This thread discusses the Content article: How to Improve ‘Inception’: Some Enthusiastic Ideas From CC2K

Wow, guys. Just, WOW.

I can't say I disagree with any of you sentiments. Some really great ideas came out of your emergency summit, which sound really, really cool. Do we still have that time machine in the sub-basement of CC2K headquarters? I think we need to make use of it.

I do want to touch on one thing you talked about, the totems. Now maybe I geeked out and read WAY too much into this element, but I thought this was actually a pretty cool concept. Here's what I had to say about it in my review:

So each personally makes a totem, a small object with very specific physical properties in the real world, properties only that person knows. For example, a loaded die that will always land on the number five. The key is that character keeps the totem with them at all times, carrying a projection of it into the dreamworld; there the character convinces himself/herself that the totem behaves differently.

Granted, Nolan never explains how the characters convince themselves of how the totem behaves in a dream state, nor how they're able to preserve that belief even when the rest of their subconscious may be cracking. I interpreted that part of it came from the personal crafting of each totem. Just as we saw Page making her chess piece-thing, I imagine JGL made his loaded die (he didn't just go out and buy one).

So when we see Cobb's wife do something as simple as set her spinning-top totem on it's side, she's actually making a fundamental change - evidenced by her doing it in a safe in her childhood home, i.e. deep within her subconscious. Of course, Nolan never explains how Cobb knew/learned the combination to his wife's mind-safe, not to mention what he'd find inside.

I'll admit Nolan did a poor job of building this conceit, and your "canary in a coal mine" idea is very cool, but it worked for me.

Any other reactions out there?

Great ideas, guys. I haven't seen the movie yet, but from the way all my friends/acquaintances have described their reactions to it, it seems like you both are right on the money with your ideas for improvement.

The movie certainly must be good, since plenty of people are creaming their shorts over it and telling me to "run, not walk" to the theater to see it, but too many of my friends whose opinions I respect much more seem to have plenty of problems with it.

Namely that there is way too much boring exposition, too much tell and not enough show, and that there isn't really much tension, plot-twisting, or shit-your-pants visual segments.

Which brings up some important questions:

Does Nolan really have nobody in his corner that could come up with the fabulous and easily-integrated improvements you two devised in a mere day? Does he live in a world where nobody tells him 'no' and they revere him as a genius to the point where he can spend $100 million shooting the first draft of a script that could easily have been developed into something mind-blowing and lasting, as opposed to a perfectly-serviceable summer flick that fails to sock you in the jaw and energize you like a thousand Red Bulls?

Sadly, that is probably the case.

Guys,
Let me start off by saying: GREAT JOB ON THIS. You have presented some amazing ideas here, that would have made this film exponentially better. Tony, I LOVE the notion of the expanded roster of “roles” that this type of work would need, and Lance, the more complex characterizations for JGL and Ellen Page would have given the film a deeper sense of impending chaos. I shudder to think how good Inception would have been with these inclusions.

Having said this…

I can’t shake the feeling that this article is the pop culture equivalent of a mother chastising her grade school kid for getting an A on a paper when it should have been an A+. When I was watching Inception and getting my mind blown (full disclosure, as if it needed to be stated: I am an unabashed Nolan apologist. I went into Inception WANTING to love it, and I was not disappointed.), I DISTINCTLY wondered what the two of you would think of it. Tony…you were a crapshoot. You have shown the propensity to love movies that most people deem forgettable with the same fervor that you express displeasure with films that everyone else seems to love, so I had NO IDEA what you were going to think of Inception. Lance…if I could have bet money, I would have mortgaged the house (based on your feelings for Nolan films past) that you were not going to like this one. As I wrote and published my (admittedly too adulatory by 50%) Nolan piece last week, I was actually nervous at the comments that you guys were going to leave about it.

So, in defense of the prostrate and crying Nolan, let me offer a few defenses for the film as is:

1. It’s ALREADY two and a half hours long – Is there too much exposition? Without a doubt. Are the lesser characters not as fleshed out as they could have been? Absolutely. But guys…this is a LONG movie that creates an entirely new conceit from the ground up. To incorporate all of the ideas you suggest could EASILY have added another sixty to ninety minutes to its running time. Some things have to get cut, even when you’ve got the magic green light like Nolan does. For my money (and this is my personal taste, I freely admit), I would rather concede some characterization in favor of compelling plot any day of the week.

