Was talked into going to the midnight show of Hobbit last night (smelt like desperation in that theater ugh) and the teaser was shown. It got people excited but also let many people scratching their heads on what the fuck is it about. Showed a lot of shots of cornfields, so the rumors about the corn MIGHT be true. Get a brief glimpse of Matty McC.

The trailer drops tomorrow and I need to peep it again cause from what I remember it was all but a brief cocktease about the human race moving forward.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nyc6RJEEe0U

Kip Thorne was one of my grad school advisors back when he was writing the original treatment for this. So I heard a few (probably highly inaccurate) rumors about what the story was in 2007. But obviously it's been through a lot since then.

presumably on penalty of a huge NDA.

All I know is what he asks us to produce pictures of for the special effects team, but none of that is particularly revealing.

Good grief

i've been loving these science fiction films that are steeped in realism

How soon until Nolan does a 2 hours film of nothing but monologues? The Designated Mourner must be on his to do list.

It'll be interesting to see how Nolan does with a film that looks like it's more about hope and exploration. To me, he's close to Fincher in the coldness of his films.

As for this, tough to say anything. The monologue topic and Matty McAlrightAlrightAlright gave me Contact flashbacks. But I've liked Nolan's non-Dark Knight stuff the best (well, besides The Following) so I'm still probably going to get sucked into this one as well.

also produced Contact. So there might turn out to be a lot of Contact connections.

Was not moved by it at all idk about this one.

He's proven himself to me. Theyre not all winners, but he has more quality than quantity.
Trailer doesnt do much for me tho.
I will have to wait until it hits theatres.

http://collider.com/matthew-mcconaughey-interstellar-christopher-nolan/

While Matthew McConaughey talked about his recent work � including turns in Dallas Buyers Club, HBO�s True Detective, and Mud among others � he briefly commented on a highly anticipated upcoming film: Christopher Nolan�s Interstellar. Not only did he call the sci-fi film �the most ambitious thing he�s ever done�, McConaughey also talked about meeting Nolan at his house for what turned out to be his role in Interstellar. Hit the jump to see what he had to say.

Be sure to check out Variety�s full interview with McConaughey, who is currently experiencing an incredible run of performances. Here�s what he had to say about Nolan�s Interstellar:

�Here�s what I can tell you, It�s the most ambitious thing he�s ever done. And he�s done some ambitious stuff. � There�s no fucking around on set. He�s a great problem solver. In that way, he�s very indie. Here�s a guy who could have whatever budget he wants � and we finished shooting early.�

The audition process was not exactly by-the-book, but it ended with McConaughey being offered the role:

�He came up to me and said, ��Mud.� I love that movie.� I sat down with him for about 2� hours at his house. Not one word came up about �Interstellar.� I walked out not sure what to think. I mean, he�s not a guy who takes general meetings.�

Nolan himself also commented on McConaughey�s work ethic:

�Matthew works from the inside out. He approaches a character from a deep human understanding, refusing to take shortcuts to an emotional connection with the audience � all while never losing sight of the demands of the overall narrative.�

Interstellar also stars Anne Hathaway, Jessica Chastain, Casey Affleck, Michael Caine, David Oyelowo, Wes Bentley, John Lithgow, Ellen Burstyn, Topher Grace, David Gyasi, Mackenzie Foy, Bill Irwin, Timoth�e Chalamet, and Matt Damon and opens November 7, 2014.

a la Inception/Prestige the other makes me hope he makes a 'straight' film similar to what the very simple teaser trailers look like; a futuristic NASA film.

Just have a feeling and I have no basis for it.

...Nolan's biggest film to date. And it's still my most anticipated film of 2014.

Which makes sense.And I mean like a 2 minute teaser all comprised new footage.

*Yawn*


----------------------------



O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "

and Lady In The Water*

*checks Nolans track record in that time*

Yeah

U Mad








































































































And we know why.

