What's spinning in your DVD PLAYER? eh? eh? General Movie Discussion - Page 62 - Dallas-Mavs.com Forums

Underdog · 08-20-2010, 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Boy Laroux

ah, but one other wrinkle. How did Fischer get to this final level if it was Cobb's dream? He was shot before cobb and ariadne went down there. The message relayed to the audience was that Fischer got there by dying (indicating that it was indeed limbo).

***INCEPTION SPOILER***

Fischer wasn't dead yet and time expands with each layer, so everything slowed down - going one layer deeper bought him more time (just like they tried to do with Saito, before he eventually kicked the bucket...)

Big Boy Laroux · 08-20-2010, 10:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

The snow fort explosives went off BEFORE Ariadne hit the ground, so she was pulled out of that dream without "dying" and the rest of the kick sequences went on as planned...

I just edited my post above with that same statement. She was pulled before she hit the ground. but if she DID hit the ground, she would have died. Seems a BIG risk to take.

Big Boy Laroux · 08-20-2010, 10:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

Fischer wasn't dead yet and time expands with each layer, so everything slowed down - going one layer deeper bought him more time (just like they tried to do with Saito...)

How did they bring Fischer to the new level? they didn't hook him up to anything.

but Cobb did say something to the effect of "Mal took Fischer". So maybe since she was Cobb's projection Cobb knew she took him into Cobb's dream world? i guess that works, although that's awfully late in the movie to introduce a concept of "taking" someone to a level without the use of a machine.

Big Boy Laroux · 08-20-2010, 10:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

Ariadne didn't KNOW if Eams was successful in planting the explosives. They were being attacked, so the kick might not have been planted yet..

my point was that setting the explosives appeared to be part of the original plan, because cobb told eames to start setting the explosives before ariadne even suggested they go down another level. So why do that?

Underdog · 08-20-2010, 10:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin

Why would she plan on dying so deep in a multilayered dream? Wouldn't that be sending her to limbo?

***INCEPTION SPOILER***

Getting stuck without a kick would send her to limbo too - she took her chances, hoping that the sedative would be close to wearing off, thus allowing her to wake up instead of going to limbo (the same way Cobb & Saito "woke up" from limbo by apparently shooting themselves...)

But I'm only arguing one viewpoint here - the movie was left ambiguous enough to make all the questions valid. There was so much uncertainty as to what the "rules" were once the plan fell apart...

Underdog · 08-20-2010, 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Boy Laroux

my point was that setting the explosives appeared to be part of the original plan, because cobb told eames to start setting the explosives before ariadne even suggested they go down another level. So why do that?

***INCEPTION SPOILER***

I dunno - was it BEFORE they thought about going down another level? Fisher was already shot, so maybe Cobb was thinking a step ahead?

I'd have to see the movie again to have an opinion on that, but I definitely know that kicks happen the next level up, not the level in. When Cobb's chair fell at the beginning of the movie, it was to pull him out of the Asian dojo (or whatever) that him & Arthur were in...

Big Boy Laroux · 08-20-2010, 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

I'd have to see the movie again to have an opinion on that, but I definitely know that kicks happen the next level up, not the level in. When Cobb's chair fell at the beginning of the movie, it was to pull him out of the Asian dojo (or whatever) that him & Arthur were in...

Yes, we agree on that. That was my stance in the initial post. But the combination of the timing of the explosives statement (i am pretty damn sure it was stated before the idea of going down another level) combined with the statement by cobb that they would have to improvise a kick while in the lowest level (and Ariadne yelling that jumping was an improvised kick), that really muddied up the rules of where the kick occurs.

on another note, why did they even need a machine at all in the dream world? the machine would be a dream... so couldn't they just decide to go into a new dream without a machine?

Usually Lurkin · 08-20-2010, 11:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Boy Laroux

on another note, why did they even need a machine at all in the dream world? the machine would be a dream... so couldn't they just decide to go into a new dream without a machine?

heh. What I love most about the movie is that no one asks, "How do you go into someone else's dream anyway?" There's just a sedative and a machine, and people just do it with out any "teching the tech" (to borrow from star trek).

Underdog · 08-20-2010, 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Boy Laroux

on another note, why did they even need a machine at all in the dream world? the machine would be a dream... so couldn't they just decide to go into a new dream without a machine?

