Latest news with #Inception
Geek Feed
2 days ago
- Entertainment
- Geek Feed
Will Smith Reveals He Also Turned Down Christopher Nolan's Inception
Will Smith has been going around promoting his new music video Pretty Girls , and while everyone knows the story of how he passed on The Matrix, he's revealed that there was another blockbuster project that he was almost a part of. In a recent talk with Kiss Xtra (via @ArtofDialogue), Smith reveals that he was actually approached by Christopher Nolan to be part of Inception , Nolan's 2010 blockbuster hit about dream thieves. Will Smith reveals director Christopher Nolan brought him the movie "Inception" first, but he turned it down and says movies about alternate realities don't pitch well. (🎥 Kiss Xtra) — The Art Of Dialogue (@ArtOfDialogue_) June 15, 2025 'I don't think I've ever even said it publicly before… Chris Nolan brought me Inception first and I didn't get it… I've never said that out loud, and now that I think about it, it's those movies that go into those alternate realities, they don't pitch well.' Admittedly, Smith hasn't been batting a lot of hits like he used to, with projects like Gemini Man and Emancipation . He did win the Oscar for King Richard , but everyone mostly just remembers him slapping Chris Rock during that event. For now, it does seem like Smith is leaning back on his rap career, and while others have been dubbing Pretty Girls as 'UncRap', some people think that the beat could be a hit if they sped it up. Personally I think it's great, and Smith still has that superstar charisma. Maybe there's room for him in Nolan's next film now that he's put it out there. Honestly I'm rooting for Smith after all the drama he's been through in the recent years. Hopefully he manages to bring the good graces of the audience back to him soon.
India Today
2 days ago
- Entertainment
- India Today
F1 movie review: Brad Pitt delivers the most enjoyable film of the year
Joseph Kosinski, who directed Tom Cruise's bona fide smash 'Top Gun: Maverick', is also the director of the upcoming motor-racing adrenaline rush titled 'F1'. To sum up F1 in a line - it's about experiencing a visceral, high-speed head rush inside the claustrophobic cockpit of a racing car.'Top Gun Maverick' and 'F1' have a lot of similarities - both are headlined by the world's biggest superstars. One has the daredevil Tom Cruise while the other has the absolutely charming and handsome Brad Pitt. They both have top-notch soundtracks boasting of big pop stars like Lady Gaga in 'Top Gun' and Doja Cat in 'F1'. But despite the comparisons, they are both very different. How ? Let's find has Pitt playing the title role of a washed-out ageing race driver, Sunny Hayes. He gets a once-in-a-lifetime offer from his old colleague, played by Javier Bardem, to join his team of racers and help him qualify and possibly win the F1 title. It all seems very unlikely with Sunny's ageing career and rising competition from Joshua Pearce played by the surprise package of the film - Damson Idris. There are so many subplots that add up and lead to that mind-numbing climax, and every actor and character has his or her space in this high-octane journey. Take a look at F1's trailer: F1 is easily one of the best films of the year simply because it knows how to dish out what it promises to its audience. From the very first frame to the last, the build-up is so solid that you forgive some of the gaps and overlook the blunders. The camera work is sharp and the Hans Zimmer background score is hypnotic. It almost feels like the Inception sound on LSD. But the single best reason why 'F1' works so well on the big screen is - Brad Pitt bringing that good old-school charisma back to the big director has clocked some bare-body money shots of Pitt to show that he still has got that sizzle, but it's his face that really is the main draw. With those tossed-up hair and that blue-eyed grin he could sell you air for a dime, and you would buy a barrel! Another strong point of the film is the young actor Damson Idris, who is rock solid in his performance as Pitt's adversary cum sidekick. His character is so nuanced and grey that it's a delight to watch him in awe. He stands his own ground in the big stand-off scenes with Pitt and excels at his craft.'F1' is not deep or serious. It doesn't engage you much at that level. But it reminds us why we go to the theatres - to have a blast. At a time when this experience of having a good time in the theatres is getting less and less enjoyable, 'F1' is a reason to celebrate. Jump on that ride, fasten your seat belt because 'F1' is one hell of an adrenaline rush that you don't want to miss!4 out of 5 stars to Reel
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
Will Smith Rejected Nolan's ‘Inception' Because He Didn't Get the Plot
