# Interstellar (2014 movie)



## bi0boy (Nov 3, 2013)

Christopher Nolan ventures into big $$ sci-fi with Matt Damon. It's been a while since the last decent megabucks sci-fi movie.


----------



## snadge (Nov 3, 2013)

So a big rip off from stargate


----------



## DotCommunist (Nov 3, 2013)

caine and lithgow though


----------



## Crispy (Dec 15, 2013)

Teaser trailer:



Spoiler








(Contains almost zero footage of the actual movie).
Apparently Kip Thorne (Caltech astrophyiscist and old friend of Carl Sagan) came up with the plot.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (Dec 15, 2013)

Kip Thorne? 

Might have some chance of plausible science then ...


----------



## Crispy (Dec 16, 2013)

An early draft of the script leaked a while back and this much is known:

Interstellar is said to be set in the future where governments and economies across the globe have collapsed, food is scare, and NASA is no more, with it said the 20th Century is to blame.
It's said that a mysterious rip in space and time opens, and it's up to whatever is left of NASA to explore and offer up hope and salvation for mankind.
It's also said to be a lot more complicated than that, but further details are not being released.

Sounds ok. Could be mawkish and awful, but it's in good hands.


----------



## mwgdrwg (Dec 16, 2013)

NASA? Surely it would be more plausible if it was the CNSA.


----------



## Crispy (Dec 16, 2013)

mwgdrwg said:


> NASA? Surely it would be more plausible if it was the CNSA.


Depends how far into the future it's set. Nasa's glory days may be behind them, but they still represent the leading expertise in human spaceflight. Nobody else has Nasa's wealth of experience, except maybe the Russians, but their knowledge and infrastructure is rusting away. China are doing well, but are still slowly playing catch-up. They've never built a heavy lift rocket, or kept people alive in space long term. The latter won't be achieved for another 10 years at least, and no development work at all for the former (just a paper study).


----------



## Fez909 (Dec 16, 2013)

Crispy said:


> Depends how far into the future it's set. Nasa's glory days may be behind them, but* they still represent the leading expertise in human spaceflight*. Nobody else has Nasa's wealth of experience, except maybe the Russians, but their knowledge and infrastructure is rusting away. China are doing well, but are still slowly playing catch-up. They've never built a heavy lift rocket, or kept people alive in space long term. The latter won't be achieved for another 10 years at least, and no development work at all for the former (just a paper study).



And not just human spaceflight, of course. The USA has sent more space probes than any other nation even this millennium.

Probes and satellites since 2000
USA 16
European Space Agency 6
Japan 5
UK 4
Iran 3
India 2
*China 2*

They are way behind!

Russia have sent only one btw. in 13 years. They sent 23 in the 1970s


----------



## Crispy (Dec 16, 2013)

Russia's space program is fucked. The wages are terrible, so no new engineers are entering the field. The greybeards are slowly dying, and quality control has evaporated. Look at that Proton crash earlier in the year and how stupid the mistake was that caused it, also the comically inept handling of the multi-purpose lab module for the ISS - 10 years on the factory floor and still riddled with defects. Soyuz and Proton keep on flying, but they're on borrowed time, depending on ISS crew rotation and their low prices for commercial launch. SpaceX is going to steal those markets out from under them in the next few years, and that'll be the last straw.


----------



## DexterTCN (May 16, 2014)




----------



## Crispy (May 16, 2014)

YEP


----------



## spacemonkey (May 16, 2014)

Good trailer too, I reckon that looks like the first 10-20mins of the film and that there's *lots* more to come.

Rust looking good also.


----------



## Bernie Gunther (May 16, 2014)

Alcubierre warp drive maybe?


----------



## DexterTCN (May 16, 2014)

Seriously looking forward to this.

Seriously.


----------



## Crispy (May 16, 2014)

Bernie Gunther said:


> Alcubierre warp drive maybe?


"Inspired by" I expect.
Definitely some spacetime curvature going on there. Nicely realised


----------



## DexterTCN (May 17, 2014)

That clip makes me feel like this.


----------



## Awesome Wells (May 17, 2014)

Looks interesting, not sure what the plot is specifically: earth runs out of food so they build a giant spaceship and just fly off at warp speed.

That's one hell of a hail mary!


----------



## DotCommunist (May 17, 2014)

its him from True Detectives!


----------



## Sigmund Fraud (May 18, 2014)

It sounded great until I saw the trailer and found that The Chest was the lead actor.


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 18, 2014)

Sigmund Fraud said:


> It sounded great until I saw the trailer and found that The Chest was the lead actor.



The OP said it would be Matt Damon, who's been shite in just about everything since The Departed


----------



## Barking_Mad (May 18, 2014)

Looks great, script sucks ass. How many more times can one retired dude be persuaded to save the planet.


----------



## Sigmund Fraud (May 18, 2014)

SpookyFrank said:


> The OP said it would be Matt Damon, who's been shite in just about everything since The Departed



His ratio of shit to gold is still far better than The Chest. Larger than Life, Reign of Fire, Ghosts of Girlfriends past,Failure to Launch, The Wedding Planner, Contact...has The Chest done anything good before his recent redemptive Dallas Buyers Club and True Detective?