***INCEPTION SPOILER***

You want my honest opinion? (nobody wants to hear this because it destroys their idea of what the entire move was about...)

I think Cobb made up all the "rules" as he went along because he was still stuck in limbo from when he and Mal went there. When she jumped to her "death", she woke up - Cobb remained...

I mean, even when he's in "reality", he 's always getting chased by The Authorities - it's almost as if his own mind was starting to turn on him... That's why he created the elaborate idea of inception, with a "deus ex machina" solution of Saito waiving a magic wand and giving him a happy ending.

The entire movie was Cobb's projection - every character, every instance, every inconsistency. The details were ambiguous and fuzzy because that's exactly how dreams work. The only inception being planted was in the mind of the audience - what if "reality" is simply a matter of perception?

But, no, that's way to difficult to wrap one's head around - there needs to be a simple explanation with a neat little bow tied around it (plus nobody wants Christopher Nolan probing around in their mind - defenses up!)... The movie was simple entertainment, not a thought-provoking work of art that challenges the viewer to see the world in a different light... (where' my popcorn, bitch?)

Usually Lurkin · 08-20-2010, 11:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

You want my honest opinion? (nobody wants to hear this because it destroys their idea of what the entire move was about...)

I think Cobb made up all the "rules" as he went along because he was still stuck in limbo from when he and Mal went there. When she jumped to her "death", she woke up - Cobb remained...

I mean, even when he's in "reality", he 's always getting chased by The Authorities - it's almost as if his own mind was starting to turn on him... That's why he created the elaborate idea of inception, with a "deus ex machina" solution of Saito waiving a magic wand and giving him a happy ending.

The entire movie was Cobb's projection - every character, every instance, every inconsistency. The details were ambiguous and fuzzy because that's exactly how dreams work. The only inception being planted was in the mind of the audience - what if "reality" is simply a matter of perception?

But, no, that's way to difficult to wrap one's mind around - there needs to be a simple explanation with a neat little bow tied around it (plus nobody wants Christopher Nolan probing around in their mind - defenses up!)... The movie was simple entertainment, not a thought-provoking work of art that challenges the viewer to see the world in a different light... (where' my popcorn, bitch?)

That's what I said. His phone conversation with his kids was too weird for me. I think he killed his wife at some point, though, and even the original limbo with his wife was just a buffer from reality. But that's an idea planted by other movies I've seen. The best explanation is that Cobb is the post-lobotomized version of DiCaprio's character from Shutter Island.

Underdog · 08-20-2010, 11:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin

That's what I said. His phone conversation with his kids was too weird for me. I think he killed his wife at some point, though, and even the original limbo with his wife was just a buffer from reality. But that's an idea planted by other movies I've seen. The best explanation is that Cobb is the post-lobotomized version of DiCaprio's character from Shutter Island.

I haven't seen Shutter Island, so I have no basis of comparison...

But the idea that limbo is a buffer for his guilt is definitely an idea that resonates with me...

Usually Lurkin · 08-20-2010, 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

I haven't seen Shutter Island, so I have no basis of comparison...

But the idea that limbo is a buffer for his guilt is definitely an idea that resonates with me...

oops.

I meant **** Shutter Island Spoiler!!!***

Big Boy Laroux · 08-20-2010, 12:42 PM

Ha Ha no crap UL! Thanks!

CadBane · 08-20-2010, 05:16 PM

Anyone seen The Expendables yet?

Big Boy Laroux · 08-20-2010, 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin

heh. What I love most about the movie is that no one asks, "How do you go into someone else's dream anyway?" There's just a sedative and a machine, and people just do it with out any "teching the tech" (to borrow from star trek).

Yeah I never questioned the machine. It is what it is. It didn't need to be explained.

But going into more dreams with a dreamed machine... That's pushing it.

Big Boy Laroux · 08-20-2010, 06:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

***INCEPTION SPOILER***

You want my honest opinion? (nobody wants to hear this because it destroys their idea of what the entire move was about...)

<remove rest of UD's uber-long post>

*** MORE INCEPTION SPOILERS ***

I actually agree with you. I like the idea that the upper level is a dream and not reality. Maybe cause I just gravitate toward non-happy endings (like "up in the air".

)

The problem I have with saying that every inconsistency that shows up in the movie is the product of cobb's mind is that it is a major copout in terms of plot holes. "oh you don't need that to make sense, it's all in cobb's mind anyway!" Nolan made a great film but there are holes.

