The Sword and Laser discussion

125 views
TV, Movies and Games > Interstellar *spoilers*

Comments Showing 1-43 of 43 (43 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by [deleted user] (new)

So, I just saw it and am curious about what people thought?

I enjoyed the movie pre-black hole, but it turned sour for me after that.


message 2: by Trike (new)

Trike | 8768 comments So I saw Interstellar this afternoon. I should have trusted my instincts... it's a rental at best. It's definitely no Gravity. How a pilot/engineer/astronaut could *possibly* be unfamiliar with wormholes is beyond me. I know you need to explain crap to the audience, but not at the expense of making your lead look like a moron. This is grade school stuff.

It didn't help that an elderly couple came in after I did and the geezer felt the need to mansplain everything to his wife. Which is bad enough, but that dolt was wrong about EVERYTHING.

No, mister, the asteroid belt is NOT a fucking hazard to space travel. It's 99.99999% empty space. The next time you go up in a plane, look out the window. Do you see any other planes? Almost never. And the density of planes in the air over America is something on the order of ten BILLION times greater than the prevalence of rocks in the asteroid belt.

By the time he got to tackling Einstein's Theory of Relativity (by which he meant the *Special* Theory of Relativity, not the general one), I was praying for a stroke. Him or me, I didn't care.

There's one scene where the baseball player lets a hit roll through his legs and he old guy shouts, "Oh come on!" Dude, the game isn't actually HAPPENING, and the reason he missed the ball is because he was looking at the giant sandstorm coming over the horizon.

There's a rule in movies -- if a big star suddenly shows up out of nowhere and his name wasn't in the credits and he wasn't in the trailers, 9 times out of 10 he's either going to end up dead or be the killer. So when Matt Damon showed up, I knew right away he was both, because of the ham-fisted foreshadowing. Sure enough....

Interstellar is basically an episode of Star Trek. With a touch of Inception.

The only thing I really liked about it was the Texas school system teaching that the Apollo landings were faked in order to bankrupt the USSR. And by "liked" I mean "terrified," because it's all too true these days.


message 3: by [deleted user] (new)

Trike wrote: "So I saw Interstellar this afternoon. I should have trusted my instincts... it's a rental at best. It's definitely no Gravity. How a pilot/engineer/astronaut could *possibly* be unfamiliar with wor..."

I actually think the scenes with Matt Damon were among the most honest ones. He wanted to be a hero. He was raised on media which propagated the idea of the "male hero who sacrifices all" and he dedicated a lot of his outward persona in trying to become this hero. And he couldn't. When push came to shove, he couldn't. I didn't need his death to be shocking for it to mean something. Whedon's deaths are always shocking but also lackluster for the reason that they come out of nowhere.

But I far from found the movie perfect. :/ And I agree with you on a lot of points. I'd be willing to forgive the pseudoscience if the plot was good and if it wasn't essentially riding on the science.


message 4: by Trike (new)

Trike | 8768 comments It was just so clunky.

There were moments that I quite liked ("I just got you suspended."), but overall I didn't care for it. I didn't buy the rationale of the blight, I could not believe that either McConaughey or Catwoman were actual scientists, the space shuttles were a little too out there to be plausible, and they always had the right (or wrong) amount of fill-in-the-blank just when the plot dictated they would.

If it hadn't been sold to me as "the greatest hard science fiction movie since 2001!" then maybe... no, not even then.

I'm not terribly demanding of cinematic sci-fi. I just watched the original 1968 Planet of the Apes again last week and enjoyed the heck out of it yet again. And THAT movie is stuffed with all kinds of crazy nonsense. Apes that speak English and have Christian names... where the hell did you think you were, Taylor? But PotA has real verve to it, something Interstellar lacks.

I also saw Big Hero 6 yesterday, and I thought that movie was terrific. It's a lot of fun and tugs on the heartstrings a lot better than all the caterwauling and crying in Interstellar... and there was a helluva lot of that, too.

I will say this for both movies: they have really outdone themselves in coming up with incredibly cool robots, who basically steal the show.


message 5: by Trike (new)

Trike | 8768 comments Neil DeGrasse Tyson is currently tweeting about Interstellar. The tenor of his tweets is that he liked it a lot, while last year he hated Gravity.

Just goes to show that even smart people have blind spots.