What a dogshit fucking movie

----------------------------



O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "

http://www.comingsoon.net/news/cinemaconnews.php?id=116504

The two major studio presentations on CinemaCon Day 3 were bisected by a special luncheon showcasing the work of filmmaker Christopher Nolan called "From Passion to the Big Screen: The Work of Christopher Nolan." Since Nolan's next movie, coming out in November 15, is the enigmatic Interstellar, one would think that he'd want to talk about that a little bit. Nope.

Try as he might, interviewer Todd McCarthy, senior film critic for The Hollywood Reporter, kept asking Nolan direct questions about Interstellar, trying to get him to talk about the movie, only to get largely the same response (always with a smile, mind you):

"I don't want to say too much about 'Interstellar'."

This is a far cry from a few years back when Nolan was at the then-ShoWest, ready to finally reveal what his next movie, Inception was about, following an equally enigmatic teaser that had The Dark Knight fans scratching their heads.

Nolan did confirm that the film involved wormholes that allow us to travel long distances to places we couldn't travel to otherwise, but brushed off McCarthy's question on whether the movie dealt with time travel at all. He did once again mention the fact that theoretical physicist Kip Thorne was one of the film's executive producers.

Nolan also said that one of the reasons he cast Matthew McConaughey as the lead in the film is because he wanted an "everyman" with whom the audience could experience the fantastic events of the movie through. It was after seeing the Oscar-winning actor's performance in Jeff Nichols' Mud that made Nolan think that McConaughey might be right for that role.

When asked about the use of locations versus CG environments in Interstellar -- something that might be hard to do with a film set in outer space -- Nolan said that he had his team construct sets of the interiors of the spaceships, but had monitors outside the windows so that the actors could see exactly what they'd see outside of the ship. It meant that the visual FX people had to work overtime in advance of shooting to have things ready for the actors when they arrived (similar to Alfonso Cuaron's approach to Gravity, in fact). It also allowed him to shoot the movie "like a documentary."

Towards the end, Nolan suggested that his film harkens back to the "Golden Age of blockbusters" in which he grew up. He mentioned that seeing Star Wars and 2001: A Space Odyssey as a child were two huge film influences on him. He thought that back then films were more broad-based and that "family films" weren't looked down upon by cinephiles as they are today. Mentioning that the film has a very different tone than one he's done in the past, a tone he was interested in exploring, made us think that Interstellar may be something closer to Disney's The Black Hole than 2001 and it might not be nearly as dark or intellectually challenging or an "adult movie" like Inception was.

Nolan also mentioned that he wanted the film to have a "universality" that looked at where we are as people and where we want to go, as he's really trying to create an experience in moviegoers to carry with them similar to the ones he had when he was watching films growing up.

Once again, Nolan has shot the film using IMAX technology, stating that he shot more for this film in that format than his previous films. While the film will roll out in all different formats, they do have something planned to give the audience an "incredible immersive experience" while still using existing equipment already in theaters. Nolan still isn't a fan of 3D and only thinks it works for the right project but he hasn't felt that 3D is right for any of the films he wants to make, including Interstellar. (Nolan cited Baz Luhrmann's The Great Gatsby as one of the 3D movies he's seen that used that technology in the most effective way for the story.)

There was a lot more information to be had from the luncheon spotlight on Nolan, talking about why he likes working with Michael Caine and writing with his brother Jonah as well as his mainly technical issues with shooting digitally vs. on film because he doesn't feel it captures what he sees as accurately. If we have time, we'll post some more from the insightful career-spanning interview sometime soon.

Interstellar doesn't come out until November 7, so you'll just have to wait a little bit longer to learn more.

Read more: CinemaCon: Christopher Nolan Says He Shot Interstellar 'Like a Documentary' - ComingSoon.net http://www.comingsoon.net/news/cinemaconnews.php?id=116504#ixzz2x7O86691
Follow us: @ComingSoonNet on Twitter | ComingSoon on Facebook

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/style-blog/wp/2014/05/05/insterstellar-trailer-premieres-at-d-c-s-air-space-museum/

The school kids and tourists who settled in to watch �Hubble 3D� at the Smithsonian�s Air & Space Museum were treated to a dash of unexpected Hollywood ballyhoo Monday morning when the trailer for Christopher Nolan�s upcoming sci-fi adventure �Interstellar� made its world premiere at the Lockheed Martin IMAX Theater.

