Can some movie expert tell me...

[Matt Jacobs]

You again didn't get what I was saying. It does not matter whether he's in a dream because that's not what's important about the ending. And what's wrong with making your own interpration of what happened? It's a common technique to leave something ambiguous that lets viewers think about what they saw after they leave the theater. Since whether he's in a dream isn't what's important to his character arc, it's fun to speculate about without making the ending cheap.

[Murcuseo]

I did get what you were saying, I just didn't agree with all of it. It certainly mattered to me whether he was in a dream, or not. There's an episode of House, the latest season where he is treating a writer that finishes her series of books on a cliffhanger and doesn't explain anything about the main characters arc at the end. It basically has no real ending. It's the same thing at the end of Inception. I know you use the term 'ambiguous', but to me it just seems lazy and indecisive. They just didn't want to take a punt and choose one ending over another. Which I find annoying.

We obviously just have different outlooks on this, so the debate can't go anywhere.

With any film that has no real ending I get frustrated, not unless they plan on making a second film of course, but that's not likely with Inception. Of course, I could be wrong.

[Matt Jacobs]

But Inception does explain the main character's arc. He gets over his trauma relating to his wife's death and goes back to his children.

Nolan deliberately made it so the ending is uncertain about whether he's still dreaming. That's not the same as not picking a "real" ending.

[Murcuseo]

To me it is, but as I said, It's a difference of opinion.

Also, your first assumption is only true if he actually isn't dreaming. If he is still dreaming then the fact he sees his children's faces may be just another moment where his wife is manipulating the dream.

To be honest, I'm not entirely sure my own assumptions are correct either, I'll have to watch it again. lol

[Matt Jacobs]

It's not actually his wife going after him in the dreams, its his subconscious manifesting itself as her. Why would it manipulate him to think he had solved his problems if he hadn't? It's his subconscious.

[Murcuseo]

I know it's not actually his wife. lol

Also, as you've probably found out yourself, your subconscious can work in strange ways and can often portray a truer sense of self than most people would like to admit. That could be even more true in the dream world.

[luckkyd]

@Murcuseo I agree with your take on the ending of the movie. It was lame way for the movie to end. I don't know that I could sit through the movie a second time.

For me it was just an "OK" movie.

[FateofVengeance]

I found the ending quite interesting. It was left open and closed at the same time. If you think about it is the only time we see Michael Caine in that particular scene. He never appeared in any of the other dream/memories Leo kept locked away. As for the totem, it wavered. Any other time in the dream world, once it started spinning, it never wavered or stopped. Just a smooth spin. He's at home in the real world. Just my take. Doesn't matter really though because he's with his kids right?

As for Leo's best movie? Blood Diamond.

[Garbot]

To be honest, I had to turn the beach off after he took that drink or whatever in that room with those locals within the first few minutes. I hate to be that "the movie sucks, the book rules" elitist idiot, but in this case I have no choice.

[thevinnyluongo]

Cause Nolan took the idea from Donald duck

http://www.buzzfeed.com/reddit/inceptio ... -strip-wat