silentangst
Bluelighter
No it wasn't.
-
⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
Film & Television
Welcome Guest
⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ -
⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️
Forum Rules Film Chit-Chat Recently Watched Best Documentaries ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ ⭐️ -
Film & TV Moderators: ghostfreak
Film Inception
- Thread starter tribal girl
- Start date
I think you are thinking about Invictus, the South African rugby/apartheid movie. Inception is totally different, yet the both share a good amount of critical acclaim.
as far as your question regarding Inception and hallucinogenic drugs, I suppose the two could be loosely related. if you've followed any of director Christopher Nolan's other films, you would notice that they all are quite a trip (The Dark Knight, Memento, etc). I don't think he made the movie to be anything like a commentary on trippy drugs, but rather the far out can be used in great association with a movie about people entering other peoples' dreams.
fwiw - I thought the movie Inception was quite good, but not the end-all be-all of movies like most people decided it was...
Bardeaux
Bluelight Crew
I was planning on watching this tonight. But for some reason the certain website I watch movies at deleted it. Something about "Copyright Infringement" or something. Whatever...
TheDeceased
Ex-Bluelighter
Just finished watching this.
So many plot holes. The time dilation thing / multiple simultaneous climax with the van going into the river was cool, but it was the only thing I liked about the film aside from the special effects. The first hour or so of the movie was tired explanation / set-up for the rest of the film. The second half of the film made up for it a bit. But not enough. I found the action to be under-directed. It didn't engage me. And there was a lot of it. This is supposed to be a thinking man's sci-fi, yet there is an armed militia of super warriors inside someone's head? Pretty stupid Hollywood crap.
For all the good ideas Incpetion has going for it, there are ten bad ones.
The scene were DiCaprio's character asks her to prove her talents by drawing maps on a piece of paper is one of the stupidest things I've ever seen.
Why did Juno chick's character create a fortress in the middle of the snowy mountains when she knew that level of consciousness would be unstable?
SO many plot-holes / inconsistencies. So much bullshit convenient dialogue. So many bad action scenes. So many forgettable characters. So many uses of the word 'dream' within the film (sort of like TDK with use of / reference to the term 'vigilante').
3 stars.
The Prestige and Memento remain Nolan's only 5 star films IMO.
(The time dilation / multiple level of consciousness thing definitely reminded me of psychedelia - specifically Amanita Muscaria. It's very similar.)
So many plot holes. The time dilation thing / multiple simultaneous climax with the van going into the river was cool, but it was the only thing I liked about the film aside from the special effects. The first hour or so of the movie was tired explanation / set-up for the rest of the film. The second half of the film made up for it a bit. But not enough. I found the action to be under-directed. It didn't engage me. And there was a lot of it. This is supposed to be a thinking man's sci-fi, yet there is an armed militia of super warriors inside someone's head? Pretty stupid Hollywood crap.
For all the good ideas Incpetion has going for it, there are ten bad ones.
The scene were DiCaprio's character asks her to prove her talents by drawing maps on a piece of paper is one of the stupidest things I've ever seen.
Why did Juno chick's character create a fortress in the middle of the snowy mountains when she knew that level of consciousness would be unstable?
SO many plot-holes / inconsistencies. So much bullshit convenient dialogue. So many bad action scenes. So many forgettable characters. So many uses of the word 'dream' within the film (sort of like TDK with use of / reference to the term 'vigilante').
3 stars.
The Prestige and Memento remain Nolan's only 5 star films IMO.
(The time dilation / multiple level of consciousness thing definitely reminded me of psychedelia - specifically Amanita Muscaria. It's very similar.)
Wordswords
Bluelighter
this movie was very good.
Belisarius
Bluelighter
^
I have to find the torrent of that episode! :D
Still the best movie I've seen in a long, long, time--I'm wasting no time snatching up my own copy once it's out.
I have to find the torrent of that episode! :D
Still the best movie I've seen in a long, long, time--I'm wasting no time snatching up my own copy once it's out.
HoneyRoastedPeanut
Bluelighter
FYI, you can watch pretty much any episode of SP online Here. That episode is called Insheeption and will be available tomorrow.