As I replied to one of his tweets, in Interstellar they have these superscience magic robots yet they use pencils, which are a known hazard to humans and equipment aboard a spaceship. Neither of which makes sense, but combining them is worse.


message 6: by [deleted user] (new)

Trike wrote: "Neil DeGrasse Tyson is currently tweeting about Interstellar. The tenor of his tweets is that he liked it a lot, while last year he hated Gravity.

Just goes to show that even smart people have bli..."


Well, I don't know, just because you like something doesn't mean it's unlikeable. Maybe, he really liked that they showed that men of colour are involved in interstellar travel. Maybe he enjoyed the plot about fatherhood. :S It doesn't make it a blind spot.


message 7: by Dharmakirti (last edited Nov 10, 2014 09:27AM) (new)

Dharmakirti | 942 comments I really liked this film despite its flaws (the Nolan brothers really could use a script doctor to rework their dialogue).

I was a little let down by the climax, I thought it was too obvious. I did like the way the tessaract was visually represented, however.

One of my favorite images in the film was the way they rendered the black hole. Wow. I want that as a photo or something. http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/spac...


message 8: by Sandi (new)

Sandi (sandikal) | 1212 comments I really enjoyed it. My biggest complaint is the casting of Matthew McC as a genius test pilot/engineer. That guy just doesn't seem very intelligent. He's also not that good of an actor.

The movie reminded me a lot of 2001, especially when Cooper went into the wormhole. I was looking for the space fetus. I also kept waiting for TARS or CASE to start blowing our heroes out the airlock. I guess Matt Damon had to fill the role of HAL instead. I did figure out pretty early that there weren't any aliens, but that the messages and wormhole came from future humans. It's probably best not to think too deeply about it.


message 9: by Trike (new)

Trike | 8768 comments Anja wrote: "Well, I don't know, just because you like something doesn't mean it's unlikeable. Maybe, he really liked that they showed that men of colour are involved in interstellar travel. Maybe he enjoyed the plot about fatherhood. :S It doesn't make it a blind spot."

Well, he's all about black holes -- as in, that's the thing he loves best about space -- so I think that colored his reaction to Interstellar. They got the singularity right (from the outside), so that allows him to forgive its other faults.

I don't know what his problem was with Gravity. He was getting factual things wrong which were openly stated in the movie. It was if he were distracted by something else the entire time he watched it, because it's not like there are a huge number of infodumps in it.


message 10: by Igor (new)

Igor (igorrodrigues) | 13 comments Trike wrote: "Anja wrote: "Well, I don't know, just because you like something doesn't mean it's unlikeable. Maybe, he really liked that they showed that men of colour are involved in interstellar travel. Maybe ..."

Although he got extra picky with scientific inaccuracies in Gravity, he stated that he enjoyed the movie a lot. And regarding Interstellar he said he was merely commenting of scientific facts rather than giving an opinion about the movie itself.


message 11: by [deleted user] (new)

Trike wrote: "Anja wrote: "Well, I don't know, just because you like something doesn't mean it's unlikeable. Maybe, he really liked that they showed that men of colour are involved in interstellar travel. Maybe ..."

I also think going the route of "Everyone who enjoys this movie is blind" is going to alienate people who enjoyed it from commenting on this thread. I know reading positive reviews of something I disliked always helped me see something that I missed.


message 12: by John (Nevets) (new)

John (Nevets) Nevets (nevets) | 1592 comments Well, I saw it tonight. Couldn't turn down a $5 ticket for IMAX. And I really enjoyed it. I don't know if I lost my critical pants somewhere or what, but despite a few things I didn't like in the film, overall I really liked it.


There was a lot of reference to 2001. So much so, I thought they over did it a bit. It was interesting to even use some of the same score, not only as a homage, but more of a cue to the audience, to get us thinking along those lines. I also thought this almost had an M. Night Shamalon (sp) feel to the twists, as apposed to the normal Nolan brother twists. I'm not sure I liked that. I'm also a bit surprised they ended it where they did. They gave it the "Happily Ever After" ending, instead of just ending it when it went to white, and letting the audience decide what happened next. I will say I would never have never trusted another Chris Nolan film if when he had woken up in the hospital it was all a dream. And what made that worse is they got you thinking that for a few seconds, that was almost Whedon'esk in how it played with the trope.


