I liked how solid and gritty the dreams were. Nolan resisted the impulse to go as crazy as the Matrix or The Cell, but instead gave the dreams lots of texture. The texture gave the effects much more weight. It's interesting when Paris folds in on itself; it's even better that it *looks like* Paris is folding in on itself.

Yeah, but pretty well every dream--except for the opening one, had very literal setting, literal turns of events.

The only fantastical elements of the dreams seemed to come at the hands of the architects or extractors. Everyone else was dreaming business or fancy parties and there was not one midget wrestler, nor potato that transcended time and space, nor dreams where one person was in B&W and the rest of the dream was in colour. The magic and mystery of dreams is that fucked up things can happen and your just accept that as reality. I just think there was an opportunity for some absurdity, and I was a little disappointed there wasn't any.

Also, Leo has to cut out the tanning or tanner, whatever that was. He looked positively orange.

He sure did look orange. I was like, damn.

Do you think that the fantastical stuff was put aside in the quest for making sure that it would be easiest to find the secrets the un/subconscious held? The metaphor of a safe makes things easy to find if you have traditional settings.

I actually don't recall my dreams, but Beau has certain kinds of fantastical dreams and he would probably know if something were weird if the things were behaving a bit differently than is typical for him. You have to know someone pretty well to replicate a believable absurd for them.

Do you think that the fantastical stuff was put aside in the quest for making sure that it would be easiest to find the secrets the un/subconscious held?

I think they stuck to a literal storyline in the dreams because there were so many lines of narrative going. In order to help the audience follow the storylines, the dream worlds were kept pretty simple.

Beau has certain kinds of fantastical dreams and he would probably know if something were weird if the things

I swear I have dreamscapes that don't exist in reality that are instatly recognizable in my dreams. Parts of my own ton that don't exist...a dream London that is unlike any bit of London I was in.

I used to write down my dreams every morning, but I never have time anymore, so I only remember a few. I've never had a superpower, like flying or breathing underwater...it's a big disappointment for me.

Oh, yeah, the literalness of the dreams themselves didn't bother me. Partly because I'm more and more convinced that it's a meta-commentary on movies anyway.

By literal I meant... thematically? I'm not sure how to articulate it. I guess I expected that I'd have more to ponder than the mechanics of the movie. I think Nolan usually ties some big ideas to a high concept, and this time I'm not sure that happened. But I'm open to the possibility that I may find something more there on a repeat viewing.

there was not one midget wrestler

To quote "Living in Oblivion":

Have you ever had a dream with a dwarf in it? Do you know anyone who's had a dream with a dwarf in it? No! I don't even have dreams with dwarves in them. The only place I've seen dwarves in dreams is in stupid movies like this! "Oh make it weird, put a dwarf in it!". Everyone will go "Woah, this must be a fuckin' dream, there's a fuckin' dwarf in it!". Well I'm sick of it! You can take this dream sequence and stick it up your ass!

I have totally had a dream with a dwarf in it. He was green and naked. This happened fifteen or more years ago, and I'm still a little scarred.

I was once chased through the streets of London by a mini-Hulk Hogan and another midget wrestler dressed as a leprachaun. ETA: In a dream, I mean. All my examples were from my own dreams.

Partly because I'm more and more convinced that it's a meta-commentary on movies anyway.

I totally agree with that. I loved where cuts in the movie that I took for granted as edits were used to demostrate dream logic. I stopped seeing them as I was more caught up in the story, but I am sure they were there.

I thought the movie really worked...but I just wanted a skooch of the absurd.

Oh, yeah, the literalness of the dreams themselves didn't bother me. Partly because I'm more and more convinced that it's a meta-commentary on movies anyway.

I loved the constant shots of the van falling. I thought the use of time dilation in dreams was a great way to have action sequences that last waaaaaay longer than should be possible (the bomb was supposed to go off, like, three minutes ago!) for a reason. But I'd love to hear more about your idea.

One thing that bothered me was that they didn't all wake up when the van flipped over. I mean, come on, that didn't qualify as a kick??

I've seen some people complain that there's a lot of exposition in the first half, but, honestly, I didn't mind or notice because it was handled so well and the characters were so compelling and entertaining (that cast!). And the second half is a fucking thrill ride that occasionally manages to be three times as intense as any other action film and features an amazing, beautiful fight scene in the midst of all the chaos. As if all this weren't enough, the action, intensity, and suspense are rooted in character emotions. Plus, the score and sound design are great. Oh, Christopher Nolan. Keep being awesome.

One thing that bothered me was

Yeah, me too.