Jump to content


Welcome to DBSTalk


Sign In 

Create Account
Welcome to DBSTalk. Our community covers all aspects of video delivery solutions including: Direct Broadcast Satellite (DBS), Cable Television, and Internet Protocol Television (IPTV). We also have forums to discuss popular television programs, home theater equipment, and internet streaming service providers. Members of our community include experts who can help you solve technical problems, industry professionals, company representatives, and novices who are here to learn.

Like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community. Sign-up is a free and simple process that requires minimal information. Be a part of our community by signing in or creating an account. The Digital Bit Stream starts here!
  • Reply to existing topics or start a discussion of your own
  • Subscribe to topics and forums and get email updates
  • Send private personal messages (PM) to other forum members
  • Customize your profile page and make new friends
 
Guest Message by DevFuse

Photo

Inception


  • Please log in to reply
26 replies to this topic

#21 OFFLINE   QuickDrop

QuickDrop

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 1,115 posts
Joined: Jul 20, 2007

Posted 08 August 2010 - 05:36 PM

It's phenomenal and it's not difficult to understand like many people say it is. It's ranked as the third best movie of all time by imdb for a reason.


I assume that reason is the people who vote on IMDB haven't seen many films and the films they have seen are blockbusters from the past 20 years.

...Ads Help To Support This SIte...

#22 ONLINE   dpeters11

dpeters11

    Hall Of Fame

  • DBSTalk Club
  • 13,105 posts
  • LocationCincinnati
Joined: May 30, 2007

Posted 09 August 2010 - 08:21 AM

I assume that reason is the people who vote on IMDB haven't seen many films and the films they have seen are blockbusters from the past 20 years.


I have a problem with a movie currently in theaters being called one of the best of all time. But looking at the list, fortunately not all of them are blockbusters of the past 20 years. Shawshank is #1, definately wasn't a blockbuster. Godfather was #2. The one surprising to me was that 12 Angry Men (1957) is #8.

Inception certainly is a great film (though Armond White disagrees of course) but this ranks it a bit too highly. It's all subjective though.

#23 OFFLINE   greatwhitenorth

greatwhitenorth

    Godfather

  • Registered
  • 360 posts
Joined: Jul 18, 2005

Posted 09 August 2010 - 08:31 AM

I saw "Inception" last week, and it's a shame you didn't stay on. It takes quite a while for the story to develop. To be sure, it was difficult to follow, not really knowing at any given time if you were immersed in DiCaprio's dream or someone else's, or if it was a dream within a dream. I think it would actually be worth seeing again, knowing how it all fit together. It's a tense drama definitely worth seeing.


Yes, my problem with the movie was that it took so long to get any traction. About 1 1/2 hours in, it became one of the best movies I've seen. With some smarter writing and editing, I think it could have been brought down to 2 hours even, without destroying the integrity of the plot. While I enjoyed the movie, the lack of flow of the movie in the beginning takes it out of the Top 10 of all time for me. I recommend viewing this one from home.
The opinions expressed here are my own, and do not reflect the opinions of Dish Network.

#24 OFFLINE   pappy97

pappy97

    Icon

  • No PM's
  • 611 posts
Joined: Nov 14, 2009

Posted 10 August 2010 - 09:07 PM

Why?


Because the movie is too smart to simply be enjoyed for special effects only. I know that sounds very elitist, but maybe it is. This isn't "Transformers 2" where the only thing going for it (if that) is the visual effects. It's a smart Memento-like Christopher Nolan movie and IMHO, should be viewed/enjoyed/critiqued as much.
My setup (TV + DirecTV):
Master Bedroom: LG 32" 120hz LCD TV, GENIE Client
Living room: Samsung 46" 120hz LED LCD TV 7000 series, GENIE Master
Dedicated HT: Epson 8700UB projector with 150" 16:9 painted on screen and 180" 2.4:1 painted on screen, HD-DVR (HR22), Denon AVR-890, Klipsch Icon Front Speakers, Center Speaker, and Klipsch Icon Floorstanders for side and rear speakers (6 total floorstanders), subwoofer is BIC America V-1220 12" down-firing sub

#25 OFFLINE   QuickDrop

QuickDrop

    Hall Of Fame

  • Registered
  • 1,115 posts
Joined: Jul 20, 2007

Posted 11 August 2010 - 09:51 AM

Because the movie is too smart to simply be enjoyed for special effects only. I know that sounds very elitist, but maybe it is. This isn't "Transformers 2" where the only thing going for it (if that) is the visual effects. It's a smart Memento-like Christopher Nolan movie and IMHO, should be viewed/enjoyed/critiqued as much.


In terms of "smartness," how would you compare it to a film like Resnais's "Last Year at Marienbad"? A film Nolan says he didn't see until after he made "Inception", but admits he was indirectly influenced by because he was imitating films that were imitating "Marienbad". Resnais's "Je t'aime, je t'aime" is another film that is certainly an indirect influence. Both, it could be argued, makes "Inception" look like "Transformers 2". Okay, "Transformers 1"; I should give Nolan some credit.

I hope this post doesn't sound elitist or anything.

#26 OFFLINE   Stuart Sweet

Stuart Sweet

    The Shadow Knows!

  • Super Moderators
  • 36,876 posts
Joined: Jun 18, 2006

Posted 11 August 2010 - 09:56 AM

No it doesn't, and I had the same discussion with someone else recently. But I think, there are films that no one sees that are great, and films that everyone sees that are crud. Then there are films that have just enough mainstream appeal to make money while making people think at the end. Inception deserves credit for walking that line.
Opinions expressed by me are my own and do not necessarily reflect
those of DBSTalk.com, DIRECTV, DISH, The Signal Group, or any other company.

#27 OFFLINE   spartanstew

spartanstew

    Dry as a bone

  • Registered
  • 12,442 posts
  • LocationWylie, Texas
Joined: Nov 16, 2005

Posted 11 August 2010 - 10:20 AM

Because the movie is too smart to simply be enjoyed for special effects only. I know that sounds very elitist, but maybe it is. This isn't "Transformers 2" where the only thing going for it (if that) is the visual effects. It's a smart Memento-like Christopher Nolan movie and IMHO, should be viewed/enjoyed/critiqued as much.


So what? If someone wants to see it just for some special effects, or if they think the special effects are the best part, why would you care how they view/enjoy it?

I'm sure Directv can't wait to get their hands on your unit.

 
Directv customer since 2000




Protected By... spam firewall...And...