Water is ALL OVER Inception.

1) The first image is water, Cobb washing up on shore.
2) Cobb is dropped into a bathtub to kick-out of the first scene.
3) Several times Cobb splashes water on his face after coming out of a dream.
4) Robert Fischer is given sedative in a glass of ice water.
5) It rains in Fischer's 1st level dream.
6) Fischer's 3rd level dream is blanketed in snow. (frozen water)
7) Thunderstorms in limbo.
8) The van falls into water.

Scott, as you know, my family has a history with Carl Jung, and I agree with you completely that he would have loved this movie. I also agree with Mouse that water--which tends to symbolize the power of the subconscious--provides an important visual theme.

One interesting point to consider, something that people unfamiliar with Jung's life story might miss, is a possible situational homage to Jung's own dilemma in his life--the conflict between Emma Jung and Tony Wolff (Jung's long-term mistress who he saw as his muse) in the characters of Mal (which in French is used to indicate illness) and Ariadne (named after the goddess who aids Perseus in the slaying of the Minotaur). I heard many stories about Emma's uneasy truce with Tony as a child.

There are layers and layers of meaning in the movie, so I also look forward to "Inception" coming out on DVD. :-)

Whoops, wrong name--it was Theseus who overcame the Minotaur with Ariadne's help. In mythology, the Minotaur was a monster (symbolic of the dangers inherent in exploring dark places of our psyche without adequate strength), the dweller of the Labyrinth (symbolic of the twists and turns one must take to achieve what Jung would call Individuation) and Ariadne designs a labyrinth in the movie.

I disagree with you on one thing scott. Inception is emotionless. But ina good way.

Most have emotional growth. This movie had psychological growth.

In a rom com, the woman is hurt and doesn't believe in love. Emotionally she changes over the movie via her beau and what once was frumpy smiles. It's clear on her face the entire movie the emotional growth she had.

Psychological growth is different. We don't show our psychological issues on our face in this movie. Fischer is hurt because of his father's connection. but does he ever show it? No, he'll talk about it. We see a pained expression in his face when his father smacks the photo to the ground. But we don't show psychological growth really.It isn't until fischer cries at the end that he has moved past his pain.

Leo has guilt over the inception of Mal. But like Fischer he doesn't fully show it. It is pained expressions and his totem which show it. We know what is bothering him the whole movie but he won't show what's bothering him. That's true psychological trauma.

That is why people thought it was emotionless. Because the emotion is always hinted never fully shown.

All well and good Scott, but I'm sorry this wasn't a huge revelation for me, nor did it make for an engaging film experience. Other films have accomplished this much better. I was bored during most of Inception, and laughing at the dopiness by the third act.

Daveed, I'd love to see a list of films that accomplished the same thing a lot better.

I found Inception to be fun and quite entertaining. I see it as an ingenious take on Tron meets Mr. and Mrs. Smith inside a person's mind, with a bit of Hancock mixed in. I don't see is as any kind of serious psychological exploration, just a romp. :-)

BTW a trailer of the Tron sequel is now showing in theaters.

Good article in LA times about the generational gap affecting whether people liked it or not. Most people over the age of 40 tended to disconnect from the movie and most people under 40 tended to love it. Also, I personally think the entire movie was a dream and even when Cobb went 'home' he was still in a dream.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/the_big_picture/2010/08/why-is-it-that-the-older-you-are-the-more-you-cant-stand-inception-.html

Yeah Daveed, I must say, if you are aware of any film that does what Inception does only better then toss some titles my way, I'm all in.

Besides Satoshi Kon's Paprika (and perhaps Bergman's Persona?) I can't name one film that even comes close...

Christopher Nolan is a strange director.

I don't know how to describe his style -- other than a feeling.

I always feel that he holds the audience at arm's length from the protagonist.

INCEPTION reminded me a lot of MEMENTO.

Where Scorcese talks about favoring story over plot, what he is talking about is following a character rather than events.

Other directors do the opposite. And for most there's only 2 choices. But Nolan doesn't do either.

-- Nolan favors structure over story.

It's almost more important how a Christopher Nolan movie is put together than the content of the movie.

It's vital to MEMENTO that it is told backwards. That device becomes more important than the characters.

I felt the same way about INCEPTION. It felt like the device of traveling through dreams, through the layers, was more important than what they were actually doing in them.

I find it very interesting that he is incredibly consistent about this, as well.

Off the top of my head: Memento, The Fountain, Mulholland Drive, Magnolia, The Sixth Sense, Apocalypse Now, The Seventh Seal, Destiny, Existenz...

I loved this article. I love Jung & Inception, so this was the perfect mix!

However, a question lingers on for me:
According to Jungian theory (as far as I understand it- I'm a relative beginner!), one has to move towards psychological wholeness by learning to accept and love all denied parts of the personality - namely, the shadow. That's why, if you ever study lucid dreaming, Dr. Stephen Laberge instructs you to try and love all the dark monsters you encounter in dreams, rather than run from them, because running would just mean you still refuse to admit their existence = DISUNITY!

In the end of Inception, Cobb's projection of Mal is left dead and still antagonistic (I think - keep in mind, I only saw the movie once). If we want to talk about Jungian dream analysis with a subjective interpretation, all characters in a dream represent some part of the dreamer's psyche as well. If we want to claim Cobb truly individuated by the end of the film, shouldn't he have somehow come to terms with Mal, instead of forever neglecting her presence as a part of him?

