Interstellar (Nolan)

[dimejinky99]

spoilers...

15 maddening 'Interstellar' plot holes
http://popwatch.ew.com/2014/11/08/inter ... lot-holes/

[Heathen]

I don't get how believing the worst about mankind is a bad thing.

[Heathen]

I mean that would almost make me want to see this movie.

[dimejinky99]

Being American or being from anywhere else, probably will affect how you see this film..

or am i thinking of Armageddon?


The stars n stripes got more screen time than Ben Affleck and Liv Tyler combined in that one

[McParadigm]

This wasn't a contender for his best work, but it was an engaging and sometimes overwhelmingly powerful movie.

Mostly, it's still just really refreshing to watch the occasional blockbuster-sized film that is not a sequel, franchise piece, or reboot, and which takes the time for emotions to impact rather than pushing them through while rushing forward to the next set piece.

My biggest complaints would be about the places where it strayed into lazy Hollywood setups...oh, he's the best astronaut we ever had and oh we happen to be like a mile down the road and etc. A lot of that stuff was just sort of unnecessary, and distracted from the primary juxtaposition/too-relatable dilemma of believing your work is important, or that you are capable of achieving something, but having to sacrifice time with your kids in order to succeed.

[LoathedVermin72]

When Cooper drives away from the house, and as his pickup rumbles down the gravel road leaving a cloud of dust the rocket launch countdown begins, instead of with him seated in the shuttle. His true take-off was right there in that moment, and it was bittersweet for him. You could tell the pilot in him wanted to go, but he was gutted to leave his family, Murphy especially. Nolan took us directly from the seat of Coop's truck to the edge of Earth's atmosphere. I think a huge credit goes to McC again, but I thought the whole scene was really well put together.

From a pacing perspective, I hated the leap from truck to space. That said, I think you make a very solid and convincing argument for it. I won't argue your point.

I was impressed by all of the shots of the ship drifting through space, but I found the tension in the docking scenes to be absolutely riveting. When we think about space travel, naturally we are more inclined to imagine the dramatic view of huge planets, or the intensity of entering an atmosphere. It's easy to forget just how difficult even the most basic or boring tasks are. Both docking scenes were beautifully captured imo. On the last one I could almost feel the g-forces pinning me to my seat.

See, to me, that just felt like what I mentioned earlier: Nolan focusing on petty human conflict and narrative over beauty. They are EXPLORING ANOTHER GALAXY. Why would I want to watch some cheap thrills revolving around a docking procedure over the magnificence of another freaking galaxy? I felt like I barely got to see the planets, the black hole, etc., but I sure got more than enough shots of a spinning docking port. Yippee?

I think it's possible to represent both the riveting human conflict AND majestic space imagery. Again, just look at 2001: A Space Odyssey. There's a spinning docking scene in that movie too, and it's fucking beautiful. That movie also addresses the boredom and monotony of basic tasks in space, and does it in a way that doesn't inordinately shift the focus away from the gorgeous atmosphere of space. It also devotes significant screentime to a Man vs. AI subplot (which could have easily turned into a distracting focus on petty conflict), yet doesn't use it for merely cheap thrills or cynicism. The relationship between people and the universe felt cohesive and whole. That movie puts the insignificance of human beings in its proper perspective against the backdrop of space. That movie offers genuine reverence for the universe and genuine insight into the human condition. Interstellar offers cheap thrills, trendy cynicism, and meretricious pseudo-profundity.

[Malloy]

I don't get how believing the worst about mankind is a bad thing.

because prima facie cynicism is fucking boring and not at all as "radical" or "critical" as the people who adopt it as their m.o. think it is. especially in 2014. in fact, it seems like the opposite of critical engagement. (i say this as someone who adored Nightcrawler, which was savage, unrelenting and a much darker picture than Interstellar-but never cynical.)

[Heathen]

So the epitome of critical engagement in 2014 would be what, delusion?

[BurtReynolds]

Team cynicism, though I still fail to see how this movie is overly cynical. Is it because humans broke the Earth? BEcause astronauts trapped alone on desolate hellholes break? People are sometimes selfish? wtf? There is plenty here to offset that. Its not a cynical movie.

