Here are some thoughts I'd like you to respond to in your answer to this blog:
1. Philosopher Immanuel Kant would likely say that both inception and extraction are immoral, despite your intentions, because because you (as the extractor) are violating the autonomy of the individual. These actions disrespect humanity because your personal autonomy (or ability to control yourself, your thoughts, and actions) is a mark of your humanity, what makes you different than other animals in this world. If someone has implanted an idea in your head, how can you be responsible for it or the actions that come from it?
2. Ariadne acts like Cobb's therapist throughout the movie and helps him with the guilt that is sabotaging his dreams and memories. In the first dream (Yusuf's, in the scene in the warehouse), Cobb tells her why he feels so guilty - because, after 50 years in Limbo, he had planted the idea in Mal's head that this world (Limbo) wasn't real and that they needed to kill themselves to get back to reality (being awake). She brought this idea back with her into reality and flipped the idea around - her waking state was Limbo and that she needed to get back to reality (in her mind, Limbo). My question for you is: is Ariadne practicing her own version of inception w/ Cobb by placing the ideas in his head that he needs to confront Mal's projection and rid himself of the guilt of her suicide (which he eventually succeeds in doing)? Why or why not?
3. Catharsis -- a concept first introduced to us by Aristotle (a purging or purification of the self or the transformation as a result of the catharsis), Cobb, Arthur and Eames have all talked about Fischer reaching a state of catharsis with his father so that their inception idea can take hold. Reconciliation with positive emotion is much stronger, according to Cobb, than with a negative emotion. So we see that Fischer is reconciled with his father at the end and decides to break up his company when he awakes from the kidnapping scene. But, does Cobb reach his own catharsis when he finds that he's allowed into the United States and can finally see his children's faces again? Throughout the movie, that's all he's ever wanted is to get back home to his kids, and the ending scene shows that reunion (with his children a couple of years older - I checked the credits - there are two different pairs of child actors). But does this catharsis really happen because of the ending scene with the top? Did the scene turn off before the top fell over?
- Cobb also has another scene of catharsis near the end in limbo when he says goodbye to Mal "you're just a shade of my real wife..."
4. Movie - Making - Inception, as a film, is all a dream, but it's also an extended metaphor for filmmaker Christopher Nolan. Like a dream, the movie is a shared dream for the audience and has its own rules and functions along those lines. Some characters and scenes happen like dreams in which there seems to be no rhyme or reason: Mal comes out of a crowd and stabs Ariadne; the train in the first dream that blasts through downtown where there's no tracks; the elder Fischer's hospital bed in a huge vault inside of a mountain fortress; Cobb squeezing between an amazingly small gap of two buildings. Mal even makes the case to Cobb at the end that he is in fact still stuck in a dream, with feelings of persecution (the authorities or Cobol's security forces), creeping doubts, and little remembrance of how he got there. On another thought, the way the dream team works is similar to how a movie is made - they plan the scenes and the movie sets down to the smallest details, always conscious of the audience (the dreamer's projections) and its reaction. And, the way the movie ends with the cut scene of the top and then kicking into the music (Edith Piaf's haunting melody) as the credits roll is kind of like a dream because sometimes we are ripped out of a dream before its ending and we want to know how it ends. Yet we can't go back.
-- all of this is controlled by the master manipulator, the director, Christopher Nolan. Everything in this movie is done for a reason. Cobb is the director, Arthur is the producer who does the research, Ariadne the screenwriter when she acts as the architect, Eames is the actor and Yusuf is the technical guy that makes it all happen. Saito is the money guy (also a producer) who finances the whole operation and Fischer is the audience who is taken for an exciting adventure by the director, Cobb. Yet we are also the audience too, since this is a movie. Arthur mentions continuously that they cannot mess with the dream too much, otherwise the dreamer knows something is wrong. The same can be said for movies - when there's too much fakery or interference from the director, we as the audience snap out of the trance that the movie is weaving for us and see the movie for what it is. We lose ourselves in well-made movies b/c we're not paying attention to the poor acting or screenwriting or plot holes or ridiculous scenes. We care about the characters and want to see a satisfying resolution. And so Cobb, as the director, makes an amazing movie, but also brings part of himself into the movie (Mal) which can influence the audience (she shoots Fischer in the 3rd dream). Most of the jarring scenes in Inception include Mal. And it's Mal who questions Cobb and raises doubt as to his true purpose.
