Is inception over hyped?
- Thread starter blobin
- Start date
Recommended Videos
It might have been exhausted through the press for being such a great film, but it was... to bad majority of the people who saw it didn't understand or couldn't pick up the symbolic meaning of the film, just like Eternal Sunshine or the Matrix. Movie goers are just that now-a-days, move goers; who don't understand anything but big names and special effects, but what can you expect from a world which is slowly losing their intelligence, becoming to lazy to read books on human life and philosophy of it. The reason it is/was overhyped is because of the effects, as sad as it is to say. Only a few people I have talked to about the movie actually understood the meaning, and even some showed me things that I missed. I think I'll label this theory of movies becoming extremely popular due to computer graphical effects as 'The Michael Bay Theory'
Hahahahaha I agree. I will admit that Inception was easier to follow then Paprika. In Paprika I could never really put my finger on if they were dreaming or not later in the movie, but all in all it was amazing! I'm so glad I have added it to my collection.tanis1lionheart said:I liked it better when it was called Paprika...yeah, I went there.
I thought it was pretty good. It isn't as hyped as a lot of other movies that were completely terrible(or decent at best). Then again, I think you are confusing "overhyped" with "overrated"
Like, with each other? Were they supposed to? They were just business partners. Why were they supposed to connect emotionally?gillrobin said:
I noticed that. My cousins have it to us and he said something like "you have to watch it 2-3 times to fully get it". I watched it and got it the first time.PureChaos said:
Yes, Inception is overrated, and this coming from a guy who usually is all over so-called deep and subversive films. David Fincher is my favorite director, and I find myself regularly using Fight Club as an example of how to do this kind of film well.
Thing is, in my opinion most of the "depth" in Inception is fluff. Once you strip the story down to its bare minimum, there are two interpretations. One is obvious and shallow, the other is "deep" but INCREDIBLY STUPID, because if we assume that ending is true then basically the entire movie is nothing happening. Yeah, none of it really matters or affects anything.
So either its a shallow action film or a deliberately obscure failed attempt at a deep narrative. I just wasn't that impressed by the action or any of the set pieces aside from the gravity one, and there really wasn't much here for me to enjoy. If you liked it, fine, but I don't really makes this movie any deeper than just about every other competent action flick out there. I find it comparable to something like The Matrix or Tron-there are a lot of cool elements, but most of the "depth" seems to come out of what you choose to read into the story, rather than what is actually there.
I offer up The Game, Se7en and Ghost in the Shell as superior "deep" cinema. The Laughing Man alone provides more genuine fodder for discussion of concepts which exist in this world and aren't made up within the ridiculous confines of an imaginary world, and when an anime out-realism's a movie, you know there's a problem.
Also, Minority Report was Paprika before Paprika was Paprika. So we can keep tracing this trail back.
Thing is, in my opinion most of the "depth" in Inception is fluff. Once you strip the story down to its bare minimum, there are two interpretations. One is obvious and shallow, the other is "deep" but INCREDIBLY STUPID, because if we assume that ending is true then basically the entire movie is nothing happening. Yeah, none of it really matters or affects anything.
So either its a shallow action film or a deliberately obscure failed attempt at a deep narrative. I just wasn't that impressed by the action or any of the set pieces aside from the gravity one, and there really wasn't much here for me to enjoy. If you liked it, fine, but I don't really makes this movie any deeper than just about every other competent action flick out there. I find it comparable to something like The Matrix or Tron-there are a lot of cool elements, but most of the "depth" seems to come out of what you choose to read into the story, rather than what is actually there.
I offer up The Game, Se7en and Ghost in the Shell as superior "deep" cinema. The Laughing Man alone provides more genuine fodder for discussion of concepts which exist in this world and aren't made up within the ridiculous confines of an imaginary world, and when an anime out-realism's a movie, you know there's a problem.
Also, Minority Report was Paprika before Paprika was Paprika. So we can keep tracing this trail back.
I didn't feel over-hyped. However, I didn't go see it in theaters either, so what do I know? I just get lately creeped out by DiCaprio lately. Something about him is off.
THIS. it was a good movie and i definately enjoyed it. but everyone went ON and ON at how complex it was and it wasnt....PureChaos said:
Yes, it was. It was a good movie, and had great cinematic quality.
But it's just so full of itself. BA-ZING!