After a brief announcement, the trailer unspooled to show Matthew McConaughey driving his truck through corn fields while a lush orchestral score swelled in the background. Later, the fields had caught fire, an ominous dust cloud could be seen looming over a baseball game, and McConaughey (playing a character named Cooper) was reassuring his daughter that he loved her � right before being shot into space in order to save the world.

The plot of �Interstellar,� written by Nolan and his brother Jonathan from a treatment by theoretical physicist Kip Thorne, has been kept largely under wraps, although the word �wormhole� has been mentioned in early reports, suggesting that the McConaissance is now on the verge of breaking the time-space continuum. As the trailer�s tag line puts it, �Mankind was born on Earth. It was never meant to die here.�

Nolan, the director of �Inception� and �The Dark Knight� trilogy, has famously stayed loyal to large-format film stock during cinema�s digital revolution. He photographed �Interstellar� on 70 mm and IMAX film; the director�s commitment to film, along with the movie�s space-travel theme, made it a natural fit with the museum �- one of the only theaters in the region that shows IMAX movies on film, rather than digitally. The Lockheed Martin IMAX Theater will be the only theater showing the trailer until it appears with �Godzilla� when it opens in other theaters throughout the country next week. The �Interstellar� trailer will play before all of the museum�s IMAX offerings.

Air & Space Museum theaters director Zarth Bertsch said that the trailer�s exclusive run will continue at least until �Godzilla�s� May 16 opening date, and perhaps longer if it doesn�t interfere with the theater�s regular programming. (There�s even a chance that �Interstellar� will play there during its theatrical run.) �The extra two minutes have made our turnaround time between shows pretty tight,� he said. �But we�d like to play it indefinitely if we can.�

�Interstellar� is scheduled to open November 7.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSWdZVtXT7E
-------------------
http://blog.melanism.com
http://twitter.com/Melanism
http://seanlovesthis.tumblr.com
http://www.formspring.me/seanathan
http://www.last.fm/user/Melanism
http://www.flickr.com/photos/meldotcom/

Can't wait.

And it's kinda funny that "our planet is dying but hey there MIGHT be another planet out there for us somewhere!" passes for optimistic right now


But I'll take it

I'm just glad I won't be around for that.

Is the planet still worth saving?

~~~~
When you are born, you cry, and the world rejoices. Live so that when you die, you rejoice, and the world cries.
~~~~
You cannot hate people for their own good.

I can't wait.

The wormhole visuals, by the way, are accurate.

I mean, I'm obviously seeing this shit regardless but the trailer did nothing for me.

cuz that trailer is really nothing more than Armageddon 2 but everyone seems really hype over it.

