 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
75.71.53.221
I'm not really a fan of DiCaprio, but I do like Ellen Page, and the other actors in the movie did a fine job as well. It was thought provoking, but became a bit tedious at times (perhaps because I'm coming down with a cold). I will say I left the theater a bit disoriented--so the movie worked on the whole. What about the rest of you? It is a movie one could watch a number of times, taking away something with each viewing. Any impressions?
Follow Ups:
It crosses the line between "thought provoking" and "mind numbing" in the first 15 minutes, and then downhill.
Spoilers here too...
.
It did create a dreamlike quality that was neat but so what?
I think it should have been done on a smaller scale, with less people and less effects. If I actually cared about the people it would have helped, instead it was confusing within 10 minutes, they lost me early and nothing emotional to rebound to.
mildly entertaining and a waste of talent
Phil
...with spoilers
This article brings out an important parallel between film and dreaming, which is a fascinating point.
The first part of the article aligns with my own view, which is that nothing from the beginning could be real. There is a strange disconnect between the crew of extractors and the subject. While the subject comes out of his sleep with maybe only a dim memory of dreams, perhaps signified by a glance at the end, the crew seem to remember everything.
In addition, there are strict rules for dreams, rules which are specific and make little sense. Time passes at specific rates at specific dream levels, for example.
And there is the disconnect noted in the article, which I also noticed, that the wife is jumping from a different balcony reached from a different hotel room.
So in general, I don't think anything in here can be taken as waking reality. And that makes sense after all, it is a movie fantasy, and that is what I think it is meant to be in the end, which is a level different than our waking reality.
..who among you would put this film on your top 100 favorite films list? Pick another higher number and defend its position there.This kind of crap is the Lady Gaga, the Brittany Spears, the Miley Cyrus of film. It's the latest piece of meat synthesized to satisfy modern American pop culture's mindless thirst for distraction and sensation. To fill up an emptiness of soul that overarches our times. It is a formulaic fix that will be quickly replaced and forgotten as soon as the next one comes along.
Michael Cimino lost a career over a costly debacle that exceeds this one in interest and contribution to excellence in American cinema. I'd sooner give him $160,000,000 for a remake of Heaven's Gate than approve of this comatose product and the calculation from which it came.
Inception? It's more a deception.
Edits: 07/22/10
...how do you feel about the movie? :)
I don't think it would be in my top 100, but it wouldn't be in the bottom 100 either--that leaves a rather wide range, methinks.
..and at the same time deserves spoiling. It contains a cynical stink that will become more apparent day by day.As Tin has already said its complexity is foisted upon us as intelligence. It only fools the foolish. It was produced to appeal to the sensationally-minded gamester. To indulge oneself in the effort of "following" it is to deceive oneself of empty accomplishment.
It impedes goodness, beauty and art.
Edits: 07/22/10 07/22/10
I lasted an hour. What I saw was nearly all exposition, interrupted by action sequences that had cool cgi effects and were ultimately boring (to me). A movie like Matrix told a complicated tale of multiple realities by SHOWING us what was happening instead of having characters lecture at us. Also, in the first hour, it seemed apparent to me that the director and script writers had no real interest in the humanity of their characters. The characters' only role was to be chess pieces in the plot. To steal Hitchcock's joke, I'd say that the entire plot was a McGuffin--so there was nothing else to see.
story line, ugly film, inept acting. Another vehicle for FX but with one difference: they weren't paradigm shifting as were those in "Inception."
Keanu Reeves.
Good God.
You are too kind.
Dean.
reelsmith's axiom : Its going to be used equipment when I sell it, so it may as well be used equipment when I buy it
For what it was it was a good film. It was only later, when the "bullet time" effects started showing up in every other movie and the laughable pseudo-philosophical sequels came out that The Matrix lost its appeal.
OK, Reaves is a bad actor. And the music was terrible. But unlike the characters in Inception , I really was drawn in and cared what happened in The Matrix . I liked all the Chicago references. The action scenes were choreographed well and were easy to follow - hence exciting - unlike Nolan's style of using quick cuts and close ups.
If the sequels were never made, The Matrix would be a far more respected film. As it is, it's still more entertaining yet just as meaningless as Inception .
...you realize, of course, that one minute after you left the theater, it became a wonderful movie?! :)
In your dreams.... Which are my dreams of dreaming that you are dreaming my dream of being a dream of a butterfly dreaming that he is a man dreaming that he is a butterfly.
