Inception - Chris Nolan + Leo DiCaprio = best movie of the summer?

Word Calx

  On 7/29/2010 at 9:48 AM, oscillik said:

you're all twats of the highest calibre

LOL

fu

  On 7/29/2010 at 9:06 AM, abusivegeorge said:

So have the days of just sitting down and enjoying a film gone out of the window?

 

...

 

Sit down, watch a movie, have no expectations, and try not to pick fault. Try it next time you watch something, and you might enjoy it a little more.

i only have problems with movies that try too much to be more. i didn't have problem with avatar, i didn't have problem with predators. but inception was different.

dude, it wasnt 'trying' to be 'more', the only reason you think that is because of the hype you read about on the forums before you saw it. you went into it being super critical and when it didnt live up to the hype you picked every little thing apart and made it seem way worse than it actually was.

i don't know anymore, really. there WAS a lot of hype. but i'm pretty sure the same things would bother me anyway.

actually, i don't want to discuss this movie any more. i didn't like it very much.

  On 7/29/2010 at 10:35 AM, kokoon said:

  On 7/29/2010 at 9:06 AM, abusivegeorge said:

So have the days of just sitting down and enjoying a film gone out of the window?

 

...

 

Sit down, watch a movie, have no expectations, and try not to pick fault. Try it next time you watch something, and you might enjoy it a little more.

i only have problems with movies that try too much to be more. i didn't have problem with avatar, i didn't have problem with predators. but inception was different.

  On 7/29/2010 at 11:09 AM, kokoon said:

i don't know anymore, really. there WAS a lot of hype. but i'm pretty sure the same things would bother me anyway.

 

actually, i don't want to discuss this movie any more. i didn't like it very much.

Fair enough mate, and yeah 30 pages is probably enough lol.

  On 7/29/2010 at 10:59 AM, MAXIMUS MISCHIEF said:

dude, it wasnt 'trying' to be 'more', the only reason you think that is because of the hype you read about on the forums before you saw it. you went into it being super critical and when it didnt live up to the hype you picked every little thing apart and made it seem way worse than it actually was.

This is deifnetly a major issue with almost every film release now, there's a huge fucking deal made about almost every up and coming film, and quite frankly they are made out to be awesome, you have really high expectations just from a 2 minute trailer and some ads.

In reality, that 2 minutes trailer has all of the best bits from the film in it, leaving nothing to be desired lol. That's why I don't watch film traliers, read reviews and google films before I watch them. I don't watch tele, so I am completely able to avoid any advertisement.

Movies I think are shit offend me as a viewer. There's almost no preparation possible for that, except maybe getting drunk. Being offended means that the movie patronizes me, makes me and idiot or cretin just by watching it, or the movie makes such stupid things I feel sorry to be human. That happens a lot watching hollywood production.

I don't watch as much of that as I used to. I loved action, I loved zf movies, that mostly came from america. It's been pretty hard, having to switch to other stuff, when this let me down. Nowadays I usually just watch a blockbuster for fun, with friends at home, I rarely go to the cinema. Because it's almost always the same, getting all nervous because the movie reminds me of too many bad things going on around (without him trying to, he's just part of it).

  On 7/29/2010 at 8:37 AM, kokoon said:

  On 7/28/2010 at 11:27 PM, blicero said:

Avatar was shit.

 

Cameron is almost as bad a writer as Lucas. Nothing original but the 3d tech, which I just found to be distracting. Good popcorn movie, laughable as a best picture nom.

i completely agree. but, unfortunately, inception wasnt even that. it tries far too much to be taken as a serious movie. avatar didn't. predators neither. i would rate predators higher than inception, lower than avatar.

 

 

oh btw blicero - i dreamt about you last night. you came to visit me and we had a great time!

strange. what did i look like? did we do butseks?

  On 7/29/2010 at 9:06 AM, abusivegeorge said:

So have the days of just sitting down and enjoying a film gone out of the window? Because I am sorry but you cannot say that these films were really that fucking shit (as shit as you're making them out to be). You can only say that because what you've done is you've analyzed the film in depth whilst watching it, and I am assuming you must do this with all movies. It must be real hard to find a movie you sincerely enjoy. I can name some shit movies, and they really are shit, like you don't even need to analyze them to know they are shit, and Avatar does not enter that league of shittiness, which I'm getting from you both.