The next time Will Smith gets offered an alternate reality sci-fi thriller, he should seriously consider just saying, 'Yes!' First, the actor admitted he turned down The Matrix, which cast Keanu Reeves instead. More from The Hollywood Reporter Box Office: John Wick Spinoff 'Ballerina' Opens to Sluggish $25 Million, 'Lilo & Stitch' Rules With $32.5 Million 'Ballerina' Director Len Wiseman Talks Scrapped 'John Wick 3' Connections and the Truth About Additional Photography 'John Wick' Boss Chad Stahelski Gets Candid About Franchise: "My Process Is F***ed" Now Smith confirms he also turned down the lead role Christopher Nolan's Inception, which starred Leonardo DiCaprio. 'I don't think I've ever said it publicly before, but I am going to say it now because we are opening up to one another,' Smith told the radio station KISS XTRA, with a fair amount of good humor. 'Chris Nolan brought me Inception first and I didn't get it. I've never said that out loud. Now that I think about it, it's those movies that go into those alternate realities they don't pitch well. But I am hurt by those, too … It hurts too bad to talk about.' The Independence Day star turning down 1999's The Matrix is actually pretty understandable, as writers-directors The Wachowskis were still an unknown quantity at the time. Rejecting 2010's Inception when Nolan was coming off his blockbuster masterpiece The Dark Knight, however, seems like a more baffling move. Yet he wasn't the only A-list actor to pass on the role — likely due to Nolan's high-pressure casting strategy. In Inception, the lead character plants ideas in people's dreams as a novel form of corporate espionage. As The Hollywood Reporter revealed at the time, Nolan first offered the twisty script to Brad Pitt but demanded the actor accept within 48 hours. When Pitt didn't commit, Nolan went to Smith. When Smith didn't accept, Nolan sent it to DiCaprio, who took it. 'It's never couched as, 'Hey, I'm more important than you, therefore just say yes,'' said an executive, noting big stars 'are used to having people wait a year or more' before they commit and 'usually don't have to board a moving train.' Inception went on to gross more than $800 million at the global box office. Needless to say, nowadays the Oscar-winning director can probably get top actors to sign onto a project even without showing them a script. As for The Matrix, Smith has candidly detailed the pitch meeting for that project and recently did a music video for 'Beautiful Scars' where Smith played a parody version of Neo. 'I'm not proud of it, but it's the truth, all right, I did turn down Neo in The Matrix,' Smith said in a YouTube video posted five years ago. 'After we made Men in Black, the Wachowskis came in and they'd only done one movie. They did a movie called Bound. And then they made a pitch for The Matrix. And as it turns out, they're geniuses, but there's a fine line in a pitch meeting between genius and what I experienced in the meeting. So this is the actual pitch that they made for The Matrix …' At this point in the video, Smith humorously enacted a meeting where the Wachowskis enthuse confusingly about various wild action moves the character would be doing, but didn't discuss the film's plot or character ('And then we'll put in 50 cameras, and you'll see the whole jump while you stop in the middle of the jump …'). 'So I made Wild Wild West [instead],' Smith admitted, referring to his notorious 1999 sci-fi flop. Having said that, Smith added, 'Keanu was perfect. Laurence Fishburne was perfect. If I had done it, because I'm Black, [Fishburne's character] Morpheus wouldn't have been Black because they were looking at Val Kilmer [for] Morpheus. So I probably would have messed The Matrix up. I would have ruined it. I did y'all a favor.' Best of The Hollywood Reporter 13 of Tom Cruise's Most Jaw-Dropping Stunts Hollywood Stars Who Are One Award Away From an EGOT 'The Goonies' Cast, Then and Now
Daily Mail
3 days ago
- Entertainment
- Daily Mail
Will Smith reveals he turned down HUGE role in one of the greatest films of all time for box office flop Wild Wild West
Fans were left in shock after Will Smith revealed he turned down a role in one of the greatest science fiction movies of all time for his box office flop Wild Wild West. The American actor, 56, appeared as a guest on KISS XTRA radio on Saturday and discussed with Craig Mitch the movies he wished he had never turned down. Kicking off the interview, Craig asked the star: 'I don't know if you can confirm it that you turned down The Matrix to do Wild Wild West?' Smiling, Will replied: 'That was one of my beautiful scars!' and the pair broke out into a fit of laughter. Action-comedy Wild Wild West co-starred Kevin Kline, Kenneth Branagh and Salma Hayek and was a critical and commercial disappointment. It grossed $222.1 million worldwide against a $170 million budget. In contrast, The