Comments on: Inception of Architecture

By: Miracle Latoya

Miracle Latoya — Fri, 10 Feb 2012 20:13:08 +0000

[...] ORIGINAL OF THE ARTICLE WITH ILLUSTRATIONS & VIDEO IS PUBLISHED ON http://archialternative.com/2010/07/26/inception-of-architecture/ [...]

By: Albert

Albert — Thu, 04 Nov 2010 13:28:05 +0000

No doubt you’re noble & intelligent person, livvyjams… I highly appreciate your comment. Yes, I would recommend to all my readers to click the link and to read your review.
I might have not such a good taste after all

By: livvyjams

livvyjams — Thu, 04 Nov 2010 09:12:35 +0000

I liked your review even if you didn’t like mine http://blogs.suntimes.com/foreignc/2010/10/inceptions-made-of-sand.html#comments

By: inception | arkitekt amateur

inception | arkitekt amateur — Wed, 08 Sep 2010 19:32:19 +0000

[...] inception Posted on 8 september, 2010 by arkitekt amateur Det är väl på en sån här blog nästan obligatoriskt att skriva något om höstens/sensommarens stora blockbuster Inception och de drömlika arkitektursekvenserna. Lustigt nog tycker jag ändå inte att det finns så mycket att säga om de där visserligen fräcka scenerna (jag har sett filmen). Jag såg dock att en annan bloggare skrivit en ganska lagom och träffande blänkare om alltihop, så jag länkar helt fräckt vidare den intresserade dit. [...]

By: bLogHouse

bLogHouse — Fri, 06 Aug 2010 17:25:21 +0000

Good one Albert! Interestingly I had similar thoughts. I also think the bending of Paris and the endless triangular stair are ideas borrowed from Escher, although in the film Arthur mentions Roger Penrose.

By: Albert

Albert — Thu, 05 Aug 2010 00:38:40 +0000

Yep, I was thinking to re-watch eXistenZ as well… No one thinks of Cronenberg…leave alone Borges… it’s kinda saying something about intellectual state of our society, isn’t it?

By: John Powers

John Powers — Wed, 04 Aug 2010 23:46:55 +0000

No one talks about eXistenZ either, which I also spent some time chewing over. (I loved both films.) I had some fun comparing them, but really need to see the Cronenberg again, its been a while.

By: Albert

Albert — Wed, 04 Aug 2010 18:35:40 +0000

I’ve read like few dozens reviews – no one mentioned Borges. Isn’t it weird? It’s so obvious.

By: John Powers

John Powers — Wed, 04 Aug 2010 18:31:37 +0000

Great post Albert, I’ve been thinking along simular lines. I came away thinking the architecture was by far the most interesting part of the film. I like your take – really wish I had thought of Borges and the mirrors – awesome!

By: archata » Inception – architektūrinis sapnas

archata » Inception – architektūrinis sapnas — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 13:49:37 +0000

[...] apžvalgų, žinoma ir patį filmą pažiūrėjau. Apžvalgose žavimasi miesto erdvių formavimu, nauju požiūriu į futuristinę architektūrą, tikrovišku santykiu su žmogumi. Tenka pripažinti, kad visa tai yra tiesa, šie aspektai tikrai [...]

By: Spiros

Spiros — Thu, 29 Jul 2010 22:40:47 +0000

I didn’t manage to watch the movie properly, it was a hand cam shooting with extremely bad picture and sound definitely unable to watch. Here it comes at the theaters on 24/08 so I guess I’ll shape an opinion after vacation. But I must admit that I enjoyed the style of your approach. You transmitted to me something from the atmosphere of the movie and I descried a comic attitude. Regarding that and the comparison you made with other “sci-fi” films, I’ll refer to the great comic maker Enki Bilal, and the movies that were made by 3 of his albums: Bunker Palace Hotel (1989), Tykho Moon (1996) and Immortal (2005). Bilal’s future is free of bright signs, large screens and colorful lights as far as I remember. It isn’t also shiny at all.
Thanks

PS. I agree 100% with your references to Architectural aid SW. I believe that even the most sophisticated SW is nothing more than a trap for our imagination and the more options it has, the more obstacles places in our minds, because it unconsciously guides us. We can only use it right when we use it as a simple tool and not as an invasion machine.

By: Albert

Albert — Thu, 29 Jul 2010 15:36:11 +0000

Fantastic comment! I understand you, Damian…. (Hello Franz Kafka, do you hear us?)

By: Damian

Damian — Thu, 29 Jul 2010 06:31:35 +0000

I appreciate what you tried to do with the post.
But I understood your article as much as I understood Inception.
Zilch.

By: Albert

Albert — Thu, 29 Jul 2010 03:00:08 +0000

Marc, I really appreciate your friendly remarks. I am glad you like the ideas… As for the language nuances, I’ll do my best. Promise. Thank you.

By: Marc

Marc — Thu, 29 Jul 2010 01:47:07 +0000

I love where you’re going with this, but I can’t get through your post because of the writing. I’m going to wildly venture the notion that you are from Eastern Europe. I should point out I’m not trying to be rude or offending, but… Your vocabulary is so elaborate, and what you write is so sharp and bright, maybe take a look at the grammar next time?

By: Lee

Lee — Wed, 28 Jul 2010 23:46:17 +0000

Not exactly the same clothes – the boy is wearing trainers not sandals and the girl has a white top over her dress.
Also in the credits there are 2 actors for the guy and 2 for the girl. Listed like:
Actor X – James (aged 20 months)
Actor Y – James (Aged 3 years)
Actress X – Phillipa (aged 3 years)
Actress Y – Phillipa (aged 5 years)

By: Albert

Albert — Wed, 28 Jul 2010 22:42:42 +0000

That’s a hell of an observation, kate! It can’t be accidental… no way!