[BurtReynolds]

This wasn't a contender for his best work, but it was an engaging and sometimes overwhelmingly powerful movie.

Mostly, it's still just really refreshing to watch the occasional blockbuster-sized film that is not a sequel, franchise piece, or reboot, and which takes the time for emotions to impact rather than pushing them through while rushing forward to the next set piece.

My biggest complaints would be about the places where it strayed into lazy Hollywood setups...oh, he's the best astronaut we ever had and oh we happen to be like a mile down the road and etc. A lot of that stuff was just sort of unnecessary, and distracted from the primary juxtaposition/too-relatable dilemma of believing your work is important, or that you are capable of achieving something, but having to sacrifice time with your kids in order to succeed.

That was my general takeaway. But considering Nolan is extremely hit or miss with me, I think its one of his best. It generally plays to his strengths, and masks some of his weaknesses.

[Dev]

lotta talk about this movie. I will have to rush to the nearest theatre.

[BurtReynolds]

Starting with an apocalyptic scenario is always a tricky thing to do, because there's a certain amount of cynicism inherent in that alone. But it can be explored in ways that are interesting and edifying, ways that transcend facile cynicism or pessimism. This movie doesn't do that.

True, its tricky to mix a sense of awe and wonder with intensity or danger (hence why Horror movies are seldom full of wonderment), but I think the balance is hit very well here. The frightening aspects don't overwhelm the brighter aspects. Where people draw the line is purely subjective, but again, you are dismissing the film because it doesn't conform to what you think a movie should promote. You demand some sort of blind optimism, and are disappointed when the director has no intention of giving it to you. Go watch another movie instead of dismissing this as poorly done. You are conflating two different things.

This movie almost always chooses to believe the worst about mankind, such as when it's saying that people in the future have accepted the moon landing as faked political propaganda or only focus on "their place in the dirt"

I disagree that it always chooses to believe the worst of mankind, but so what if it does? Perfectly acceptable area of exploration for a film, and plenty of real world instances validate the events of the film. And for the love of God, stay away from Lars von Trier.

or that even bright, scientific, supposedly noble minds will choose to resort petty, selfish survival at the cost of everyone and everything else (that Matt Damon scene was just the fucking worst).

After years of isolation on desolate hellholes or dying planets? You really expect a lot from people! i didn't find their actions petty at all. Selfish I suppose, but Jesus Christ, have some pity! The Matt Damon scene was fine, silly man.

Nolan seems to want to re-ignite some kind of passion or joy for space exploration (a worthy cause),

ugh again with the demands of responsibility. shove your "worthy causes" in film, or better yet, make your own.

Spoiler: show

but that is totally undermined by his cynical conceit and inordinate focus on conflict and tired drama. Take, for example, the wave planet sequence. The imagery should be awesome; mammoth waves obscuring the horizon, crashing down with unbelievable power. But does Nolan ever let the imagery breathe? Nope. He focuses on stupid, boring "tension" involving Anne Hathaway playing the part of a melodramatic retard and getting a colleague killed. No time for majesty; humans needs to act like idiots.

agree to disagree. The movie is dark sometimes, sure but it didnt overwhelm it. The realization that the mountains were not mountains was cool! I thought Brand's death was... weird and confusing. Its hard to even blame Hathaway's character. He just didnt get in the ship! Not a great scene for sure, but it didn't hurt the imagery of the planet at all for me.

It's the worst of both worlds for me: a cynical, pessimistic view of the world and humanity countered by sappy, maudlin platitudes about family and love. Both sides of the coin are painfully lacking in depth.

It is sappy at times, and pessimistic at times. Its also absurdly hopeful, fun, beautiful and tense at times. You missed those when you DISMISSED IT FOR NOT PRESENTING AN ARGUMENT YOU WANTED THAT THE FILMMAKERS HAD NO INTENTION OF MAKING!

yes

no.

[McParadigm]

So the epitome of critical engagement in 2014 would be what, delusion?