- And since the movie is like a dream, it has planted the idea of itself in the mind of the movie audience as well - is this a movie or was the whole thing a dream? This is where the movie becomes almost a meta-movie; it is Christopher Nolan dreaming about Cobb.
Please discuss your thoughts on 3 of 4 of these topics. 300 words minimum for your total comment. Due Friday, May 6 by class.
ReplyDeleteDoes this catharsis really happen because of the ending scene with the top? Did the scene turn off before the top fell over?
Even though the scene ended before the top fell, I still understood the catharsis and felt like the story came to a fulfilling end. Personally, I think the top wobbling and Cobb seeing his children’s faces was enough proof that he exited limbo. In limbo, neither happened, the top always spun in a clear and contant way, never starting off course or tipping, unlike at the end of the movie where, while the top did not fall, it did have an irregular spin. In limbo, and even the memories that Cobb shows during the trip down the elevator, we never see his children's faces. I think that is enough proof that Cobb has left limbo, and even if he didn’t, he still reached catharsis believing he left limbo.
Is Ariadne practicing her own version of inception w/ Cobb by placing the ideas in his head that he needs to confront Mal's projection and rid himself of the guilt of her suicide (which he eventually succeeds in doing)? Why or why not?
I don’t think Ariadne is practicing inception. She is placing ideas in his head, but she is not making Cobb think they are his own original thoughts. She confronts him, speaking directly to him and not going into his mind to trick him. I think inception only counts as inception if the victim thinks that their thoughts are totally their own and not placed there by an outside force. Cobb is aware that the ideas being planted in his head are Ariadnes’ thoughts and not his own, so therefore it is not inception.
If someone has implanted an idea in your head, how can you be responsible for it or the actions that come from it?
I think that everyone is responsible for their own actions. Many people have intrusive thoughts, and yet not many people act on them. Having a thought does not mean that the action must be made, especially if it is a harmful thought. This kind of thinking reminds me of witch hunts, blaming ‘sinful’ actions or thoughts on the devil or possession, and not on another outside force. Without taking blame, the person doesn't get punished or the help that they could need. Thoughts are simply that, thoughts. They have no physical form, so unless someone acts on the thoughts, then thoughts are not physical. If an idea is planted in someone's head, it is not physical unless it is acted upon, so the person acting it out is the one to be responsible.
1. I would agree with immanuel kant by saying inception and extraction are immoral. Your brain and thoughts should be a private thing to a person. By entering a person's dreams and looking at their thoughts and even creating ideas ruins the boundaries of a person. Inception would be like reading someone's diary, a person's private thoughts. I think if someone plants an idea into your head you are still in a way responsible for the actions that come from it. Though the idea did not originate from you, you still have the freedom of choice for the actions that come after the idea.
ReplyDelete2. I would say aridane is performing inception on cobbs but without knowing it. I think her intentions are simply to help Cobb cope with the guilt of losing his wife. Aridane also isn't placing ideas in Cobb's dreams, she talks to him in reality and Cobbs ultimately decides to forgive himself. When a person gives someone else an idea in reality, we know the idea came from the first person, not the person being told the idea. Because of this Cobb made the decision for himself to forgive himself. Adriene also didn't only get the information of Mal being dead from Cobb's dreams, she got it in reality when Cobb and her would talk.
3. I think Cobb does reach catharsis when he is able to see his kids again. I think the ending scene was purposefully cut where it was because it makes the viewer wonder if Cobb's catharsis and seeing his kids was actually in a dream or reality. Even if it was a dream I still think Cobb reached catharsis because he believed it was reality whether it was or not.
Oli
ReplyDelete1. This first question is difficult for me to answer because I have conflicting ideas. On the one hand do you lose all reason when someone has implanted an idea in your head? If someone were to implant a very horrible idea that you would normally find morally wrong, would you think the thought and then immediately think yourself out of it because you still have your morals? If so then I think you still have responsibility for your actions, if not then I would have to agree with Kant and say that the action is immoral and you cannot realistically have responsibility for your actions influenced by inception and extraction.
2. Again this is something I don’t know the answer to. On the one hand I think that Ariadne certainly helped him reach the conclusion that he has to confront Mal’s projection and rid himself of the guilt of her suicide, but when she was doing this, he was aware of it the whole time. It is still inception if the dreamer or person is aware of their mind being changed. I think Cobb allowed her to change his mind. She went into his dream and knew his thoughts to then talk him into facing his problems, but in some of those, depending on the ending of the movie, he was not even in a dream state. There was no clear planting like Cobb spinning the spinner in the safe. But there was certainly some convincing in the dream state.
