Thinky thoughts about Inception

[fishpatrol]

So I went to go see Inception today and it was fantastic and shiny and pretty, but...

The entire premise (i.e. the mission) revolves around planting an idea in Fischer's mind, even if the lives of the team members are risked. Is such a high-risk mission necessary to bring down Fischer's company? Are there no other means to prevent Fischer's company from taking over? I found that part of the plot particularly weak and was a bit of a logic!fail.

The other issue I had was the characters' motives. Okay, Saito and Cobb, I get. Yusuf was being paid quite a lot -- presumably that was Eames's incentive as well. And Arthur? Idk, maybe he enjoys working with Cobb? Maybe he's also getting paid a lot for this job? But Ariadne? Especially in Dream Level #3, where she was adamant about going after Fischer in limbo, despite the others' protests (even Cobb hesitated!) -- what was that all about? What is she getting out of the deal?

Despite the logic!fail of the main plotline and the characterization fails (and as an aside: why is it that the character who makes the stoic and mysterious male protagonist get in touch with his ~*emotions*~ always female? The only female character in this movie --not counting Mal because she was technically not real-- and her main purpose was not her designing skills, but rather, her persistence at convincing Cobb to ~*examine his feelings*~)...uh, so despite all that, I really did enjoy the movie. :D;; I loved the idea of having layers of dreams and needing a "kick" to get out of each layer (I lovelove the fact that there needs to be this "designated driver" in each level to wake the others). The music was awesome, as expected -- Hans Zimmer never fails to deliver!

Lastly: did the top topple or not, at the end? I know it was supposed to be ambiguous, but my friend argued that it definitely toppled since it clearly wobbled at the end (he also insisted that there should've been a slo-mo sequence at the end that depicted Ariadne and Arthur testing their respective totems). I think it was still part of a dream, though -- the resolution was far too easy! The children were too young! And they had the same clothes on! Idk, it was all kind of trippy! \o\

I've been avoiding spoiler posts for the most part, so tell me what you guys think? (or point me to your reaction posts?)

And next week, I think I shall go see Salt. :>

Comments

[short-hemline.livejournal.com]

and as an aside: why is it that the character who makes the stoic and mysterious male protagonist get in touch with his ~*emotions*~ always female? The only female character in this movie --not counting Mal because she was technically not real-- and her main purpose was not her designing skills, but rather, her persistence at convincing Cobb to ~*examine his feelings*~

Yeah, this made me kind of sad, but I appreciated other things about Ariadne's character, such as the fact that she was played by Ellen Page ;) But, um, yeah...I agree, that was weird. Also, I don't know if you've seen Memento, so spoilers ahead, but I noticed that both movies are about a man haunted by the memory of his wife and driven insane with guilt thinking that he caused her death. It's like Mal and the guy's wife in Memento (and Ariadne) are not so much characters as they are motivators for the real characters. But whatevs, I still liked the movie a lot, too!

Also, am I the only person who left that movie shipping Arthur/Ariadne instead of Arthur/Eames or Arthur/Cobb? I usually have no interest whatsoever in het pairings, but now I ship Arthur/Ariadne like burning and there's no fic :( It's tragedy.

[fishpatrol]

are not so much characters as they are motivators for the real characters

This is a good description of what Ariadne's character seemed to have become in the end. When we're first introduced to Ariadne, she was this creative individual who felt stifled by the limitations of the real world (which was completely awesome) -- but by the end, she stopped being her own character and became, as you said, a motivator for Cobb (which is not so awesome D:).

I've never seen any of Ellen Page's movies before and didn't recognize her -- for a while, I thought she was one of the girls from the Narnia movie. XD;;; I'm not too interested in watching Juno, but I think I'll give Whip It a shot. :D

I knew before going to the movie that a lot of people were shipping Arthur/Eames (and I can totally see where they're coming from), but I started off by slightly shipping Arthur/Cobb, and by the end, I wasn't really shipping anyone (to my surprise! XD).

[short-hemline.livejournal.com]

Yeah, Ariadne seemed like a really cool character, but then the story kind of lost her thread. Sigh. I'm tempted to watch or rewatch all of Christopher Nolan's films now and see if it has the same problems as Inception and Memento, but that might make me depressed because I'm a big fan of his.

And I just saw Whip It last night! It was pretty good. The story was just okay, but it was a lot of fun overall. It made me want to join a roller derby team :D

And maybe your lack of interest in any pairing has something to do with the fact that the movie was an ensemble piece? I mean, Ariadne didn't seem to be the only character who wasn't completely fleshed out...you could probably say the same of the rest of the characters, excluding Cobb. Maybe the lack of complex characterizations makes them less interesting outside of the action of the story?

[fishpatrol]

I don't watch a lot of movies, so the only Christopher Nolan movie I've seen is Dark Knight (which I really didn't enjoy at all, but shhh, this is apparently a Very Unpopular Opinion ;)).

Oh, awesome. :D It looks like a fun and mostly mindless (but not too mindless) movie.

