Read Mixed User Reviews for Interstellar

5

AkashVijayApr 6, 2015

Interstellar may have been scientifically accurate but that doesn't excuse it of its thematic flaws.
Foe one I think it's tediously wordy at times. There's a lot of unnecessary dialogue that just takes away from the emotional heart of theInterstellar may have been scientifically accurate but that doesn't excuse it of its thematic flaws.
Foe one I think it's tediously wordy at times. There's a lot of unnecessary dialogue that just takes away from the emotional heart of the film - like that bloke who starts explaining why worm holes ought to be spherical in 3 dimensions using flowcharts and diagrams. What was the point of doing that? For one you'd think a Nasa pilot whose mission is to enter a wormhole would know that but more importantly it degraded a thrilling moment (entering the wormhole) with a bunch of prose. And there's a lot of this in the film. The part on Newton's 3rd law made me cringe.

Characters explain the effects of warped space-time to each other and throw away cheesy relativity punch lines but they hardly ever have real human moments. I would've preferred if the film explained none of its scientific complexities. Let the audience rise up to the occasion, let them figure it out. But this is where Nolan's commercial instinct takes over. I get that he's trying to sell the film to a wider demographic and I get that there had to be some amount of exposition but Nolan does this to such an extent that it takes away the humanity of his characters. Why should I care about them? Exposition is a cheap alternative for not being able to convey your ideas through imagery. Anne Hathaway's Dr. Brandt is a poorly written character because midway through the film, her personality just flips in a dime and we have a new character clothed in the same flesh. She's introduced as a stern and no-nonsense woman but later on she starts spewing the most nonsensical things in the movie - like that "love is quantifiable" baloney she's obsessed with. Again just shows you Nolan's women can't be strong women, they can only be strong lovers. I was shocked in the end when I found out that Cooper and Brandt were supposed to end up together. Was there any chemistry there? And then you have Matt Damon who's not really a character but a walking wikipedia that's there only to list the pro's and cons of being human - the performance doesn't help either.

The part of the film that needed explaining is the sci-fi-y part (which you can't look up in a book) about how humans are planning to leave the planet. In fact I still don't understand it. So the astronauts went searching for some specific numerical data required for solving some equation that could be found only inside the black hole but how would the unification of general relativity and quantum mechanics help us leave the planet. In fact how did we leave the planet? Weren't we out of fuel? I'm not trying to poke holes or anything. I just don't get it.

There's things that the movie does very honestly and get's right - like the relationship between Murphy and Cooper but I also think there's stuff the film gets very wrong. The best scene Nolan's ever directed is from the Dark Knight when the Joker leans out of the police car and shakes his head in glee. There's no dialogue, there's no music but it's a haunting and beautiful sequence that conveys volumes. In my opinion Interstellar never achieves that sort of artistry. I still liked it but I don't think it's as good as recent sic-fi films such as Wall-E, A.I., Children of Men, Minority Report, Eternal Sunshine of Spotless Mind or Nolan's own the Prestige. Interstellar may leave one feeling completely indifferent or deeply moved. Sadly I'm among those who felt it was contrived, unfocussed and eventually self-defeating.… Expand

37 of 67 users found this helpful3730

All this user's reviews

4

argonsteeleNov 7, 2014

Very disappointing. Everything is done for cool visuals and nothing makes sense. Serious and pretentious and ultimately boring. Wants to be about the future of the human race, but ends up being about the power of love. ;-/ There's a lotVery disappointing. Everything is done for cool visuals and nothing makes sense. Serious and pretentious and ultimately boring. Wants to be about the future of the human race, but ends up being about the power of love. ;-/ There's a lot of great visual references to 2001 and some good humor actually, but you can't help wondering how the script was green lit. It could have been great if he had taken more (or less) LSD!… Expand

49 of 98 users found this helpful4949

All this user's reviews

5

Brent_MarchantNov 8, 2014

A surprisingly underwhelming offering sorely in need of judicious editing, better writing and a clearer focus. Despite capable performances by Matthew McConaughey, Matt Damon and Jessica Chastain, as well as an emotive score and terrificA surprisingly underwhelming offering sorely in need of judicious editing, better writing and a clearer focus. Despite capable performances by Matthew McConaughey, Matt Damon and Jessica Chastain, as well as an emotive score and terrific sound, the picture suffers from largely mediocre special effects, uneven pacing, underdeveloped characters, bland supporting performances and a choppy, bloated script. When telling a tale that aspires to epic heights, the worst offense a director can commit is to make the story boring, which is precisely what has happened here. Don't believe the hype; this release is far from what it could and should have been.… Expand

24 of 50 users found this helpful2426

All this user's reviews

5

MahmusOct 3, 2019

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I am really not a fan of this movie.

The visuals are great and I'm sure the science is very accurate and that's very impressive... but the writing is total mess.

I never liked how Cooper completely ignores his son Tom, who he clearly loves less than Murph. I never liked Brand's awful monolgue about love. I get that she's supposed to be wrong and irrational and over-emotional in this scene (isn't she supposed to be a scientist?), but she's proven right in the end, which just sucks for so many reasons. I mean, they seriously made the only female scientist on board be the one that almost jeopardizes the mission because she gets emotional and misses her boyfriend. Yikes.

I never liked dialogue. I've always had a problem with how Nolan movies are written. Full of endless exposition and corny speeches that are meant to be deep, and this is no different.

The following is an actual conversatiom from the movie:

-------------------------------------------------------------
COOPER: All of this, is one little girl's bedroom, every moment! It's infinitely complex! They have access, to infinite time and space, but they're not bound by anything! They can't find a specific place in time, they can't communicate. That's why I'm here. I'm gonna find a way to tell Murph, just like I found this moment.

TARS: How, Cooper?

COOPER: Love, TARS, love.
-------------------------------------------------------------

This movie wants to be 2001: A Space Odyssey, but it feels like Nolan didn't trust the audience to be smart enough to understand the film like Kubrick did, so instead of conveying its themes and science visually like 2001, he makes the characters constantly explain the science to the audience and give long speeches about whatever he's trying to say. It's like he thinks we're babies or something.

I like most Nolan films, but this just feels like he didn't respect the viewer's intelligence enough, and it turns what could have been a poetic space epic into a bunch of boring characters telling us what's going on at all times.… Expand

3 of 3 users found this helpful30

All this user's reviews

6

StealthgearDec 15, 2014

Nolan is Michael Bay with a slightly longer attention span. Interstellar is filled with movie ruiners; Matt Damon, a Deus ex Machina ending, and sad characters; The daughter doesn't find resolution or make emotional sense in regards to herNolan is Michael Bay with a slightly longer attention span. Interstellar is filled with movie ruiners; Matt Damon, a Deus ex Machina ending, and sad characters; The daughter doesn't find resolution or make emotional sense in regards to her dad. This one was typical of Nolan's past style where what you see is what you get. It never finds new ground, a new level of artistry, or metaphor like 2001 did. This ain't Kubrick. The story is part JJ Abrams Star Trek, Astronaut Farmer, and any post apocalypse movie. It does not even surpass how fun Gravity was. The actors and sound designers all did a good job though. It has some cool moments where I thought it might be a great movie. The first half of the movie is great honestly. The fighting scenes and unoriginality seep back in. The previous mentioned movie ruiners really set this back. You might be thinking huh? When you figure out everything you realize that it doesn't set the bar higher.… Expand

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

5

moogalaniMay 2, 2015

The plot ends up depending upon an absurd paradox. It's not 'scientifically accurate' as some seem to believe either. You can't effect the past in physics exactly because it results in the absurd paradoxes that are seen in this movie.

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

5

Tss5078Mar 7, 2017

Christopher Nolan is the smartest writer/director in Hollywood, so smart that a lot of people claim his films are over their heads. The master of twists and deception made Batman real, showed us how dreams work in Inception, and brought usChristopher Nolan is the smartest writer/director in Hollywood, so smart that a lot of people claim his films are over their heads. The master of twists and deception made Batman real, showed us how dreams work in Inception, and brought us inside the dangerous world of magic in the Presitige. In his latest film, Interstellar, Nolan tackles the concept of time and how different it is from what we perceive. This film does have a great twist in the end and some terrific special effects, but beyond that it is one of the longest and slowest moving films I've seen in years. Once again, Humans have finally destroyed Earth and have gone looking for a new home, but outside our solar system, things are much different than they appear. Time and gravity are different concepts in different regions of space, and the effects on the crew, who had hoped to one day see their families again, diminish with each passing day. Matthew McConaughey stars and as is the case with most of his films, he's terrific. Based on some of the poor choices he made in his younger years, he has a bad rep among critics, but the fact is that he's always fun to watch, and is one of the most intense actors out there today. As for the rest of the film, it's usually Nolan's genius that makes the film unique and special, but in this instance he was too smart for his own good. The story moves very slowly and at times is more than somewhat confusing, not to mention at nearly three hours long, it's a challenge to sit through to even reach his famous twist at the end. Nolan films are something I always look forward to, as they are different and both entertain me and make me think, but in this case, I was just beyond bored and fed up with the whole thing. I guess sometimes even genius takes a holiday.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

5

Rox22Jan 25, 2016

At the end of the day, this is a movie. Whether or not the science behind it is realistic or not is irrelevant. As a movie it is meant to entertain. Does it do that? Here and there.

The movie does have a clever premise, but it also feelsAt the end of the day, this is a movie. Whether or not the science behind it is realistic or not is irrelevant. As a movie it is meant to entertain. Does it do that? Here and there.

The movie does have a clever premise, but it also feels like the writers dumbed it down a bit too much. Pacing is slug like at times. It takes way to long for the movie to go anywhere, and when it does, it does so in sporadic bursts.

While the story is an interesting one, it is far too predictable. No real surprises. It feels like this was done deliberately to ensure a broader audience could follow the narrative.

Matthew McConaughey does do his very best. In fact I kinda think he overdid it at times. I give him credit, he knows how to cry on queue. Other than him, none of the other cast were memorable.

Overall:
Interstellar is a good idea that just was far too dull the way it was executed. Either do the Hollywood thing, or do the artsy thing. Don't try to do both.

Side Note:
Anyone else wonder why McConaughey's skin looked orange in the movie?… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

5

SmoothrunnerNov 21, 2015

It seems that Nolan decided to outdo Kubrick's "2001: A Space Odyssey". To hog the laurels of the best sci-fi movie. Dubious attempt, given the disparity of talents. But what Nolan really quietly "taken over", is a Paul Anderson's storyIt seems that Nolan decided to outdo Kubrick's "2001: A Space Odyssey". To hog the laurels of the best sci-fi movie. Dubious attempt, given the disparity of talents. But what Nolan really quietly "taken over", is a Paul Anderson's story "Kyrie", replacing supernova by black hole, telepathy by gravity, and stuffing it by cheap and highly implausible melodrama. The result is another "Batman" - not a masterpiece movie picture a la Kubrick, with his attention to details and authenticity, but a grotesque movie-SF- comics, caricature Gargantua. However, Nolan's talent was enough to make this inappropriately stretched movie to be quite fascinating for what he could receive 6 out of 10, but taking into account the theft of Paul Anderson's idea, 5 out of 10 will be the most honest assessment.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

6

Ali_MarashianMay 12, 2017

This movie is not nearly as great as the hype it recieved. Nolan just is trying to be a better director on emotional levels, but he simply cant. Get over it Nolan!

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

6

MCRRApr 19, 2015

A much anticipated movie displaying tones of '2001' especially the classical music laced over the visual backdrop of space and the 'trapped in time-like' ending. A strong performance from McConaughey and a reasonable plot although displacedA much anticipated movie displaying tones of '2001' especially the classical music laced over the visual backdrop of space and the 'trapped in time-like' ending. A strong performance from McConaughey and a reasonable plot although displaced by a somewhat 'Hollywood style' last 20 minutes. This could have been so much more..... Space visuals were pretty ordinary, good effects Re spacecraft and... It just seemed to go nowhere!!! A good movie, but could have been far more superior than what was delivered.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

4

originalballoonJun 5, 2015

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Christopher Nolan seems to draw a buzzing mass of Nolan-fanatics wherever he goes. These little buzzers swarm around The Light That Is Nolan and in His light, nothing can ever go wrong. Who cares if Bane’s death in The Dark Knight Rises was ridiculous?

Okay I get it, Memento was ingenious, The Dark Knight set new standards for the superhero-scope of the cinemaverse, but Nolan sure doesn’t have the Midas hand of movie-making. He’s a man, he makes mistakes, and not all of the stuff he makes turns out so fabulous.

