DescentBB

...The inevitable discussion thread!

I don't know about you guys, but it's easily my favorite movie!

Intense, creative, mind-bending, no sex, dang well thought out, etc.

Let's hear your thoughts!

It was good, although the director must hate the audience since they didn't show if it stopped or not at the end.

Actually the first thing I thought of when I looked at the plot outline was an animated movie I've seen called \"Paprika\" but aside from having people use some <plot device> to dive into other peoples dreams they have very little in common.

Ok, I'll see it this weekend.

My wife and I saw it on Friday. Very VERY good, IMHO.

Exceeded my already-high expectations (I've always enjoyed Nolan's films); easily the best film I've seen in a while.

Krom wrote:It was good, although the director must hate the audience since they didn't show if it stopped or not at the end.

EVERYONE in the theater I was in started freaking out simultaneously! I really loved/hated that twist though, VERY thought provoking!

Great movie. It made my balls explode

phx13 [POC] wrote:It made my balls explode

That's what you say about everything.

Great remake of \"Dreamscape\"

The end of the movie? Yeah, I just laughed.

The final twist was predictable, but I thought it was well-done. Sparked some intriguing conversation.

Agreed. Half of me wants it to fall over so he can actually be living reality but the other half wants it to stay up which would mean his wife is still alive...

Off topic, I saw The Prestige last night, I thought that was pretty cool too

Krom wrote:It was good, although the director must hate the audience since they didn't show if it stopped or not at the end.

The director doesn't hate the audience at all, it stopped in the end and he was in the real world. If you pay attention to his wedding ring throughout the movie he will have it on whenever he is in a dream and have it off whenever he is in the real world. He didn't have it on in the end.

what would have made the ending even more trippy is if the dad came back and stopped the spinning top before Cobb could see it still spinning. That would trip up quite a few more audiences and I feel would have made the better ending. lol

Saw it again last night WOW it's even BETTER the second time! One of those movies that just leaves you breathless at the end!

My boyfriend wants to see it again and I couldn't wait for it to end.

I gave it only two stars. I liked the story, the special effects and especially the actors but I didn't like the cinematography. The lens distance to subject, and excessive camera shake, was awful and I never liked movies where the characters are so \"in my face\" I can almost count skin pores so I won't be buying the DVD or seeing it again.

I liked the last twenty minutes partly because of the music and partly because it was finally over. Just wanted to give another point of view.

Bee

I heard that it's dumb as ice. =P

Bet51987 wrote:...I didn't like the cinematography. The lens distance to subject, and excessive camera shake, was awful and I never liked movies where the characters are so "in my face"...

Okay, I can understand the objection to the "up close and personal" filming style. I enjoyed it, as I felt the film was more character-driven than anything, but I can appreciate someone not liking that style.

But where are you getting "excessive camera shake"? They used a lot of rolling / tilted / moving shots, but Nolan used almost zero camera shake.

I can say that, because I always take note of camera-shake nowadays. My wife has had inner-ear issues for almost 10 years now, and is very sensitive to even the smallest shake. It's something I now watch for, and I only remember one scene early in the film where any shake was used.

After the movie, my wife said she had to focus on other things during some of the rolling / tilting / moving shots, but she also mentioned the lack of shaking, and said she appreciated that the director hadn't overused it.

Want excessive camera shake? Watch, Blair Witch Project, Quarantined, Cloverfield, etc. Inception is NOT one of those types.

Foil wrote:Okay, I can understand the objection to the "up close and personal" filming style. I enjoyed it, as I felt the film was more character-driven than anything, but I can appreciate someone not liking that style.

But where are you getting "excessive camera shake"? They used a lot of rolling / tilted / moving shots, but Nolan used almost zero camera shake.

Sorry, I should have said it differently. I just meant that I didn't like the quick scene changes, panning, and moving shots while still shooting with an "in your face" close-up lens. It ruined it for me and I found the same problem with the Star Trek movie.

I also thought the lead in was boring and way too long but the excessive use of the close up lens was my main reason for wanting to leave and I'm very much a science fiction fan and I see every one of them.

@AlphaDog. Yeah, those had "camera shake" but third person movies are supposed to.


Bee

This is basically that other movie from the 1980's where that young man enters into people's dreams.

Neo wrote:This is basically that other movie from the 1980's where that young man enters into people's dreams.

Remake or not, this movie was better than 99% of the other ones out there in the theater. What movie are you talking about? I want to check it out.

Bet51987 wrote:The lens distance to subject, and excessive camera shake, was awful

I did notice the lens distance being quite close but it didn't seem to bother me that much. Maybe because I was sitting on the very back row but I don't know.

Regarding excessive camera shake, I honestly didn't notice this at all. Most recent movies I have gone to see I distinctly remember walking out of the theater thinking "blah blah blah was cool, but I will never purchase this or want to see it again because of the excessive shaking in every scene". I can't stand that, this annoyance started for me with the Bourne Identity. Now I actively look for shaky reports before I go see a film. But I really didn't notice it in this film if it was there.

Neo wrote:This is basically that other movie from the 1980's where that young man enters into people's dreams.

Which one?

I quite enjoyed eXistenZ. It wasn't so much "dreams" as "video game simulations", but the basic idea was the same.

Lothar wrote: I quite enjoyed eXistenZ. It wasn't so much "dreams" as "video game simulations", but the basic idea was the same.

Haha, that movie pissed me off. Now THAT is the worst ending ever. One of those movies where you think "now what was the point of anything in this movie when the ending is like that!"

Movies that are all dreamy with confused reality can be good but there needs to be SOMETHING planted on solid ground or there is no point in anything that goes on.

eXistenz was a great idea done horribly wrong IMHO.

I think someone said it already, Dreamscape but I might be mixed up. I liked how eXistenZ ended. IMO it leaves it up to the audience to find and understand the \"solid ground\"