Interstellar

[ack]

What did you think of this movie? I thought it was profound, despite the usual space-time paradoxes or the questionable "worlds" we would see if we were to fall into a black hole (as in that tesseract structure Counaghey falls into in the end). Slow in the beginning, but I would love to watch it again. The producers had hired a theoretical physicist to assert accurate _theoretical_ depiction of certain physical phenomena in space.

 

[still-one]

I saw this a week ago and I am still not sure how I would rate it. I enjoyed it but at the same time I don't think I would want to see it again. This is one of those movies that is probably best seen in IMAX as I don't think it is going to translate to the home theater.

 

[Steve Williams]

I saw it in iMax over this past weekend and for me it was a solid 6/10. Nothing more. The visuals were very good but we've seen better

I have no desire to see it again.No Oscar nod for him this year for that role. Happy to have seen it but I was disappointed. You just don't fall into a Black hole and live to come out the other end

I wanted to like the film which I did but I thought some of the story lines were absolutely preposterous according to the laws of physics as we know them

Neill DeGrasse Tyson has refuted many of these so if they hired a theoretical physicist Im not so sure what he was smoking

13-Tweet Review: Scientist Neil DeGrasse Tyson Breaks Down “Interstellar

http://theurbandaily.com/2014/11/14...neil-degrasse-tyson-breaks-down-interstellar/

 

[Sharp 1080]

I saw it with my son over the weekend in IMAX format. I pretty much agree with the others as liking it but not that groundbreaking. I have to say the visuals were fantastic on the large screen. There is also a lot of low end in this movie, the only complaint was it was too loud. I like my music and movies loud occasionally but this was over the top. The loudness drowned out several scenes of dialogue which I won't mention to avoid spoilers.

 

[Steve Williams]

BTW if you want to do something interesting Wiki "tesseract" and see if you understand it all by the bottom of the page

 

[WLVCA]

I saw the movie last week as well. Thought it was a good movie but not great. A little long as well.

I left wondering how his daughter, obviously a brilliant woman, remained bitter and angry with her father for her entire life - especially when she was involved with NASA as well and understood the importance of his mission.

I also struggled with the concept of the five-dimensional beings that decided to extend a helping hand to humans. Obviously i am not a phyisist.

A couple reviews mentioned that perhaps humans evolved into this form and reached back to help.

 

[jazdoc]

My wife liked it; I thought it was kinda "meh". Glad we saw it at IPic with lounge chairs and cocktails!

 

[Steve Williams]

My wife liked it; I thought it was kinda "meh". Glad we saw it at IPic with lounge chairs and cocktails!

I am glad that I wasn't the only one who felt the same about the film. I'm glad I saw it. No doubt it will make a lot of money but will ultimately end up on PPV or Netflix. I kept asking my wife when we are going to see the 5 dimensional beings

I guess they were there but we couldn't see them even if we tried.

My wife liked it as well

 

[jazdoc]

I am glad that I wasn't the only one who felt the same about the film. I'm glad I saw it. No doubt it will make a lot of money but will ultimately end up on PPV or Netflix. I kept asking my wife when we are going to see the 5 dimensional beings

I guess they were there but we couldn't see them even if we tried.

My wife liked it as well

I did get a couple of chuckles from the Nolan brothers subversive humor....putting Dr. Mann on a frozen planet was delicious....otherwise

 

[ack]

Check out the Scientific Accuracy of the movie here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstellar_(film)

Because the black hole is supermassive, it would also allow a character to cross the event horizon without experiencing spaghettification.[SUP][61][/SUP]

 

[zztop7]

I saw it in iMax over this past weekend and for me it was a solid 6/10.

Watched the 3 minute YouTube version & that was 6/10 - pretty sad if the trailer can not make 8/10.
zz.

 

[dan31]

I saw it in IMAX 70 mm film print this weekend. I really enjoyed it. The physics were actually pretty close to the book as we know them.

 

[amirm]

I love science fiction and was hoping it would get good reviews. I don't go to movie theaters anymore so will probably get the blu-ray when it comes out. Thanks for the reviews guys.

 

[KeithR]

I give it a B+. Much preferred Inception. First act really dragged and honestly I didn't find the visuals that great. Gravity was better in space for example.

Would agree with others that in have no desire to see again.

 

[rblnr]

Am a big fan of the Nolans from Memento on out. Saw Interstellar in IMAX -- found it mostly slack at best. Last thing I expected from them although I suppose 'Inception' might have been a clue to the path. Big disappointment. Some vague SPOILERS below.

LOTS of space/time mumbo jumbo; conversations, equations, etc. that create no drama, make the actors look mostly silly (not their fault, tough to spit out a lot of this gobledygook stuff) that a) really doesn't make a ton of sense and feels fudged (so why dwell on it?), b) sucks any tension out of the moment (and the film as a whole), resulting in c) proclamations like 'We're here to save the Earth!' Laurence Olivier would struggle with that one if he had to do it straight. The film flirts with goofy quite a bit. An of course, solving all the space/time conundrums happens remarkably easily at the right moment.

