|
|
Post by lightbulbhalo on Nov 14, 2010 3:44:54 GMT -5
Just seeing Cillian on TV is awesome, but on the big screen... now that's something. I enjoyed Inception so much that I actually saw it three times  and I'll probably have to buy it on dvd when I get the chance. |
|
|
|
Post by razzthekid on Nov 14, 2010 11:08:04 GMT -5
I saw it twice in the cinema and it was better the second time around. First time was a bit too much to take in and make sense of while at the same time marvelling at all the actors and the amazing special effects.
|
|
|
|
Post by disarm79 on Nov 29, 2010 15:29:47 GMT -5
I was looking for a thread with Inception music but couldnt find it,so my post is sort of out of place. I was away from the tv, and I swore I heard the Inception trailer music. You know the BRRRRRRRRRM BRRRRRRM! I ran back into tv room to see what it was but it was only a trailer for "True Grit" www.youtube.com/watch?v=xG9bCd49ZkEAlso, I found something on you tube that I think we talked about before, but I dont think this was ever posted www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVkQ0C4qDvM |
|
|
|
Post by LBrooke on Nov 30, 2010 9:22:59 GMT -5
OMG Hans Zimmer's masterpiece .. Inception Music..One of the best soundtracks this year.
I'll read the review later but I can't wait.
|
|
|
|
Post by Crane on Dec 1, 2010 10:50:47 GMT -5
I loved it so much I saw it 5 times at the pictures  I've got the blu-ray edition special edition coming with all bonus features AND you get a little spinning top as well!! (imagine Cillian's face in high def! OMG!) Seriously, I LOVED the film, I also loved Cillian in it, but TBH it would still have been one of my all time favourites even if he hadn't been in it. But as he was, it is my favourite film ever! |
|
|
|
Post by punctuator on Dec 1, 2010 12:56:04 GMT -5
... really: you have no problem with the fact that Cillian is playing an innocent man who is being royally screwed over for no good reason? And, no, the implanted "happy Daddy" thoughts don't count. (If he's that hung up on Papa Maurice, Fischer doesn't need idea-thieves stampeding through his dreams, he needs a therapist.) Cobb and his thugs are brain-banging Fischer on the say-so of a business rival who's apt to skip off and launch a monopoly of his own-- since anti-monopoly laws conveniently don't seem to exist in Nolanworld. They're committing a most heinous crime against-- one more time-- an innocent man. This ain't like people robbing a bank (in the excellent The Town, say), where the FDIC will cover the losses: Fischer's business could well go into free-fall, with disastrous personal and economic results not just for Robert but for thousands of other people as well.
Or is it that important that Cobb slither past those very flimsy "legal" excuses (What trial? Where? Where's the forensic evidence that he killed Mal? [Here's a hint: THERE ISN'T ANY.] Where, for that matter, are the police? And who, in the first place, was watching those precious kiddies when Dom and Mal were building their homage to Soviet housing blocs in Limbo? Come to think of it, what if something happened to the kids while Dom and Mal were playing Brain Legos, and that's where his guilt really comes fr-- oh, never mind!) to see his kids? Makes me wonder where we'd draw the line: It's okay for him to destroy the livelihood and legacy of a man-- a complete stranger-- who's done nothing wrong-- who's certainly done nothing to Cobb, personally. So what, then, would be "out of bounds" for Cobb to do in order to take that mythical voyage back home? Would it be okay for him to walk up to Fischer and shoot him in the head (if, of course, buddy Saito said it was okay)? Shoot down a plane full of people? Blow up a major business? Stomp a bag full of hamsters?
(And before we all jump in with that time-honored chestnut "But people will do anything for their kids!"-- which, in itself, is a deeply scary idea-- keep in mind that Cobb's kids aren't in any kind of peril. They haven't been thrown to hungry tigers; they haven't been sold to pedophiles; they're not even wards of the state. They're living with Granny, for crying out loud... Granny, who, if Cobb got on her good side (and he seems to be halfway there, via Miles), and who, if this wasn't all a dream (mm hm), could bring the kids to visit HIM.)