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 18, 2014)

Sigmund Fraud said:


> His ratio of shit to gold is still far better than The Chest. Larger than Life, Reign of Fire, Ghosts of Girlfriends past,Failure to Launch, The Wedding Planner, Contact...has The Chest done anything good before his recent redemptive Dallas Buyers Club and True Detective?



Mud is worth watching. He has a great turn in Richard Linklater's Bernie too. 

And most of the films you mention would've been equally shit with any other actor tbf, I suspect most hollywood actors have to take what work they're offered and McConaughey seems to have been offered a disproportionate amount of shit movies. I never thought I'd find myself sticking up for the lad but he's clearly got some talent and it's nice to see him getting some good projects.


----------



## SpookyFrank (May 18, 2014)

Barking_Mad said:


> Looks great, script sucks ass. How many more times can one retired dude be persuaded to save the planet.



Nolan's scripts have been known to let him down. No amount of impressive visuals could save The Dark Knight Rises from its risible dialogue and cartoon plot.


----------



## Sigmund Fraud (May 19, 2014)

SpookyFrank said:


> I suspect most hollywood actors have to take what work they're offered and McConaughey seems to have been offered a disproportionate amount of shit movies.



Who knows? He's still made a ton of money and didn't seem bothered about being in shit romcoms - if he did he responded to this by being in even more shit romcoms. Not a lack of talent but a lack of good decision making.


----------



## Barking_Mad (May 19, 2014)

SpookyFrank said:


> Nolan's scripts have been known to let him down. No amount of impressive visuals could save The Dark Knight Rises from its risible dialogue and cartoon plot.



Can't comment, as I wont watch that fascist rot 

It's such a well worn cliche script. I guess it brings in the droves to part with their cash who like that kind of stuff, but it ends up being a bit crap for my liking. Challenge my brain ffs!


----------



## Kid_Eternity (May 19, 2014)

Crispy said:


> Russia's space program is fucked. The wages are terrible, so no new engineers are entering the field. The greybeards are slowly dying, and quality control has evaporated. Look at that Proton crash earlier in the year and how stupid the mistake was that caused it, also the comically inept handling of the multi-purpose lab module for the ISS - 10 years on the factory floor and still riddled with defects. Soyuz and Proton keep on flying, but they're on borrowed time, depending on ISS crew rotation and their low prices for commercial launch. SpaceX is going to steal those markets out from under them in the next few years, and that'll be the last straw.



Yup.


----------



## editor (Jul 30, 2014)

New trailer:


----------



## Crispy (Jul 30, 2014)

Apparently this trailer shows what's at the other end of the journey. I am not watching it.


----------



## SpookyFrank (Jul 30, 2014)

Crispy said:


> Apparently this trailer shows what's at the other end of the journey. I am not watching it.



Thanks for the warning. I'm getting pretty sick of trailers that tell you the entre plot


----------



## The Octagon (Jul 31, 2014)

Crispy said:


> Apparently this trailer shows what's at the other end of the journey. I am not watching it.


 
The one posted above your post doesn't, think that might even be an older one.

The newer one is here - http://www.interstellarmovie.com/index-intl.php
Code is 7201969

EDIT - Just watched it, there's a little bit shown about where they end up (at least I assume)


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 31, 2014)

Looks like a pile of wank. Grizzled old guy gets to do one last mission to save the world. With added cgi! LOOK AT THE CGI! Will he make it back to his wife a and kids? Who cares.

Groundbreaking stuff.


----------



## Crispy (Jul 31, 2014)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Looks like a pile of wank. Grizzled old guy gets to do one last mission to save the world. With added cgi! LOOK AT THE CGI! Will he make it back to his wife a and kids? Who cares.
> 
> Groundbreaking stuff.


AFAIK, that's just the setup. "what happens next" is apparently much more interesting.


----------



## beesonthewhatnow (Jul 31, 2014)

Crispy said:


> AFAIK, that's just the setup. "what happens next" is apparently much more interesting.


A pint says it isn't


----------



## Crispy (Jul 31, 2014)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> A pint says it isn't


 Fine


----------



## 8den (Jul 31, 2014)

Sigmund Fraud said:


> His ratio of shit to gold is still far better than The Chest. Larger than Life, Reign of Fire, Ghosts of Girlfriends past,Failure to Launch, The Wedding Planner, Contact...has The Chest done anything good before his recent redemptive Dallas Buyers Club and True Detective?



Um Dazed and Confused, Lone Star, to name but two. 

The whole disappointment with his career for most of the last decade as a romantic comedy lead ius because he showed great promise in the 90s


----------



## The Octagon (Jul 31, 2014)

Some actors find their niche a bit later in life, especially if they start to look a little more 'character actor', seems to be the case for McConaughey.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Aug 2, 2014)

Crispy said:


> Apparently this trailer shows what's at the other end of the journey. I am not watching it.



