Out of Pod Experience

It was excellent, but hardly the film of the year.
Don't expect too much, especially after all the things EVE has taught you.

i generally ignore the media so im hype free \o/

Just came out of cinema. Didnt understand, have to watch again.

Dangit, I had hoped it would be crap so I'd have some more stuff to complain about and one thing less to spend money upon. -.-

No offense Charlie. But did we watch the same movie? Now I understand why Big Lynx didn't fully get it. It is a movie with many aspects and it has completely blown my mind. It is a master piece.

However I don't think it is a movie for everyone. It takes a basic understanding of physics and a large chunk of space exploration childhood dream to fully get this movie. That being said. I have rarely been so emotionally touched by video media than I have from this. And on top of that is the epic work of Hans Zimmer. With the soundtrack from the movie still playing in my mind I have a huge urge to reach out for the stars.

I fully understood the movie. I have studied Physics myself, and dedicated a lot of my time to Relativity, Special and General. And every boy that ever existed dreamt of exploring space, to be an astronaut.

That being said, it doesn't take a physicist to fully understand the film, as the characters describe and explain it eloquently to the viewer. You don't need, as you put it, a basic understanding, just to know that gravity has effects on time, when the characters repeat it in layman's term again and again.

I wasn't impressed by the film. There were scenes which were touching, plus Zimmer did a very good job with the score. However, objectively speaking, that would be personal emotions at its most fragile state dictating whether this was a masterpiece, rather than looking at all the aspects, and then rating it as a whole.

We have different opinions, and I respect yours.

I am going to be brutally honest, I have nothing good to say about this movie at all.






[SPOILERS AHEAD]







It is no coincidence that "Interstellar" looks similar to "Contact" based on Carl Sagan's novel of the same name. The project was hatched by "Contact" executive producer Lynda Obst and Kip Thorne, technical adviser for the film after Sagans passing. Jonathan Nolan wrote the manuscript, Steven Spielberg would direct, but it was Christopher Nolan, Jonathan's brother, who finally took the job.

The photography of Hoyte van Hoytemas, the visual effects and the result isn't too shabby, even if some of the animated space panoramas in this $165M movie looks like they have been taken from album covers from the '70s. The story is, however, a genuinely weak construction, built with embarrassing simplifications, drastic makeshift solutions, hocus pocus theories and a concoction of stolen swag from other movies.

The story takes place in a apocalyptic future, possibly the consequence of climate change but it is never revealed why. The only "explanation" given, is the speech by grandpa Donald about general materialism which also serves as the Ayn Rand inspired excuse to ditch the majority of humanity and focus on a small elite of noble survivors, whose future is either on new planets (Plan A) in different galaxies or on space stations (Plan B).

The sob story between father and daughter, the emotional foundation of Interstellar, has been copied multiple times from "Contact" - partly in Coops and his soon-to-be-space physicist daughter Murph and partly in professor Brand and his daughter/student. The shortcut to the universe goes through a wormhole that sits by Saturn, conveniently placed there by "higher powers" is taken from "2001" and the jovial super computers are no doubt happier counterparts to the psychotic HAL 9000.

It doesn't stop there though, the world record in unimaginativeness goes to the exploration of other worlds that quickly turns into a snooze fest, only matched by the buzz killing flirting between the two Star Trekkers Coop and Amelia. The final crashes into a banal resolution how the main character and the fragments of humanity, against all odds, survives thanks to a time paradox (based on Terminator) that tries to explain the emergence of the wormhole and a dopey happy ending, more suited for old fashioned novels that you find at the gas station than a modern scif-fi movie.

I want my three hours back.

Oh, don't even get me started on the physics.

Since most of your post seems directed at me, I'll address it as such. Correct me if I am wrong though.

It is true as you say, every film and book is derived from something previously and there is no exception to that. But I am not sure how my opinion of a movie that I really wanted to see disappoints me so much that turns me me into "a 2bitter4u critic with a superiority complex". Another example of a movie that I was really eager to see but turned out to be poo was Prometheus, that was better as a trailer than as a movie.

I am admittedly very jaded when it comes to stuff that is supposed to entertain me whilst wanting my money but I don't see anything wrong with having high standards.

Speaking of growing up, how about you post with your main?

My nerd of reference states that it's not a bad movie but it's very foreseable ("and now will happen this... and this guy will do that...", to the point of being boring sometimes, and all in all doesn't lives up to the expectations no matter the interest in liking it.

I never said anything about having a better taste, smarter preferences or a superior artistic knowledge, what I said was that "Interstellar" stole this and that from other movies in the worst manner possible that makes the previous works stand out as shining beacons in the night sky and from a director of Christopher Nolan's calibre, I don't think it is unfair to say that I expected better.

As for having high standards, it is about the matter that I want value for my money spent as a consumer. Call that having better taste, smarter preferences or a superior artistic knowledge if you want.