Now that the dust has settled, was Inception kino?

Now that the dust has settled, was Inception kino?

Reznor instead Zimmer
good dialogue instead bad dialogue
better exposition
this changes and it would've been a kino

After seeing 2049 Nolan flicks have lost their Kino status.

one of the worst movies of all time

capeshit disguised as kino

It was the definitive piece of kino for the 10s until master Villeneuve put out the cerebral Blade Runner 2049

>Inception came out 7 years ago

probably one of nolan's better films looking back

instellar was bad
dunkirk was too safe and frankly boring

>dunkirk was too safe

it is his boldest. still sucked tho

It was a fucking flaming piece of shit, objectively speaking.
Fuck that meme within a meme flick.
Seriously, Nolan has made some good films like Memento and Batman Begins. But holy fuck, his bad films are abysmally bad.

good film but not spectacular. Brainlets were flashed to death because they only watched capeshit before this and only saw it because Nollen directed some capeshit right before that film

I love how no one has any valid reasoning on why it's bad. Just being contrarian for the sake of being contrarian.

very bad bait. My post literally begins with "Good film". 1/10

I liked the film more than the bs ending discussions. It's not really ambiguous if it doesn't change a single damn thing.

Good cinematography as always, decent cast and acting on par.
The problem is the entire fucking plot.
It's a torn man struggling with the loss of his psychotic wife, but portrayed in a universe with Matrix-like dream states, zero science, and having to perform a "heist" into someone's subconsciousness for the chance at seeing his children again. Throw in shit like totems and maze designs for dream creation, someone must have been on some serious drugs writing this shit. It could have worked as a Terry Gilliam-style abstract, but not as the horrendous action-drama we got. If you've seen enough films and aren't so juvenile, I don't understand how anyone could defend this abomination. Be serious.

I love it, masterfully done. I can't think of another director who could've pulled off this crazy movie.

Anyone defending Inception needs to put down the pipe, see a lot more films and mature a few years. It's not even fun if you turn off your brain as popcorn entertainment.

complex, technical and hollow, perfect for our era

>good guy went home and everyone is (kinda) okay except that one autistic kid nobody cares about

technically excellent but boring movie that failed to get me invested

Go huff some paint, retard

It was a OK-to-good blockbuster.

I enjoyed what was presented to me on screen, I liked the idea within the film, I liked the score. I thought it paced itself well, and there enough crevices within the idea to explore and it was fun seeing them unravel first go around.

That's not to say it isn't flawed, it depends on your degree of sincerity as a viewer. What standards do you hold a contemporary blockbuster to have? Does it deserve the flat critique all films deserve? Or do you give it some allowance?

What really pisses me off is the dream sharing machine. So you're telling me that you have some sort of apparatus that has a cord you stick in your hand and suddenly you can share or construct artificial dreams with other people, all in the context of a world that seemingly doesn't appear to be more technologically advanced than the one we live in today. I mean seriously that's got to be one of the greatest inventions ever, how did Leo came upon it, did he pull it out of his ass? Nothing is explained, and if it would have been some random subplot thingy I wouldn't care but the movie literally would not exist without it. Compare this with the Matrix where at least they give a few throwaway lines to how they can connect to the Matrix by emmiting a pirate signal, and at least there's some consistency and common sense the way they jack into the brain, the same way as while in thrir pods, while most of the infrastructure was built by the machines while people born naturally can't jack in, etc. But in Inception, poof it's there, don't ask questions faggot. Well fuck, you I'm a turbo autist, I will ask questions.

exactly this

>movie taking 60% screentime in a dream
>mundane unimaginative scenery looking like a vr action movie

It could have been great, but the presentation and characters are badly done imo. Page's and DiCaprio's dialogues were painful. 5/10

>all in the context of a world that seemingly doesn't appear to be more technologically advanced than the one we live in today.
Most sci fi suffers from this. The rest of the world doesn't show any of the requisite advances in technology that would make the plot device possible.

This, mostly saved by an excellent soundtrack.

It is for normies and plebs.

