Month: October 2011

I love inception

I’m watching Inception again.

I love the clothes, I love the acting, I love the fact that it only has two funny moments, I love the fact that it’s as thought provoking as it is entertaining, I love the music, the post and the headfuck.

But most of all I love the way it can plausibly be several stories at once:

There’s the ostensible story, which is entertaining enough. But then there are five others, of which this is my favourite:

All of Inception is a dream.

We are never once shown reality. Every frame of Inception is a dream. Whose dream? My money is on Cobb, though it is conceivable that Cobb is simply the subject and that he is in someone else’s dream (see Interpretation 3 and 4 below).

There are a number of key elements throughout the film – lines of dialog shared amongst the characters (Mal and Saito both tell Cobb to take a “leap of faith”, Cobb predicts what Saito will say in limbo), acceptance of improbable events during segments of “reality” (Saito saving Cobb in Mombasa) – that support the notion that everything is a dream, but for me it all comes down to a simple question: What is our totem? We learn very early on that the one unimpeachable way to know whether or not you’re in a dream world or the real world is to test your totem; an item whose behavior only a single individual can identify and predict. In the case of Cobb, it’s his wife’s spinning top. Arthur’s is a single loaded dice. Ariadne’s is a precisely weighted chess piece. But what is the audience’s totem?

What event in Inception is the audience aware of that no one else can know? There isn’t one. There’s no point in which reality is clearly and unimpeachably established. The film opens in a dream sequence (Saito’s limbo) before transitioning to another dream sequence (Saito’s dinner party), which then slides into another dream (Saito’s secret apartment). The characters supposedly awaken from that last dream sequence aboard a Japanese train, this presumably being our first glance at reality, but one must ask how the characters arrived from the apartment to the train. There’s no visual transition; no shot of “tunneling” from one reality to another. One second we’re one place, a second later we’re somewhere else, but can you remember how we got there? No, because we’re never shown it; we’re never shown the awakening process that bridges the two. And not being able to identify specifically how you got from point A to point B is clearly established within the film as a sign that you are in a dream.

That transition, if it existed, would be the audience’s totem; it would be the one thing we can cling to, whose behavior we can understand intimately and always predict. By not giving the audience a totem of their own, Nolan has flat out made it impossible to ever anchor any portion of the film as being real versus being a dream.

Now, that’s not to say that the movie is ruined if everything is a dream. It doesn’t negate the emotional breakthrough that Cobb goes through, which is ultimately what the film is about. In fact, everything being a dream is the ace up Inception’s sleeve: if it’s all a fantasy, then there can be no plot holes; the lack of deep characterizations for anyone other than Cobb can be chalked up to the fact that they are all his projections and thus do not require rich histories or distinguishable character arcs. It’s basically a catch-all safety net for any complaints registered against Inception’s narrative.



More money up the wall of post houses

This time it’s the turn of Sony, who, rather curiously, have made an ad about feeling which is totally devoid of such a thing. It’s all so blandly CGI-ed that you might as well be watching a minute of Transformers: Revenge of the Tepid.

And it’s a Director’s Cut FFS! God, I really loved the original so I’m totally stoked that they’ve put back all the footage they didn’t include in the first release. It really has expanded the whole thing into a far richer experience that I REALLY COULDN’T HAVE DONE WITHOUT WPDHUPCBEJKRVJK4JVIUSWQZ1Z11AS11111!11!11GKAWEBKJWEKJRVH KLBEVIPUHQEFRVP8GQERV



Weekend

Fun-ish kerning game.

Are blackboards in porn correct? (SFW; thanks, J).

Adele has eaten about 200lbs of couch cushion in her lifetime (thanks, CD):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SB_AI0ZGDmI&feature=player_embedded

Brad Pitt getting run over a lot (thanks, P):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wUq8bH8wiU&feature=youtu.be

The wonderful Richard Madeley song (thanks, J):

Excellent fan-made titles for Tintin.

Get your own Liam Fox business card.

Bill Gates jumps over a chair (thanks, P):

Fascinating look behind the scenes of photojournalism.

Why you should never speak to the police (if you’re American, but it may apply to wherever you are):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8z7NC5sgik&feature=player_embedded

The beauty of the fairytale apocalypse (thanks, P).



