INCEPTION - Nolan's masterpiece!

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: INCEPTION - Nolan's masterpiece!

    Originally posted by Biohazard View Post
    Page panicked because Leo made stuff go boom.

    The fact that this is even under discussion only highlights the weak screenwriter's inability to clarify an important aspect of the rules of the film.
    I thought that part was pretty clear. In fact I thought for such a complicated story, the exposition was handled incredibly well. We didn't waste time one explaining stuff that doesn't matter so we could spend time on the stuff that did.

    Ariadne made stuff go boom as soon as Cobb told her they were in a dream.
    Chicks Who Script podcast

    Comment


    • Re: INCEPTION - Nolan's masterpiece!

      The stakes in the Matrix were HUUUUGE. Inception, not so much. The dude pulled a Polanski and now he wants back in to see his kids. And why didn't the kids move to Paris, that's what I want to know. That's the first thing I thought. Just because grandma didn't like Leo? He could have sent someone to break into grandma's dreams and change her mind.WTF?
      Last night, Jesus appeared to me in a dream and told me that loving me is the part of His job He hates the most.

      Comment


      • Re: INCEPTION - Nolan's masterpiece!

        Originally posted by emily blake View Post
        I thought that part was pretty clear. In fact I thought for such a complicated story, the exposition was handled incredibly well. We didn't waste time one explaining stuff that doesn't matter so we could spend time on the stuff that did.
        Emily, I don't understand how the whole scene showcasing the changing the dream world actually mattered, considering the dream world was never altered during the mission itself.

        Why did we need to know that? It seems like a waste of time to me.

        Comment


        • Re: INCEPTION - Nolan's masterpiece!

          Brilliant analyses here and on the link Gwai posted. At the risk of repeating myself and perhaps getting chewed up in the buzzsaw of this forum, I offer.....

          The problem I had with the movie is that it did not connect with me on a human level. What I've read here and at the Chud link has opened my eyes even more to the movie's exceedingly clever construction. But as the story wore on while I was watching it, I simply didn't care. In part, that's because so much of the action (all of it, if we agree with some reviews) takes place while people are sleeping. So I'm thinking: hell, what's the worst that could happen? Sure, Limbo, an alert commenter here will argue--but in the actual movie that idea carried no menace or fear: that's all it was: an idea; it came a cross as a mere intellectual construct. The movie talked about it, but didn't make it a visceral threat--at least, not to me as an audience member.

          So all the stuff falling, blowing up, bleeding--none of it mattered, because none of it was "real" and carried no more than thimbleful of tension or suspense. Although I do remember feeling: I wish that goddamn van would hit the water already, so they'll all wake up and I can find out what's really going to happen.

          A huge amount of the debate here has focused on the "rules" of the story and whether they were consistent or logical. Well, that does make for an interesting parlor game--a sort of brainteaser exercise, and a good one at that. But for me, a movie needs to be more than just a good puzzle.* People have commented insightfully on what was at stake for the various characters, probably accurately. My question: did you care about any of that while watching the movie? Did any of it hit you in the gut? Did anything other than Mal's "fatal" leap make a genuine emotional connection with you? Did any dramatic conflict between characters jump out at you? Isn't a movie supposed to stir our emotions and give us someone, or something to cheer for? (Substitute "root" or "sympathize with" if "cheer" tastes like too much butter on the popcorn.)

          So, I'm prepared to acknowledge that everyone who has explained the "rules" is right. My reaction: So what?

          A better movie, one with a pulse, that actually made a human connection, would be a little less tricky while leading the audience through a similar story. Except in this better story, the protag starts off believing one thing about reality and about his "lost" wife/kids, and ultimately journeys back to the "true" reality in which they're all reunited. I can almost hear scornful comments about a "happy ending," but remember, the movie we saw did have pretensions to a happy end, although the filmmaker played a cute little trick on the audience with that also. I won't knock him as a filmmaker; he's probably a brilliant guy. But this story of his was simply filled with too much artifice and too little conflict to care about.