Disengagement

[Kaius]

Team cynicism, though I still fail to see how this movie is overly cynical. Is it because humans broke the Earth? BEcause astronauts trapped alone on desolate hellholes break? People are sometimes selfish? wtf? There is plenty here to offset that. Its not a cynical movie.

I was just going to post that the cynicism is being way overstated here.

LV- you cited Matt Damons character as being the worst of all. Yes, he was a prick, suffering from isolation induced space madness, and he snapped.

But look at David Gyasi's character for a different sample. He was left on the station for 23 years alone, and was able to keep his humanity in tact.

[LoathedVermin72]

I don't get how believing the worst about mankind is a bad thing.

because prima facie cynicism is fucking boring and not at all as "radical" or "critical" as the people who adopt it as their m.o. think it is. especially in 2014. in fact, it seems like the opposite of critical engagement. (i say this as someone who adored Nightcrawler, which was savage, unrelenting and a much darker picture than Interstellar-but never cynical.)

I like you.

[LoathedVermin72]

True, its tricky to mix a sense of awe and wonder with intensity or danger (hence why Horror movies are seldom full of wonderment), but I think the balance is hit very well here. The frightening aspects don't overwhelm the brighter aspects. Where people draw the line is purely subjective, but again, you are dismissing the film because it doesn't conform to what you think a movie should promote. You demand some sort of blind optimism, and are disappointed when the director has no intention of giving it to you. Go watch another movie instead of dismissing this as poorly done. You are conflating two different things.

1. I said cynicism and pessimism, not intensity and danger. Those are very different things. Awe and wonder can certainly coexist with intensity and danger, though - see everything I said about Godzilla already. But like you said, we just subjectively disagree on how well Interstellar hits that blend. Personally, I never felt the awe and wonder because Nolan’s cinematic language never spoke to me.

2. Has it occurred to you that perhaps a big part of why you like this more than I do is BECAUSE we have differing worldviews? You admit to being on “Team Cynicism,” and the way you add “blind” before “optimism” says a lot about our differing views, haha. So I think it makes total sense that you don’t have a problem with a lot of things I do in the film; we’re coming from fundamentally opposed perspectives.

But that doesn’t mean I can’t criticize the movie because I have a problem with its worldview. You have to understand that I find the brand of cynicism/pessimism in this movie to be inherently juvenile and callow, so when it is applied to things like the future of humanity and the vastness of space, the stupidity of it all becomes insufferably amplified. It explodes into pretentious ridiculousness.

I disagree that it always chooses to believe the worst of mankind, but so what if it does? Perfectly acceptable area of exploration for a film, and plenty of real world instances validate the events of the film. And for the love of God, stay away from Lars von Trier.

Again, different viewpoints. I don’t find that an interesting area for a film to explore at all; I find it empty and dull, and I never bought the way Interstellar goes about exploring it. It came off as silly and ridiculous.

And, oh, don’t worry - I already hate Lars Von Trier.

Spoiler: show

After years of isolation on desolate hellholes or dying planets? You really expect a lot from people! i didn't find their actions petty at all. Selfish I suppose, but Jesus Christ, have some pity! The Matt Damon scene was fine, silly man.

Okay, so he’s been isolated on a lonely planet. He was also in hyper-sleep for much of that time. But regardless, this guy is a trained professional who willingly volunteered to take part in a mission that he was fully aware could very well end in his death. But he did so selflessly, nobly, recognizing that the future of mankind was much more important than his own survival as an individual.

But now that he’s been up there for a while and undergoes some hardship, he decides, “Fuck it. I don’t wanna die. Fuck the human race; I don’t care if they all die as long as I get to go home. So now I‘m going to straight-up murder my colleagues.”

Bullshit. Fucking bullshit. That is merely shallow cynicism, something that is all the rage in modern film and TV. The concepts of true courage, selflessness, and nobility seem unfathomable to Nolan; in the end, everyone is selfish. Everyone lies. Everyone chooses themselves over others. Again I say: bullshit. We’re dealing with intergalactic exploration and the future of the entire human race, here. I don’t buy for one second that our astronauts and scientists would behave so childishly.

ugh again with the demands of responsibility. shove your "worthy causes" in film, or better yet, make your own.