Despite all that, I never got bored, I never felt let down by the ride. And, I never got disappointed. Maybe that was because I knew absolutely nothing about it going in except what was in the trailer, or maybe I did loose my critical pants. I've been enjoying way too many things lately ;-).


message 13: by John (Nevets) (new)

John (Nevets) Nevets (nevets) | 1592 comments Oh, and I have a strong suspicion TerpKristen will absolutely hate this movie. Should we warn her? I'd hate to be wrong, but knowing her feelings on "Gravity", "the Martian", and a few other things, I just don't think it would be her cup of tea.


message 14: by terpkristin (new)

terpkristin | 4188 comments I'm not planning to watch, not for concern of being annoyed with the accuracy, but more because I have found I just don't have the patience (or really, the time) to sit down and watch. Maybe when it comes to HBO I'll put it on while doing other things, but that's a way off. :)

For the record, I only picked on The Martian because I also got bored with it. I don't think the Tobinson Curusoe story is my thing.


message 15: by Mark (new)

Mark | 64 comments John wrote: "Well, I saw it tonight. Couldn't turn down a $5 ticket for IMAX."

Wow, good deal. Interstellar is beautiful in IMAX (as was Gravity); really enjoyed despite a few flaws.


message 16: by Trike (new)

Trike | 8768 comments Nolan is apparently taking exception to bad reviews and is essentially telling people they weren't smart enough to get it the first time around and should go see it again.

That kind of pisses me off.

He really should have just ignored the criticisms, because not everyone is going to like what you make, but insulting those critics is not the way to get people on your side.

Also, it's not the science I have a problem with, it's all the other dumb stuff surrounding it. The whole movie is like a string of Coincidence -> Infodump -> Coincidence -> Infodump, with interstitial caterwauling.


message 17: by Trike (new)

Trike | 8768 comments You know, I think I figured it out: Cooper dies in the crash at the beginning of the movie and everything after that -- all the preposterous coincidences and goofy science adventures -- is just his imagination going wacky and concocting this imaginary life as his brain shuts down due to anoxia.


message 18: by Jeanetta (new)

Jeanetta Lee | 6 comments I liked the movie a lot. I go to movies suspend reality and if I am entertained then I'm happy. I was very entertained. I really like some of the witty lines and the father daughter theme. Plus looking at Matthew Mc-something was a pleasure. I'll probably watch it again when it comes out for rental.


message 19: by Andy (new)

Andy (andy_m) | 311 comments I really liked Interstellar a lot. The movie had me leaning forward in my seat which never happens. I am a sucker for weird robots, interstellar had them in spades. The movie just worked for me.

My biggest criticism is Cooper's son - he got the shaft on the fatherly love the entire movie. The story would have worked better if it had been reworked to just have one child.

Overall I can see the criticism that is directed at the movie, this is just one of those movies that hits me at a lot of levels really really well.


message 20: by [deleted user] (new)

Andy wrote: "I really liked Interstellar a lot. The movie had me leaning forward in my seat which never happens. I am a sucker for weird robots, interstellar had them in spades. The movie just worked for me.

..."


I don't think so. I think in sibling relationships there are situations in which a parent feels more connection to one child over the other and I think that was the point. He was a symbol of people who instead of innovating on ways to solve a problem, just think things will get better on their own and Murph represented those who recognize there's a problem and want to solve it. And it makes sense. Cooper's son was fairly unambitious and just wanted to follow the government checklist of how to live a good life. Get married, become a farmer, have 2.5 children and a white picket fence. He thought he was doing the right thing in taking up what he believed was his father's legacy and he obviously had great love and respect for his father.

And he and Cooper were very different. And Cooper was more attached to the child he believed was his actual legacy, and that was Murph.

I wish Cooper's son was mentioned in the end. I don't believe we know how his story ended. I feel like the story shafted him in the end because he was inconvenient after he served his metaphorical purpose. (Definitely a problem with other characters too. I found the movie often shafted characters when they were metaphorically done with them.) But in terms of having a kid who the parents is less attached to? I can see that.


message 21: by Andy (new)

Andy (andy_m) | 311 comments @Anja

Cooper's son serving his purpose and bowing out stage left is a fair criticism in my mind. It is a character development flaw, I do not think he was all that needed. The role is important as you mentioned, the person living the life that the government wanted, but with it being a child of Cooper, the ending disturbed me.


message 22: by Trike (new)

Trike | 8768 comments I think the ending -- where no one talks to Coop as he visits his daughter and then he goes into the white tunnel to be with his ideal woman, who is both smart and helpless -- is the last of his synapses firing, so he resorts to primal feelings.