By: kate

kate — Wed, 28 Jul 2010 22:39:09 +0000

Great inspection of the architecture in Inception! Though I think ExistenZ is a creative mess and Inception is way superior…but…gotta love paranoid movies. I’d like to point out that at the end of Inception Cobb’s kids are wearing the same exact clothes as he invisioned them to be since he last saw them and come on, it isn’t possible for the kids to be in the exact set of motion he last saw them.

By: Albert

Albert — Wed, 28 Jul 2010 19:29:42 +0000

On a second thought, I agree. Not a big deal to introduce better example than “Star Wars” without being movies expert. “My bad”.

By: Michael

Michael — Wed, 28 Jul 2010 18:36:07 +0000

Can't comment on Inception since I haven't seen it yet, but if we are talking about old-school approach to cinematographic design, I think the best movie in recent years is Moon. Not only the plot and the acting are really good, but the design is flawless; everything is done with miniature models, not computer graphics

By: Bill

Bill — Wed, 28 Jul 2010 18:31:37 +0000

By: Albert

Albert — Wed, 28 Jul 2010 17:41:37 +0000

It’s good I bought an insurance at the beginning: “Sure I’m not a movie columnist but an amateur who loves cinema…”

By: Bill

Bill — Wed, 28 Jul 2010 17:14:45 +0000

Awesome article on an amazing movie!

But…

…Star Wars isn’t an example of futuristic sci-fi….remember: “a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away….”

By: Dan

Dan — Wed, 28 Jul 2010 14:49:16 +0000

What bothered me about Inception wasn’t the physical architecture but the narrative architecture. It is rare in a dream for the laws of physics to be twisted, but very common for narratives to be episodic, conflated, and twisted. I suspect that since a film with dream-like narratives wouldn’t be watchable, the Nolans substituted a malleable physical architecture for a malleable narrative architecture.

By: Albert

Albert — Wed, 28 Jul 2010 13:17:26 +0000

I couldn’t imagine my 12 words Postscript will be so debatable!
With all due respect (taken in account all the differences, even the budget scale) I still believe that juxtapose “Incention” & “ExistenZ” is apples to apples comparison.
At that time (90-s) Cronenberg was “cool indie” dude. Not so sure about today…

By: ash

ash — Wed, 28 Jul 2010 13:06:40 +0000

when i saw the sequence it took me back to a book i had read from Arthru C Clarke – “Rendezvous with Rama” – the cover art on my copy featured an artists impression of the view inside RAMA – the eponymous alien space ship which is explored by a group of humans. The space ship as described in the book was a fifty km long cylinder with a 20km diameter which replicates gravity by rotating in air and has the entire world living on the insides. What stunned me as kid (20 years ago) was the sheer scale of this world with the idea that sky above me was actually full of people, houses, etc. What an exotic world this would have been to explore – at once crazy yet awe-inspiring. When i saw inception, the first thing the Paris sequence brought alive was that same feeling albeit on a smaller scale – what fun!!!!

By: Patrick

Patrick — Wed, 28 Jul 2010 09:12:53 +0000

I love your analysis about architecture in ” Inception”. Extremely well done, and a very good observation.
Didnt notice the absence of cell phones or any ” futuristic” details neither. Thanks for that
I respect your preference about the Cronenberg’s movie. Love the movie too !!
But doesnt agree at all with the comparaison.
First, I would like to remind you an Albert, that the Cronenberg’s movie is about ” entering a game”.
“Inception” is about “entering the consciousness”.
If you want to compare ExistenZ with other movies…do it with the same subject.
Using “Tron” or Mamoru Oshii’s ” Avalon” for instance.

And to Albert…again , I quote your words:
Inception” is Hollywood-polished blockbuster. High budget. Super stars. Nolan is amazingly smart guy, but once you’re on the Olympus you can’t be sincere & raw.

So you think that Cronenberg is a “cool indie” filmmaker ?
I invite you to discouver ” Fast Company”

By: Top Posts — WordPress.com

Top Posts — WordPress.com — Wed, 28 Jul 2010 00:14:41 +0000

[...] Inception of Architecture Spectatvm venivnt, venivnt spectentvr vt ipsae. They come to see, they come that they themselves be seen [...] [...]

By: Ilana

Ilana — Tue, 27 Jul 2010 23:39:08 +0000

Wow – this post has left me speechless. What a cool idea to analyze the history and philosophy of architecture through a movie! It makes me believe that you can connect architecture to almost any topic LOL !Very brilliant analysis of the psychology behind the movie’s “wow” factor. This is deep, man! I really did enjoy it thanks ps. the trailers are a cool idea too – your posts are fun

By: Albert

Albert — Tue, 27 Jul 2010 23:23:57 +0000

ExistenZ was raw. David Cronenberg is a freak. He is a maniac. His soul is abyss full of evil. I liked it. (Did you see Crash – http://imdb.to/12oACG).
“Inception” is Hollywood-polished blockbuster. High budget. Super stars. Nolan is amazingly smart guy, but once you’re on the Olympus you can’t be sincere & raw. Plus “Inception” was so-o-o predictable. Despite all it’s twists & turns I knew that Cobb will find his kids all right. I knew (and you knew it as well) that at the end they would provide us with some hint showing that the dream is maybe not over.
Don’t you think it’s a bit banal?
ExistenZ had a bloody crazy end. Paranoid movie indeed.