Sure, Interstellar has fancy technology, as its Oscar for Best Visual Effects will demonstrate. The most accurate portrayal of a wormhole, precision of orbital physics and astrophysics, [insert fancy jargon here]……

All that’s great, except that there’s more to a movie than just technical splendor.

Stanley Kubrick’s science fiction masterpiece 2001: A Space Odyssey isn’t considered one of the greatest sci-fi films ever created only for its revolutionary techniques in portraying space and spaceships; its profound ruminations of the nature of man and the questions it raises on the divide between natural and artificial intelligence are what has put the film on the pinnacle of cinema. Of course, the movie’s amazing sequences of spaceships moving slowly in harmony with Strauss’s majestic pieces cannot be overlooked, but that does not mean they are the sole reason behind A Space Odyssey’s critical acclaim.

Interstellar tries valiantly to mimic both the technical and philosophical marvels of historical sci-fi films like 2001: A Space Odyssey, yet it fails by a long shot in delivering a significant, poignant message. The early scenes between Murph and Cooper fall flat in emotion; neither the acting nor the dialog carry through the fragile emotions that should have been exchanged in such a scene. Nolan’s efforts to raise questions on the “human identity” are easily spotted in scenes that seem almost forced, with little contextual connection to the sequence of events that move the story forward. The best example would be Anne Hathaway’s excruciatingly cringe-worthy scene in which she claims love is worth jeopardizing their whole mission and the future of humanity for. Seriously, this comes out of nowhere—when did Hathaway’s character become so irrational and obsessed with her probably long-dead lover?

“Love is the one thing we’re capable of perceiving that transcends time and space,” she cries. Sound like something from one of those turn-your-life-around-through-these-10-steps books? It’s unbelievably sloppy and unrealistic dialogue, and something I’m not at all surprised to find in a Nolan movie. Self-important, philosophic textbook quotes may work in a superhero movie where the hero is expected to be somewhat presumptuous, but not so much for a supposedly realistic science fiction flick.

What I’ve concluded is that Interstellar is neither unique nor special; its ideas of travel through wormholes and warped time in different areas of the galaxy have already been entertained in science fiction films of an earlier age such as Star Trek. The only factor that Interstellar can show off above all other is the accuracy to which it incorporated modern theories of space and time—the wormhole’s curved surface is supposedly the most accurate representation of such a thing ever put on screen.

Perhaps the supposed scientific genius of the movie becomes more real to its audience because of the background of the movie, or the way the subject of space travel is treated. Science fiction movies like Star Trek seem far off from reality—such movies portray themselves as fiction, a made up world, a world that is usually beyond the parameters of a “what if” world that diverges from our own. Interstellar, however, tries to make itself seem like an extension of the reality we live in—our future very well may have in store for us a dry, bleak land that has forsaken the human race. Dying potato fields and giant dust storm seem less childlike, less like a figment of our imagination than do lightsabers and evil warlords waging war on the galaxy. We are led to empathize with the world of Interstellar as if it were our own and not a created fantasyland, which is why some of the things that happen in the movie seem less absurd than what happens in other films of the same genre (of course, these “things” exclude the infamous bookshelf and Morse code scene, the absolute bane of the movie and the epitome of Christopher Nolan’s over-ambition with his newest project).

So if you thought Interstellar was an absolute blast, good for you. Congratulations for spending those extra dollars on watching IMAX 3D or whatever it is they have these days. Next time though, you might want to consider crashing on your couch with a nice, homemade bowl of buttery popcorn and let Netflix lead you through the world of true, time-proven science fiction. (Of course, Interstellar re-runs are always available. Respect personal preference I must.)… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

5

jackalskOct 16, 2015

Visual is good. Story is under average. Dialogues are boring. The main idea is badly premeditated. Warning! Drink a lot of coffee before seeing this movie to avoid fall in sleep.

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

6

FuturedirectorMar 17, 2017

An overrated, slow-paced and surprisingly dull adventure that could only win a redemption by its great cast and it's impressive script. Interstellar has a good message but its ending can be imagined by anyone who has creativity.

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

6

AbeMCJul 14, 2017

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Interstellar attempts to be a character-driven space drama grounded in pseudo-realism. “Attempts” being the operative word. The character-driven drama is undermined by awkward story jumps and rushed / poorly explained motivations (though at almost three hours, the film isn’t short). None of this is helped by some nonsensical subversion of sci-fi common sense (seriously, who would think about inhabiting a planet near a black hole - let alone THREE planets near a black hole?). Add in a classic time-travel paradox and the seeds have been sown for some major confusion. It's a Christopher Nolan film, of course, so you can expect some great visuals, a great score by Hans Zimmer, and some good acting by all involved (except, strangely enough, leading man Matthew McConaughey, who mumbles half his lines and has a wooden expression on his face for the first two-thirds of the film). Interstellar tries to be thoughtful, insightful, reflective and predictive, but never inspires the sense of wonder that is a part of any great sci-fi film.

Interstellar is worth a watch once if you enjoy Nolan's film-making. Watch it again and you'll begin to pick the flaws apart. A disappointing 6/10.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

5

DominArsenDec 8, 2018

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Visuellement le film ne casse pas une prune je trouve les effets de lumière grenelée les mise au point flou (Oui filmé en mode année 50 Imax 70mm) et les effets visuels dans l'espace complètement raté et je ne parle même pas de saturne qui doit être une .PNG fournie par la nasa sur lequel ce déplace un point blanc pendant 10 secondes sur un plan 2D bref en ligne droite pour nous dire que c'est le vaisseau... Pas de 3D c'est vraiment dommage !!! (de toute façons Christopher Nolan et les nouvelles technologies ....) Après il ne faut pas lui enlever la scène de fin qui est quand même belle et celle dans la sortie de la galaxie.

Pour la Music, mise à part le thème je ne vois pas ce que contient la BO et dire que c'était Hans Zimmer qui n'a d'après ce que j'ai lu sur des news, pas vu le film ni lu le scénario (non, mais c'est quoi ça .......

Le scénario et bien il nous perd dans les théories de la physique quantique, la relativité et j'en passe et des meilleurs. À la fin [spoiler] ""SPOIL"" ce retrouver en pause ou mort dans la 5D puis jeté par on ne sait par quel moyen et retrouver comme ça a coté de saturne 116 464km de Diamétre un homme de 1 mètre 78 ""SPOIL"" [/spoiler] Bref la ou Inception nous prenez par la main et nous faisait voire un film de science-fiction ici c'est un documentaire qui s'en mêle les pinceaux avec toute c'est théorie balancer a l'aveugle

Oh et au niveau des personnages je me suis plus attaché au robot qu'au Personnage principal LOL.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

6

Popcorn55Sep 25, 2019

Had high hopes for this but they messed it up in the usual way by mixing in half-hearted family matters into the hard science action adventure. These things just don't mix and the obligatory inclusion of a family story that's not really doneHad high hopes for this but they messed it up in the usual way by mixing in half-hearted family matters into the hard science action adventure. These things just don't mix and the obligatory inclusion of a family story that's not really done with any conviction, spoils the entire drama and dynamic of the film. It's just like when they have the kid in Terminator 2 having fun with the Terminator. No, no, no! Jumped the shark right there with a cutesy family angle. Stupid! And the same kind of thing spoils this film.

Also, the adventure isn't very interesting either, and I can't even remember much about it now, that's how dull it was. One problem is that Hollywood needs to realize that BLACK HOLES ARE OVER -- they aren't interesting or cool anymore. That was the 70s, guys. Let's move on to other topics, please.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

6

SaythatDec 8, 2018

The secret of this movie lies in its pressing on emotional buttons of human soul. It also contains a bunch of scientifically looking inserts which makes it to appear more hm... solid, truthfully looking, you know... The truth is "I don't buyThe secret of this movie lies in its pressing on emotional buttons of human soul. It also contains a bunch of scientifically looking inserts which makes it to appear more hm... solid, truthfully looking, you know... The truth is "I don't buy it" was the phrase I constantly repeated while watching this movie. While each scientific ground is true in separate, together they form a frankenstein. Fuel consumption in the time-slowing gravitation field of Gargantua (it is horrible, guys, horrible, unless you use gravitational engine with galactium as a fuel:); the ability to perform a kryo flight and the inability to maintain hydroponics... or to extract oxygen from the environment (for those, who forgot or never knew, oxygen accounts to 49% of it by mass) In general: clumsy solutions to the invented problems. I don't buy it.

I would not mention scientific and common logic as an argument at all, but without it the movie is just boring. If you do a melodrama, don't fill the movie with the science. If you do a scientific apocalypse, make sure it looks plausible in the whole, not just in parts.

The only plus of this movie: it is well made in visual forms and actions. Only because of that respect to the amount of work done it is 6/10… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

5

BenWomackMar 4, 2020

Not true. Basis: story in the New Yorker.
Description: Earth is dying in a draught. Team goes off to Space in search of a habitable planet. There is mischief afoot- some people die; others are abstracted into a bookcase/ Jean Michel JarreNot true. Basis: story in the New Yorker.
Description: Earth is dying in a draught. Team goes off to Space in search of a habitable planet. There is mischief afoot- some people die; others are abstracted into a bookcase/ Jean Michel Jarre concert for eternity.
Reaction : I think it’s about a single dad starting to look for a companion.
Thanks.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

6

BrushedRedJan 15, 2016

I'm not necessarily saying this is a bad movie, but for what it is, the score on IMDb is insane... It's tied with The Godfather... Come on now. Kubrick did this same thing almost 50 years prior with visuals that were almost on par.. Not toI'm not necessarily saying this is a bad movie, but for what it is, the score on IMDb is insane... It's tied with The Godfather... Come on now. Kubrick did this same thing almost 50 years prior with visuals that were almost on par.. Not to mention that almost every frame of this movie ripped off 2001: A Space Odyssey. It tries to be edgy and "groundbreaking" with "new ideas," yet everything that happened in this movie had been done before. Not to mention done in a better way.

Now this is better than your standard popcorn flick for sure. The science isn't as accurate as it has been in other movies, but it'll impress some who haven't been through many physics courses. And the cinematography is gorgeous and the acting is pretty great as well. But I will say I can't give it a positive review just because of how much it ripped off one of the greatest movies ever made. But it's worth a watch if you're curious especially just for the aesthetics.… Expand

5 of 7 users found this helpful52

All this user's reviews

5

KrotosNov 12, 2014

Interstellar is similar to Avatar and Prometheus in that it's full of impressive visuals and epic music and high-concept dialogue and environments -- but not much else. All three of these movies commit the sin of trying to substitute aInterstellar is similar to Avatar and Prometheus in that it's full of impressive visuals and epic music and high-concept dialogue and environments -- but not much else. All three of these movies commit the sin of trying to substitute a setting for a plot, hoping that we'll be so blown away by the exotic universes they're depicting that we won't notice the thin storylines and unmemorable characters. There is no excuse for this: the greatest sci-fi movies, such as the original Star Wars trilogy, did not skimp on either setting *or* plot and are great for that reason. Sadly, it's been some time since such movies were regularly made.… Expand

4 of 6 users found this helpful42

All this user's reviews

5

raybiesJan 28, 2015

This movie was totally bull. Nothing about it was scientific or complex, and the whole premise is idiotic. B movie plot, with some good actors.
I don't want to give anything away about the movie, but there was no drama, no suspense, no realThis movie was totally bull. Nothing about it was scientific or complex, and the whole premise is idiotic. B movie plot, with some good actors.
I don't want to give anything away about the movie, but there was no drama, no suspense, no real scifi and a self center whiny little girl... oh and a surfing inter-galactic space shuttle.
It's not all ridiculous, oh wait it actually is but ridiculous can still be some what entertaining.
The space/time narrative, the planets and blackwhole was poorly executed... but at least they had these elements.
Ultimately I wasn't expecting much (I tend not to after Prometheus) and it didn't deliver, scifi in action movies like the Avengers or Guardians of the Galaxy is more convincing... at least they don't send humans on 100 year missions to find habitable planets in a little shuttle! Probe ANYONE!!!???… Expand

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

5

HotelCentralFeb 12, 2015

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The film has a beginning, a middle, and an ending, and it does not rely entirely on brainless action and fiery explosions to keep the audience awake, and it strives to say significant things of a thematic nature, though at the risk of turning melodramatic.

Now for the bad news. A significant amount of what the cast says is either too quiet to be clearly discerned, or is smothered by the score. The characters spend a great deal of time debating things that, by any reasonable standard, should have been thoroughly debated and planned for before anyone suited up for a ride in a space ship. One character effectively stranded in space is heard to say that he has been waiting for 20 years, leading me to wonder what he did for food, and in a film that runs dangerously close to three hours I fail to see why a moment or two was not devoted to explaining what he did for food.