Going back to the kicks for a second - I think they actually were trying to establish that a kick had to happen on the level you were on as well as the level above (which goes against the precedent set earlier in the movie). Or else, wouldn't Arthur have woken up from the hotel dream when the van went over the railing, or when it flipped?

Underdog · 08-20-2010, 08:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Boy Laroux

Going back to the kicks for a second - I think they actually were trying to establish that a kick had to happen on the level you were on as well as the level above (which goes against the precedent set earlier in the movie). Or else, wouldn't Arthur have woken up from the hotel dream when the van went over the railing, or when it flipped?

***INCEPTION SPOILERS***

Because the kicks had to be synchronized, but I'll let someone else do the 'splainin' on this one:

Quote:

Why didn't Arthur wake up from the first kick when the van drove off the bridge?

Due to the sedative, a synchronized multi-level kick was needed (the van freefalling, the original plan for the hotel floor explosion, and the snow fortress explosion.) Yusuf's kick (van freefall) was too early due to Fischer's projections attacking, and thus, the kicks weren't synchronized. This was designed to ensure that the team was able to stay where they needed to and finish the job. If one kick failed because it wasn't synchronized, they could try another while using the musical countdown to warn the next level that it was coming. Earlier in the movie Arthur tells Ariadne that if Yusuf kicks too early (ie, if he drives the van off the bridge before Arthur has a chance to kick the group out of Eames' dream), they won't wake up. While normally in order to wake up you must receive a kick in the level above, this isn't true when using the special sedative. Instead with the sedative it takes two or more synchronized kicks in all levels simultaneously. Arthur didn't have the second kick ready when the van drove off the bridge, so he wasn't awakened by the van falling off the bridge. When the elevator hit the ground floor and the group was kicked by the freefall, they were pulled out of Eames' dream (the snow fortress) and simultaneously pulled back into Yusuf's dream (the van). Cobb and Saito weren't kicked back up because they were still stuck in limbo and weren't being kicked at that moment. So they were left in the van underwater still attached to the dreaming device.

Big Boy Laroux · 08-20-2010, 09:14 PM

See, to me, that explains why the others didn't wake up, not Arthur. In order for it to make sense for Arthur to have not woken up, it needs to be true that a kick is required at the level you are on and the level above. If that's due to the heavy sedative, so be it. But I don't think they did a good job explaining it, if that's the case.

Underdog · 08-20-2010, 09:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Boy Laroux

See, to me, that explains why the others didn't wake up, not Arthur. In order for it to make sense for Arthur to have not woken up, it needs to be true that a kick is required at the level you are on and the level above. If that's due to the heavy sedative, so be it. But I don't think they did a good job explaining it, if that's the case.

Once again, the chair falling into the water at the beginning of the movie was one level up from the dojo, not in the same level...

Getting kicked out of a dream is like someone shaking you awake. Movie aside, if someone shakes you awake in a dream, you don't necessarily wake up. But if someone shakes you in reality, you usually wake up (unless you're a ridiculously heavy sleeper...)

Big Boy Laroux · 08-20-2010, 09:49 PM

We agree on that. Thats how I understood a kick for the entire movie. That's entirely my point. They establish early in the film that a kick comes from the level above. So 2 things oppose that view in the movie - Arthur not waking up and the need for the snow explosions (which I am 99% sure was part of the original plan).

The kicks need to be synchronized with the music due to the depth of the dream. If Yusuf kicks them too soon (because he has no idea what they are doing in dreamland) they would be stuck in the hotel level. The kicks need to be synchronized such that they wake up from snow dream, then hotel dream. Why would synchronization be needed to wake Arthur up? He should have woken up with the van roll and the van going off the cliff.

Arthur not waking up is the biggest plot hole, IMO IMDB isn't enough to convince me by the way.

Underdog · 08-20-2010, 09:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Boy Laroux

We agree on that. Thats how I understood a kick for the entire movie. That's entirely my point. They establish early in the film that a kick comes from the level above. So 2 things oppose that view in the movie - Arthur not waking up and the need for the snow explosions (which I am 99% sure was part of the original plan).

The kicks need to be synchronized with the music due to the depth of the dream. If Yusuf kicks them too soon (because he has no idea what they are doing in dreamland) they would be stuck in the hotel level. The kicks need to be synchronized such that they wake up from snow dream, then hotel dream. Why would synchronization be needed to wake Arthur up? He should have woken up with the van roll and the van going off the cliff.

