Tuesday, 10 August 2010

what dreams may dream

some time ago, i posted a pretty elaborate series of posts about my top ten choices of movies. now, it's unsurprising that, given it's not something i did with too much effort, some really good movies were left out; having me not have viewed quite a lot of them, and even the ones i did, i mightn't have remembered. anyway. there's also the thing about new movies.

i never really give much credit to new movies. they're generally a bit meh, with some exceptions, and even if they're great, i guess i'm just one of those people who need it to simmer a bit before it ascends to greatness. maybe a couple of months, maybe a year or so. it's more of a general feel thing, than a clear-cut decision. no mathematical precision involved kinda. and, of course, there's some exceptions. like 'lovely bones', or shawshank, or 'matrix', or lotr, which, upon viewing, they kinda blew my mind.

anyway. ahem. as you may have expected. inception. really good stuff. yeap, you saw this coming from a kilometer away. eff you americans for your 'mile away' metaphors. SI or gtfo.

i sometimes post my random dream encounters, which are pretty retarded and full of epic fail. and i've definitely had that 'dream in a dream' crap happen one too many times. but yeah, never mind that, let me just say a few words about inception, and how it should make my list of top movies (but we'll let that simmer before any type of induction happens).

first and foremost, it's a great movie, don't get me wrong. the storyline is quite original, but it is somewhat flimsy and underdeveloped. that being said, it still lasted 3 hours-ish, and i guess that just happens when you have about 5 different movies in one (think of each level as a separate movie, i guess, with potential for a lot of development in each one).

there's a few inconsistencies, too. like, when they're in the hotel building (3rd i think?) level. oh wait, eff. i should put a disclaimer here, since maybe some people haven't seen it yet...


yeah in the hotel building, while the van is falling. apparently, the stuff in the building have zero gravity because of the free-falling van. okay, i can roll with that. but then, to create gravity, the 3rd rock guy (who i think is pretty awesome) moves everyone into an elevator, then blows up the cables, after which the elevator drops and they create artificial gravity. really, how would the elevator drop in the shaft if there was zero g effecting it? it would make more sense if the shaft were moved by the cables (at a very high speed) to artificially make gravity, but, eh... minor details. physicists, have a field day on this one. anyway. not gonna nitpick the other minor details, because it'll probably spoil the epicness for a lot of you. just wanted to point out that there's some loopholes in there. which, i guess could be explained by just waving your hands around and saying 'it's a dream, anything can happen'. i guess.


but, like my friend, the don, says: 'it has the uncanny ability to keep you at the edge of your seat, thinking to the last minute', and i totally agree with him (you can't disagree with the don, anyway, for fear of finding a horse's head in your bed the next morning). but, 3 hours, and it felt like only 20mins. why, that's like we're being in a dream, with all that time expansion crap, right? or, like i simplistically put it to the don, you rarely find such a captivating movie nowadays, it's nice and fresh to find one where you don't get bored half-way through.

at the risk of sounding like a fanboi, i'm gonna stretch it here and say, yeap, inception is totally worth the watch, and i'd watch it a couple more times just to pick on the finer details. not at the movies, again, though. i'm cheap like that.

as a closing statement, i'd just like to reflect on how at the end, leo's character spins his totem and the movie ends before we can make out if it perpetually spins, or if it drops. there's, again, something that bothers me with inconsistency relating to other parts of the movie, but i think it's well enough left there.

feel free to post comments / theories / criticisms etc. on the movie; i'd really like to hear what people have to say about it. kudos to christopher nolan.

1 comment:

etc said...

some people had pointed out to me (or at least we came to this consensus after a discussion) that the elevator thing might not have been due to gravity, but the explosions applying force on the elevator, thus propelling it downwards.

yeah, i can get with this, but 2 things remain:

1. would the bombs apply enough force to simulate at least 1g? i guess this makes sense, since he did use like 4 bombs or something like that. and it's all crazy what they can make these days. get a demolisher or something to work this out for me, please.

2. they're in 0g in the dream, but there should still be friction, at the very least because it's not a vacuum. so, unless the explosion was sufficiently strong (which, i'm not saying it's not), they would all just end up without enough force and float around at some point (which would make the timing thing even less forgiving).

bah, who gives a monkey's tail about this, it was in a dream anyway, so god know's what's possible/impossible. just enjoy the movie, i guess.