<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Taylor Holmes inc.</title>
	<atom:link href="http://taylorholmes.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://taylorholmes.com</link>
	<description>that I may know the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 19 May 2012 20:31:27 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Memento Explained by luke</title>
		<link>http://taylorholmes.com/2010/07/28/memento-explained/#comment-15547</link>
		<dc:creator>luke</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 May 2012 20:31:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://taylorholmes.com/?p=426#comment-15547</guid>
		<description>Its simple guys, leos wife survives the rape ,but leos head is slammed in and his memory problem starts.Leo kills his wife soon after over injecting her.Leo is sent to the mental hospital were teddy rescues him and uses him to his own greed after he helps kill the real killer and his greed over comes him.Natalie knows that teddy used leo which is why she keeps saying teddy was involved with her husband/friends murder.

  Leo creates the whole samy story, which is basically what really happened to him and his wife.He had a memory problem killed his wife and ended up in the mental house.How ever leo makes this other character sam up to separate reality with this fake sam story with the use of constant repetition telling every single person he meets the story of sammy over and over again.Eventually not even needing the i did it tattoo.

   Leos figure in samys fake reality could honestly be tedy.Since the samy story is nothing more than leos past reality he broke off into a story he tells others.

   Then who raped leos wife?Well teddy in the heat of the moment spills it all out he died years ago with teddys help.But leo does not want to accept the truth and writes on his picutre &quot;Teddy lies&quot; to avoid the truth hes been avoiding. He finally realizes that no matter how many times he repeats the samy story or attempts to find a imaginary killer teddy is the voice of truth(yes mixed with a little greed),and kills him.At the end he stares at the bloody killing of teddy ONCE MORE TWISTING REALITY WITH repetition. PROBABLY SOON FORGETTING HE KILLED TEDDY!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Its simple guys, leos wife survives the rape ,but leos head is slammed in and his memory problem starts.Leo kills his wife soon after over injecting her.Leo is sent to the mental hospital were teddy rescues him and uses him to his own greed after he helps kill the real killer and his greed over comes him.Natalie knows that teddy used leo which is why she keeps saying teddy was involved with her husband/friends murder.</p>
<p>  Leo creates the whole samy story, which is basically what really happened to him and his wife.He had a memory problem killed his wife and ended up in the mental house.How ever leo makes this other character sam up to separate reality with this fake sam story with the use of constant repetition telling every single person he meets the story of sammy over and over again.Eventually not even needing the i did it tattoo.</p>
<p>   Leos figure in samys fake reality could honestly be tedy.Since the samy story is nothing more than leos past reality he broke off into a story he tells others.</p>
<p>   Then who raped leos wife?Well teddy in the heat of the moment spills it all out he died years ago with teddys help.But leo does not want to accept the truth and writes on his picutre &#8220;Teddy lies&#8221; to avoid the truth hes been avoiding. He finally realizes that no matter how many times he repeats the samy story or attempts to find a imaginary killer teddy is the voice of truth(yes mixed with a little greed),and kills him.At the end he stares at the bloody killing of teddy ONCE MORE TWISTING REALITY WITH repetition. PROBABLY SOON FORGETTING HE KILLED TEDDY!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on 7 Dream Layers of Inception by Taylor</title>
		<link>http://taylorholmes.com/2010/07/20/7-layers-of-inception/#comment-15532</link>
		<dc:creator>Taylor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 May 2012 23:07:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://taylorholmes.com/?p=486#comment-15532</guid>
		<description>Hey Eames, 
One question - if my layer 6 &amp; 7 are the same then why does Cobb wash up on the shore of Saito&#039;s world?  If Limbo is a collective layer why does it appear to travel there in the same 
method he arrived at his own limbo?  As far as your ring observation goes that bit o trivia has been so widely discussed throughout these comments I can&#039;t bear recovering the topic again. 