Or is it somehow okay if the assault, the crime, the hurt happens in a dream? (No: for Fischer, his employees, and customers, the effects are going to be quite real-world. [If the inception "takes" at all-- and if Fischer mindlessly sticks to his "let's break this sucker up!" guns through some ten years of litigation. I know for a fact that boards of directors don't just roll over and die. Come to think of it, that means the whole inception scheme is a ruse: if Saito so desperately wanted control of Fischer's company, he'd arrange a little accident for Bobby-- mid-ocean, say-- and start buying up shares. He wouldn't sit through a decade of legal wrangling. Ah, but come to think of it, corporate law as a whole quite probably doesn't exist in Nolanworld, either.])
Just curious. See, the film left me somewhere between "flat" and "mad as hell." It nearly made me queasy, seeing what happened to Fischer. He wasn't a villain by any stretch of the imagination, and Cobb and his goons mind-bleeped him for no good reason, on the flimsiest of excuses. (OH, MY [IMAGINARY] KIDS! OH, SAITO SAID SO! OH, FISCHER'S GONNA FEEL SO MUCH BETTER ABOUT HIS DADDY AFTER WE DRUG HIM, KIDNAP HIM, AND RE-ENACT SECOND-RATE JAMES BOND ACTION SCENES ALL OVER HIS BRAIN!)
*****
(This is all assuming that the whole mess isn't taking place in Cobb's mess of a head. Which I think it is. Be that as it may: if the attack on Fischer is real, or if it's all cotton-candy dream-stuff, it's still heinous.)
*****
Or is it all okay because Cillian wore very nice suits and cried very sweetly (for all of three seconds-- that was a very nasty edit, Mr. Nolan) on the big screen?
Maybe it was partly Leonardo DiCaprio. I loved him in The Aviator and in Shutter Island, where he was essentially playing Dom Cobb the Cop; in Inception, he struck me as nothing more than a wheedling, shifty used-car salesman. (Sort of like that exchange in Ghostbusters, when Sigourney Weaver tells Bill Murray: "You don't seem like a scientist. You seem more like a game-show host.") He practically reeks of neurotic desperation. The bar scene is a particularly creepy example: if I were Fischer, I wouldn't trust that twitchy freak Cobb-- or "Mr. Charles"-- as far as I could throw him.
(Side question: Dream-state mirror-imaging, maybe...? Cillian is right-handed. Why, in the lavatory (and on the poster, too-- notice, however, that Fischer didn't make the cut for the DVD/BluRay cover art), is he holding the automatic in his left hand when he threatens to shoot himself?)
*****
And, just to throw this out there: What if the roles had been swapped around a bit? For instance, what if Fischer were the "little guy" asking Cobb to attack "big boy" Saito? (In this era of "diversity," overcooked "political correctness," and "globalization," would we be as quick to support a story in which a Caucasian businessman launches an unwarranted attack against an innocent Asian businessman?) What if-- and this is my personal fave-- Ariadne was the pro and Arthur was the newbie?
*****
*****
Not that I'm not buying the disc: after all, one of my many middle names ("bi[t]ch," "flamethrower," and "troublestarter" being a few of the others) is "completist"...
(... not to mention, "hypocrite"...)
... and "BUY THE DISC. BUY IT. BUY THE DISC." was probably buried subliminally in that skull-grinding score. Oh, the things I do for this guy....
|
|
|
|
Post by Kizuna on Dec 1, 2010 23:14:53 GMT -5
punctuator:
You raise many good points, even a few I agree with, but really, you make Cobb out to be this complete inhuman monster and while I'm not his biggest fan, I have to disagree with some of other things.
First off, I don't really see how it can be "scary" that a loving and dedicated parent would do anything for their kid(s). Love for one's child is a very strong drive (both in survival instincts and emotions), and sometimes, that love and drive can cloud one's judgment. Humans aren't the only beings that can get crazy if thier children are in danger. Yeah, the kids are safe, and we aren't given any hint as to how long Cobb's been separated from them. But given what he has been through (from what we're given, mind you), it must've felt too long since he had last seen them. And moreover, just being separated from close family members for an extended period of time is just plain painful. I'm speaking from experience - I haven't seen my mom in months since my parents' divorce, and it's really painful to not get to see her, so I'm really hoping to see her during the winter break soon.