Exactly! In my dream, I would not want DeCaprio...that much is sure!
I don't think it is possible to spoil this movie by revealing any one aspect....or by stating how the movie ends. It is just too convoluted. Whatever enjoyment a viewer may get comes from watching the multi-layered processes of the movie work itself out.
This is a "heist flick". Or let's call it a caper. The job for DiCaprio's character (Cobb) is, by means of his dream manipulations, to infiltrate the subconscious mind of a new corporate leader(Robert Fischer Jr. played by Cillian Murphy) and plant an idea. An idea that benefits Cobb's billionaire employer, (Saito) who, as it happens, is head of a competing corporation.
Corporate espionage in reverse.
Instead of -stealing- ideas, our heroic culprits are -planting- ideas within the subconscious minds of competing corporate leadership. An interesting prospect.
Once that idea has been planted, the caper is to be considered a success. And then the deal between Cobb and Saito is for Saito, who apparently has political clout, to simply make a call that will open the gate for Cobb to return to his home and children. It is not clear if Cobb will still have to stand trial afterward.
Oh yeah,I forgot, Cobb has been living in exile from the U.S. to avoid being extradited to stand trial for the death of his wife. Add to that another 'oh yeah', Cobb's dead wife seems to persist in popping into his dreamscape maneuvers and interfering with the task at hand.
This is as complex a plot as any I've seen. But then I don't get out much.
Did I care for these characters? No, not really. I found myself emotionally detached yet curious enough to stay and watch the film out.
The film has its moments. Here's one: Cobb and Ariadne (Ellen Page), who is to be hired on as a "dream architect", are sitting at a big city sidewalk cafe sipping coffee when it becomes apparent that they are really within the construct of an orchestrated dream. The laws of physics are suspended as the city breaks in half then folds up around and above them. Reminds me of some of the scenes from the movie "Dark City". Only CGI has improved since that movie.
In this scene I'm also reminded of M.C.Escher's "Relativity". That illustration of a room which offers no visual reference between up and down. There are more M.C.Escher moments. Staircases which seem to be a continuous loop when observed from one plane, but become a deadly drop off when viewed in the perspective. These are "maze techniques" for Ariadne to make use of in the dreamscapes that she is to design.
Other thoughts and observations:
The movie sound track was played too loud in the theater. Some of the gun fighting actually hurt the ears!
Much of the gun fighting and other scenes of physical combat seemed gratuitous. Yes, in a heroic tale there has to be a challenge. There must be obstacles to be overcome. There must be a struggle. But I had no real sense of that necessity here.
The gun-toting opponents engaged in these layers upon layers of dreams, we are told, are products of the targets' (Fischer Jr.) subconscious mind, his personal security within the dream. Oh yeah, I seem to recall that the technology of "dream espionage" may also be known to the target and he has had some preparation to fend off such an attempt. Hence the security squads. I still say it was gratuitous.
Layers upon layers.
The players:
DiCaprio (Cobb) Well enough played I thought. I had no problem believing his character. On the other hand, I really did not care if Cobb lived or died, stayed in dream limbo, or returned to his children.
Ariadne (Paige) This is a young actress. She looks young. Still has a baby face. But a smart one. Wiser than her years. We know she's a college student. We don't know if she's a grad student. She looks and acts the part of the kid genius. The one that skips several grades in public school and goes on to graduate college while still a teenager. I thought she wore her role well.
Arthur (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) An able assistant to Cobb. Handles much of the hand to hand combat and other bits of dirty work.
Saito (Ken Watanabe) Employs Cobb to infiltrate the mind of his main business competitor.
The movie ran a bit long for my attention span. It did get a bit tedious in parts. But seemed to gain momentum here and there. At one point it becomes obvious that the "team", once gathered, is training for a heist. All heist movies have this moment.
When this comes out on video will I bother to buy the BD, or rent the movie On Demand? I don't think so. Not for myself, anyway. I saw this movie because a lot of people were talking about it. And now, so am I. It must be important. But was it enjoyable? You decide. Me, I'm probably just dreaming that I'm typing this, and then wondering why I bothered.
-Steve
Thorens Rules
...this movie will wilt before the end of the month. It is a prime example of the arrogant falsity, the mediocrity, the illness of contemporary Hollywood.DiCaprio is a pitiful, deluded figure of an actor whose principal "chops" are a furrowed brow and good agent.
Repeat, this film has lots of brow, no legs.