Arthur not waking up is the biggest plot hole, IMO IMDB isn't enough to convince me by the way.

Well, the "rules" went to sh!t when the plan went to sh!t...

At that point, Cobb/Christopher Nolan (ever notice how Leo looks a lot like Chris in this movie?) can write any nonsense they want to fill in the gaps - plot holes are a natural part of dreaming. Cobb even explains this much to Ariadne when they're sitting at the outdoor cafe - the part about getting somewhere without knowing how you got there...

I think all the "plot holes" are there to mess with us, otherwise you & I wouldn't be having this conversation... Are we having this conversation? (there is no spoon...)

Big Boy Laroux · 08-20-2010, 09:58 PM

we just debated for two pages and went full circle once you realized that you agreed with me.

also, let me repeat. I did really like the movie (it's beautiful, well-acted, smart, etc. - but i did like scott pilgrim more

), but covering for plot holes with "hey, it's a dream" is a cop-out on Nolan's part, IMO.

Not saying he has actually said that, but that seems to be the consensus.

Underdog · 08-20-2010, 10:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Boy Laroux

we just debated for two pages and went full circle once you realized that you agreed with me.

also, let me repeat. I did really like the movie (it's beautiful, well-acted, smart, etc. - but i did like scott pilgrim more

), but covering for plot holes with "hey, it's a dream" is a cop-out on Nolan's part, IMO.

Not saying he has actually said that, but that seems to be the consensus.

A "cop-out" is one way to look at it...

A "device" is another way to look at it (just like Scott Pilgrim fighting his way through his emotions rather than actually expressing them in words...)

Big Boy Laroux · 08-20-2010, 10:11 PM

did you see scott pilgrim? Cause i don't want to spoil anything if you haven't... even though we've been spoiling inception for pages.

Underdog · 08-20-2010, 10:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Boy Laroux

did you see scott pilgrim? Cause i don't want to spoil anything if you haven't...

I have.

I liked it, but I would have liked it better if someone else was cast as Scott Pilgrim (I hate Michael Cera, much in the same way I thought Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind would have been infinitely better if someone else was cast in place of Jim Carrey...)

But I'm a fan of the comic book, so I'm biased. I did like the movie though... The dialog & special effects were brilliant - Edgar Wright can do no wrong in my eyes...

Big Boy Laroux · 08-20-2010, 10:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

I have.

I liked it, but I would have liked it better if someone else was cast as Scott Pilgrim (I hate Michael Cera, much in the same way I thought Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind would have been infinitely better if someone else was cast in place of Jim Carrey...)

But I'm a fan of the comic book, so I'm biased. I did like the movie though... The dialog & special effects were brilliant - Edgar Wright can do no wrong in my eyes...

*** SCOTT PILGRIM SPOILERS ***

ok then, then you would know that Scott actually DOES express himself in words at the end, and that's really the whole growth of the character. not a plot hole.

See, i thought cera worked. I do think Scott is meant to be a little more jerky than he played him, but i'm honestly not sure of another actor that would have been a good fit. Also, that's saying something about eternal sunshine... it's one of my favorite films, ever. Who would you have cast as Scott Pilgrim, or in place of Jim Carrey?

I'm a fan of the books, too, but man, the majority of the changes in the movie were actually much better than the books (the nega-scott resolution, the twins fight (WAY better), the stunt double fight, scott having something to do with the vegan police showing up instead of it being solely a deus ex machina moment), aside from the very end. Ramona should have had a much bigger role in defeating Gideon. She was just a bystander in the movie (aside from one groin kick), and that's a shame.

I was surprised that wright was able to actually convey a lot of the heart from the books in such a condensed film (condensed compared to the book).

Flacolaco · 08-20-2010, 10:25 PM

I saw one commercial for "Scott Pilgrim" once and thought "Wow, that looks like your usual late summer crap."

Now you're not only telling me that the movie is good, but that I should have heard the phrase "scott pilgrim" before today?

Big Boy Laroux · 08-20-2010, 10:28 PM

see, i hadn't heard of Scott Pilgrim until i saw the first trailer, and i was hooked. Plowed through the books (quick reads). So i was a late-comer to the book party, but the last one only came out a month before the movie so i was on the same page as everyone else when it was released.

but i think i said it in an earlier post, you do not need to know anything about the source material. There are quite a few changes (and big ones at that), so you could see the movie, then read the books later and not know specifics.