It really doesn't give away much.


----------



## editor (Aug 2, 2014)

Kid_Eternity said:


> It really doesn't give away much.


Indeed. I can't say what I've seen has got me as excited as  I hoped to be, either.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Aug 2, 2014)

editor said:


> Indeed. I can't say what I've seen has got me as excited as  I hoped to be, either.



Nolan is a funny one, he does utterly amazing films (Momento/ Dark Knight) then real pedestrian ones like Insomnia and Inception...hard to say which Nolan film we're getting with Interstellar...


----------



## DexterTCN (Aug 3, 2014)

Kid_Eternity said:


> Nolan is a funny one, he does utterly amazing films (Momento/ Dark Knight) then real pedestrian ones like Insomnia and Inception...hard to say which Nolan film we're getting with Interstellar...


I have to disagree with your opinion on Inception.  It was clever, twisty, funny, riveting and had some brilliant action sequences.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Aug 4, 2014)

It had some nice fight scenes but it wasn't very clever. A few people I know thought it was complicated which is baffling. It was easy as hell to follow and pretty damn obvious for the most part...


----------



## bi0boy (Nov 7, 2014)

beesonthewhatnow said:


> Looks like a pile of wank. Grizzled old guy gets to do one last mission to save the world. With added cgi! LOOK AT THE CGI! Will he make it back to his wife a and kids? Who cares.
> 
> Groundbreaking stuff.



No cheesy love interest this time.


----------



## bi0boy (Nov 7, 2014)

Best movie i've seen in ages 

Go watch it


----------



## mauvais (Nov 9, 2014)

I was hoping for Gravity and I mostly got Armageddon. Not brilliant.


----------



## mauvais (Nov 9, 2014)

Although I did like the bit where he was in The Borrowers.

Also, 124? Fuck off.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Nov 10, 2014)

There was a couple of real 'Wait, what!?' moments the big one being about love...

The main thing was the twist was obvious from REALLY early on, as was the bad guy moment...


----------



## red & green (Nov 10, 2014)

Saw it today was underwhelmed - more soap in space and the monolith was missing


----------



## mauvais (Nov 10, 2014)

The more I think about it, the more I dislike this film.

This sums it up pretty well (*full o' spoilers*): http://www.vulture.com/2014/11/21-things-in-interstellar-that-dont-make-sense.html

Best ever film my arse. It was alright, but the general adulation is ridiculous.


----------



## Crispy (Nov 10, 2014)

balls, I was really looking forward to this


----------



## editor (Nov 10, 2014)

Crispy said:


> balls, I was really looking forward to this


Me too but from what I've heard and seen so far, I don't think I'm going to like it much at all. Why is good sci-fi so bloody rare?


----------



## bi0boy (Nov 10, 2014)

Crispy said:


> balls, I was really looking forward to this



Still look forward to it. Kip Thorne used the black hole CGI for which he wrote the equations for to write a physics paper ffs, most sci-fi films, such as Gravity, get the science wrong. This is so much better than Gravity from a science, plot, score, acting and directing POV.


----------



## mauvais (Nov 10, 2014)

bi0boy said:


> This is so much better than Gravity from a science, plot, score, acting and directing POV.


Is it balls. It's got Matthew McConnaughey in it for a start.



Spoiler



This is an actual moment of dialog:

Unexplained robot thing: That's not possible
Matthew McConnaughey: No, _it's necessary_

Wanker.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Nov 10, 2014)

I know of two people who have seen it.
1st one said it's a turkey.
2nd one said it's great.

I don't fancy it.


----------



## 8ball (Nov 10, 2014)

I won some cinema tickets in a pub quiz and they expire at the end of the year - is it better to see this or gamble on something better appearing in mainstream cinemas before Christmas?


----------



## Fez909 (Nov 10, 2014)

8ball said:


> I won some cinema tickets in a pub quiz and they expire at the end of the year - is it better to see this or gamble on something better appearing in mainstream cinemas before Christmas?


Mr Turner?


----------



## 8ball (Nov 10, 2014)

Fez909 said:


> Mr Turner?



Thanks - IMDB seems lukewarm but metacritic rates it very highly.


----------



## gaijingirl (Nov 10, 2014)

I went to see this last night.. it had 9.1 on IMDB so I thought it would be amazing.  The music and scenery etc were great and it was very very tense (but I'm quite claustrophobic so I found it anxiety making in places as I often do with Space films)... but I was a bit disappointed in the ending and ultimately it felt a bit same-old same-old, especially the ending which was lame.  Also I felt, as I so often do these days, that it was over-long.  Even gaijinboy, who loves sci-fi, was a bit underwhelmed - he guessed "the twist" very early on and the bad guy was obvious too.  Also Matthew McConaughy mumbled his way through the thing, so half the time I'd no idea what he had said.   "Underwhelmed" was the exact word we used, like the poster above.