          * I did like Memento, but don't remember enough now to say specifically why, other than to say the story seemed "real" and the protag was strongly sympathetic, and his goal had an immediacy which invigorated the story.

          Comment


          • Re: INCEPTION - Nolan's masterpiece!

            Originally posted by NatachaVonBraun View Post
            Just because grandma didn't like Leo? He could have sent someone to break into grandma's dreams and change her mind.WTF?
            lol.

            Comment


            • Re: INCEPTION - Nolan's masterpiece!

              If you start thinking about the stakes and execution in the best of sci-fi movies, Inception starts to look pretty bad. More than I initially thought I'm afraid. (That whole it's all gonna be fixed with a phone call business is just plain stupid.)

              The Matrix, The Terminator, Blade Runner, Children of Men, all deal with the survival of humanity and what it means to be human. Nolan should have gone that route. A la John Connor coming back to make sure he's born.

              BTW, all of these have love stories at their core as well.
              Last edited by NatachaVonBraun; 07-20-2010, 05:55 PM.
              Last night, Jesus appeared to me in a dream and told me that loving me is the part of His job He hates the most.

              Comment


              • Re: INCEPTION - Nolan's masterpiece!

                Originally posted by Biohazard View Post
                Emily, I don't understand how the whole scene showcasing the changing the dream world actually mattered, considering the dream world was never altered during the mission itself.

                Why did we need to know that? It seems like a waste of time to me.
                It was an exposition scene. I suppose they could have been sitting in a living room chatting, but that wouldn't have been too exciting huh?

                The main purpose of that is to show the rules of the world and explain why you can't just go changing anything to suit your needs. But they do change something later. When Cobb's life starts to invade the dream, members of Fisher's mind give him dirty looks and begin to threaten their plan.

                If you want to, you can question every single scene, but in the end if this is a film you just didn't like, well, there it is. Lots of people like it and understand it. You didn't. Doesn't make you or me any better than the other one, just different. That's why they call it an opinion.
                Chicks Who Script podcast

                Comment


                • Re: INCEPTION - Nolan's masterpiece!

                  Originally posted by emily blake View Post
                  It was an exposition scene. I suppose they could have been sitting in a living room chatting, but that wouldn't have been too exciting huh?

                  The main purpose of that is to show the rules of the world and explain why you can't just go changing anything to suit your needs. But they do change something later. When Cobb's life starts to invade the dream, members of Fisher's mind give him dirty looks and begin to threaten their plan.

                  If you want to, you can question every single scene, but in the end if this is a film you just didn't like, well, there it is. Lots of people like it and understand it. You didn't. Doesn't make you or me any better than the other one, just different. That's why they call it an opinion.
                  yeap. we can debate bio until the cows come home but he isnt gonna change his mind. doesn't make either side more right than the other but the problem is it seems bio thinks his opinion is the only "right" opinion but lets not keep beating our heads against the walls, shall we?

                  on to a more interesting topic, i dont think inception will be as revered as the matrix or star wars down the road because while a great movie, it doesnt possess the "it" factor. matrix had it with its buddhist-enlightenment philosophy and bullet time, star wars had it with light sabers, the force and its amazing cast of characters though inception definitely had cool set pieces (zero gravity) and an inventive concept (heist in a dream). i believe in the years to come inception will rank among the best of the heist films such as heat and the thomas crown affair.

                  Comment


                  • Re: INCEPTION - Nolan's masterpiece!

                    Originally posted by NatachaVonBraun View Post
                    If you start thinking about the stakes and execution in the best of sci-fi movies, Inception starts to look pretty bad. More than I initially thought I'm afraid. (That whole it's all gonna be fixed with a phone call business is just plain stupid.)

                    The Matrix, The Terminator, Blade Runner, Children of Men, all deal with the survival of humanity and what it means to be human. Nolan should have gone that route. A la John Connor coming back to make sure he's born.

