Christopher Nolan's Interstellar

So good!

This flick blew me away, and was certainly not too slow. This reminded me of good old fashioned science fiction in the vein of Bradbury, Clarke, and Heinlein. A strong emotional component completes the package. I will probably watch this again soon!

__________________

The last thirty minutes or so are really good, I must admit (nearly great even), just a shame that the other two hours mostly consists of stuff that, well, is just really not that good. For most of the film I thought I was going to end up hating it, but I feel as though some of the stuff we see in the last hour complemented the rest of the film in a way, ultimately helping the film redeem itself. I found the scenes taking place inside the spaceships and back on Earth to be pretty boring, in terms of direction, visuals, narrative and everything else - it actually makes me sad how some of Nolan's directorial choices (and here they're in abundance) come off as really lazy and uninspired, especially considering the ambition of the film. I seriously find it hard to wrap my head around it.

Overall I liked the premise and the ambition, but the execution leaves a lot to be desired. I was mostly unimpressed even on a technical level (even if the special effects were nice), it's a real mess in terms of camerawork and shot composition, but at least it's more worth watching than most of the recent sci-fi out there

Came here to say mostly the same as BlueLion.

I gave this a rewatch, and while I'm still not a huge fan, this time I felt like it was much better mainly because of the third act. But the film has so so so many problems that I can never get close to thinking of it as a masterpiece or even a "smart" movie. But some good popcorn entertainment it defiantly ended up becoming!

I think the third act is superior to the rest of the film in every way, and not just because I saw it as some kind of a Solaris/2001 tribute. I thought it was easily the most creative, imaginative and artistic part of the film. But man, this film has so many problems like you said, particularly when it comes to tone and pacing. It's just all over the place. Not to mention it's so expository, but that is to be expected from Nolan I guess

What are some of the problems you folks had with the film? I actually enjoyed the fact that most of the early character development took place during a period when the main problems and goals in the film hadn't yet been presented.

The biggest problem I had with the film was the overall execution of the film and the way in which Nolan presented the themes of the film. With execution I mean everything, from the tone of the film to the expository dialogues to the direction and the camerawork, I think it lacks focus in that regard. It constantly shifts in tone and I think the film is inconsistent throughout.

Just compare it to the sci-fi greats where images can say a thousand words and could be interpreted in numerous different ways, in Interstellar there is no such scene/shot. Leave it to Nolan to constantly spoon feed the audience and provide answers along the way, making it impossible for the viewer to meditate or lose themselves in the atmosphere of the film. Even when Nolan gives you a glimpse of a visually stunning sequence, he cuts to a totally unnecessary reaction by one of the astronauts or some other just as unnecessary shot, right when he makes us think he's giving us an impressive sequence of a wormhole/black hole or whatever it is. He lets these scenes last five to ten seconds tops, which is a real shame because it removes all the artistic feel from the film and makes it look pretty generic instead. I think with action movies like The Dark Knight (and to some extent, even Inception) it works, but he should have been more subtle here. Nolan has again shown the middle finger to subtlety as always, presenting us with yet another one of his trademark twists, and modern audiences seem to love these. Now, don't get me wrong, I love me some old-fashioned, fast-paced entertainment, but Interstellar could have been so much more, it had the potential to be a great film.

Fair enough, even if do not agree on the comments on direction. I understand Nolan has a slew of detractors that find his style of directing to be ham-fisted, but I think they guy strikes a good balance, and I guess I don't see it as spoon-fed. Keep in mind that if a major picture like this starts to seem too cryptic to the suits, they will ask the director, firmly, to inject some exposition into the film. With the money behind this thing, I presume Nolan doesn't get final cut. With the sort of whack science Nolan was perpetrating here, he clearly needed a couple scenes to get people thinking about some of the more obtuse concepts he was playing around with.

Also, I watched this again last night, and I pretty sure the wormhole trip lasts longer than 5-10 seconds, and is probably closer to a minute or 1.5 minutes. I mean, they go through the wormhole entry, then space time starts to distort, and the handshake happens etc. he definitely could have pushed them out a bit longer, but the flick already clocks in at 2:45, so I guess trimming had to happen in some places.

Yes the wormhole trip definitely lasts longer, I should have made myself clearer, sorry. That is actually one of the reasons why I enjoyed the third act of the film a lot more. I was referring to most of the scenes with the exception of that one, like for instance when they show this and then also this from a distance, or some of the scenes around Saturn/the rest of the planets etc., these definitely didn't last long

No need to apologize.

Yeah, some scenes were certainly brief, but i guess I was caught up in the character story, or perhaps in this, the fourth decade of my life, I tend to focus more on the characters etc. than other things in the film.

I want to add that I do think the film is flawed, but sort of a flawed masterpiece. I realized it had some issues as I watched it the first time, but ultimately decided that the visceral and emotional payoffs more than made up for it with me. I found the fist-fight on the ice world to be cliche and silly, and I wondered why Damon was so mentally ruined after 10 years on the planet, and yet the poor sap that got stuck waiting next to Miller's world waited 23 years for the expedition to return.