We watched a film called Moon earlier this month with Sam Rockwell in it, which was far more original and interesting.  Also Gravity - much preferred that.  My disclaimer is that I wouldn't have a clue on the scientific front so couldn't judge on that.  My partner, however, would, and still wasn't overly impressed with Interstellar.


----------



## gaijingirl (Nov 10, 2014)

mauvais said:


> I was hoping for Gravity and I mostly got Armageddon. Not brilliant.



yes.. this hits the nail on the head.  I was going to mention Armageddon too - it really reminded me somehow of this.


----------



## 8115 (Nov 10, 2014)

The plot was very uneven and the genre seemed to skid all over the place. The early stuff on earth was pretty good, actually quite a lot to think about and then it just got proressively sillier.



Spoiler: plot



The bit on the planet with the massive waves was genuinely shit scary though, and so was the whole, one hour equals seven years, I gave up waiting for you.

The quantum bit at the end was a bit cheesy but it did kind of make me understand quantum mechanics a bit better.



Michael Caine was terrible in it. I think he knew how bad it was and was hamming it up.


----------



## red & green (Nov 10, 2014)

Could have been tolerable if they had edited it down - it was far too long - agree with above poster that its v v v difficult  to find a good sci fi movie these days .....


----------



## Lea (Nov 11, 2014)

Watched this on Sunday evening. Really enjoyed it. Sort of like Gravity with more of a story to it although there were holes in the plot. I thought it was thought provoking, a bit mind bending like Inception. Of course there were lots of inaccurate stuff which geeks and the like will pick up but who cares this is science fiction after all. The music and cinematography was amazing. Found it a bit diffuicult to understand Matthew McConnaughey (sp?) mumbling southern accent at times. There was a WTF moment when Anne Hathaway starts talking about love bla bla bla. Otherwise a big thumbs up from me. Not everyone will like it. I went on the IMDB duiscussion board after I got back from film and there was mixed reaction to the film.


----------



## mauvais (Nov 11, 2014)

As I said a while back, the more I think about it, the more it loses its shine.

It's a bit confirmation bias, but two things I thought about it and other people have since moaned about: the sound was crap, often not being able to hear people. The photography was often pedestrian too - not whether the scenes were impressive as such, but the really conventional and sometimes lazy way they were shot. Gravity did much better on that front, although maybe it's a bit of a high target to call out every film against.

The best legacy of the film is the bits it leaves you to imagine for yourself, except it's soured by the fact that a lot of that stuff is excuse-making to cover the plot issues. I can happily ignore large chunks of it, like all the unexplained stuff about the situation on Earth, or those bloody robots, but the paradox is a great big problem that won't go away.

It grates that they go into specific details and make them plot-centric, like the 23 years, and then trash that by completely overlooking it in others, e.g: 



Spoiler



How many years added on after going _through the black hole_, FFS? And while we're at it, who builds a rocket next to their fucking boardroom?


Suspension of disbelief becomes quite difficult.

The characters are passable but shallow. McConnaughey is neither good nor appropriate. Don't even get started about Michael Caine. I don't really know what the point of Hathaway is; I can't remember anything she did except that bit about the choice. Answer me this: what meaningful, serious human interactions can you recall from this film? That's what I mean about it fading on review.

Overall I felt it was a film that was preaching to the choir: people that go to see it wilfully wanting to like it probably will, or people who enjoy and are looking for mindless disaster-movie-on-rails type stuff, but people going with vague expectations or in the hope of some Gravity-esque show and tell piece about space (and don't get me wrong, Gravity wasn't perfect) may not get on with it. Am I able to say it felt like a film for idiots without being a snob?


----------



## Wilf (Nov 13, 2014)

gaijingirl said:


> I went to see this last night.. it had 9.1 on IMDB so I thought it would be amazing.  The music and scenery etc were great and it was very very tense (but I'm quite claustrophobic so I found it anxiety making in places as I often do with Space films)... but I was a bit disappointed in the ending and ultimately it felt a bit same-old same-old, especially the ending which was lame.  Also I felt, as I so often do these days, that it was over-long.  Even gaijinboy, who loves sci-fi, was a bit underwhelmed - he guessed "the twist" very early on and the bad guy was obvious too.  Also Matthew McConaughy mumbled his way through the thing, so half the time I'd no idea what he had said.   "Underwhelmed" was the exact word we used, like the poster above.
> 
> We watched a film called Moon earlier this month with Sam Rockwell in it, which was far more original and interesting.  Also Gravity - much preferred that.  My disclaimer is that I wouldn't have a clue on the scientific front so couldn't judge on that.  My partner, however, would, and still wasn't overly impressed with Interstellar.


Yeah, all that sounds about right.  Just seen it tonight, enjoyed it even if it was a bit slow paced in part, making it very long.  Lots that was daft and a sentimental ending, but I somehow managed to still enjoy it.


----------



## golightly (Nov 13, 2014)

Having gone with fairly low expectations after all of the hype I ended up rather liking it.  It wasn't what I had expected, but I was pleasantly surprised.  Yes, a bit long and sentimental, but I liked the sentimental aspect as it gave a purpose to the story otherwise I think that it would be just another film with spaceships and big explosions.


