For the last couple of years, whenever I say that Inception is my favourite film I'm often asked why. And to be honest, I can never come up with a reason. Sure, I can say "acting, writing, directing, action and pace are all great" but a lot of the films I love carry all those aspects. So what makes Inception stand out? The answer as I realised myself just recently, is fairly simple; it perfectly encapsulates the cinematic experience and the way films bring out our aspirations.
Now, I assume you've all heard the comparison between the characters and roles in film making. Dom = director, Eames = actor, Ariadne = art director, Arthur = producer (possibly writer, though they all contribute to the story in some way which I'll explain later), Saito = studio and Yusuf = Uuuh. . . projectionist. Now, Robert is in essence the audience surrogate. But hold on, isn't that Ariadne's role? She's asking all the questions after all.
This is true, however this brings up how the characters contribute to the story. We see as they plan the heist that they come up with ideas, changing things so that they could work better with Cobb (the director) shifting the tone of the message to something that will work better "positive emotion trumps negative emotion". Now they also make the decision to let Robert give himself the idea, this is key in elaborating on the audience's role. When writing any story, simple implications can be taken a long way. To the point where even the smallest of props or costume pieces can spark whole new ways to view the tale, as we have seen on these very forums. This is something that cinematography holds a trump-card in, with the written word you have to describe the implications therefore putting them in plain sight, and with audio you have to describe them as well. Films can have these kinds of things in plain sight, yet still hidden away.
This is the way that Inception had to be done on Robert, he had to take what was given to him and shape it into genuine emotion. And just as Cobb and the heist crew performed Inception on him, so too did Nolan and the film crew on the audience. But that's not all, through movie-making the Inception doesn't stop with just one film. It's all films.
Now think, from a simple marketing standpoint, what is Inception as a movie? A summer blockbuster. Blockbusters are the big movies, where you see tons of action, good-looking stars and big names in the trailers. It's the land of one-liners, explosions and bombastic soundtracks. Inception has all of that (and more), but why?
I'm going to bring this point across in a way that once again calls back to audience interpretation, but you don't have to view it that way to see where I'm coming from. Most of the speculation of Inception comes from the ending being a dream or not but with this view we're going to invert it. Think of the entire movie as being a dream until Cobb wakes up on the plane. How does that change things? For starters, the concept of extraction and inception might not exist, Cobb could just be an ordinary businessman coming back to his family after a tiring business trip. The suitcase that enables dream-sharing is never seen again so where is the evidence of it?
But wait, we did see dreams within dreams and sharing them inside this "dream", isn't that proof enough that they exist? Not really, it's Dom's dream. He can come up with the craziest things and it'll still make sense within the context of the dream. In films, there is such a thing as narrative coherence. This is when minor details, such as flimsy science or new techno-babble can be ignored for the sake of the plot. As long as it's minor enough, we don't care and we enjoy the film anyway, the technical skeleton of the movie simply disappearing. Most of the time we don't even realise these faults even after the credits roll. "Dreams feel real while we're in them, it's only when we wake up that we realise something was actually strange."
Now we see. Movies are essentially just dreams. We tread through all the nightmares and oddball stuff so we can escape into these new worlds. We long for excitement, to relate to the underdog or be alongside the big action hero. When we see the boxer winning the championship, the disabled person overcoming hardships or the man that becomes something else entirely, we see ourselves. It's not just the audience-surrogate, it's the creator's vision that we relate to. Whether it be a message, something we relate to or just something plain old enjoyable.
That is what Inception is to me and why I love it so much; the magic of movies. Not just dialogue, not just cameras, not just effects but an idea. One that stays with us even after the break from reality and changes us as much as we change it. Even now, after the dream has ended.
Well, there is my analysis on Inception. Hope you liked it. :goNF:
Now, I assume you've all heard the comparison between the characters and roles in film making. Dom = director, Eames = actor, Ariadne = art director, Arthur = producer (possibly writer, though they all contribute to the story in some way which I'll explain later), Saito = studio and Yusuf = Uuuh. . . projectionist. Now, Robert is in essence the audience surrogate. But hold on, isn't that Ariadne's role? She's asking all the questions after all.
This is true, however this brings up how the characters contribute to the story. We see as they plan the heist that they come up with ideas, changing things so that they could work better with Cobb (the director) shifting the tone of the message to something that will work better "positive emotion trumps negative emotion". Now they also make the decision to let Robert give himself the idea, this is key in elaborating on the audience's role. When writing any story, simple implications can be taken a long way. To the point where even the smallest of props or costume pieces can spark whole new ways to view the tale, as we have seen on these very forums. This is something that cinematography holds a trump-card in, with the written word you have to describe the implications therefore putting them in plain sight, and with audio you have to describe them as well. Films can have these kinds of things in plain sight, yet still hidden away.
This is the way that Inception had to be done on Robert, he had to take what was given to him and shape it into genuine emotion. And just as Cobb and the heist crew performed Inception on him, so too did Nolan and the film crew on the audience. But that's not all, through movie-making the Inception doesn't stop with just one film. It's all films.
Now think, from a simple marketing standpoint, what is Inception as a movie? A summer blockbuster. Blockbusters are the big movies, where you see tons of action, good-looking stars and big names in the trailers. It's the land of one-liners, explosions and bombastic soundtracks. Inception has all of that (and more), but why?
I'm going to bring this point across in a way that once again calls back to audience interpretation, but you don't have to view it that way to see where I'm coming from. Most of the speculation of Inception comes from the ending being a dream or not but with this view we're going to invert it. Think of the entire movie as being a dream until Cobb wakes up on the plane. How does that change things? For starters, the concept of extraction and inception might not exist, Cobb could just be an ordinary businessman coming back to his family after a tiring business trip. The suitcase that enables dream-sharing is never seen again so where is the evidence of it?
But wait, we did see dreams within dreams and sharing them inside this "dream", isn't that proof enough that they exist? Not really, it's Dom's dream. He can come up with the craziest things and it'll still make sense within the context of the dream. In films, there is such a thing as narrative coherence. This is when minor details, such as flimsy science or new techno-babble can be ignored for the sake of the plot. As long as it's minor enough, we don't care and we enjoy the film anyway, the technical skeleton of the movie simply disappearing. Most of the time we don't even realise these faults even after the credits roll. "Dreams feel real while we're in them, it's only when we wake up that we realise something was actually strange."
Now we see. Movies are essentially just dreams. We tread through all the nightmares and oddball stuff so we can escape into these new worlds. We long for excitement, to relate to the underdog or be alongside the big action hero. When we see the boxer winning the championship, the disabled person overcoming hardships or the man that becomes something else entirely, we see ourselves. It's not just the audience-surrogate, it's the creator's vision that we relate to. Whether it be a message, something we relate to or just something plain old enjoyable.
That is what Inception is to me and why I love it so much; the magic of movies. Not just dialogue, not just cameras, not just effects but an idea. One that stays with us even after the break from reality and changes us as much as we change it. Even now, after the dream has ended.
Well, there is my analysis on Inception. Hope you liked it. :goNF:
Crazy Eight wrote:no ur a assbenderAllstar wrote: Thoughts on Michael Fassbender?