                    BTW, all of these have love stories at their core as well.
                    Going back after your kids is comparable to saving humanity. If you have kids, you feel that way. The others were mislead about the severity of the mission in order for Cobb to complete his goal. Once they were in the dream, their stakes for their own lives were infinitely raised, as we saw with Saito's character disappearing in limbo. This is what makes it grounded and real, particularly in a film about dreams. This of course is all subjectivity. For example, at the risk at getting bashed, I thought Lawrence of Arabia (which you brought up earlier) was ok. Not flawless. And I didn't "care" about the character at all. I didn't really care about the characters in Inception either, but I seldom care about characters in movies. I just need to find them interesting to watch, and Inception was. Btw, I appreciate your thoughts. You're certainly entitled to your opinion. You said others have been offended somewhat, but I like hearing different perspectives. After all, the point of the analysis is to make ourselves better writers.

                    Comment


                    • Re: INCEPTION - Nolan's masterpiece!

                      Originally posted by emily blake View Post
                      It was an exposition scene. I suppose they could have been sitting in a living room chatting, but that wouldn't have been too exciting huh?

                      The main purpose of that is to show the rules of the world and explain why you can't just go changing anything to suit your needs. But they do change something later. When Cobb's life starts to invade the dream, members of Fisher's mind give him dirty looks and begin to threaten their plan.
                      But that is not pertinent information. If we didn't know it, nothing would change.

                      It's as if Star Wars told us about how the Empire grew so strong and the formation of the Rebel Alliance...we don't need to know that information if no part of the story requires us to know.

                      No part of Inception requires that we know anything about changing the world of the dream if all that happens is a bunch of extras turn to look at Leo for 4 seconds. That's it.

                      If you set something up, you better pay it off later. Inception failed to pay-off the changing the dream world.

                      Originally posted by lordmanji View Post
                      yeap. we can debate bio until the cows come home but he isnt gonna change his mind. doesn't make either side more right than the other but the problem is it seems bio thinks his opinion is the only "right" opinion but lets not keep beating our heads against the walls, shall we?
                      Sorry, but unlike many people, I will not make excuses for faults in professional Hollywood films. Instead, I recognize them as problems that are holding back a good movie from being great, and try to learn from it. Doing anything else is detrimental to the screenwriting learning process, and if that's what you want to do, that's your prerogative.

                      Comment


                      • Re: INCEPTION - Nolan's masterpiece!

                        Originally posted by NatachaVonBraun View Post
                        If you start thinking about the stakes and execution in the best of sci-fi movies, Inception starts to look pretty bad. More than I initially thought I'm afraid. (That whole it's all gonna be fixed with a phone call business is just plain stupid.)

                        The Matrix, The Terminator, Blade Runner, Children of Men, all deal with the survival of humanity and what it means to be human. Nolan should have gone that route. A la John Connor coming back to make sure he's born.

                        BTW, all of these have love stories at their core as well.
                        i would strike children of men from that list myself. when i watched it, i could care less about clive owen. then there was that talk with the professor or hippie in the forest that reminded me of minority report. and finally the end with the girl being the savior which has been seen in countless films before. you can tell it's been a while since ive seen it but it always struck me as a barely sci fi movie that was really a chase film and a derivative one at that.

                        i think minority report will be among the "lesser" classics a generation from now along with inception.

                        Comment


                        • Re: INCEPTION - Nolan's masterpiece!

                          I'm glad Bio took the mantel and ran with it in regards to the failures of the movie, because I wouldn't have the stamina for it. Too much to criticize.

                          INCEPTION was a failure on storytelling and craft level. On a cinematic level, I could see it being thrilling, but for me the shortcomings were too large and obvious that I couldn't enjoy it. To me, Bio's critiques are perfectly sound. A little brash, sure, but perfectly reasonable and I feel, true. I agree with almost all of it and would add a few more to the list.

                          I think people are just very enamored by the originality, scope and vision of the film, that they forget that all commercial films abide by the same laws which you need to get right. If you strip INCEPTION to its bare bones, the flaws are probably much more transparent and, I would say, abundant.

                          Comment


                          • Re: INCEPTION - Nolan's masterpiece!

