OT: Go see Inception.

18 Jul

Inception was so good that I’m hijacking my own blog to tell people to see it.

Comments are open to spoilers, so reader beware if you haven’t seen the movie yet.

…Okay, slightly on-topic:  all of the actors, both male and female, in this movie are beautifully lensed and a pleasure to look at.  However, even though Tom Hardy’s Eames has the devil-may-care alpha swagger, I was most taken with Cillian Murphy’s Robert Fischer.

18 Responses to “OT: Go see Inception.”

  1. Will S. July 18, 2010 at 7:00 pm #

    I saw Inception last night, and enjoyed it very much, even if it was highly derivative of “The Matrix”. The little punch with the final scene at the very end was rather amusing. An action movie that was also thought-provoking, and a decent enough sci-fi plot. I intend to see it again soon, while it’s still in the theatres; it’s that good, IMO, and I’m sure I’ll catch stuff I missed the first time around.

  2. Aunt Haley July 19, 2010 at 12:17 am #

    The little punch with the final scene at the very end was rather amusing.

    I thought it was kind of a cheat that Christopher Nolan would refuse to resolve the story, because up until then, the ending had been wholly satisfying in a way that few movies are.

  3. Will S. July 19, 2010 at 7:31 am #

    I saw it more as a bit of a joke, the way it slipped briefly. (Because of that, it seemed resolved to me, even if he was teasing.)

  4. Aunt Haley July 19, 2010 at 10:13 pm #

    Will – so I take it you are in the “Cobb successfully made it back to reality” camp?

  5. Will S. July 20, 2010 at 2:35 pm #

    Yes, I believe so.

  6. Hermes July 20, 2010 at 5:33 pm #

    OT: Haley, I’ve bookmarked you and added you to the blogroll of my too-infrequently-posted-to blog. Nice to see a girl who gets it–particularly one who gets as frustrated by Boundless as I do.

  7. Aunt Haley July 20, 2010 at 10:32 pm #

    I’m in the same camp, which is why I’m a little surprised at how passionately people believe that Cobb ended up in (or was always in) a dream. Having the whole thing (or even just the ending) be a dream isn’t “deep.” It robs Cobb’s entire journey of catharsis and unironically contradicts the theme of the need to live in reality.

  8. Aunt Haley July 20, 2010 at 10:45 pm #

    Thanks, Hermes. I’ve been reading Boundless for a few years. Occasionally they make good points, but much of the time I want to bash my head against the wall. The comments are usually a cornucopia of cliches and judgmentalism written in fluent Christianese.

  9. Will S. July 21, 2010 at 8:33 pm #

    (In response to Aunt Haley, July 20, 2010 at 10:32 pm)

    Exactly! Well said.

    I saw it again last night, and nothing changed my mind; it was as enjoyable the second time, as I did indeed notice little details I missed the first time around, which is always fun.

    Of course, the ending, even if positive in many aspects, isn’t a cliched Hollywood ending. After all, his wife is still dead. But he has grown, and finally come to terms with that.

    Funny how a sci-fi flick (and that is what Inception is) argues successfully for the need to live in reality, and ends on a realistic, rather than a completely positive or, alternately, completely negative, note.

  10. Hermes July 22, 2010 at 5:38 pm #

    Ah, yes, the comments. When I mention frustration at Boundless I’m usually thinking of the white-knighting and woman-pedestalizing of Ted Slater, Motte Brown, and Steve Watters, but it’s true, the comments are their own kind of special. They’re usually in about a 1:10 ratio of intelligent thought to pablum like “you can’t generalize; my cousin got married at the first time at age 43 and she looked beautiful and she and her husband have a truly blessed and Godly marriage!”

    Have you listened to the Boundless Show segment on that notorious Hannah Rosin article in The Atlantic about The End of Men? Talk about wanting to bash your head against the wall. They invited some marriage-and-family “expert” from FotF name Glenn Stanton on to discuss it. He fell so far short of addressing the actual topic of the Rosin piece (which was that our post-industrial society is making men obsolete, and maybe that’s just the way it is and there’s nothing we can or should do about it) that one wonders if he even read the piece at all. Lisa Anderson kept asking him these questions about what men should do, what society should do, and he kept giving these pat answers about how our society isn’t “manufacturing good men,” men need to “man up,” women need to hold men to a higher standard and expect more from them, women feel the selection of men out there is so poor, men are this way because they didn’t have good masculinity modeled for them, etc. And then in the comments section on the blog, nobody was interested in discussing the topic, preferring instead to debate whether or not premarital kissing is a sin. That episode has long since faded off their main page, but it incensed me so much that I still want to blog about it when I finally have time.