4. This question almost makes me spiral… almost. However, I don’t think the movie is a dream of Nolan, I do think that it plants the idea that we’re all living a dream in the audience when they watch. It’s almost like that horror movie where the girl comes out of the TV to kill you. After watching most of the things we watch in this class I usually question my reality a little bit. In that way it is like we are in our own inception, and maybe the movie is someone’s way of telling us (or me I guess) that we are dreaming and to wake up. Maybe we’re in limbo, but probably not.
1. I think that inception and extraction are immoral because I feel like it’s invasive to the other person’s privacy of their own thoughts and mind. It breaks the boundaries that we humans are entitled to and we are allowed to be able to think what we want in our own heads without someone else interfering and knowing what we are thinking. If someone were to plant an idea into your head, it’s hard to know whether or not they are then responsible for that idea. You don’t really have much control in that situation because you didn’t come up with the idea, but I guess you would have control afterward in what you do after the idea is planted. It’s half and half.
ReplyDelete2. I’m honestly not really sure if I feel like Adriane is practicing inception because while she is putting new thoughts and ideas into Cobb’s head, she makes sure he is aware that they are not his own original thoughts. Ultimately, she is just trying to help him get through his guilt. It feels like everything she does, she makes sure he understands that she isn’t trying to trick him or anything. He allowed her to help him change his mind and get through the guilt he was feeling about what happened with Mal.
3. Once Cobb is able to finally see his children again, it feels like he has reached catharsis. Throughout the entire money, it’s been mentioned and hinted that Cobb really just wants to get back to his children, and it makes sense for him to be overjoyed to see them when it’s what he’s been wanting the entire time. So I think he does reach catharsis, but it leaves the question of whether his reunion with his kids was real or not. I feel like he could still be dreaming but it’s something left to the audience to decide because I don’t think the movie really clarifies it. Either way, dream or reality, Cobb did reach catharsis.
Especially during a period when, as a woman, my bodily autonomy is being threatened I do think this could be a violation of that. With something as intimate and personal as dreams/the mind, I think that no one should be able to enter that space without consent. Your mind is not really your own if others can manipulate and invade it. I do think extraction and inception would be a violation of bodily autonomy and morally wrong. I do not think Ariadne is doing inception with Cobb, because she is simply offering him advice. She is offering a new perspective, and giving him support in relieving him of his guilt. Unlike inception, she is doing something morally right by telling Cobb it is okay to let go of guilt that is trapping him. I do think Cobb reaches his catharsis when he sees his children once again, even with the undisclosed ending. I think him seeing his children's faces once again was real to him, and the goal he was working towards throughout the film. I think the whole set up of the movie does call into question whether the entire movie was a dream. Although I do believe some of the movie was based in reality. There is a foolproof way of knowing whether your in a dream which was Cobb's totem, and there are moments throughout the movie where he spins it and it falls. I think this is a solid indication of reality within the movie. The dream within a dream is where it got confusing on what was dream and what was it. For a long time i forgot the kidnapping scene was part of the dream, and had to keep reminding myself which really resonates with the whole premise of the movie, and limbo. I think the way the movie shot giving the audience a similar sense of confusion.
ReplyDeleteInception was a crazy movie indeed. Including scenes that strike both your mind and heart. The first question that I’d like to answer is number one. Someone implants an idea in my head, how exactly can I handle and be responsible for the actions that come next. My first thought is self control and discipline. If you train your mind well enough to resist certain impulses or actions, then controlling the outcome of the idea should come easy. If Cobb hadn’t implanted an idea in Mal’s head then maybe she would be easier to deal with. Just realized Mal is bad in Spanish. Is there double meaning behind her name now? Spooky. The next question is number 3 on whether or not catharsis is taking place in this last scene of the movie. In the ending scene, the totem is seen spinning but also wobbling, as if it were to fall. I’d have to applaud the producer and director because the ending is a good way to branch off into another movie. I think Cobb is experiencing catharsis. His totem could be on the brink of falling over because he’s going to escape this dream land that he’s been living in. He found out that he will have the chance to see his kids again and I think he will take it and step out of the dream reality. The last question is very striking. Was this whole movie a dream? One way to tell is if the totem is still spinning. I don’t think Christopher Dolan put a mini totem on the screen to show us if he’s dreaming or not. Maybe this whole movie was a dream but this dream is just playing on a loop. The beginning of the movie is showing Cobb passed out in the water and then we work our way through the sequence of events. I also heard that you know that Cobb is dreaming when you see he’s still wearing a wedding ring. I think that’s something to look out for the next time watching Inception.
