Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 8:48 AM ET, 08/10/2010

'Inception': A question that requires an answer

By Jen Chaney

Nearly one month after it arrived in theaters, someone has finally asked the "Inception" question that most begs for an answer, even if it does misspell Michael Caine's name.

If you still haven't seen Christopher Nolan's much-discussed, brain-twisting film, yes, there is a spoiler ahead...

(Image from, found via Buzzfeed)

Seriously, why didn't he??

By Jen Chaney  | August 10, 2010; 8:48 AM ET
Categories:  Movies, Pop Culture  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Levi Johnston to seek public office as part of reality show; Christensen, Bilson break up
Next: Did Emma Watson cut her hair for 'Dragon Tattoo' audition?


Hmmm...because it was all taking place in Cobbs dream and when he's talking to Fisher he's really just talking to a projection of his own mind? The whole point of the movie was that he was trying to practice inception on himself so he could join his wife in reality.

Posted by: me1212 | August 10, 2010 9:27 AM | Report abuse

Maybe he wants to see his kids the way he's dreamt of seeing them. Derrrp, good question though!

Posted by: steampunk | August 10, 2010 9:40 AM | Report abuse

And also... wouldn't it be dangerous for him to around his kids if there's still a price on his head? Then again it will always be dangerous for him... and I'm surprised none of the people going after Leo went after his kids in America.

Posted by: steampunk | August 10, 2010 9:58 AM | Report abuse

If people in movies and/or TV made logical choices or did the right thing immediately 99% of movies would be 10 minutes long and better suited as after-school specials.

Posted by: misc1997 | August 10, 2010 10:24 AM | Report abuse

Duh, the Boeing 787 Dreamliner is still behind schedule and won't be flight-certified until late this year.

Posted by: kabuki3 | August 10, 2010 11:24 AM | Report abuse

Because grandma wouldn't let them out of the country. She even took the phone from his kids and hung up on him. She's so mad she makes her husband, Michael Caine, work across the ocean.

Posted by: CommentSnide | August 10, 2010 11:46 AM | Report abuse

No, no people. Michael Caine was Leo's father. The grandma that had custody of the kids was the wife's mother. She thinks Leo killed her daughter. That's why the kids couldn't just come to live with him in France.

You're welcome.

Posted by: SweetieJ | August 10, 2010 1:08 PM | Report abuse

Oh, snap, @SweetieJ!

Posted by: CafeBeouf | August 10, 2010 1:52 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, Michael Caine was his english father. :/ He was his father in law. jeez. Wow, pay attention to the movie. As for flying the kids over, they were under the grandmother's guardianship or supervision. She, like many others, blamed Leo for the death of her daughter.

As for the whole, it's all a dream...I dont buy it. I actually do believe it's a little more straight forward then people are making it out to be. And while the ending was meant to be ambiguous...I fully believe the totem would have toppled. And yes, I do believe that he possesses ownership over said totem, even used to be Mal's. I dont think she had any power over it anymore. Some say the kid's faces are his totem...but I just think he didnt want to look at their faces in the dream world, because it would mean he'd be losing touch with his reality...he refused to look at their faces in that world. If he did, he would probably be sucked in deeper, and lose touch with the real world. As for the wedding ring totem theory...dont buy it either. It just shows that he can be with her in his dreams, but not in the real world.

Posted by: brickman08865 | August 10, 2010 9:58 PM | Report abuse

Agree with Sweetie. They made it ** very clear that the maternal grandmother is planning on raising the kids without Leo to the point of telling the kids he's never coming back. ** If she's not going to talk to him on the phone she's certainly not going to let the paternal grandfather take them out of the country.

The point of him coming back once the charges are dropped would mean that he would be able to challenge her for custody. Even then it may be tricky as she could argue that he'd abandoned the children. The occasional stuffed toy isn't the same as maintaining his parental support but it would reinforce that he never severed ties with the kids.

Posted by: k4man123 | August 11, 2010 9:35 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company