Maybe the lack of complex characterizations makes them less interesting outside of the action of the story?

Oh, yes, definitely. I require more backstory and interaction before I can be convinced to ship a set of characters, and I find that movies often aren't able to sufficiently flesh out characters (especially if the movie is more plot-driven than character-focused) due to time constraints. Which is probably one of the main reasons why I don't watch movies frequently -- there just isn't enough to make me feel invested in the characters (or pairings, if any). :( Again, this is probably an Unpopular Opinion and places me in the minority of fans. ;) [/rambling] But I can totally see why you ship Arthur/Ariadne! The potential was definitely there (the kiss, the conversation on the river-bank at the end).

[kazie-oh.livejournal.com]

I also LOVED Inception but yeah, there were a few logic!fails. I really want to watch it again so I can look for certain things from the beginning.

The whole Ariadne thing was a bit off, yeah. If she's so amazing as an architect then why don't we get to see more of it? What is she really doing - babysitting Cobb? Just out of the goodness of her heart? I guess that they don't want to be killed and sent to limbo.

Limbo, on the other hand, is what I have most problems with. It's supposed to be this horrible place where you can lose your mind, right? Then why is it just pretty benign? I would have thought it was a place where gravity and all those things don't quite work the same way - you know, actual limbo. Is it just another level below the third level? So it's the fourth level of dreams? How could they follow Fisher into it? Aaahh I have questions!

I absolutely loved the gravity-free fight scene, though. How incredibly well done.

/rant :P

[fishpatrol]

If she's so amazing as an architect then why don't we get to see more of it? What is she really doing - babysitting Cobb? Just out of the goodness of her heart?

I know, right? D: Why couldn't she have her own motives like the other characters? (even if it was just for money! I can accept that!) She was a really cool character when she was first introduced, but by the end, she lost practically all of the interesting characteristics she began with (her ability to create amazing structures, her fascination with the dream world, and so on).

You make a good point about limbo! It did seem more like a fourth level of dreams than a mess of a place that one can easily lose one's mind in. The plot kind of lost me by the time they reached the third level. XD;;

Yeah, the gravity-free fight scenes were fantastic. :> (Joseph Gordon-Levitt was so bendy, hee.)
It was a very visually appealing movie!

[spring.livejournal.com]

i saw it twice. this (http://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2010/07/the_ultimate_explanation_of_in.html) made me realize that if it toppled or not, it doesn't matter. good stuff. :)

[fishpatrol]

Oh man, that was an interesting read (thanks for the link!). I'm not quite sure what to think anymore! :> I love stories that screw with your interpretation of what is real vs. imaginary.

[akintay.livejournal.com]

I'm pretty good at disregarding possible plot holes and not even thinking about what might not work if a movie is really good. And Inception was amazing, so I just accepted things how they were in the movie.

And I kinda like not knowing if the whole thing ended up being reality or not :-)

[fishpatrol]

I usually overlook plot holes as well -- especially with movies since there is always the issue of time constraint with this form of story-telling medium. But I guess I went into this movie prepared to turn on my thinky-thoughts. :> (Unfortunately, it did decrease my enjoyment slightly because at the back of my mind, I was all, "Logic!fail~~~ \o\") Overall though, I did quite like it -- I really enjoy stories that play with the idea of reality vs. imaginary. :D

[canyon_deye.livejournal.com]

I didn't even think about those things, lol. Maybe I'm too easy :D

IA with you though, I think it was still a dream in the end. Or I guess I just like to see it that way ;)

[fishpatrol]

I'm usually all *turn off brain* for movies and TV shows (it's too distracting otherwise!), but I read a couple of spoiler-free reviews before seeing Inception and was thus prepared to turn on my thinky-thoughts just this once. ;)

The ending seemed too easy to be real (and I'm glad that it wasn't resolved, one way or the other), but maybe the point is that it doesn't matter as long as Cobb perceives it as real.

[wrangler.livejournal.com]

My reaction post (http://wrangler.livejournal.com/703851.html).

Thank you for criticising the film! Haha. I'm seeing a lot of squee but for me the meta is more interesting.

I quite like Ariadne being the only one to question Cobb. Like you, it kind of bothered me that it had to be about emotions because, y'know, she's female - but I do think it balanced itself out in that her confrontation of him and his authority was bold and ultimately correct.

[fishpatrol]

The issues I mentioned above distracted me throughout the movie to prevent me from full-out squee. ;)

I do like Ariadne questioning Cobb and not fully trusting his judgment as well -- but I also wish that she didn't become such a flat character at the end, serving only as a motivator (or perhaps a voice of reason) for Cobb. She seemed to lack her own motivations, unlike the other (male) characters.