ReplyDeleteI believe that in some way, Ariadne is practicing an inception of her own with Cobb throughout the movie. You notice that in many different scenes, Ariadne is convincing Cobb, or at least trying to convince Cobb, to confront his the feelings of guilt that he has for lying to Mal and taking part in her sucide, also leading her to believe that her entire life is a lie in limbo. For example, when Ariadne explored Cobb’s mind and took the elevator trip throughout the different levels of his mind, his most regretful memories, she was very determined to explore Cobb’s most regretful moments in his life, and even pushed him out of the elevator to go to the bottom floor, where she sees Mal in the hotel room. Clearly, Ariadne is trying some sort of inception on Cobb, in order to fight the projection of Mal that he sees and to clear her suicide off his conscious. I believe that Cobb does reach some sort of Catharsis towards the end of the movie, and not just once, but twice. I believe that the first time Cobb achieved his catharsis is when he finally let go of Mal in limbo, and told her that her life was a complete fantasy. The second time he reached catharsis was when he came back home, and saw his real children. These both are times when Cobb had a rebirth of sorts, and broke free from his inception. While most of it were dreams, and part of dreams, I don’t think that it was all a dream. We could see that through different scenes, Cobb’s totem proved this multiple times. However, I do think that the ending scene is debatable, when we see Cobb’s totem look like it is about to fall. It might have been possible that Cobb was still in a dream when he saw his kids, but I think that the director left this up to debate on purpose.
ReplyDelete1- I agree that inception and extraction are immoral. They’re like gaslighting taken to an extreme. If intentionally manipulating someone’s emotions from the outside can be considered immoral, then manipulating their feelings from the inside is definitely very bad. That level of invasiveness itself is pretty disrespectful, but done without a person’s knowledge it’s even worse. I would still say a person is responsible for any actions they take because of this manipulation though. Everything we do is a result of other people, situations, or biological aspects of ourselves that impact the way we think and feel. In the Spinoza chapter of Sophie’s World, Sophie and Alberto talk about this very concept; none of our actions or thoughts are truly original, and everything is the result of something else. So you could argue that nobody is ever truly responsible for anything they do. But that seems like an extrapolation in normal circumstances, whereas here we can see that a person is being intentionally manipulated by another person. So, if Fischer chooses to abandon his father’s company to pursue something else, he may not be responsible for that decision. But if inception was used to convince him to kill someone (or do something else to an extreme degree like that), I would argue he would be responsible, since that’s something he shouldn't be so easily manipulated into doing due to its obvious and extreme immorality.
ReplyDelete2- No, Ariadne is not “incepting” Cobb’s mind. As I discussed in the previous question, there is a major difference between manipulating someone from outside their mind (which I’m not even sure she technically did, I can’t remember the exact situation) and doing so from inside it. There may be some parallels, but she isn’t breaching the privacy of his mind to convince him of something without his consent.
3- I’m not completely sure if the ending was real or not. Maybe we don’t see Cobb leave limbo because he’s still there. But then he would have to leave eventually anyway, which would suggest that this isn’t truly the conclusion to his story. It’s an intriguing concept, but also an unsatisfying end to this movie. I’m not fully convinced that the top seeming to slow down meant something so literal, either. Maybe it’s meant to signify that he’s losing his grip on reality after being in limbo for so long. Given how uncertain the true fate of the top is to us viewers, I think either is a possibility.
Bailey
Although it was extremely confusing, I did enjoy Inception. I always enjoy a “heist plot”, especially when fantasy elements are involved. I also definitely see why we’ve watched this movie in class; the main plot points explored are quite existential and touch on a variety of topics. When presented with four of these topics, I’ve chosen to delve into topics two, three, and four.
ReplyDeleteFirst, there are Ariadne’s conversations with Cobb. Aside from the obvious reference to the myths by creating mazes, Ariadne further parallels the Greek character by paving the way for Cobb to move on from Mal’s death and helping him out of the maze of his psyche. When asked whether or not this counts as inception, I would argue that it is. While Ariadne gives Cobb the support he needed to open up and confront his demons, he had to go through that development on his own. Ariadne is certainly a catalyst for Cobb, but there is no possible way to confront your guilt in any other way than on your own. Looking at it from this lens, it’s quite clear that Ariadne’s support was itself a form of inception.