The film is very long and it feels long. It feels especially long in the beginning, perhaps because I saw and heard nothing to clearly signpost where the film was, where it was going, and why the events of the early scenes should matter. And, frankly, I felt bored enough to have walked out.

Furthermore, I have to agree with another reviewer's criticism of the film's climax, which appears to be telling us that the power of love, coupled with the magic of a black hole, can defeat both time and space--at which point the film exits the realm of science fiction and enters into science fantasy.

The problem here, I suppose, is that the authors of this film try to explain the inexplicable. If they had simply let things happen and left audience members to devise their own theories "Interstellar" might have seemed cast more in the mold of a 2001, rather than a flawed space fantasy.

I debated giving the film a "6", but in the end I didn't really like it and would not recommend it to friends.… Expand

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

6

lyonsd78Feb 22, 2015

Whilst undoubtedly an amazing feat production-wise, this - for me - is without a doubt Christopher Nolan's poorest movie to date. The smugness of Mathew McConaughey doesn't do the film any favours either. There are a couple of touchingWhilst undoubtedly an amazing feat production-wise, this - for me - is without a doubt Christopher Nolan's poorest movie to date. The smugness of Mathew McConaughey doesn't do the film any favours either. There are a couple of touching moments and the storyline - whilst riddled with a few question marks - has to be applauded. But this is no jaw-dropper like Inception or Memento. A big disappointment for a huge Chris Nolan fan.… Expand

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

6

DavidV293Apr 13, 2015

This is a type of movie where I watch it just once. The plot is crazy, the acting is amazing, and I like the intensity. But the movie tries to throw a lot of things like on the end in the bookshelf part. This movie reminds me ofThis is a type of movie where I watch it just once. The plot is crazy, the acting is amazing, and I like the intensity. But the movie tries to throw a lot of things like on the end in the bookshelf part. This movie reminds me of Predestination. It was confusing but I figured what was going on. All I gotta say is that this is a one time for me.… Expand

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

6

mx1810Apr 1, 2015

Honestly, I'm surprised for the high scores that this movie received. I found it a little boring, and disappointing.
Actually I must say that at the beginning it's promising and exciting, but at the end it just becomes ridiculous. ThatHonestly, I'm surprised for the high scores that this movie received. I found it a little boring, and disappointing.
Actually I must say that at the beginning it's promising and exciting, but at the end it just becomes ridiculous. That "bookshelf" scene at the end of the movie... Why?
I really hated the Jessica Chastain's character. It's lame and annoying.
They try to save the human kind, but I found a little disturbing the lack of emotions they show every time a mate astronaut died.
Oh, I almost forgot: Matt Damon is in the movie. Maybe those was the well-paid 5 minutes in his career.
Final verdict: not bad if a rainstorm blocked your door and have enough popcorn for almost 3 hours.… Expand

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

5

lomeliApr 27, 2015

The formula for a perfect film is there: visual resplendence, decent casting, and it's even more sentimental and humane than your average Nolan film- yet it somehow fails to capitalize on all those assets, and subsequently manages to plummetThe formula for a perfect film is there: visual resplendence, decent casting, and it's even more sentimental and humane than your average Nolan film- yet it somehow fails to capitalize on all those assets, and subsequently manages to plummet to such great depths in the final act. Interstellar ultimately suffers from narrative inconsistency, under-developed characters, and sadly, the glorious spectacle can only compensate for so many of its glaring flaws.… Expand

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

6

DomgwyDec 20, 2017

About a week ago I saw Interstellar, Christopher Nolan’s new Sci-Fi epic.

It’s taken me this long to write about because honestly, my opinion on the film is still changing. Part of me wants to call it a masterpiece, part of me wants to markAbout a week ago I saw Interstellar, Christopher Nolan’s new Sci-Fi epic.

It’s taken me this long to write about because honestly, my opinion on the film is still changing. Part of me wants to call it a masterpiece, part of me wants to mark it down as an overthought and underwritten mess.

The truth (or at least how I see it, and lets face it, I’m just one of thousands of nerds shouting into the vast vacuum of the internet where no one can hear you scream) is somewhere in the middle.

Parts of Nolan’s ambitious story of wormholes, relativity and the fifth dimension are truly awe inspiring. The space scenes, and even some of the more intimate character moments, are just pure cinema at its best and NEED to be experienced in the movie theatre. It’s hard to even describe the wormhole scene about an hour into the film because we have simply never seen anything like it before. In the era of endless reboots, sequels and ridiculous special effects, that feat is almost enough to justify seeing the movie by itself.

But Interstellar goes beyond stunning visuals. Nolan has become a star of a director, one who’s name can sell out cinema screenings in a way not seen since Spielberg’s glory days. This means every actor in the business is clamouring to work with him and that pays off big time here.

I am now fully on board with the McConaissance. Shamefully, I still haven’t seen Dallas Buyers Club (I know I need to but it’s really hard to motivate yourself to watch something so dark and heavy when you could just watch Guardians of the Galaxy again) but I was absolutely blown away by True Detective earlier this year. McConaughey’s world weary and at times bitter performance ground Interstellar and stop it from becoming a dreary, if spectacular, three hour science lesson.

Here in lies the essential problem of the film, and it’s one that is starting to threaten film as a format. Three hours is simply not long enough to tell the story Nolan is trying to tell.

In the new golden age of television we are now seeing, complex and epic plots play out across sixty hours of movie quality entertainment. With the likes of Game of Thrones, House of Cards and Breaking Bad now eating up weeks of viewers time, its hard for a film to make the same impact. How can any actor or any director make you invest in a character and a story the same way you have with Walter White or Tyrion Lannister in just two and a half hours?

This is not to say people can’t love movie characters or stories, it just means that performances and scripts have to be that much tighter and direct in order to really connect.

The problem with Interstellar is that there is so much dense science to explain and such an involved story to tell that the character development and emotional impact get lost in the mix.

The films greatest strength is also its greatest weakness — the cinema as a format. If Nolan had instead made a five part HBO miniseries, for instance, telling the same story, he could have achieved both the character development and the mind blowing scientific accuracy he’s striving for.

The downside is we would then miss out on the shear spectacle of the sights and sounds (Hans Zimmer, killing it yet again) on display as they should be experienced.

Maybe we already have the solution — the splitting of films into multiple parts. Unfortunately this format seems to have been highjacked by young adult novel adaptations looking to increase their all important box office. Not something I think Nolan would sign off on, I mean this is the guy who refused to shoot the Dark Knight films in 3D despite studio pressure to the contrary.

Would audiences go for an Interstellar parts 1 and 2? Maybe not given the films critical reaction.

The fact remains, Nolan has created something special with Interstellar. Supported by a flawless cast and a truly original and mind blowing premise, it is both a cinematic triumph and a harsh reminder of the limitations of film.

To use a really cheesy suburban wall art saying, Nolan reaches for the moon and, even though he falls, he lands in the stars.… Expand

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

6

thegeofryeDec 26, 2019

I doubt the "Universal Acclaim" rating, since I do not universally acclaim this movie. The movie contains some great sequences and shots, but the impact was quite lacking. There was little emotional connection. This was just an average film to me.

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

5

yrcrazyNov 12, 2014

The audio and visuals were good but there are too many 'wormholes' in the plot to warrant a high score. Any tens are purely reactionary and based on the cinematic experience.

5 of 8 users found this helpful53

All this user's reviews

5

dierregiNov 9, 2014

Roughly divided in three parts and taking place not too far away in the future, the story follows the adventures of Cooper, NASA ex-astronaut turned farmer. Cooper lives in Dusty Somewhere, USA, with his two children (Murphy and Tom) and dadRoughly divided in three parts and taking place not too far away in the future, the story follows the adventures of Cooper, NASA ex-astronaut turned farmer. Cooper lives in Dusty Somewhere, USA, with his two children (Murphy and Tom) and dad in law. Mankind destroyed Earth ecosystems and our heroes are facing dire consequences.

Cooper finds “by chance” the secret location of the new NASA and he is immediately assigned the very important mission to retrace some astronauts sent into a wormhole 10 years previously to check some promising planets in another part of the galaxy.

Much as I like Nolan’s films, I found Interstellar the weakest of his production. There are some major plot holes in the script, such as why new NASA does not just call Cooper to guide the new mission instead of waiting for him to “accidentally” stumble upon the super-secret location. The whole first part of the movie feels like wasted time, except for establishing the strong bond between Cooper and Murphy.

We also get plenty of cringe-inducing dialog about love, relativity and gravity and a glued-on happy ending after over 2 hours of extreme gloominess.… Expand

5 of 8 users found this helpful53

All this user's reviews

6

timselMar 25, 2015

I was looking forward to seeing this movie; it had an 8.8 on IMDB, it is about sci-fi space stuff, so it had to be good. Wrong... Although enjoyable with very beautiful graphics, there were to many small inaccuracies in the story to make itI was looking forward to seeing this movie; it had an 8.8 on IMDB, it is about sci-fi space stuff, so it had to be good. Wrong... Although enjoyable with very beautiful graphics, there were to many small inaccuracies in the story to make it close to a good movie. Interstellar tries to be a serious science fiction space movie, however it chose to ignore many basic rules of physics. At first I was able to see past most of them, but they add up fast. Especially in a movie of this length they also sum up to a very large number.

For me one of the biggest annoyances were the robots in the story. At first I actually thought some idiot edited the movie and replaced all normal/useful/decent robots with the strange unpractical things that are in the movie I saw. But apparently there are intended to look like that (likely because they spend all budget on the beautiful graphics and had no more money for the robots...).

If you read elsewhere that this movie has a very advanced story and is based on complicated science, keep in mind that that is not true! It is a enjoyable movie, but do not expect plausible physics or a deep and advanced story. It is a simple sci-fi movie with a simple story and beautiful graphics (6/10).… Expand

3 of 5 users found this helpful32

All this user's reviews

5

Azure2290Nov 9, 2014

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. To start off, I liked the film. But I felt that there were too many errors in the film.

Firstly the first planet they arrive on is 130% earth's normal gravity and their ship had no real issues with gravity landing and taking off. Yet back on earth they needed a fully built rocket to launch that same ship off into space. Unless I am missing something that is a HUGE error in a Si-fi film.

Secondly the plot becomes very predictable to the point where me and some friends were bouncing around what was going to happen next a basically getting every single point right.

Third, I could not get emotionally attached to the characters, except for the robot which I felt had the best personality in the film. Though for one of my friends the emotional side of the film hit the mark with him, so overall it is hit and miss with the characters.

Overall the film is worth a watch do not expect a massive amount of space scenes but once you have seen the film most people will probably never watch it again as the story is entertaining but very slow if you know what is coming.… Expand

3 of 5 users found this helpful32

All this user's reviews

5

anyaluz22Nov 9, 2014

This is the rare movie that dies a slow and fitful death under the weight of its lofty verbiage. It's a shame really, because Interstellar could have been brilliant. For the first hour or so I was fascinated. The visuals were breathtaking,This is the rare movie that dies a slow and fitful death under the weight of its lofty verbiage. It's a shame really, because Interstellar could have been brilliant. For the first hour or so I was fascinated. The visuals were breathtaking, the acting was quite good, and the story seemed to be moving in the direction of mind bending possibilities. It was for these reasons that, at first, it was easy for me to overlook the somewhat contrived sounding explanations that would occasionally intrude into an otherwise smoothly flowing script. After a while, however, it became disconcertingly obvious that the purpose of these very cerebral interludes... was simply to educate the movie viewer. Unfortunately, all of this explaining only served to distract me from the story, and much of what was said struck me as being overstated. Besides! A movie shouldn't have to repeatedly explain itself, right? Movie making is an art form; it calls for finesse and subtlety. In a well-written screenplay, themes are developed gradually, almost imperceptibly, in small increments. Then, at some point along the way, an almost magical "resonance of increments" takes place: at which time the movie viewer arrives at a realization, an "Aha!" moment.
Interstellar gets bogged down in far too many themes, for any one of them to be effectively developed. When the time arrives for an audience "realization," the desired epiphany is simply not forthcoming -- at least, not without the aid of an overly amped up movie score and yet another explanatory passage -- perhaps a soliloquy this time --, to help get the movie viewer over the hump.… Expand

3 of 5 users found this helpful32

All this user's reviews

4

EmmeNov 11, 2014

Interstellar starts too slow, has a short peak, then drops into the black hole. Throwing together ideas from 2001, Contact, The Black Hole, Ghost (yeah !!!) and Forever War (novel), this thing is 170 minutes of nothingness. Its not evenInterstellar starts too slow, has a short peak, then drops into the black hole. Throwing together ideas from 2001, Contact, The Black Hole, Ghost (yeah !!!) and Forever War (novel), this thing is 170 minutes of nothingness. Its not even vidually as thrilling if You consider movies like Apollo 13, Gravity or Solaris.
Less minutes, a more focused plot and less Deus Ex Machina would have made a better movie.… Expand

8 of 14 users found this helpful86

All this user's reviews

6

brohugNov 10, 2014

Much like the intense gravity of a black hole, the big ideas of "Interstellar" overwhelm and crush the film. The Nolan brothers mix in real theoretical concepts of astrophysics into the story (singularities, wormholes, time dilation) but alsoMuch like the intense gravity of a black hole, the big ideas of "Interstellar" overwhelm and crush the film. The Nolan brothers mix in real theoretical concepts of astrophysics into the story (singularities, wormholes, time dilation) but also unwisely choose to have the characters banter back and forth these complex ideas in order to prop up a plot with more than a few holes (even for a sci-fi flick). The casting is just okay: McConaughey is riding the high tide he has enjoyed from solid work in "Dallas Buyers Club" and HBO's "True Detective", and has the requisite Texas twang of an astronaut/engineer who is convinced to leave his earthbound family behind in the name of preservation of no less than the entire human race. Anne Hathaway is something a curiosity as an unconvincing astrophysicist, but apparently gets the Nolan 'pass' from her previous work in "The Dark Knight Rises". Then Matt Damon appears later in the film, entirely out of place as a failed mission commander whose motives may or may not be altruistic.