Taylor</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey Eames,<br />
One question &#8211; if my layer 6 &amp; 7 are the same then why does Cobb wash up on the shore of Saito&#8217;s world?  If Limbo is a collective layer why does it appear to travel there in the same<br />
method he arrived at his own limbo?  As far as your ring observation goes that bit o trivia has been so widely discussed throughout these comments I can&#8217;t bear recovering the topic again. </p>
<p>Taylor</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on 7 Dream Layers of Inception by Eames</title>
		<link>http://taylorholmes.com/2010/07/20/7-layers-of-inception/#comment-15528</link>
		<dc:creator>Eames</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 May 2012 21:24:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://taylorholmes.com/?p=486#comment-15528</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t agree.
There are only five. The two limbo&#039;s are one - but separate since Cobb and Saito&#039;s buildings are different. 
The real world IS the real world - we can see it in the end. It wobbles. And the ring is not there in the end scenes, which is the ultimate proof that the real world IS the real world. Sorry for the spoiler... :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t agree.<br />
There are only five. The two limbo&#8217;s are one &#8211; but separate since Cobb and Saito&#8217;s buildings are different.<br />
The real world IS the real world &#8211; we can see it in the end. It wobbles. And the ring is not there in the end scenes, which is the ultimate proof that the real world IS the real world. Sorry for the spoiler&#8230; <img src='http://taylorholmes.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Prestige Explained by Stanley</title>
		<link>http://taylorholmes.com/2009/08/26/the-prestige-explained/#comment-15479</link>
		<dc:creator>Stanley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 May 2012 16:51:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://taylorholmes.com/?p=273#comment-15479</guid>
		<description>The thing that intrigues me most is the comparison made between Borden/Edison and Angiers/Tesla. Edison was known for his no nonsense approach (1% inspiration, 99% perspiration) whereas Tesla was known (though his research has been buried, made to look forgotten despite him being responsible for alternating current, wireless technology. His research into frequency and vibration was used in  the HAARP machine.) to make things work &#039;as if by magic&#039;. For example, the scene with the light bulbs in the snow, he made things like that happen. My point is this, Tesla did make &#039;magic&#039; happen. He may of been fooling Angier with the cloning machine, but the man was capable of magic, so to speak. He was capable of using forces and energies we don&#039;t readily use (some say because he was right, you can provide free energy. If you head of GE, you&#039;d want to keep yourself in a job and free energy for all would have you out of a job in no time). I think Nolan is up to something in his films, something along the lines of Kubrick&#039;s subversion.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The thing that intrigues me most is the comparison made between Borden/Edison and Angiers/Tesla. Edison was known for his no nonsense approach (1% inspiration, 99% perspiration) whereas Tesla was known (though his research has been buried, made to look forgotten despite him being responsible for alternating current, wireless technology. His research into frequency and vibration was used in  the HAARP machine.) to make things work &#8216;as if by magic&#8217;. For example, the scene with the light bulbs in the snow, he made things like that happen. My point is this, Tesla did make &#8216;magic&#8217; happen. He may of been fooling Angier with the cloning machine, but the man was capable of magic, so to speak. He was capable of using forces and energies we don&#8217;t readily use (some say because he was right, you can provide free energy. If you head of GE, you&#8217;d want to keep yourself in a job and free energy for all would have you out of a job in no time). I think Nolan is up to something in his films, something along the lines of Kubrick&#8217;s subversion.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Memento Explained by KG</title>
		<link>http://taylorholmes.com/2010/07/28/memento-explained/#comment-15440</link>
		<dc:creator>KG</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 May 2012 13:55:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://taylorholmes.com/?p=426#comment-15440</guid>
		<description>@Steph That theory is nice, but doesn&#039;t really work out. For instance when he is chasing Dodd and goes back to his hotel to get the beat on him he sits down in the bathroom with the bottle of alcohol. Then he &#039;restarts&#039; and doesn&#039;t understand why he is holding the bottle, so he starts to take a shower. So if he was faking, why would he do this? This clearly doesn&#039;t benefit him and he is in private so it doesn&#039;t make sense to fake it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Steph That theory is nice, but doesn&#8217;t really work out. For instance when he is chasing Dodd and goes back to his hotel to get the beat on him he sits down in the bathroom with the bottle of alcohol. Then he &#8216;restarts&#8217; and doesn&#8217;t understand why he is holding the bottle, so he starts to take a shower. So if he was faking, why would he do this? This clearly doesn&#8217;t benefit him and he is in private so it doesn&#8217;t make sense to fake it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on 7 Dream Layers of Inception by Val Gunn</title>
		<link>http://taylorholmes.com/2010/07/20/7-layers-of-inception/#comment-15431</link>
		<dc:creator>Val Gunn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 May 2012 16:34:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://taylorholmes.com/?p=486#comment-15431</guid>
		<description>Late to the game, but wanted to say this a very good and thoughtful thread. I loved the movie and believe somewhat similarly that the entire film is Cobb&#039;s dream.

Here is a brief rundown of what, in my opinion, has possibly occurred.

Mal is real, and she is the one trying to wake Cobb. But feelings of regret, despair, and guilt stand in the way of his waking. I&#039;m unsure, but thinking that they went through a nasty divorce and Cobb sees Mal as an antagonist. 

Cobb is in a coma. This was the result of a car accident that [inconclusive] took the lives of his two children. He was initially awake at the time of the incident, before shock and injury slipped his body and mind into the coma. In that state of limited awareness, he believes that his children to be dead. Awaking from the dream will force him to face the reality and horror of the consequences suffered in the accident. He cannot bring himself to do this. By staying in the dream, he can always be with his kids.

There was a cool short film called World Builder that is a very interesting watch:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VzFpg271sm8

There are strong Jungian aspects to the film and lets suppose that these innermost characteristics exist within the collective unconscious (the deepest state within ourselves).  The other characters in the film were just different segments of himself. Jung lists seven such archetypes:

1. The Persona is the image you present to the world in your waking life. It is your public mask. In the dream world, the persona is represented by the Self.  The Self may or may not resemble you physically or may or may not behave as your would. For example, the persona can appear as a scarecrow or a beggar in your dream. However, you still know that this &quot;person&quot; in your dream is you.

2. The Shadow is the rejected and repressed aspects of yourself. It is the part of yourself that you do not want the world to see because it is ugly or unappealing. It symbolizes weakness, fear, or anger. In dreams, this figure is represented by a stalker, murderer, a bully, or pursuer. It can be a frightening figure or even a close friend or relative.  Their appearance often makes you angry or leaves you scared. They force you to confront things that you don&#039;t want to see or hear. You must learn to accept the shadow aspect of yourself for its messages are often for your own good, even though it may not be immediately apparent.