Matrix - starring Keanu Reeves and Carrie-Anne Moss - grossed over $463 million worldwide on a $63 million budget. Yet that wasn't Will's only bad decision. Craig, who was intrigued to know more, then asked: 'Are there any other movie roles that you've, you know, turned down?' Will then shockingly revealed that British-American filmmaker Christopher Nolan brought the action/ sci-fi movie Inception to him first. Inception, starring Leonardo DiCaprio, Michael Caine and Tom Hardy, was the fourth-highest-grossing film of 2010, making over $837 million. Will said: 'I can't it hurts too bad!' as Craig cut in, laughing: 'Oh, you don't even want to revisit it!' Will added: 'It hurts too bad. I don't think I've ever even said it publicly before... gonna say it now because we're opening up to one another. Chris Nolan brought me Inception first, and I didn't get it.' Appearing lost for words, Craig said: 'Wow! That's never been said before?' and Will confirmed: 'I've never said that out loud.' 'And now that I think about it, It's those movies that go into those alternate realities they don't pitch well. He confessed: 'But I'm hurt by those two...I'm hurt by those two.' Radio presenter Craig Mitch, who was intrigued to know more, then asked: 'Are there any other movie roles that you've, you know, turned down?' and Will confessed it was Inception Inception was the fourth-highest-grossing film of 2010, making over $837 million (Christopher Nolan, Leonardo DiCaprio and Marion Cotillard pictured in the film) Following his radio appearance, fans took to X, formerly Twitter, to share their opinions - and many were divided as some praised Will for turning down the movie while others were shocked he would do such a thing. One user shared a meme as he wrote: 'Reading about Will Smith turning down Inception because he didn't understand it and also The Matrix because he didn't understand it.'; 'When Christopher Nolan asks you to be in one of his movies you don't say no. You just say yes no questions asked because it will all make sense later.'; 'I can kinda understand turning down the Matrix because the Wachowskis were fairly unproven at the time and the concept was wild at the time. But Nolan was proven at the time. You just say "Yes."' While another defended Will's choice to turn it down, saying: 'Well Inception is one of the worst movies ever made so I'm happy for Will he skipped it. Totally drivol made for people who never had a creative thought in their life or watched any art house films to go have their "minds blown".'
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Health
- Yahoo
The neuroscientist working on ‘zapping' away unwanted memories
Think of your happiest memory. A wedding, your child's birth, or maybe just a perfect night out with friends. Sit with it for a moment. Remember the details. What were you wearing? What did it smell like? How did it make you feel? Now do the opposite. Think of a sad memory—the loss of a loved one, getting laid off, or a painful breakup. Sit with this one too. Which would you rather keep? Of course, you want the happy memory, the one that made you feel good and joyful about life. Yet, the painful ones linger for years and sometimes decades, like bruises beneath the surface. If you could choose, would you keep them—or delete them entirely? If this is all starting to sound like something out of Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind or Inception, you wouldn't be too far off—and Steve Ramirez would agree with you. Ramirez is a neuroscientist at Boston University and National Geographic Explorer whose research occurs on the bleeding edge of memory science. He's perhaps best known for studies he helped conduct that showed that it was possible to implant a false memory in mice. The findings were published in the journal Science in 2013 and the Royal Society in 2014. His research is built on a central truth: Memory is fickle. It changes and morphs every time we recall it. Ramirez compares it to hitting 'Save As' on a Word document. Everytime we retrieve a memory, we change it slightly. Ramirez is exploring whether we can harness that 'Save As' process—intentionally rewriting our memories instead of letting them change by accident. So far, he's figured out how to do something even more surprising: not destroy a bad memory, but create a new one. 'We know memories are malleable, and susceptible to modification,' says Ramirez. 