Hey now....I HAD to go see Twilight for my Wife's sake :P . You can't blame a man for that....that's like blaming a man for liking oral sex. It just doesn't make sense

As for the rest...*sigh* you're right, and well said.

P.S. I WAS there!!! Didn't you know? I'm secretly Merlin in disguise and I age backwards...really really slowly j/k

Ah yeah, that was a good movie indeed. It's a shame that Guillermo Del Toro "abandoned" The Hobbit...:| He is a decent director.

Had to see it for your wife's sake???  You could have gone and closed your eyes.

As for the other (oral sex)... dunno, I don't talk about sex anymore...

Yet again, why gets half a topic about Inception turned into "my favourite movies/must see this/random fantasy movies"-thread ?

Just noticing, I could also go reply in every thread that I like Pan's Labyrinth and post a random trailer (Sucker Punch, at least this looks more fun than Watchmen).

Maybe I should mention I like pineapple pie ?

Back to topic: Maybe not the best movie ever as I'm more a fantasy guy, but yep, worth the money spend for the cinema. The only thing which was a bit astonishing myself was that the quality - even it was a digital cinema - was par to my blue-ray / DTS system at home, at least what I see from my BR films I have at home ..

Perhaps because the base topic had no legs and would have died a death?

There is no law requiring a thread to remain word-specific and the comments still pertain to 'best movie I ever saw', so it's actually still 'on topic', apart from the word 'Inception'...;)

Here we go...

From its INCEPTION this thread has been about "the best movie I ever saw"....

Suffice?....;)

And hence the birth of this: 

BTW, I saw Inception last Tuesday and although it was a good movie, I was expecting it to be more.  Personally, I think Shutter Island trumped this one.  I'm a huge fan of "mind f**k" movies, (Vanilla Sky, Dark City, Memento, etc), so I guess I was just expecting something a little less expected.

The movie was a good idea and unique narrative/visual construction, but it failed a crucial test of all potentially great films...namely, that the audience never identifies or develops a rapport with the main character (Leo's).

In INCEPTION, the goal to get back to the kids isn't fully fleshed out until the third act...and by then it is far too late.

When one realizes this is actually just a bad heist genre film, plot/character-wise, you'll understand why so many people fall asleep at the end of the first act.

A film that demands this much mental energy MUST connect to the audience, so they will go along with the ride willingly.   If you were watching INCEPTION on your TV for the first time late at night, you'd most likely fall asleep or turn it off within the first 1/2 hour.

Contrast this to THE MATRIX (the first, classic one, not the knock off sequel crapolas).  We learn very quickly that the fate of the whole human race is at stake...and almost more importantly, the meaning of life/existence is hinted at right from the outset.  We all identify with those questions, etc. so we're hooked on wanting to know more BEFORE the big twist is dropped on us.

Simply put, INCEPTION is a very visually stylistic OCEANS 11, but without the strong character connection of even that lessor effort.  

In 10 years, you will be still be watching THE MATRIX from time to time.  Is there really any reason, even now, to watch INCEPTION more than once?  Think about it.  

That's the difference between truly great movies and movies that only pretend to be great.

 

 

 

So what you're saying, Excalpius, is that I can save myself the expense and wait 'til it comes to 'free-to-air'??

You're calling THE MATRIX a truly great movie?  You're argument is entirely invalid.  It's child-like philosophical undertones are given a concrete resolution before the end of the first film - why yes, the world is a computer generate dream world and yes, people subconsciously know that the world around them isn't real.  Discussion destroyed.
The film was made famous due to it's then-inventive special effects and action scenes.  Ignoring that it's also responsible for the entirely over-used 'wire fu' that infests movies these days, every aspect of the film - every. single. one - is borrowed from better films and books such as Dark City and Alice in Wonderland and the entire Hong Kong film industry.  Tinting the picture green and blue, making Keanu Reeves say 'Woah' and asking 'is the world real' doesn't make for a 'truly great' movie, I'm afraid.  It's still a good action film, and isn't as dumb as most others, but if THE MATRIX is your idea of a great film, then I fear to ask for your definition of a bad one.