Christopher Nolan has done his youthful homework: there are ideas borrowed from a fanboy's inspirational memories of "2001: A Space Odyssey" and "Solaris". I won't deny some of the film's visuals are stunning and actually effective when it comes time to render an environment as unfathomable as the very center of a singularity inside a cosmic black hole. But no amount of editing can reconcile the back-and-forth of an astronaut trapped inside some theoretical dimension of a singularity (when really he would have been shredded at the event horizon), and the quiet, lonely space on earth of a young daughter's bedroom.

"2001", "Solaris": these films were also laden with big ideas. But they granted the subconsciousness of the audience space to work through very abstract concepts without trying to dictate either clumsy exposition or a Hollywood happy ending.… Expand

4 of 7 users found this helpful43

All this user's reviews

5

petehendoorsunNov 9, 2014

Despite moments of cinematic glory, Nolan's latest offers a bewildering, often underwhelming, emotional drama. Viewers must endure clunky expository dialogue and over-written lines drawled out by McConnaughey that feel like you're watchingDespite moments of cinematic glory, Nolan's latest offers a bewildering, often underwhelming, emotional drama. Viewers must endure clunky expository dialogue and over-written lines drawled out by McConnaughey that feel like you're watching another one of his car commercials. Despite this, McConnaughey delivers an emotional performance that's consistent with what we've grown to expect from him in recent years. The cinematography is up to scratch but easily trumped by Kubrick in 1968.
Those expecting a thrilling adventure through space will feel hugely let down by the bulk of the movie which consists of people sitting around explaining how the plot makes sense rather than participating in it. The main issue with 'Interstellar' is that it feels disjointed and rushed. Plot turns feel contrived and ultimately frustrating, especially when compared to Nolan's previous masterpiece 'The Dark Knight'. With an ending so rushed, unnatural and overly-sentimental, the film leaves you with a bad taste in your mouth that makes you want to forget the entire thing ever happened.… Expand

4 of 7 users found this helpful43

All this user's reviews

6

SergeantSozNov 8, 2014

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I'm going to give this a 6. Its a great movie theater experience, but I don't see it having much value when it comes to dvd and bluray. I have mixed feelings.
Pros
The movie is eye candy. Everything looks incredibly realistic. It doesn't even look like CGI. Any astronomy buffs will love this.
Cons
Complicated plot narrative, bad cast, ect. It seems like the writer of this movie was trying to hard to make people think he's smart by using big boy scientific words. He forgot most of the audience aren't PhD physicists and astronomers. I took college astronomy and even I was struggling to keep up. Its Inception in space. Also if you know too much about astronomy, you'll probably like the movie a little less because some things are very illogical. For example, the planets are close to a black hole. They didn't even consider the incredibly high levels of radiation that would be there. No sequel is possible, since they're all sure to have cancer. Also the time relativity theory is a bit off. There is no way time is different between orbiting a planet and being on the surface. The gravity is the same, so time would be too. Also if you get sucked into a black hole, you're going to become human spagetti. The tidal forces would rip you apart. Thats why light can't escape. The gravity is that freaking strong. But no, you SPOILER enter the fifth dimension and teleport back to Saturn and miraculously get spotted and picked up before your oxygen runs out.

Overall I didn't like the story, the score, the actors or much of anything other than the visual effects. See it in theaters or don't see it at all.… Expand

5 of 9 users found this helpful54

All this user's reviews

5

SrohrerNov 8, 2014

First off, the sound effects overwhelm the dialog a lot. No idea what the characters on the screen were saying a number of times. I have to assume the director decided what they were saying wasn't that important and went for making you feelFirst off, the sound effects overwhelm the dialog a lot. No idea what the characters on the screen were saying a number of times. I have to assume the director decided what they were saying wasn't that important and went for making you feel just like you were there. Which is did a few times because I saw it in a theater with some pretty good sound equipment. McConaughey's excessive perma-tan was distracting too especially contrasted to Hathaway. Not sure HOW he maintained that tan after being on a space mission for years (yeah I get the relativistic time dilation but they were awake, in a ship in space for months according to what the dialog showed). Also not sure why they needed to launch from Earth in a huge multi-stage rocket to get the exact same landing craft up to the rest of the ship that they were later able to use to cruise around and take off from under its own power on a planet with 1.3 Earth gravities.

I felt a bit ripped off that you don't see much of the space ship until long after the launch, no outside shots, just the boosters dropping away shots that we've all seen 1,000 times. Then when you do see it, there's nothing notable about the ships looks. Just kind of ho-hum. They obviously spend the budget on the sound effects and score, which were pretty good.

There's a lot of excessive spinning scenes on the screen to make you dizzy. There was one long sequence near the end of the show that I felt went on a bit longer than it needed.

The plot was ok, premise was ok, dialog (what you could hear of it) was ok except for the mantra they kept repeating over and over (guess that's a mantra's definition), visuals... I don't know, I just wasn't impressed by them, I saw it on a huge special screen but just never had any "oooh! That's cool!" kind of moments. Maybe I've just seen too many science fiction movies and have become desensitized. Just seemed like there should be some memorable scenes visually at some point in the movie.

I'd still say give it a shot, you might enjoy it more than I did. I'd probably not spend the extra bucks to see it in the big special theater screens. Wasn't worth $15 for what you didn't get, unless you're really into movie audio, then you're going to love it. It did do it's job and entertain me for a few hours.… Expand

12 of 22 users found this helpful1210

All this user's reviews

5

AaronANov 7, 2014

Incredibly disappointing, but still gets props for some uniqueness and originality here and there. Ruined by a bunch of "love > science" bullcrap.

The people who like this movie know 0 - absolutely nothing - about physics and are clearlyIncredibly disappointing, but still gets props for some uniqueness and originality here and there. Ruined by a bunch of "love > science" bullcrap.

The people who like this movie know 0 - absolutely nothing - about physics and are clearly oblivious to real human behavior and massive plotholes. MASSIVE PLOTHOLES staring you right in the face as you are watching - not ones you realize afterwards.

Visuals are decent, but sound design is some of the best ever. The score is alright, thankfully less "cheesy epic" than Zimmer's usuals.… Expand

10 of 19 users found this helpful109

All this user's reviews

6

xhaosisNov 8, 2014

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. It started out with me thinking this was going to be AWESOME. Yet it ended with a whimper.. It was good but just not great, I predicted how the climax was going to effect the rest of the movie, by about the 2nd hour into the movie. I was a little disappointed but it was not a waste of time either.. A little unsettling to me thou that I could figure the whole movie out..

I am not even sure if the FIRST half hour was even suppose to be in this movie. It had allot of potential but it lost allot of respect from me about 30 mins into the movie when we are introduced into the plot.

A little lame there..… Expand

4 of 8 users found this helpful44

All this user's reviews

5

DarthPreampApr 20, 2015

An utter waste of time, except for THE one interesting idea presented to the audience towards the very end of the movie. There is NO character development, only stale cardboard characters who have one way of viewing things, no growth. TheAn utter waste of time, except for THE one interesting idea presented to the audience towards the very end of the movie. There is NO character development, only stale cardboard characters who have one way of viewing things, no growth. The premise is so preposterous in so many ways, that it is hard to buy into what is clearly a vision of a possible future for mankind from director Nolan. Read the synopsis, and don't waste your time with this narcissistic and extremely indulgent piece of garbage.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

5

Ell_DjejDec 3, 2014

Considering the other movies directed by Nolan, the good reviews and the theme, i was really excited to see this movie. Unfortunately movie was a big let down.

Stunning visuals and an epic score from Zimmer sets the foundation for an epicConsidering the other movies directed by Nolan, the good reviews and the theme, i was really excited to see this movie. Unfortunately movie was a big let down.

Stunning visuals and an epic score from Zimmer sets the foundation for an epic movie, but the poor story makes me want to laugh instead of cry. And when we are talking about laughing; how did the robots get pass the drawing board? The movie started off great, and I bought the whole end of the world setting, but i just couldn't swallow the 5th dimension - gravity from the future,inside a black hole plot. Nolan also gives way to much screen time for the two female characters struggling with their love life, and too little to the I should save the world or my kids theme. The trailer promised me an epic movie about interstellar travel, not sentimental drama about long-distance relationships.

I guess I´m the odd one out since everybody else seems to love this movie. Please explain to me how you can let this poor writing get 10/10?… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

6

AcaciaDec 7, 2014

My take away from this movie is that it is far too long, way too complicated and a bit Ho hum for about the first two hours. I did finally begin to feel involved in the final hour when the movie juxtaposes events on earth with events inMy take away from this movie is that it is far too long, way too complicated and a bit Ho hum for about the first two hours. I did finally begin to feel involved in the final hour when the movie juxtaposes events on earth with events in space. I found that quite engrossing. There were some surprise cast members I had not known about and that was fun. I sort of enjoyed the last hour, but it involved concepts way beyond my comprehension. So I just had to go with the emotions the actions generated. Matthew McConaughey and Anne Hathaway are great as the two astronauts who are risking everything to save the human race. Although, actually, earth is doomed and their Plan B would be to colonize another planet with embryos that are somehow supposed to grow into human beings. Anyway, I have to say that when it comes to space movies, I enjoyed "Gravity" much more. And, frankly, "Alien" and "Aliens" are more my space movie cup of tea. So suit yourself on this one. But, I do not recommend it. Alright, alright, alright! Sorry, MM!… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

5

atomicsynthDec 7, 2014

It is possible that when a director is referred to as a genius too many
times that he may begin to believe it too much. Such is the case with Interstellar's convoluted story with many holes. Of course, a good way to make a viewer becomeIt is possible that when a director is referred to as a genius too many
times that he may begin to believe it too much. Such is the case with Interstellar's convoluted story with many holes. Of course, a good way to make a viewer become more accepting of the premise is to throw "gargantuan" special effects and make the movie 1/2-45 minutes too long. The viewer gets tired and is more accepting, simply wishing for it to be over.

Nolan spends too much time setting up Matthew McConaughey and the family. This could have been done in 1/4 of the time which would have afforded more time to fill in blatant holes which dominate this movie.

Nolan's second mistake was to create a near philosophy faux academic undercurrent which also went on far too long. Do you think he's a genius? I think he has an imagination and big budget to fill it with. I do not think his story is at all profound though. One does not need to be a physicist to see how far concepts such as singularity and black holes have been stretched; and stretched to the point of being ludicrous.

The ending (without spolier) made very little sense as it was not adequately explained how McConaughey's character not only survived but arrived where he was, or even where exactly he was, or even how "others" got there.

It is as if Nolan was determined to confuse people even more than "Inception" did.

I enjoyed the movie nonetheless. I do not think it greatness. I think it to be big budget and reflective of such.

I did not stay for the credits because I was ready to get out of the theatre after such a long time but I am sure that the Music was Hans Zimmer. The themes were underdeveloped (which seems to be a trademark nowadays of Zimmer). His harmony is simplistic to the point to lacking for. Worst of all is that the music is way too loud and covers up dialogue frequently.