 

Go and watch "Borstal Boy" and then come back and tell me that avatar and inception are shit. The problem is when you're sitting watching a film and analyzing (and you must be, to give these films such bad cred) it like that, you can never fully enjoy it anyway, so it's a double negative.

 

Sit down, watch a movie, have no expectations, and try not to pick fault. Try it next time you watch something, and you might enjoy it a little more.

 

Not having a go at you guys at all, it just seems the days of watching a movie without being so fucking negatively critical are way out the window.

 

I mean you say it was shit, but then you say it's a good popcorn movie. Does not compute, a good popcorn movie is not shit.

 

Maybe I'm being really hypocritical here and just over analyzing you guys, but fuck me, it's 8 am and I've not been to bed yet and MY FUCKING NEIGHBOURS ARE CUNTS.

You don't understand, George. You're simply one of those average people who enjoy any blockbuster presented in the nearest theaters. As a WATMMer with a genuine ability to analyze films, there are 3 requirements to follow so a movie is objectively considered a masterpiece:

1- The movie must be filmed in a foreign language, so subtitles are the only way to understand the movie

2- The movie must be in black and white

3- The movie must be restored by Criterion Collection

I didn't detect any of those characteristics in Inception, hence why this is one of the biggest failures of the year.

Enter a new display name has some strong points

He still needed to edit his post = LOL

Posting, edit: and editing, for posterity.

  On 7/28/2010 at 8:44 PM, iamabe said:

  On 7/28/2010 at 4:15 PM, Benedict Cumberbatch said:

  On 7/26/2010 at 6:57 PM, iamabe said:

 

 

 

this image actually confuses things AND get the final level wrong. it says "cobbs dream" but I believe limbo is shared dream space. so should say limbo. the fact that cobb built the world was because he was there before not that it was his dream.

 

Cobb's Dream IS the fourth level, and limbo is an entirely seperate affair (in the center of the triangle timeline) that Saito and Cobb shared in the first and last scene of the film. Cobb has been in limbo two times - the first was with Mal when they were stuck in Sim City for 50 years. That's why his dream, the fourth level, resembles his original limbo. But the limbo Saito and Cobb share is seperate; you can see how the lines that follow their characters drop off at different levels in the timeline into the limbo in the center.

 

ah so cobbs dream is 4th and he then gets into limbo by... how does he get into limbo? page and fischer jump off the building and kick up to snow world. cobb stays and goes into limbo... oh he dies of his stab wounds. ok got it.

i saw a better diagram somewhere else. must find it.

  On 7/29/2010 at 9:29 AM, Calx Sherbet said:

  On 7/29/2010 at 9:06 AM, abusivegeorge said:

So have the days of just sitting down and enjoying a film gone out of the window? Because I am sorry but you cannot say that these films were really that fucking shit (as shit as you're making them out to be). You can only say that because what you've done is you've analyzed the film in depth whilst watching it, and I am assuming you must do this with all movies. It must be real hard to find a movie you sincerely enjoy. I can name some shit movies, and they really are shit, like you don't even need to analyze them to know they are shit, and Avatar does not enter that league of shittiness, which I'm getting from you both.

 

Go and watch "Borstal Boy" and then come back and tell me that avatar and inception are shit. The problem is when you're sitting watching a film and analyzing (and you must be, to give these films such bad cred) it like that, you can never fully enjoy it anyway, so it's a double negative.

 

Sit down, watch a movie, have no expectations, and try not to pick fault. Try it next time you watch something, and you might enjoy it a little more.

 

Not having a go at you guys at all, it just seems the days of watching a movie without being so fucking negatively critical are way out the window.

 

I mean you say it was shit, but then you say it's a good popcorn movie. Does not compute, a good popcorn movie is not shit.

 

Maybe I'm being really hypocritical here and just over analyzing you guys, but fuck me, it's 8 am and I've not been to bed yet and MY FUCKING NEIGHBOURS ARE CUNTS.

 

 

no shit! i seriously don't notice ANYTHING that people complain about in a movie unless it's so brutally obvious. i mean, once they point it out, then i can kinda see it more clearly. but critical and negative is the majority of what i hear about movies. i never see in depth reviews or examinations of movies where the person is like "wow, that fuckin ruled!"

