Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Inception's Usability Problem

gamermelodico.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 40 posts

Re: Inception's Usability Problem

#31

Post by Karzyn »

mbateman wrote: post #21
Tycho wrote: post #7

I'm pushing a lot of film criticisms onto my mind's stack of 'possibly groundless convictions' these days. I keep seeing complaints that a) a good film needs you to 'care' about the characters who must have 'emotional depth' through 'development' b) a good film should not be pre-occupied with 'exposition' or 'explaining' what is happening but... says who? They sound like half-baked ideas that arm-chair movie critics…

To defend the film critic regurgitation a bit, I don't think characters have to have emotional depth or development, but it's typically a good thing when you care about them and their problems. As for the exposition point, I think something can be said in defense of the story in the link. (Spoilers follow.) Re: emotional attachment. One of the things that annoyed me about Inception was that the big reveal of what hap…

----SPOILER----

Absolutely agree regarding throwing out the labyrinth in favor of a fight scene. Throughout the entire movie prior to the snow-dream I had really been looking forward to, what I hoped would be, a thought-provoking or mind-bending maze through the world of dreams and subconsciousness. To have that pushed aside in favor of gunfights was incredibly shallow and disappointing.

Re: Inception's Usability Problem

#32

Post by spinchange »

Tycho wrote: post #25
pchristensen wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd read a review that said the same thing complaining about lack of character development in the film, but it made sense based on how I interpreted the ending. --------------SPOILER ALERT-------------------- I think the whole movie was DiCaprio's dream, something he constructed for himself to plant the idea that he didn't have to feel guilty about his wife. Then it would make sense for all the other characters to be…

---spoiler----- I think you're partly correct. His wife was not a real character but a projection of his subconscious, hence the impression that one of the main characters was 'underdeveloped' - she was supposed to be. I don't think the other characters were underdeveloped, they were just minor characters anyway. If his wife was a normal character, then it would seem like a normal film in terms of character developme…

I haven't heard anyone posit that the end is actually supposed to be real. I'd concluded, just like the parent commenter, that the whole thing -supporting characters and all- was a dream to let himself off the hook and move on.

Re: Inception's Usability Problem

#33

Post by xurble2 »

Tycho wrote: post #7

I'm pushing a lot of film criticisms onto my mind's stack of 'possibly groundless convictions' these days. I keep seeing complaints that a) a good film needs you to 'care' about the characters who must have 'emotional depth' through 'development' b) a good film should not be pre-occupied with 'exposition' or 'explaining' what is happening but... says who? They sound like half-baked ideas that arm-chair movie critics…

With regard to your point on exposition on and the question "says who?"

Well David Mamet for one:

Any time two characters are talking about a third, the scene is a crock of shit.

Any time any character is saying to another "as you know", that is, telling another character what you, the writer, need the audience to know, the scene is a crock of shit.

http://ezinearticles.com/?David-Mamets-Rules-For-Writers---W...

Not having seen inception, I can't judge if the exposition somehow avoids this problem, but in general I feel like Mamet is as good an authority as any to appeal to :)

Re: Inception's Usability Problem

#34

Post by kwamenum86 »

I disagree with this review. I was told I had to pay close attention so I concentrated on every last detail (a rarity for me in movies) and was able to follow the movie pretty effortlessly. My girlfriend was able to do so with no such hint (but maybe she is a lot smarter than me.)

This movie is a THINKER not unlike the mind-bender Primer, which almost certainly requires multiple viewings and a wiki page to fully grok. Understanding these movies is not supposed to be passive (giving you exactly what you need to know when you need to know it would enable you to be a passive viewer) and when the movie is over you're supposed to be thinking about what you just saw for more than 5 minutes and on more than a superficial level.

This movie was very good at what it tried to do. It didn't get bogged down by in-depth explanation of the technology involved in dream-diving, didn't give us super complex character back-stories, and didn't overwhelm the user with technologies to that world. I felt we were provided with a set of basic building blocks (in the form of world-unique jargon) and then given a tour of a complex world based on these blocks - and it was damn cool. If it had tried to do more than his the movie would have gotten bogged down.

Re: Inception's Usability Problem

#36

Post by liljimmytables »

I actually wrote a scathing reply to this, complaining that he'd seen a film, not enjoyed it, and rationalised his experience. Big logic fail. Who is he to say that having lots of exposition is not enjoyable? I enjoyed it. Sure, he's obviously got a bit of understanding about a subject and he's put it to good use in manipulating other people's thoughts, but that's just wrong.