In the end, I decided that with a film of this scope and structure, there are going to be some chinks in the armor here and there. The fact that Nolan put together an epic sci-fi flick that runs close to 3 hours while yet again toying with structure, time, and relativity, to me...is pretty damned impressive. I mean ****, people raved and raved about the completely overrated Guardians of the Galaxy, a film in which I got to see a raccoon and a tree hold hands and wink at each other as the finale. I didn't like that as much, for sure. I will support actual speculative sci-fi like interstellar all day long.

As much as I like atmosphere and lingering shots of dramatic spectacle I never once considered the lack of these things whilst watching Interstellar. I think it's very well balanced in that respect. There's a counter argument that says those very long lingering shots are just as cliched because we've seen plenty of that style before too. The film is already compared with 2001: A Space Odyssey so imagine if Nolan had further imitated Kubrick's style; we'd probably all be slaughtering him.

To me Interstellar is a film about possibilities, and theoretical science applied to foresight. It may be exposition heavy, but at least it's fascinating exposition (at least to me anyway). I didn't even have a problem with Matt Damon's character and the ensuing punch up on the ice, because the film does a very good job of conveying everyone's desperate situation. I wasn't rooting for Damon's character but I could certainly empathise and found that whole scene very exciting.

My problem with Interstellar is the paradoxical ending which all feels a bit half baked and pseudo-cryptic. If it really is scientifically explainable then why wasn't Nolan consistent with the rest of the film's expositional tone with something a little more palatable to the layman? Part of me thinks it was a deliberate device to make the higher intelligence seem more like a higher intelligence, but I think it let's the film down.

__________________
100 Favourites From The Future: REWIRED

SPOILER BELOW!!!



Enjoyed it greatly, but I get a bit annoyed when our hero wakes up from another dimension, black hole, etc right where he should be. I would think things could get pretty damn random when you are sucked into a black hole. Yes, I know it wouldn't be a great ending if he found himself floating on a psychedelic planet with talking sneaker people.

__________________
Under-the-radar Movie Awesomeness.
http://earlsmoviepicks.blogspot.com/

I have yet to give it another viewing since I saw it in the cinema but I have a feeling this is going be a movie that gets better as it ages. I've had a couple people who didn't see it in theaters tell me they loved it. I think their was too much hype for the movie and that sorta hurt it in it's theater run because it was not really commercially friendly (as opposed to The Dark Knight). People who went to see it in theaters had this preconceive notion of what it would be when it turned out another way. As opposed to people who waited until DVD and weren't as excited for it are blow away because they had no preconceived assumptions. I think it had some big ideas that need to marinate for awhile.

__________________
I came here to do two things, drink some beer and kick some ass, looks like we are almost outta beer - Dazed and Confused

101 Favorite Movies (2019)

accurate.

I'm 90 minutes into this right now, but I had to take a break. I feel EVERY minute of its' runtime. The ambition and beauty is definitely there, but also there are alot of Nolan's horrible shortcomings as a filmmaker.

I'll write a proper review later today or early tomorrow.

i just like to say about this movie, i think there should have been more space scenes, like worm holes etc, it's for the most part made to be a down to earth scifi drama, and not a scifi adventure, i felt it sometimes, that it was down to earth even if it is a space movie.

[QUOTE =ram bond;1279578]i just like to say about this movie, i think there should have been more space scenes, like worm holes etc, it's for the most part made to be a down to earth scifi drama, and not a scifi adventure, i felt it sometimes, that it was down to earth even if it is a space movie.[/quote]
I agree I really like the movie but I do wish there were more space scenes. who knows if they make a sequel maybe there will be

I like how no one is even talking about Interstellar lol

Finally saw this for the first time. I liked it! They really explored the time differentials more in depth than any film before it. Character development was spot-on. Only thing I didn't like was the box robots. I mean, they didn't even try! Really?! Even a toy company could've come up with a more practical design.
Aside from that one Piccadillo it was the easiest long watch I've had in awhile.

Glad you liked the film! I especially like the Dad/Daughter element of the story.

As for the bots: Those things are totally practical, and quite an elegant and logical design. What would you change about them? They don't have any of the balance issue of a biped, and they are shown to be quick and mobile when they unfold and roll around.

If I recall, Nolan wanted to go with a design that was sleek and minimal, while also hiding various complex functionalities.

"My idea was to remove any trace of anthropomorphism, so it doesn’t have a face. It doesn’t have arms and legs. It does have a voice and therefore a personality. The great Bill Irwin, who was puppeteering and voicing TARS, was able to give an inanimate, non-human object a personality."

If I recall, he wanted to make sort of an Anti-HAL, while also paying homage to 2001 by making the bot in the shape of the monolith. Interstellar is very much Nolan's love letter to Kubrick's Space Odyssey.

Here are its listed attributes:

• Humanoid consciousness
• Humanoid locomation in general motion
• Super-human locomation when needed
• Super-human strength
• Hibernation capabilities
• Cubic shape efficiency

In other words: TARS is awesome!

@Sedai lol! Ok so you liked it. If he was doing a homage to 2001 then ok, but still the direction thetre going with robotics designs makes this far from what it will actually be in the future. It just looked out of place amongst so many seemingly authentic and slick effects throughout the movie. The voice actor nailed it, the robots capabilities too. Just the look of the thing wasn't something I could soften too. It was like a filing cabinet that came to life.