 

i don't think i would even have enough in me to write that much pessimism over a movie.

 

ugh, frustration urghgrufurghur

for me what i see people doing is they are far more critical of a piece of art that is ambitious and tries to be creative. These same people excuse over and over again things of banality as being 'better' because they arent trying to be 'something more than they arent' i find this type of double standard pretty hollow but i see it with music & art all the time. Why do you think Burial is so popular? Repeatedly thought out criticisms in this thread are negated by statements like 'avatar was better because it wasn't trying to be anything it wasn't' really? You don't think james cameron was taking all his themes and philosophies in that movie very seriously? The distinctions seem very arbitrary.

But yeah sometimes the standards for movies being intellectual or foreign enough in here are so high it makes me wonder why are so many of those people here in a music forum when 80% of them settle for the popcorn of electronic music, Boards of Canada with no complaints.

  On 7/29/2010 at 6:33 PM, Benedict Cumberbatch said:

  On 7/28/2010 at 8:44 PM, iamabe said:

  On 7/28/2010 at 4:15 PM, Benedict Cumberbatch said:

  On 7/26/2010 at 6:57 PM, iamabe said:

 

 

 

this image actually confuses things AND get the final level wrong. it says "cobbs dream" but I believe limbo is shared dream space. so should say limbo. the fact that cobb built the world was because he was there before not that it was his dream.

 

Cobb's Dream IS the fourth level, and limbo is an entirely seperate affair (in the center of the triangle timeline) that Saito and Cobb shared in the first and last scene of the film. Cobb has been in limbo two times - the first was with Mal when they were stuck in Sim City for 50 years. That's why his dream, the fourth level, resembles his original limbo. But the limbo Saito and Cobb share is seperate; you can see how the lines that follow their characters drop off at different levels in the timeline into the limbo in the center.

 

 

 

ah so cobbs dream is 4th and he then gets into limbo by... how does he get into limbo? page and fischer jump off the building and kick up to snow world. cobb stays and goes into limbo... oh he dies of his stab wounds. ok got it.

 

i saw a better diagram somewhere else. must find it.

Unfortunately you need to add a whole extra corner onto that diagram because Cobb has been asleep in that Indian basement all along.

so is no one else confused about how they got 'kicked' out of the rainy city universe? it wasnt from the van hitting the water because they were mostly awake after it happened for at least a few minutes. Are we supposed to assume the pilot gave them a kick by spinning the plane 360 degrees? someone please explain

  On 7/29/2010 at 7:51 PM, Awepittance said:

so is no one else confused about how they got 'kicked' out of the rainy city universe? it wasnt from the van hitting the water because they were mostly awake after it happened for at least a few minutes. Are we supposed to assume the pilot gave them a kick by spinning the plane 360 degrees? someone please explain

the timer on the machine they all were hooked up to on the airplane.

  On 7/29/2010 at 7:51 PM, Awepittance said:

so is no one else confused about how they got 'kicked' out of the rainy city universe? it wasnt from the van hitting the water because they were mostly awake after it happened for at least a few minutes. Are we supposed to assume the pilot gave them a kick by spinning the plane 360 degrees? someone please explain

I guess the air-hostesses unplugged them all at a certain time.

awepittance, your post was great up until

  Quote

makes me wonder why are so many of those people here in a music forum when 80% of them settle for the popcorn of electronic music, Boards of Canada with no complaints.

how dare you.

  On 7/29/2010 at 7:52 PM, blicero said:

  On 7/29/2010 at 7:51 PM, Awepittance said:

so is no one else confused about how they got 'kicked' out of the rainy city universe? it wasnt from the van hitting the water because they were mostly awake after it happened for at least a few minutes. Are we supposed to assume the pilot gave them a kick by spinning the plane 360 degrees? someone please explain

 

the timer on the machine they all were hooked up to on the airplane.

yeah i think so too

  On 7/29/2010 at 7:44 PM, Awepittance said:

  On 7/29/2010 at 9:29 AM, Calx Sherbet said:

  On 7/29/2010 at 9:06 AM, abusivegeorge said:

So have the days of just sitting down and enjoying a film gone out of the window? Because I am sorry but you cannot say that these films were really that fucking shit (as shit as you're making them out to be). You can only say that because what you've done is you've analyzed the film in depth whilst watching it, and I am assuming you must do this with all movies. It must be real hard to find a movie you sincerely enjoy. I can name some shit movies, and they really are shit, like you don't even need to analyze them to know they are shit, and Avatar does not enter that league of shittiness, which I'm getting from you both.