----------



## Wilf (Nov 13, 2014)

Quite liked the role the robots played in it - _'sarcastic sidekick'_.


----------



## campanula (Nov 14, 2014)

I can count good sf films on my fingers....as a rule, I find it best to stick to books (as I am rarely 'whelmed' by graphics and flash bangs). I prefer the more meditative and imaginative process involved in reading good sf without being bullied by filmic imperatives.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Nov 14, 2014)

If you had a spiritual awakening watching Avatar or found Inception profoundly confusing you'll LOVE this.


----------



## HAL9000 (Nov 15, 2014)

So So, film.  Its a pity since there was an attempt to have a plot which many films lack. But..


Any plot holes were filled with word 'love', I think aliens would have been better.
Too long.


----------



## yield (Nov 16, 2014)

Saw this last night and really enjoyed it. But then again I like Avatar and Inception.

Read so may negative reviews I wasn't expecting much to be honest. Felt more like Contact than 2001.

Agree with a lot of the criticism. The sound was terrible and I missed a fair bit of dialogue



mauvais said:


> It grates that they go into specific details and make them plot-centric, like the 23 years, and then trash that by completely overlooking it in others, e.g:
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Spoiler



From falling into the black hole to being recovered by humans in a space habitat? His daughter Murph was 120 years old


----------



## frogwoman (Nov 16, 2014)

Saw this with my mum. I enjoyed it buy there were a shit load of plot holes and dodgy science , I'm not a scientist but a lot of it was not plausible at all. 

For example how could you get so much light on a planet orbiting a black hole, where was the sun


----------



## golightly (Nov 17, 2014)

frogwoman said:


> Saw this with my mum. I enjoyed it buy there were a shit load of plot holes and dodgy science , I'm not a scientist but a lot of it was not plausible at all.
> 
> For example how could you get so much light on a planet orbiting a black hole, where was the sun


 
Yes, there are plenty of plot holes and dodgy science, but the light was coming from the plasma surrounding the black hole.


----------



## stereoisomer (Nov 21, 2014)

frogwoman said:


> Saw this with my mum. I enjoyed it buy there were a shit load of plot holes and dodgy science , I'm not a scientist but a lot of it was not plausible at all.
> 
> For example how could you get so much light on a planet orbiting a black hole, where was the sun


The implausible bit wasn't that, a black hole emits a lot of light from the disc of matter orbiting it (that was well-represented).. but you couldn't live there because of the massive amounts of gamma radiation. There were a lot of scientific errors in the film but I chose to ignore them and just enjoy it. 



Spoiler



I thought this was a film with a really good message: that we have a big problem (ecological disaster) and science is the solution. That might seem trite and obvious to some, but there are a lot of people who haven't grasped this yet. I also really liked that the person who saves Humanity is a female scientist, that was nice for me and probably nice for any other female scientists watching!  I really enjoyed it and I don't care that there were cheesy bits about love.

My favourite bit was where Matthew McConoghey falls into the K-hole .. I mean black hole. It was very K-holey though. Inception was also very K-holey.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Nov 22, 2014)

For a film which starts after billions have died and there was no real government left I thought the people were exceptionally well adjusted. No real trauma, or you know cannabalism..! Also, were American's the only ones left or the only ones who worked on a space programme. Kinda thinking the Chinese and Indians should have figured more prominently...


----------



## Lord Camomile (Dec 4, 2014)

Finally got round to seeing it yesterday, generally thought it wasn't terrible but _really_ took a fucking nosedive towards the end, particulary when it introduced the mother of all deus ex machinas. A few times I thought we were going to get some interesting explorations of issues that face humanity, but then they didn't really go anywhere  Another film that was more plot than character.





Kid_Eternity said:


> The main thing was the twist was obvious from REALLY early on, as was the bad guy moment...


So that wasn't just me!  When they're that obvious I always end up thinking "is this just poor film making, or am I some kind of genius ". To the disappointment of all involved, it generally tends to be the former


----------



## belboid (Dec 8, 2014)

Lord Camomile said:


> particulary when it introduced the mother of all deus ex machinas.


I'm not entirely sure it did so, what you're talking about is the whole premise of the film (or, one of them at least).  It made absolutely no sense to me, but they had been setting it up as the rationale. 

I'll kind of forgive that bit, it was the rest of the stuff on earth that just made absolutely no sense. Too many examples to list, but just for one, why didn't NASA just pop down the road and ask him?


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Dec 10, 2014)

Lord Camomile said:


> Finally got round to seeing it yesterday, generally thought it wasn't terrible but _really_ took a fucking nosedive towards the end, particulary when it introduced the mother of all deus ex machinas. A few times I thought we were going to get some interesting explorations of issues that face humanity, but then they didn't really go anywhere  Another film that was more plot than character.So that wasn't just me!  When they're that obvious I always end up thinking "is this just poor film making, or am I some kind of genius ". To the disappointment of all involved, it generally tends to be the former



Haha me too! Everyone I was with was like 'Wtf you saw it coming??'.