I didn’t demand any responsibility here. In fact, I made it very clear talking about Gone Girl that I never demand responsibility from anyone. All I was saying that Nolan’s constant refrains about how humans weren’t meant to die on Earth and the way the film sets up space exploration as the salvation of human civilization is pretty clearly making a contemporary point. And that’s great; I am all for that point. But, again, the way he actually makes the point undermines it.

Also, the "Why don't you just make your own movie?" tactic is such a worthless straw-man argument that I can't believe someone is actually trying to employ it. That has precisely zero bearing on anything we're talking about.

Spoiler: show

agree to disagree. The movie is dark sometimes, sure but it didnt overwhelm it. The realization that the mountains were not mountains was cool! I thought Brand's death was... weird and confusing. Its hard to even blame Hathaway's character. He just didnt get in the ship! Not a great scene for sure, but it didn't hurt the imagery of the planet at all for me.

God I would have loved to have had some more time to absorb that planet. It was such a cool concept and it had the potential to be really beautiful.

Its also absurdly hopeful, fun, beautiful and tense at times. You missed those

I found its hopefulness disingenuous and platitudinous. Again, all the cynicism and pessimism undermined it. “Fun, beautiful, and tense” is subjective, and I disagree on all counts. I didn’t “miss” them - I just didn’t experience the same emotions you did while watching it.

[Kaius]

Bullshit. Fucking bullshit. That is merely shallow cynicism, something that is all the rage in modern film and TV. The concepts of true courage, selflessness, and nobility seem unfathomable to Nolan; in the end, everyone is selfish. Everyone lies. Everyone chooses themselves over others. Again I say: bullshit. We’re dealing with intergalactic exploration and the future of the entire human race, here. I don’t buy for one second that our astronauts and scientists would behave so childishly.

Spoiler: show

Not everyone, though. Just this guy. Astronauts and scientists are still human first, and humans fuck up sometimes. Nolan showed plenty of selflessness on screen by drafting the main character to consistently be putting other's needs before his own. I see where you are drawing your line, and you make good points about the theme of cynicism, but it's not nearly as rampant in this movie as you portray. Plan B wasn't cynical. Cooper was not a cynic. And though she made a mistake that cost Doyle his life, in the end Amelia proved courageous in her actions. There's proof of characters, major and minor both, completely buying into the plan and ready to do whatever it takes to get it done.

[spike]

matt damon's in this?

[LoathedVermin72]

Bullshit. Fucking bullshit. That is merely shallow cynicism, something that is all the rage in modern film and TV. The concepts of true courage, selflessness, and nobility seem unfathomable to Nolan; in the end, everyone is selfish. Everyone lies. Everyone chooses themselves over others. Again I say: bullshit. We’re dealing with intergalactic exploration and the future of the entire human race, here. I don’t buy for one second that our astronauts and scientists would behave so childishly.

Spoiler: show

Not everyone, though. Just this guy. Astronauts and scientists are still human first, and humans fuck up sometimes. Nolan showed plenty of selflessness on screen by drafting the main character to consistently be putting other's needs before his own. I see where you are drawing your line, and you make good points about the theme of cynicism, but it's not nearly as rampant in this movie as you portray. Plan B wasn't cynical. Cooper was not a cynic. And though she made a mistake that cost Doyle his life, in the end Amelia proved courageous in her actions. There's proof of characters, major and minor both, completely buying into the plan and ready to do whatever it takes to get it done.

Spoiler: show

I get what you're saying, but there aren't all that many characters in the movie, and Nolan made the decision to include a guy who takes his selfishness to calculated, cold-blooded, murderous (genocidal, really) degrees. He chose to put that in there. I think that was a very cynical decision.

[LoathedVermin72]

Spoiler: show

I'm also not sure the others are as selfless as you suggest. Cooper's motivations and his arc are always tied to his family. Even at the end, he keeps screaming to himself "Stay!" He wishes he had never chosen to leave his family. Hathaway's character admits to being driven at least partially by her love of someone else. Plan B isn't necessarily cynical, but lying about ever even trying Plan A first is.