nope, the whole environment is provided by Yusuf, Fischer's mind just populates it...Cobb said that when he was teaching Ariadne in the Paris dream world

exactly. and since limbo is a state of unrestrained dreams i'd expect it to be more of a mess and since the person in limbo should be confused as shit and wouldnt know they're in a dream it doesnt make sense that ariadne could just leave so easily. if level 4 was limbo it would make limbo look like just another level. cos they way they were talking about limbo in level 1, it sounded like it was a death trap.

we didn't take limbo seriously because ALL of those who fell into it escaped it unscathed, and no one were seriously "hurt" by it

i think if the movie showed the effect of not able to leave limbo in time, then we will have the sense of urgency when Cobb mentioned to Eames that they will drop into limbo in the taxi scene

the danger about limbo is no physical but the mental one, your mind is the one trap in limbo for year and years until you become an old man in the a young man body and lost grasp of what is real and what is not.

we didn't take limbo seriously because ALL of those who fell into it escaped it unscathed, and no one were seriously "hurt" by it

i think if the movie showed the effect of not able to leave limbo in time, then we will have the sense of urgency when Cobb mentioned to Eames that they will drop into limbo in the taxi scene

I also disagree with the theory Mal was right it's a dream all along.
Why? Because she never appears in the real world. Ever.
Hence all of this line up to say it's Limbo and not level 4.

As for the end, I would like to go with the reality theory as well.
Because in the end, all of them will wake up.
Saito was already old in the final cut scene and is still remembering the agreement.
They both know they're in limbo and will obviously make the right choice.

Their bodies are all dead in level 1,2 and 3 which means killing themselves in limbo would immediately wake them up.

Hence it all lines up it's reality.
Yeah, his children are wearing the same clothes but the totem was wobbling as well. But I believe this a trick Nolan used on us to get repetitive viewings.

Now, I've only seen "Inception" once, and I suppose all of these suppositions may be valid, given the world Nolan has created for the film, but rather than mollify my reservations about the movie, they only deepen my sense of dissatisfaction. Why would Cobb (Leonardo DiCaprio) and Arthur (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) guide their new architect Ariadne (Ellen Page) through such nifty surreal dreamscapes as the exploding neighborhood cafe, the origami Paris and the Escher staircase if she's not allowed to create any such environments herself? Why would Nolan intentionally stick the movie's most tantalizing images up front, instead of saving them for when the real action gets underway? Wouldn't it have made for a better story (and better showmanship) if the dreams got more spectacular as the movie went along? Wouldn't a chase through the streets of a folded city be more dazzling than, say, regular old gridlock (even if somebody does throw a runaway locomotive into the middle of it)?

In other words, Nolan may have painted himself into a corner with his own "rules." In movies that come pre-loaded with operating instructions for the world in which they take place, there's always the danger that the auteur's self-imposed guidelines won't entirely serve the movie's interests. Why would Nolan create rules for dreams (and let's not forget that they are called "dreams" throughout the movie) and disallow the dream-logic that makes them different from reality?

The way I look at it, whether the top keeps spinning or not makes no difference to the movie's story or thematic concerns (whatever they may be). The goal of the shot is simply to toy with the audience one last time, to create a little suspense. The movie goes black just as the top stops spinning -- a nice little metaphor for "waking up" from the movie itself. Really, how deeply does it change the movie? It changes the level on which Cobb's story is taking place, but thematically it's still the same story.

Which gets me back to some of my earlier questions about what Nolan's movies mean: What they are about, rather than just what stories they tell. (I'm talking theme instead of plot.) Burr writes:

My immediate response was a dazzled appreciation of the film's fiendishly complicated narrative structure, followed by a slow cooling off period as I realized the movie isn't really about anything beyond that structure. What I genuinely love about "Inception" is not its metaphysics but the way Christopher Nolan visualizes them...
And yet: Dreams within dreams within dreams -- kewl! And? Depressingly, there is no "and," which wasn't the case with "Memento," the Nolan film that's closest in spirit to "Inception."... "Memento" was a tragedy about identity and memory, how the former relies on the latter to string itself into a fragile chain of existence and how easy it is to wipe both away. "Inception" is... a heist movie.

A fascinating heist movie, true, and one that works out most of the variations on its theory before spinning to a halt only because movies have to end sometime. Yet I never felt the wracked angst of Leonardo DiCaprio's Cobb the way I did Guy Pearce's Leonard in "Memento," maybe because the awful confusion of losing one's memory has real-world resonances whereas plummeting through levels of another man's dreams doesn't....

Urban Dictionary: Ineption



/Film reader Gary W sent me an e-mail to alert me of a new new movie related term which has been added to the Urban Dictionary — Ineption, meaning: the lack of understanding or misunderstanding about Christopher Nolan’s Inception. I’m note sure there is much use for this word in my day to day vocabulary. Actually, I think you can only use it ine one or two ways. But I thought I’d point it out

Cynical Inception Infographic

There have been a lot of Infographics going around the web trying to explain the complexities of Christopher Nolan’s Inception. Talk about ineption (see, I knew I’d find a way to use it today!).

As with Nolan’s The Dark Knight, or any other film with way too much praise, a backlash has begun. And while I don’t agree that Inception is a masterpiece, it is one of the best films released this year (right now in my top two or three). But high praise draws out the packs of contrarians. Designer Graham Scott tweeted the above cynical infographic (found via: Bleeding Cool) as a response to the buzz, acclaim and other inforgraphics trying to explains the how, when’s, who’s and why’s.

lol u guys still debate is real or dream a?
Actually is real la, at credit listen the carefully ,u will hear the totem drop

Wow...this is the first time I heard this theory.
Anyone can confirm whether this happened or not?

What if...

The totem wobbled, but it didn't drop?

Back to square one guys?

NUUUUUU...

End this agony!!! 

Lets End this with SCOTT PILGRIM!

Damn nice first volume, finished in 30 minutes. WELL SPENT. haha.