Yep, short of Nolan saying concretely what his intent was there's no way to prove something isn't a dream. But if you're reading the various sites discussing this you'll find a lot of people saying that because the kids had not aged in the last scene and were wearing the exact same clothes it is proof positive that it was a dream.

Oh yeah, I've been seeing that all over the place, and love that it's been shot down. If anyone wants proof positive of something, I think they're looking in the wrong movie.

Our anniversary gift to ourselves was Inception.

I liked it a lot, but didn't love it. So much to say. I've read most of the thread, I'll try to keep things brief.

1) Regarding dream vs. not dream, I have no doubt that Nolan purposely made it interpretable. I choose to interpret it as NOT a dream at base level because I find it more interesting to ponder in that context. Unfortunately that interpretation doesn't allow me to ignore some of the plot holes, but I'm still more intrigued by the non-dream version WITH plot holes than the dream version wtihout.

2) Like everyone, I've spent a lot of time mulling over the recurring shot in which Cobb can't see his childrens' face. It was CLEARLY intended to be the single most dream-like sequence in the entire film, putting aside the blatant out-of-whack physics scenes. And clearly intended to be the single biggest "clue" pointing to the whole thing being a dream. However, what I've just come up with is this: Like the people in Yousef's basement, Cobb has spent too much time under and therefore can no longer dream without the technology (as he explicitly stated). And, as the weird old guy assisting Yousef said, for such people the dreaming IS their reality, real life becomes unreal. Thus, Cobb's real life memories have become like his dreams and vice versa. BOOM!

3) The main thing that's keeping me from really loving this movie is pace. Specifically, after all the setup about the time shift that happens between levels, I intensely disliked the payoff. I understand that, because of the unexpected variable of Scarecrow's security things got hurried from level 1 on, but even so, while according to the setup each level should have felt slower and less hurried than the last, the exact opposite was true. It became more and more frantic each level down. I understand WHY, and understand that it was because of the sudden need for speed due to the unforeseen, and understand that by showing the van falling in super slow motion was supposed to illustrate the time shift, but it just didn't work for me. I would have like to see Nolan figure out a way to actually slow the pace down at each level while still communicating the urgency. Not that I have the answer for how to do it, but that's the element that was missing for me.

4. While I choose not to look at it as being a dream from the beginning, I AM willing to fall on the side of it being a dream by the end. My biggest clue for that...limbo turned out to be so easy to solve apparently. I mean, it was set up as the worst of all possible fates...but eh, Cobb just kinda went in and saved both the Scarecrow and Saito. I mean, they tried to make it look like he had struggled and worn himself out, but so what? He still did it, and they didn't SHOW much struggle. Which makes me think...he didn't actually do it. He just convinced himself he did, meanwhile he's still stuck deep down, and possibly happier for it.

5. Possibly explained away with the above, but I was bugged by the lose definitions of how to get in an out of limbo. Like, when was it established that you could either die...or just kinda go one more level down? Seems like an odd pair of methods. Why is 4 levels enough to get to limbo? And why, if dying in the "normal" dream was so dangerous because of the sedation, why was dying for Scarecrow and Juno okay in limbo?



There's something about the way Nolan handles the maze-like complexities in both Inception and Dark Knight doesn't click with me. I think the best I can summarize it as is that he puts too much into the cleverness and not enough into the execution, pacing, and storytelling. I appreciate the cleverness but find myself wishing it were presented differently.

Quick hit - good film, enjoyed greatly. Full of holes but that's the way it goes. I love a film that demands your whole brain and every ounce of your attention. iSm mentioned On Her Majesty's Secret Service - I was already thinking this was a great Bond film with all the travel and intrigue, especially in Mumbai, and when they showed up at Hoth world I almost laughed out loud in glee. (Special thanks to the Bond thread, I think.)

The film started a little too quickly but as GD pointed out to me, one could tie that in to the dream-like feel (you never know how you got there). On the other hand, it seems that all the "hey this might not be great filmmaking" comments get answered with "it's like that in dreams".

BTW I shy away from the all-a-dream interpretation for reasons similar to Alex's. I am sure that the film was designed to evoke this and leaves it up to you to "believe" in it or not...I choose not to.

If they had invested just a few extra minutes here and there with certain dropped details, it would have been much more engaging. For instance, when Ariadne rips Cobb apart for his issues, I felt they hadn't sufficiently indicated that she was now so well-versed in all this dream stuff that she could take him to task. When Cobb is trying to remember what he came to Limbo to do for Saito it just isn't enough to sell me on "keeping your head in Limbo is hard." There were a bunch of these moments.

Quite a few important lines of dialog were rushed and hard to hear over music and background sound - unsure if that was our print (I'm never seeing an action/visual heavy film in old-school projection again) or poor editing, though Dark Knight seemed to have similar issues.

I enjoyed all the acting (I don't have a Leo grudge) and felt empathetic to all the characters. When Saito was shot I was surprised how much I cared.

I'm still puzzling out the Limbo issues. There are many. More on that later.

My interpretation is that the subconscious is supposed to be very separated from the conscious Cobb. As Cobb can't tap into or control his subconscious mind, the subconscious can't control or tap into the conscious either. The projections exist only in the realm of the dream (whether constructed by the dreamer or an architect) and no alarm bells go off until the dream's fabric is tampered with.

I thought of this after the "dream big" line where one of the guys pulls out a humongous gun. If you can dream any weapon you want, it kind of unravels a lot of things. These movies always have huge plotholes like this once characters are given some measure of god-like powers. I accept that even though it does bug in the days following the viewing.

And another thing...

The whole "totem" thing is very much full of holes. It was explained that, since no one touched it, no one could know how it feels. How does that translate into the spinning/lack of spinning thing? The idea whole point is that, in the scenario you're trying to guard against, you aren't the one dreaming. You're the "target" and have been unknowingly inserted into someone else's architected dream. So, since it's not your dream, you can't control the physics, how exactly is the top supposed to stay spinning in the dream? The person doing the dreaming isn't supposed to know about your totem, so they can't make it still spin. Does not compute.

Nevermind that the whole totem thing calls a lot more into question. I mean, forget holding a certain little object, if a trained dreamer can be aware enough to notice that subtle of a difference, then I could be aware enough to realize that, say, whoever is doing the dreaming doesn't know the specifics of my penis. I'd notice pretty quickly if things weren't hanging right, I wouldn't need anything ELSE in my pocket.

Well, there was that day I was hanging to the left ALL DAY, and tweeted about it constantly, and it bugged me, and it wouldn't stop ... but it wasn't a dream.

Upon further reflection I suppose it could be argue that one's own body sense is produced by your own mind, even within someone else's dream, so that could be considered an unreliable cue.

However the point regarding the spinning top still stands.

Yeah, the forever spinning thing is hard to explain under the rules given. The architect remembered to make it a part of the dream that a truck driven off a bridge falls into the river, how hard is it to automatically apply other rules of physics somewhat automatically.

That said, there had to have been some unique aspect to Cobb's top otherwise anybody who knew he had a top as his totem would be able to replicate it easy enough. So it shouldn't have been that it fell or didn't but that it fell in some unique way.

Agreed on the issues with the top. Why not pick something that makes more sense?

I went back and read the article EH linked to. I really dug the filmmaking parallels.

Except that the top wasn't his. It was Mal's. Why, if someone has to have something that's unique your own, would he take someone else's totem. And why was that totem her "secret" that she locked up in her safe?