Note that the theatrical trailers are pretty good, the TV ads are HORRIBLE.

A lot of people think it's intended for teenagers, but the demographic is really 25-40 year olds.

Big Boy Laroux · 08-20-2010, 10:40 PM

By the way, UD, i would have given you rep for this exchange we had going, where i solidified my standing as a genius, but i have to spread it around.

Underdog · 08-20-2010, 10:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Big Boy Laroux

*** SCOTT PILGRIM SPOILERS ***

See, i thought cera worked. I do think Scott is meant to be a little more jerky than he played him, but i'm honestly not sure of another actor that would have been a good fit. Also, that's saying something about eternal sunshine... it's one of my favorite films, ever. Who would you have cast as Scott Pilgrim, or in place of Jim Carrey?

After Jesse Eisenberg out-Cera'd Michael Cera in 'Zombieland', I'm convinced that all sorts of people could have been a better fit for Scott Pilgrim...

Hey, how about Jesse Eisenberg, for starters? Or fellow 'The Social Network' star (and new Spiderman), Andrew Garfield? Better yet, Joseph "Inception" Gordon-Levitt, who definitely showed some Scott Pilgrim-esque moments in (500) Days of Summer... I dunno, I'm not a casting director - I just don't like Michael Cera's one-note act (oh, but Kieran Culkin was absolutely brilliant as his roommate - perfect casting!)

And Jim Carrey's character in 'Eternal Sunshine' could have literally been played by ANYONE - there was nothing about Carrey's brand of acting that lent anything to the role... I kept waiting for him to yell "smokin'!" or "alrighty then!" (that's the problem with casting well-known actors in certain roles...)

But I liked both movies (it's not like either actor was horrible) - I just thought stronger casting would have rated both movies higher in my book...

fluid.forty.one · 08-21-2010, 03:27 AM

BBL I think you're thinking about this from the wrong angle.

They (Cobb and the girl, not Fisher) were in a dream AND in limbo at the same time, because they jacked into FISHERS mental state. Basically, Fisher was in limbo (his state of mind) because he died and they entered his dream (his state of mind) with that machine to find him. Does that make sense? They followed him in through the machine so they needed a kick to get out of it.

Proof that it was limbo and not just a dream world 4. When they enter, it's Cobb's old limbo place. If this was just Fisher's dream world 4 it would be HIS place, not Cobb's... but limbo works differently.

This is the most important thing: The reason Cobb RE WASHES back up on shore into limbo again (ultimately rebooting for a sec giving Saito time to age and build his own little castle thing) was because as they are getting kicked back up, and they are back in the van... they leave Cobb in the van. They all take air and swim back up... Cobb stays and drowns, therefore dying in an earlier dream state which sends him back into limbo because of the sedations.

edit: I see your flow chart has "Cobb dying in the van part" correct but I also see Cobb as dreaming world 4. It just doesn't make sense. They follow FISHER in. It makes way more sense for them needing the kick (which seems to be whats bothering you) because they entered Fishers state technologically rather than organically.

Big Boy Laroux · 08-21-2010, 06:58 AM

*** more inception spoilers ***

I get that Cobb died in the van. Never had an issue with that timeline.

However, I don't agree that they entered fischer's dreamspace. He wasn't hooked up to anything. Cobb and Ariadne were over to the side hooked up to the machine, not Fischer. That is absolutely how I remember it.

Also, my initial point is that the snow explosives were planned all along. I could be wrong on that, I do need to see it again to see when Cobb talks about planting the explosives (before or after they decide to go down one more time - I remember it as before).

If it was actually limbo (which is what I did think originally), it does make sense that Fischer and Ariadne had to die to wake up at the snow level. But again, that makes the snow explosives irrelevant.

I don't think they ever said that the place mal took Fischer was limbo, but you were meant to imply it by the whole "washing up on shore" thing.

But again, Fischer wasn't hooked up to the machine, thus the belief they entered Cobb's dream.

Big Boy Laroux · 08-21-2010, 07:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Underdog

After Jesse Eisenberg out-Cera'd Michael Cera in 'Zombieland', I'm convinced that all sorts of people could have been a better fit for Scott Pilgrim...