----------



## mwgdrwg (Mar 24, 2015)

Ruined for me, by the incredibly lazy, predictable, boardroom-written bad guy bit.


----------



## Silva (Apr 1, 2015)

Looks decent in places, has some neat theories and themes, but it's way, WAY too long and still manages to not explore those themes. Instead, let's spend three minutes chasing an Indian drone!


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Apr 1, 2015)

It was boring. The first Nolan movie I haven't really enjoyed...


----------



## mack (Apr 1, 2015)

Watched this last weekend on my own (missus would have hated it!) after reading this thread I went into it with very low expectations 

It was alright, bit long, bit boring, but decent enough sci-fi, probably wouldn't watch again.


----------



## 5t3IIa (Apr 1, 2015)

gaijingirl said:


> I went to see this last night.. it had 9.1 on IMDB so I thought it would be amazing.  The music and scenery etc were great and it was very very tense (but I'm quite claustrophobic so I found it anxiety making in places as I often do with Space films)... but I was a bit disappointed in the ending and ultimately it felt a bit same-old same-old, especially the ending which was lame.  Also I felt, as I so often do these days, that it was over-long.  Even gaijinboy, who loves sci-fi, was a bit underwhelmed - he guessed "the twist" very early on and the bad guy was obvious too.  Also Matthew McConaughy mumbled his way through the thing, so half the time I'd no idea what he had said.   "Underwhelmed" was the exact word we used, like the poster above.
> 
> We watched a film called Moon earlier this month with Sam Rockwell in it, which was far more original and interesting.  Also Gravity - much preferred that.  My disclaimer is that I wouldn't have a clue on the scientific front so couldn't judge on that.  My partner, however, would, and still wasn't overly impressed with Interstellar.


Moon is wonderful. Love Sam Rockwell, and the whole thing went so deliciously as he and us worked out what was going on. It was _obvs_ obvs to the 'durr that was barely even a twist' types but if you can go with the flow it was scary, sad and lovely.


----------



## Pingu (Apr 1, 2015)

I watched this last night and fell asleep at least twice during it. havnt bothered putting it back on - will do so at some point but there is some paint I need to watch drying first


----------



## wayward bob (Apr 1, 2015)

as a fan of space movies and christopher nolan i can confirm this is a steaming pile of crap * *massive* fucking spoiler* *alert* but this summed it up pretty well for me :thumbs :


----------



## Sweet FA (Apr 1, 2015)

wayward bob said:


> as a fan of space movies and christopher nolan i can confirm this is a steaming pile of crap * *massive* fucking spoiler* *alert* but this summed it up pretty well for me :thumbs :



Ta for that.
Mrs FA fell asleep so I was trying to tell her what happened in the last hour  I gave up after realising I'd forgotten the whole Anne Goaway bit. She can just watch that now


----------



## wayward bob (Apr 1, 2015)

the thing about the son cracks me up every time


----------



## Sweet FA (Apr 1, 2015)

'A Baked Potato'


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Apr 1, 2015)

Confusing + boring + corny = not a good a movie.


----------



## J Ed (Apr 1, 2015)

Just saw it, it was total shit. Jacobin mag had it right - reactionaries in space but fucking boring ones


----------



## maomao (Apr 1, 2015)

I think I must just have really poor taste in movies cause I enjoyed it. Space bookshelf didn't bother me. Very Star Trek TNG that bit. I wasn't really expexting gritty realism though. Only bit that really jarred was at the end when she travelled for however long to see him and then basically told him to sod off after a minute and a half.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Apr 1, 2015)

Jeff Robinson said:


> It was boring. The first Nolan movie I haven't really enjoyed...



Insomnia wasn't just the worst Nolan film I've seen it was also one of the most boring films I've ever seen. Didn't think much of the Prestige either...


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Apr 1, 2015)

Kid_Eternity said:


> Insomnia wasn't just the worst Nolan film I've seen it was also one of the most boring films I've ever seen. Didn't think much of the Prestige either...



Yes, I remember you expressing these wrong opinions before.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Apr 2, 2015)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Yes, I remember you expressing these wrong opinions before.



You have a good memory.


----------



## Silva (Apr 2, 2015)

maomao said:


> Only bit that really jarred was at the end when she travelled for however long to see him and then basically told him to sod off after a minute and a half.


That would stretch the film to an unreasonable amount on something that clearly wouldn't be important for the much-talked about "human side of the story".


----------



## Orang Utan (Apr 2, 2015)

I feel like I have to watch this just so I can cuss it out.
I HATE Christopher Nolan films.


----------



## wayward bob (Apr 2, 2015)

memento... following... the prestige... surely you can't hate them _all_?


----------



## Orang Utan (Apr 2, 2015)

wayward bob said:


> memento... following... the prestige... surely you can't hate them _all_?


Yep. Never enjoyed any of them. They're full of muttering. I've never fully understood any of them.


