Questions about Interstellar

Tools    





There's some things about Interstellar that have me completely baffled, i was hoping some fans of the movie could help me out with.

1) How were they panning on moving the Earth and its inhabitants to another planet? If it was explained was it plausible?

2) How come they didnt try to colonise Mars?

3) Why was the base that Cooper discovered, hidden? If it was NASA, why was it hidden?

4) Professor Brand on his death bed tells the daughter that Cooper and his team had zero chance of succeeding, so why send them out on the mission?? Why make Cooper go on the mission and have him miss his daughter grow up.

5) Tying back to the first question, how would that even work, in terms of logistics, of transporting a planet and all its inabitants (lets say for arguments sake 10 billion), to an entirely different solar system? How would all the people be fed? Isnt this science fiction at its most absurd?

6) Wasnt it poorly thoughtout to send astronauts through a wormhole? What if was only one way travel and they couldnt enter back into the worm hole to get back?

7)Was anyone else frustrated and annoyed with how the movie ended? I suew was. i felt it was so tacky for them to say love was the most powerful force in the universe and it goes to a scene where people are living in space. It made me roll my eyes. Why does Hollywood have to end every movie, even sci fi movies in such a tacky way.

I would greatly appreciate if anyone could have a go at answering these questions.



We've gone on holiday by mistake
1) Several giant space stations were constructed, they just couldn't get them off the Earth. This was explained in movie.

2) Mars in not habitable. Guess they left terra forming out of this movie.

3) Not really sure. Maybe because resources were scarce they didn't want people asking "why do we have a NASA"?

4) Plan B. The plan was really to arrive at another planet and "grow" humans, saving the human race but not the people on Earth. Professor Brand had solved his equation and knew they could never get the Space stations off Earth without data relating to Gravity.

5) Read the above.

6) No, it was rather the only choice imo.

7) Didn't think it was tacky but the whole ending sequence was very ambitious.

Great movie I think, watch it again to understand it more.
__________________



Welcome to the human race...
1) How were they panning on moving the Earth and its inhabitants to another planet? If it was explained was it plausible?
As I recall, the plan (that was apparently realised at the end of the film) was that the space station from the end of the film would serve as a checkpoint (since it was located near the wormhole) to connect Earth to whatever other planet they'd end up colonised. I'm not sure if they'd be able to move the entire population, even if it was drastically reduced over the passage of several decades. It might have just ended up being like Blade Runner or something where the rich and privileged are able to move off-world while the have-nots are basically stuck on Earth because they can't or won't be rescued.

2) How come they didnt try to colonise Mars?
That might have had something to do with the fact that it was well-established that Mars was a cold and generally inhospitable planet. Since the NASA people were aware of the existence of a wormhole, my guess is that they figured that they should at least explore it in search of some better planets to terraform.

3) Why was the base that Cooper discovered, hidden? If it was NASA, why was it hidden?
Since the planet was experiencing a massive blight, the government was outwardly trying to put as much focus on farming and food production. This is evident in the scene where Cooper talks to his kids' teachers and it is revealed that the textbooks have been rewritten to discourage students from pursuing other goals such as space flight. Under these circumstances, NASA operations would have to be hidden so as to not draw negative/unwanted attention.

4) Professor Brand on his death bed tells the daughter that Cooper and his team had zero chance of succeeding, so why send them out on the mission?? Why make Cooper go on the mission and have him miss his daughter grow up.
I think the idea is that the mission as Cooper understood it ("Plan A") was that they were supposed to find a new planet for the human race to colonise and relocate to. What Professor Brand meant was that there was a Plan B that was actually intended to re-establish the human race using a collection of various diverse embryos (even though that would mean that all the humans left on Earth would presumably die). The idea was that "Plan A" would require the gravity equation necessary to make building the space station possible, but since that science didn't exist at the time Professor Brand came up with the "Plan B" to guarantee humankind's survival even if everyone on Earth died.

5) Tying back to the first question, how would that even work, in terms of logistics, of transporting a planet and all its inabitants (lets say for arguments sake 10 billion), to an entirely different solar system? How would all the people be fed? Isnt this science fiction at its most absurd?
That's not just tying back to the first question, that's basically re-phrasing the exact same question. Also, I figure that, between the blight and the decline of medical technology (case in point - Cooper's wife apparently dying due to a lack of MRI machines), the population is probably even lower than 10 billion, even with the passage of several decades between now and the beginning of the film. Even so, the film never actually seems to state that literally every human being on Earth is going to be saved. The idea is to save the species more so than the people (hence the Plan B I mentioned earlier), so the goal is to colonise another world because Earth is apparently dying. At least with the space station there are going to be more people saved, but I wouldn't be surprised if there was a pecking order that prioritised sending V.I.P.s into space instead of, well, everyone. That or Interstellar is just absurd anyway.

6) Wasnt it poorly thoughtout to send astronauts through a wormhole? What if was only one way travel and they couldnt enter back into the worm hole to get back?
Considering the fact that the alternative is to stay on Earth until the food runs out, it was probably a risk they were willing to take.

[quote]7)Was anyone else frustrated and annoyed with how the movie ended? I suew was. i felt it was so tacky for them to say love was the most powerful force in the universe and it goes to a scene where people are living in space. It made me roll my eyes. Why does Hollywood have to end every movie, even sci fi movies in such a tacky way./QUOTE]

This question needs to be clearer.
__________________
I really just want you all angry and confused the whole time.
Iro's Top 100 Movies v3.0