Inception <spoilers present>

[ItisWritten]

Saw this a couple days ago, then read this thread. I tend to believe that the ending is reality. I outright reject the idea of the movie as Cobb's dream, simply because the scope of the movie is diminished, making the viewing experience the equivalent of watching someone jerk off. Nolan's dream? I can get behind that. My take on a few of the points made here.

On the children--yes, there were different child actors for the different ages. In the credits, the character names are listed along with their ages. This in itself is inconclusive because Cobb could have aged them in his mind. But that the distinction is made is important. If Cobb was truly addicted to the dream, why would the passage of time matter? To make the dream more real? Then why not opt for reality? We can come up with reasons (Mal is alive and left him and took the children), but none of that is evident in the movie.

On the spinning top--yes, it was Mal's, but Cobb sought it out in Limbo and corrupted it to plant the idea in her head that they weren't in reality. His guilt in what happened after prompts him to adopt it. It symbolizes not only reality, but his past. Leaving the top behind at the end signifies that the guilt and Mal no longer holds him. He wanted to go home; why would he accept a figment?

Does Cobb actually escape the dream?--I know it's only a movie, but I tend to look at things logically. If he's still dreaming in limbo at the end, where's the closure for the rest of the characters? Are they still on the plane, waiting for him to awaken? Ten years passage on Level 3 equals how much time in Limbo?

On the freefall of Level 2 that doesn't exist in Level 3--I think this has to do with the dreamer at each Level. The chemist at Level 1 caused it to rain by the need to pee. From this we can see how the dreamer effects that level. Level 2 dreamer Arthur, a less imaginative, pragmatic character must logically feel the topsy-turvy of Level 1 in his dreaming. At Level 3, Eames the forger is an actor, able to push aside the distractions and focus on the performance. He can probably feel the upset, too (he hears the warning music) but it's irrelevant to his more imaginative mind so the fortress world is stable.

There have been so many good things to say about the movie it feels almost redundant to agree. But I do.

[Loredoctor]

That's a great review, itiswritten.

[Usivius]

agreed.

[Zarathustra]

If Cobb was truly addicted to the dream, why would the passage of time matter? To make the dream more real? Then why not opt for reality? We can come up with reasons (Mal is alive and left him and took the children), but none of that is evident in the movie.

If he thought he was already in reality, then he couldn't simply "opt for reality" as something distinct from what he actually did.

I've come to doubt my own reasons for thinking it was all definitely a dream. But I think the ambiguity is still there. And if you view Cobb's problem as the opposite of Mal's, it's still quite an interesting interpretation and not merely watching someone jerk off. For instance, if her problem was that she couldn't accept reality as real, his problem could be viewed as the opposite case of not being able to accept a dream as fake. They are two sides of the same coin, two kinds of inauthenticity, two ends on the same spectrum of mind/reality. This spectrum contains all that is problematic with our own experience with reality--the apparent reality of dreams and the fallibility of our senses. Both are forms of evidence from either side of mind/reality divide that points out problems with naive realism (i.e. our typical way of viewing our existence in the world).

Reducing the movie--or our ontology--to either position is problematic.

[ItisWritten]

If Cobb was truly addicted to the dream, why would the passage of time matter? To make the dream more real? Then why not opt for reality? We can come up with reasons (Mal is alive and left him and took the children), but none of that is evident in the movie.

If he thought he was already in reality, then he couldn't simply "opt for reality" as something distinct from what he actually did.

I understand the distinction. What we do in our own heads often defies logic. Watching it a second time, I noticed the total disbelief on Cobb's face when he woke on the plane. He was completely aware that his mind might have created a false reality. I also believe that he was not certain of his sanity even when he arrived home, hence the last spin of the top. But when he saw his childrens' faces, aged faces that he hadn't seen in months, he believed. I've stated my reasons for believing the last scene was reality.

I've come to doubt my own reasons for thinking it was all definitely a dream. But I think the ambiguity is still there. And if you view Cobb's problem as the opposite of Mal's, it's still quite an interesting interpretation and not merely watching someone jerk off. For instance, if her problem was that she couldn't accept reality as real, his problem could be viewed as the opposite case of not being able to accept a dream as fake. They are two sides of the same coin, two kinds of inauthenticity, two ends on the same spectrum of mind/reality. This spectrum contains all that is problematic with our own experience with reality--the apparent reality of dreams and the fallibility of our senses. Both are forms of evidence from either side of mind/reality divide that points out problems with naive realism (i.e. our typical way of viewing our existence in the world).

Reducing the movie--or our ontology--to either position is problematic.

Well, I prefer to leave the existential hoodoo to those who can get their minds around it. Me?

I was merely speaking of my own simple opinion, and I'm quite certain that I watched a movie that stretched the boundaries of several tropes while still telling an oddly straight-forward movie about a man trying to go home.

[Cambo]

If Cobb was truly addicted to the dream, why would the passage of time matter? To make the dream more real? Then why not opt for reality? We can come up with reasons (Mal is alive and left him and took the children), but none of that is evident in the movie.

If he thought he was already in reality, then he couldn't simply "opt for reality" as something distinct from what he actually did.

I've come to doubt my own reasons for thinking it was all definitely a dream. But I think the ambiguity is still there. And if you view Cobb's problem as the opposite of Mal's, it's still quite an interesting interpretation and not merely watching someone jerk off. For instance, if her problem was that she couldn't accept reality as real, his problem could be viewed as the opposite case of not being able to accept a dream as fake. They are two sides of the same coin, two kinds of inauthenticity, two ends on the same spectrum of mind/reality. This spectrum contains all that is problematic with our own experience with reality--the apparent reality of dreams and the fallibility of our senses. Both are forms of evidence from either side of mind/reality divide that points out problems with naive realism (i.e. our typical way of viewing our existence in the world).

Reducing the movie--or our ontology--to either position is problematic.

Excellent post Z.

[Lazy Luke]

Seems to me it would make more sense that Leo would know the weight and balance of the top and thus would know how long it should spin (depending on how hard he spins it) and thus by spinning it in a dream and observing the spin, he would be able to determine if he was in another's dream as the architect of the dream would not know the exact spin characteristics of the top and thus would not be able to replicate it exactly.

Does that make any sense?

Here's an angle on the spinning top that I noticed. DiCaprio is Nolan. If you think of Alfred Hitchcock putting himself on screen, Christopher Nolan is there for the whole movie. Squint your eyes while watching the film and you'll see him, just below the surface. Why? To add a final layer to the dreamscape.

At the end of the movie the top will wobble but still spin indefinately, or it will stop. It all depends on how the viewer reads the story. Like Saito, Mal is old and trapped deep down under the Inception. You can either leave her there, or find the combination and unlock the safe ...