'Every time they're recalled, they're being saved and edited with bits and pieces. We wanted to see if we could do that in the lab. Because if we could do that directly in the lab and brain, then we can really get a higher resolution snapshot of how memories work when they're being warped or when they're being modified.' The team's foundational study came in a 2012 paper published in Nature where they identified and activated a cluster of neurons in mice brains that encoded a fear memory—specifically, a mild foot shock. To do so, the researchers genetically engineered the mice so that memory-related neurons become light sensitive. The creatures were then placed into a box and received a foot shock—resulting in the memory of that shock becoming encoded in the light-sensitive brain cells. The team then surgically implanted a tiny fiber-optic cable into the skull of each mouse that they could use to shine a laser into its brain. When they turned it on, it activated the bad memory on command like flipping a switch. Next they wanted to see if they could create a false memory. For this, they put a mouse in a safe box and let it explore. The next day, they placed the mouse in a different box, triggered the memory of the safe box by shooting a laser over its brain, and simultaneously gave it a foot shock. When they later returned the mouse in the first box, it froze in fear—even though it never received a shock in that box. The team had, in effect, implanted a false memory in the mice. 'The key thing with that experiment was that we showed that we could artificially activate a memory while the animal was experiencing something. Later, that new, updated version was the animal's last recorded version of that memory,' he explains. 'The mouse was scared in an environment where, technically, nothing bad happened.' Between the lasers, false memories, and shocking experiments, you'd be forgiven if you thought this was getting pretty sci-fi. Ramirez embraces the comparison as his work often brushes up against science fiction in big ways. 'I think science fiction and science reality are in lockstep, often influencing each other in surprising and unpredictable ways,' Ramirez says. 'What sci-fi can get 'wrong' sometimes is inevitable, but the work it inspires and the dreams and visions sci-fi can conjure up in people is practically limitless, and I love it for that very reason.' Still, it can seem scary, especially when you consider the potential applications to humans. But Ramirez says that memory manipulation would take a decidedly less invasive approach for people—no brain lasers required. Instead, if you want to activate a happy memory in another person, all you have to do is ask them about it. (Remember the beginning of the story—or did you forget?) 'We can update a seemingly safe memory into something negative,' he says, referring to the foot shock test. 'But what about the opposite: Can we turn a negative memory into a positive memory?' Despite the pop-culture comparisons to Inception or Eternal Sunshine, Ramirez's real-world applications are far less cinematic—and arguably more profound. Instead, his work is laying the groundwork for helping people with PTSD process harmful memories, or those with neurodegenerative disorders like Alzheimer's and dementia live longer, better lives. In a forthcoming paper currently under peer review, his team claims they were able to identify where exactly a memory will form in the brain days before it even happens. It's like being able to predict where lightning is about to strike before the storm even gathers. This might allow future clinicians to anticipate the effects of Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, and dementia before they occur. 'Imagine being able to make a Google Maps for memory, but with the level of individual brain cells,' he says. 'You could say, 'This is a positive memory in the brain. It's located here in this 3D web of activity. We can zoom into it here and it looks like something is misfiring, and that might be the remnants of some kind of cognitive decline or memory loss, or amnesia, or Alzheimer's.'' We're still a long way away from a Google Maps for memory. However, Ramirez is quick to point out that his field of research is still in its infancy. He puts it this way: the study of neuroscience is roughly 100 years old—whereas physics is more than 2,000 years old. 'Relative to physics, neuroscience is still in its Pythagorean Theorem stage,' he jokes. There's still a lot we don't know about the brain and, as a result, how memory works. But Ramirez and neuroscientists like him are turning science fiction into science reality, which may allow us to one day edit and manipulate our own experiences. More importantly, their research helps us understand the profound ways that memory shapes us—and how we might begin to shape it right back. This article is part of Your Memory, Rewired, a National Geographic exploration into the fuzzy, fascinating frontiers of memory science—including advice on how to make your own memory more powerful. Learn more. The nonprofit National Geographic Society, committed to illuminating and protecting the wonder of our world, funded National Geographic Explorer Steve Ramirez's work. Learn more about the Society's support of Explorers.