Moviemakers need to approach mixing a soundtrack on the basis of not having every line in the script memorized and then need to ask themselves if they can hear every word. Perhaps then mixes would be better. Nor, again, was the music of any substance to demand such priority.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

6

DudeUnknownJan 1, 2015

Too hard to follow. Way too long. The only good thing was that the time-space subject was fascinating. Not a great movie. I recommend you just read up on time-space, and skip the movie.

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

5

AlignmentGSMar 7, 2016

I don't rush out to watch movies, simple because so-called 'blockbuster'' movie rarely match their hype.

Interstellar is just such a movie. The initial storyline of the earth not being able to produce enough food is believable, but that isI don't rush out to watch movies, simple because so-called 'blockbuster'' movie rarely match their hype.

Interstellar is just such a movie. The initial storyline of the earth not being able to produce enough food is believable, but that is it. Once in space, the movie becomes a preposterous mix of science theory, that is far fetched and completely unbelievable.

I was very disappointed by this movie and only gave it a 5 for the special effects.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

4

IuliaAndFeb 5, 2016

A movie should be judged as a movie so having "correct" physics doesn't make it good. Most fans are just pretentious pricks that think they're some sort on superior species for understanding it.

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

4

CalibMcBoltsMay 30, 2016

nterstellar was phenomenal up untill the last 30 or so minutes when that movie implodes in itself and completely destroys my love for it.
Even with enormously ambitious ideas and a overwhelming score beautifully composed by Hans Zimmer, thisnterstellar was phenomenal up untill the last 30 or so minutes when that movie implodes in itself and completely destroys my love for it.
Even with enormously ambitious ideas and a overwhelming score beautifully composed by Hans Zimmer, this dazzling but flawed science fiction film suffers from lots of ''In-Your-Face'', expository dialogue and other forms of explination, plot holes and inconsistencies throughout the whole movie where this reaches an all-time high at the end, which is contrived and almost impossible to make sense out of.

Interstellar is a fun and entertaining movie, but definitely doesnt deserve the immense praise it is getting, because it is ultimatly a very flawed film. (Like C'Mon it's in the higher end of the top 50 on IMDb)?… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

5

toadvinesJan 11, 2017

A somewhat disappointing effort from Chris Nolan that features plenty of his trademark lapses of logic and plot holes but doesn’t deliver the satisfactory overall story that normally makes up for this. The Prestige, Inception and TDKR all hadA somewhat disappointing effort from Chris Nolan that features plenty of his trademark lapses of logic and plot holes but doesn’t deliver the satisfactory overall story that normally makes up for this. The Prestige, Inception and TDKR all had plenty of WTF moments (such as the crew formulating plans on board the ship rather than preparing in advance), sure, but you can forgive them because the rest is so good. Not so here. The story absolutely fell apart at the end for me and those moments I refer to can’t be redeemed. The film could still have been saved if it looked spectacular – but to me it just looked really, really bland! The two planets they visit are feature the dullest looking vistas imaginable – endless sea and endless snow. The space exterior scenes were completely lacking in awe or majesty. The camera always seemed to cut away too quick. On the plus side, I enjoyed MMs performance and I really enjoyed the time bending aspects of the story when they visit the first planet. Overall this was a wasted opportunity.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

6

tamcwlmmJan 23, 2018

I like every Christopher Nolan film, but this one was not that good. Why I liked it: This is a great story with the best Visuals I've ever seen. Great acting as well. Great twists troughout the movie and that climax was great.

Why I didn'tI like every Christopher Nolan film, but this one was not that good. Why I liked it: This is a great story with the best Visuals I've ever seen. Great acting as well. Great twists troughout the movie and that climax was great.

Why I didn't like it: The movie is to slow paced for to long of a time. At moments, nothing really happened. The begining is the slowest of the whole movie. Where Nolan had to keep it interesting, he didn't, which is why I have mixed feelings. And the movie is waaay to long for me. The movie had its sheer moments of emotions, and damn I have to admit I teared up a few times.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

4

AmirMHMDFeb 1, 2019

Bad directing, Bad photography, Bad screenP, and a Bad movie. Although Stanly Kubrick's masterpiece, 2001, is Nolan's favorite movie and he have tried a lot to make his movie like that, but interstellar was a sick and boring movie. DespiteBad directing, Bad photography, Bad screenP, and a Bad movie. Although Stanly Kubrick's masterpiece, 2001, is Nolan's favorite movie and he have tried a lot to make his movie like that, but interstellar was a sick and boring movie. Despite the movie itself, there was one thing about movie that made to score 4 to it and it was its soundtrack, Nolan should be grateful of Hans Zimmer for that. Another bad point of interstellar that have made it very boring to us was its running time: 169 mins! and again nothing happens.Beside that, this movie had no colors. just some blue-white color in Desmond and Mann's planets and a shut space into the spaceship. I'm still wondering why lot of people like that and give it 10,. Maybe because they think that just blew their mind but they don't even try to figure it out. VERY DISAPPOINTING AT ALL.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

6

augurseerNov 8, 2014

Not a bad one, definitely visually great and well acted...has a few points where the obvious next scene actions pop in. I would describe it as if inception, the machinist and prestige have a three way.

The kind of movie that Neil DegrasseNot a bad one, definitely visually great and well acted...has a few points where the obvious next scene actions pop in. I would describe it as if inception, the machinist and prestige have a three way.

The kind of movie that Neil Degrasse Tyson and Stephen Hawking will love for the ships but hate for the science. I tries to have science as a clear background and driving force but in the end "love" is the beacon home.… Expand

3 of 7 users found this helpful34

All this user's reviews

5

tspaffordNov 11, 2014

Scientific accuracy? Really. Man orbiting planet ages 23 years while 2 other people are on planet below for several hours. Are the people on the planet moving near speed of light while orbiting craft is not? How do you get huge tidal waveScientific accuracy? Really. Man orbiting planet ages 23 years while 2 other people are on planet below for several hours. Are the people on the planet moving near speed of light while orbiting craft is not? How do you get huge tidal wave when water depth is 1-2 feet?… Expand

3 of 7 users found this helpful34

All this user's reviews

5

fantasyNov 8, 2014

I love science fiction movies as they are my favorite. I don't hate anyone. So it was with great anticipation that I looked forward to seeing Interstellar. After seeing the movie I didn't know whether to give it a 10 or a zero as I wasI love science fiction movies as they are my favorite. I don't hate anyone. So it was with great anticipation that I looked forward to seeing Interstellar. After seeing the movie I didn't know whether to give it a 10 or a zero as I was that torn in two directions. So first the Pro's in that the visuals are simply breathtakingly stunning. You feel like a kid in a candy store taking in all the sights and sounds that NASA provided of space. So now for the cons. The movie is way too long, and in parts drags on unmercifully. The character development other than Cooper is sadly lacking. There are more plot holes than blackholes. Matt Damon is totally miscast and distracts from the actual movie. There is way too much technical "gobbily **** going on in which you need to be a rocket scientist to understand what the characters are discussing. It all gets boring very fast. Other than Cooper and his daughter Murph there is no other character you really care for; unless, of course the Robot is considered a person. LOL Anne Hathway, a terrific actor in her own right, is totally miscast. Michael Caine is totally underutilized. John Lithgow is wasted. When the movies draws to its illogical conclusion you feel as if saying OK I just wasted 3 hours of my life. The message is simple. As the Beatles once said ALL YOU NEED IS LOVE!… Expand

5 of 12 users found this helpful57

All this user's reviews

4

kurasanwichNov 14, 2014

You gotta be kidding me. These reviewers are way off. The greenlight on this one went something like this. Think Gravity meets Doctor Who meets Contact. Soooo stupid. Also very looong. I just can't understand how people think this is aYou gotta be kidding me. These reviewers are way off. The greenlight on this one went something like this. Think Gravity meets Doctor Who meets Contact. Soooo stupid. Also very looong. I just can't understand how people think this is a good movie. Its watchable but not gripping. It uses a good musical score to add drama to scenes that were not dramatic and the plot had little to do with linking those scenes. I regret spending 3 hours on this.… Expand

5 of 12 users found this helpful57

All this user's reviews

5

terrible_lizardNov 8, 2014

You're not fooling me again, Mr. Nolan. Critics raved for "Inception," and fanbois were spawned by the million. I had to see for myself what Inception was. And it turned out to be beautiful, sterile, and incredibly dull; an elaborateYou're not fooling me again, Mr. Nolan. Critics raved for "Inception," and fanbois were spawned by the million. I had to see for myself what Inception was. And it turned out to be beautiful, sterile, and incredibly dull; an elaborate structure that was hollow on the inside. Now those same critics and same feverish fanbois are telling me how this new movie of yours will change my life yet again. Not fooling me Mr. Nolan, I doubt this will even rate a redbox rental. GOOD DAY to you sir.… Expand

4 of 10 users found this helpful46

All this user's reviews

6

BioHazardParkNov 11, 2014

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. It's one of those things where I have to accept that so many people will love this movie and I really found it barely ok. I feel that some of the people calling this a masterpiece might need to reevaluete their opinion.

It's tough to watch a movie almost 3 hour in length when my friend and I called out the major twists in the movie in the first act and kept doing so for the rest of the movie. The love will save us all is really laughable ... it feels like it would have been a decent 30 min twilight zone episode instead of a three hour movie about saving humanity from extinction.

I did enjoy and laugh at some of the one liners and I think this humor saved the movie for me.

Here is a list of things that bugged me and I have no doubt other people will disagree with and that's fine by me.

-They talk so much about the ghost in the first act, my friend and I said "hey it's probobly him pushing the books"
-The soundtrack covers so much of the dialogue I think I missed so many lines in the movie because I was not able to hear them
-So much of the script feels like set up pieces for scenes to come, it's down right annoying.
-This does not look like a visual spectacle, I am sorry but where exactly are these amazing scenes.
-To be compared to Kubrick and 2001 and some of the people are doing right now...you can not have scenes like...discovers nasa, says goodbye, is on a rocket out of space. If you feel this stuff is out of place when you watch a movie...that's how it is. The pacing/timing just feels wrong in so many scenes ...the rocket, watching the 28 year footage, leaving his daughter to find Brand etc
-The Matt Damon scene enforces the weak script, as they hammered the lines "Mann's the best of us, mann's this mann's that...I already felt this character is not going to be what it is...and as soon as you see him on the screen you are like "ok I know where this is going.,,,"
which is bad in my opinion
-I really did not buy into the emotion, of father daughter relationship. The scene where Cooper watches 28 years of footage just left me cold and seems also out of place...or not at the right pace.
-I was really annoyed at the transition of the boy to Casey Affleck, it felt weird, their voices were so different, reminded me I was watching a movie and it's hard to lose yourself in an epic sic-fi when this happens over and over.
-For a 3 hour movie the characters and their decisions sure feel underdeveloped.
-The whole dust things, everyone is driving pickups in the future, funny. There is no militaries for some reason but none of this seems somehow justified in the movie-logic. The older people in the beginning set up the movie for a good ending, as they are referencing the events to come as the past.

Anyway these are just some of the things that bugged me about the movie. It was not a bad flick it's just not the epic science fiction movie other people claim it to be.

