Rate the last film you saw partie deux

[JoetheRam]

2 hours ago, Carl Sagan said:

I'm curious because I can't imagine what bits you mean. Can you specify (absolutely fine if you don't wat to bother, but I am genuinely puzzled)?

I'd say Nolan is the last director who would cheat his audience - just the opposite in that he accepts they're a bright bunch who don't have to be spoonfed everything. So, there's a lot of depth in his films and the audience is well-rewarded by repeat viewings.

I'll also add that my counter-post to your original post was a little tongue-in-cheek and just my interpretation of the film. I didn't mean to pick on you! But as well as many viewings I have read the screenplay (the shooting script) several times to come to that particular interpretation. But like all good films there's no "right" interpretation.

Trying to remember some specifics...

I will probably have to watch again.

The bit I most remember is where they need to access deeper dream levels so that they've got more time to do something, which is made out to be a problem, but then hey-presto they find a guy who just happens to have some extra strong prescription that allows them to do that.

Also, is it ever explained how Di Caprio is somehow able to get inside people's dreams and why he's even doing that? 

I also never understood why there's people after him if he makes the dream seem unrealistic. It's his dream, he can surely just dream that they're not after him? 

The maths of how time slows down seems pretty arbitrary. Why is ten hours in a level 2 dream 6 months in real life?

Why is gravity affected in two levels because of the van falling?

As I said, not my usual genre and maybe I wasn't paying enough attention but I just didn't ever really understand why certain things were happening.

[ViewsFromTheMiddle]

Inception is bobbins.

[Carl Sagan]

21 hours ago, JoetheRam said:

Trying to remember some specifics...

I will probably have to watch again.

The bit I most remember is where they need to access deeper dream levels so that they've got more time to do something, which is made out to be a problem, but then hey-presto they find a guy who just happens to have some extra strong prescription that allows them to do that.

Also, is it ever explained how Di Caprio is somehow able to get inside people's dreams and why he's even doing that? 

I also never understood why there's people after him if he makes the dream seem unrealistic. It's his dream, he can surely just dream that they're not after him? 

The maths of how time slows down seems pretty arbitrary. Why is ten hours in a level 2 dream 6 months in real life?

Why is gravity affected in two levels because of the van falling?

As I said, not my usual genre and maybe I wasn't paying enough attention but I just didn't ever really understand why certain things were happening.

Although the maths in the film isn't perfect, it's reasonably coherent and one of the cleverest ideas they come up with. Basically (and true to real-life) an hour of real time is the equivalent of 12-20 hours dreaming (20 if you have a strong sedative like the guy is able to prepare). And in the next level of dreaming this is multiplied so an hour in real life will be between 144 and 400 hours of dream time. And so on. Your question gets it the wrong way around. They have to do everything during the flight to America, but by the time Cobb is rescuing old man Saito from "limbo" at the end it's right that Saito would have lived decades down there and Cobb would have had time to bring him out.

Either in reality Cobb knows Yusef is a good chemist and has to go to wherever it is (Morococo?) to hire him or it's Cobb's overall dream state and he finds himself there when he needs the good chemist.

I think the film would have been dull if they explained how people get into each other's dreams. They show a device that they hook themselves up to and for that you have to suspend your disbelief and accept that this is possible.

In the film, the different levels are parts of different people's dreams. My personal interpretation was the entire film is set within an overall dream of Cobb's, but he refuses to acknowledge he's dreaming. His wife has killed herself to wake up, but he doesn't think it's a dream so he can't dream he's not being chased. But if you take the initial level as reality, the dream levels go:

1. Van chase - chemist Yusef's
2. Hotel - Arthur
3. Snow fortress - Eames (the forger)
4. Cobb's and his wife's dream world - Cobb
5. Limbo - a shared state

The absence of gravity from the truck falling has a clever impact on the next dream down in the hotel. It makes sense to me that this happens, though I can see inconsistencies in that it doesn't affect the further down dream levels. The Nolan brothers would probably argue the effect is localized. Though I accept the kick of van hitting water and lift hitting the ground feed through the other levels.

All thoughtful questions. My answers may be rubbish or unsatsfying but it's important to me that there is a logical consistency to these things so I enjoy thinking about it. Onward! I have premieres of Downsizing and How to Talk to Girls at Parties coming up in a couple of weeks so look forward to posting about those.

21 hours ago, ViewsFromTheMiddle said:

Inception is bobbins.

Is that good or bad?

[ViewsFromTheMiddle]

3 minutes ago, Carl Sagan said:

Although the maths in the film isn't perfect, it's reasonably coherent and one of the cleverest ideas they come up with. Basically (and true to real-life) an hour of real time is the equivalent of 12-20 hours dreaming (20 if you have a strong sedative like the guy is able to prepare). And in the next level of dreaming this is multiplied so an hour in real life will be between 144 and 400 hours of dream time. And so on. Your question gets it the wrong way around. They have to do everything during the flight to America, but by the time Cobb is rescuing old man Saito from "limbo" at the end it's right that Saito would have lived decades down there and Cobb would have had time to bring him out.

Either in reality Cobb knows Yusef is a good chemist and has to go to wherever it is (Morococo?) to hire him or it's Cobb's overall dream state and he finds himself there when he needs the good chemist.

I think the film would have been dull if they explained how people get into each other's dreams. They show a device that they hook themselves up to and for that you have to suspend your disbelief and accept that this is possible.