As for the moral issues, yeah, it really isn't raised much except by Ariadne for the briefest moment. Also, rewatching recently, I can't help but get the feeling that Cobb does come off as an unreliable narrator when reflecting on his past with Ariadne.
And as for Fischer being a completely innocent angel, I'm not putting him down, but the only thing that we're really shown in terms of his character were his daddy issues. We don't know what kind of businessman he was. Was he a ruthless executive type in the boardroom? What were his aspirations for the company's future? Who knows, maybe Saito was onto something...
Though, I'll admit, I found Eames' idea of making the "split the company up as a screw you to the old man" a better idea, if only because it would've actually made more sense and been way easier.
|
|
|
|
Post by Crane on Dec 2, 2010 4:38:19 GMT -5
morality can go screw itself if i've got a film which has futuristic elements, a good plot (if you suspend your disbelief) and great effects. throw into that some serious men-in-suits eye candy and i'm happy!! Morality is all well and good but for me isnt necessary in fiction. I think it is actually more realistic to have lack of morality, but realism is not what i'm after in every film I watch, so that doesnt matter to me. Good rant there Punctuator! |
|
|
|
Post by iamthemaxx on Dec 2, 2010 9:36:40 GMT -5
You all make very valid points, though none are as funny as punctuator's insights....one feels as if a fist might come flying through the computer screen accompanied by a tremendous roar,hahaha. If we're aligning ourselves here, I want to make it clear that I enjoyed this movie immensely in the theater. Granted, I have only seen the movie once (at 12am in an IMAX showing) with a frame of mind that was delightfully blank thanks to my spiked theater slushie. However, after letting the movie sort of "marinate" in my brain for a while I did decide that there were elements to the story that were extremely flimsy (stole your word P, I owe you a pint) to the point of me not caring so much about whether A)it was all a dream B)was he or wasn't he dreaming at the end C)was he the one being extracted/incepted(inceptioned?) Oh I don't know!  My grasp on the english language and grammar is shaky at best =/. Kizuna, I'm not sure if this is what you meant, but I too felt that the principle characters were not fleshed out enough and certainly relied on the viewer to project their own opinions and emotions onto the characters in order to make the ride worth it. morality can go screw itself if i've got a film which has futuristic elements, a good plot (if you suspend your disbelief) and great effects. throw into that some serious men-in-suits eye candy and i'm happy!! Morality is all well and good but for me isnt necessary in fiction. I think it is actually more realistic to have lack of morality, but realism is not what i'm after in every film I watch, so that doesnt matter to me. Well said Crane. Sometimes I just go to the movies to GO to the movies. That being said, the looks of consternation on the faces around me leaving the theater were worth the price of admission. It was funny to see people feeling as if they were just made to think for over 2 hours (and would need another 2 to continue working it out). |
|
|
|
Post by jazzylady on Dec 5, 2010 21:24:21 GMT -5
Its almost here!!! For those of us in the States, here is a list of some retailers and what they are offering. If you are looking for the coveted briefcase edition, you are going to have to be very lucky or get it off Ebay.
BestBuy- DVD 17.99, Blu-Ray 18.99, DVD+BR+Digital Copy 24.99 *BestBuy Exclusive DVD+BR+DC+Inception The Shooting Script: with Chris Nolan's Initial Handwritten Notes of the Plot 29.99
FYE- Exclusive Steelbook 32.99/29.69 for members
Target-DVD+BR+DC 17.99
Meijer-will offer it at Midnight, but no price listing
Blockbuster- DVD 22.99, DVD+BR+DC 31.99
Walmart-should offer at Midnight. DVD 16.86, DVD+BR+DC 24.86 (site states prices may vary per store)
Borders- DVD 22.99, DVD+BR+DC 29.99 They also offer the soundtrack for 14.99
I will be getting the BestBuy Exclusive!!!!