                            Originally posted by gravitas View Post
                            Going back after your kids is comparable to saving humanity. If you have kids, you feel that way. The others were mislead about the severity of the mission in order for Cobb to complete his goal. Once they were in the dream, their stakes for their own lives were infinitely raised, as we saw with Saito's character disappearing in limbo. This is what makes it grounded and real, particularly in a film about dreams. This of course is all subjectivity. For example, at the risk at getting bashed, I thought Lawrence of Arabia (which you brought up earlier) was ok. Not flawless. And I didn't "care" about the character at all. I didn't really care about the characters in Inception either, but I seldom care about characters in movies. I just need to find them interesting to watch, and Inception was. Btw, I appreciate your thoughts. You're certainly entitled to your opinion. You said others have been offended somewhat, but I like hearing different perspectives. After all, the point of the analysis is to make ourselves better writers.
                            Saying that Larry of A was just ok is like saying Led Zeppelin is an ok band.
                            Last night, Jesus appeared to me in a dream and told me that loving me is the part of His job He hates the most.

                            Comment


                            • Re: INCEPTION - Nolan's masterpiece!

                              Originally posted by NatachaVonBraun View Post
                              Saying that Larry of A was just ok is like saying Led Zeppelin is an ok band.
                              Well, they were.
                              "Forget it, Jake. It's Hollywood."

                              My YouTube channel.

                              Comment


                              • Re: INCEPTION - Nolan's masterpiece!

                                Someone mentioned BLADE RUNNER having higher stakes than INCEPTION. For the life of me, I can't even remember what the stakes in BLADE RUNNER were. Deckard was doing nothing more than his job of finding Replicants. But they were all going to die anyway. And even when Deckard did catch up to Batty, he got his ass kicked by him.

                                BACK TO THE FUTURE? Are we supposed to buy how Marty McFly was going to physically vanish on a highschool stage in front of others? Why, when his siblings vanished from his photo, is he able to retain memories of them? And why were they vanishing from oldest to youngest, body part by body part? How was science explaining that?

                                On top of that, the scene was redundant as the timeline was already set in motion -- Marty was just strumming the guitar, his actions wouldn't alter things -- and George was invevitably going to shove away that kid dancing with Lorraine and kiss her -- so why was Marty vanishing in the first place? To add further insult to the viewers, when Marty returns to the "new" 1985, why does he have no knowledge of his family's new blessings. He can vanish on stage but yet retain "old" 1985 memories? The time travel rules are inconsistent and illogical.

                                There are so many flaws with this movie. Including the boneheaded concept that Marty is able to hit a cable at exactly the same time lightning strikes the clock tower -- a clock with no seconds hand on it. Or that wheels nailed to a flat piece of board somehow makes it into a maneuverable skateboard. There's enough holes in the movie to fly a fleet of 747s through.

                                STAR WARS? You just have to watch satirical spoofs to see just how flawed and goofy it is.

                                But that doesn't stop them from being great movies.

                                To me, picking flaws that others aren't bothered about -- from a movie that the majority of audiences and critics love isn't learning. Ditto when you're doing it with Oscar and Nicholl winning scripts when you're trying to win it yourself. It isn't learning at all -- you're doing something else.

                                To me, figuring out the specifics why successful movies/scripts worked so well with others is much harder -- because you're having to step out of your biases and view things objectively. Being objectve isn't about being "right" or "wrong". It's about realizing the subjectiveness of your own criticisms and seeing things from the eyes of others -- the audience. INCEPTION, at the end of the day, did well with audiences and critics. There is no way you can call it a failure and say that you're learning by picking faults with it. To me, that's like saying you're learning how to run by picking out fault with Usain Bolt. How about learning from where Bolt went right?

                                Panning is easy. Analyzing faults is easy. Every kid on the internet is doing it. Critics do it -- which is why their jobs are so easy. But none of them know how to analyze what works in a successful movie -- which, imo, is the basis of how screenwriting is learnt and taught.

                                Personally, I think there is no discounting the subjective nature of movies.
                                Last edited by Why One; 07-21-2010, 01:19 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X