Also haters gonna hate, but Inception was original and still managed to appeal to a mass audience. If Nolan keeps it up he's going to be the top director in the biz before too long.
Belisarius
Bluelighter
^
Thanks for the link.
Re Nolan: I don't know about becoming the top director overall, but I think it's a safe bet he'll clinch that spot in the SF and action genre in terms of quality if not monetary draw ([cough]Michael Bay[cough]).
Thanks for the link.
Re Nolan: I don't know about becoming the top director overall, but I think it's a safe bet he'll clinch that spot in the SF and action genre in terms of quality if not monetary draw ([cough]Michael Bay[cough]).
Eyes On the Roll
Bluelighter
one of the best fucking movies i have ever seen
I liked that about it. It was like a heist movie. But in the MIIIIIIIND!
TheDeceased said:
Well it's a big hollywood movie. At least they had a pretty novel way of justifying the inclusion of mindless violence ('the mind attacks the intrusion like white blood cells attacking a disease' - I thought that was clever.) What's truly great about it is that it's the first hollywood movie to justify the whole 'bad guys can't shoot for shit' thing.
TheDeceased said:
I bet you hate action movies.
Belisarius
Bluelighter
NSFW:
TheDeceased
Ex-Bluelighter
Rated E said:
In the context of a dream you can write ANYTHING. There are no limitations. Whereas when writing straight up action you're restricted to the laws of physics (more or less) and real world situations, etc. Whatever parameters you set yourself, really. Most action films are set in reality on earth in the present. So guys with machine guns make sense as a threat.
In dreams, on the other hand, you can do ANYTHING. So rather than having generic bad guys with big machine guns like every other fucking action film ever made, why not use their imaginations a bit and think of another threat?
At one point, one of them (3rd Rock kid) was shooting a guy on the top of a building with a machine gun. Another one of the team (some forgettable character) gave him/ or fired a rocket launcher (i can't remember which) and said something like: "you've got to dream bigger".
So if they can conjure up whatever they want within other peoples dreams, then why do they limit themselves to realistic technology? And why don't they use a tank instead of a pair of skis? The film doesn't utilize the dream environment and the dreamers ability to manipulate that reality. It's inconsistent. The dream segments don't seem like dreams. Mostly they're just seem like action sequences. There's very little surreal or dream-like, just some particularly cinematic special-effects sequences (like the buildings crumbling) in between gunfights.
You can fly in dreams. You can travel forwards and backwards through time. There are aliens, monsters.
In Inceptions dreams, there are none of these things.
There are bad guys with big guns.
This film could've been a real psychological head fuck and a good action film. Instead it was just a good action film and I think the premise deserved more.
TheDeceased
Ex-Bluelighter
There were indeed many paper thin explanations as to why everybody's dream was a Hollywood action movie. Very few made any sense.
Being inconspicuous in a dream would logically require the team to act in a dream-like fashion rather than a real world fashion. They should have been adapting to the people's psyches that they were entering in order to be inconspicuous rather than just acting 'normal' because the norm inside somebody's head is defined by them, not the exterior world.
It felt like the film didn't even attempt to explore anything psychological, which is crazy given that most of it is set within people's subconscious.
If you still insist the crew had to be inconspicuous, why are the dreams and the dreamers so boring? Logically they too wouldn't behave inconspicuously in their own dream, so why aren't there any interesting scenarios depicting the inner workings of the dreamers psyche?
Being inconspicuous in a dream would logically require the team to act in a dream-like fashion rather than a real world fashion. They should have been adapting to the people's psyches that they were entering in order to be inconspicuous rather than just acting 'normal' because the norm inside somebody's head is defined by them, not the exterior world.
It felt like the film didn't even attempt to explore anything psychological, which is crazy given that most of it is set within people's subconscious.
If you still insist the crew had to be inconspicuous, why are the dreams and the dreamers so boring? Logically they too wouldn't behave inconspicuously in their own dream, so why aren't there any interesting scenarios depicting the inner workings of the dreamers psyche?
Last edited: