• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Inception Ending Explained (contain spoilers)

Still not explained. Was it real or not? There's no answer to that question. The only thing that could come close is that it doesn't matter (which the article gets to at a point).

Still hardly an explanation.
 
that was pretty much my take.

it was probably real but cutting at the end before confirmation was just one last mind f*ck
 
Its quite simple I think, It was real.

Nobody would have the skill to recreate his children, He didn't even have the skill to recreate Mal as Cobb said good bye to her, stating she was just a shadow of the real mal, grossly failing to capture all her perfections and imperfections.

Then there was also the lecture he gave the other girl about recreated places you have been. Only Cobb knew the details of his home to recreate them, the girl, who was the architect could not have recreated it.
 
Last edited:
this is what Nolan said about inception ending “There can’t be anything in the film that tells you one way or another because then the ambiguity at the end of the film would just be a mistake … It would represent a failure of the film to communicate something. But it’s not a mistake. I put that cut there at the end, imposing an ambiguity from outside the film. That always felt the right ending to me — it always felt like the appropriate ‘kick’ to me….The real point of the scene — and this is what I tell people — is that Cobb isn’t looking at the top. He’s looking at his kids. He’s left it behind. That’s the emotional significance of the thing.”
 
mysticdream said:
this is what Nolan said about inception ending “There can’t be anything in the film that tells you one way or another because then the ambiguity at the end of the film would just be a mistake … It would represent a failure of the film to communicate something. But it’s not a mistake. I put that cut there at the end, imposing an ambiguity from outside the film. That always felt the right ending to me — it always felt like the appropriate ‘kick’ to me….The real point of the scene — and this is what I tell people — is that Cobb isn’t looking at the top. He’s looking at his kids. He’s left it behind. That’s the emotional significance of the thing.”
Click to expand...

That makes sense. It seems that he doesn't care (and it doesn't matter to him) anymore what is real and what's dreaming. As long as he's happy and with his kids, he's done trying to figure it out....and so am I 🙂
 
The article is almost a year old...

Nolan apparently likes that interpretation. You don't know if it is real or not, but you do know that Cobb doesn't give a shit anymore.
 
zinfamous said:
I don't know why it is confusing for so many people. :\
Click to expand...

Me either, I haven't read the article in the OP yet though but I did not feel that the movie lent itself to the ambiguity that some people seem to have taken away. For me, the biggest and main thing was that the ending sequence involved a myriad of other characters. For the entire movie, DiCaprio's character only had a single person from his past in his dreams, his dead wife. We never see him reconstruct his children or teammates. When we see the movie go to the deep down sequences, the dreamer is either alone or seems to be surrounded by generic people. It just never made sense in the context of the rules given in the movie that the dreamer would suddenly recreate a range of people from their life and start interacting with them.
 
Sorry, just stumbled upon this and wanted to put a nail in this coffin:

Nolan explains that to blatantly state whether or not Cobb was dreaming would not only be a disservice to the film (and its audience), but that people obsessed with finding the answer are missing the point entirely:

“There can’t be anything in the film that tells you one way or another because then the ambiguity at the end of the film would just be a mistake … It would represent a failure of the film to communicate something. But it’s not a mistake. I put that cut there at the end, imposing an ambiguity from outside the film. That always felt the right ending to me — it always felt like the appropriate ‘kick’ to me….The real point of the scene — and this is what I tell people — is that Cobb isn’t looking at the top. He’s looking at his kids. He’s left it behind. That’s the emotional significance of the thing.”
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
So if the end was "reality" are we to believe someone randomly decided to start spinning his top on a whim before exiting for no reason? That doesn't make any sense. Maybe if the top was just laying on it's side, motionless. That to me would say it was just left behind.
 
Sophitia said:
So if the end was "reality" are we to believe someone randomly decided to start spinning his top on a whim before exiting for no reason? That doesn't make any sense. Maybe if the top was just laying on it's side, motionless. That to me would say it was just left behind.
Click to expand...

Per Nolan, you cannot definitively say one way or another whether the end was reality or not

Cobb spins the top and leaves, which is a significant change from his behavior during the rest of the movie.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top