NZ Hilux ad

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JspHqoegTkc

It’s a bit like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7elPeGwX1nw

But not quite as good.



I just can’t seem to stop putting up ads right now

Here’s another:

I don’t think much of it; I’ve always been somewhat of the opinion that ‘Keep Walking’ is a bit of a weak wordplay to hang a whole campaign on (I’m wrong, obviously. It’s been running for years and won loads of awards). But that aside, there does seem to be an odour wafting past my nostrils… an unfamiliar scent of… what is that?… Could it be?… I think it is… Fuckloads of cash.

Between this, Muller and Canal+ it does feel like rather a lot of reddies are being spunked up the wall of Framestore/MPC/The Mill. How does that chime with these supposedly recessionary times? Who knows? Who cares? Not the boys in the Flame suites, that’s for sure (is it still Flame these days?).



Canal+ Bear

Here’s the new ad from the people that brought you this absolute classic:

I like it a lot. Well observed, properly made, funny…

But it reminds me of that ad for Reader’s Digest from about fifteen years ago that was made by the wonderful Lee Goulding (and was it with Chips Hardy, father of film star Tom?). It showed a bin enjoying all your winnings – going on holiday etc. – because that’s where you put your ticket for the RD prize draw. I’m sure Lee and Chips would concede that the production values are a little higher here, and I have a feeling that 2011 French creatives may not have remembered and stolen a UK ad from the nineties, but what the hey… I’m just dumping out my thoughts on the internet like so many pointless turds.



Information vs entertainment: away win.

I was recently involved in a debate about whether information or entertainment was the most important thing to advertising.

I was on the side of information, but as the debate went on I realised that these are the only two essentials in any ad, in fact any piece of communication.

In its purest form, information tells you something. It might be a reminder of something you already knew or it could be a real eye-opener that changes your thinking 180 degrees. Whichever it is, there is always going to be some form of it in an ad.

There’s obtuse, abstract information that you might find here:

(Budweiser is a good drink to have with your friends or while watching a game of football.)

Or explicit information along these lines:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LApWU34o0eY

(Dyson blah blah blah suction blah blah blah etc.)

But information is always there.

However, it can’t exist without entertainment, which in its purest form is diversion: if you don’t notice something, you can’t be informed by it, so it has to catch the eye/ear/brain in some way.

You might consider the Dyson ad to be dull, but if you were ever aware of it then it entertained you to some degree (possibly a very tiny degree, but a degree nonetheless).

This balance was brought to light in the comments section of the yoghurt wars post I put up last week. Dave Trott wrote:

Ben, I appreciate this is a very old skool pov, but forget brand for a minute. Which one tells you anything about why you should put your hand in your pocket (or purse) and actually exchange cash for that (word that’s fallen out of favour) product?

to which I replied:

Dave, To answer your question: YV; Muller is simply branded entertainment.

But then I think it’s difficult to judge either of these as conduits for persuasion or information, rather than just diversion. I hear Yeo Valley’s words and accept that, as they are organic, they farm in the right way. So far, so exactly what I thought before the ad. Muller tells me nothing, but then we all know it’s low quality yoghurt with a corner of chocolate balls or jam, so I would have been insulted if they tried to suggest there was anything more to it. They have a shit product and that means they have no choice but to try to distract us from that fact. Lipstick on a pig, innit?

The odd thing for me about Yeo Valley is that they add so much ‘entertainment’ to their communication that it almost gets drowned in the bullshit. They have something good to say, but seem to feel that it’s not enough, that they must put lipstick on something that’s already very attractive.

It then struck me that in these days of homogeneity of product, multiplicity of media channels/messages and reduced attention spans, entertainment will always win out. Hardly anyone has anything worth saying, and even if they did, the need to cut through is keenly felt. So you tell people your dairy products are well made but you do it via the medium of a two minute boyband pastiche.

For better or worse I suppose that’s what we’ve come to.



Aussies do funny for sports bet

(Interest declared: the CD was my my friend Cam @ Droga 5 Sydney.)



Playstation ‘Michael’

OK, here’s a proper good ad.

Does it make it to the hallowed levels of ‘great’? Not quite, but it is really fucking good:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdWkKKSckNk



New Pot Noodle ad

Charming. Not The Slag Of All Snacks quality, but pleasantly amusing.