Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

InterstellarFollow

#1 Nov 16 2014 at 5:24 PM Rating: Excellent
***
1,148 posts
Just came home from watching this.

It started a little slow but soon became an incredible ride. I'm not sure I'm 100% happy with the way the story was resolved because it seemed a bit Deus Ex Machina for me. Matt Damon showing up halfway through the movie and being an enormous **** was fun though. Did not know he was part of the cast beforehand.

The visuals were breathtaking and the soundtrack complimented them nicely. Overall I'd say one of the best movies I've seen in a while.
#2 Nov 16 2014 at 6:37 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
17,302 posts
I saw it this morning at an 11:10am showing. The local theater here was only $5.50 for the ticket.

It was good. Definitely longer than I expected. They did spend a lot more time in Earth than I expected them to given the trailers I had seen previously. I got out of the theater at around 2:20pm. So be prepared for a long show.

I also did not expect Matt in the movie. But I did see the ending coming from the very beginning. Knew it was him trying to talk to her. Not 100% happy with the whole black hole happy ending but... Whatever. The ending sequence there seemed strange but I guess it just shows how a 5th dimensional reality would be interpreted by a three dimensional being. Completely strange and unrealistic in terms of their understood reality. As his character (or was it the robot that said it? I think so.) said It was the beings' attempt at creating a three dimensional space for him to interpret the 5 dimensions and communicate to Earth since they could not do it directly themselves.

I did like the idea there that humans needed to stop thinking as individuals and instead as a species in order to succeed in space travel and evolve.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#3 Nov 16 2014 at 8:17 PM Rating: Good
Keeper of the Shroud
*****
13,632 posts
I found it to be slow, plodding, and incredibly predictable. The second they mentioned the bit about gravity and time, I knew exactly how the movie was going to play out. Then I sat there while it slowly and painfully unfolded exactly as I expected. I'm assuming that all of those people raving about it aren't used to science fiction movies. If they were, they wouldn't have been so impressed by such a second rate story.
#4 Nov 16 2014 at 9:40 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
17,302 posts
Also...

He was piloting spacecraft long before anyone paid him to pilot spacecraft...
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#5 Nov 17 2014 at 6:34 PM Rating: Good
Like the space porn & Mcconaughey. Disliked the 5th element stuff. Better than Prometheus, but that isn't saying much.

Edited, Nov 17th 2014 7:38pm by Omegavegeta
____________________________
"The Rich are there to take all of the money & pay none of the taxes, the middle class is there to do all the work and pay all the taxes, and the poor are there to scare the crap out of the middle class." -George Carlin


#6 Nov 17 2014 at 7:04 PM Rating: Excellent
***
1,148 posts
Omegavegeta wrote:
Better than Prometheus, but that isn't saying much.


That really isn't saying much. Smiley: lol

I thought it to be better than Gravity and on par with Europa Report and Sunshine. Please don't crucify me for putting these three in one sentence. I know they are very different from one another and in the case of Sunshine, get a lot of flak for some of their elements. But they are (for me) the best space-travel related scifi movies of the last decade or so and I enjoyed each of them. If someone has recommendations of similar-themed movies, that would be very welcome.

(I plan on watching Kubricks 2001 some time soon, so no need to tell me that one)
#7 Nov 17 2014 at 7:13 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
17,302 posts
I think Sunshine is a good comparison. Even up to the very end where **** goes from "Ya, space travel" to "Kind of weird".
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#8 Nov 17 2014 at 11:20 PM Rating: Good
***
1,159 posts
It was okay. It has the right themes for a hard sci-fi film about space exploration (well, love as a cosmic force aside) but it pulls its punches in the wrong places. The resolution is obviously pretty telegraphed.

