demagogue on 15/8/2010 at 22:06

---

When Nolan says his major inspiration for the movie was 8 1/2 and not The Matrix, the interpretation practically writes itself.

But anyway, how else are we to take a conversation where Cobb effectively says "Cut to the chase" and Ariadne says "But then everyone will notice the plot holes"? Could it be any more self-referential?

Edit: As for the Eames part, yeah, that part I was making up. That's what an interpretation is, dumbass. But that's how I honestly interpreted it when I saw it. I understood that Cobb was asking Ariadne to make some changes on the spot, and she said there was some parts Eames set-up so she could move some things around to put them to use. And then I thought that's what she did.

Sulphur on 15/8/2010 at 23:41

---

I interpreted it as a contingency plan in case shit was going to hit the fan. I don't see why it couldn't have been part of the original dream-world blueprint before they entered Eames' dream; there's nothing about that conversation that says 'change the framework now'.

Kuuso on 19/8/2010 at 22:01

---

http://26.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_l747f3WWmT1qbxqz5o1_500.jpg

Scots Taffer on 26/8/2010 at 05:56

---

Saw this again last night and while some of the old gripes hold true (too many guns, lack of messing with reality), the puzzle really deepens every time you try to get a firm grip on it.

The film-making metaphor is extremely obvious second time around and the amount of nods and winks to the audience on this confirm that it was very much part of what Nolan wanted to achieve, however the true mystery surrounds Cobb and Mal and reality versus dream.

I do feel the pull of that mystery, of wanting to know where Cobb truly is at the end, of where he was at every point during the tale... The film actively challenges you to do this, circular dialogue, other characters (Miles, Ariadne, Mal) prompting Cobb to confront reality and leave the dream, the recurring images of the children and Mal. My mind is pulled back to the totem and the original act of Inception. What does someone touching the totem do? Why does it matter if someone else knows the precise weight of your own totem? What did Cobb truly do when he set the spinning top in motion for Mal, and what does it mean for him when he tries to use it?

Then there's the literary implications of the character names: Cobb (like cobb-web, (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/coppe) from coppe, the old english for spider), Ariadne ((http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariadne#Minos_and_Theseus) who in Greek mythology helped Theseus escape from the labyrinthby giving him a ball of thread she'd spun) and Saito ((http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/fl20091011x1.html) Japanese, with its origins in ritual purification) - you could say that these could sum to Cobb building a web from himself that Ariadne is trying to lead him out of and by reaching a conclusion with Saito that purifies him of his guilt...

There is also consistent use of dream logic in the movie (which is similar to movie logic/plot holes/convenience), something may hold true somewhere but not somewhere else (eg. zero-g in level 2, gravity in level 3), people instinctively knowing things (like Cobb knowing Saito had died, he was still alive when they went under) and the warping of perception (alleyway narrowing, Saito appearing out of nowhere, Miles being in France then being in America, the kids never changing appearance, etc).

And of course, there's also the "one phone call solving all problems"... Why would the police file disappear, why would the immigration flag no longer exist, why would people no longer think this of Cobb, what of the psychological results of Mal's proving she was sane and her death and his disappearance? This cannot be solved by a phonecall, under any pretense.

I've come back around to the idea that the movie is all about performing inception on Cobb (stopping him from becoming "an old man, filled with regret, waiting to die" and living forever trapped between the floors of moments between he and Mal that are all he can recall), but I'm still trying to put the pieces together on how that makes complete sense.

Edit: Hah! (http://nymag.com/daily/entertainment/2010/07/inception_theory.html) Turns out I'm not the only one who thinks this way... and it even ties into the use of the Edith Piaf song, already an injoke in its own right.

I think as a sci-fi actioner with an emotional core it's a reasonable entertainer with some flaws but as a logic/methapor puzzle that leaves people buzzing and debating it's amazing.

This one made me chuckle:

http://images2.fanpop.com/image/photos/14200000/Inception-Macros-Funny-inception-2010-14243122-500-635.jpg

ZylonBane on 26/8/2010 at 18:17

---

Here's a better explanation-- Nolan wrote a sloppy script, and knew he'd written a sloppy script, so he sprinkled it with just enough meta tee-hees to trick a significant subset of sufficiently gullible viewers into thinking he's some kind of auteur genius.

"At last the dream is over... OR IS IT?" Gosh, how cutting edge.