But it's just so full of itself. BA-ZING!
I think its overhyped, but I think DiCaprio is over hyped, since the movie before inception was a bust.
Its a good movie, dont get me wrong, but its not as good as everyone likes to say it is.
Then again, I worked at a movie theatre for about two years, so I knew everything before most everyone, since our manager had a friend in hollywood and filled us in, and movies get ruined when you have everyone walk up to you and ask you your opinion on movies and whether you think it will be good because someone is in it or because someone directed it, or because of one little plot event. The whole thing killed it for me.
And I've been told thats childish and dumb, but think about it this way. If you had well over 10000 people walk up to you and ask you to tell them all you know about th emoive, then have them tell you all they know about th emoive, and you cant walk away or else you get written up for bad customer service, would you honestly want to see the movie in question?
Its a good movie, dont get me wrong, but its not as good as everyone likes to say it is.
Then again, I worked at a movie theatre for about two years, so I knew everything before most everyone, since our manager had a friend in hollywood and filled us in, and movies get ruined when you have everyone walk up to you and ask you your opinion on movies and whether you think it will be good because someone is in it or because someone directed it, or because of one little plot event. The whole thing killed it for me.
And I've been told thats childish and dumb, but think about it this way. If you had well over 10000 people walk up to you and ask you to tell them all you know about th emoive, then have them tell you all they know about th emoive, and you cant walk away or else you get written up for bad customer service, would you honestly want to see the movie in question?
Oh come on. First, that's incredibly insulting. Second, it's no more valid than defending a game with, "you don't like it because you suck at it."ClifJayShafer said:
Actually, after watching and not liking Inception, I did some research on possible interpretations of the movie. See, unlike many people (apparently), I tend to think the CREDITS mean the END OF THE FILM, so I missed a key piece. But that's fine, I looked everything up, checking into what people thought the different endings might mean, figured out which viewpoint Christopher Nolan supported and claimed to have intended to be "correct" and... I think it is incredibly stupid. I still think Inception is a big, dumb movie, only now it's pretentious.
Look, movies have to connect with something real. If the real story of Inception is what I think it is, the only, ONLY thing we can latch onto as something having anything to do with reality is the main character. Even The Matrix didn't spend the ENTIRE MOVIE in the Matrix. Why? Because without reality we have no concept of the virtual. There's no difference for the audience. Ah, but that's the point, is your response. Indeed, well then what is the point of Inception? If this is the thesis statement of Inception, it is a concept so simple a 5-minute AMV could accomplish the same thing.
The way I see it, Inception is either about the concept or about Cobb. If it's about Cobb and nothing is real, then I feel it's a mistake for nothing to be real because then Cobb is the only real "person" in the movie (everyone else is an actor), and all that action nonsense becomes both needless padding and shameless pandering to this mindless movie audience you mentioned, ironically. If Inception is about the high-minded concept, why all the preaching about stupid, asinine dream logic rules which have no relation to how dreams work in real life and the constant supporting actor banter?
I actually like the scenes between Cobb and the japanese guy (I want to say Retamoto, but I'm not sure), because they sort of approach that Matrix level of multiple meanings, that Neo and Morpheus kind of interplay. But the movie never settles into that groove for long before we're watching chase scenes that were crap back when Matrix Reloaded did them. Again, when the rules are a bunch of cow manure made up for the film with no logical context, I have no reason to be invested in whether they can make their completely arbitrary time limit.
Eugh, I just don't like this movie. There's something about it that smacks of faux-movie elitism. If you're a fan of Inception, don't let me put you off liking it. But don't use Inception as a vehicle to blast other people who may not share your tastes.
The way I see it, Inception is either about the concept or about Cobb. If it's about Cobb and nothing is real, then I feel it's a mistake for nothing to be real because then Cobb is the only real "person" in the movie (everyone else is an actor), and all that action nonsense becomes both needless padding and shameless pandering to this mindless movie audience you mentioned, ironically. If Inception is about the high-minded concept, why all the preaching about stupid, asinine dream logic rules which have no relation to how dreams work in real life and the constant supporting actor banter?
I actually like the scenes between Cobb and the japanese guy (I want to say Retamoto, but I'm not sure), because they sort of approach that Matrix level of multiple meanings, that Neo and Morpheus kind of interplay. But the movie never settles into that groove for long before we're watching chase scenes that were crap back when Matrix Reloaded did them. Again, when the rules are a bunch of cow manure made up for the film with no logical context, I have no reason to be invested in whether they can make their completely arbitrary time limit.