Continuing, we have the subject of catharsis. Cobb absolutely experiences a moment of catharsis when he sees the faces of his kids. Throughout the entire rest of the movie, we the audience never see the faces of the kids until this moment, which I interpret as a manifestation of Cobb’s guilt over both leaving the kids and Mal’s death. Seeing the faces of his kids, no matter if he’s imagining the older faces, is a sign that he’s been able to move past his trauma and continue with his life.
Finally, there’s the most meta topic: the notion that we all were collectively dreaming the events of the movie as a story. I honestly wouldn’t put it past Christopher Nolan to make a movie that transcends the fictional narrative he’s telling and puts doubts in the minds of an introspective audience, but I don’t entirely think that this was meant to be that way. As a person who has been a part of many creative processes, I genuinely don’t think that anyone would be willing to put that much thought and effort into their worldbuilding.
Overall, I think Inception, while extremely confusing, was quite enjoyable and I plan on looking into more of Nolan's work outside of the superhero genre.
For the first question about whether or not a person can be held responsible for the ideas that are forcefully implanted by their brain, I believe they cannot be. Considering this is someone completely manipulating your mind, I believe that you are not responsible for what occurs. This is because it is different from someone “nudging you” in a regular circumstance where you have the ability to rationalize that idea. However, this is completely brain manipulation and I don’t believe that the person who has been manipulated is at fault because it is literally a hijacking of their brain.
ReplyDeleteSecondly, Ariadne is for sure a therapist for Cobb. However, I don’t believe that this is necessarily the same as inception because Cobb is aware of this “manipulation.” You see, if this was a regular implant Cobb probably wouldn’t be so stubbornly against ridding himself of the guilt of Mal’s suicide. I think this is more of what a normal nudging is that we often have in real life and similar to what therapy would be like. But overall, I don’t think this is equivalent to the inception going on in terms of everything else we see in the movie. It seems to be more so working through with Cobb instead of forcing a thought onto him.
Lastly, for the 4th question, I think that is a bit too far-fetched. I believe that it is just a film about an imaginary topic, not that this is some meta-verse where we are watching Nolan’s dream. While it is a dream in some regards, like most movies are, I don’t think that was some sort of secret that this is actually about Nolan. I just think this is from a third-person perspective of all the characters, rather than Nolan’s singular perspective. I don’t know, however, because this is a pretty trippy thought.
3.Even if we do not see the top fall over, I still think that Cobb’s catharsis when he finds that he’s allowed to see his children happens. Catharsis is more about the person’s emotion and less about what is actually happening. Just like how Fisher reached a state of catharsis in an unreal scenario happening in his head, Cobb’s catharsis is still real even if the event happens all in his head. Even if he is still dreaming, he chooses to believe he is with his children and it has the same emotional effect on him than if it was happening in real life.
ReplyDelete1.I agree with what Kant would likely say about inception and extraction, since it can take away their personal identity and personal privacy.I also believe that if someone implants an idea in your head, you are still responsible for the actions that come from it. I think that if someone has implanted an idea in your head, you are not responsible for having the idea, since you have no control over it coming into existence in your mind, but you are responsible for the actions you choose to take from these ideas, since you have the ability and the freedom to choose.
2. I don't think that Ariadne is practicing her own version of inception with Cobb. Inception in the movie is placing a simple idea that seems original in a person’s subconsciousness with them thinking it is their own made idea. When Ariadne tells Cobb he need to confront Mal’s projection and rid himself of the guilt of her suicide, she is not making it seem like it was Cobb that came up with that idea, she is just giving a pre-existing idea that he later adopts, but since he knows where it comes from and he does not think that he is the one that created the original idea to confront Mal, it is not truly inception.
-Elliot Viaud-Murat
1) All the responsibility of the actions that come from an idea being planted in one's mind should be put on the person that plants the idea. The idea being planted causes an action that would most likely not occur without that idea to happen, which makes the person who planted it to be at fault. Although Cobb did not know the consequences of placing the idea in Mal’s head, he is still at fault because Mal would not have killed herself without the idea being planted. The blame cannot be put on the person who did the action because it is not their fault that an idea was planted in their head. This is similar to pleading insanity in a court because they could not control doing the action, like Mal.
