Christopher Nolan's Interstellar

Tools    





Ug, I'm sorry about the SPOILER tag fail! I wrote that on about 4 hours sleep and my son was nagging me for the computer so I posted and left without proofreading. Sorry! Sorry! Sorry!

Thankfully someone with superhero like powers fixed it for me!!!!!!

What's wrong with it? It's competently made, scripted, acted, etc. It's a comedy so, for the most part, it either works for you or it does, However, as I understood what you were saying (which is why I tried to clear up what it was you were saying/asking) this passes as a 'good' film which is then subjectively not well considered.
I'm not sure a film whose premise requires that every single person in the film must be an idiot for it to work counts as a modern comedy classic...

But, I'll play along (I haven't seen Weekend at Bernies since I was about 13 so I don't remember anything about it). It does have a surprising 6.3 rating at IMDB, so this begs the question of what's the cutoff for people "liking" a film? It's at least better than 50%

Maybe you stumped me, but I'm pretty sure everything about the plot of that films hangs on the biggest suspension of disbelief eclipsed since then only by the idea that Denise Richards could be a physicist...
__________________



I don't feel the want to try and comprehend what the hell happened in the last 20 minutes of this movie and that makes me sad.

I'm tired of Nolan mind****ing people like me just because he can. I'm an intelligent guy and yet me and my three mates had no idea what the hell happened towards the end. Soured a good movie for me.



I don't feel the want to try and comprehend what the hell happened in the last 20 minutes of this movie and that makes me sad.

I'm tired of Nolan mind****ing people like me just because he can. I'm an intelligent guy and yet me and my three mates had no idea what the hell happened towards the end. Soured a good movie for me.
Come on. It's not that hard to comprehend. McConaughey's character pretty much explains what's happening while it's happening (which didn't feel necessary to me) so that everyone can understand. He's not mindf*cking people because he can. He just took some liberties to fill in the gaps that science hasn't solved yet.

WARNING: "Interstellar" spoilers below
In the black hole McConaughey suddenly finds himself in a construction that's (probably) made by humans from the far future who were somehow able to transcend the fourth dimension by "materializing" that fourth dimension (which is time) in a three-dimensional way. Just like a wormhole can fold distance and space, they were able to "fold time". It's not very scientific, but in a sci-fi environment it kind of works.

In the end the film is just another take on the deterministic way that time is constructed (which is something that isn't at all new in films) and how it somehow was manipulated by humans in the future to save their species in the past.
__________________
Cobpyth's Movie Log ~ 2019



Saw this last night. Geez, is there a lot to take in. I'm still processing it.

I don't think it's a perfect film, but it's ridiculously ambitious and very powerful, and I strongly suspect (based on looking closely at his previous films) that some of the leaps and machinations will hold up pretty well given a little time and perspective. I've yet to see a Nolan film that looked cruder up close than it does at first. Interstellar is absolutely brimming with themes and ideas that just beg to be analyzed over and over.

Also, this isn't really spoilery, but I'll hide it anyway:

WARNING: "Interstellar" spoilers below
If you've read C.S. Lewis' Space Trilogy, big parts of this film might as well have been pulled right from it. Aspects of the water planet and Mann basically being indistinguishable from Weston, in particular. I won't say much more in case anyone decides to read it, but I'd be genuinely surprised if Nolan hadn't read them and borrowed here and there.



Oh, also, for people who've read that essay I linked in the previous post...

WARNING: "Interstellar" spoilers below
The useful lie strikes again!



You can't make a rainbow without a little rain.
I'm not sure a film whose premise requires that every single person in the film must be an idiot for it to work counts as a modern comedy classic...

But, I'll play along (I haven't seen Weekend at Bernies since I was about 13 so I don't remember anything about it). It does have a surprising 6.3 rating at IMDB, so this begs the question of what's the cutoff for people "liking" a film? It's at least better than 50%

Many of my favorite movies have mid-range IMDB ratings. They're not masterpieces, and I'm sure they were never intended to be. They don't require any discussions or deciphering afterwards. They're just good movies that I enjoy watching over and over again.



I hope overexpectation does not kill enjoyment of the movie for me .

If a movie has been greatly praised by everyone I go with too many expectations and the experience becomes underwhelming for me---that's what has happened too many times for me .

Generally I want to go to movies without too many expectations , so that I get pleasantly surprised if the movie is good .



I don't feel the want to try and comprehend what the hell happened in the last 20 minutes of this movie and that makes me sad.