3. The Anima / Animus is the female and male aspects of yourself. Everyone possess both feminine and masculine qualities. In dreams, the anima appears as a highly feminized figure, while the animus appears as a hyper masculine form. Or you may dream that you are dressed in women&#039;s clothing, if you are male or that you grow a beard, if you are female. These dream imageries appear depending on how well you are able to integrate the feminine and masculine qualities within yourself. They serve as a reminder that you must learn to acknowledge or express your masculine (be more assertive) or feminine side (be more emotional). 

4. The Divine Child is your true self in its purest form. It not only symbolizes your innocence, your sense of vulnerability, and your helplessness, but it represents your aspirations and full potential. You are open to all possibilities. In the dreamscape, this figure is represented by a baby or young child.  

5. The Wise Old Man /Woman is the helper in your dreams. Represented by a teacher, father, doctor, priest or some other unknown authority figure, they serve to offer guidance and words of wisdom. They appear in your dream to steer and guide you into the right direction.

6. The Great Mother is the nurturer. The Great Mother appears in your dreams as your own mother, grandmother, or other nurturing figure. She provides you with positive reassurance. Negatively, they may be depicted as a witch or old bag lady in which case they can be associated with seduction, dominance and death. This juxtaposition is rooted in the belief by some experts that the real mother who is the giver of life is also at the same time jealous of our growth away from her. 

7. The Trickster, as the name implies, plays jokes to keep you from taking yourself too seriously. The trickster may appear in your dream when you have overreach or misjudge a situation. Or he could find himself in your dream when you are uncertain about a decision or about where you want to go in life.  The trickster often makes you feel uncomfortable or embarrassed, sometimes mocking you or exposing  you to your vulnerabilities. He may take on subtle forms, sometimes even changing its shape.  

Now the trick is trying to link the film characters to these archetypes.

Here is another link that delved into this very subject:

http://www.cinemablend.com/new/What-If-Inception-Were-Analyzed-By-Dream-Experts-19638.html

Highlights from the article:

Mal/The Shade as The Shadow Archetype

One of Jung&#039;s most prominent archetypes is the shadow, which is mostly the darker side of oneself projected into an entity. This archetype can be represented as many different figures, from people to animals that might have haunted you in your childhood. The way archetypes work is like this: they aren&#039;t really the shape that you see but more a feeling or emotion that is transformed into an entity that we can relate to, and the shadow archetype represents the worst parts of ourselves and the evil that lurks within us. So, if you&#039;re still following me here, then you&#039;ll know that Mal is certainly the evil that lurks within Dom. I mean, it&#039;s even in her name, (Mal in Latin means evil, after all). 

But let&#039;s look even deeper. As we know, Mal is already dead by the first time we see her in Saito&#039;s dream on the Shinkansen. She killed herself after she thought that limbo was still reality and that the world she lived in was all a lie. As we know, she only thinks this because Dom Cobb performed Inception on her and he feels that he is the cause of her death, so his dark side is manifested in Mal, who might as well just be a literal shadow because she follows him everywhere he goes, much like a shadow would. This leads to disastrous results, like in the form of a freight train through the streets or as an assassin in the snow. Mal in every way is the darker side of Cobb that he can&#039;t contain, and that&#039;s what makes her such a threat, because deep down, he knows that she&#039;s really the worst side of himself, and everything she does affects the rest of his innermost archetypes. 

Arthur/The Point Man as The Hero Archetype

Let&#039;s face it, even though Dom Cobb is the star of the show, he&#039;s hardly the hero. He&#039;s more like a broken down sad sack dealing with shameful emotional issues caused by his dominant shadow (See above). But Arthur, who is willing to take on an onslaught of bad guys in a constantly shifting hallway so his friends can enter into a deeper dream state, is pure hero material, especially when he runs the risk of being “killed” and sent to limbo in such a heavily sedated state. 

Arthur is everything Dom wishes he could be but can&#039;t because he has so many ghosts following him around. He gets to kiss the girl, save the day (Notice that he&#039;s one of the first ones to wake up in the submerged car and pull the others to safety), and doesn&#039;t fail in his mission to lead the bad guys away from his friends. While Dom, on the other hand, fails in every way, even allowing his shadow/Mal to “kill” Fischer Jr. from behind, which compromises the entire mission. So, if we&#039;re keeping track of our Archetype discussion, that would mean that Arthur is also Dom, but the part of him that is brave and courageous and willing to put his life on the line for his friends. He doesn&#039;t have any excess baggage. He&#039;s just all business, and all kickass. 


Saito/The Tourist as the Father Archetype

The father archetype is a very strong figure in the human psyche, as it&#039;s one that gets what it wants and has a great deal of control in the person he inhabits. And in every way, that&#039;s what Saito is, acting almost as a dues ex machina by the end of the film with his ability to literally overturn the law so that Dom can return to America. Saito would be the side of Dom&#039;s character that would be authoritative and demanding. In other words, he would be the boss when it got right down to things. We already see that Dom&#039;s not the boss of his own team as his second architect doesn&#039;t even follow his instructions when he tells her not to go deeper into his mind. She does just that and sees what Mal is really capable of doing within him. So in that way, Dom has very little control over his circumstances, while Saito is exactly the opposite—he gets what he wants and knows how to get it. 

