Inception Discussion Thread/Major Spoilers etc ...

[Kraftwerk]

Let me clarify.

As envoys to LDing amongst our friends and relatives, we need to ask ourselves why we'd desire an accurate account of LDing in a movie.  Is it for them, or for us?  IMO, the LDing community will be far, far better off having the non-dreaming community gain an interest in dreaming than to know the specifics of what one can and cannot do in an LD upfront.  Perhaps the realistic science of dreaming will come at some point, but why rush it?

Enthusiasm builds an openness from non-LDers that our community has not seen enough of.  Every board I know of has a thread, "Why isn't LDing more accepted, etc".  Ever notice this?  From this cultivated openness will be an interest, then a desire to learn, and then a desire to attempt.  In the theater I was in, the crowd literally all collectively released an "aaaaaaa!" right at the end when the last shot cut, which was followed by notably curious conversations around me mostly about dreams and conscious dreaming.  I was literally doing RCs at that point, because I couldn't believe I'd ever see such interest in dreaming as a whole.

The movie built enthusiasm in the crowd for dreaming.  What more could we, as lucid dreamers want or need?  I believe many, in time, will be hooked (just like Ellen Page in the movie).  All that is needed then is a quick websearch for specifics, right?  I'm sure others currently at MM can remember those times, when we first SAW the excitement of the dream world which we personally didn't experience yet... or have we ourselves forgotten those times already, as we sit atop our current knowledge base and desire for accuracy?  If you don't see yourself there, you aren't looking hard enough.

That being said, I believe this movie will be a win/win for LDing as a whole, and our not-so-little community here.

Ahh, Very insightfull post there, Analyst. I hadn't thought of the Enthusiasm the movie had built.

[Serenity]

Just saw it a couple of nights ago. Overall verdict is, I really thoroughly enjoyed the movie

I had to agree, the top at the end was wobbling a little too long for my liking (to think that he wasn't still dreaming). It almost looked like it righted itself, or corrected its own balance. Tops don't do that, do they? (Honestly asking, I don't have a lot of experience with tops). Also, somebody mentioned that his kids hadn't aged... Though it doesn't say anywhere specifically how long he's been away (be it months or years), the lack of aging bothered me, too. It was their positioning in the hallway, too. They were huddled over something, just like they always had been whenever they showed up.

I'm not entirely convinced that the toppling of the top proves reality or not, anyways. Everyone knows you should endeavour to do more than one reality check, because EVERY reality check has the potential to fail.

Just before that, during the climax, it looked like one of the kids was going to look at him, and he looked away. I thought to myself, he would probably get lost and sucked into the dream (lose his lucidity) if he saw their faces. Then, at the very end scene, he spins the top, but sees their faces and leaves before finishing his reality check. Which to me kinda said, well, he wouldn't have a clue, because he got sucked into the dream. They could have made the top vanish, because he forgot about his reality check. It's sort of like a dream I had a couple of nights ago, where the elevator I was in was working very oddly. I thought to myself, "It's acting weird, just like it might in a dream," but then I got distracted by something, it broke my lucidity, and I forgot about it entirely for the rest of the dream. I got sucked back in.

The lack of control did bug me too. I think it would for most LD'ers. I also wondered why they wouldn't just fly and I was thinking to myself, "For highly trained people, they really suck at manipulating the dream world." I was hoping to see a few fireballs rather than guns, but oh well And yeah, the dying thing kind of bugged me... I mean, if you don't want to die, then create a barrier to stop the bullets.

One explanation I had for the realism was... they didn't want Fischer to clue in that he was dreaming (at first). So in the first level, they had to make it seem more realistic. Apparently, Fischer was trained against extraction, so they would have to make it seem as realistic as possible so he wouldn't recognize a dream sign and become lucid. Same goes for the second layer, actually. Since telling him he was dreaming was a Plan B (so it seemed?), so the second level had to be constructed realistically, too.

As for the 3rd level, well, that one didn't have to be so realistic. They could have exerted a lot more control there and used more techniques to protect themselves from death, since Fischer was now lucid at that point, too. They also could have flown, teleported, made fireballs or shields, or what have you.