I'm not sure it's clear that he ever learnt to love the part of him that she represented - the fundamental criterion for individuation. Instead, he leaves her dead - which to me, means he thinks he escaped her. This is a nono for those who seek unity.

What say you?

@Noam: It's a fair point, Noam, and absolutely right, as far as I know, per Jung's assertion that in order to move toward wholeness, an individual must engage all aspects of their psyche, including their shadow.

What I think is going on with Cobb (Protagonist) and Mal (Nemesis) per Jung is that what is blocking him from unity isn't Mal per se, but his own attachment to her and unwillingness to let her go, i.e., accept her death. He's created this elevator of memories to keep her 'alive' in his dreams. And that is what is keeping him from any chance of unity.

The fact that Mal and his children keep sneaking into his dream-state and even conscious-state are signs - to me - that Cobb's subconscious is leading him toward where he needs to go: He needs to engage Mal directly and honestly for what she is -- nothing but a "shade" -- in order eventually to experience his children directly and face-to-face as his family. In other words, give up the couple-family (Cobb and Mal), which is based on attachment to an illusion, in order to attain the father-children family, and in that, achieve a kind of unity.

So Cobb does engage his shadow, both in the form of Mal and his unwillingness to let her go, then does what he needs to do in his journey toward unity: Give them both up.

Does that make sense?

@Scott--I think that scene that shows Cobb and Mal as old people--"We *did* grow old together" in their dream world, is Cobb's embracing of the shadow.

Different people can interpret this differently, however, Cobb stayed in the "limbo" world for a long time, found Saito and either attempted or succeeded in bringing him back to the "real" world as per the ambiguous ending...

I believe that there are a lot of intended ambiguities in the film. I think I'll watch it at least a few more times...

I've read a lot of reviews on this amazing movie, but only a few which directly compares it to Jungian psychology. Loved this.

But apart from Jungian, in my opinion is *does* have some Freudian elements as well: unresolved conflicts, regression and catharsis as a means of resolving them... (ok here's where I get bricked by anti-Freud Jung fans) :p

Am a fan of both by the way. Oh well, overall it's probably the best movie of the year.

The truth is that Jung was a fan of Freud. I heard stories from insiders that Jung attempted more than once to mend their differences. He did not, however, entirely buy into Freud's opinions on human sexuality.

Both of them did amazing work that continues to have influence on how we think about the human experience.

Wondering if the conversation can pick up on this blog, now that Inception has come out on DVD? So comforting to know that others saw Inception as I did -it seemed almost obvious to me from the start (with the movie beginning with water and a beach) that this would be an extremely psychological movie. I consider myself a student of Jung and find this movie to a perfect example of the journey to discover the Self.

I wonder if Colon intended that?

One thought I wanted to share after reading the blog - perhaps Mal is someone who never truly existed in Cobb's life? If this is a dream and these are all projections of himself, Mal is (more than likely) purely a representation of his Guilt. In fact, my theory is that Mal = Cobb's Ego. Play out some of the scenes in using that analogy and see where it takes you...

Thanks, Dara! I completely forgot about this!

Now that I know so much more about Jung, I absolutely love analyzing films from the archetypal perspective!

Scott, do you have any other good Jungian analyses of big films on your site? Looking back at it, this one was great!

Other good films that fit very well into Jungian theory are Where the Wild Things Are (Believe it or not, this one is so Jungian!!!!), Nine (though apparently many Fellini films were highly Jungian - I've never seen any of them, guess I got to get on that), and my personal favourite which I analyzed for school: Grease ! Amazing!

@Dara and Noam: My journey with Jung has been most interesting. I've studied Joseph Campbell since college and was introduced to Jung that way (Campbell edited "The Portable Jung"). I was developing some theories about character archetypes, then as I dove into Jung found quite a bit of synchronicity with his ideas. Basically I think it's quite interesting to think about a movie as a Protagonist's story of individuation, that all the primary characters in the story are physicalizations of various aspects of the P's psyche, forcing the P to enjoin them in order to move toward a sense of unity, which fits with the fact that most movies have as their central narrative the theme of metamorphosis.

Here are a few other movie analyses I've done on the blog which break down the story per five primary character archetypes: Protagonist, Nemesis, Attractor, Mentor, Trickster.

The Wizard of Oz, Part 1

The Wizard of Oz, Part 2

The Silence of the Lambs in which I use a technique whereby we switch Protagonists.

Up.

I teach much, much more of this content in the Core II class at Screenwriting Master Class. Plus I'm writing a book on character archetypes.

keylogger
Thanks for the marvelous posting

Interesting to see a post here about a year after the initial postings. I decided to watch Inception again, back-to-back with Source Code.

I've heard someone compare Source Code with Groundhog Day. Hmmm, I wonder about a comparison between Inception and Groundhog Day. While on the outside they look entirely different, in both movies the protag has to embrace his shadow.

Am I getting too far out there? I'm certain some of you will say yes... :-D

[…] tests is surely an significant component of myers briggs personality test for free leading Scientology religious improvement. The most crucial check is obviously this subjective test […]