geekhack

geekhack Community => Off Topic => Topic started by: dante on Wed, 05 November 2014, 08:23:12

Title: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: dante on Wed, 05 November 2014, 08:23:12
 ;D
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: paicrai on Wed, 05 November 2014, 08:44:18
the trailer was just "LOOK AT THE ACTOR WE GOT" i still dont know what its about
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: 0100010 on Wed, 05 November 2014, 09:08:06
the trailer was just "LOOK AT THE ACTOR WE GOT" i still dont know what its about

This.  Still might see it though.
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: dante on Wed, 05 November 2014, 09:29:12
the trailer was just "LOOK AT THE ACTOR WE GOT" i still dont know what its about

Unfortunately the trailer showed more than I wish it did.  That being said, it's almost 3 hours long so there is plenty of stuff not seen yet.

The 35mm version was available locally between Tues-Thurs, Fri+ is digital which I am going to see again.  The music was a bit muffled in 35mm but even so I'm ready to buy the soundtrack which is something I've never done before.  It's good!
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: Karura on Sun, 09 November 2014, 16:14:03
the trailer was just "LOOK AT THE ACTOR WE GOT" i still dont know what its about

Unfortunately the trailer showed more than I wish it did.  That being said, it's almost 3 hours long so there is plenty of stuff not seen yet.

The 35mm version was available locally between Tues-Thurs, Fri+ is digital which I am going to see again.  The music was a bit muffled in 35mm but even so I'm ready to buy the soundtrack which is something I've never done before.  It's good!
While I really enjoyed the film, I found the soundtrack to be disruptive and loud in certain scenes (similar to Inception, done by Hans Zimmer as well), and not very memorable as a whole.

That said, I will have to watch it again and pay more attention to it the second time!
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: dante on Mon, 10 November 2014, 20:28:53
I'm going to see it again in i-Max in the next few days.  This is my favorite music from the movie - probably the main reason I'm buying the sound track.  I will definitely need to check out more of Hans Zimmer's work:

Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: Karura on Mon, 10 November 2014, 22:03:57
I'm going to see it again in i-Max in the next few days.  This is my favorite music from the movie - probably the main reason I'm buying the sound track.  I will definitely need to check out more of Hans Zimmer's work:


Have fun with that. Hans Zimmer basically makes everything lol :D
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: billnye on Mon, 10 November 2014, 22:12:42
I really liked this movie. I was a little worried I would fall asleep, but it was really entertaining! 8/8 would recommend.
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: jdcarpe on Mon, 10 November 2014, 23:48:44
There were a couple reasons why I was reminded of Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey. I think it will be regarded as a classic film of our time.
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: dante on Tue, 11 November 2014, 12:53:52
Just found (http://www.watertower-music.com/releases_spotlight.php?search=WTM39546_interstellar) out that there will be three versions of the sound track.   :thumb:
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: baldgye on Thu, 13 November 2014, 15:13:11
There were a couple reasons why I was reminded of Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey. I think it will be regarded as a classic film of our time.

Where those reasons that he couldn't work out if he wanted to try and remake it or not?

Watched it last night, seriously meh movie. I don't and continue not know why people rate Nolan so high. His Batman movies where good but difficult to re-watch due to Batmans silly comedy voice, and really the only good batman movie he made was The Dark Knight. Inception was just desperate to be the next Matrix... And this just seems desperate to be the next 2001.

The plot was silly, over dramatic and it went on for far too long. It's not a bad movie and it had some cool scenes, but seriously meh.


For me Prometheus remains this decades best Sci-fi movie, by a pretty large margin.
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: StylinGreymon on Thu, 13 November 2014, 15:31:11
B-but Prometheus was awful...
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: dante on Thu, 13 November 2014, 16:35:15
There were a couple reasons why I was reminded of Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey. I think it will be regarded as a classic film of our time.

Watched it last night, seriously meh movie. I don't and continue not know why people rate Nolan so high. His Batman movies where good but difficult to re-watch due to Batmans silly comedy voice, and really the only good batman movie he made was The Dark Knight. Inception was just desperate to be the next Matrix... And this just seems desperate to be the next 2001.

Just a couple comments on this - which incidentally a lot of reviewers have brought up.