[Zhon]

As for the 3rd level, well, that one didn't have to be so realistic. They could have exerted a lot more control there and used more techniques to protect themselves from death, since Fischer was now lucid at that point, too. They also could have flown, teleported, made fireballs or shields, or what have you.

Actually, they had to stay realistic with that one too.  They had Fischer convinced they were entering the other guy's dream (don't remember his name).  That one had to look realistic so they could keep up appearances - not trying to be subtle or hiding their presence as much as possible would have warned Fischer that something was wrong.  They can't be careless in that section, seeing as that's when Fischer is closest to catching the team red-handed.

[Serenity]

Good point! I forgot about that

[SStride]

Dear All,

I saw the movie too. It was entertaining. I think the writers intentionally avoided lucidity (and all that it entails) because they could not take as many creative liberties otherwise. The subject of lucidity has been so well researched, they probably thought using it would limit the storyline. In fact, I don't recall the term "Lucid" being stated in the movie...anyone remember? Shared dreaming is not well researched or understood, so they could make up things about it and who could argue differently. The 60/5 minute ratio of time dilation may be true of shared dreams but not lucid ones.

What troubled me was the dream machinery and drugs that worked perfectly in the lower levels. Presumably the dreamer knew how the machine and drugs worked and could replicate their effect in the lower levels on other participants. Another difficulty was the lack of gravity in dream level 2. In level 1 the van is in free fall (no gravity) and so in level 2 there is no gravity. If level 1 physical effects transfer into level 2, why would they not penetrate deeper, and be zero G on all levels? Because the writers took liberties and made it inconsistent, and who could argue differently.

I too was intreagued by the totem concept. The concept is basic enough. A "small and heavy" object in the physical world which is forbidden to operate a certain way because of its physical properties. In the dream world the totem can violate the laws of physics and be made to manifest the impossible. In reality, the top will always lose energy and topple; the die will always throw a 6 more often that 1 to 5; the Queen is bottom heavy and rounded so she won't fall over if bumped (I think that was what Ariadne made); the poker chips will never merge together into 1 chip, or change value, when rubbed together. The challenge is to create/buy a simple object with properties it can't violate in the physical...only in the dream, then use it as a reliable RC tool. An easy one is a small bubble level. The bubble being less dense than the oil/water will always rise to the opposite end of the glass. It does not work right in zero G and hence can violate its physical properties in a dream. The bubble could stay in the wrong end or not move at all when tipped in a dream.

MM could have a totem ideas contest or start list of some kind. I know Dr. T has a magic wand, but I wonder if he takes it to work.

Sincerely,

Scot Stride








This grou

[SStride]

Dear All,

I think the poker chip totem was supposed to multiply or change values in the dream because Cobb said to Eames "You can rub them together all you want, they're not going to breed."

Apparently, the PASIV device injected the person with a drug that induced REM sleep, instant dreaming and self-awareness. That would be one complex LDS if it was ever synthesized. No, we don't know of any LDS cocktail that can do that.

Hey PJ, has the MM hit counter gone up since the movie was released?

Thanks,

Scot Stride

[pj]

(Responding LONG after the fact, Scot.  Sorry!)

Yes, we had a definite bump in activity and new interest after the movie came out.  That was a while ago now!

I viewed the movie with my family last night - the first time I watched it since its theatrical run.  I really enjoyed the film this time - way more than the first time.  This was in no small part because I was not expecting anything factual or accurate when it comes to lucid dreaming.  Once those expectations are set aside, the REAL plot about how a tiny idea can define a person and how the dead and gone can continue having major influences on the living came through.  And it is a great plot, supported by very good acting, directing, camera work and special effects.

If you've not seen it, I do recommend it.  Just don't expect a lucid dreaming movie.

[Specialis Sapientia]

I saw this presentation yesterday on Inception, it was good. So many things I never noticed, and it now seems much more likely that it was ALL a dream.

Quite interesting, see it!

http://youtu.be/ginQNMiRu2w

[Sunshine]

(content removed by user request)

[DrTechnical]

actually MB, Inception was a pretty damn good movie. Just don't go into it expecting to be a lucid dreaming movie which it really is not. But I think your experience with lucid dreaming in general will help give you perspective and significantly impact your interpretation of the movie.