----------



## wayward bob (Apr 2, 2015)

i rely on a certain amount of disbelief suspension and just let the story flow. memento's one of my favourite films of all time, as long as i leave 6 months between viewings i _never_ remember the twist


----------



## Crispy (Apr 2, 2015)

I saw Interstellar at full-size IMAX, centre row, centre seat. Got smacked hard in the face by the visuals, felt the music right in my gut, felt genuinely gripped during the action sequences, laughed at the funny robots.

Had to swallow a bit of sick back down when it turns out that LOVE is a fundamental force of nature.

While walking out, realised that the plot made no sense whatsoever and would only be more obviously nonsensical on second viewing. Coupled with the lack of IMAX face-smacking, it would probably taint my overall positive memories of seeing the film. So I won't watch it again for a while.


----------



## Orang Utan (Apr 2, 2015)

You can't suspend disbelief if you don't know what's going on cos you can't understand a word anybody is saying.
It's not just Nolan that is guilty of this, but he's the worst offender.


----------



## wayward bob (Apr 2, 2015)

oh dear ou. i hope you're not outing yourself as not clever enough to get them


----------



## Orang Utan (Apr 2, 2015)

wayward bob said:


> oh dear ou. i hope you're not outing yourself as not clever enough to get them


Yes, I don't understand them even with subtitles. But it's mainly cos of the mumbling.


----------



## wayward bob (Apr 2, 2015)

fair enough - i've enjoyed pretty much all of them (not seen dark knight) but this lost me on too many levels.

i'll keep pushing europa report as the best recent space movie second only to moon... (gravity was a fucking turkey too )


----------



## 5t3IIa (Apr 2, 2015)

Crispy said:


> I saw Interstellar at full-size IMAX, centre row, centre seat. Got smacked hard in the face by the visuals, felt the music right in my gut, felt genuinely gripped during the action sequences, laughed at the funny robots.
> 
> Had to swallow a bit of sick back down when it turns out that LOVE is a fundamental force of nature.
> 
> While walking out, realised that the plot made no sense whatsoever and would only be more obviously nonsensical on second viewing. Coupled with the lack of IMAX face-smacking, it would probably taint my overall positive memories of seeing the film. So I won't watch it again for a while.


A film designed for IMAX and IMAX only, and its fundamental force only makes sense in that context <swallowssick>


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Apr 4, 2015)

wayward bob said:


> fair enough - i've enjoyed pretty much all of them (not seen dark knight)



You should try and see that - it's one of his best...


----------



## Orang Utan (Apr 4, 2015)

i beg to differ - an awful mess


----------



## Up the junction (Apr 5, 2015)

Saw it last night. Hell of a place to go surfing.  Robot should have had the voice of Michael Caine:  'I said, blow the bloody hatch off', etc.

Just so much Hollywood wank. Coleen Nolan would have done better.


----------



## girasol (Apr 6, 2015)

Finally watched it.  I'd forgotten everyone was talking about how dodgy the sound was at the start of the year!!! But so true, we struggled to understand what was being said at times.  So we turned the volume right up...  And got blown away by the amazeballs soundtrack!  Think I might watch again (the last hour or so) just for that.

I really do HATE Anne Hathaway and my hatred hasn't diminished after this viewing.

edit: and OMG, the black hole/bookshelf scene at the end?  I've had k-holes that felt a bit like that


----------



## girasol (Apr 7, 2015)

Watched it again today. It's pretty damned good second time around. Especially the first hour.

Oh, I liked Avatar, but not Inception...


----------



## Tankus (Apr 10, 2015)

Better than I expected ......pretty much sussed out the Damon character within a min.... as that story's quite an old one..... and the ghost....but still.......rather wish I had seen it on the big screen now ...!


----------



## strung out (Apr 11, 2015)

I've seen it twice - once at IMAX and the other time was last week at the Royal Albert Hall with a full orchestra, introduced by Stephen Hawking, Brian Cox, Hans Zimmer, Christopher Nolan, Kip Thorne and Michael Caine. Absolutely loved it both times


----------



## seventh bullet (Apr 11, 2015)

Tankus said:


> Better than I expected ......pretty much sussed out the Damon character within a min.... as that story's quite an old one..... and the ghost....but still.......rather wish I had seen it on the big screen now ...!



It would have looked an amazing mess on the big screen, sure.  Damon's recreant leader of the earlier missions was obvious, but a lonely death on an ice cloud would be hard thing to come to terms with.  I enjoyed it with low expectations, though, including the desperate talking baddie part.


----------



## hot air baboon (Apr 11, 2015)

....huge let down apart from the quite imaginative and creepy visualisation of fourth dimensional space....that endless stack of cubes stretching away into infinity....


----------



## Crispy (Apr 11, 2015)

The making-of videos are on youtube. Actually more entertaining than the movie. Loads of practical effects, models etc. The soudtrack one is good, as is the physics one with Kip Thorne (is it me or does he look completely pissed all the time?). Also the wafty hand-wavy explanation of the plot, delivered in a dead serious tone by Nolan confirms my suspicions that he's not half as clever as he thinks he is.