For some that claim that you have to be a sophisticated thinker to understand the science ...miss the point ...it's a blockbuster movie that should not require a science course or a book reading prior to watching it. I understand these ideas are real, but I don't feel the implementation and execution in the movie is something pulled of but anyway...agree to disagree :)… Expand

2 of 5 users found this helpful23

All this user's reviews

6

Truth_TellerNov 10, 2014

With the exception of Matthew McConaughey's accent, Interstellar isn't that difficult to understand. The graphics are mesmerizing (better than Gravity, in my opinion), and everything seems perfect until the last 30 minutes. I would thinkWith the exception of Matthew McConaughey's accent, Interstellar isn't that difficult to understand. The graphics are mesmerizing (better than Gravity, in my opinion), and everything seems perfect until the last 30 minutes. I would think that Nolan, of all people, would understand that not every movie needs a happy ending. His "too perfect" conclusion kills it for me.… Expand

2 of 5 users found this helpful23

All this user's reviews

5

BarkerDennisNov 15, 2014

This movie was much longer than it needed to be. This 3 hr movie could have been edited down to 2 hrs. The sound editing was a mess. At times, it was difficult to understand what the characters were saying over the overly intenseThis movie was much longer than it needed to be. This 3 hr movie could have been edited down to 2 hrs. The sound editing was a mess. At times, it was difficult to understand what the characters were saying over the overly intense background music. The robotic character was ridiculous. A great big stainless steel rectangle that had a bizarre way of walking? Really, was that the best you could come up with? Modern day Robots from Japan are better than this obelisk At times, the theory of relativity took over the drama between the father and children. The idea that re-forestation never occurred to these earthlings to bring the oxygen levels back to normal for the future? The thesis that we are destroying our planet seemed to pander to the Hollywood left that created this mess of a movie. It was offensive. I did, however like the actors and their performances.… Expand

2 of 5 users found this helpful23

All this user's reviews

6

BikerjamesNov 23, 2014

It's time to suspend all belief and logic and get ready for another Christopher Nolan film. This film has a lot going against it - a soundtrack that annoys (do we really need loud music playing all the time in a film? I also could notIt's time to suspend all belief and logic and get ready for another Christopher Nolan film. This film has a lot going against it - a soundtrack that annoys (do we really need loud music playing all the time in a film? I also could not understand what they were saying in several parts of the film, especially Michael Caine's death bed scene), robots that are comical in their movements that no engineer would ever design, a bad guy played by Matt Damon because, well, you just have to have a bad guy thrown in somewhere, a docking sequence that could never possibly happen, extremely complex problems solved in short meetings that would normally take much longer, some bad acting thrown in here and there, and more. Countering that, however, is how beautiful the film looks and that was the saving grace of the film in the end. It was a mixed bag for me, but not a film I would want to see again.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

5

tomizawaMar 7, 2015

As with any other of Nolan's films: captivating landscapes and flawless acting. Yet, I found it extremely predictable and a bit confusing at times. Was totally expecting to be dazzled and mind-blown by this movie but unfortunately it wasn'tAs with any other of Nolan's films: captivating landscapes and flawless acting. Yet, I found it extremely predictable and a bit confusing at times. Was totally expecting to be dazzled and mind-blown by this movie but unfortunately it wasn't the case... I was pretty bored and unimpressed. The ones that don't pay much attention to details might have a better time enjoying the movie. Good luck.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

6

cryhardhumorJul 26, 2015

The first six hours of Interstellar are amazing and contain some of the most beautifully shot and thrilling scenes from a sci-fi movie, but the final act isn't just unsatisfying...it unravels the rest of what was a beautifully woven story.

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

6

ozymandias79Jan 21, 2015

Some of the drama elements are forced and the movie slows right down for them, which doesn't help. Parts of the film are also very predicable, especially the arc with Matt Damon and toward the end. The robot design and their human qualitiesSome of the drama elements are forced and the movie slows right down for them, which doesn't help. Parts of the film are also very predicable, especially the arc with Matt Damon and toward the end. The robot design and their human qualities are stupid. The interactions with the robot are reminiscent of 80's anime. As the cherry on top, despite the near 3-hour length, the ending felt rushed and unsatisfying. Interstellar is different but its too flawed to be considered a good film.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

6

XenixJan 28, 2015

The philosophy of the film says : " Destroy the Earth , there are more worlds out there "

The philosophy of 2001 says : "We do not need new worlds , we need mirrors "

Technically , the film is well done, but the massage is bad!

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

5

BillsettNov 13, 2014

I am truly angry at Christopher Nolan for making a great science fiction film and all but ruining it with an ear-splitting, bone-shaking soundtrack that obliterates much of the dialogue and distracts the viewer from absorbing and reacting toI am truly angry at Christopher Nolan for making a great science fiction film and all but ruining it with an ear-splitting, bone-shaking soundtrack that obliterates much of the dialogue and distracts the viewer from absorbing and reacting to the actual story told in this otherwise magnificent film. It's as if you were watching a great movie in a theater and a guy sat down next to you and yelled in your ear for the duration of the film. I know this is undoubtedly wishful thinking, but maybe someday Nolan will make a "director's cut" without the mind-numbing soundtrack. Now THAT would be a great film!… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

5

hockeymaniac87Apr 14, 2015

Yet another beautiful looking adventure from the mind of Christopher Nolan. Unfortunately, it's as wordy and overly complex as Inception.

The problem that I seem to have with Nolan's most recent films is that he tends to rely solely onYet another beautiful looking adventure from the mind of Christopher Nolan. Unfortunately, it's as wordy and overly complex as Inception.

The problem that I seem to have with Nolan's most recent films is that he tends to rely solely on intense imagery and excessive dialogue to drive his stories. His all-star cast becomes relegated to the duty of trying to explain the plot to the viewer while performing supplemental tasks or strolling around like an Allen Sorkin walk-and-talk. His characters are simply used as vehicles to push his convoluted plotline, and any real connection or empathy with them is suppressed by the importance to explain an excessively wordy exposition. What makes a great film is when great actors (not necessarily famous ones) weave into great characters that effortlessly escort the viewer into their world. Although there were some performances in the film that were admirable, Interstellar seemed to merely test the actor's ability to recite lines, not showcase their talents.

The best quality of any Nolan film, especially with Interstellar, is his use and non-use of sound. He's brilliant in understanding when sound and music are needed, and tends to have an "Easter egg" meaning to his scores. The cinematography is beautiful, and his use of unique over the shoulder camera angles is perfectly fitting. For these things I commend Nolan, as anyone should.

Maybe Interstellar is a perfect or above average movie for some people, but I feel that films like these are highly praised based on their blockbuster status, much like a pair of designer jeans or a fancy sports car. Christopher Nolan is a great writer and director, but for my taste and his future, I think he will have to reinvent his ability to tell stories and create new ideas. Interstellar seems to have been conceived after taking a long nap during a Cosmos marathon. Luckily for Nolan, he is able to call up his regular all-star cast, sprinkle in some famous boys from Boston, add a Michael Caine crying scene and push out a beautiful looking yet pretentiously wordy film whenever he comes up with a crazy idea… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

6

EliascNov 9, 2014

I was hoping for a better film. 'Interstellar' is the science-based film we have all been hoping for which uses actual astrophysics and theory to tell a story of Earth's last gasp and the attempt to save humanity by escaping to the stars.I was hoping for a better film. 'Interstellar' is the science-based film we have all been hoping for which uses actual astrophysics and theory to tell a story of Earth's last gasp and the attempt to save humanity by escaping to the stars. However one would think that with almost three hours to play with that the film would have been more coherent. Perhaps the version I saw in the theater was faulty. It was the digital version and not the film nor the 70 mm version. Although the screen images were OK, it did not have the clarity of detail I have seen in other digital projections.
The plot was very good and interesting and I was not bored with the long sequences of expository dialogue that attempted to explain the science behind the events depicted in the film. The actors are outstanding in their roles and the depiction of spaceflight and other planets were very believable.
The film could have used better editing though. A few transitory scenes were hard to follow.
Part of the problem was the poor sound in the theater showing I attended. Throughout most of the film, the dialogue was hard to understand because of the very loud music tracks and the shrillness of the music. If I didn't already understand astrophysics, I would have been totally lost. As it was, I could not hear much of the significant conversations between the characters and had to guess at what significant plot point had just been revealed. I originally though that the poor sound quality was the theater's fault but later learned that the sound problem was often mentioned by professional film critics as well. Simply stated, the music too often overwhelmed the dialogue. I consider the use of this music score by Chris Nolan a major mistake and makes the film almost unwatchable. I hope to watch this film again in the future on DVD without the ear-piercing music soundtrack.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

5

Fabricionet232May 31, 2015

Interstellar really disappointed me.
While i was expecting a smart, entertaining sci-fi flick, what i saw was a boring, predictable and emotionless mess. It is really overlong, with a middle-chapter so predictable and boring that'sInterstellar really disappointed me.
While i was expecting a smart, entertaining sci-fi flick, what i saw was a boring, predictable and emotionless mess. It is really overlong, with a middle-chapter so predictable and boring that's frustrating. Tho, i must say it has got his moments but they're mostly courtesy of the awesome cast.
In conclusion, if you haven't watched any sci-fi movie, you gonna like it, but if you have seen films like Alien, Sunshine or 2001, you're bound to be disappointed, mostly because of the awful story.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

4

TheWinlockianDec 26, 2014

Sometimes lousy endings can ruin an otherwise-solid film, and Interstellar has become, for me, the go-to example of such blunders.
While some of my friends really enjoyed how the end played out, I could not help but sit back and wonder ifSometimes lousy endings can ruin an otherwise-solid film, and Interstellar has become, for me, the go-to example of such blunders.
While some of my friends really enjoyed how the end played out, I could not help but sit back and wonder if Big Bird had received a writing credit for the climax and finale, as there was no longer an ounce remaining of the anticipation, wonder, grit, tension or brutality the film had spent so much time developing beforehand.
The story revolves around a dying earth and a quest by astronauts through an inexplicably-convenient wormhole to search out new planets capable of sustaining life. The initial search reveals a few likely new homes and a second team, led by NASA-pilot-turned-farmer Cooper (Matthew McConaughey), ventures through the anomaly to make contact with their most viable options.
While there’s a lot of cool stuff to geek out over, including black hole physics and theories behind long-distance space travel, these tantalizing plot points do not make up for how outstandingly clichéd and predictable the end wound up being. I mean, I feel like I spent the last half hour in the theater getting beat over the head with a two-by-four wrapped in barbed wire that had “plot device” burned into the side of it. I get it. It’s a happy ending for an otherwise-not-happy movie. If I had known, I would have waited until it came out on DVD.
And all of this could have been overlooked, except that it came from Director Christopher Nolan, the man who gave us Inception, The Prestige, Memento and Following, among other suspense-filled brain-teasers. I wanted exactly that kind of movie when I went to watch Interstellar, and was so outstandingly underwhelmed with what I got.
Interstellar makes me very nervous to watch whatever film Nolan comes up with next. But the opportunity to come across another of his knock-it-out-of-the-park films will likely outweigh such inhibitions, like the ending of Interstellar outweighed the rest of the movie.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

5

CanisrahNov 14, 2014

I realize I'm in the minority here - but in my view this film wasn't very good. I went along with an open mind and high expectations given others had seen it and loved it.

While I held out hope right until the final frame that the geniusI realize I'm in the minority here - but in my view this film wasn't very good. I went along with an open mind and high expectations given others had seen it and loved it.

While I held out hope right until the final frame that the genius others saw would be made manifest - at the end I walked out thinking it was long, tedious and overwrought. Most of all, I couldn't stomach pervasive humanist ideology underpinning the whole narrative - masquerading as philosophy.

The film has lofty goals - tries to soar to the heights of human thought and experience - and fails leaving the viewer empty. We see characters striving for... what? Family love is a theme we can all relate too, yes, and it is used here to reasonable effect; but the narrative is trying to elevate our thoughts to something more... something more mind expanding and striking at the heart of existence itself. And the setting, out in space, is an environment that is well suited to contemplating our own tiny existence and asking big questions like whats the meaning of it all? Questions other films like Prometheus, Moon, and the seminal 2001 dealt with much more effectively (without providing answers of course).

Ultimately, the film poses these lofty questions and then attempts rather ingloriously to insert humanity into the frame as the answer - as if we were some sort of deity which is as absurd as it is meaningless. And the driving motivation of some characters to save the human race, to promulgate the human species - to what end? For what purpose? There is in this film, at it's core, an unexplained emptiness that means it cannot fulfill on the promise of the setting and the sweeping cinematography.

At best, it is average sci-fi trying to legitimize itself in pseudo science and faux humanist philosophy. At worst, and in keeping with one of the film's themes that time is precious...it's 3 hours you'll never get back.… Expand

3 of 10 users found this helpful37

All this user's reviews

5

DalifeblivesNov 5, 2014

Didn't really like it. Too damn confusing. May need to watch it again but I'm tired of Nolan not explaining anything. Felt the same way about inception. I felt like you had to be a rocket space major to understand what was going on in the movie.

5 of 17 users found this helpful512

All this user's reviews

4

philo-sofaNov 10, 2014

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I'm concerned I may not review this movie fairly given my expectations.

If you are however the kind of person who likes the above disclaimer as an approach to observing phenomena, be warned. This movie may be irritating for the scientifically literate: from magically fuelled spacecraft, to the idea that you can 'lift off' normal on rockets after going so far down a black hole's gravity well that time dilates to run one sixty thousandth of normal speed, this movie disappoints.

Not to mention the idea that (no really) you can't see anything on a planet from a spaceship as you land (even if that thing kilometres high and thousands long) nor receive pictures or historical logs. These are all fundamental plot points.