Eugh, I just don't like this movie. There's something about it that smacks of faux-movie elitism. If you're a fan of Inception, don't let me put you off liking it. But don't use Inception as a vehicle to blast other people who may not share your tastes.
I don't think it's overhyped - it really is a great movie.
What is over-hyped is the usefulness of IMDB's all-time movie list. Recent stuff is absurdly over-represented on that list due to sheer weight of votes from breathless fans who walk out of the cinema and give any movie they enjoyed a 10.
What is over-hyped is the usefulness of IMDB's all-time movie list. Recent stuff is absurdly over-represented on that list due to sheer weight of votes from breathless fans who walk out of the cinema and give any movie they enjoyed a 10.
We could make a game out of this for all new movies.tanis1lionheart said:
Black Swan? I liked it better when it was called Perfect Blue.
It's a movie and it's great. It's pretty disorienting and doesn't make tons of sense, but definitely worth watching.Eico said:
I thought it was good, but way too over-hyped. And I have a few friends that constantly say how it was amazing, and mind-blowing. How in blue blazes is it mind-blowing!? I thought it was very straight-forward. Nothing about it blew my mind at all. Unless they think the technology is real, but my friends aren't stupid.
Now, The Matrix? That was a smart and mind-blowing movie.
Now, The Matrix? That was a smart and mind-blowing movie.
I try to imagine what you look like grinning at a movie, and I always picture Vito from Mafia II, 'cause of your avatar... I think.Woodsey said:
Anyways, my irrelevant imagination aside, I do not believe it is over hyper. It highly deserves the praise it got; it was very interesting, well written and had good acting.
I never got why it was so popular, it's quite clever but it doesn't leave interpretation like other great films such as American Psycho and Fight Club. It has some alright martial arts bits but not nearly as good as anything with Jet Li.
It was good but not great. It wasn't amazingly intelligent like some people have been saying and at times it felt a bit mismatched but that's my opinion, if you don't like my opinion you cango fuck yourself explain why you disagree
It was good but not great. It wasn't amazingly intelligent like some people have been saying and at times it felt a bit mismatched but that's my opinion, if you don't like my opinion you can
So it's been a long, LONG time since I saw that movie and this will derail the thread entirely, but - was Black Swan really that similar to Perfect Blue? I think you might be stretching it a tad, but feel free to point out the similarities for me (besides the obvious young girl/art performance connections)mireko said:
But, uh, no, Inception is not overhyped. <---- now my post is on-topic.
Wait Nolan has an official viewpoint? I didn't think Nolan says anything about his films, heck, he never does any commentaries on any of his movies on DVDs.Samurai Goomba said:
I thought the whole idea was that it didn't matter if he was dreaming or not, because either way it's a happy ending. Anyway, I think you're too hung up on the ending and the idea that Inception is about questioning reality. There are other things the movie deals with, I'll just stick with one though. The whole movie is an extended metaphor for the experience of going to the movies. Cobb is like the director and Fischer is the audience. Based on their roles the other characters can be put in similar terms; Eames is the actor, Ariadne is the writer, etc. Cobb takes Fischer through a series of fabricated events without him knowing it; similar to how a director tries to maintain the audiences' suspension of disbelief. When Fischer wakes up he is changed even though what happened was not real. Ideally, the same should happen to the audience at the end of a movie.
A similar thing happens to Cobb as well. Near the end, Cobb no longer regrets that he couldn't grow old with Mal because he realizes he had already done so, even if it was spent in limbo (even if it wasn't "real"). He sees its foolish to keeping holding on to Mal since the one in his mind was not the real thing. You could say his "suspension of disbelief" was broken since he knew too much about the true Mal and the substitute could never fill role.
I guess I thought Inception was more about how works of fiction can affect people in a very real way, than it was about questioning reality. The things learned and experienced from books, films, and video games can be important and be a big part of who a person is even though they aren't real. It's kinda like the opposite of when you're a little kid and spend a lot of time reading fantasy books and people tell you they're silly and you're wasting your time.
I really enjoyed it but It was a bit over hyped and I don't get why people thought it was complicated it was very easy to follow