Edits: 07/20/10 07/20/10 07/21/10
"• What's with the ending?
When expert mind-thief Cobb (Leonardo DiCaprio) finally reunites with his kids in the film's last scene, filmgoers are treated to a rare triple-twist ending, all in the space of just one second. Out of habit, Cobb spins his top, which is his touchstone to reality, as it is mentally programmed to spin endlessly in dreams; as the camera pans, fans realize first that the top is still spinning, but just as they realize everything is a dream, it begins to wobble. And then, as they begin to realize it's about to fall, meaning everything is actually real, Nolan cuts to black, 'Sopranos'-style, leaving whiplashed viewers debating whether Cobb ended up in a dream or in the real world.
• So if it was a dream...?
If it was real, of course, then there's not a whole lot to strain your brain over. But if that top is still spinning on some cutting room floor, then a whole new slew of questions open up. Are the other members of Cobb's team figments of his subconscious, or are they sharing the dream with him? If they are constructs, does that mean everyone is a construct, even Cobb's wife Mal (Marion Cotillard) and his kids? And if it is a dream, whose dream is it -- is it Cobb's dream, or has another architect tapped into his mind and constructed everything? Which brings us to our main question:
• Is Cobb the real target?
The plot revolves around Cobb's efforts to implant an idea in the mind of a business scion (Fischer, played by Cillian Murphy). But is Cobb the real target of inception? There are some details that suggest this is the case, namely the fact that multiple characters, from Mal to Ken Watanabe's Japanese mystery man Saito, insist that Cobb "take a leap of faith," along with repeatedly warning Cobb that he will become an "old man, filled with regret, waiting to die alone." It seems to us that even while Cobb is running around trying to pull off his inception scheme, these ideas are being planted in his mind just as subtly as anything his team is doing to Fischer."
There's more in the link below...
Chris
I very much enjoyed the FX in "Inception." It really was easy to feel like the café exploding building scene or the decaying buildings-on-the-beach scenes were "real" or part of your waking dream world.
So, a worthwhile experience. A strange new category of experiential art, I'd say. As film, per se, a miserable failure.
I viewed it last night at the local IMAX and found it to be an involving experience. Based on audience comments I overheard as we were exiting, most of them did too. It absolutely held my attention for the entire 2++hrs and this at the 10:40 PM showing, a time period when other distractions tend to diminish my attention span.
I'm curious why you describe Inception as miserable failure as a film. I found it thought provoking and entertaining in a visceral sort of way. Most Hollywood films and esp the latest batch of this summer's blockbusters probably can't make that claim!
Regardless, I'm planning on viewing it again over this next weekend if it's still playing at the IMAX.
personally, I don't mind LDC's acting in this movie as it really wasn't all that important to the message and the script just didn't lend itself to 'good acting'.
If people want to bitch, or people want to moan, so be it. I do think that it's a movie that really needs, much like THE USUAL SUSPECTS, to be seen a good two or three times.
I'm sure DVD sales will be going through the roof due to people not 'getting it' the first time around and who don't want to sit in a theatre again.
Chris
...in this film watch Michael Caine.
*
..he was, by his very presence, a profound relief from the contrived silliness that was taking place around him. Caine - and others of his elevated ilk - have the innate capacity to transform a scene or a movie. Their standards of artistic expression do not depend on direction or script. They bring an quality of artistic expression that transcends outside influence.
He was a reality among relative poseurs.
...in the link.Spoiler Alert !
reelsmith's axiom: Its going to be used equipment when I sell it, so it may as well be used equipment when I buy it
Edits: 07/19/10
Still in the dream, and at least two levels down because they cannot just shake him awake.
We'll have to agree to disagree about global warming until the next global cooling scare comes along
the whole, 'can't wake normally from a deep level' had more to do with the sedatives that the guy in Mombasa was mixing, than how deep down one went, no?
LDC didn't have those sedatives early on, when he went deep with his wife and got lost, so I don't know why that would have happened unless he did in fact, drug himself while delving into the deeper dream levels.
I think that's a 'hole' that they glossed over. They needed greater, more severe, 'knocks' to come back, based not on how deep they were, but on how drugged up they were.
Chris
.
Share a bowl of grits with someone you love tonight.
Makes one think, refreshing coming from Hollywood.
We'll have to agree to disagree about global warming until the next global cooling scare comes along
I read it three times and would like to have the DVD, as I missed some points the article touches upon.