ReplyDelete4) I believe that Inception was a dream, not a movie. I think that it is overthinking to consider it a movie. I understand the metaphor, but I do not think it was intentionally set up in that way with all the characters having roles such as director or technical. The dream just happened to be put in a way that could be interpreted as a movie with deep examination of the whole dream.
2)I do not think that Ariadne is trying inception on Cobb. I think she was just trying to give him advice so that they would be safe from Mal in the dreams because of the danger she brings. She does not necessarily plant this idea in Cobb’s mind. She tells Cobb he has to confront Mal, but this does not mean she planted it. If she planted it then Cobb would have had no choice on what to do. His actions would be determined by Ariadne. In this case, Cobb still had a choice on what to do. He decided to take Ariadne's advice, but not because the idea was planted.
Charles Cusimano
Immanuel Kant ideas of inception wouldnt be too far-fetched in his questioning of morality. but the idea that I thought can be original is false. they may have said it in the movies but they haven’t had an original thought since some of the natural philosophers. Old ideas will spread and crafted according to the situation. Love thy neighbor is a concept that’s been around for hundreds of years but like inception can be flipped and used in a bad way. Mals interpretation of Cobbs idea of limbo is a good example to compare when looking for similarities in The way an idea can easily be manipulated and twisted in some persons mind.
ReplyDeleteAriadne acting like Cobbs therapist is her self-serving inception attempt on changing his subconscious perception of his dead wife. She is actively placing ideas in his mind about confronting her whether that be through talking in person or once she goes in his mind and is caught dealing with Cob’s projections. While this mostly stems from a concern of safety like she’s like a contractor in a broken building hired to fix it, she genuinely cares and is sad because she feels like he’s going to waste his life chasing his dead wife and chasing the perfect version of her.
I wouldn’t consider him to have reached it’s catharsis just because we don’t know if the top ever finished spinning. I am 99% sure that it does and he’s back in reality want to be 100% certain I had to go back and watch and see if he fulfills all the promises he’s made. if his kids bring catharsis isn’t enough I feel like when he left Mal in limbo that was a big turning point. He’s now become aware
morgan
1. I agree with the statement that inception and extraction are immoral, despite the intentions, because your autonomy is being violated. If someone implanted an idea in your head, I’m not sure if you should be held responsible for the actions that come from it. If no one knows that the idea was implanted in you then you would likely be held responsible and there is nothing that you can do about it. This can be related to someone that commits a murder because they have a voice in their head that told them to do it. Even if a mental illness such as schizophrenia influences someone to commit murder, they will still be help accountable and removed from society for the safety of others.
ReplyDelete2. No, I do not think Ariadne is practicing her own version of inception. I think she is just trying to give him useful information to help him rid his guilt and anxiety. That would be like saying therapists are practicing inception by implanting ideas in their patients heads. I think Ariadne and therapists alike are only offering suggestions to be helpful and not trying to implant ideas in someone's head to influence them.
3. I think Cobb does reach catharsis when he is able to see his kids again. Even if it was a dream I still think Cobb reached catharsis because he believed it was real whether it was or not so what is the difference?
1. I believe that to some degree you aren’t responsible. After all, how is it my fault if someone breaks into my mind? It’s not like I consented. Unless you knowingly did in which case, I’d say you are responsible although maybe not fully) or even if you did unknowingly (referring to you knew but not their intentions) then I’d say you get less blame than if you did know their intentions, but still you were pretty stupid because, you didn’t even know what they were doing and still said yes. However, I think you are also responsible to try and prevent things like that, because it was mentioned that there are people that can train you to have mental defenses.
ReplyDelete3. I believe that he does reach his own stage of catharsis because he is finally back with his kids, the thing he has been trying to do for so long. For him like with Fischer this is a reconciliation with a positive emotion. Specifically, the hope that one day he will see his children again. To be honest I do think that that scene is only a portion of it. I think that also when he finally let go of Mal, that there was some catharsis there as well. However, on the last bit about the top I do agree that it was pretty wobbly and would have fallen over if the scene didn’t cut where it did.
4. This is a point that I agree with. With dreams being compared to movie making. I know one thing that I think when I think of this is the movie Inside Out. For context this is a movie about the different emotions that essentially control you happiness, sadness, anger, fear, and disgust inside the head of a twelve or thirteen year old girl. At one point it shows dreams being made. In this it has a studio where they film and livestream these dreams to the girl while she sleeps. Which is a concept that I find interesting.
-Emma