holymadness
Distinguished Member
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2008
- Messages
- 3,609
- Reaction score
- 11
the movie is decent, there's one part i didn't understand, maybe someone could enlighten me.
**spoiler**
when they were in the snow scene(dream level 3), how did Leo and Page went in to limbo by just entering another dream state. i assume Leo is the dreamer for the next level, so Leo's dream world = limbo? i thought the only way to enter limbo is to die in a dream while being too sedated to wake up in reality. If they simply went into Leo's dream world, why would Fischer be there?
Spoilars:
I noticed this plot hole as well. It would seem logical that they'd have to kill themselves in level 3 in order to follow Fischer to limbo. The other possibility is that there are only 4 levels of dreaming, hence if you go down once more using the dream machine, you are by default in limbo, the lowest possible level. It's not a very satisfying explanation, though, as there's no reason within the rules established by the film why this would be so.
Interesting points Holymadness, I'd be equally interested in reading your interpretation as well. I agree with you that the Adam White explanation is very unsatisfying, making the movie seem quite pointless and dull and that it doesn't work logically as it involves making up facts that have not been referenced at all in the film.
I don't have an overarching theory of the movie. I tend to be suspicious of such explanations, which either distort and render meaningless the material in order to explain away all difficulties (Adam White), or else defy credulity by trying to interpret every element as a literal symbol for a dubious allegory (e.g. Inception is a movie about making movies, the various characters in the film represent the various cast members on a set, etc.). I also find it amusing that so much ink has been spilled to brand it as merely a mediocre video game adaptation by a constipated logician; I don't seem to recall G.I. Joe generating that much vitriol. Bad movies are merely dismissed. Interesting movies that are both liked and disliked are debated endlessly.
Moar Spoilars:
Anyway, all that to say that I find certain elements of the story interesting from a philosophical point of view, but that I don't think there is an interpretive key to be discovered. I particularly like the idea of the totem and I think Nolan considers it significant because a) it's introduced even before its purpose is explained to us and b) the movie ends with a shot of one.
A totem is an object whose physical properties are known only to the person who created it. It is created in the 'real world' to help distinguish between the real and the dream worlds, presumably because it has different properties in the dream world. This makes sense if you consider that, in someone else's dream, the architecture is under their control. Thus, someone unfamiliar with your totem will be unable to replicate it exactly, which would give away the fact that you're in a dream if you tried to manipulate the totem (which is more or less what happened in the opening scene with Saito's carpet). Hence why JGL tells Ariadne that she can't touch his loaded die.
On the other hand, what if you are in a dream of your own creation, as Cobb frequently is? Since Cobb is creating his own dream world out of his imagination, or else from his memories, it stands to reason that he would be able to perfectly replicate his totem, rendering it sort of useless. As best I can understand, he imposes special rules on the totem when he enters a dream state; in his dreams, the top will spin forever, whereas this is impossible in the real world.
But here's the rub: Cobb himself is imposing the rules which tell him whether his existence is objectively real or not. That is a paradox, since the conditions of objectivity have been decided by a subjective entity. The test therefore reduces to the absurd proposition of "If this world is real, then this world is real. If this world is fake, then this world is fake." We can see how he wants the top to act like an artificial god, telling him whether or not the world is real, but there is nothing beyond Cobb's own interpretation of the rules that renders an objective verdict on the state of reality.
Since the behaviour of the top depends on what Cobb already believes, it merely reflects his particular state of mind. There is no reason why the top couldn't topple in a dream state if Cobb is convinced that he's actually awake. (On the other hand, Cobb could never make the top spin forever in the real world, so while he can convince himself that he's not dreaming when he is, he can never convince himself that he is dreaming when he really isn't).
I suppose that's why the last shot is interesting. If Cobb is convinced that he's in the real world, the top will fall regardless of whether he's dreaming or not. The point is that he doesn't really care. He turns his back on the top before knowing the outcome, thus ultimately deciding the top's behaviour if he is still dreaming. He's made a Kierkegaardian leap of faith, like Abraham sacrificing Isaac. He has chosen to live in a world where his wife is dead and he's able to come back to the US to be with his children. Whether this world is objectively real is less important than whether Cobb believes it to be.