Just with Leonardo DeCaprio instead of Keanu Reeves. I think the best way to describe the movie is just very meh. I mean, I guess it was okay... and that's being generous. If you liked the Matrix, you'll like this. I know I'm overly harsh on movies most the time, so maybe this is really an amazing movie. But I found so many things in common with the Matrix that I have a hard time seeing why everyone says it's so original/interesting/ispirational. I was able to keep up with everything that happened in the movie... and I got what the director was going for... but whatever.

Inception = Dreamscape

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dreamscape_%28film%29

tbh, it looked a bit matrixy... but i'm not much of a leonardo fan. unless he's a turtle *shrug* wasn't planning to see it anyway, at least not in the cinema.

I guess I'm the only one that really enjoyed this.

I enjoyed it very much.

I don't think the Matrix traits were accidental, really. There are also about 4 other movies it was probably deliberately referencing, and not being.
Inceptetion "=" The Matrix in the same way Canadians are French.

I don't know... people plugging into sh*t to leave reality to jump into a world, that if you know isn't real, is malleable seems really Matrixy to me. They just ended up going inside the Matrix, inside the Matrix, inside the Matrix... and somehow it's much better. And any plot hole they just covered up with "it's just their subconscious." Which is the only way they'd be able to set up an arctic tundra military base fight.

...that is unless I'm missing something here.

probably you're just missing the point at which they stopped needing films to make sense. it's entertainment, plots are for books.

Lantis doesn't enjoy movies like the rest of us.

I saw it tonight and I enjoyed it a great deal. But when I go to see movies, I go to be entertained and, generally, plot holes be damned. I didn't really notice any, but I'm sure I would if I studied it.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and instead of analyzing the entire movie the way I took it, which is VASTLY different from the way Lantis must have, I'm just going to say two things.

1: Cobb's totem is useless. It tells us NOTHING about reality, because it was never his totem. Mal suggests the "real world" is in fact a dream world, and there's no actual evidence against that being truth. It's very likely that top is a dream construct in and of itself, and is thus meaningless.

2. A major grounding scene in telling us which world was the real world is potentially actually evidence that the "real world" is a dream world. When Cobb is being chased by some men, he gets caught in between two walls that are literally closing in on him. This is a common dream scenario, and the reality of this situation is already brought into question again by Mal.

I propose that every single minute of the movie is within a dream world, and that it is all a reflection of our own reality that we all live in. I'd go so far as to say the vagueness about many aspects of the "real world" in this movie are intended - Cobb's mind was filling in the blanks, and thus things don't have to make realistic sense at all.

I saw it yesterday (Well, today actually, since it was midnight) and I did enjoy it. I just don't feel like it was that much of a big deal. By what people told, me, I was expecting to be confused about the layers and stuff, but I think it was pretty easy to follow. I was kind of expecting to have to figure out by myself
It was still good. I just don't see myself dying to see it again at movies.