been a dream of dreams within dreams, with Dom's fighting his own inner demons all by himself, or maybe with the help of some Inception scheme implemented by Michael Caine's character.
    Just (part of my very confused) two cents.

    August 19, 2010 at 3:08PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    RonMexico801

    I don't know about this. It's good in theory but the more I think about it the more I don't buy into this theory.

    I don't think Saito was in on the job. I don't think Ariadne was hired to help defeat Mal. I think her character was named Ariadne for the very reason Drew stated (the Greek Myth allegory) but I think her character was written so that in the story she helped Dom slay his minotaur, not that she was hired in the movie universe to do so.

    If everything Drew said was right, then why did Dom have to flee the country in the first place? Was it a now or never job opportunity he was given? Maybe he screwed up the one job that pissed off the company that was hunting him and he had to go into hiding? why show Fischer and his father and the board if none of that was real? Too many questions, sorry for the brief comment. Back to work I go.

    August 19, 2010 at 3:09PM EST Reply to Comment
    • Default-avatar

      whiterok I agree that this theory doesn't hold up completely. I think Ariadne was referred by Dom's father-in-law to help him unravel his demons, But the rest was at it was presented, a job to incept Fischer. No need to add too much complexity to an already layered, and very carefully explained universe.

      August 19, 2010 at 7:58PM EST
  • Default-avatar

    junior

    "His recurrent dream of not being able to see his children's faces is symbolic of not being able to face them because of the shame he feels." Finally, someone else gets it. Thanks Drew.

    August 19, 2010 at 11:42PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Dave

    Write a comment...

    August 24, 2010 at 1:42PM EST Reply to Comment
  • Default-avatar

    Dave

    Hey Drew! I don't buy that totems are 'just shuffle.' Buddy didn't make it out of the dream. Period. The last shot of the bloody movie is that top. That can't be an accident. He's still living in a state of unreality. I think. Maybe.

    August 24, 2010 at 1:44PM EST Reply to Comment


  • Thank you for that most insightful piece!

    Personally, I'm convinced that there are - at most! - 3 real shots in the movie (plus, possibly, the pan at the end), which would be the first two wave shots and the one on Dom's face. The next cut-away brings us to 'within' Dom's mind.

    What happened before those 3 shots? I'm not too sure but should think that there was indeed some sort of accident. Perhaps Dom drowned. There are plenty of water/drowning references within the 'plot' that follows.

    Does it matter if the top falls in the end? Dom embraces his children - who look the same as he (and we) saw them throughout the movie. They have not aged. They wear the same cloths. They cannot be 'real'. Yet they are certainly what his pain and what his journey are about.

    If all of this plays out within Dom's mind, as I am quite sure it does, than none of the characters we meet along the way are 'other' characters, they must all be reflections of Dom himself. Including Mal (who, as you say, and I totally agree, holds him back; is his 'dark' side). And including the children, who might just be him.

    Fleischer is Dom's vehicle, helping him to get to where he needs to go, which, I guess, is himself - to be at peace. And Richard's journey is all about childhood.

    Some say, we build our own view and interpretations of things (incl. of ourselves) so that we can manage with life. We bend reality so that we can deal with it, in a way ... we escape from it, however little. Like we do when we're going to watch a movie.

    Dom, as I see (...) it, has build such a movie in his own mind, set up rules, to find a way from A to B - to fulfil a need.

    The references to Bond and Indiana Jones and whatnot (and I love your's to Rosebud!), may very well be references to how we include what we see in movies into the make-up of our own dream worlds.

    Well. Maybe we will never know exactly what it was that Nolan wanted to tell us here. One thing is for sure: he managed to get into the heads of very many of his audience with it. Which I find more brilliant than I have words for.

    August 25, 2010 at 2:22PM EST Reply to Comment

Get Instant Alerts on Motion/Captured

Latest Posts
More Posts
Recent Activity on Facebook
Most Popular on Facebook
Top Stories From Around the Web