Chris
It was fun and entertaining IMO, if not a bit long. My buddy was on the edge of his seat, but I think the seat was just uncomfy. :) The film just got too deep for my taste; too many dream layers. And too much about the ex and kids. Other than that it was fun.
Bud wanted to see Predator which is not my kinda film, glad I talked him out of it.
I just didn't care whether or not DiCaprio's character got to see his kids again.A convoluted fantastic story like this needed a stronger emotional core or all the twists and complexities of the subplots are worthless. So at the end DiCaprio spins the top and doesn't watch to see what happens. Neither did I. Dream or reality - same difference as far as I was concerned. I was not once on the edge of my seat worrying about the fate of these characters. Alternatively, as some sort of "intelligence test" for the viewer, the story was so opened-ended, obtuse, and pointless that "solving" it would be roughly akin to solving a Rubik's cube with all the sides the same color.
How many different ways can I say it? The movie bored the crap out of me.
I blame DiCrapio. Yep, once again DiCrapio failed me. I swear I will never see one of his movies ever again.
Edits: 07/19/10
Nolan's use of symbols and imagery always hits home with me. In Prestige and Dark Knight it was the coin. In Inception it was the spinning top. Powerful symbolism. The brightness of the kids' faces was very powerful too, as was the image of the old couple holding hands.
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
territory far better, clearer, and you very much care about the central characters. Carrey is surprisingly good and Winslet is her usual superb self.
...we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. I felt nothing for Carey or Winslet character's in Eternal Sunshine...I had wished they would both just shoot each other! That being said, didn't care a great deal for DiCaprio's plight in Inception either. Speaks to the importance of our idiosyncratic view of the actor, I suppose.
Moreover, didn't feel one way or the other about whether their mission of "inception" succeeded or not--what would have happened if they had failed? Not clear.
The financier would have lost his business due to the massive energy monopoly the target had.
We'll have to agree to disagree about global warming until the next global cooling scare comes along
...I understand that, but, do I really care? I cared somewhat whether DiCaprio got to see his children again, but I didn't really care about the business and the actual inception and the consequences of the inception.
as substance.
More silly warfare than 2 "The Saint" James Bond "thrillers."
DiCaprio was surprisingly good, he seems to have matured into a guy with some gravitas: the only enjoyable component was his performance.
Were Ellen Page any more lightweight she'd have floated off the screen into 3-D land.
A plot so ridiculous people around me actually were laughing as yet another layer was spun; a film that lasted 2:20 minutes but, like the dream sequences, actually felt 10 or 100 times that long (I don't know what dream level I had drifted to); and a key which was so poorly developed that we could have cared less.
Somewhere in there was a story about a guy who lost his wife through death or divorce and couldn't get visitation rights to his kids. Nolan detonated a 200-megaton turd.
"Memento:" now THAT's a great film.
Now, if your idea of a wonderful film is one that counts explosions, smashed cars, bullets, army extras, etc., well, yes. You will be thrilled and vastly entertained.
I keep hearing that about every film DiCaprio does. And so far it hasn't been true. That's what's holding me back from seeing this film.
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
...it dragged on a bit in spots. So, seeing it once is enough for me ...the tedious spots would just be more so the second time around.
One of few films we've seen recently that my wife and I talked quite a bit about afterwords ...checking each other to make sure we hadn't missed any tricks.
Like you, I enjoyed Ellen Page and the rest of the cast. But I think I'm getting bored with DiCaprio.
A fun flick.
Dean.
reelsmith's axiom : Its going to be used equipment when I sell it, so it may as well be used equipment when I buy it
...has become one of my favorite actresses...for whatever reason, there's an intelligence that comes through with her.
'An intelligence that comes thru her'. She's cute and petite and has BIIIIIIG brown eyes.
And as much intelligence as a termite.
She's just cute. That's it. And she was a terrible choice for this part.
"Lock up when you're done and don't touch the piano."
-Greg House
...I would certainly agree that her casting in this movie was questionable--didn't quite fit the part in some way. In terms of intelligence, depends on her comparison group and, compared to many actors, she strikes me as relatively intelligent...compared to my university colleagues, not so much.
Did you see her in "Hard Candy"? Quite a different role than what we have seen in, say, Juno.
.
Share a bowl of grits with someone you love tonight.