Note that not only did he convince Dom to plant inception in a business competitor&#039;s mind, but he also got to tag along with the others as a tourist, which is highly dangerous and a definite risk factor in a mission like this. Saito gets whatever he wants. So is it any wonder why he gets shot so early in the mission? Dom can&#039;t deal with a figure like that right now within himself, as he has his own problems to deal with. If anything, he needs a strongly based mother archetype, one who will take care of him and not demand too much out of him. Unfortunately, there isn&#039;t one to be found in this movie, making his catharsis that much harder. 


Eames/The Forger as The Trickster Archetype

The Trickster Archetype is deceptive and shady, and Eames is the shadiest of them all. Working as a forger in reality and as a shape shifter in the dream world (even switching genders at one point to lead the target off-guard, which is VERY Trickster-esque), Eames is the side of Dom that can still laugh at itself and crack a smile, but also the great deceiver that can&#039;t tell reality from a dream. The Trickster is very prominent in the film in that Dom lies to not only his team but also himself, believing that he has everything under control when he knows deep down that he&#039;s a complete and utter mess. 

It&#039;s in Eames&#039; dream in the snow fortress that Dom is truly confronted with his shadow, and it&#039;s at that point that he knows that he can&#039;t lie to himself anymore. The Trickster proves it to him by putting his shadow front and center there for him. And with his shadow “killing” Fischer, she is also killing the child within him (More on that in a second). 


Robert Fischer Jr./The Mark as The Child Archetype

Robert Fischer Jr. just wants acceptance from his father, and like the child archetype, he is the side of Dom who desires to be innocent again. Note that when Fischer&#039;s safe opens, he pulls out the pinwheel that he had in the picture with his dad. This side of Dom is very tricky to discuss as Dom actually deceives the child within him by lying to Fischer at the bar and claiming that the images he sees are really trying to kill him when their purpose is to actually save him from dream thieves, Dom being one of them. 

This leads me to believe that Dom is trying to move on from the helpless side of himself by this part in the movie and doesn&#039;t want that innocence to hold back. He wants to be more like the father archetype and have control. But Dom can&#039;t reach catharsis by subduing his archetypes, and by bringing Fischer back from the dead in the end, it allows him to open his safe, which I definitely think is tantamount to Dom&#039;s rebirth, which is a part of what the child archetype represents within the dreamer, a new beginning. So yeah, it&#039;s some pretty heady stuff. 

Ariadne/The Architect as The Anima Archetype

The Anima is the feminine side within a male (Whereas, the animus, would be the male side within a female) and she represents who a male truly is rather than who he presents himself as in reality, and in many ways, what that&#039;s what Ariadne represents for Dom. Out of all the other characters in the movie, she&#039;s the closest to being who he really is—note, all of the details he tells her are basically the same details he&#039;s telling us, too, with the audience being a part of who he is, as well, being that we&#039;re living inside his head while we watch the movie—and she&#039;s also an architect, which Dom once was too before his shadow became overbearing. 

Think about it, it&#039;s Ariadne who goes with him into limbo when everyone else has to stay behind. She&#039;s the one who tries to pull him away from his darker side and get him to move on so he can be himself again. She&#039;s basically a young Cobb with a vagina. I don&#039;t know how else to explain it. 

Miles/The Mentor as The Wise Old Man Archetype

Miles, Dom&#039;s father-in-law, is the wise old man within himself, and believe it or not, this might be the most complex archetype of all to explain. This is almost a paradox of sorts really (Like those twisting stairs in the movie), in that he is both knowledge incarnate, but also the teacher within himself that is able to take in his anima as a student. I don&#039;t know. I really can&#039;t wrap my head around this one. Maybe you can do a better job. 

Yusef/The Chemist as The Self

The self represents both the conscious and the unconscious worlds within oneself, and that&#039;s what Yusef is in this mission for Dom. He is both the link to reality and the also harbinger into the dream world. By being the initial dream that his team enters within, believe it or not, I think Yusef might be the closest to who Dom really is as an individual by having all of these archetypes swimming inside himself. Remember, Yusef is the only other one who knows about Limbo on the onset, as Dom must have been dabbling with chemicals himself to get to that sort of state with his wife. So it is in Yusef that we have the whole to the other segmented sections of Dom, and by allowing his other archetypes to sink deep within him, he is allowing them to all come to grips with each other. 