The cinematography was however excellent and the sound okay. Overall that made for epic movie fail, but maybe I just had to many expectations for it... that I can't say.… Expand

2 of 7 users found this helpful25

All this user's reviews

4

KilgortNov 9, 2014

Those guys who are telling that this film has anything to do with science just don't know what they are talking about. As Inception, this film is just imagination of author. Inception was interesting to watch, with spec effects and other niceThose guys who are telling that this film has anything to do with science just don't know what they are talking about. As Inception, this film is just imagination of author. Inception was interesting to watch, with spec effects and other nice stuff, this film is just boring as hell melodrama. Why Nolan said that this were Science-Fiction? He lied, it's just stupid melodrama that got nothing to do with science and fiction.… Expand

2 of 7 users found this helpful25

All this user's reviews

4

Movie_DudeNov 12, 2014

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Just left the theater...had a lot of confusing parts

1. How did earth get to the position it was in...dust blowing
2. Was there a time line....how did cooper know how to fly and operate the new technology?
3. most confusing was the ending...this 7 layer 3d world of time...
4. he waited all this time to see his kids - why leave your die'n kid side..why didn't someone introduce him to his grand kids???? Why go after the female???
5. Matt Damon should of had a different part....… Expand

2 of 7 users found this helpful25

All this user's reviews

6

francisrgoNov 7, 2014

"Interstellar" is a good SciFi Film but has couple of problems. First off it really drag in the beginning and the relationship between father and daughter could have been a little better. Secondly, the story needed more cohesiveness and at"Interstellar" is a good SciFi Film but has couple of problems. First off it really drag in the beginning and the relationship between father and daughter could have been a little better. Secondly, the story needed more cohesiveness and at some point it was just indulgent. The key lesson learned in this film is that "Time is just Relative" and the one thing that suppress or pass space is "Love." Which I, and everyone else in the auditorium, gasped for air. Lovely. The movie needed more explanation and I couldn't bypass how one thing leads to the other. What really made the movie good is the stunning visuals and soundtrack though "Gravity" was more masterful and complex. On a good note, Christopher Nolan is still a fantastic Director, Producer and Writer.… Expand

9 of 33 users found this helpful924

All this user's reviews

6

EludiumQ36Jun 12, 2015

Almost 3 hrs long, this is more mini-series than movie and the slow pace/build up makes it seem all the more longer. The film's premise is great but it dies in execution. This should've been a much faster paced film instead of the sleepyAlmost 3 hrs long, this is more mini-series than movie and the slow pace/build up makes it seem all the more longer. The film's premise is great but it dies in execution. This should've been a much faster paced film instead of the sleepy classic "2001" it tries to emulate in some ways. The final half hour is where the payoff comes and it's appreciated and touching but again, it takes far too long to get to that point. Chris Nolan is a fine director but even the best have to be told to re-think their approach some times and this was one of those times. "Interstellar" could've and should've been much much better than this.… Expand

1 of 4 users found this helpful13

All this user's reviews

6

sammurphy66Nov 6, 2014

Interstellar does boast some fantastic performances and stunning visual effects, but its choppy story line and disjointed plot leave a lot to be desired.

5 of 21 users found this helpful516

All this user's reviews

6

MrShiftyNov 5, 2014

Best comparison is to the movie Signs by M. Night Shayamalan. (Full disclosure: I hated Signs with white-hot hatred.) Both movies have a single father living in the middle of a corn field who tidily resolves a dilemma concerning destiny withBest comparison is to the movie Signs by M. Night Shayamalan. (Full disclosure: I hated Signs with white-hot hatred.) Both movies have a single father living in the middle of a corn field who tidily resolves a dilemma concerning destiny with appropriate amounts of woo. Interstellar is laudably not religious in the least, but you can't credibly slap a 'science' label on woo and have anything but mislabeled woo.… Expand

4 of 19 users found this helpful415

All this user's reviews

4

FaceTheSlayerNov 10, 2014

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This is not a good movie. First of all it is too long, you could cut 1 hour of slow and meaningless conversations and still get basically the same movie. Then you have huge plot holes and scientific inaccuracies. Main character is an ex NASA pilot and he lives few hours oh driving from NASA headquarters without knowing it? And he is a farmer?
He travels through wormhole to other galaxy and still receives clips from his family. Taking off from earth is realistic, but then later they take off from other planets in a very small ship without rockets.
They are loosing precious time on that planet near black hole and talk gibberish for ten minutes that translates to years on earth. Main character travels to black hole, gets hit by some rocks, ejects himself and becomes a ghost powered by love. Too much? Not for Nolan. He can change his past by not sending coordinates, but he still sent them. And he somehow lives after traveling straight into black hole without explanation. Total nonsense. After watching this movie one could say that its message is about power of love, but you'll be better with some romantic comedy if you want that kind of a movie.… Expand

1 of 5 users found this helpful14

All this user's reviews

5

iTheViewerNov 14, 2014

Unterstellar is an appropriate description of this movie. I could barely stay awake through substantial portions of it. Crying...docking...crying...docking. Yes, scene after scene of people crying - everyone gets a turn - I am totallyUnterstellar is an appropriate description of this movie. I could barely stay awake through substantial portions of it. Crying...docking...crying...docking. Yes, scene after scene of people crying - everyone gets a turn - I am totally serious. That adds up to about half an hour.

Then scene after scene of spacecraft docking - another half hour. Why? We're still watching docking scenes of plastic models in 2014? We have robots with AI strolling around in the movie, but to dock we need both Matthew M and Anne H using their little joysticks to dock? Really sad.

Then another half hour of joyless, dull Matt Damon clunking through the story - with no point to it whatsoever in the overall scheme of the movie. Was he a paid product placement? I don't get it.

It picked up at the end, but it's a very large meatball. Oh, I was at least hoping for some cutting edge visuals - nada.… Expand

1 of 5 users found this helpful14

All this user's reviews

4

lee020Nov 10, 2014

The general idea of the film is good, with the earth dying man needs to find a new home. However for me the director lost direction, in deciding what he wanted to do and ended up with a bit of a mess. The general story is there but the wayThe general idea of the film is good, with the earth dying man needs to find a new home. However for me the director lost direction, in deciding what he wanted to do and ended up with a bit of a mess. The general story is there but the way it is conveyed is a mess. It's almost like the first half of the film is a physics lesson, then the second half is an attempt to move it into a emotional drama. This would have been ok he he had remembered to stay within the realms of basic physics instead of introducing an unexplained paradox, and totally ignoring the theory of relativity in the final scenes that were so dominant at the start of the film.… Expand

1 of 5 users found this helpful14

All this user's reviews

4

jkprince1283Nov 10, 2014

Interstellar had everything you needed to make a great movie. An interesting premise, exceptional production, and good acting. Unfortunately, the storyline really fell apart early for me.

For anyone who has ever seen "Terminator," there isInterstellar had everything you needed to make a great movie. An interesting premise, exceptional production, and good acting. Unfortunately, the storyline really fell apart early for me.

For anyone who has ever seen "Terminator," there is a time paradox in Interstellar that is similar to the one posed by Terminator. If you take into consideration the entirety of the "science" (the science as a whole seemed like somebody spent a little bit of time studying a few scientific principles behind wormholes, singularities, and possibly a bit of string theory and then embellished based on how the movie was meant to turn out), the time paradox is magnified a thousand-fold. Additionally, the writers/producers couldn't seem to make up their mind about whether the movie was about the power of science or the power of love.
There were certainly some interesting themes that were scientifically accurate (in theory), such as the relativity of time near a singularity. On the other hand, the filmmakers appear to have forgotten that the sheer force of gravity would crush a human or a ship long before they ever reached the event horizon of a singularity. Either that or the fact was conveniently ignored to add a measure of suspense in the end of the movie. I can't really go into any more detail about my problems with this film without creating an immense list of spoilers, so I'm just going to have to leave it there.… Expand

1 of 5 users found this helpful14

All this user's reviews

4

kubrickianNov 16, 2014

I knew this movie would crash and burn with the Kubrickian fanboy-ism of Nolan with the diametrically worst of dude actors that should've been quarantined in the 20th century actors McConahay-hay hay. Honestly I walked out 3/4ths of the wayI knew this movie would crash and burn with the Kubrickian fanboy-ism of Nolan with the diametrically worst of dude actors that should've been quarantined in the 20th century actors McConahay-hay hay. Honestly I walked out 3/4ths of the way through. Yes I've read the best Sci-fi books like Forever War, Childhood's End, etc. but in reality Nolan would be better suited for a Space Opera like Battlefield Earth. Show us what giant blue gorillas look like instead of a Travolta inspired 80's hair band version.

And Nolan, it's really time to dump your stable of non-likable actors and get some fresh faces.… Expand

1 of 6 users found this helpful15

All this user's reviews

5

pittuDec 13, 2014

Interstellar promised well, but ended up being a confused pile of concepts that the author clearly couldn't handle. Simpy put, it did NOT deliver.
The movie tries to capture the watchers and get them emotional by adding to the mix elementsInterstellar promised well, but ended up being a confused pile of concepts that the author clearly couldn't handle. Simpy put, it did NOT deliver.
The movie tries to capture the watchers and get them emotional by adding to the mix elements like love, family and humanity.
Basically, once again, it's the usual American movie where someone - American of course - will save the world.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

chugheadNov 24, 2014

Dr Who has a makeover! Hollywood Science has certainly been twisted by going religious about the supernatural making Paradise in space exists like heaven. This was more like a 'Gravity' ripoff pt 2 extended version, but with a lot moreDr Who has a makeover! Hollywood Science has certainly been twisted by going religious about the supernatural making Paradise in space exists like heaven. This was more like a 'Gravity' ripoff pt 2 extended version, but with a lot more thinking involved to try and blow your mind and make you intelligent, failed attempt which makes you go, huh!.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

jdotjdot7Dec 22, 2014

I went to see this movie after all the hype... It was pretty bad. First off, let's just ignore all the **** science and plot holes and just go straight into the awful music. The music is always present in the movie, it's largely always theI went to see this movie after all the hype... It was pretty bad. First off, let's just ignore all the **** science and plot holes and just go straight into the awful music. The music is always present in the movie, it's largely always the same track, and many times it is so loud that you can't even hear what the people are saying. The story is made up of a bunch of sub-stories that are fairly fragmented, predictable, and boring. This is also an extremely long movie, it seems like every aspect is drawn out for no reason at all and you'll find yourself asking, "When does it END!?"

Now, lets get into this ridiculous movie. (SPOILERS AHEAD! BUT, if you want the just of it, the science in the movie is about as realistic as Star Wars)

Avoiding the "fifth dimensional beings thing" here is a list of ridiculousness that I noticed:

1. It requires a gigantic amount of thrust to propel the initial space craft into orbit, yet, the first planet they go to has 130% of Earth's Gravity and they take off from it with no problem at all.

2. The planets they are searching for have no star. They have a black hole and a neutron star, both of which are not really able to emit the light necessary for human survival.

3. How in the world can it be easier to colonize an entirely new planet completely starting from scratch than to figure out a way to fix the problems on Earth? They obviously had water and gas, plenty of resources, they had ridiculously advanced robots, and yet the entire human race is brought to its knees and somehow our technology is capable of colonizing a new planet rather than fixing the few issues on the current one.

4. Yeah... they are sitting directly outside the event horizon of a black hole. Just because you are outside of the event horizon doesn't make you safe. The event horizon is where LIGHT can not escape anymore, if this little space craft needed a three stage rocket to escape Earth's gravity there is no way that that little space craft could resist the extremely gigantic pull of the black hole.

5. They completely "sci-fi fantasied" the black hole. Apparently, the black hole is a portal to a pocket of space in which an infinite amount of realities exist laid out in order relative to time (simulating how it would be if we could experience time as a physical dimension). Obviously, this is a very old trope in sci-fi movies that a black hole is a portal to an alternate dimension... Boring as well as ridiculous

6. In the alternate part of the story, apparently the protagonist comes up with a way to defy gravity. Yup.

Overall, I went into the movie being led to believe it was a semi-realistic space film and ended up with a ridiculous sci-fi fantasy film with awful audio and a boring plot.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

4

RobbyPNov 14, 2014

Doesn't make a whole lot of sense when you actually start to think about it. Numerous plot holes, bloated, and self important. I'd give it less of a rating but the visuals are great and the acting is great, so they didn't get everythingDoesn't make a whole lot of sense when you actually start to think about it. Numerous plot holes, bloated, and self important. I'd give it less of a rating but the visuals are great and the acting is great, so they didn't get everything wrong. But people fall all over themselves to praise anything Nolan touches so it has a good score. I usually like his films, but this was nothing spectacular.

