INCEPTION Discussion Thread (***Spoilers!!!***)

[Shatterer of Dreams]

Or Ellen Page, the architecht, simply changed their looks to trick him and give him happiness. She was the only one who knew Cobb's secrets. And her comment to Arthur somewhat supports this theory.

Its not a definative thing.

Except that Nolan was quoted as saying that it's not a dream. Same with the people who have worked on the film.

 

[Maglor]

Just a quick thought before I do my digging:

Those that believe that the ending is a dream can share no more than shadowy baseless theories, whereas the argument for the ending being real are solid and abundant.

 

[Deckard]

Except that Nolan was quoted as saying that it's not a dream. Same with the people who have worked on the film.

I think you need to reread that boss. He says no such thing.

His exact quote on the toppling :

"This gives Cobb a base-line reality"

A far cry from Ridley himself saying Deckard is a replicant.

 

[Maglor]

Yeah, it would be news to me to see Noland going on record as saying whether the ending as a dream or not. It needs to be up to the viewer.

I do remember hearing/reading that he does know what happened at the end. Meaning, as the writer, he had something specific in mind.

 

[Deckard]

Just a quick thought before I do my digging:

Those that believe that the ending is a dream can share no more than shadowy baseless theories, whereas the argument for the ending being real are solid and abundant.

Thats all there is supporting either claim. We've been told we cannot trust Cobb's narration. It's open to interpretation until Chris decides otherwise.

If he does come out and say its not a dream, I will happily lay down any other theories because he's in charge, its his story and what he says goes. His goal as a filmmaker is to evoke emotion and get people talking about the movie. The ending does both.

Also one last thing that no one has answered pertaining to my theory, who saved Cobb from the van? They are just standing there watching it sink to the bottom of the river. If he isn't awake in that level, how could he be kicked back to the real world? He cannot by there own rules. You can't kick up more then one level at a time, so he's still just asleep underwater and running out of oxygen/lungs filling with water. To his brain if he did kick back out to that level, he would be drowning at the bottom of a river.

 

[Mad Old Lu]

From Wikipedia:

Nolan himself interprets the ending as a return to reality, but noted that "I choose to believe that Cobb gets back to his kids, because I have young kids. People who have kids definitely read it differently than those who don't". He indicated that the top was not the most crucial element of the ending, saying "I've read plenty of very off-the-wall interpretations... The most important emotional thing about the top spinning at the end is that Cobb is not looking at it. He doesn't care."

I'll go along with what Nolan believes.

However, and I just watched it again last night, I can't get past the kids being the same age and wearing pretty much the same clothes. Also, Mal and Cobb got out of limbo by doing the train thing, but they jumped straight into reality? Shouldn't they have jumped back to the secondary/tertiary dream, and then needed to wake up from those? But that could just have been done to be quick and efficient in storytelling.

At first I was really annoyed at the ending, but after I read what Nolan says is the point of the scene (that Cobb doesn't care about the top), it made it sit better with me. Still, it's a fantastic movie that feels so cathartic to watch, especially such a strong emotional end with the swelling melancholy music.

 

[Devil_666]

Those that believe that the ending is a dream can share no more than shadowy baseless theories, whereas the argument for the ending being real are solid and abundant.

I'll change all that. Trust me.

 

[Maglor]

I'll change all that. Trust me.

I'll be very impressed if you can present an argument that hasn't already been thoroughly discussed already.

 

[Shatterer of Dreams]

I think you need to reread that boss. He says no such thing.

His exact quote on the toppling :

"This gives Cobb a base-line reality"

A far cry from Ridley himself saying Deckard is a replicant.

"The kids are not wearing the same clothes at the end! And they do age! We were working with two sets of kids,"

 

[Deckard]

"The kids are not wearing the same clothes at the end! And they do age! We were working with two sets of kids,"

Yes he did say that. That... is not :

Nolan was quoted as saying "that it's not a dream."

Not even remotely close and still proves zippity doo da.

It could still be Ellen Page's doing or Cobb building again without Mal and moving on.

"Cobb is an untrushworthy narrator."

I use to believe it wasn't a dream and then after my second viewing I just realised way too much more of what was going on to say its either, but I'm more convinced it is.

 

[Maglor]

Thats all there is supporting either claim.

I disagree. Case in point:

The ending is real because the children are played by different (older) actors and are wearing different clothes than they were in the dreams. That is tangible and solid.

The "dream theory" response to that is: 'well Ariadne could have created a dream world where his kids are older and wearing different clothes." That's totally nebulous and without basis. When is it ever implied that Ariadne had the time and the will to do this? It only works as a theory, not as a real argument.

We've been told we cannot trust Cobb's narration.

Yes. He himself is unsure... UNTIL THE END.

That's the conclusion to his character ark. He embraces truth and reality. And we can choose to complete the journey with him or continue to doubt... but now I'm getting into the content of my past posts, which I will repost soon.

It's open to interpretation until Chris decides otherwise.

If he does come out and say its not a dream, I will happily lay down any other theories because he's in charge, its his story and what he says goes.

In defense of those who like to believe the ending is a dream, I would say that they are fully within their rights to keep believing that, even if Noland contradicts it. One can still choose to interpret it differently.

His goal as a filmmaker is to evoke emotion and get people talking about the movie. The ending does both.

Exactly. And that's true regardless of what Noland personally intended.

Also one last thing that no one has answered pertaining to my theory, who saved Cobb from the van? They are just standing there watching it sink to the bottom of the river. If he isn't awake in that level, how could he be kicked back to the real world? He cannot by there own rules. You can't kick up more then one level at a time, so he's still just asleep underwater and running out of oxygen/lungs filling with water. To his brain if he did kick back out to that level, he would be drowning at the bottom of a river.