The film has gotten great reviews - the best for a non-children's film this year, it seems. So for the first time in months I'm interested in going to the theater. (Last film I saw in the theater was the dreadful Avatar , in headache-inducing 3D CameronVision.) Two concerns though:1) I hate DiCrapio and his baby face. He's always going to be the non-threatening teen girl heartthrob "Jack Dawson" from Titanic for me. Every subsequent film I've seen in him ( Gangs of New York , Aviator , The Departed ) he seems too young and too much of a lightweight to pull off the part he's playing. I can't take him seriously. Plus, he's a far poorer actor than critics give him credit for being.
2) This being a Nolan film, I'm concerned the film has an irritatingly incessant underlying musical soundtrack that makes dialogue hard to hear.
Can you suggest whether my fears of a bad night at the theater based on the above are unfounded?
Edits: 07/18/10 07/18/10 07/18/10
...in What's eating Gilbert Grape.
And if you read the book first to notice the subtle clues, he was excellent in Shelter Island.
He is very good here and is in pretty much every scene.
I didn't notice the musical soundtrack on Memento so much but as you probably read below I sure had problems with this one.
Just as in Blood Diamonds, DiCrapio had no business playing a man-of-the-world professional mercenary. His looks and voice can't convince. He was a joke in Gangs and I can't see why he is so bankable.
Share a bowl of grits with someone you love tonight.
If you think about it, Decap actually didn't belong in this world of billion dollar finance. Remember the final scene? The top spun! He is still at least two levels down and his wife in the real world is trying to get him out.
We'll have to agree to disagree about global warming until the next global cooling scare comes along
Can't fully agree....the top began to wobble, remember? Sequel?
Share a bowl of grits with someone you love tonight.
My interpretation is that he is still dreaming. The top is the key:
--It was his wife's totem first. The point is made that you should not touch someone else's totem because it leaves you open.
--You do not see him leave it spinning until the end. The first time he spins it either he picks it up or they cut away--can't remember. The second time he tries to spin it but fails when it falls onto the floor--not a true test of his state. You can see his uncertainty.
--Third time it keeps going. A wobble is not a fall.
But I will have to see it again!
John K.
there was something said about having your own, unique totem, so other 'bad guys/what were they called?' couldn't get to you, or trick you.
I don't know how the fact that it was his wife's totem, gleaned from the fact that he opened her safe if the flash backs, ultimately plays out, but that's something that I thought about. He was opened up to manipulation (by his wife?) due to this fact.
Chris
the totem was now his. Or do we have to conjecture more rules to argue the point about totems?
Share a bowl of grits with someone you love tonight.
...with the wobble and not knowing if it toppled over, we have no idea what level he is on.
Geez ...I hope the sequel is shorter.
reelsmith's axiom : Its going to be used equipment when I sell it, so it may as well be used equipment when I buy it
...the success of the movie is in spite of DiCaprio, which says something about the strength of the supporting cast and the rest of the movie. I see him as the weakest link in the movie.
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
...makes me recall the thrill of seeing Memento, Dark City and the Matrix when they first came out.
Except this one has a director at the top of his form, A-list actors and very high production values. It looks as if no expense was spared.
Except maybe to capture the dialogue in a few scenes.
It has so many great ideas and pulls them all off in a very effective way.
Kept the audience at the edge of their seats not wanting to miss a thing so they could figure out what was going on and be in on the final payoff.
Middle aged couple coming out of the theater behind us - the man said "I feel like I've just taken an intelligence test." The woman, "I failed."
I loved it. Amazing film. I'll see again.
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
...was a much better movie than Inception, I believe. Indeed, I just watched it based on this discussion. I don't really want to jump into the fray regarding what actually happened in The Prestige, but after reading several discussion boards, I have to side with Jazz Inmate on this one. That being said, anything is "possible" in the movies and in human imagination, isn't it?
The Prestige pissed me off. Don't tell me I should have read the source material first to understand it was a sci-fi story. It was presented as a period piece about two rival magicians . I didn't expect the explanation for all the convoluted twists to be that the freakin' cloning machine was real . What a cop out! I never felt so cheated watching a movie in my life. Garbage.
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
The film follows the book fairly well and the visit to Tesla and development of a working cloning/teleportation device features prominently in both.
Are you sure you've seen 'The Prestige' ?
J.B.
"You want to be fooled." Borden's voiceover "are you watching closely" comes as the camera shows the top hats that Tesla planted to make it look like his device was cloning so he could get Angier's money.