Anyways, some food for thought!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Late to the game, but wanted to say this a very good and thoughtful thread. I loved the movie and believe somewhat similarly that the entire film is Cobb&#8217;s dream.</p>
<p>Here is a brief rundown of what, in my opinion, has possibly occurred.</p>
<p>Mal is real, and she is the one trying to wake Cobb. But feelings of regret, despair, and guilt stand in the way of his waking. I&#8217;m unsure, but thinking that they went through a nasty divorce and Cobb sees Mal as an antagonist. </p>
<p>Cobb is in a coma. This was the result of a car accident that [inconclusive] took the lives of his two children. He was initially awake at the time of the incident, before shock and injury slipped his body and mind into the coma. In that state of limited awareness, he believes that his children to be dead. Awaking from the dream will force him to face the reality and horror of the consequences suffered in the accident. He cannot bring himself to do this. By staying in the dream, he can always be with his kids.</p>
<p>There was a cool short film called World Builder that is a very interesting watch:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VzFpg271sm8" rel="nofollow" onclick="pageTracker._trackPageview('/outgoing/www.youtube.com/watch?v=VzFpg271sm8&amp;referer=');">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VzFpg271sm8</a></p>
<p>There are strong Jungian aspects to the film and lets suppose that these innermost characteristics exist within the collective unconscious (the deepest state within ourselves).  The other characters in the film were just different segments of himself. Jung lists seven such archetypes:</p>
<p>1. The Persona is the image you present to the world in your waking life. It is your public mask. In the dream world, the persona is represented by the Self.  The Self may or may not resemble you physically or may or may not behave as your would. For example, the persona can appear as a scarecrow or a beggar in your dream. However, you still know that this &#8220;person&#8221; in your dream is you.</p>
<p>2. The Shadow is the rejected and repressed aspects of yourself. It is the part of yourself that you do not want the world to see because it is ugly or unappealing. It symbolizes weakness, fear, or anger. In dreams, this figure is represented by a stalker, murderer, a bully, or pursuer. It can be a frightening figure or even a close friend or relative.  Their appearance often makes you angry or leaves you scared. They force you to confront things that you don&#8217;t want to see or hear. You must learn to accept the shadow aspect of yourself for its messages are often for your own good, even though it may not be immediately apparent.</p>
<p>3. The Anima / Animus is the female and male aspects of yourself. Everyone possess both feminine and masculine qualities. In dreams, the anima appears as a highly feminized figure, while the animus appears as a hyper masculine form. Or you may dream that you are dressed in women&#8217;s clothing, if you are male or that you grow a beard, if you are female. These dream imageries appear depending on how well you are able to integrate the feminine and masculine qualities within yourself. They serve as a reminder that you must learn to acknowledge or express your masculine (be more assertive) or feminine side (be more emotional). </p>
<p>4. The Divine Child is your true self in its purest form. It not only symbolizes your innocence, your sense of vulnerability, and your helplessness, but it represents your aspirations and full potential. You are open to all possibilities. In the dreamscape, this figure is represented by a baby or young child.  </p>
<p>5. The Wise Old Man /Woman is the helper in your dreams. Represented by a teacher, father, doctor, priest or some other unknown authority figure, they serve to offer guidance and words of wisdom. They appear in your dream to steer and guide you into the right direction.</p>
<p>6. The Great Mother is the nurturer. The Great Mother appears in your dreams as your own mother, grandmother, or other nurturing figure. She provides you with positive reassurance. Negatively, they may be depicted as a witch or old bag lady in which case they can be associated with seduction, dominance and death. This juxtaposition is rooted in the belief by some experts that the real mother who is the giver of life is also at the same time jealous of our growth away from her. </p>
<p>7. The Trickster, as the name implies, plays jokes to keep you from taking yourself too seriously. The trickster may appear in your dream when you have overreach or misjudge a situation. Or he could find himself in your dream when you are uncertain about a decision or about where you want to go in life.  The trickster often makes you feel uncomfortable or embarrassed, sometimes mocking you or exposing  you to your vulnerabilities. He may take on subtle forms, sometimes even changing its shape.  </p>
<p>Now the trick is trying to link the film characters to these archetypes.</p>
<p>Here is another link that delved into this very subject:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.cinemablend.com/new/What-If-Inception-Were-Analyzed-By-Dream-Experts-19638.html" rel="nofollow" onclick="pageTracker._trackPageview('/outgoing/www.cinemablend.com/new/What-If-Inception-Were-Analyzed-By-Dream-Experts-19638.html?referer=');">http://www.cinemablend.com/new/What-If-Inception-Were-Analyzed-By-Dream-Experts-19638.html</a></p>
<p>Highlights from the article:</p>
<p>Mal/The Shade as The Shadow Archetype</p>
<p>One of Jung&#8217;s most prominent archetypes is the shadow, which is mostly the darker side of oneself projected into an entity. This archetype can be represented as many different figures, from people to animals that might have haunted you in your childhood. The way archetypes work is like this: they aren&#8217;t really the shape that you see but more a feeling or emotion that is transformed into an entity that we can relate to, and the shadow archetype represents the worst parts of ourselves and the evil that lurks within us. So, if you&#8217;re still following me here, then you&#8217;ll know that Mal is certainly the evil that lurks within Dom. I mean, it&#8217;s even in her name, (Mal in Latin means evil, after all). </p>
<p>But let&#8217;s look even deeper. As we know, Mal is already dead by the first time we see her in Saito&#8217;s dream on the Shinkansen. She killed herself after she thought that limbo was still reality and that the world she lived in was all a lie. As we know, she only thinks this because Dom Cobb performed Inception on her and he feels that he is the cause of her death, so his dark side is manifested in Mal, who might as well just be a literal shadow because she follows him everywhere he goes, much like a shadow would. This leads to disastrous results, like in the form of a freight train through the streets or as an assassin in the snow. Mal in every way is the darker side of Cobb that he can&#8217;t contain, and that&#8217;s what makes her such a threat, because deep down, he knows that she&#8217;s really the worst side of himself, and everything she does affects the rest of his innermost archetypes. </p>
<p>Arthur/The Point Man as The Hero Archetype</p>
<p>Let&#8217;s face it, even though Dom Cobb is the star of the show, he&#8217;s hardly the hero. He&#8217;s more like a broken down sad sack dealing with shameful emotional issues caused by his dominant shadow (See above). But Arthur, who is willing to take on an onslaught of bad guys in a constantly shifting hallway so his friends can enter into a deeper dream state, is pure hero material, especially when he runs the risk of being “killed” and sent to limbo in such a heavily sedated state. </p>