My understanding is that Cobb dies in all of the levels. Thus, when he dies in limbo he goes straight to reality.

 

[Deckard]

Psst, his name is Chris Nolan.



And with that I'm gonna stick with my theory. (and yes its probably a big deal your missing those details)

 

[Deckard]

Yes. He himself is unsure... UNTIL THE END.

Actually Chris says he just doesn't care. Ellen saw the kids in person, she knows about Mal, the only one who does. She has every reason to want to help Cobb, she knows its killing him, she sees it firsthand in Limbo. She knows all he wants is his kids. And she knows Cobb can't build himself anymore. It makes complete and perfect sense. All she has to do is build the situation and let Cobb project whatever life/people he wants into it.

 

[Shatterer of Dreams]

From Wikipedia:


I'll go along with what Nolan believes.

However, and I just watched it again last night, I can't get past the kids being the same age and wearing pretty much the same clothes. Also, Mal and Cobb got out of limbo by doing the train thing, but they jumped straight into reality? Shouldn't they have jumped back to the secondary/tertiary dream, and then needed to wake up from those? But that could just have been done to be quick and efficient in storytelling.

At first I was really annoyed at the ending, but after I read what Nolan says is the point of the scene (that Cobb doesn't care about the top), it made it sit better with me. Still, it's a fantastic movie that feels so cathartic to watch, especially such a strong emotional end with the swelling melancholy music.

Yes he did say that. That... is not :



Not even remotely close and still proves zippity doo da.

It could still be Ellen Page's doing or Cobb building again without Mal and moving on.

"Cobb is an untrushworthy narrator."

I use to believe it wasn't a dream and then after my second viewing I just realised way too much more of what was going on to say its either, but I'm more convinced it is.

Obviously you did not read Old Jim's post......

Nolan himself interprets the ending as a return to reality, but noted that "I choose to believe that Cobb gets back to his kids, because I have young kids. People who have kids definitely read it differently than those who don't". He indicated that the top was not the most crucial element of the ending, saying "I've read plenty of very off-the-wall interpretations... The most important emotional thing about the top spinning at the end is that Cobb is not looking at it. He doesn't care." So that is him saying "this is the ending"

and the fact that the chidlren were different and he wasn't wearing his ring does prove that it's not a dream.

 

[Deckard]

Obviously you did not read Old Jim's post......

Nolan himself interprets the ending as a return to reality, but noted that "I choose to believe that Cobb gets back to his kids, because I have young kids. People who have kids definitely read it differently than those who don't". He indicated that the top was not the most crucial element of the ending, saying "I've read plenty of very off-the-wall interpretations... The most important emotional thing about the top spinning at the end is that Cobb is not looking at it. He doesn't care." So that is him saying "this is the ending"

and the fact that the chidlren were different and he wasn't wearing his ring does prove that it's not a dream.

Again you misquote or put words in his mouth. He did say that he chooses to believe he gets back to his kids, he never says that it was a return to reality, that is the interviewer's words in concerns to his own opinion. So I love that Chris is saying its open to interpretation and yet think there is a definitive answer all in one thought.

There is a reason he is using words like "he chooses to believe" instead of "Cobb is back in reality"

And again, it could simply be Ellen Page doing it. Of course they would need to look differant for Cobb to believe it. And of course she understands how his Totem works and can manipulate it.

 

[Devil_666]

The ending is real because the children are played by different (older) actors and are wearing different clothes than they were in the dreams. That is tangible and solid.

Actually it isn't. You're using examples outside of the movie itself to prove/disprove points IN the film. That's like saying "Well I know for a fact this character doesn't die because the credits list so-and-so as the stunt double i.e. the character in question wasn't even in that scene, it was the stunt double. So that character is still alive. That is tangible and solid."

The only reason you know for a fact that the kids were played by different children for the different ages AND that they had on slightly different clothing is because of information outside the realm of the movie i.e. IMDB/Film Credits/Interviews.

So those things IMO aren't credible and shouldn't be credible when discussing the actual film.

 

[Maglor]

The only reason you know for a fact that the kids were played by different children for the different ages AND that they had on slightly different clothing is because of information outside the realm of the movie i.e. IMDB/Film Credits/Interviews.

But the content is there. A screen cap will show that it's different kids of different ages. It will show that they are wearing different clothes.

 

[Mad Old Lu]

I found this:
https://evakriss-corner.blogspot.com/2010/08/inception-2010-details-explaination.html

Scroll down to point #3 and they show you a comparison of the children.

I needed to see that because just from what I see on screen, there is no way that I would be able to tell the differences by simply watching the movie.

 

[Maglor]

Looks like an interesting read.


To me, looking at those screen caps, it's pretty clear that the kids (especially the girl) are older.

Of course Nolan wouldn't make it too overt, because it's supposed to make you second guess. On a single viewing you shouldn't pick up on that.

 

[Shatterer of Dreams]

Again you misquote or put words in his mouth. He did say that he chooses to believe he gets back to his kids, he never says that it was a return to reality, that is the interviewer's words in concerns to his own opinion. So I love that Chris is saying its open to interpretation and yet think there is a definitive answer all in one thought.

There is a reason he is using words like "he chooses to believe" instead of "Cobb is back in reality"

And again, it could simply be Ellen Page doing it. Of course they would need to look differant for Cobb to believe it. And of course she understands how his Totem works and can manipulate it.

he's being tactful because he wants people to take what they want to take from it. It's like when a musician is asked about his lyrics he'll usually say "i'd rather not talk about it because it may mean something else to someone and I don't want to ruin it for them" - eddie veder. If Chris says that he "thinks" the movie has the happy ending then why would I disagree with that?