Thanks for linking to your reaction post! You raised a lot of interesting points that I hadn't even considered! I loved the concept of the story, the play between reality versus dreaming -- but what didn't quite work for me was the assumption that the seed of idea can be planted and will grow in a specified way (i.e. giving Fischer the idea that he should not be like his father and having this idea definitely grow into "Fischer will break down the empire") -- that is simplifying the human mind way too much for my taste. XD I definitely agree with you re: lack of cohesion. Inception tried to incorporate more concepts and storylines than it could possibly handle. The Matrix followed the basic plot of "hero saving the world", but Inception lacked this basic plot. Was it a story about a man overcoming his guilt? Or a man trying to save the world from an evil company? And oh man, the whole "we must plant an idea in Fischer's mind OR ELSE" thing didn't make sense at all, considering the risks that were involved. I completely agree with everything you said about Saito's story. \o\

/rambling ^^;;;

[lemniciate.livejournal.com]

YES. Ariadne's lack of personal journey/purpose annoyed me. I wish for lots and lots of fandom exploration of how she is brilliant and real, and like, a college student. \o/

[fishpatrol]

I suppose, to be completely fair, no one else had a personal journey either (other than Cobb, of course -- and maaaybe Fischer) -- but Ariadne didn't even have a plausible motive. :(:( Hopefully the fandom will fill in all the plot holes! ;)

[scintilla10.livejournal.com]

I just saw this movie! (and also kind of feel like I was the last person on the internet to see it /o\). I agree with a lot of your criticisms of it; there were a lot of things I really loved about it, but too much of it felt, idk, kind of shallow? Like you, I felt like some of the character motivations were missing or incomprehensible (Ariadne especially), and I also felt like character interactions and relationships were only shakily developed. (For instance, I'm not sure why Arthur/Eames is the big slash pairing to come out of this movie? I mean, I kind of see it, but barely. D:)

The world building seemed weak too; I wanted to know more about where this technology/ideas had developed, how these people fell into this line of work, how they know each other, etc.

I think the ending was supposed to be purposely ambiguous. Which is kind of frustrating, because the whole sequence was so ridiculously too good to be true, with the inspiring music and the kids in the same clothes and in the exact same position on the lawn, that I didn't think it could be anything BUT a dream.

But then, I also think they totally underused the whole idea of the totems. (i mean, why did Ariadne make a chess piece? how do totems help if you are stuck in your own dream?)

I don't have a reaction post, but the comments to this post (http://coffeeandink.dreamwidth.org/1079996.html) bring up the possibility that Ariadne is Cobb's grown-up daughter who is in his dream trying to perform inception on him, and HOLY SHIT, I want that to have happened in the actual film!

(I kind of think I understand why fandom has exploded around this film in that there are incredibly interesting ideas at play and the characters are so -- well, lightly drawn, that it's the perfect fandom for fans to step in and fill in the blanks much more awesomely than the film did or, in fact, could have.)

[scintilla10.livejournal.com]

oh man, long comment is long. Sorry! /o\

[fishpatrol]

Haha, no worries, I love reading people's takes on this movie! The more I think about the movie, the more confused I get!

too much of it felt, idk, kind of shallow?

I definitely get the impression that the movie tried to tell more stories than it could handle and ended up appearing shallow and oversimplified in some respects.

I'm not sure why Arthur/Eames is the big slash pairing to come out of this movie? I mean, I kind of see it, but barely.

Maybe it's the number of quirky exchanges that determines which ship becomes the fan-favourite. XD I suppose if we use that as the guideline, then Arthur/Eames comes out as the winner (also, Eames called Arthur "darling" -- I have a feeling the ship's foundation is built around that, haha). Personally, I see the potential for ships, but I'm not feeling the shippy vibes (again, back to the point about these characters being not well-developed).

because the whole sequence was so ridiculously too good to be true, with the inspiring music and the kids in the same clothes and in the exact same position on the lawn

The ending was resolved way too easily for it to be reality! But apparently, according to some sites, the kids' shoes were different (black instead of white) and the clothing was slightly different. Some other people were saying that Cobb's totem was actually his wedding ring -- he only wears it in dreams, but never in reality -- and he wasn't wearing his ring at the end (I didn't notice at all while watching the movie ^^;;).

why did Ariadne make a chess piece? how do totems help if you are stuck in your own dream?

The friend who I watched the movie with would totally agree with you. He was all, "Why did they bother showing Ariadne going to all the trouble of handcrafting her totem? Why didn't they bring back Arthur and Ariadne's totems at the end?" I guess the point of showing Ariadne making the chess piece was to establish the importance of the totem? Maybe? And I don't think they help at all if you're stuck in a dream, but they allow you to recognize if you're in a dream or not. Here's another question: if you're not supposed to allow others to touch your totem, then why was Cobb using Mal's? (unless, of course, his totem was actually not the top, but rather, his wedding ring)

Ariadne is Cobb's grown-up daughter who is in his dream

That would certainly add another layer of trippiness! Oh man, some of those theories are really compelling... (this is going to be one trippy fandom, heh)

it's the perfect fandom for fans to step in and fill in the blanks

That's a really good point! The biggest fandoms do seem to involve canon material that are full of holes (*coughSPNcough*).