So I finally saw Inception last night. I'd heard a lot of positive reviews and it sounded like a movie that I'd be into. It was. Probably not for everyone, as it was a serious mindfuck but I have to admit that I really enjoy those. I'm going to try to break it down and attempt to write out what I think happened. THAT MEANS SPOILERS. ERON, DON'T KEEP READING.
The basic premise and concept of the movie was based on a new technology called dream-sharing where several people could share the same dream. Actually, this is all really complicated so I'll just send you to this link that explains the concept, and this link that breaks down the technology and specific roles of each of the players. Trust me, its complicated. But understanding the basic concepts is the only way to figure out what was going on.
Okay, so. My theory. Its out there. Blame LOST. I don't think that the two most common theories are even close. 1. The end was real. 2. The end was still a dream. I don't think those theories go far enough. Those theories assume that the rest of the movie was on the level and that just the ending was up for interpretation. My theory: Cobb was the 'target,' not Fischer. There were a bunch of subtle clues and hints that lead me to think that. The most subtle 'inception' ideas were given to Cobb. To 'wake up.' That whole mantra that everyone kept saying to him. To 'take a leap of faith.' Not to 'become an old man, waiting to die alone.' Here are some of the reasons I think the ENTIRE movie was all Cobb's dream, orchestrated by the grandfather.
1. The creepy repeated mantra.
2. The fact that Cobb was able to change things in dreams where he was not the architect and allegedly not the dreamer.
3. There were multiple instances of 'how'd they get THERE?' which was supposedly how you would realize that you were in a dream. It could also have been standard film transitions.
4. The grandfather whose grandkids are now parent-less was the man who taught Cobb. Motive.
5. At the end of the movie, Cobb's kids are exactly how he remembered them, down to the clothes, posture, and AGE.
6. Remember the weird classical music that was played as a "que" to wake up? I'm pretty sure it was also what played in the credits. A subtle 'its time to wake up' for the audience.
Honestly, I'm not all that concerned with the "exactly what happened." The moral seems to be that Cobb's character went from a paranoid whackjob spinning the top at chance he could, ready to blow his brains out if it kept spinning... to spinning it at the end of the movie and then not even caring if it stopped or not. Dream or reality, he chose that plane of existence to be his reality.
At the end of the day, I think that 'The Point' of the movie was not to try and puzzle out what the 'Correct' ending or explanation was.... I think that Nolan wanted the viewers to leave the theater simply with the idea that, obviously, reality is very subjective. Perception is reality. This idea was planted subtly throughout the entire movie (sound familiar?) in little bits that snowballed until the end. It sounds like a stoner idea, "dude are we even really here? are we just all in one big dream?" The Australian Aborigines thought so. I remember being a kid (scary that I was having these thoughts so young) about 9-10 years old and being alone, listening to the ringing sound of silence and trying to push my consciousness outside myself. Thinking things like, 'what are the odds that I'm me? how crazy is it that we exist as we do, with the ability and intellect that we posses? what if I was someone else? what are the astronomical odds that I'm in my family, not some 3rd world refugee or insect?' Yeah, maybe that's why I'm so weird. I got a little too existential at a young age.
In the end I think the title of the movie wasn't inward facing; talking about the idea planted in Fischer (or Cobb depending on your theory). I think it spoke to the idea that WE as an audience had planted subtly in our minds; that reality is subjective. Its is exactly what we make of it. So take advantage of it while we can lest we 'grow old waiting to die alone.'
3 comments:
Here's where I got a bit lost. When Cobb and Ariadne go into their first dream together they have tons upon tons of projections right? Why were there 0 projections when the 5 of them tested the maze? Why did only Cobb's projection of Mol come and no one else had projections? Why did Cobb and Mol have only projections of the kids (which was never seen, just spoken about) when they were in limbo? Still blown away by the special effects and how they made the whole swimming and anti-gravity look how my dreams feel. Worth seeing in a theater again. "Is this real life?"
Can't resist a quick comment or two:
1. My first impression: impressive.
2. But do special effects sometimes overwhelm the movie? (Very typical of contemporary Hollywood, IMHO.)Movies need moods, not just special effects. The special effects should enhance mood. During the snow fortress scenes I began to wonder if I'd wondered into a James Bond movie.
3. My more considered impression (beyond the inception?) says it's not quite in the elite category of SF. I don't think--after only one viewing, mind you--that it's "2001", "Blade Runner", "Matrix"-level good.
4. Has anyone read Ursala LeGuin's "The Lathe of Heaven"? Its been decades (yes, literally) since I read it, but I think that they share a similar premise, but maybe not more than just dreaming. Not sure. Also a precursor: "Forbidden Planet". A bit cheesy, but an interesting (very Freudian) premise.
I have refrained from fully reading your interpretation, wanting to see it again before further commenting. Thanks.
Can't resist a quick comment or two:
1. My first impression: impressive.
2. But do special effects sometimes overwhelm the movie? (Very typical of contemporary Hollywood, IMHO.)Movies need moods, not just special effects. The special effects should enhance mood. During the snow fortress scenes I began to wonder if I'd wondered into a James Bond movie.
3. My more considered impression (beyond the inception?) says it's not quite in the elite category of SF. I don't think--after only one viewing, mind you--that it's "2001", "Blade Runner", "Matrix"-level good.
4. Has anyone read Ursala LeGuin's "The Lathe of Heaven"? Its been decades (yes, literally) since I read it, but I think that they share a similar premise, but maybe not more than just dreaming. Not sure. Also a precursor: "Forbidden Planet". A bit cheesy, but an interesting (very Freudian) premise.
I have refrained from fully reading your interpretation, wanting to see it again before further commenting. Thanks.
Post a Comment