----------



## binka (Apr 13, 2015)

so at the end he takes a space ship to go back through the wormhole to find the woman he left behind. it's apparent humanity is living in space, lots of space stations and space travel is an every day affair. so surely at some point in the previous 100 years more ships would have gone through the wormhole to check out the planets the original mission set out to explore. in fact you'd have thought by the time she landed on the planet (having lost 100 years due to the black hole) she'd have landed in the middle of a thriving human colony. 

what a load of shit


----------



## Bonesy (Feb 12, 2016)

Watched it last night and whilst I enjoyed much of the visuals and the haunting score I found it extremely slow-paced in parts. I'm assured the science behind it is very accurate but I don't think that necessarily makes for a great film...


----------



## stdP (Feb 12, 2016)

Ooh, hadn't noticed this thread so yay for bump. As I said t'other day, loved the first two acts (aside from the occasional pacing problems) what with hard sci-fi problems and reasonably plausible physics (by hollywood standards anyway)...



Crispy said:


> ...the wafty hand-wavy explanation of the plot, delivered in a dead serious tone by Nolan confirms my suspicions that he's not half as clever as he thinks he is.



...both the writing and the direction went completely to pot in the final act. I got the impression that the dog had eaten the last bit of script and Mr. Nolan had to improvise a new one on the school bus in the morning. Nicely foreshadowed shit ending when Wosshername started waffling on about love as a physical force and then something about gravitons which isn't even resolved by the end of the film. Nolan very definitely isn't as clever as most people seem to think he is but apparently it's a capital crime to call the Batman films shit.

Anyway, it's convinced me to watch 2001 again which'll be shortly followed by The Martian which I've not seen yet. It's been a good week for physics.


----------



## Bonesy (Feb 12, 2016)

Enjoyed The Martian much more. Gripping from start to finish.


----------



## Treacle Toes (Dec 28, 2016)

Rutita1 said:


> I know of two people who have seen it.
> 1st one said it's a turkey.
> 2nd one said it's great.
> 
> I don't fancy it.



I take this back only because I forgot i posted it 

It was entertaining.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 28, 2016)

My main thought on this was that they were trying to make a serious and philosophical sci-fi film, a la 2001 or Tarkovsky's Solaris.
And for the most part all the elements were there...patient story telling, aesthetically beautiful, some great design and production work, wonderful soundtrack, a desire to keep the science correct (supposedly!), and a storyline that hangs on ideas rather than action.... great!

But ultimately it was a $150million studio movie and all of the above got watered down with out of place action sequences, some miscasting of big names, and general sillyness.... all entertaining if youd dony pay too lose attention.

But whats really lost is that in a movie like Solaris you have time and space within the runtime of the film to think about what is happening and reflect on the points being explored...in this its such a mishmash of stuff and it comes from different angles that it left me feeling unmoved. 

It did make planet colonisation look like a really stupid idea, which i approve of.

STAY


----------



## DotCommunist (Dec 28, 2016)

ska invita said:


> my main thought on this was that they were trying to make a serious and philosophical sci-fi film, a la 2001


thats what sold it to me, that it was an 'answer' to 2001 or perhaps a response. I never made it to the end. Concersely The Martian which didn't come in heavy and overly srs was one of the best little sci fi films I saw this year


----------



## ska invita (Dec 28, 2016)

DotCommunist said:


> thats what sold it to me, that it was an 'answer' to 2001 or perhaps a response. I never made it to the end. Concersely The Martian which didn't come in heavy and overly srs was one of the best little sci fi films I saw this year



will give that a try - despite my anti-going to mars beliefs.... hoping matt damon dies  

i still enjoyed interstellar a lot - great atmosphere and look.... but despite the furrowed brows its pretty silly


----------



## Reno (Dec 28, 2016)

ska invita said:


> My main thought on this was that they were trying to make a serious and philosophical sci-fi film, a la 2001 or Tarkovsky's Solaris.
> And for the most part all the elements were there...patient story telling, aesthetically beautiful, some great design and production work, wonderful soundtrack, a desire to keep the science correct (supposedly!), and a storyline that hangs on ideas rather than action.... great!
> 
> But ultimately it was a $150million studio movie and all of the above got watered down with out of place action sequences, some miscasting of big names, and general sillyness.... all entertaining if youd dony pay too lose attention.
> ...


In Solaris the idea was never to colonise the planet, the idea was to study it, because the ocean which covered it was one huge alien lifeform.


----------



## ska invita (Dec 28, 2016)

Reno said:


> In Solaris the idea was never to colonise the planet, the idea was to study it, because the ocean which covered it was one huge alien lifeform.


I wasn't comparing plots though, more moods and attempt at being profound.


----------



## pengaleng (Dec 28, 2016)

sick film


----------



## Badgers (Nov 16, 2018)

Just put it on then read the urban reviews 

Heard good reviews of First Man on a science podcast and decided I wanted to watch a space film. Perhaps I have not chosen wisely


----------