<p>Arthur is everything Dom wishes he could be but can&#8217;t because he has so many ghosts following him around. He gets to kiss the girl, save the day (Notice that he&#8217;s one of the first ones to wake up in the submerged car and pull the others to safety), and doesn&#8217;t fail in his mission to lead the bad guys away from his friends. While Dom, on the other hand, fails in every way, even allowing his shadow/Mal to “kill” Fischer Jr. from behind, which compromises the entire mission. So, if we&#8217;re keeping track of our Archetype discussion, that would mean that Arthur is also Dom, but the part of him that is brave and courageous and willing to put his life on the line for his friends. He doesn&#8217;t have any excess baggage. He&#8217;s just all business, and all kickass. </p>
<p>Saito/The Tourist as the Father Archetype</p>
<p>The father archetype is a very strong figure in the human psyche, as it&#8217;s one that gets what it wants and has a great deal of control in the person he inhabits. And in every way, that&#8217;s what Saito is, acting almost as a dues ex machina by the end of the film with his ability to literally overturn the law so that Dom can return to America. Saito would be the side of Dom&#8217;s character that would be authoritative and demanding. In other words, he would be the boss when it got right down to things. We already see that Dom&#8217;s not the boss of his own team as his second architect doesn&#8217;t even follow his instructions when he tells her not to go deeper into his mind. She does just that and sees what Mal is really capable of doing within him. So in that way, Dom has very little control over his circumstances, while Saito is exactly the opposite—he gets what he wants and knows how to get it. </p>
<p>Note that not only did he convince Dom to plant inception in a business competitor&#8217;s mind, but he also got to tag along with the others as a tourist, which is highly dangerous and a definite risk factor in a mission like this. Saito gets whatever he wants. So is it any wonder why he gets shot so early in the mission? Dom can&#8217;t deal with a figure like that right now within himself, as he has his own problems to deal with. If anything, he needs a strongly based mother archetype, one who will take care of him and not demand too much out of him. Unfortunately, there isn&#8217;t one to be found in this movie, making his catharsis that much harder. </p>
<p>Eames/The Forger as The Trickster Archetype</p>
<p>The Trickster Archetype is deceptive and shady, and Eames is the shadiest of them all. Working as a forger in reality and as a shape shifter in the dream world (even switching genders at one point to lead the target off-guard, which is VERY Trickster-esque), Eames is the side of Dom that can still laugh at itself and crack a smile, but also the great deceiver that can&#8217;t tell reality from a dream. The Trickster is very prominent in the film in that Dom lies to not only his team but also himself, believing that he has everything under control when he knows deep down that he&#8217;s a complete and utter mess. </p>
<p>It&#8217;s in Eames&#8217; dream in the snow fortress that Dom is truly confronted with his shadow, and it&#8217;s at that point that he knows that he can&#8217;t lie to himself anymore. The Trickster proves it to him by putting his shadow front and center there for him. And with his shadow “killing” Fischer, she is also killing the child within him (More on that in a second). </p>
<p>Robert Fischer Jr./The Mark as The Child Archetype</p>
<p>Robert Fischer Jr. just wants acceptance from his father, and like the child archetype, he is the side of Dom who desires to be innocent again. Note that when Fischer&#8217;s safe opens, he pulls out the pinwheel that he had in the picture with his dad. This side of Dom is very tricky to discuss as Dom actually deceives the child within him by lying to Fischer at the bar and claiming that the images he sees are really trying to kill him when their purpose is to actually save him from dream thieves, Dom being one of them. </p>
<p>This leads me to believe that Dom is trying to move on from the helpless side of himself by this part in the movie and doesn&#8217;t want that innocence to hold back. He wants to be more like the father archetype and have control. But Dom can&#8217;t reach catharsis by subduing his archetypes, and by bringing Fischer back from the dead in the end, it allows him to open his safe, which I definitely think is tantamount to Dom&#8217;s rebirth, which is a part of what the child archetype represents within the dreamer, a new beginning. So yeah, it&#8217;s some pretty heady stuff. </p>
<p>Ariadne/The Architect as The Anima Archetype</p>
<p>The Anima is the feminine side within a male (Whereas, the animus, would be the male side within a female) and she represents who a male truly is rather than who he presents himself as in reality, and in many ways, what that&#8217;s what Ariadne represents for Dom. Out of all the other characters in the movie, she&#8217;s the closest to being who he really is—note, all of the details he tells her are basically the same details he&#8217;s telling us, too, with the audience being a part of who he is, as well, being that we&#8217;re living inside his head while we watch the movie—and she&#8217;s also an architect, which Dom once was too before his shadow became overbearing. </p>
<p>Think about it, it&#8217;s Ariadne who goes with him into limbo when everyone else has to stay behind. She&#8217;s the one who tries to pull him away from his darker side and get him to move on so he can be himself again. She&#8217;s basically a young Cobb with a vagina. I don&#8217;t know how else to explain it. </p>
<p>Miles/The Mentor as The Wise Old Man Archetype</p>
<p>Miles, Dom&#8217;s father-in-law, is the wise old man within himself, and believe it or not, this might be the most complex archetype of all to explain. This is almost a paradox of sorts really (Like those twisting stairs in the movie), in that he is both knowledge incarnate, but also the teacher within himself that is able to take in his anima as a student. I don&#8217;t know. I really can&#8217;t wrap my head around this one. Maybe you can do a better job. </p>
<p>Yusef/The Chemist as The Self</p>
<p>The self represents both the conscious and the unconscious worlds within oneself, and that&#8217;s what Yusef is in this mission for Dom. He is both the link to reality and the also harbinger into the dream world. By being the initial dream that his team enters within, believe it or not, I think Yusef might be the closest to who Dom really is as an individual by having all of these archetypes swimming inside himself. Remember, Yusef is the only other one who knows about Limbo on the onset, as Dom must have been dabbling with chemicals himself to get to that sort of state with his wife. So it is in Yusef that we have the whole to the other segmented sections of Dom, and by allowing his other archetypes to sink deep within him, he is allowing them to all come to grips with each other. </p>
<p>Anyways, some food for thought!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Memento Explained by Rick</title>
		<link>http://taylorholmes.com/2010/07/28/memento-explained/#comment-15332</link>
		<dc:creator>Rick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 May 2012 03:21:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://taylorholmes.com/?p=426#comment-15332</guid>
		<description>@Steph

