As much as I hate to post two successive blog entries about the same movie, when that movie is as dense as “Inception” was, there is a lot to chew on. So I just saw the film for a second time, and it was a remarkably clarifying experience. Knowing all the rules going in, watching the explanation is no less boring, but you pick up a lot of early references in the way the film is depicted and written that you don’t catch the first time around. It makes the total experience all the more impressive. There were hints in the dialogue and visual aspects that you don’t get the first time (specifically the meaning of the rioters in the opening and the slow motion watch movements in level one of the first dream series).

But what I really want to touch on are the popular theories for how the movie ended. Just like there are a million interpretations of dreams, every commenter on the Internet seems to have their own theory for where reality ends and the dream world of “Inception” begins. After viewing a Cinematical article posted over the weekend with the top six theories, I watched the film specifically looking for justification for each of these. The following is my opinion based on what we see as empirical evidence for the theories.

Hiding behind a jump to prevent spoilers. IF YOU HAVEN’T SEEN INCEPTION, DON’T CLICK “READ MORE”…

Theory #1: It’s all a dream.

This is the theory I subscribed to after my first viewing. While the movie tries to set up reality, the fade to black with the totem at the end provided too much doubt as to think that anything was concrete. I usually gravitate towards a creator screwing with the viewer the whole time, and it was just too brain-busting exiting the theater to pick sides, until I settled into the “it must be a dream” camp. Upon watching the movie a second time, there is undeniable set-up and evidence that at least part of the world of Inception is reality. The parts of Cobb’s real life, the struggles he faced, are emphasized too much to be merely subconscious. While some jumps are sudden, there are no indications of the reality portions following the same rules as dreams.

Theory #2: Everything after the sedative test was a dream.

This is a theory I was interested in, and tried to see if I could support while watching the film a second time. However, i addition to what Cinematical says about the twist ending being moot, there is no story evidence to back this one up. Cobb wakes up, and while initially confused, the reality portions play out straightforward and without abrupt shifts. The mission is enacted. Cobb has to reason to fabricate the complications of research and teaching Ariadne the rules of the game.

Theories #3 and #4: Saito/Ariadne are the architects and play mind games.

No, just no. It’s a stretch and nothing evolves naturally where these two characters are the real focus behind the movie. We are supposed to follow the devastation Cobb’s guilt infests the dream world with. This isn’t “Shutter Island”, but it is a movie. A movie where sometimes people just show up at the right time to advance the plot.

Theory #5…stay tuned. The holes poked by the article about the children would probably be chalked up to a continuity error and the need to hire multiple children, but there is a point.

Theory #6: Reality was reality, no questions asked.

Upon watching the film, this is probably the one that makes the most narrative sense. The focus of the film is Cobb’s mission to overcome his guilt and free himself of the last barriers to seeing his real children again. As I think most of the film is based in reality, there really is no evidence that, after all that is done to establish the irregularities that bind how the dream world works, the end is anything but real. In the inevitable DVD commentary, this will probably be the ending that Nolan cops to, as most of the film is fairly straightforward once you know how it works a second time through. The plot is simplified and the motives more easily traceable. This is a heist movie within dreams, run by a team of black-ops biotech wonders. They enter multiple levels of dreams, emerge to reality, and complete the mission. It’s amazing how relatively simple the trajectory is once you’ve had time to digest all the information. And yet, I can’t help but think something is off…

My Theory: All of the “reality” portions were real…except the end.

And here is where I split the difference and offer my own interpretation of the ending. See, there is enough evidence to support that 85% of the movie takes place in reality and dream-induced endeavors from it, but the ending montage is unclear. After Cobb meets Saito in Saito’s Japanese temple limbo, they discuss the arrangement, and Saito reaches for the gun, presumably to wake them both up, Cobb then himself. But we never actually see it. Instead, there is an abrupt cut to the plane where everyone wakes up, lands, and Cobb returns to his kids. The kids are dressed the same (as in his enduring memories), yet speak as if they are slightly older (as in the phone call). The top spins…and spins…and wobbles, but keeps spinning. Who is to say that Cobb imagines being shot in limbo, or is and his mind jumps deeper: to a self-fulfilled fantasy of what would happen when he wakes up. Perhaps he is still on the plane, but Saito is trapped and would not return to reality in a condition enough to make the call. Much less Cobb, who after two trips to limbo is a delirious mess.

I sort of feel as if Nolan intended some kind of twist ending, and so this is my personal interpretation. It could change. For all we know the only mind games are the one that Nolan plays by leaving such a vague ending open to interpretation. It’s genius in the way that “The Sopranos” ending left a lot to the imagination with its own cut to black. Nolan is saying that there is no one interpretation, just like there is no one set meaning to our dreams. In that way it is equally brilliant, but for my own games, I’d like to think there was a little extra sand(man) kicked in the eyes.