2. The “This was all a dream!” plot device is WAY more tired than anything seen here – The person I saw Inception with apparently spent the entire first two hours believing that the entire plot was the fevered coma dream of Cobb’s, and that Mal was the Extractor who kept infiltrating his dreams in an attempt to wake him up from them. Now this could have actually been the case for all I know (more on this in a second), but I contend that if this (or something similar) had been the case, I would have been disappointed. Even in a movie about dreams, I would hate to be misled like that. Some grounding in reality, even in a dream about the unreality of our subconscious, is vital (again, in my opinion) if we’re going to give ourselves over to the movie’s conceit. All this to say that, for all the (justifiable) criticism that the dream world was too linear, and the plot in the dreamworld too straightforward, I understand why it’s there, and I had no problem with it.

As for the ending itself, I am honestly confused with Tony’s critique that it was “tacked on and obnoxious.” The entire movie was leading us to that final image, and the ambiguity of those final seconds allow any and every theory as to “what really happened” to have a measure of credibility. Again, for my money, I LOVE movies that allow this type of post-mortem breakdown.

3. Two erudite and intelligent movie-goers do NOT represent the movie-going population at large – Guys, I BEG you to consider this, my final point. Christopher Nolan just made a very complex psychological thriller that forces you to really THINK about what the hell is happening…and it’s going to be a huge commercial success. We live in a culture right now that seems to want nothing more than Shrek sequels, gross-out comedies and comic book adaptations, and he just got the country to embrace a movie that is original, and actually makes its audience think. I wonder if other, more complicated ideas (such as the ones you lament the absence of) were discarded in favor of accessibility. In other words, if the movie was even more dense and multi-layered to include all of the things that you suggest…is it not at least a possibility that it would ultimately turn off the majority of its audience?

Let me make my final point VERY VERY clear: You two – Tony and Lance – represent two of the most creative minds I know. It is entirely possible (in my book, plausible) that one or both of you will one day create the movie that obliterates Inception in originality and complexity. But if and when that day comes, you WILL owe a debt to this movie. Inception (God willing) will show studios that movies with substance can work critically and commercially. It IS flawed, and there ARE holes…but they pale in comparison to all that it actually is.

RvW, very nice rebuttal, my friend. Let me chime in once more with a few thoughts on a point you made:

I am honestly confused with Tony’s critique that it was “tacked on and obnoxious.” The entire movie was leading us to that final image, and the ambiguity of those final seconds allow any and every theory as to “what really happened” to have a measure of credibility.

RvW, I'm with you on this. When Cobb sets the top to spinning, then walks off into the bright sunshine to embrace his kids, and we come back to the spinning top, I was holding my breath. And then when it wobbled, I (internally) screamed, "it's gonna fall!" and then Nolan cuts to black. Like RvW, I thought it great.

Tony, I too was confused reading your criticism of this. Perhaps you could expound a bit?

PS - How great is it to have this level of movie analysis/discourse on CC2K again?

PSS - Nice to hear from you again, Lance!

Thanks for welcoming me back, Ross. I've been away in another dimension fighting battles to keep you all safe. I hear that you're moving to the West Coast...I'm sure we'll have time for Emergency Summits in the future.

Rob, I couldn't agree more that even if Nolan fell a bit short, it was still a worthy try and I'm ecstatic that the ticket-buying masses seem to be embracing this. If it gets a few more non-comic book studio movies through the system, then "Inception" will more than have done its job.

I'm not trying to take anything away from your enjoyment of the movie. I enjoyed it, too--It was a very memorable evening out.

You might be right that our suggestions would make the movie too long--but I suspect it wouldn't. I feel like "Inception" is a good first draft of a script, and working all our stuff in would not lengthen the movie, but would change it. There's reams of stuff I felt was completely unnecessary and nowhere near as imaginative as it had to be to pay off the bold set up. Balancing character vs. plot is ALWAYS tough, but the space is already there--Nolan gives each character Leo recruits his/her own scene where Leo meets them in their world.

In conclusion, I will (eventually) let Christopher Nolan out of the closet I've been stowing him in while he cries himself out.