Filmmaker Christopher Nolan’s labyrinthine noggin heist INCEPTION hits DVD next week, so fans can rewind and frame-by-frame at their leisure in search of any clues and answers hidden within.
Meanwhile, Nolan talked with Wired about the movie, giving up some details and impressions on the various theories floating about in the wake of the theatrical release. Some samples (and SPOILERS):
On the theory that INCEPTION is actually about movie making:
“I didn’t intend to make a film about filmmaking, but it’s clear that I gravitated toward the creative process that I know. The way the team works is very analogous to the way the film itself was made. I can’t say that was intentional, but it’s very clearly there. I think that’s just the result of me trying to be very tactile and sincere in my portrayal of that creative process.“
On how it’s more like a videogame:
“I think it’s very analogous to the way people play videogames. When you play a videogame, you could be a completely different person than you are in the real world, certain aspects of the way your brain works can be leveraged for something you could never do in the real world. It was important, for example, that Cobb not be as physically skilled in the real world. And when he’s charging through Mombasa, I think Leo does a tremendous job of slightly differentiating his body language and the way he moves in that world. Of course, that can be based on what he believes of himself in that particular reality, so …”
On the notion that the kids at the end are the same ages and wearing the same clothes as Cobb’s dream:
“No, they’re not. I’m not giving anything away there. Also I’ve read a lot of misunderstanding or misremembering of the way those kids are portrayed onscreen. But on the Blu-ray, people will be able to check, say, the ages of the kids.”
On the final shot of Cobb’s top:
“Sometimes I think people lose the importance of the way the thing is staged with the spinning top at the end. Because the most important emotional thing is that Cobb’s not looking at it. He doesn’t care.”
On whether he himself has definitive answers:
“Oh yeah. I’ve always believed that if you make a film with ambiguity, it needs to be based on a sincere interpretation. If it’s not, then it will contradict itself, or it will be somehow insubstantial and end up making the audience feel cheated. I think the only way to make ambiguity satisfying is to base it on a very solid point of view of what you think is going on, and then allow the ambiguity to come from the inability of the character to know, and the alignment of the audience with that character.”
Check out the whole interview HERE!