I think on some level he knew he was dying, represented by the blight wiping out one crop at a time. It also explains why he was able to fly spaceships he was never trained on as expertly as any robot, why he made them do impossible things at least three times, why everyone thinks he's the greatest pilot ever (all of those being wish fulfillment as he dies in a crash), why they have no food but still have beer, and how his truck never ages in 30+ years, why the super-advanced robots have 1980s monitors in them, they have greatly advanced science yet weirdly dated technology... and all those other weird inconsistencies.


message 23: by John (Nevets) (last edited Nov 15, 2014 12:05AM) (new)

John (Nevets) Nevets (nevets) | 1592 comments Yea, the whole not talking to your grand kids, and at least great grand kids, was very weird. I honestly can't think of anyone who wouldn't want to get a chance to meat there descendants. And like wise why they didn't want to meat him either was odd.

Like I said earlier, I was very surprised the movie didn't end with the white out after he got the message across. The rest just felt tacked on, and didn't add much except a happily ever after for the protagonist, that he didn't need, he should have been content with the knowledge he had gotten the info across.

In thinking about it more, while there are clues that would suggest it was a dream, I think the Nolens are better then that. If it was meant to be that, then you would have never had a scene without Cooper in it. In fact that would be an interesting fan edit. Take out all the earth scenes after Cooper leaves (except those in his daughters room), and a handful of other ones, and see how it looks then.


message 24: by Michael (new)

Michael (michaeldiack) | 96 comments I really liked the movie, just saw it last night. The visuals were amazing and while it could have done with a trim, I was never bored.

I'm really enjoying researching about it today, as there is so much I didn't understand but am eager to find out more about the science (or not) behind the plots. I go to the cinema to be entertained and I certainly was, even my girlfriend didn't fall asleep and she hasn't even seen Star Wars yet...

I don't understand who gave Murphy and Cooper the co-ordinates to the NASA secret base, as supposedly the first time we see Cooper behind the bookcase he writes only STAY - which pre-dates that scene. Anyone help me?


message 25: by Michael (new)

Michael (michaeldiack) | 96 comments *post-dates that scene i meant..if you understand.


message 26: by [deleted user] (new)

Michael wrote: "I really liked the movie, just saw it last night. The visuals were amazing and while it could have done with a trim, I was never bored.

I'm really enjoying researching about it today, as there is..."


The coordinates were given using the sand which Cooper was shown to have messaged. The STAY was given using the books. I don't know why he sent a mixed message.

To be fair, I fall asleep during Star Wars.


message 27: by Caitlin (new)

Caitlin | 355 comments He said "STAY" first in the tesseract because he felt like he had left for no point and everyone would die. Then he got the information he needed to give to Murph, so he went to the bookcase that represented the time he needed to send the coordinates, and then to another to encode the watch with the aforementioned information Murph needed.


message 28: by Matthew (last edited Nov 16, 2014 10:04PM) (new)

Matthew (matthewdl) | 341 comments I loved it. It's the best movie I've seen since Her. I don't know enough about the physics behind it to comment on the use of time, or the space manoeuvring, or the black hole so maybe that has something to do with it but I was hooked right from the beginning.

It had the emotional resonance for me that Gravity lacked and the kind of grand, optimistic, romantic view of science and space travel that I love so much about Asimov and Clark. Plus the robots were awesome and I thought the movie was visually stunning.


message 29: by Michael (new)

Michael (michaeldiack) | 96 comments Thank you for the answers to the question I posted! Was confused coming out of the cinema but then I also enjoy films that leave me confused or wanting to research more/ask questions. I'll be interested in the DVD, hopefully it will be packed with interesting features and commentaries about the physics and theories involved.


message 30: by Joe Informatico (new)

Joe Informatico (joeinformatico) | 888 comments Trike wrote: "How a pilot/engineer/astronaut could *possibly* be unfamiliar with wormholes is beyond me. I know you need to explain crap to the audience, but not at the expense of making your lead look like a moron."

My friend and I said the same thing coming out of this film. Whatever you think of him as a writer, at least Michael Crichton knew the trick for getting around this. You make your ensemble cast of science-heroes hail from a variety of disciplines, then they can explain things to each other for the benefit of the audience.