While it's certainly open to interpretation, you are in the camp that wants to be fooled and I am in the camp that worked it out, to quote Cutter. Rather than discuss this intelligently, you're on another forum posting insults at me, so I'm not expecting a good discussion about this from you. Though the film certainly merits good discussion.
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
I was merely pointing out that for someone who has such a large ego investment in his knowledge of and ability to analyze film you show a shocking lack of analytical abilities and understanding of many films you comment on.
That's not an insult it's a statement of fact as any reading of your posts on various films show...this thread for instance high-lights this quite nicely.
J.B.
95% + of the posters - many who have spent inordinate effort studying the film and the book it's based on - agree that the cloning machine was a real working device in the movie. Those who believe there was some other explanation for all those clones in the water tanks shown at the end of the film have failed to make a good argument. Their arguments are always quickly and convincingly refuted.
Jazz, the concensus says you're wrong. However, if you can explain in detail how your explanation works I'm all ears. Keep in mind it's been a couple years since I saw the film, so please keep it clear.
> > Jazz, the concensus says you're wrong. However, if you can explain in detail how your explanation works I'm all ears. Keep in mind it's been a couple years since I saw the film, so please keep it clear. < <
I wouldn't pay attention to what "most people" say. Nolan, through Cutter, says right up front that most people are perfectly happy being fooled, wanting to believe the illusion and failing to work it out. This is a huge hint. The overarching theme of the movie is that everything has a rational explanation. Even Angiers admits this at the end as he's dying "the world is solid all the way through." So it's not set up as a sci fi movie. I have no problem going into a movie and suspending disbelief if the plot calls for it. But "The Prestige" didn't call for it. Quite the opposite, in fact--it had a rational explanation throughout.
Angiers only knew one way to do the trick: finding body doubles. Cutter educated him how to do this in the film and it was a big part of the plot. Angier had been burned by Borden and he had been burned by Tesla, a historical figure who invented AC electricity. Tesla never produced a "cloning device" and had a reputation for promising inventions that he couldn't deliver (e.g., a death ray he tried to sell to the US government) after Edison campaigned to turn Tesla into a pariah. The film was set up so that the audience would believe the illusion and not try to work it out (as Caine's narration said). It was also set up so that every "magic" trick would have a logical explanation. Cloning is not logical.
The tanks were filled with look-alikes that Angier had rounded up in his travels and murdered under the stage during his brief run designed to exact revenge on Borden once and for all. While idiots on IMDB may think it's "impossible" to find a few body doubles, it's easy compared to cloning via an electric device which truly is impossible.
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
I did not read the book but it would have been most logical to hire a body double, then pay him well and keep him healthy and happy as the money is raked in. It only makes sense to kill clones as they would be a real threat being they were him with all his ambition and ego. The cloning machine had to be real for him to kill each time the feat was performed.
Just my 2 cents.
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
Nolan apparently tricked you , not me. You're looking for the logical answer that isn't there.The entire film presents a magician's world in great detail. Every illusion and trick is thoroughly explained - except for the transported man trick. We, the audience, are conditioned to expect a rational solution to every illogical happening in the film. Even as we realize Nolan is happily painting himself inextricably into a corner plotwise, we expect the big reveal at the end and can hardly wait for it! It doesn't come, other than by explanation that Tesla's device really works. As I remember, it's the ONLY explanation that fits the plot. No one could explain the plot otherwise without opening gaping plot holes. That, supposedly, is the art of the film. Whether or not you find that satisfying is another matter. I didn't.
So in essence, Nolan tricked us. It's MAGIC! And since when does a good magician reveal his secrets during interviews?
Edits: 07/21/10
The cloning was the illusion that you want to believe. "You don't want to work it out. You want to be...fooled."
> > Nolan apparently tricked you, not me. You're looking for the logical answer that isn't there. < <
If you believe it's cloning you believe there is no trick. I'm afraid you're just satisfied to believe the illusion. You want to be fooled.
> > The entire film presents a magician's world in great detail. Every illusion and trick is thoroughly explained - except for the transported man trick. < <
Wrong again. The transported man trick was explained. It was first explained by Cutter who correctly observed that Borden must be using a double. He was right. But the double was a twin. When Angier tried to use a double, the double realized his interests were not with Angier and he publicly and physically damaged Angier. Angier then went on his wild goose chase with Tesla who tricked Angier with a cheap cats'n'hats routine and cleared out with Angier's money, leaving him a worthless device.