I'm tired of Nolan mind****ing people like me just because he can. I'm an intelligent guy and yet me and my three mates had no idea what the hell happened towards the end. Soured a good movie for me.
Are you sure?

They were basically telling us, more or less, what was going on as it was happening.

EDIT: Oops, missed Cobpyth's post... What he said.



And on the movie, I thought it was pretty great. I can't see it being as well received as Inception was, for a couple of reasons, but i thought it was one of my best cinema-going experiences. Seeing it at an Imax theatre definitely helped.



I hope overexpectation does not kill enjoyment of the movie for me .

If a movie has been greatly praised by everyone I go with too many expectations and the experience becomes underwhelming for me---that's what has happened too many times for me .

Generally I want to go to movies without too many expectations , so that I get pleasantly surprised if the movie is good .
You're going to hate it. I have no idea what kind of films you like, but this, IMO, is Nolan's least accessible film.

I only say that because it's very science geeky and very heavy science fiction. And I'm not talking about science fiction like Star Wars or Prometheus where the science fiction sets up the story; this is the science fiction where it is the story. It's Nolan's lowest rated film on Rotten Tomatoes and it's easy to see why, IMO. It's the type of film I adore and wish they made more of, but it's the type of film not everyone will really enjoy.

If you like Orson Scott Card, Greg Bear, Arthur C. Clarke, Phillip K. Dick, etc. then this film will be pretty great (though it obviously doesn't reach the same depths that those types of writers can reach).



I think it's funny that so many people lost it at the end (last 30 min) or just didn't like it.

I think that's exactly where things got interesting, fleshed out, played with and partially explained (to some extend unneeded explanations, but it is still a big movie for a mainstream audience also).

But I think it should've been playful and daring earlier on in the movie. Most of its running time consisted of guesses, scientific and try-hard back-and-forth and if just became a little boring... I wish Nolan "went for it" earlier in the movie. Gave the viewers a little here, and a little there, so the journey could be as interesting as its conclusion.

But I need at least a viewing more, cause now I know the basics, the story, the conclusion and so on... Then I would be able to analyze on it, and dive deeper into it.



You're going to hate it. I have no idea what kind of films you like, but this, IMO, is Nolan's least accessible film.

I only say that because it's very science geeky and very heavy science fiction. And I'm not talking about science fiction like Star Wars or Prometheus where the science fiction sets up the story; this is the science fiction where it is the story. It's Nolan's lowest rated film on Rotten Tomatoes and it's easy to see why, IMO. It's the type of film I adore and wish they made more of, but it's the type of film not everyone will really enjoy.

If you like Orson Scott Card, Greg Bear, Arthur C. Clarke, Phillip K. Dick, etc. then this film will be pretty great (though it obviously doesn't reach the same depths that those types of writers can reach).
Will somebody who liked inception like it? Cos I liked it a lot.



It's different than all of his films to date, but it's closer to Inception than any of the others, I'd say.
Then I may like it



I agree with Yoda. Inception is the closest comparison. I didn't like it as much as Inception. I think it gets bogged down in the "science" a little more. Still very interesting concept, and lots to digest.
__________________
Letterboxd



I'd say it's incredibly different if only in that it feels far more heartfelt and sincere than his other films. The relationships between the characters feel far more central than in any of the Batman films and even Inception. I know there's supposed to be a strong emotional core in Inception with Cobb and Mal but I found that relationship sort of sterile and I always responded better to the final moment between the Fischer's.

There's some really human moments in Interstellar, not just the father daughter moments, but also in other scenes I don't want to accidentally spoil again. Yes, it's very science heavy and there's quite a bit of exposition that serves only to inform the audience, but the emotional beats really worked for me.



The only relationship that worked for me in Interstellar was the father daughter, which was quite good, I agree there. I liked DiCaprio's relationship with three of the characters in Inception though. Maybe they didn't tug at the heart strings as much, but I thought they were well done. It is probably time for me to watch Inception again. I have seen it twice but it has been a couple years.



I enjoyed the film a lot, but what I really can't get over is the audio design/technique and that beautiful beautiful score. I had goosebumps throughout the entire film, whether it was the loud grumbling of a space launch or the haunting pipe organ while floating in darkness. I can't wait to watch it again. I was able to watch the 70mm IMAX vesion with a full theater. I plan on watching the same version one day during the week, hoping to have an empty theater this time.
__________________
If I had a dollar for every existential crisis I've ever had, does money really even matter?



Master of My Domain
My bladder exploded after watching this movie. Too much coke.