Hey, how about Jesse Eisenberg, for starters? Or fellow 'The Social Network' star (and new Spiderman), Andrew Garfield? Better yet, Joseph "Inception" Gordon-Levitt, who definitely showed some Scott Pilgrim-esque moments in (500) Days of Summer... I dunno, I'm not a casting director - I just don't like Michael Cera's one-note act (oh, but Kieran Culkin was absolutely brilliant as his roommate - perfect casting!)

And Jim Carrey's character in 'Eternal Sunshine' could have literally been played by ANYONE - there was nothing about Carrey's brand of acting that lent anything to the role... I kept waiting for him to yell "smokin'!" or "alrighty then!" (that's the problem with casting well-known actors in certain roles...)

But I liked both movies (it's not like either actor was horrible) - I just thought stronger casting would have rated both movies higher in my book...

Eisenberg actually has started to annoy me more than cera. His neurotic style actually makes me (as the viewer) nervous. I liked him in adventureland, but he has shown he basically plays one style as well. I think he would have been too neurotic for pilgrim.

Haven't seen Garfield in anything, but I know of him. His neck is way too long.

I did like gordon-levitt in 500 days of summer, but he's definitely too "put-together" for pilgrim.

I didn't think cera was absolutely perfect either, but I don't agree that he was just playing himself again.

As for eternal sunshine, I recognize that a lot of people could have played the role, but I was asking who you thought would have been BETTER. Carrey was great in it - it was your expectation of him that appears to have ruined him in the movie for you. Possibly the same thing with cera.

I agree culkin was amazing. The entire cast was spot-on. I loved culkin, pine, Evans, routh, schwartzman, whitman, etc.

LonghornDub · 08-21-2010, 11:49 AM

*Inception spoilers*

They fairly clearly explained limbo when they first went into the dream and were in the warehouse, I thought. It's not anybody's dream space. It's a shared dreamspace for all of them, which contains past relics of their dreams/memories/etc. They even explicitly mentioned that's why Mal would be down there. When it says she "took" Fisher, I just assumed that meant she killed him and sent him to limbo, where she would be waiting.

I don't think it matters that Fischer wasn't hooked up in the snow level, because they were all hooked up together in reality. When any one of them dies at any dream level, they go into limbo with everybody else who they're dreaming with and who has died. It didn't appear to be a matter of "following" anybody in. There's just one limbo for all of the dreamers.

fluid.forty.one · 08-21-2010, 12:03 PM

They did say that Fisher was in limbo, a couple of times. AND Cobb tells the girl he's going to "stay there" to find Saito. It's definitely limbo.

Big Boy Laroux · 08-21-2010, 12:25 PM

Fluid and dub, that's how I initially took it as well, that the last "dream" was indeed limbo. And yes, i get that limbo was shared dreamspace. But they did also state that dying in the sedated dream brings you to limbo, not that you dream your way there. I think there is evidence to support both theories. Actually on the fence about it myself.

fluid.forty.one · 08-21-2010, 12:30 PM

Are you absolutely sure they don't hook the machine up to Fisher before they go under? It would have been a very quick and subtle thing.

Another reason why it had to be limbo... Fisher got shot and died to get there, and under their rules "dying in a dream space sends you to limbo because of the sedation". If you believe that Fisher didn't actually die because of the gunshot from Mal, how do you explain him dying in "dream space 4" by being thrown off the building not sending him to ACTUAL limbo.

Big Boy Laroux · 08-21-2010, 12:44 PM

Unless mal took Fischer down to cobb's lowest dream level, because she is cobb's projection. They made a point to say that mal took him, as opposed to it being a "normal" death like saito.

As for Fischer and the machine, we see multiple shots of eames by fischer's body, and the only thing i remember being there is the defibrillator.

And was Fischer actually dead? Or near death (able to be revived by the defibrillator)? As UD pointed out earlier, Fischer being brought by mal to one dream lower would have extended the little time he had left.

As for Fischer coming back up - did he do so because of death? Or because of the kick from the defibrillator? Remember the lightning in the sky? Again, evidence to support both theories.

Underdog · 08-21-2010, 12:45 PM

I love this thread - Christopher Nolan is a genius...

(seriously, when's the last time you discussed a movie in such depth?)

Big Boy Laroux · 08-21-2010, 12:55 PM

A genius or a hack director with no concern for plot holes.

For the record, I have liked all the movies of his I've seen.