The science is really bad in some parts for no real reason.The water planet is probably the most egregious example: time doesn't dialate anywhere near that much in that kind of gravity and the tidal forces on the planet would be obvious beforehand. What are they even doing there? The radiation'd probably sterilise the whole expedition anyway.
____________________________
Timelordwho wrote:
I'm not quite sure that scheming is an emotion.
#9 Nov 18 2014 at 8:58 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
Kavekkk wrote:
It was okay. It has the right themes for a hard sci-fi film about space exploration (well, love as a cosmic force aside) but it pulls its punches in the wrong places. The resolution is obviously pretty telegraphed.

The science is really bad in some parts for no real reason.The water planet is probably the most egregious example: time doesn't dialate anywhere near that much in that kind of gravity and the tidal forces on the planet would be obvious beforehand. What are they even doing there? The radiation'd probably sterilise the whole expedition anyway.

There was much ado made of the fact that the movie peoples hired on a world-renown astrophysicist to help with the science.

I tried my damnedest to get the hubby to go see this with me this weekend, but without success.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#10 Nov 18 2014 at 9:36 AM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
17,302 posts
Elinda wrote:
Kavekkk wrote:
It was okay. It has the right themes for a hard sci-fi film about space exploration (well, love as a cosmic force aside) but it pulls its punches in the wrong places. The resolution is obviously pretty telegraphed.

The science is really bad in some parts for no real reason.The water planet is probably the most egregious example: time doesn't dialate anywhere near that much in that kind of gravity and the tidal forces on the planet would be obvious beforehand. What are they even doing there? The radiation'd probably sterilise the whole expedition anyway.

There was much ado made of the fact that the movie peoples hired on a world-renown astrophysicist to help with the science.

It wasn't Michio Kaku, was it?

(He likes to exaggerate things and do the fake science stuff to make things sound cool)
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#11 Nov 18 2014 at 10:07 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
Astrophysicist Kip Thorne.

Quote:
Kip Thorne
Physicist
Kip Stephen Thorne is an American theoretical physicist, known for his contributions in gravitational physics and astrophysics. Wikipedia
Born: June 1, 1940 (age 74), Logan, UT
Books: Black Holes and Time Warps, Black Holes and Time Warps: Einstein's Outrageous Legacy
Education: Princeton University (1965), California Institute of Technology (1962)
Awards: Albert Einstein Medal, Guggenheim Fellowship for Natural Sciences, US & Canada


____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#12 Nov 28 2014 at 6:29 PM Rating: Decent
**
807 posts
Elinda wrote:
Astrophysicist Kip Thorne.

Quote:
Kip Thorne
Physicist
Kip Stephen Thorne is an American theoretical physicist, known for his contributions in gravitational physics and astrophysics. Wikipedia
Born: June 1, 1940 (age 74), Logan, UT
Books: Black Holes and Time Warps, Black Holes and Time Warps: Einstein's Outrageous Legacy
Education: Princeton University (1965), California Institute of Technology (1962)
Awards: Albert Einstein Medal, Guggenheim Fellowship for Natural Sciences, US & Canada





They should have used Sheldon Cooper....
#13 Nov 30 2014 at 7:20 AM Rating: Decent
It's not Nolan's best imo. I liked the movie, enjoyed it even, but it's not memorable at all. It's going to be a very nice boost for the SF movie genre, given that it's pretty successfull and is going to get some Oscars most likely, but it's not groundbreaking in story or visuals.

Matt Damon's character was a great addition. A nice play on the whole 'needing to look at the bigger picture to protect mankind's future'.

But there were a couple of things that did not make that much sense to me. Why rig the robot to explode just to protect the real data? Why not just trash the data? Why didn't he just admit to Cooper that he lied and the planet wasn't viable at all? Damon knew that the ship could go to the next planet, so why the elaborate (relatively speaking) plot?

And how did they get so close to Gargantua after they saved the ship, so that they had to try the manouver that conveniently sent Cooper in the black hole?


The writers of the story knew their SF classics, there wasn't really anything new in this movie. Still, it's not a bad movie. Compared to a lot of other SF movies, this one is still one of the best imo.


Edited, Nov 30th 2014 2:20pm by Zieveraar
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 146 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (146)