Personally, I thought Inception was brilliant, a five star movie.  Instead of borrowing ideas from better films and stealing action scenes, Nolan created a film that relies on the audiences abilitiy to comprehend it's intricate nature and subject matter.  By sheer definition it requires more than one viewing to truly understand.  The film leaves with an open resolution that is then appropriated by the audience member; it means whatever you want it to mean.
Unlike THE MATRIX, which hands you generalised questions of a silver plater ('Is the world real?  How do you know?') and then almost as quickly answers them by the resolution of the film (and don't get me started on the pathetically bloated sequels) Inception asks actual philosophical questions through it's resolution; if the world around you was really all a dream, would you care to know?

A good movie, for me, is something that is worth watching at least once.

A great movie is something that I would be willing to watch again in order to show someone else.

beyond that ... it depends on your favorite genre, your favorite type of movie, your current mood, and the time of day.

 

For instance, currently I consider Jurassic Park, Pandorum, and Identity as the top 3 movies of the hour.

 

another hour I may prefer the 3rd LOTR, Kingdom of Heaven, and Chronicles of Riddick

 

another hour I may prefer Matrix, Inception, and 6th sense

 

For those of you that hold the first Matrix miles above the latter two ... consider this: the first movie was the unveiling, rather different from the rest of the saga as it sets up the story rather than "telling it." Better for the psycho-thriller/philosophy crowd ... yet still satisfying the action crowd. The latter 2 aren't "sequels" but rather are the rest of the saga, telling the whole story. The full "matrix" movie is in fact all 3 tied together, all at once. Part of the dissapointment some feel in the latter 2 is that they were looking forward to MORE unveilings (more twists and turns, dreams within dreams) but really there were no more 'real' unveilings to be had. A couple of twists maybe, but by that time the "world version" was already set in stone. The latter two were simply the rest of the story. Sure they can't stand by themselves as "good movies" ... but they weren't individual movies, they were latter segments of the first one.

Nor it seems any less.

Aw c'mon.... I don't even think about it anymore!!! 

Probably no less either... cos sometimes I'll have a thaughty.

 

INCEPTION actually asks of you nothing and does not pose the question you seem to wish it poses.  You are projecting your desire to make the movie more meaningful than it actually is.  Taken at face value, it is inventive as a narrative/visual exercise, yes, but a rather poor bit of character driven storytelling presented with a patently linear plot.  

INCEPTION is a generic heist film in an inventive setting (recursive dreams).  There is actually no "purpose" or "meaning" to these dream layers beyond being new staging areas for stock action 101 moments.  Yawn.

And no, the movie doesn't even take one sitting to understand it.  Its plot was linear, cookie cutter and obvious, even before the end of the first act.  Notice how there are no twists or turns in the plotting or character development?  Disagree?  Name one.  And no, deus ex machinas (i.e. the van is hit by a car) don't count. 

Much better films that cover similar concepts and still hold up on repeat viewings decades later include THE TRUMAN SHOW, the first MATRIX film, and even to a lesser extent DARK CITY.  These films are both narratively inventive AND emotionally engaging.

Okay .... I'd say my favorite movie of the hour is Memento.

Seriously, good movie.

Agree with Excalpius to a lesser extent about the characters and plot being somewhat lacking. I think he is being a little cynical in his whole approach to critiquing such a movie. I would say that based merely on its concept and execution of the dream world, I am sufficiently impressed to say this is my favorite exploration into the dream state. To me this movie is less about the characters and their minute internal conflicts and more about the exploration of humanity's ability to create. Creation is the ultimate goal of life in the universe. If a dream can be controlled and the dream is better than or equal to reality, does it matter if its real? This is the great question this movie asks as many others have done before. This one asks it uniquely and without some of the sidetracking plots that I find fault in, such as "The Matrix." If you disagree that is fine, but knit-picking the explicitly if the main character's drive is a somewhat subjective argument to make.