In the film, the different levels are parts of different people's dreams. My personal interpretation was the entire film is set within an overall dream of Cobb's, but he refuses to acknowledge he's dreaming. His wife has killed herself to wake up, but he doesn't think it's a dream so he can't dream he's not being chased. But if you take the initial level as reality, the dream levels go:

1. Van chase - chemist Yusef's
2. Hotel - Arthur
3. Snow fortress - Eames (the forger)
4. Cobb's and his wife's dream world - Cobb
5. Limbo - a shared state

The absence of gravity from the truck falling has a clever impact on the next dream down in the hotel. It makes sense to me that this happens, though I can see inconsistencies in that it doesn't affect the further down dream levels. The Nolan brothers would probably argue the effect is localized. Though I accept the kick of van hitting water and lift hitting the ground feed through the other levels.

All thoughtful questions. My answers may be rubbish or unsatsfying but it's important to me that there is a logical consistency to these things so I enjoy thinking about it. Onward! I have premieres of Downsizing and How to Talk to Girls at Parties coming up in a couple of weeks so look forward to posting about those.

Is that good or bad?

Bad  I saw it when it came out at the cinema, didn't enjoy it then but might rewatch and see if my opinion will change.

[r4derby]

23 hours ago, Paul71 said:

Yep that's the one. Not sure how else it was meant.

Completely agree. Bizarre to me why it's included

[uttoxram75]

Pete's Dragon. The 2016 Disney version. 7/10

Watched it with the grandkids. There was a few tears half way through but the little uns told me its ok in the end...

[TimRam]

Saw Legend a few days ago. The original release passed me by.  Tom Hardy is
excellent as the Kray twins. 8/10

[Wolfie]

T2: Trainspotting

The first one was a landmark of my youth and I'm just pleased that this one didn't kill the good feelings about the first. Very good follow up, overall.

8/10

[Gaspode]

Rogue One: A Star Wars Story - usually a Star Wars fan (odd crap characters aside) but thought this was over-hyped garbage - couldn't connect with any of the characters and spent most of the film hoping they'd get killed off - seems the franchise has simply become an opportunity to make more money.....

[StringerBell]

26 minutes ago, Gaspode said:

Rogue One: A Star Wars Story - usually a Star Wars fan (odd crap characters aside) but thought this was over-hyped garbage - couldn't connect with any of the characters and spent most of the film hoping they'd get killed off - seems the franchise has simply become an opportunity to make more money.....

I worry that'll be the case. I'm hoping the next two episodes move away from the copying of the original trilogy that the Force Awakens did and offers something different. Not Inception or anything as cerebral as that but something that challenges the audience in some way. Kylo Ren being redeemed or something like that. I hope the Jedi do end.

I love Star Wars and don't want franchise fatigue to set in this early. Enjoyed Rogue One though, even though there wasn't a lot of time to develop the characters.

[Sith Happens]

7 hours ago, StringerBell said:

I worry that'll be the case. I'm hoping the next two episodes move away from the copying of the original trilogy that the Force Awakens did and offers something different. Not Inception or anything as cerebral as that but something that challenges the audience in some way. Kylo Ren being redeemed or something like that. I hope the Jedi do end.

I love Star Wars and don't want franchise fatigue to set in this early. Enjoyed Rogue One though, even though there wasn't a lot of time to develop the characters.

Rogue one was OK but like a fan film to me, too many nods and references. 

Not expecting much from the han solo one.

Really looking forward to episode 8 though. I enjoyed the force awakens.

[Comrade 86]

On 8/1/2017 at 06:30, oomarkwright said:

Lucy- Meh 5.5/10

Is that the one where a fitty necks a disco biscuit and turns into a USB drive? Utter pants...  

[oomarkwright]

Yeh. Wierd. 

[McRamFan]

Guardians of the Galaxy 2. Loved it 9/10, utter bonkers.

[BathRam72]

The hit-man's body guard. Thoroughly enjoyed it 9/10

[Steve How Hard?]

Went to see Victoria and Abdul today. Have to say I went partly to gain some brownie points with the missus but admittedly it was pretty good. More amusing than I imagined it would be. Overall I'd say the best period drama I've seen since the missus went through the menopause. 

[Comrade 86]

Insomnia back with a vengeance so having conceded defeat I watched King of New York and Blade Runner last night. Seen both before, the latter several times and would recommend both to anyone even if the former seems slightly dated these days.

[Gaspode]

Southern Fury (currently on Sky Movies) - absolute horse manure - huge holes in the plot - a wooden leading actor - gratuitous slow motion violence (special effects team showing off) - and one of the worst acting performances ever from Nicholas Cage (wearing a weird false nose that was almost as off-putting as his strange wig and dodgy accent).

Used to like Cage's films (in a 'switch your brain off and enjoy the ride' sort of way), but he's really getting involved in some rubbish recently - a couple of weeks ago, I forced myself to sit through another of his latest films "Dog Eat Dog" which was also over-violent and under-plotted. Think he needs to choose  his parts a lot more carefully while he still has a career....

[ViewsFromTheMiddle]

1 hour ago, 86 points said:

Insomnia back with a vengeance so having conceded defeat I watched King of New York and Blade Runner last night. Seen both before, the latter several times and would recommend both to anyone even if the former seems slightly dated these days.

Blade Runner is epic.

[Sith Happens]

1 hour ago, 86 points said:

Insomnia back with a vengeance so having conceded defeat I watched King of New York and Blade Runner last night. Seen both before, the latter several times and would recommend both to anyone even if the former seems slightly dated these days.

 

28 minutes ago, ViewsFromTheMiddle said:

Blade Runner is epic.

Blade Runner is one of those i have enjoyed more the older i get I was about 13/14 first time i saw it and it bored the pants off me, but love it now, a bit like the original Alien film, thought the same of that but think its great now.