Inception

[Totenkindly]

just saw this movie on my computer and loved it, heh, shoulda watched it in the theaters so i can discuss it with you peeps~

i'm dumb when it comes to typing characters, but everyone seems to agree that Eames is an ENTP. can anybody please explain how Eames is an ENTP? thanks

Well, if you use a "snapshot recognition" eval of people's types, he definitely fits with snapshots of other ENTPs... but that's not conclusive.

We do know he's likely to be N, because the script pits him as the voice of multi-directional thought / thinking outside the box vs Arthur who is portrayed as the rock/stability/linear thinker. Their arguments are typical N vs S arguments.

Watch his behavior, and he comes off as an impersonal thinker -- detached.

So we now have NT.

Does he seem to like to control situations?
No, he adjusts to situations as they unfold (and does this with natural ease throughout the movie).
His appearance is a bit neat (which is more J), but it's still relaxed; and his manner is more P.

Once you get him down to INTP vs ENTP, he is far too comfortable in social situations and fits a typical ETP pattern (the ESTPs look similar to him as well), and INTP would just not respond that easily and naturally within the exterior world. You can also see the I/E difference between Ariadne (who is IxTx) and Eames -- Ariadne detaches and analyzes, Eames engages.

Overall the best fit is an ENTP who actually is fairly well-rounded, as he can focus clearly and not shoot off in every direction (and a lack of focus is usually the bane of the young/unnuanced ENTP).

Hope that helps.

 

[guesswho]

Here's an interesting thing about Inception's soundtrack:

 

[Totenkindly]

Yes, the trombones/brass is just a slowed-down version of the "kick" song.

Isn't that cool?

 

[guesswho]

Yes, with them being in the dream when time is slowed.

I wonder if Nolan created the dream architect character after himself actually....

 

[Retmeishka]

Sorry, this is going to be one of those forum posts where everybody was enjoying the lighthearted conversation until I walked in...

I loved Arthur, he was my favorite. I didn't know he was probably an ISTJ. I like it when something happens that verifies the 'opposites attract' theories. He made me feel secure and I wanted to go hug him. I wouldn't have enjoyed the movie half as much if he wasn't in it.

I loved and hated this movie. I've watched it several times and ended up buying it.

caution: I don't like any movie that encourages suicide, even though I know most viewers are able to figure out that it was something that only worked in the context of the movie and they shouldn't do it in real life... I don't like movies that encourage you to believe reality is only a dream. (And yet I bought The Matrix and have watched it many times.)

inaccurate: Controlling people's dreams by connecting wires to them? Not necessary. You don't need wires. Unfortunately, this is something that I learned about the hard way, and I know nobody is in my room putting wires and drugs into me.

accurate: yes, the dreams usually have some kind of music playing in them.

inaccurate: it's actually very, very, very, very hard to make people do what you want to force them to do. You have to keep working with them for months and months and tinkering with it to get it to work. One dream isn't enough. It's a battle, especially if you are trying to make them do something that requires prolonged, focused effort.

terrifying: Mal's suicide scene was too scary for me. My toes were clenched and I was almost covering my eyes not to look while they were sitting on the ledges of the building. And I somehow recognized the helpless futility of desperately trying to convince someone when they refuse to listen to you and are believing their own crazy ideas instead. (that might have been from the guy I dated when I was a teenager.)

liked: I liked the movie's complexity. I had to watch it several times just to understand what was going on. It was hard to understand who was where, and what kind of kick they were getting to wake up and so on.

liked: I like any movies about mind control. I don't necessarily like them in a happy way. (Truman Show = liked that one in a happy way.)

inaccurate: They don't just give forced dreams to 'important' people like the CEOs of corporations. They don't just have 'big important purposes' like breaking up a competitor's business. In real life they do it to ordinary people for harassment purposes or for trivial reasons that no one can really explain.

liked: beautiful images of changing the physics of reality. Flying through the air as gravity shifts around. Water exploding into the dream. Bending the other half of the city 180 degrees up above you.

liked: dropping papers on the stairs and picking them up.

that's it then.

 

[Synapse]

The complexity ended in the vault...

 

[Totenkindly]

liked: dropping papers on the stairs and picking them up.

Actually, I though the paper-dropping in "Big: Extended Edition" was more authentic, as well as encapturing the paradoxical creative/destructive impulses of the main protagonists of the film while maintaining a certain amount of verve and energy. Here, the papers kind of just fell on the floor and laid there, lifelessly.

The complexity ended in the vault...

Sometimes we make things a lot more complex than they truly are.

 

[Retmeishka]

Saito: One of the first things that characterizes Saito is when he is knocked down on the carpet and notices that the carpet is wrong.

Si, introverted sensing: The carpet is made of wool in real life. He remembers it from previous experiences and compares those experiences to the present. http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com/introvertedsensing.html

Te, extraverted thinking: Since this carpet isn't wool, we're not in the real apartment, and you're lying to me. We're dreaming. He follows the logic and notices that something isn't right. http://www.cognitiveprocesses.com/extravertedthinking.html

 

[SilkRoad]

Would you believe it, I only just saw this. But I managed to see it in the theatre anyway, in second run

I LOVED it. My only real quibbles were a) yes, it is a bit confusing and doesn't always quite hang together...but perhaps that is dreamlike... and b) I sort of wish the dialogue had been better. Not that it was bad, it just wasn't that memorable, in general. Can you imagine how fantastic this film would have been if it had dialogue of the quotability of another sci-fi classic, Blade Runner?

And yes, as others have said, it was very Ni. I am in a very Jungian/synchronicity/dream fascination mood at the moment which was why it was especially appropriate (almost to the point of synchronicity!) that I saw it now rather than earlier. I loved the whole "kick" concept - the feeling of falling that wakes you up, and how they made it such a key plot point.

And the whole washing up on the shores of consciousness thing...man. I really do believe in Jung's collective unconscious, and there are certain things... I remember years ago having an incredibly vivid and beautiful dream about dying by drowning, and waking up on a shore with a midnight blue sky and golden stars overhead. This film reminded me of that. And also, Cobb being haunted by his wife in his dreams, and the guilt - it reminded me of what I think of as my "unfinished business" dreams, and those people that come back and back when you're trying to forget them. Though it does annoy me a little that I remember my dreams a lot less than I used to...

Loved it - will probably buy the DVD, but I am really glad that I finally managed to see it in the cinema. I wanted to see it at the time, but just didn't get around to it, which has happened to me with many films lately.

 

[Orangey]

It was a good film. My only complaints are that (1) the scenes with Mol got old and boring really fast (except the one where she kills herself...that was good), and (2) the end scene with the top was corny and cliche as fuck. As for the critics, I actually thought the film was overrated. I mean, one of the reviewers actually had the nerve to compare Nolan to Kubrick.

 

[Vorm Krieg]

Why the need to put on an entertaining science fiction film a shroud of "intelligence" and "complexity"? Are we that deprived of movies with good execution of a well thought out concept?

And comparing Nolan to Kubrick is just.. bullshit.

 

[Orangey]

Why the need to put on an entertaining science fiction film a shroud of "intelligence" and "complexity"? Are we that deprived of movies with good execution of a well thought out concept?

And comparing Nolan to Kubrick is just.. bullshit.

Agreed.