And by the way, anyone who says the "science" is remotely believable is wrong. If you've taken any sort of quantum physics you will know that, as Nolan said, he may have consulted scientists regarding the film, but he sure as hell didn't listen to them. I could have let that slide because that wasn't one of the main reasons I wasn't impressed with this film, but people keep going on about how plausible the science in this movie is. Wrong.… Expand

0 of 5 users found this helpful05

All this user's reviews

5

GetReelNov 8, 2014

I'll make this as clear as possible: The movie was very slow and the plot had many holes (not to mention convoluted). This film was not nearly as good as many reviewers are claiming. Compare a film like this to great films like Gladiator,I'll make this as clear as possible: The movie was very slow and the plot had many holes (not to mention convoluted). This film was not nearly as good as many reviewers are claiming. Compare a film like this to great films like Gladiator, Good Fellas or even something closer like the recent Gravity... and it doesn't really hold a candle. Obviously the graphics (cgi) were good when they were on the screen, but take it from me, it's not worth 3 hours of your precious time.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

6

ScribeHardDec 2, 2014

To dive into the flaws of the film is to dive headfirst down a slippery slope. There are plot/story/writing issues – holes, if you must – throughout the film. It isn’t the details of those issues that concern me so much as it is what theyTo dive into the flaws of the film is to dive headfirst down a slippery slope. There are plot/story/writing issues – holes, if you must – throughout the film. It isn’t the details of those issues that concern me so much as it is what they represent: an abandonment of, even a disregard for, solid storytelling in the name of stunning visuals and deafening sound (at times loud enough to drown out dialogue). Most disappointing is that the film demands you respect its intellectualism, yet treats you as stupid at the same time.

There is enough impressive stuff in Interstellar to make it worth watching. But at three flawed hours, one trip into this deep space is enough.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

jeanrenoir13Dec 24, 2014

Preposterously overrated movie. 2001 was a work of genius, because Kubrick himself was an authentic artistic genius. Christopher Nolan is merely a creator of dumb, empty spectacle. Comparing Interstellar to 2001 is like comparing Stephen KingPreposterously overrated movie. 2001 was a work of genius, because Kubrick himself was an authentic artistic genius. Christopher Nolan is merely a creator of dumb, empty spectacle. Comparing Interstellar to 2001 is like comparing Stephen King to Dostoevsky. The characters are shallow and vapid. The script is a collection of dumb cliches about family and love guaranteed to rope in the multiplex crowd. The score is strident and bombastic. Etc. Interstellar is the exact OPPOSITE of 2001 in every way, on every level--a stupid Hollywood crowd pleaser appealing to both shallow sci-fi and video game brains, instead of a profound mockery of the pretensions of sci-fi and scientific rationalism itself in the face of the unknowable chaos of the universe in 2001. Kubrick merely used Arthur C. Clarke in order to make fun of his kind of enthusiasm for and overconfidence in human rational understanding. Interstellar is right down on Arthur C. Clarke's level. No wonder it will be a much bigger hit than 2001 was, since 2001 naturally truly baffled people when it came out, whereas Intstellar provides a sort of momentary sense of disorientation while ending Hollywood style in a dumb "explanation" of it all, not to mention ending with the idiotic combo of the hero completing his "quest" AND fulfilling the inevitable Hollywood "love" theme, all in one dumb gesture. Contrast that ending with Kubrick's deliberate total subversion of Hollywood, not just in 2001 but in every film he ever made. There was a reason Kubrick lived in London.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

4

wiktorpolakNov 13, 2014

All right , 1st of all .. Creators were like " We know science , we're gonna show you everything about that!!!" and then they are like "Let's make everything scientifically inaccurate LOL.." Then you still give them a chance and they are likeAll right , 1st of all .. Creators were like " We know science , we're gonna show you everything about that!!!" and then they are like "Let's make everything scientifically inaccurate LOL.." Then you still give them a chance and they are like " Yay ! Now that we **** up everything about science , let's make the movie to be some kind of hidden deep meaning between the line kind of" , it's as much crap as you can get in 3 hours.. not worth it..… Expand

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

6

KTCopelandNov 15, 2014

Decent, epic movie, but not a masterpiece. For the most part, the science is okay: there are stretches made for the sake of drama that could leave those with a strong background in physics disappointed. That being said, there is a goodDecent, epic movie, but not a masterpiece. For the most part, the science is okay: there are stretches made for the sake of drama that could leave those with a strong background in physics disappointed. That being said, there is a good mixture of drama, humor and action that will make it worth your while to suspend disbelief. Like Hedonia's elixir in Flash Gordon, doing so will not make you forget, but you won't mind remembering... much.

There are clear demarcations that culminate in "wow" moments which are extremely rewarding. The path taken to bring viewers to those points is littered with details that should have either been expanded or left out entirely. I suspect that is the reason for so many mixed reviews. This is a good film, that could have been marvelous. Ultimately, it took a parade of accomplished actors unceremoniously drowned in loud special effects to keep this from being the, "Ishtar of Space." I liked it more than I hated it. Your mileage may vary.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

4

ronnie25Nov 17, 2014

the plot and subject is great but nolan lost the plot somehwere midaway nd focusses the movie on things
great plot whcih could hav been made a good movie

0 of 5 users found this helpful05

All this user's reviews

6

TPaKToP-TK3CNov 21, 2014

So much talent being wasted on making an excellent movie appealing to the general public. Don't get me wrong, this is very much a movie worth seeing. Please go and see the movie.

The crew that made it had everything necessary to make aSo much talent being wasted on making an excellent movie appealing to the general public. Don't get me wrong, this is very much a movie worth seeing. Please go and see the movie.

The crew that made it had everything necessary to make a masterpiece. What stopped them however, was the urge to make it profitable and appealing to the general public. The problem with general public is that it can't handle the "coldness" of space. As a result the excellent Sci-Fi material had to be mixed with an unhealthy amount romantic nonsense. Such a pity :(… Expand

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

4

bleedsblue96Jan 4, 2015

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Matthew McConaughey, the decent soundtrack, and the visuals are the only reasons to see this movie. The characters around him fail to demonstrate anything about themselves, the ambitious movie tackles many concepts in the worst setting of outer space. Christopher Nolan's brilliance proves to be shadowed by his past inability to demonstrate that he's a human being with emotions and feelings too. Tough film to nitpick, but tough film to enjoy with a lot of the crying and constant depressive sad moments throughout. Its about saving the Earth, and at least Cooper decides to change his views in the weird unexplainable 3rd act. Entertaining movie, if you see it, see it in IMAX, otherwise, not your moneys worth.… Expand

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

4

imthenoobJan 29, 2021

Interstellar, to really simplify this review, is a movie that tries way too hard explaining everything we see onscreen through dialogue rather than letting the movie speak for itself. It tries to be bigger and more mysterious than what it isInterstellar, to really simplify this review, is a movie that tries way too hard explaining everything we see onscreen through dialogue rather than letting the movie speak for itself. It tries to be bigger and more mysterious than what it is when really it's just a grand, straightforward movie that just isn't all that interesting.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

nozamanJan 2, 2022

Ultimately this film is an exercise in self-indulgence and hubris. Matthew McConaughey is in full-on, wide-eyed mumble mode for most of the film, and as others have mentioned, the dialogue is already muffled.
There are plenty of ponderousUltimately this film is an exercise in self-indulgence and hubris. Matthew McConaughey is in full-on, wide-eyed mumble mode for most of the film, and as others have mentioned, the dialogue is already muffled.
There are plenty of ponderous shots of spaceships spinning, lens-flares on strange, alien worlds, and far too much emotive crying for this type of film. Yes, literal crying.
The wise-cracking robot is completely incongruous with the tone, as if the robot dialogue were re-dubbed after test screenings. Many of the special effects are shoddy—especially the spacecraft modeling. Anne Hathaway is badly miscast as a boundary-pushing scientist/astronaut. The plot makes little to no sense. Worse, the implication is we will be so impressed by the prettiness, emoting, earnestness and quantum mumbo-jumbo we will not care that it makes no sense.
To some extent this all works. Many of the beats will seem familiar to lovers of existential sci-fi. There are a couple moments of genuine tension. But it’s all been done before, and with more technical expertise, cleverness, and humility.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

DawdlingPoetDec 18, 2021

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This is an immersive watch. Its quite intriguing, although a bit bleak, philosophically speaking. It, unsurprisingly, features good CGI and its quite gripping at times, although I felt frustrated by the quite frequent whispery/mumbled dialogue, this makes it hard to follow whats being said at times. I suppose the film is about hope, though I'd also say its about determination and isolation. The dialogue is a little cheesy at times, with one line I remember being "love is the only thing capable of transcending time and space'. A more notable quote, I thought, was 'out survival instinct is our greatest source of inspiration'. Suffice to say, this is not a light watch(!), thus its a bit hard to follow fully but I'd be lying if I said it doesn't have anything going for it. There are some plot twists and near the end I did feel a bit let down a bit, in as much as I can't say I felt what happened was entirely believable? also it didn't surprise me this is a Christopher Nolan film, given one of the aspects featured in the film which clearly harked back to Inception.

I thought the cast gave relatively decent performances and its certainly a thought provoking film - its somewhat memorable too. I'd say, in my mind, its more of what I'd call a 'deep film' than an 'epic', although it certainly has an epic running time of just shy of 3 hours long (2h49 to the end of the credits). If this really interests you, then its probably worth seeing but if your not interested in the sci-fi aspects of this, then it'll likely seem a bit too long winded and lose your interest, so I'm 50/50 about recommending it but hopefully my review has given you an idea if this is for you or not.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

Sierra-117Dec 6, 2020

Consider this quote:

"Though I speak with the tongue of men and of angels, but have not love, I have become sounding brass. And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand... all knowledge, and though I have all faith, so that I couldConsider this quote:

"Though I speak with the tongue of men and of angels, but have not love, I have become sounding brass. And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand... all knowledge, and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing."
This is part of a quote from the 1966 Russian classic Andrei Rublev, which is my favourite film from legendary filmmaker Andrei Tarkovsky. In this moment we hear our protagonist performing a sermon of sorts, about the significance of love, and how life is meaningless without it. In this scene we see the camera shift in and out, from Anatoly Solonitsyn‘s consistently phenomenal acting, to the beautiful imagery of snow falling near the church. Andrei has previously had an encounter which has caused him to ponder over what it means to love, and this moment is nothing more than a projection of his newfound occupation. Notice how Tarkovsky effortlessly hints to poignant themes in his films? Whilst some of these ideas may be far less subtle (such as the Stalker’s outlook on faith in Stalker), in just one beautiful moment, he lays out his ideas in ways that are both meaningful, impactful, and don’t require compromise from the narrative. Now take this quote from Interstellar:

"Love is the one thing we’re capable of perceiving that transcends dimensions of time and space. Maybe we should trust that, even if we can't understand it."
At this point in the film, the crew is deciding on which of the two potential planets is the most likely to result in success, and Anne Hathaway’s character, is trying to convince them that the second option is better. Her partner is on that planet, and she holds the belief that, just because he is most likely dead, yet she still feels compelled to go there (because of love), then that is significant justification for them to risk the entire fate of humanity. Naturally the other two character’s dismiss her, deciding instead to go to Professor Mann’s planet, and what ensues is an entire section of the film which serves no purpose other than to prove that; "love was the right choice. You guys chose wrong you idiots". My point is, if Nolan is so desperate to convey that the main theme is love, surely there were better ways to go about doing so? These quotes feel like they were ripped straight out of a Terence Malick film, but without the powerful imagery to convey these points. Nolan is making a sci-fi epic, and at that he excels, however for whatever reason he is torn between the decision to focus on the sci-fi elements and the main theme of love, and in trying to connect them his narrative has only suffered. In his attempt to make this theme as clear as possible, Nolan sacrifices a significant portion of his dialogue. On top of receiving endless amounts of exposition that explain the nuances of the many different scientific aspects, we have this idea shoved down our throats in the form of even more exposition, and an entire section of the film. Furthermore, at many points of key dialogue, Hans Zimmer’s brilliant but deafening score continuously escalates. This, combined with cooper’s muffled voice, the forced idea that love is the only true power in the universe, and Nolan’s infamously bad sound mixing, all result in me personally losing all interest and my sense of immersion. I suppose there are others who enjoy this, and to them I ask; do you think interstellar would be a better or worse film if Nolan didn’t attempt to experiment with themes? I personally wish that he had chosen to focus on what he does best, but in the end it is all subjective.
The film isn’t all bad. I especially love the whole 'waves' subplot. Zimmer’s ticking score can be heard every time a year of Earth’s time goes by, which adds to the suspense felt by your subconscious. As everyone will already know., the visuals are extremely impressive, and do wonders for the spectacle Nolan is attempting to achieve. The following scene where Cooper has to watch his children grow old is heartbreaking and brilliant, and by far my favourite moment in the movie. In fact, the performances from McConaughey and Chastain are both great, and are part of what carries the film to as high a score as I’m willing to give.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews