My friend at UCB theorized that Inception is basically a metaphor for the way films are constructed and portrayed to the viewer. I think there is validity in that argument, based on the parallelisms one can draw between films and the entire “logic” sequence: the whole soundtrack ‘kick’, emotional catharsis through protagonist, building sets, special effects for the unreal and imaginary, etc. (I don’t know if this is public: Click here to read all her thoughts)
Was it a mind-trip? No, not really; if we’re talking about mind-buggery, I would recommend something along the lines of Memento. Did I like anybody? No, except for a sliver of bias towards Tom Hardy’s Eames, another sliver of attraction towards JGL’s stick-up-his-arse!Arthur, and more than a sliver for Ken Watanabe’s Saito. What is the real world? According to the themes of Inception, you might as well forget about it because there isn’t—just layers and layers of different worlds where things can be shifted depending on whose perspective(s) are involved and so on, which I’m personally fine with since I think I have a tenuous grasp on this world’s reality at times. Did I think really hard about this film? No, not really. I treated the viewing as a fun romp through fantasy and illusion and lots of adventure. Anything that didn’t really tie up loose ends, I contributed it to the way Nolan approached this theory of dream-thievery.
What I’m saying here is that I have nothing constructive to say about it, nothing scathing to say about it, nothing to theorize about, and basically…LEONARDO DICAPRIO’S NOSTRIL HAIR.