1. I don't follow Nolan in any sense.  My wife loves Inception but I thought it sucked.  The Batman movies were ok but nothing I would go back and watch.  What sold me on this movie was how hard they tried to make the special effects as accurate as possible - or at least to what we currently understand as the laws of astro/quantum physics.  For example the Worm Hole special effect clocked in at around 850 terabytes of storage just to render the scene; with Kip Thorne signing off on all of it.  I still want to buy the "Science of Interstellar" book that is being sold as it explains that pretty much everything in the movie is theoretically possible (including the last 1/3 of the movie.)

2. Everyone inevitably brings up 2001; I think I've watched it once - maybe 15-20 years ago.  Maybe I need to rewatch it again because everyone is comparing it to this.   Also, don't just automatically assume everyone has seen 2001.

I can understand what some folks are talking about though and won't turn a blind eye - there are some sound mixing issues - and I think the beginning was a little hurried.  Some people got butt hurt by having the astronaut actor explain worm holes and what not in simple terms - it didn't bother me.
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: baldgye on Thu, 13 November 2014, 17:42:55
If you've not seen 2001 you should probably do something about that ;)

Tbh my biggest issue with the movie was, why not just move to Mars? They have crazy space ****, why not terraform Mars?
I liked the way the movie looks and its respectable how accurate they tried to make it, but that ddoesn't make it a better film.
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: 0100010 on Thu, 13 November 2014, 18:56:42
B-but Prometheus was awful...

Totally this!  I walked into Prometheus with extremely high hopes, and walked out pissed off.  Terrible, awful movie - only redeeming value was the visuals.

Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: jdcarpe on Thu, 13 November 2014, 19:05:49
If you've not seen 2001 you should probably do something about that ;)

Tbh my biggest issue with the movie was, why not just move to Mars? They have crazy space ****, why not terraform Mars?
I liked the way the movie looks and its respectable how accurate they tried to make it, but that ddoesn't make it a better film.

If they could terraform Mars, why not just terraform the Earth again? It's never explicitly stated, but the implication is that we humans somehow ****ed up the planet, typical global warming agenda bull****. Although, it's not central to the plot, so it's mostly harmless.
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: dorkvader on Thu, 13 November 2014, 20:16:30
If you've not seen 2001 you should probably do something about that ;)

Yeah I watched that movie a few years ago.

Probably my least favourite of kubrick's films. The whole things was trippy and made no sense. I was told that I should have read the book first.

what a cop-out. If I want to read a good book, I'll read a book. I love reading. What if I want to watch a good sci-fi film? Are there any that don't require book beforehand?
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: VesperSAINT on Fri, 14 November 2014, 01:51:21
Just watched it. It was pretty damn good. Had more heart than most of Nolan's other movies (or maybe it was just McConaughey's acting). The story overall was pretty good, even though it did get pretty damn convoluted near the end (yes, I understood it while I was watching it), but they tied it up well enough. Overall 9/10.
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: baldgye on Fri, 14 November 2014, 04:29:22
If you've not seen 2001 you should probably do something about that ;)

Yeah I watched that movie a few years ago.

Probably my least favourite of kubrick's films. The whole things was trippy and made no sense. I was told that I should have read the book first.

what a cop-out. If I want to read a good book, I'll read a book. I love reading. What if I want to watch a good sci-fi film? Are there any that don't require book beforehand?


I don't think 2001 requires you to read the book before hand, but it is pretty vague and it leaves a lot to your own interpretation. It's also not my fav Kubic movie but it's iconic.

B-but Prometheus was awful...

Totally this!  I walked into Prometheus with extremely high hopes, and walked out pissed off.  Terrible, awful movie - only redeeming value was the visuals.


Everyone is entitled to there own opinions but please explain why you didn't like Promethus lol
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: mauri on Fri, 14 November 2014, 07:57:41
I liked it alot.
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: StylinGreymon on Sun, 16 November 2014, 22:14:01
The nods to 2001 were lovingly done, as was the score (though I thought it was distractingly similar to David Wingo's score for Take Shelter).
The visuals were spectacular. I loved the physical representation of time, and how they showed the difficulty of trying to successfully dock to something moving in 3 dimensions.
I definitely teared up at some points.

I didn't like how distracting the score was at certain quiet moments, nor how it sometimes overwhelmed the dialog (though that may have been the venue's speaker placement at fault).
Also thought that the movie didn't need an antagonist at all, so certain character arcs could've been done away with entirely.

Favorite movie this year, though I haven't seen very many.
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: dante on Sun, 16 November 2014, 23:35:35
(http://pixel.nymag.com/imgs/daily/vulture/2014/11/11/tars-posters/11-the-tars-knight.o.jpg/a_560x0.jpg)
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: StylinGreymon on Sun, 16 November 2014, 23:49:45
God, those robots were so dumb...
They didn't match the look or the tone of the movie at all.
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: baldgye on Mon, 17 November 2014, 01:35:14
Robots imo were one of the best things about the movie
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: StylinGreymon on Mon, 17 November 2014, 05:28:18
Romilly: saddest character ever, or the saddest character ever?

I mean, what a story arc...
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: baldgye on Mon, 17 November 2014, 06:43:06
Idk I thought his son's story was pretty tragic, in how it was written... And how it is never resolved, or how no one cares about him after his sister works out the watch magic
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: Belfong on Mon, 17 November 2014, 07:52:22
I saw it in IMAX and it was a great experience. I like how accurate they portrayed sound in space - none - during the docking or the explosion scene, there was no sound  :thumb: I also like how the stage was set in the first hour of the show. How the earth was sick and that there was just so much dust. I do have a hard time understanding the main actor's accent have to resort to translated subtitles once a while. Other than that, it was a remarkable movie. I don't get the last part of the show where he was in this time warp from a different dimension or something. How did he get there? What's happening?
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: mauri on Mon, 17 November 2014, 08:03:20
I saw it in IMAX and it was a great experience. I like how accurate they portrayed sound in space - none - during the docking or the explosion scene, there was no sound  :thumb: I also like how the stage was set in the first hour of the show. How the earth was sick and that there was just so much dust. I do have a hard time understanding the main actor's accent have to resort to translated subtitles once a while. Other than that, it was a remarkable movie. I don't get the last part of the show where he was in this time warp from a different dimension or something. How did he get there? What's happening?

spacetime .. something something only gravity can exist in past present and future something humans evolution something ascension to 5th dimension.
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: Belfong on Mon, 17 November 2014, 08:06:28
Yeah! That part about gravity transcending the there existences are totally Greek to me. I'm not so smart :(
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: mauri on Mon, 17 November 2014, 08:10:30
Yeah! That part about gravity transcending the there existences are totally Greek to me. I'm not so smart :(

Wibbly Wobbly Timey Wimey...Stuff
Title: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: Belfong on Mon, 17 November 2014, 08:14:15
I gotta say though, I totally dig that water world. The way the tsunami rise and came towards them - very simple in execution but it's just so mind blowing.

But then, how is it that a trip from the orbit into the planet could have age the other guy by 23 years? He was just at the orbit of the planet. It's like saying people in International Space Station just above us will age faster. Did the movie explain why?
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: mauri on Mon, 17 November 2014, 08:16:36
I gotta say though, I totally dig that water world. The way the tsunami rise and came towards them - very simple in execution but it's just so mind blowing.

But then, how is it that a trip from the orbit into the planet could have age the other guy by 23 years? He was just at the orbit of the planet. It's like saying people in International Space Station just above us will age faster. Did the movie explain why?

Time relativity, due to the black hole.

And Romilly wasn't orbiting the planet, he was orbiting the Gargantua aka the black hole. At least that's what I gather from this time line picture.

http://imgur.com/gallery/MgwWMFU
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: baldgye on Mon, 17 November 2014, 08:23:02
I gotta say though, I totally dig that water world. The way the tsunami rise and came towards them - very simple in execution but it's just so mind blowing.

But then, how is it that a trip from the orbit into the planet could have age the other guy by 23 years? He was just at the orbit of the planet. It's like saying people in International Space Station just above us will age faster. Did the movie explain why?

Time relativity, due to the black hole. Doubt there are any scientific grounds to that.
Wat
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: mauri on Mon, 17 November 2014, 08:27:41
I gotta say though, I totally dig that water world. The way the tsunami rise and came towards them - very simple in execution but it's just so mind blowing.

But then, how is it that a trip from the orbit into the planet could have age the other guy by 23 years? He was just at the orbit of the planet. It's like saying people in International Space Station just above us will age faster. Did the movie explain why?

Time relativity, due to the black hole. Doubt there are any scientific grounds to that.
Wat

We got the science when are we leaving
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: baldgye on Mon, 17 November 2014, 08:36:18
I still think the whole idea that the only available planets where, right next to a blackhole... Talk about contrived lol
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: p3rhaps on Mon, 17 November 2014, 08:39:52
It's like saying people in International Space Station just above us will age faster. Did the movie explain why?

Actually, Astronauts in the ISS above us age slower. They age 0.007 seconds slower than people on Earth.

http://ideonexus.com/2009/02/17/how-much-does-time-dilate-for-the-iss-astronauts/
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: Belfong on Mon, 17 November 2014, 08:51:36
Oh! Romilly was orbiting Gargantua? Ok, I can accept that. But really? How did they dock back? That would waiting years for it to swing in.
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: mauri on Mon, 17 November 2014, 09:05:59
I still think the whole idea that the only available planets where, right next to a blackhole... Talk about contrived lol

Well first of all, the wormhole leading to the other galaxy didn't just appear, it was put there by "them aka future us". So there was a reasoning; a black hole that could "age" McConagheys daughter to understand sciency **** and at the same time have his dad be alive to be the puppet master

Love conquers all rabble rabble

But back to topic, the soundtrack was immaculate. Hans Zimmer is a god
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: baldgye on Mon, 17 November 2014, 09:27:25
I still think the whole idea that the only available planets where, right next to a blackhole... Talk about contrived lol

Well first of all, the wormhole leading to the other galaxy didn't just appear, it was put there by "them aka future us". So there was a reasoning; a black hole that could "age" McConagheys daughter to understand sciency **** and at the same time have his dad be alive to be the puppet master

Love conquers all rabble rabble

But back to topic, the soundtrack was immaculate. Hans Zimmer is a god

What?
I know future humans put the worm hole there, at a really odd place, probably because Venus looks cooler than Mars, but given that there are more stars in the galaxy than black holes, couldn't they have simply picked a collection of planets, or indeed single planet that better matched earth? Hell given what we know already via Hubble and other space telescopes we have found various planets that seem to be nicer than the ones they found, without a massive black hole next door.
The whole thing was so contrived and silly. It only existed to give Chris a reason to age everyone and include time in the plot. Like his son, he only has a son in the movie so that someone can give him updates about earth etc whole his daughter hates him/refuses to talk to him because she's super emo...
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: mauri on Mon, 17 November 2014, 09:31:30
I still think the whole idea that the only available planets where, right next to a blackhole... Talk about contrived lol

Well first of all, the wormhole leading to the other galaxy didn't just appear, it was put there by "them aka future us". So there was a reasoning; a black hole that could "age" McConagheys daughter to understand sciency **** and at the same time have his dad be alive to be the puppet master

Love conquers all rabble rabble

But back to topic, the soundtrack was immaculate. Hans Zimmer is a god

What?
I know future humans put the worm hole there, at a really odd place, probably because Venus looks cooler than Mars, but given that there are more stars in the galaxy than black holes, couldn't they have simply picked a collection of planets, or indeed single planet that better matched earth? Hell given what we know already via Hubble and other space telescopes we have found various planets that seem to be nicer than the ones they found, without a massive black hole next door.
The whole thing was so contrived and silly. It only existed to give Chris a reason to age everyone and include time in the plot. Like his son, he only has a son in the movie so that someone can give him updates about earth etc whole his daughter hates him/refuses to talk to him because she's super emo...

They would've never solved the gravity problem without getting the quantum data? Sure Plan B would've worked if it was just a normal galaxy with a earth-like planet however that wouldn't have been a happy enough ending.

After that it gets pretty tricky.. "they" needed us to teach ourselves how to leave because they couldn't comprehend/exist outside of the 5th dimension or some ****.

Over-analyzing movies takes all the fun out of it imo, especially in scifi just eat that **** up.
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: baldgye on Mon, 17 November 2014, 09:45:50
Right, but the only way that future 'us' would have know that flying into a blackhole was totally cool would have been to fly into one?
Maybe I missed something but there just seems to be a bit of a logic loop, they couldn't have ever saved the people on earth, without flying into a blackhole, thus flying into the magical gravity thing, that allows you to manipulate time?
Which then allows him to send morse coded messages to his daughter who can feel him there due to 'love' (which is the most retarded logic thinkable) who then solves the riddle and saves earth?

Like I said, maybe I missed something, but if future humans can do all this, why didn't they simply email someone the ****ing maths to someone before the problem with earth ever came up? Or better yet, why didn't they email them the cure to the plague that was DESTOTYING (idk why that's in all caps, ask iOS auto correct) earth?




I know trying to dissect this stuff is missing the point to some extent, but the movies plot seemed so super dumb and super contrived, especially given how much effort was taken to ground a lot of science in actual science.
The plot reminded me actually of a really terrible movie that came out a year or two ago, it was a love movie about a ginger guy who can time travel, except when he has kids and all the men in his family been able to do it. Both dumb contrived plots that only exist for the sake of telling a meh story.
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: dante on Mon, 17 November 2014, 09:51:49
(http://pixel.nymag.com/imgs/daily/vulture/2014/11/11/tars-posters/11-the-fault-in-our-tars.o.jpg/a_560x0.jpg)
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: mauri on Mon, 17 November 2014, 10:09:49
Right, but the only way that future 'us' would have know that flying into a blackhole was totally cool would have been to fly into one?
Maybe I missed something but there just seems to be a bit of a logic loop, they couldn't have ever saved the people on earth, without flying into a blackhole, thus flying into the magical gravity thing, that allows you to manipulate time?
Which then allows him to send morse coded messages to his daughter who can feel him there due to 'love' (which is the most retarded logic thinkable) who then solves the riddle and saves earth?

Like I said, maybe I missed something, but if future humans can do all this, why didn't they simply email someone the ****ing maths to someone before the problem with earth ever came up? Or better yet, why didn't they email them the cure to the plague that was DESTOTYING (idk why that's in all caps, ask iOS auto correct) earth?




I know trying to dissect this stuff is missing the point to some extent, but the movies plot seemed so super dumb and super contrived, especially given how much effort was taken to ground a lot of science in actual science.
The plot reminded me actually of a really terrible movie that came out a year or two ago, it was a love movie about a ginger guy who can time travel, except when he has kids and all the men in his family been able to do it. Both dumb contrived plots that only exist for the sake of telling a meh story.

They way I saw it was that they had ascended beyond this realm and couldn't interfere much. Cooper himself had to figure out the way to communicate with us. Sorta like a proxy of "them" without "them" affecting our decisions and actions. They did open up a wormhole to destination the new galaxy, maybe it had something to do with gravity as it was the only thing that existed outside of time?

Maybe "they" had ran simulations of every and each human beying varying for generations til they found how to save the human race (time paradox of sorts)

I don't think the plague that was the only problem, it was just another symptom of our planet dying. At least that's what I feel like was implied.

There always comes a point in scifi where you simply cannot argue with the storytellers reasoning because he can always make **** up


"yeah but you have to take to account the multiverse translater gravitonial beam syncronizer"
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: dorkvader on Mon, 17 November 2014, 11:26:23
but given that there are more stars in the galaxy than black holes, couldn't they have simply picked a collection of planets, or indeed single planet that better matched earth?
Can't give you that as a given. We don't know that there are more stars than black holes, partially because the only evidence we have of black holes is circumstancial: that is: we observe their effect on nearby things to "know" there's a massive object in the vicinity that's not emitting anything. If a black hole is out on its own we can't detect it. We also can't resolve individual planets (usually) unless they're really close, which means there can easily exist black holes with planets orbiting that we have no way of currently knowing about.

Actually, black holes at random is my pet theory explaining the mass curve of the milky way.
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: dorkvader on Mon, 17 November 2014, 13:33:37
Maybe I missed something but there just seems to be a bit of a logic loop, they couldn't have ever saved the people on earth, without flying into a blackhole, thus flying into the magical gravity thing, that allows you to manipulate time?
That's what you get when you violate causality.

I do think that after Cooper does hes thing in the black hole, he "magically" gets teleported back to the solar system or wherever he ended up at the end was a bit of a deus-ex machina (and the whole "seconds of oxygen left" certainly was, but it's so common I'll allow them the trope)

so the movie isn't perfect but I quite liked it. I also don't think that the music was too loud, but some of the SFX were. It's tough to hear them talking over the noise of rocket engines (understandably so)
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: MOZ on Mon, 17 November 2014, 13:44:40
I thought the movie was okay. Not bad, definitely worth a watch but I think I was expecting more from it.

The scientific inaccuracies were aplenty and the whole "love" is the 5th dimension crap was Bollywood-esque. I liked the first half (Up until Mann shows up), till then things were alright, even with their scientific flaws, post that, it just became terrible. I am starting to think Nolan's reputation preceded his work as far as this movie goes, and many a people are rating the movie highly because it is from Nolan. McConaughey is a great actor and has given some good performances recently (read Dallas Buyers Club, True Detectives) however he wasn't convincing in this movie, certainly not as the best pilot NASA has available. None of the other performances stood out either. The outer space scenes didn't look as good either, perhaps because Gravity was released recently and was brilliant in this department. Hans Zimmer however was the bright star for me, I really liked the background score and it was immersive, specially for the parts of the movie where it was very slow. Yeah, I'm not even going to go into the pacing issues of the movie.

Interesting idea. Great Cast and Crew. High Potential. Much Disappointment.
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: dorkvader on Mon, 17 November 2014, 15:40:26
McConaughey is a great actor and has given some good performances recently (read Dallas Buyers Club, True Detectives)
Not to mention those Lincoln commercials.
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: VesperSAINT on Mon, 17 November 2014, 15:56:14
Not to mention those Lincoln commercials.

Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: jacobolus on Thu, 20 November 2014, 03:19:16
Impressions:

1) Special effects were mostly pretty cool.
2) The acting was pretty good, but the actors weren’t given the best material to work with.
3) The writing was spotty. Some of it okay, some of it totally sucked.
4) The plot made no sense; parts were just left entirely unexplained, the rest was pieced together like a post-2000 Simpsons episode. To take the first available example, the whole “the earth is dying and theres’s nothing anyone can do but we didn’t have time to figure out why or explain it to the audience” thing is weak sauce. Having love + an ******* father’s promise reach across time and space to save humanity is an incredibly cheesy plot device.
5) The physics was totally broken (to take a tiny example, as someone pointed out to me, they needed a massive rocket with several booster stages to get off of Earth, but the little dinky landing ship was able to get off a planet with >2x Earth gravity with absolutely no problem. wtf? and things only get worse from there). For a movie that pretends to be semi-hard SF, there’s an awful lot of mystical bull****.

I don’t think the creators of this movie really had anything they were trying to say. Instead, I think they started with 10 completely unrelated scenes with awesome special effects, and then were like “oh ****, how can we fit these into the same movie.” Oh, and someone was clearly a big fan of 2001, and tried to copy as much from that film as they could manage to pack in.

I think this is Nolan’s weakest film yet. Memento is probably one of my top 10 favorites all time, and the Prestige was also an amazing film. Inception and the Batman movies were flashy and fun but weak as stories and very overrated IMO, especially the last Batman movie. And now this mess.

Anyway, I enjoyed myself. Worth watching once in IMAX for the scenery, but this movie will soon be forgotten. Among semi-realistic space movies, this is dramatically overshadowed by Gravity.

Show Image
(http://pixel.nymag.com/imgs/daily/vulture/2014/11/11/tars-posters/11-the-tars-knight.o.jpg/a_560x0.jpg)

LOLOLOL
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: iri on Thu, 20 November 2014, 04:45:40
The acting was pretty good, but the actors weren’t given the best material to work with.
i like how gently you put it.
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: Belfong on Sat, 22 November 2014, 01:07:35
From iTunes, it seemed that Nolan made a movie called Insomnia. Anyone saw that?
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: StylinGreymon on Sat, 22 November 2014, 01:18:38
From iTunes, it seemed that Nolan made a movie called Insomnia. Anyone saw that?
Yeah, it had Al Pacino in it, I think.

It was pretty forgettable.
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: Belfong on Sat, 22 November 2014, 01:19:56
Ha? Bad huh? Ok, probably have to rent that then.
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: StylinGreymon on Sat, 22 November 2014, 01:25:13
It wasn't bad at all, it just didn't stick with me.
Worth a watch, if you've seen everything else Nolan has done.
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: jacobolus on Sat, 22 November 2014, 01:28:17
Oh huh, I had forgotten that was Nolan.

Worth watching just to see Robin Williams in a very uncharacteristic role. That one and One Hour Photo which came out around the same time.
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: iri on Sat, 22 November 2014, 04:41:48
when watching insomnia, i thought "why the hell can't americans sleep during polar days" and fell asleep. it was during a polar day.
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: dante on Thu, 27 November 2014, 21:36:49
someone transcribed and is playing the main docking tune:
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: singaporean123 on Thu, 27 November 2014, 21:48:08
I feel like you'd enjoy the movie more if you take it as it is-a movie.

If you're trying to make too much sense of things , you'd see that there are loopholes, and that may eventually ruin the movie for you.
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: Saf_Rimons on Sat, 29 November 2014, 10:10:47
After seeing last night I didn't think much about it but now that it has settled in and I had a few moments to look at this:
(http://i.imgur.com/VSqX4Si.jpg)

It starts to make more sense. I'm not saying it was hard to grasp at first, it's just the second I left the movie I wasn't quite sure where to start; discussing the plot, space, etc. My friend was blown away with all the black hole stuff which was pretty cool, granted we don't really know much about black holes to begin with.

I wanna say that Nolan tried to keep all these space concepts grounded somehow, like Cooper and his love for his family, that's what made the movie super dramatic. I wasn't so much worried that the mission would fail, admittedly we all had that gut feeling something good was going to come out of this billion dollar space mission. Nolan did a good job keeping Cooper and Murph as close as the could get even thought they were millions of light years away. That being said, People who are really into other sci-fi probably wouldn't appreciate as much as Nolan fans and people of other film tastes.

The other friend I went with was more interested in the relationships formed on the mission and the ones on Earth, she felt more of a connection that way. I guess it puts space travel into perspective, and for some it hits close to home if you have ever been separated from a loved one for an extended period of time. People can relate easily to emotion, which is why I liked Mann's monologue about how love transcends dimensions, not sure exactly what he said but you will know what I am talking about. Also, F*** you Matt Damon I had high hopes for you doing the right thing and then you went space-crazy.

One more thing that I liked was those block robots. They added that perfect companionship roll, and (sorry if I am stating the obvious) they were funny when the movie needed it. All in all the movie was cool, but I don't plan on spending $9 and another 3 hours watching it again. It IS just a movie, no matter how real they try and make it, it is supposed to capture your imagination.
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: Heliosphere on Sat, 29 November 2014, 15:11:53
someone transcribed and is playing the main docking tune:

That docking scene and the music gave me chills. I found the movie entertaining despite all its logical holes; the movie was 3 hours but the movie was good enough that it didn't feel long. I think they tried their best to make it somewhat scientifically accurate. One will probably have a better time not going into the movie expecting anything groundbreaking or hard-sciencey.

You guys should read this satirical "abridged script" of Interstellar which points out all the silliness in the movie: http://www.the-editing-room.com/interstellar.html (http://www.the-editing-room.com/interstellar.html)

Edit: Just found this recreation of the docking scene: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-TkSkptsyuY (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-TkSkptsyuY)
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: dorkvader on Sat, 29 November 2014, 17:55:13
I feel like you'd enjoy the movie more if you take it as it is-a movie.

If you're trying to make too much sense of things , you'd see that there are loopholes, and that may eventually ruin the movie for you.
I think people were expecting a more "hard" sci-fi movie and are therefore less willing to suspend their disbelief.

Though I don't think "hard sci fi" applies to 2001. I'm usually good at such things, but in this case was completely unable to believe in this one. Certainly the worst kubrick film I've seen.
Oh huh, I had forgotten that was Nolan.

Worth watching just to see Robin Williams in a very uncharacteristic role. That one and One Hour Photo which came out around the same time.

And The final cut. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Final_Cut_%282004_film%29)
I think some of his best movies were the more serious ones.
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: jacobolus on Sat, 29 November 2014, 18:26:57
Though I don't think "hard sci fi" applies to 2001. I'm usually good at such things, but in this case was completely unable to believe in this one. Certainly the worst kubrick film I've seen.
I think it’s much harder to appreciate 2001 in 2014 than in 1968. Too many of the things that were shocking and new about it have now soaked through popular culture and film culture, and seem obvious or clichéd. It’s a film about the imagery rather than the plot or acting, so when the imagery stops having the same punch, it just seems slow and rambling.
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: SpAmRaY on Fri, 08 May 2015, 08:03:34
I finally watched this last night, I liked it.
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: noisyturtle on Fri, 08 May 2015, 08:28:02
I thought it was a tad too long, and I hate how Anne Hathaway always has this look on her face like she farted and is holding back a laugh until someone notices.
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: katushkin on Fri, 08 May 2015, 08:51:33
I honestly have no idea why it didn't win more than one oscar. I don't usually cry at films. But I could feel it coming with this film.

MUUURPH. DON'T LET ME GOOO MUUUUURRRRPH

 :'(
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: baldgye on Fri, 08 May 2015, 10:19:02
I hate how Anne Hathaway always has this look on her face like she farted and is holding back a laugh until someone notices.

it's not fair to hate someones whole acting style
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: neverused on Fri, 08 May 2015, 10:28:25
I hate how Anne Hathaway always has this look on her face like she farted and is holding back a laugh until someone notices.

it's not fair to hate someones whole acting style
I can't stand Matthew Mcconaughey or his acting. The Family Guy sketch with him and Stewie is spot on.
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: iri on Fri, 08 May 2015, 10:40:53
I hate how Anne Hathaway always has this look on her face like she farted and is holding back a laugh until someone notices.

it's not fair to hate someones whole acting style
I can't stand Matthew Mcconaughey or his acting. The Family Guy sketch with him and Stewie is spot on.
so you aren't able to watch True Detective? sad.
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: neverused on Fri, 08 May 2015, 10:46:44
I hate how Anne Hathaway always has this look on her face like she farted and is holding back a laugh until someone notices.

it's not fair to hate someones whole acting style
I can't stand Matthew Mcconaughey or his acting. The Family Guy sketch with him and Stewie is spot on.
so you aren't able to watch True Detective? sad.
I heard good things about it, but sadly I avoided it.
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: tp4tissue on Fri, 08 May 2015, 11:03:14
I thought it was a tad too long, and I hate how Anne Hathaway always has this look on her face like she farted and is holding back a laugh until someone notices.

At the end of the day.. 

Who cares,   she's pretty..... (http://www.cute-factor.com/images/smilies/onion/014.gif)
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: Oobly on Fri, 08 May 2015, 17:01:33
I think it's time I watched this....

And just a note about terraforming Mars.. Not gonna happen. Ever. It doesn't have enough gravity to hold a "normal earth" atmosphere. Hope this doesn't burst anyone's hopes of living on Mars bubble, but if you're gonna live there, it's gonna be IN a bubble.
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: tp4tissue on Fri, 08 May 2015, 18:26:00
I think it's time I watched this....

And just a note about terraforming Mars.. Not gonna happen. Ever. It doesn't have enough gravity to hold a "normal earth" atmosphere. Hope this doesn't burst anyone's hopes of living on Mars bubble, but if you're gonna live there, it's gonna be IN a bubble.


After WWIII  we would probably only have 1/10 of the current population remaining.

Through it all, the war would end all ethical obstructions to the development of advanced bio-engineering.


The nex-gen humans would not need air,  they'd probably need a base supplement liquid for the brain + electricity for all other parts...
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: paradox on Sun, 10 May 2015, 12:45:43
I hate how Anne Hathaway always has this look on her face like she farted and is holding back a laugh until someone notices.

it's not fair to hate someones whole acting style
I can't stand Matthew Mcconaughey or his acting. The Family Guy sketch with him and Stewie is spot on.

That Family Guy sketch is before he had his "renaissance" and started winning awards.

Before his recent work, I didn't like or hate McConaughey but he sort of won me over with True Detective and Dallas Buyers Club.

That being said, his whispery, philosophical acting style is beginning to grate on me starting with those Lincoln commercials.  Some of it was present in Interstellar but overall I thought he was fine in it.
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: Asininity on Sun, 10 May 2015, 14:33:22
All I could think of was Space Core.

(http://theportalwiki.com/wiki/File:Space_Sphere_from_Shirt.png)

Spaaaaaaace!
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: tp4tissue on Sun, 10 May 2015, 20:57:19
All I could think of was Space Core.

Show Image
(http://theportalwiki.com/wiki/File:Space_Sphere_from_Shirt.png)


Spaaaaaaace!

what's space core.
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: Asininity on Wed, 13 May 2015, 00:17:52
All I could think of was Space Core.

Show Image
(http://theportalwiki.com/wiki/File:Space_Sphere_from_Shirt.png)


Spaaaaaaace!

what's space core.

Have you not played Portal 2?
Title: Re: Interstellar: A brief movie review
Post by: tp4tissue on Wed, 13 May 2015, 11:15:28
All I could think of was Space Core.

Show Image
(http://theportalwiki.com/wiki/File:Space_Sphere_from_Shirt.png)


Spaaaaaaace!

what's space core.

Have you not played Portal 2?

Was that an audio tag line..   I played port 2 without sound..