Sorry that theory doesn&#039;t make sense on a lot of levels but to start with... Why would Sammy go on consciously faking a mental illness and let himself be used by Teddy when he&#039;s been acquitted of murdering his wife? I could see him faking it to get off of the murder rap, but what benefit is it for him to then continue to be faking and to be used Teddy? If Sammy wants to still kill people he no longer needs the whole guise of a fake illness.
Second, the movie shows him faking things while he&#039;s in private. There wouldn&#039;t be any need for him to be consciously faking things in private.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Steph</p>
<p>Sorry that theory doesn&#8217;t make sense on a lot of levels but to start with&#8230; Why would Sammy go on consciously faking a mental illness and let himself be used by Teddy when he&#8217;s been acquitted of murdering his wife? I could see him faking it to get off of the murder rap, but what benefit is it for him to then continue to be faking and to be used Teddy? If Sammy wants to still kill people he no longer needs the whole guise of a fake illness.<br />
Second, the movie shows him faking things while he&#8217;s in private. There wouldn&#8217;t be any need for him to be consciously faking things in private.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Memento Explained by steph</title>
		<link>http://taylorholmes.com/2010/07/28/memento-explained/#comment-15328</link>
		<dc:creator>steph</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 06 May 2012 19:59:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://taylorholmes.com/?p=426#comment-15328</guid>
		<description>A new therory...
I have a new theory not discussed and so far no one I talked to likes it. I call it the &quot;reverse psycho theory&quot; based on the hitchcook film and not the mental illness.
If you recall in psycho the audience knows a lot more about the murders than the characters in the film and the characters believe the murders were committed for money, when in fact they were the result of a mental illness and money had nothing to do with it.
  In memento the opposite is true. The audience knows less than the characters and the &quot;murders&#039; were committed for money, not on the basis of a mental illness....WHAT THE HEY???
   My theory is that Lenny is faking it, after learning of the &quot;illness&quot; of a single man known as Sammy Jenkins and he learns all about it and plans to murder his wife.....
   In the story of Sammy, you may recall that his &quot;wife&quot; turns back her watch and requests that Sammy inject her. But if she wanted to commit sucide, why would she need to turn her watch?  Wouldnt she just tell Sammy to inject her, as Sammy would have no idea what time it was..
   The reason for changing the watch is FOR THE POLICE AFTERWARDS...The police would check the dead wife&#039;s insulin level and find it high,  BUT AS HER WATCH WAS WRONG....she must have told he ill husband the wrong time and he being ill couldnt tell. So &quot;Lenny&quot; just overdosed her, and changed her watch. They put him in the institution until they figured it was an accident and he left...
   He works with Teddy to put together schemes where he kills drug dealers etc, claiming the mental illness and keeping the money. Teddy believes his illness, but uses it to get rich with Lenny.
       Only Teddy gets greedy so Lenny plans with a new girlfriend Natalie how to get rid of Teddy and steal Jimmy&#039;s money. On the night of Jimmy&#039;s death, Natalie puts the cup protector in Jimmy&#039;s pocket knowing that when Lenny kills him and takes the clothes he will find it. Also Lenny throws the keys away so Teddy cant follow him to Nataile.
   Lenny and Natalie fight to keep Teddy off guard as Teddy is watching him, as he &quot;surprises: Lenny in the car. 
    In fact the scene with the tatoos of Lenny laying with his &quot;wife&quot; are not imaginary but in the future. 
The &#039;i did it&quot; doesnt involve the killing of Jimmy g but the success of Lenny fooling everyone into thinking he has a mental illness which he can use to kill people and take their money. 
   The film &#039;ends&quot; (although this is the middle of the story) with Lenny driving an expensive car with 200,000 dollars in it. 
   The events after that are to cover their tracks (ie Natalie and Lenny) by getting rid of Dood and killing Teddy before they leave town to do it again. 
    In this case Lenny is simply letting everyone believe he is mentally ill so he can kill for money....the opposiite of the Hitchcook film in which a pscyho is killing unrelated to money...