A couple of oddly pseudo-tense scenes that have very little if any payoff: to a lesser extent, the cornfield drive thru. To a baffling extent, the docking sequence. Got the sense that they felt they needed to try to snap the slack out at that point and it felt forced. That sequence was also shot like by-the-numbers TV action; very un-Nolan-like.

After all the metaphysical claptrap (which I enjoy if it's cogent -- see any episode of Cosmos (or even Star Trek) for more concise and dramatic explications), the story basically boils down to a couple of astronauts wrestling on another planet. The movie starts out with A ambitions and devolves to second-rate B (which could have been fun if that's what the movie wanted to be) -- it feels wholly out of character with the whole dying earth/wormhole/fate of mankind setup, some of which was pretty good.

Trying to get back to A at the end is a whole sequence that doesn't work at all, and that's partly because the whole time/space stuff was never honed in a way to give it dramatic context. (Inception fell apart as it went on in this way too, but was cooler to look at) It made no real sense (despite using a 'time-tested' scifi device), and felt increasingly silly. I also didn't find it to be a convincing visual design, but others might.

And speaking of visuals -- unimpressive, even strangely so. From the lighting in the ship to all the 'galactic setpieces', really nothing of distinction.

Nightcrawler looks like the movie to see right now.

 

[Steve Williams]

Am a big fan of the Nolans from Memento on out. Saw Interstellar in IMAX -- found it mostly slack at best. Last thing I expected from them although I suppose 'Inception' might have been a clue to the path. Big disappointment. Some vague SPOILERS below.

LOTS of space/time mumbo jumbo; conversations, equations, etc. that create no drama, make the actors look mostly silly (not their fault, tough to spit out a lot of this gobledygook stuff) that a) really doesn't make a ton of sense and feels fudged (so why dwell on it?), b) sucks any tension out of the moment (and the film as a whole), resulting in c) proclamations like 'We're here to save the Earth!' Laurence Olivier would struggle with that one if he had to do it straight. The film flirts with goofy quite a bit. An of course, solving all the space/time conundrums happens remarkably easily at the right moment.

A couple of oddly pseudo-tense scenes that have very little if any payoff: to a lesser extent, the cornfield drive thru. To a baffling extent, the docking sequence. Got the sense that they felt they needed to try to snap the slack out at that point and it felt forced. That sequence was also shot like by-the-numbers TV action; very un-Nolan-like.

After all the metaphysical claptrap (which I enjoy if it's cogent -- see any episode of Cosmos (or even Star Trek) for more concise and dramatic explications), the story basically boils down to a couple of astronauts wrestling on another planet. The movie starts out with A ambitions and devolves to second-rate B (which could have been fun if that's what the movie wanted to be) -- it feels wholly out of character with the whole dying earth/wormhole/fate of mankind setup, some of which was pretty good.

Trying to get back to A at the end is a whole sequence that doesn't work at all, and that's partly because the whole time/space stuff was never honed in a way to give it dramatic context. (Inception fell apart as it went on in this way too, but was cooler to look at) It made no real sense (despite using a 'time-tested' scifi device), and felt increasingly silly. I also didn't find it to be a convincing visual design, but others might.

And speaking of visuals -- unimpressive, even strangely so. From the lighting in the ship to all the 'galactic setpieces', really nothing of distinction.

Nightcrawler looks like the movie to see right now.

I couldn't have said it better.

I was stunned when as the movie ended people in the audience began to applaud. I felt they were doing such because the movie was so damn long that now they knew they could go home

Actually I am hearing the movie to see is Foxcatcher with Steve Carell in his most defining role

 

[KeithR]

good point- the docking sequence has been done time after time. how many times do we need to see this on screen?

 

[rblnr]

I couldn't have said it better.

I was stunned when as the movie ended people in the audience began to applaud. I felt they were doing such because the movie was so damn long that now they knew they could go home

Actually I am hearing the movie to see is Foxcatcher with Steve Carell in his most defining role

I'm surprised by audiences and the critical reviews.

Heard Foxcatcher was great too. That's the other movie at the top of the list at the moment.

 

[rblnr]

good point- the docking sequence has been done time after time. how many times do we need to see this on screen?

yeah, and why did they try to make it tense?

 

[ack]

I couldn't have said it better.

I was stunned when as the movie ended people in the audience began to applaud. I felt they were doing such because the movie was so damn long that now they knew they could go home

Actually I am hearing the movie to see is Foxcatcher with Steve Carell in his most defining role

Funny, in our theater, I started the applause - and it was because I thought the vast majority of the cosmological depictions and the entire concept of the movie were far from science fiction (as per the wikipedia article I posted, which I hadn't read before the movie) and typical Hollywood drama-graphics. As you may have seen from the wikipedia article, the physicist is going to get two papers out of his work and the pictorial depiction of it.