Nothing special otherwise.

Why does Reddit hate Nolan so much?

This, it's an entertaining, well-done action flick. Anyone who thinks it's 'deep' is a brainlet.

kys virgin

yes its in my top 10 favourite english language films of all time

Complete shit. Spends 90% of it's runtime over explaining it's own boring rules then does absolutely nothing with it. Woohoo spinning slow hall fight... and snow... wow... just pure unadulterated reddit trash.

It really did nothing with the interresting premise.

You get a "show whatever you want" setting and you go for spinning hallways and a train running through new yorks city streets?

Also really bad exposition which honestly is a Nolan trademark by now.

Probably one of the most (needlessly) convoluted, big-budged movies ever. This doesn't make it good, but it's at least to be commended in some way.

>what if we take this awful idea and make nothing of it?

Sup Forums brainlets completely miss the point as usual with their autistic tendency to take everything literally. Like the Prestige, its another film about film making. Its on that basis I don't really love it, he's done it at least once before already and film makers making films about film making is like authors writing books about authors writing.

Its a story about an auteur filmmaker, his producer, his actor, his production designer etc. His psyche threatens to literally destroy the film. The plot is to showcase the logical conclusion of the heist genre, again arguably the genre that most depends on the technics of film making.

How does it end? It doesn't matter, all films end, they are just dreams you wake up from.

Its got nothing to do with the matrix and doesn't matter how dream machines work, you were just watching one work for around two hours.

Imagine a wannabe screenwriter goon nerd who watched too much Matrix as a 14 year old thinking this film up.

"Yeah you can b in like a dream and the real world stuff effects it like water and you can go into a man's dream to steal his secrets and like have multiple levels and you can get lost in the dream world where each minute real time is like a month dream time fucking deep man what is reality now let's fire some fucking guns in the snow level"

The Prestige is by several orders of magnitude a much more cohesive script than this mess.
Your reasoning alone is proof of that. No need for such masturbating mental gymnastic with The Prestige mmmh?

Movies about filmmaking are as bad as books about writers

> So you're telling me that you have some sort of apparatus that has a cord you stick in your hand and suddenly you can share or construct artificial dreams with other people, all in the context of a world that seemingly doesn't appear to be more technologically advanced than the one we live in today. I mean seriously that's got to be one of the greatest inventions ever, how did Leo came upon it, did he pull it out of his ass? Nothing is explained, and if it would have been some random subplot thingy I wouldn't care but the movie literally would not exist without it.

Its called cinema.

>and the real world stuff effects it like water
This actually happens, though. Your brain tries to incorporate external stimulus into your dreams while you sleep. You've never had someone speak to you in a dream and then wake up to find that someone is actually saying those things to you?

I think Prestige is a trickier film given that it bluffs and the whole thing is a trick played on you by Nolan.

Whereas Inception tries really hard to explain to you what the subtext is. I'm kind of baffled by Sup Forums's inability to understand it. One of the problems with it is that its so blatant "Oh hi, I'm THE ACTOR", "Oh really, I'M THE GUY THAT SORTS EVERYTHING OUT, I HAVE A CLOSE RELATIONSHIP WITH THE GUY WHO DIRECTS EVERYTHING, that chick is THE GIRL THAT MAKES A FAKE WORLD LOOK CONVINCING". Its too on the nose to really be artistic.

Most of the discussions about Inception were irrelevant crap about how kicks and dream entering technology works by autistic fucks. The last thing we needed was an explanation on how the machine itself works. The rabbit hole was deep enough. You attach a piece of string to your wrist. Cause that's where dreams are. It's silly, and more importantly not real. There is no satisfactory explanation for how that fucking thing works cause it's pure bullshit. The core of the movie is Cobb trying to move on with his life after the death of his wife. The technical aspect of dream theft is irrelevant.

Momento is not dissimilar, its a narrative about narrative, the fact that film is a linear medium even when it isn't, all that kind of shit.

I've never seen a Nolan film I didn't enjoy in the moment but, dunno, making everything meta gets boring after a bit.