They had perfectly good reasons to make one of the four astronauts someone with a biomedical background--the need for a physician on a years-long voyage, the fact they were carrying all those freeze-dried fertilized ova, they were evaluating planets for colonization, etc. They could have written that character to not be up to speed on their theoretical physics, and have wormholes and relativity explained to them. But no, this film was too grounded in that Golden Age SF mentality where no one cared if the biology and medicine were accurate, so they didn't even bother addressing it.


message 31: by Ken (new)

Ken (kanthr) | 334 comments No interest in this and no interest in Gravity. Too contrived, compartmentalized, pre-processed. No soul, no big questions.

It's not 2001.


message 32: by [deleted user] (new)

Kenneth wrote: "No interest in this and no interest in Gravity. Too contrived, compartmentalized, pre-processed. No soul, no big questions.

It's not 2001."


I actually dislike heavily Arthur C. Clarke. I find his sci fi carries way too much of his prejudices to the point of being contrived.

So i guess we'll agree to disagree.

(In my opinion, Gravity was a lot of soul and not a lot of sci fi.)


message 33: by Dharmakirti (last edited Nov 21, 2014 11:13AM) (new)

Dharmakirti | 942 comments Kenneth wrote: "No interest in this and no interest in Gravity. Too contrived, compartmentalized, pre-processed. No soul, no big questions.

It's not 2001."


I'm confused. You have no interest in watching the film, but then you critque it anyway? What are you basing your critique on if you haven't watched it?


message 34: by Ken (new)

Ken (kanthr) | 334 comments The same way I can critique the act of suicide without attempting it.

I base my criticism on what I know of the film as described in the synopsis, reviews, trailer, and screen grabs of others. I don't need to view every frame to know that it is something I'd rather not spend my time watching.


message 35: by Dharmakirti (new)

Dharmakirti | 942 comments Michael wrote: "Thank you for the answers to the question I posted! Was confused coming out of the cinema but then I also enjoy films that leave me confused or wanting to research more/ask questions. I'll be int..."

Kip Thorne, a theoretical physicist and professor at Caltech, was a science advisor (and exec. producer) on the film and he wrote a companion book The Science of Interstellar. Perhaps that might be a good place to start to better understand some of the science?


message 36: by Dharmakirti (last edited Nov 21, 2014 11:31AM) (new)

Dharmakirti | 942 comments Kenneth wrote: "The same way I can critique the act of suicide without attempting it.

That made me laugh.


message 37: by Trike (new)

Trike | 8768 comments Kenneth wrote: "No interest in this and no interest in Gravity. Too contrived, compartmentalized, pre-processed. No soul, no big questions.

It's not 2001."


Except Gravity is totally fucking awesome. A synopsis can't do it justice.


message 38: by Ken (new)

Ken (kanthr) | 334 comments Nothing is going to get me to watch two hours of Sandra Bullock in a space suit.


message 39: by terpkristin (new)

terpkristin | 4188 comments Kenneth wrote: "Nothing is going to get me to watch two hours of Sandra Bullock in a space suit."

+1.

This came up in some other thread, possibly when discussing The Martian. Even if I thought I would enjoy the story of Gravity, I really can't take SB.


message 40: by Trike (new)

Trike | 8768 comments Kenneth wrote: "Nothing is going to get me to watch two hours of Sandra Bullock in a space suit."

Your loss. She kills it.


message 41: by Matthew (new)

Matthew (matthewdl) | 341 comments Kenneth, for what it's worth I disliked Gravity because I thought it was shallow. A lot of sizzle but not much steak. But I loved Interstellar. It's not a perfect movie but it does have ambition. Maybe let downs like Gravity and Prometheus have just caused me to lower the bar but I'd say it's definitely worth a watch.


message 42: by Tamahome (new)

Tamahome | 6350 comments I just saw it. Pretty trippy. I was expecting more hard sf. I liken it more to Inception than Gravity. Matt Damon will probably win prick of the year award.


message 43: by Kevin (new)

Kevin | 701 comments Trike wrote: "Just goes to show that even smart people have blind spots."

Wow, the amount of arrogance contained in that sentence is spectacular.

Anyway, I just saw it, and I loved it on multiple levels. Fantastic film, great acting by great actors, very cool ideas, just a wee bit predictable and the scene inside the "tesseract" dragged a bit too long. 9/10 will see again.


back to top