Then I realised I was getting upset about a blog entry, and thought: wait, no. This is how the internet works. People post their opinions on blogs, like-minded people (of which I am clearly not one in this case) will enjoy sharing with them. The fellow has opened my mind to another way of interpreting a story, another angle from which I can appreciate the work. And maybe by understanding his opinion I can reflect better on my own enjoyment.

Then I thought a little harder. No, the internet works by ignorant people ranting against each other until they achieve a state of mutual indignation which overrides any basic logical thoughts they might have possibly had about the situation. It was at this point I wished I had not deleted my original post. Sorry internet, I have failed you.

Re: Inception's Usability Problem

#38

Post by JadeNB »

Maro wrote: post #29
PaulJoslin wrote: post #9

This was exactly how I felt when I left the cinema. Although it was a good film, I felt the execution of the idea felt sloppy. It had promise to be truly amazing, but often purposely became confusing in the aim of seeming to be clever. I think in Inception they took things too far, multiple dream levels, weird limbo states, etc. They could've just built a far simpler movie and it would've flowed a lot better. It's co…

I agree with PaulJoslin's criticism. It was a good film, but I didn't think it was great, by the end I had a certain hollow feeling, same as I had after Dark Knight or Memento (not after Prestige). Like in DK, I felt that the plot was overcomplicated, there were too many dream layers, too much was going on. I also missed somewhat longer, continuous action sequences. In Inception, every action sequence was over in 30…

> In Inception, every action sequence was over in 30 seconds, with everything happening in a dream (death just means you wake up), so it removed what little tension these sequences carried. (But then sometimes the in-game rules were broken, eg. the Jap. guy get shot but he doesn't wake up, so from then on shots are lethal? Well I guess not, because at the end everybody is fine after all.)

It's true that the rules are changed, but they're changed almost immediately; we have one encounter in a dream where we see that being killed means that you wake up, and this understanding is then taken away from us during the next dream (not counting the various tutorials). One may question the utility of a rule that is given only to be immediately taken away, but I believe that the point here was to make us feel the shock of the unexpected danger in which the characters found themselves—we are supposed to be shaken out of our complacency just as they are.

The second point seems truly bizarre. I think it's fair to say that a large chunk of the ‘meaning’ of the movie is that we are left to wonder at the end whether we have reached a ‘real-life’ ending, or are still watching someone's dreams. The fact that everyone seems fine, despite the severe dangers that were advertised, is, from this point of view, not lazy story-telling but a way of making us uncomfortable with the easy answer of taking the ending literally.

Re: Inception's Usability Problem

#39

Post by JadeNB »

SandB0x wrote: post #13

Inception was boring. We all knew the basic setup before the movie, which is fine, but it spends ages explaining minor details like how balance/inner ear sensation is propagated down the levels, yet uses them inconsistently - they're not floating about the snow scene, for example. Yes, I realise these are Comic Book Guy criticisms. But it wasn't engaging. The dialogue was clichéd, the characters bland, and for a summ…

> for a summer action movie it lacked a "crowning moment of awesome"

Wow, the fight in the hotel hallway didn't do anything for you? For me, that topped anything I saw in a Wachowski brothers movie (I was literally gasping); it felt like a character expertly manipulating rules of physics that he could not manipulate, rather than simply ignoring the rules that were inconvenient.

Re: Inception's Usability Problem

#40

Post by JadeNB »

JadeNB wrote: post #39
SandB0x wrote: post #13

Inception was boring. We all knew the basic setup before the movie, which is fine, but it spends ages explaining minor details like how balance/inner ear sensation is propagated down the levels, yet uses them inconsistently - they're not floating about the snow scene, for example. Yes, I realise these are Comic Book Guy criticisms. But it wasn't engaging. The dialogue was clichéd, the characters bland, and for a summ…

> for a summer action movie it lacked a "crowning moment of awesome" Wow, the fight in the hotel hallway didn't do anything for you? For me, that topped anything I saw in a Wachowski brothers movie (I was literally gasping); it felt like a character expertly manipulating rules of physics that he could not manipulate, rather than simply ignoring the rules that were inconvenient.

(Err, sorry, “expertly manipulating rules … that he could not manipulate” is nonsense. I meant “expertly exploiting rules …”; but I can't edit that post any more.)
Post reply on HN