3) When Ariadne throws Fischer and herself off the building in limbo, they end up in the third dream level, but presumably when Saito shoots Cobb and himself (assuming that's what happened to get them out of limbo) do they go directly to the plane? Why? Because the other dream levels have closed for business? Because they want to? If they ended up on the third dream level, they'd be totally screwed, because they wouldn't be able to kill themselves to get out, and they missed the kick, so they'd have to wait out the sedative there.

1) If they'd scouted that location in the real world before recreating it in the dreamspace, maybe they knew Saito always keeps a gun under his pillow?

2) I was trying to figure that one out too, and all I can think is that yeah, they just have to wait until the sedation wears off. Or until the plane hits some turbulence, since supposedly the sedative left inner ear function intact, so a real-world kick should have taken them all out immediately, right?

3) only way I can make sense of that is that since the dreamers of those levels had woken up already, those dream levels were "closed" and so Cobb & Saito skipped all the way to the top.

1) That seems like valuing verisimilitude over safety though, doesn't it? I'd leave that detail out and get the carpet right.

2) If turbulence could take them out, then doing the whole thing on a plane seems overly precarious. I think them waiting it out for a week is my new canon, which means they must have had one CRAZY, projection-dodging, Fischer-dodging, rainy-ass week!

3) Yeah, that must be it. Or, alternatively, whenever Saito shoots himself to get out of limbo, he ends up wherever he wants. If he's powerful enough to erase Cobb's criminal record in minutes from a in-flight phone call, he can do that. (I also wonder if he fixed Cobb's problem before the job ever started, because WTF, is that even possible to take care of that quickly? But he didn't tell him because he wanted to make sure he got the job done.)

I saw Burlesque this afternoon and it was great fun. Loved the setting and enjoyed the singing. Cher and Stanley Tucci were great, Kristen Bell played interestingly against type, and Eric Dane may actually have learned to act somewhere. Christina Aguilera... should probably stick to singing, though at least Taylor Swift ensured that she's not the least convincing singer-turned-actress of the year.

I was skeptical, but I must admit eyeliner, a bowler, and cabaret lighting really do make Cam Gigandet a lot more attractive.

Yeah but Taylor Swift isn't in Christina Aguilera's class as a singer either.

Zap2it says that Orlando Bloom is close to signing to reprise his role as Legolas in The Hobbit.

An idea that never caught on: Multiple Screens for Super-Movies (Apr, 1934)

THE present method of representing simultaneous scenes on a motion-picture screen, in succession, may be supplanted by one in which details will appear on one screen, and the main body of the action on another, at the same time, according to a recent patent which contemplates the making and projecting of several films at once. This will require more than one projector; and they must be operated in exact synchronism, for both film and sound. The patent contemplates either the use of two machines to fill a screen twice the ordinary size, for a spectacle, or one for a full-size scene and one for a smaller screen, as illustrated. Another feature of advantage is the more exact location of the apparent sources of different voices and other sounds. For auxiliary pictures, on a different plane from that of the main screen, a mirror is used to alter the angle.

Ahead of its time? Or a very annoying way to watch a movie?

Kristen Bell is in Burlesque? Crud, now I have to see it. Will it lose much going from big to small screen?

Ahead of its time? Or a very annoying way to watch a movie?

Didn't that 1920's French Napoleon movie do something like that?

Why, yes, it did! [link]