Think about it...Another interesting theory..</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A new therory&#8230;<br />
I have a new theory not discussed and so far no one I talked to likes it. I call it the &#8220;reverse psycho theory&#8221; based on the hitchcook film and not the mental illness.<br />
If you recall in psycho the audience knows a lot more about the murders than the characters in the film and the characters believe the murders were committed for money, when in fact they were the result of a mental illness and money had nothing to do with it.<br />
  In memento the opposite is true. The audience knows less than the characters and the &#8220;murders&#8217; were committed for money, not on the basis of a mental illness&#8230;.WHAT THE HEY???<br />
   My theory is that Lenny is faking it, after learning of the &#8220;illness&#8221; of a single man known as Sammy Jenkins and he learns all about it and plans to murder his wife&#8230;..<br />
   In the story of Sammy, you may recall that his &#8220;wife&#8221; turns back her watch and requests that Sammy inject her. But if she wanted to commit sucide, why would she need to turn her watch?  Wouldnt she just tell Sammy to inject her, as Sammy would have no idea what time it was..<br />
   The reason for changing the watch is FOR THE POLICE AFTERWARDS&#8230;The police would check the dead wife&#8217;s insulin level and find it high,  BUT AS HER WATCH WAS WRONG&#8230;.she must have told he ill husband the wrong time and he being ill couldnt tell. So &#8220;Lenny&#8221; just overdosed her, and changed her watch. They put him in the institution until they figured it was an accident and he left&#8230;<br />
   He works with Teddy to put together schemes where he kills drug dealers etc, claiming the mental illness and keeping the money. Teddy believes his illness, but uses it to get rich with Lenny.<br />
       Only Teddy gets greedy so Lenny plans with a new girlfriend Natalie how to get rid of Teddy and steal Jimmy&#8217;s money. On the night of Jimmy&#8217;s death, Natalie puts the cup protector in Jimmy&#8217;s pocket knowing that when Lenny kills him and takes the clothes he will find it. Also Lenny throws the keys away so Teddy cant follow him to Nataile.<br />
   Lenny and Natalie fight to keep Teddy off guard as Teddy is watching him, as he &#8220;surprises: Lenny in the car.<br />
    In fact the scene with the tatoos of Lenny laying with his &#8220;wife&#8221; are not imaginary but in the future.<br />
The &#8216;i did it&#8221; doesnt involve the killing of Jimmy g but the success of Lenny fooling everyone into thinking he has a mental illness which he can use to kill people and take their money.<br />
   The film &#8216;ends&#8221; (although this is the middle of the story) with Lenny driving an expensive car with 200,000 dollars in it.<br />
   The events after that are to cover their tracks (ie Natalie and Lenny) by getting rid of Dood and killing Teddy before they leave town to do it again.<br />
    In this case Lenny is simply letting everyone believe he is mentally ill so he can kill for money&#8230;.the opposiite of the Hitchcook film in which a pscyho is killing unrelated to money&#8230;</p>
<p>Think about it&#8230;Another interesting theory..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on 5 Best Mind Bending Movies by selva</title>
		<link>http://taylorholmes.com/2011/01/08/5-best-mind-bending-movies/#comment-15324</link>
		<dc:creator>selva</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 06 May 2012 05:44:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://taylorholmes.com/?p=648#comment-15324</guid>
		<description>I ve PRIMER in ma WATCH LIST!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I ve PRIMER in ma WATCH LIST!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Memento Explained by James</title>
		<link>http://taylorholmes.com/2010/07/28/memento-explained/#comment-15272</link>
		<dc:creator>James</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 May 2012 08:58:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://taylorholmes.com/?p=426#comment-15272</guid>
		<description>There ya go :
The visual map.

http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/4282/visualmapofthefilmmemen.png</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There ya go :<br />
The visual map.</p>
<p><a href="http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/4282/visualmapofthefilmmemen.png" rel="nofollow" onclick="pageTracker._trackPageview('/outgoing/img205.imageshack.us/img205/4282/visualmapofthefilmmemen.png?referer=');">http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/4282/visualmapofthefilmmemen.png</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