  11. Aunt Haley July 22, 2010 at 11:12 pm #

    Oh, I am well-acquainted with that trifecta of white knighting/woman pedestaling. Ted in particular is sort of a bizarro world Christian Roissy, who writes with even more moral certainty of his beliefs and tends to go after those who disagree in a punishing manner. (Every time he excoriates people for not practicing “media discernment,” half of me wants to throttle him while the other half of me wants to laugh.) The female bloggers aren’t much better, though, with Candice’s unironic Christian feminism or Lisa Anderson’s “you go girl”-ism. Suzanne is not so preachy, but she’s sort of turned into some patron saint of lonely single women over 30 due to her chick flick-ready story of how she met and married her husband.

    The comments from female Boundless readers are usually especially bad because they largely come from the perspective that one exception completely undoes an entire generalization. Remember Candice’s post about how being fat doesn’t mean a woman will never find a husband? Oy vey.

    I haven’t listened to the podcast in quite a while, but I think I remember that post thread where yet another passionate debate about pre-marital kissing erupted.

  12. Hermes July 24, 2010 at 1:36 pm #

    Ted Slater, and the guy he’s been defending recently, Josh Harris, are Christian alphas. These are the type of guy who are naturally charismatic, extroverted, and occupy visible leadership positions in the church. Josh Harris was a youth group leader and pastor; Ted Slater played in his church’s worship band as well as various other Christian bands. It’s easy for them to say that men need to stop “defrauding” women. Both of them came to a point where they realized that it wasn’t really fair of them to have all these women attracted to them, to be toying with them and flirting with them, and that they should just pick one and marry her, so they did so. The problem is that they extrapolated their experience to all men. They don’t know what it’s like not to be a minor rockstar in the church and have numerous attractive women interested in you. Their advice to the cubicle-drone betas sitting in the rear pews to just “man up” and ask women out is worthless.

  13. Will S. July 24, 2010 at 10:19 pm #

    Exactly, Hermes!

    I commented previously here about the way Harris’ book seems only geared towards those who are natural leaders, whether deliberately or by oversight, and I’m inclined to think more the latter. (It’s probably hard for people who are “stars” in the evangelical commmunity to identify with the ordinary folks in the pews.)

  14. Will S. July 24, 2010 at 10:22 pm #

    Oh, and I said something similar here, too. I’ll be quiet now, lest I sound like a broken record.

  15. Anna July 25, 2010 at 10:35 am #

    Tom Hardy totally had the peacocky alpha swagger. JGL’s was a lot more like the Timothy Olyphant type.

    The best thing about Cillian Murphy was that he was a regular guy. He always plays such a CRAZY because he has those huge light eyes and striking facial bones. Also, he is really slight. I cracked up when Tom Hardy bumped into him on the plane and you really saw how short he was. He was like half-sized.

  16. Cane Caldo July 31, 2010 at 9:14 am #

    Watch it again, and notice how quickly the top topples in all the other scenes. He gave up. Nolan always writes fitting endings. Cobb suffered the fate to which he doomed his wife, and his victim-turned-client.

    Did you all see Memento? Insomnia? The Prestige? The Following? Nolan is focused on the idea of how memory works, how we know reality, how tenuous is that grasp, how technology can be bad, and how tragedy can drive us to seek the imagined over the real. Pretty lies, anyone? The only time he’s deviated from this theme was in Dark Knight concerning the surveillance system, and I would not be surprised if that tech makes a comeback in the next Batman.

    PS – It’s only derivative of the Matrix in the way that the Matrix is derivative of most religions in general, and Christianity in particular. There are only so many interesting stories in the world. Fortunately, we never tire of them.

  17. Lover of Wisdom July 31, 2010 at 11:49 am #

    I thought the movie was great. I’ll be using it for years when teaching intro philosophy.

  18. Aunt Haley August 1, 2010 at 3:43 pm #

    Nolan left the ending purposely ambiguous. The top spins longer than we’ve seen it spin in reality, but it also begins to wobble right before Nolan cuts to black. I’ve seen the film twice and don’t strongly feel that the ending was supposed to be ironic. An ironic ending is just one possible read.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: