Inception - Page 16

Why even offer the digital copy if it's just going to expire?

I'm still disappointed that I can't access the HD WMV digital copy on my Terminator 2 Ultimate Edition DVD.

DRM fail.

Any DVD/BD comparisons around?

I'm waiting for those. This is the best I've found but it's not exactly what I'm looking for:

Yea, thats from the AVFORUMS thread. By the way the UK DVD looks horrendous, not sure if you guys over the pond have the same ugly interlacing problems on your DVD...?

I finally saw this over the weekend and what a fantastic flick. To think that Leo (not my favorite actor) is in two of the best films (Inception, Shutter Island) of the year is outrageous. The PQ, however, is not the the perfect 5 out of 5 that many review sites are reporting IMO. Great but not perfection.

I used to think that way too, what with Leo being mostly famous for Titanic and The Beach, not to mention Growing Pains.

But then I realized that he has somehow picked the absolute best scripts and directors throughout his entire career. The man simply does not make bad films. He is nominated if not the winner of multiple acting awards for nearly every film he chooses. I've come to accept that if Leonardo DiCaprio is in the film, it's must see. He's transitioned from a fanbase of mostly pre-teen girls to having critical appeal, appearing in films like The Aviator, Gangs of New York, Catch Me if You Can, The Departed, Blood Diamond, Revolutionary Road, Shutter Island, and now Inception. Even Titanic was critically acclaimed.

Great movie but I am not a fan of the pq. I assume it was directors intent, but it is dark and has a filtered look to it. Not eye candy at all.

Exactly my thoughts aswell. He has turned himself into a brand. A brand that always deliver quality. Is he the greatest actor alive today, no way. But he is very talented on picking the right projects. And gives a solid performance at the same time.

Good to hear you say that. Every review has given it almost perfect PQ. It is not.

Well, it seems 'perfect' in the sense that it doesn't look tampered with. It pretty much looks how it did in the theater. The 'soft' shots were soft in the theater, so if the Blu-ray reproduces that, then it's "perfect" (to me).

I feel that way about BD,if it reproduces as close as possible the source then you can't fault the BD.

Art

Yeah. We seem to understand that BD is supposed to be the best representation possible of the original source, and not just something appeasing to the eye. It's the "eye candy" people that are responsible for studios using excessive DNR, because they think that audiences want to just see a shiny and crisp "high def" looking image (like something they would see watching a football game in HD), rather than a "as close as possible" representation of the source (film grain, soft image when it was shot like that, etc...).

If the footage was shot this way, then I am happy to see it this way on BD. Imagine the uproar if Warner Bros. had used 'The Dark Knight'-esque Edge Enhancement on this release! Let's be happy we got what we did in theaters.

+1 to post #472 and #473

+1

And I thought this disc looked great. The sound was absolutely phenomenal.

The dialog was definitely buried at a few very active moments of the film. The video did have a bit of that ol' Warner pre-filtering and it did need a bump in the bitrate. Heck, "The Town", another WB Blu-ray, barely got above 20 Mbps and dipped to the single digits (and that wasn't for title cards either) even though it was an AVC encode. And it really needed it in some scenes where you'd expect more detail.

I just didn't get into the characters as much as I would have liked. Most were totally underutilized or simply not fleshed out to where I just didn't care about them very much.

The ending was telegraphed waaay too soon. I knew something like the "shocking twist" was coming. The script needed another run through, that's for sure.

My two favorite Nolan films are still "Memento" and "The Prestige" and remain so.

Also, the style of storytelling and pacing that Nolan is starting to use more and more where he jumps around constantly from scene to scene and character to character is getting on my nerves.

It's as if someone put the movie into permanent fast forward or hyper speed mode. "The Dark Knight" was the same way... like you're getting small snacks rather than full meals in each segment of the movie. You're not really allowed to drink in or savor the characters or the moment.

I don't have ADD or ADHD, so I'm not overly stimulated by just neato visual effects or having something constantly in motion, or quick edits.

It's like Nolan is becoming Michael Bay or Tony Scott (to some degree Ridley Scott)... any of that same MTV ilk. Will he wholesale abandon the story next?

I'd rather have old fashioned storytelling and cinematography and a great story and characters rather than just the latest in visual trickery... that came more apparent as I was watching the Academy Award winning "Departures" (from Japan) the other night.

A film like that was very refreshing from the typical modern Hollywood fare.

Why can't we have more epics like "Dances With Wolves" or "Lawrence of Arabia" or suspense thrillers like "No Country For Old Men?"

It seems like the pool of Hollywood directors and writers and cinematographers (like Roger Deakins, Dean Cundey, and John Toll), especially, who understand the careful craft of classic and deliberate film making... having what it takes to make quality stuff that will last for generations... is quickly drying up.

Now it's fast editing, even faster pacing, wizz-bang CGI effects, and 3D... forget the careful craftsmanship, forget the characters, heck, forget the story.

If you want to watch a classic that has impeccable cinematography and editing... do yourselves a favor and rent Sergio Leone's "Once Upon A Time In The West." It's the great antithesis to the frenetic style of "Inception." The opening is a staple of great editing... deliberately slow, slow, slow... and then BAM!

Sometimes simpler is indeed better.

IMHO.

I hate for this post to sound like I'm a fanboy, but I had a few comments:

The subject matter of the film required that the characters other than Cobb did NOT have a fleshed out persona. I don't have the link now, but there are articles about how each member of the team represents a part of Cobb's psyche. If they were fleshed out, that symbolism is lost.

I, for one, thought that Inception was a departure from modern Hollywood fare, and I think the box office totals and critical reception shows it.

I'll give you fast editing in this film, but that's the style of today. However, CGI effects and 3D are both things that this film forgoes (all of the major effects in this movie, as with all Nolan films, are practical effects rather than visual effects). The gravity in the hallway really did change, they really did walk up the walls in the Paris dream, even the water in the glasses in the hotel bar scene was filmed using practical effects. Most of these are documented on the blu-ray special features, which were a real treat.

I'll also give you that Nolan does use more practical effects than some (if not most)... I do agree with that. I was generalizing with the state of many Hollywood films these days.

As for the characters... well... to me they did need more fleshing out and humanizing. They still were representative of individuals of the team so if something happened to them you needed to feel for them, empathize.

I don't think it would have been feasible. What were there, like 6 main characters? That's a lot of material to cover before the movie is over.

How about DiCaprio's buddy played by Joseph Gordon-Levitt and the college girl played by Ellen Paige? So, that's only three main characters counting DiCaprio's.

A little more time on Ken Wantanabe's corporate raider character would have been another plus.

They seemed oddly less than fully fleshed out.

The dynamic between the rival corporations and why the "evil" one had to be taken down was also somewhat lacking.

The idea of Inception or dream manipulation was a great one, it just needed a more solid script IMHO.

Overall, I'd say it's not one of Nolan's better efforts.

Dan-

Give it a second watch. With that said though, I watched it twice and "Inception" still doesn't interest me (sci-fi is one of my favorite genres and I still will claim copiously that this is not primarily a sci-fi movie, nor does it satisfy in that sense). It's always good to sit through something twice to get a good appraisal (I do that for movies that I review on my site).

For me, not really caring much for "Inception" is more of an interest issue with the entire plot and story, along with the manner of how they produced the story (and we may share some possible development issues with the characters). However, I do realize that this is a still a great movie for many people, being excellently shot as well, and I've already recommended it many times for other people.

I shared my thoughts about "Inception" at another site (and even on this site) and was recommended "Triangle" right off the bat from a member. "Triangle" I found to be much more approachable, touching (fantastic protagonist development), suspenseful, and more of a well made thriller/twist. The filmmaking strategies are just as well done as "Inception", too.

Will have to try out "Triangle." Thanks!

What more is there to tell about those characters? We got the "buddy", the "rookie", and the "high-stakes rich guy" that facilitates the whole group on the mission?

Any further expansion on the theme of corporate espionage and a definition between which company was good and which was evil would merely serve as explaining a mcguffin, which would unnecessarily push the running time of this film beyond 2 hours. The movie isn't about the rivalry between the two (three, including Cobol) companies, it's about the catharsis required for performing inception and the inner turmoil experienced by the Cobb character.

If you want to watch a film on corporate espionage, I can recommend those films. If you want to watch a film with an ensemble cast of dynamic characters, I can recommend those films as well. Inception did not set out to answer either of those questions, otherwise Nolan would have made a different film.

Agreed.

Plus, there is the lingering question about whether or not Cobb was the real target and the others were dreamers trying to "incept him," a riddle which would have been lost if we'd been given a lot of backstory on any character other than Cobb. The entire movie is a set of Penrose stairs that can be interpreted differently depending upon the viewing angle. Too much fleshing out of characters ruins this effect. The movie needed to feel etherial (even the supposed reality scenes), and so they do.

Apparently Nolan is working on converting INCEPTION to 3D. Source: Blu-ray.com


Not sure what to think of this...

Oh, please no. He was one of the last holdouts of good directors on 3D.

Had a co-worker who seemed to enjoy Inception as much as I did. Apparently, he later visited some online site where some "really smart" people tore this film apart. The following week, he's telling me it was clichéd and knew exactly what would happen in the closing scene........wha?

That sort of rumor could easily ruin my saturday so I googled a little...

Apparently the director of Clash Of The Titans 2 agreed to convert his film to 3D instead of shooting in 3D because WB showed him a few examples of "conversion done well"... Among those examples were shots from Inception cause they actually did some tests on the film. Now...Christopher Nolan said it himself as well, even that some of these kinda worked and conversion is rather easy to do (and of course not too expensive for WB). BUT, he also said that he didn't think it would work on the whole movie, that he wasn't convinced.

http://blog.moviefone.com/2011/02/25/inception-3d/

Please Christopher Nolan, stick to IMAX if you want, but no, not 3D, pleaaassseeee!!!!!!

Conversion from 2D to Stereoscopic 3D is far from easy if done right.

Considering that Nolan flatly refused to even consider 3D in the first place, it strikes me as highly unlikely that he would suddenly agree to do so now.