 

Go and watch "Borstal Boy" and then come back and tell me that avatar and inception are shit. The problem is when you're sitting watching a film and analyzing (and you must be, to give these films such bad cred) it like that, you can never fully enjoy it anyway, so it's a double negative.

 

Sit down, watch a movie, have no expectations, and try not to pick fault. Try it next time you watch something, and you might enjoy it a little more.

 

Not having a go at you guys at all, it just seems the days of watching a movie without being so fucking negatively critical are way out the window.

 

I mean you say it was shit, but then you say it's a good popcorn movie. Does not compute, a good popcorn movie is not shit.

 

Maybe I'm being really hypocritical here and just over analyzing you guys, but fuck me, it's 8 am and I've not been to bed yet and MY FUCKING NEIGHBOURS ARE CUNTS.

 

 

no shit! i seriously don't notice ANYTHING that people complain about in a movie unless it's so brutally obvious. i mean, once they point it out, then i can kinda see it more clearly. but critical and negative is the majority of what i hear about movies. i never see in depth reviews or examinations of movies where the person is like "wow, that fuckin ruled!"

 

i don't think i would even have enough in me to write that much pessimism over a movie.

 

ugh, frustration urghgrufurghur

 

for me what i see people doing is they are far more critical of a piece of art that is ambitious and tries to be creative. These same people excuse over and over again things of banality as being 'better' because they arent trying to be 'something more than they arent' i find this type of double standard pretty hollow but i see it with music & art all the time. Why do you think Burial is so popular? Repeatedly thought out criticisms in this thread are negated by statements like 'avatar was better because it wasn't trying to be anything it wasn't' really? You don't think james cameron was taking all his themes and philosophies in that movie very seriously? The distinctions seem very arbitrary.

But yeah sometimes the standards for movies being intellectual or foreign enough in here are so high it makes me wonder why are so many of those people here in a music forum when 80% of them settle for the popcorn of electronic music, Boards of Canada with no complaints.

yawn

it's irritating that critical views in this thread are often avoided with comments to the effect that people don't get it/are missing the point, are just being pretentious b/c it's cool to hate on popular things, or have a double standard b/c they are more critical of complicated/"creative" movies than blatantly mindless flicks. this is not a serious discussion, this is just self-righteous posturing.

there have been plenty of legitimate, intelligent posts of a critical nature in this thread (cf alcofribas posts)and for the most part they are met with complaints and the diversions i just mentioned.

this film is unreleasable by any major film company and was only released b/c hollywood will release anything nolan gives them. he tries to achieve dirty production but fails. faggot

pretentious? i think that's over-analysis of what the non-complainers are saying.

unless that's not what you meant

  On 7/29/2010 at 9:36 PM, Alcofribas said:

this film is unreleasable

wow. epic hyperbole.

calx -- i was referring to blicero's post yesterday equating disliking this movie with disliking radiohead which in the world of hipsters and watmmer's means you're a pretentious cunt.

let it be said, enjoy or dislike whatever the fuck you want but please stay away from the high horse from which people seem so inclined to tell you that what you say is not only wrong but you have a hollow double standard, are full of shit, whatever.

inception: best film of the 90s.

  On 7/29/2010 at 9:49 PM, blicero said:

  On 7/29/2010 at 9:36 PM, Alcofribas said:

this film is unreleasable

 

wow. epic hyperbole.

i was making fun of something awepittance said in the ae subforum...

  On 7/29/2010 at 9:50 PM, Alcofribas said:

i was referring to blicero's post yesterday equating disliking this movie with disliking radiohead which in the world of hipsters and watmmer's means you're a pretentious cunt.

 

let it be said, enjoy or dislike whatever the fuck you want but please stay away from the high horse from which people seem so inclined to tell you that what you say is not only wrong but you have a hollow double standard, are full of shit, whatever.

 

inception: best film of the 90s.

said by a frenchman