Jarmel wrote:It seems everybody is misunderstanding the kicks. The kick goes into effect not when you're falling but when you hit the ground. The van kick went into effect when they hit the water and Dom's kick goes into effect when he hit the water in the beginning.
As others have pointed out, a kick is the feeling of falling, not actually hitting the ground. That's why, when the van went off the bridge, everyone noticed it and called it "the first kick." They weren't done with their mission, though, so they ignored/resisted it, and waited for the second kick: the van hitting the water.
mnc506 wrote:First of all, this is the best thread created so far.
I think a lot of people have really great theories--- and of course there is no way to actually prove what is "right" or "wrong." It's all about the choices we make in understanding it.
I just have a main question... I think for Fang. I think it is pretty hard to deny that the entire movie takes place in Cobb's dream state. Even in the one instance where we see (at least I think we see) the top fall (in the hotel room), it doesn't make sense. How are Cobb's children going to know what random hotel room he is? How are they going to be able to call him directly?
Mal realized what Cobb didn't. Even after killing themselves in limbo, they still weren't in "reality" yet. She's trying to get him to kill himself so they can get back to reality.
Just a quick thought on the end: For some reason people are harping on whether or not the top is going to fall, or slightly moved-- it doesn't matter. Look at both children's outfits and at Michal Caine's outfit -- its the same as they were at earlier/different dream states.
The concept of Ariadne actually being Mal as she attempts to perform inception on Cobb is just fantastic.
I'm sorry if some of this is repetitive, just wanted to hope in the discussion though.
Personally, I find the Mal is Ariadne theory compelling, but a bit too convoluted for my tastes. It throws way too much into question to pass my Occam's Razor test.
Like I said earlier, I'm leaning toward the "everything was a dream" theory, but I'll have to wait for my second viewing to decide. There's a lot that points toward this: the children don't seem to age, their clothes don't change, they're playing in the same spot. But the top does fall down in the one scene where he's talking to them, and it does fall down in the prologue comic, which I'm going to assume is canon.
However, I don't find any of this as persuasive as another piece of evidence: Throughout the beginning of the movie, while Cobb is gathering his team, the movie seemed really choppy to me. It was the one flaw in what was otherwise a nearly flawless movie. Why would Nolan do that? Why would he choose to make that section of the movie so choppy when everything else flows so smoothly? One moment they're in Paris, then in Mombasa, then in a dream, then waking up, but there's no transition between them. But that's when I realized that the reason it seems so choppy is that Nolan completely stopped using establishing shots. There's no shot of Cobb landing in Paris or Mombasa, there's no shot of him leaving. There's no shot of the outside of any of the buildings he goes into. What this means is that we, as the viewers, have no idea how he got to these places.
"You never remember the beginning of a dream. How did we get HERE?" Well? How did Cobb get THERE? How did he get to any of these places?
What this means is that the entire first half of the movie is very dream-like, and I think intentionally so. There's plenty of evidence to support both sides of the argument, but I think only one person really knows the answer for sure: Chris Nolan. Therefore, the most persuasive evidence I could possibly find is evidence that comes from him directly, through the cinematography and editing. These things represent the inside of HIS head, and they seem very, very persuasive to me.