Have fun, and enjoy the show!
|
|
|
|
Post by michelle14 on Dec 5, 2010 21:59:09 GMT -5
jazzylady Thanks for the info, I shall have to post on my christmas list! Because dumb me decided to add it on my wish list! lol
And Crane I absolutely agree with you. Movies are made for entertainment. The whole point of fiction is just that!
|
|
|
|
Post by LBrooke on Dec 6, 2010 5:15:02 GMT -5
I have to say I don't agree completely with Crane.I do and don't at the same time lol.Because movies are not just for entertainment for me.It depends of the film actually. If I decide to watch a film with Hugh Grant for instance,it'll be for entertainment only.Because I know many or all of his films are for entertainment and I'm pretty ok with that.If I want to relax & just have a nice time ok. If I go for a Ken Loach or a Woody Allen film it's more to think about it then.For instance,when I watched 'A Single Man' it has been for entertainment first but finally it has been for more. However,I think it's sometimes for both.I mean,when I saw 'Whatever Works',it has been for both finally.Cause of the sarcastic & fatalist dimension.True. Or is it all okay because Cillian wore very nice suits and cried very sweetly (for all of three seconds-- that was a very nasty edit, Mr. Nolan) on the big screen? lool! That's not enough to wear nice suits..But he wears that very well though. And, just to throw this out there: What if the roles had been swapped around a bit? For instance, what if Fischer were the "little guy" asking Cobb to attack "big boy" Saito? (In this era of "diversity," overcooked "political correctness," and "globalization," would we be as quick to support a story in which a Caucasian businessman launches an unwarranted attack against an innocent Asian businessman?) Didn't entirely get it.I mean,it's a cliche for sure but for once,it doesn't really matter to me.Because that's not the real aim and priority of the film.But that's an interesting point. (Side question: Dream-state mirror-imaging, maybe...? Cillian is right-handed. Why, in the lavatory (and on the poster, too-- notice, however, that Fischer didn't make the cut for the DVD/BluRay cover art), is he holding the automatic in his left hand when he threatens to shoot himself?) True!Don't know why either but you know,that's like the elevator scene with Saito and Eames(as a girl).In the mirror,we keep having several reflections of the girl but if she only has been an invention,we would have had one reflection of the girl and several of Eames.That's not logical.Anyway .. This has been an original commercial film I think but of course many points can be noticed.It seems it has been a bit too ambitious even for Nolan lol.I found it a bit too complicated,not complex which is a good thing but complicated,sometimes not logical & I think that Nolan and his staff deliberately used a complicated structure & elements to hide the some illogical elements of the storyline. I'm sure that many people haven't not noticed the irregularities of the story so that's not a point for the majority of them. |
|
|
|
Post by Crane on Dec 6, 2010 9:30:09 GMT -5
^ well, i have to say Lauren that i'm very upset that you dont agree with me 100%!!  |
|
|
|
Post by LBrooke on Dec 6, 2010 11:21:02 GMT -5
^ well, i have to say Lauren that i'm very upset that you dont agree with me 100%!! Hahaha!!Crane..You see what I mean..It's like reading.You can read a book just to have fun or taking it more philosophically or the like. You can enjoy the reading of a book written by a historian for instance,but I doubt it's only for having fun..(sometimes not at all for having fun).It's for the pleasure or duty to think about it and learn things,complete your knowledge.Well,that's my opinion. That's why I didnt agree entirely but I like you lots though lol! |
|
|
|
Post by jazzylady on Dec 8, 2010 10:30:23 GMT -5
Love these thoughts being thrown around. I agree with every one of you.
I was finally able to see it for the first time last night. (Seems my sweet husband/Architect wouldn't take me to the theater to see bigger than life Cilly. Wonder why? LOL)
It was a bit slow starting and even then only blurps of sheer entertainment surfaced. The ..second best person involved in the movie was the set director. Absolutely loved the set!! Stairs to nowhere...sweet! The characters certainly could have held more depth and the storyline should have been more clearly stated. It was hard to follow the first time around. I will enjoy putting the pieces of the puzzle together the next few times I watch it.
BTW my "traveling with my Architect" location has absolutely nothing to do with Inception. I actually had no idea about architects in the movie. I bet you all thought I was "in dreamland". Well, maybe that's true too!
|
|
and I'll probably have to buy it on dvd when I get the chance.
My grasp on the english language and grammar is shaky at best =/. Kizuna, I'm not sure if this is what you meant, but I too felt that the principle characters were not fleshed out enough and certainly relied on the viewer to project their own opinions and emotions onto the characters in order to make the ride worth it. 
