The "Inception" Thread

[Alex]

That is certainly one of the common interpretations of the movie. My problem with it is that if there is no basis on which to believe anything in the movie.

Spoiler:

For example, it is then equally possible that the entire movie a dream from a 13-year-old girl who doesn't actually appear in the dream.

So to me it is a great way to fanwank away any plotholes but it doesn't give any depth to the movie.

[innerSpaceman]

Spoiler:

Except that in internal framework of the film, the dreamer is always IN the dream. So I could imagine the whole thing is happening on Mars, and Cobb is kept in an ice-cold snowglobe while the Martian Princess dreams about him ... but since Cobb is the main character of the film and, I believe, is in every scene in the movie ... I'm comfortable with my assumption that the entire film is his dream.

Of course, one of the things I like about the film is - like life - it's completely open to multiple interpretations. I may develop a slightly different one if I see it again.






And, au contraire, I think it gives incredible depth to the movie. But that's just me (and, well, maybe a few hundred thousand other folks).

[Alex]

Spoiler:

True, except in the internal framework of the film there is a level of non-dream reality. If that isn't true then you no longer need give any credence to the "rules" if another interpretation is more to one's liking.

I'm sure Nolan knows what he thinks happened but I'm also sure he wants it to be ambiguous.

Oh and

Spoiler:

Cobb is not in every scene in the movie. Several scenes with Joseph Gordon-Levitt take place without even a sleeping Cobb in the scene. The scene with him stealing a kiss from Ellen Page, for example. Or both of his fight scenes in the hotel.

Also, both of the scenes where Eames is pretending to be Tom Berenger and interacting with Fischer take place without Cobb being in the room.

So if Cobb is dreaming those, he's dreaming content he wasn't present for.

[innerSpaceman]

Spoiler:

Ah, very true about the scenes where Eames is "forging" Berenger. I'd forgotten about those. I may have to re-evaluate.

But Cobb IS in the scene where Arthur steals a kiss.



I'm sure Nolan's going to keep mumm about his own interpretation. I wonder if it would change if presented with gaping plot hole that he didn't manage to fill or care about during the 10-year gestation of this project.

[Alex]

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

But Cobb IS in the scene where Arthur steals a kiss.

No he's not. Arthur and Ellen Page are in the hotel lobby. Cobb and Fischer are in the hotel bar.

Spoiler:

This separation was intentional to make it harder for Fischer's projections to find Arthur when while Cobb was making him aware of the dreamstate, creating the reason Arthur tricked Page into kissing him.

Unless I"m completely misremembering that.

I'm curious which gaping plot hole your thinking of?

[mousepod]

Here's my quick take on the Inception plot:

Spoiler:

I think the whole movie takes place in a controlled dream.

The only two ways that they use the dream technology in the movie is either for research, or to steal information.

If the dream movie was the former, then it would suck. Therefore, the purpose of the dream-movie is to steal information from some "mark".

So if the big cathartic revelation of Inception is that Cobb admits to Ariadne that he performed 'inception' on Mal, then most probably Cobb is the mark and Ariadne is the person who was hired to get that information.

If that scenario is true, then Arthur could well be the dreamer.

But who would want that information in the first place? Going out on a limb, I'd say Mal's father... who (at least in this dream reality) knows all about the process.

The whole Saito/Fischer story, then, is the 'fictional' contrivance that lets us know what's 'really' going on. It's a microcosmic telling of the story constructed to bring Cobb to his admission.

Did I mention that I really enjoyed this film?

[innerSpaceman]

Well, it wasn't such a severe separation that Arthur and Page don't see Cobb walking by from where they sit. Cobb may then walk into another adjacent room, but he's in the scene. Doesn't much matter, as the forgery scenes you pointed out require some deft acrobatics on my part to maintain my current version of my theory of the film.

The gaping plot hole I'm thinking of is ...

Spoiler:

Why Cobb's kids can't come to Paris, or any of the other dozen places outside the U.S. Cobb visits in the movie. He's obsessed with not being able to get back to the States to see his kids' faces. But not for one instant does anyone suggest or consider bringing the kids to him.

This is so much like a dream conundrum. But it's probably just a gaping plot hole. I don't know why movies are so riddled with them, despite years of preparation and constant attention.

Spoiler:

But also supporting my It's-All-a-Dream theory is the style of editing. Most movies jump from place-to-place, never showing the details of people getting in or out of vehicles, or the mundane routines of travel or interim time where no plot points happen. But I noticed early on that Nolan's editing style for this film was extreme in this regard, calling distinct attention to these jumps instead of adhering to the typical style for this sort of thing, which doesn't usually pull you out of a film by highlighting the editing.

So when the film specifically referenced the dream effect of never knowing how you got anywhere, but always just being plunked down in the middle of "scenes," I sensed a winking nod to the film's exaggerated editing style.


That style continued in much of the "real world" scenes, and was certainly as exaggerated in the final sequence (that was purposefully a mystery) as in any other dream sequence.

Of course, since it's set up to puzzle the audience as to whether Cobb ever wakes up at the end, I don't find it too much of a stretch to assume he's asleep at other times we assume he's awake.

As for whether he's asleep during the entire movie, I have to choose between the illogic of him dreaming of scenes he's not present for, and a gaping plot hole that negates his entire motivation in the film.

I don't remember my own dreams very often, or in great detail. Do people have dreams in which they are not a character, or in which they are missing from some scenes that feature other people??

[Alex]

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

The gaping plot hole I'm thinking of is ...
[spoiler]Why Cobb's kids can't come to Paris, or any of the other dozen places outside the U.S. Cobb visits in the movie.

Spoiler:

I reading on that was that Cobb made the choice not to take the children with him when he ran and so has left them in the care of Mal's parents and since they believe he murdered Mal, why would they be willing to give them back to him?

And somehow Saito's magic access cleared his name such that her parents were mollified as well.

And in fact if it is his dream, he could bring his kids to him if that is what he wanted, it would be as easy as projecting them into wherever he is.

Spoiler:

I don't remember my own dreams very often, or in great detail. Do people have dreams in which they are not a character, or in which they are missing from some scenes that feature other people??

Spoiler:

I never remember dreams so couldn't say but on other boards where this has been discussed plenty of people do claim to have dreams where they're just fuzzy observers.

But again, that's my problem with the "it's all a dream" theory. It may be the intent but it also renders moot any discussion as any point of view is equally valid by waving a hand and saying "it's a dream."

I think we need a separate thread. Spoiler tags are getting confusing.

[mousepod]

My theory handles all of the plot holes.

[Alex]

True, but like I've said, it moots all the plot discussions, too.