Admittedly obsessed with destroying Borden, what do you think Angiers would have done at that point? Given up? Of course not. He had the means, the motive and the murderous method to do the trick cutter's way but with blind stage hands who wouldn't see the murder victims. The idea that he was murdering clones is so stupid. If he truly had a cloning machine, which does not flow from the narrative, he and Tesla could have done far more incredible things with it than get revenge on Borden. Think about it. Use your brain for a fucking second.
> > We, the audience, are conditioned to expect a rational solution to every illogical happening in the film. Even as we realize Nolan is happily painting himself inextricably into a corner plotwise, we expect the big reveal at the end and can hardly wait for it! It doesn't come, other than by explanation that Tesla's device really works. < <
Wrong again. Everyone I've seen the film with was totally blown away to see Borden was twin brothers with his disguised engineer, Fallon, and that they would alternate the disguise so they each had half a life. It was a huge revelation at the end. If you're saying you had figured it out or saw it coming, you're a liar. And showing that twist at the end, coupled with Cutter's repeated lines about wanting to believe the illusion and showing the top hats while challenging the audience to work it out proves the film had a logical reason for everything.
It all depends how you interpret the hats. Clones? Give me a fucking break. If you believe those hats are clones, there is nothing to work out. You're just a lazy thinker, or a nonthinker.
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
But you being you, you are unable to accept that fact...hence the insults and cursing you bring to this discussion.
If you'd like me to explain why you are wrong and show you just how wrong you are ask nicely and I will do so.
J.B.
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
We don't often watch movies a second or third time at my house ...but The Prestige is an exception.
Dean.
reelsmith's axiom : Its going to be used equipment when I sell it, so it may as well be used equipment when I buy it
I really don't like DiCrapio. The only reason he did ok in this role is because he was passing through different realities and living a lie, which could explain the way he struggles to find his character and stay in character...aside from the obvious explanation that he's just a bad actor. I agree that Nolan got good performances out of all the other actors. Nolan's vision was almost flawlessly executed. He's been one of my favorite directors since Prestige.Spoilers: I thought there were three major copouts in the movie. The first was that DeCrapio's character referred to infiltrating the deepest depths of his wife's subconscious to find out what she'd hidden there and replace it with his own idea, which is how he proved that inception works. We find out what that idea was, but not what his wife's original secret was. This secret I believe would have added much to the story. Another copout was when Watanabe was brought out of limbo in the dream within the dream within the dream. They show DeCrapio going back for him, but edit out any explanation of how Watanabe overcame his fatal gunshot that would damn him to an eternity in limbo, based on the earlier explanation. And of course I don't get what Watanabe gained by the whole dream infiltration--did they learn anything from Fisher or plan an idea in his head that had any significance? I need to see this at least once more to tie it all together. There is no doubt that the climax and ending were masterful. The beginning was laborious, though. At first, I found it fatiguing to the point where I actually fell asleep for the first 10 minutes. There were too many complex ideas tossed out too quickly with too many plot devices in play, and it wasn't immediately paid off. But had DiCrapio been replaced with Bale, this may have been Nolan's best film.
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
Edits: 07/18/10
Is the answer to the ending of the movie. Great movie! Made me think. It did get a bit tedious with all those levels of reality going on at once. I only saw one real plot hole, out of thousands upon thousands of bullets fired by the bad guys, only one struck home.
We'll have to agree to disagree about global warming until the next global cooling scare comes along
Talked it over with the wife over dinner tonight.
We'll have to agree to disagree about global warming until the next global cooling scare comes along
I could hardly understand most of the dialog. After it was over I went to a manager and whined and he said he noticed the same thing in both screens. He said it was the mix on the print. The soundtrack is too loud and the voice range lacks volume and treble for articulation. I was kind of pissed.
Share a bowl of grits with someone you love tonight.
Check your hearing old man.
Free at the VA.
And I saw this at the Cine Capri, usually an excellent theater.
"Lock up when you're done and don't touch the piano."
-Greg House
During some of the action the woofers cracked and distorted mightily. VA hearing check is for shit. They only test you between 800 and 8K Hz. Just got tested and they say I don't need a hearing aid...how about you?
Share a bowl of grits with someone you love tonight.
It's very common. I only go to a newer AMC now and even that isn't to my liking I'd much rather be in my 7.1 home theater.
-------------
We must be the change we wish to see in the world. -Gandhi
Post a Followup:
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