His internal conflict, the guilt of his inception of his wife and his paternal instincts, was sufficient for the depth of his character, as it was. I was more enraptured by the prospects of the architects and the question of knowing if you are dreaming. This is something the Matrix refused to elaborate on, using the tome of being chosen to skirt the very question. Dreams are not easily defined as the deeper we dream, the less we are self-aware. My imagination is still racing at the visual and emotional displays of the dreams we saw and what could be, were this technology to exist.

 

Agreed.  It does an excellent job of making you care about the protagonist right from the outset.  At that point, we actually want to know the "why of it all" and are therefore willingly investing our mental energies into navigating the story until its conclusion.  

 

That's why it's hard to stop watching MEMENTO once you've hit the play button.

I wasn't thrilled by the trailers, but a friend talked me into seeing it, and I ended up being amazed.  It's so rare that a movie actually makes you think.  Plus, the hallway fight scene was f*cking incredible.

lol You found that after I showed you those other vids from there didn't you, Karen.

I definitely think that Memento is superior to Inception.  In Memento, you really can't understand the movie until the very end (err, beginning). And it works both as a story and as a film about narrative construction.

Agree with the point that Inception, once the concept is presented, is pretty straightforward.  You're just along for the ride.

Great ride though.

Inception in many ways uses a more japanese style of storytelling, as opposed to the western tradition. We already know the outcome from the first scene in many respects. I just wish they had spent more time fleshing out the characters, which is really what makes japanese drama so appealing.

I just saw this movie, and I must say that the acting was great, but the directing was horrible, and the script probably was too.

 

There's no character development. There's no suspension of disbelief. The director/screenplay just keeps throwing shit on you with absolutely no story. I mean the only time they mentioned the dream thing was "the government did it". You don't get any deep character revelation until the very end. There's no deep intercharacter dialogue. There's a lot of unnecessary action sequences, the movie was about 45 minutes too long, and worse of all it ends with a cliff hanger like a bad episode of LOST.

 

The only good thing in this movie was some nifty special effects and acting. Everything else was cliche, borrowed, and uninspired.

 

weird how some people hate certain parts b/c its a cliffhanger or its action, and others can love it b/c its a cliffhanger and has action.

 

I thought the directing and script must of been brilliant. Granted i think they left alot out and it was cheap how the rules changed, and how they dont explain who invented the whole dream thing but the whole movie is a complicated concept. To put this movie on paper and then show it to an audience in a non boring or text down way takes a good amount of creativity.

Sometimes movies dont have to explore the depth of characters. I think Leo's tormented dead wife popping back and forth was all the drama i needed. Half the movie was about his dead wife and Leo kicking himself in the ass. In the real world things arent always so complicated and dramatic. And in the job they were doing its about acting professional, dont be thinking about other crap.

Some people are bragging about Eastern character development and animes. Maybe thats why i hate sooo many animes. Kung Fu anime turns into a little girl whinning about how she lost her cat for the next 40 minutes. I guess i was raised to judge and learn from peoples actions, not what they talk about.

 

How bizarre. Tastes do differ, thank God.

Inception was entertaining, if bogged down by gratuitous gunfights and special effects. The lapses in logic were much greater than in Nolan's original masterpiece of 10 years ago: Memento, which had a similar theme but was much more coherent, dramatic, and consistent. Inception got the job done, although I would have liked to see it about 40 minutes shorter and with a bit more narrative stringency. Besides the superfluous battles, spex-orgies, and poor logic, I only found two things dissapointing: the fairly standard Hollywood dime-a-dozen hoodlums, all machine-gun wielding, who cannot hit the side of a barn -- but in Inception, these goons actually DID hit the cars aplenty, but they merely failed to cause any harm -- and the lack of imagination involved in the dreams (in which everything behaved like it does "in reality", at least in reality portrayed by Hollywood, in which 40 goons with machine guns are unable to penetrate a van door with a bullet).

Otherwise, it was an entertaining Hollywood film that didn't make you regret spending 8 Euros for 2 hours. But the best film you've seen in 25 years? My condolences.