that was a fun movie to see in theaters but when I rewatched it on HBO recently I realized how god awful of a movie it is when you aren't swept up in the hype. I suppose this movie has a lot more personal investment in it though.


~~~~~~~~~
"This is the streets, and I am the trap." � Jay Bilas
http://www.popmatters.com/pm/archive/contributor/517
Hip Hop Handbook: http://tinyurl.com/ll4kzz

Nolan, MM, sci-fi exploration, positivity, real IMAX....cannot wait.

Nolan haters gonna be mad.

http://www.thewrap.com/new-interstellar-trailer-christopher-nolan-sends-matthew-mcconaughey-anne-hathaway-to-space-video/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=contactology

Man, Nolan is GUNNING for them oscar awards....and i'm SO here for this!!!

Go to www.interstellarmovie.com and enter the "access code" 7201969 (yes, a little silly) to see the third trailer in high definition.

The final shot of this trailer, by the way, is of the spaceship in front of a black hole with a thin accretion disk. The image is, as far as I know, the first visually accurate image of a black hole ever used in a Hollywood movie. One particular point to note: the disk only appears to bend upward on the back because the photons of light that carry the image are bent downward by the black hole. Writing a code to produce this image (without the Hollywood flair, of course) was a homework problem in Caltech's GR class when I took it.

Also, the "inner ring," just barely appearing to surround the hole in the image, is *not* a second accretion disk, or even a wispy offshoot of the bigger one. It is a secondary image of the *same* accretion disk, caused by the fact that photons get dragged around the hole multiple times before they can reach the eye, producing multiple images.

************************

The first trailer was enough. No more.

But yes, they do show more of where the journey leads than the other trailers do, so I can understand someone waiting to see it all properly.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vxOhd4qlnA

In 70MM IMAX film.

It's easily Nolan's best film. This is one of the biggest movies I've ever seen.

Spielberg is gonna be pissed he didn't make this when he sees it as this seemed tailor made for him (and if American Sniper is as good as I hear it is, he'll be doubly pissed).

There was a reception before and after the film. Talked to Nolan for 30 minutes about film noir. Dude is insanely smart. Did a shot race Matty McC, and taught Ms. Chastain how to Shmoney and danced bachata. It was a very dope night.

BTW IMAX 70MM film this or bust.

Here's a good explanation of why you should IMAX it in the simplest terms: http://www.interstellarmovie.com/formats/

Full review closer to the date.

Just trust me on that one.

And to keep this shit on topic, tickets have gone on sale for showings starting on Tuesday, November 4 at 8pm.

Also, for those with movie length issues, be aware that this is 2 hours, 49 minutes.

___________________________________________________________________________________________
Some of you post as if you're really short. Also, your LULZ were never entertaining.

ASAP!!!

I did.

Seeing as we're probably never gonna see a movie projected on film again, I'm going to see this as many times as I can.

And if it's playing on a real IMAX or if you have an IMAX 70MM print playing within a 100 miles, travel to it. Go.

So far this is my favorite film of the year hands down nigga.

if you were to guess, how much of the film would you say is shot in the IMAX format?

Don't quote me on that tho. I was so wrapped up in the film to really take notice on how much was IMAX which was alot.

i didn't need to be any more amped, but thank you.

Only jealousy, of course.

I've been waiting for this movie for seven years, and people are seeing it before me?!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFNMma7M7Jc

http://blogs.indiewire.com/theplaylist/go-see-it-in-imax-paul-thomas-anderson-says-interstellar-is-beautiful-talks-shooting-on-film-more-20141006?linkId=9893421

Paul Thomas Anderson dominated the New York Film Festival this weekend. His seventh feature length effort, “Inherent Vice” screened on Saturday (read our review), a press conference followed (read a recap here and watch the video) and then the filmmaker joined NYFF committee selection head Kent Jones on Sunday for a 90 minute conversation about his recent influences, music videos he likes, films he thinks you ought to know and much more (most of the talk is recapped here).

Naturally, the conversation turned to film formats, film stocks and what PTA often referred to over the course of the weekend as “nerd talk.” Anderson said that the filmmakers that have banded together to save Kodak film stock are doing valiant work, but that it’s “still a temporary reprieve. The death notice—there’s a sign on your back that’s saying you’re still gonna get executed— ,” adding, “ more needs to be done .”

During the discussion, PTA and Jones discussed all the filmmakers who continue to work with celluloid, including Quentin Tarantino, who is shooting “The Hateful Eight” on 70mm, J.J. Abrams, shooting “Star Wars: Episode 7” on 35mm and of course Christopher Nolan, who has yet to shoot a film digitally. “Christopher Nolan is at the front lines of all of this, I have to say,” Anderson said about the struggle to keep celluloid viable for filmmakers. “He’s made a beautiful film, if anybody gets out to see ‘Interstellar’ when it comes out.” Jones then quipped sarcastically that he thinks people just may just go check out the movie, which lead to a lot of uproarious laughter. “I’m just trying to put in the good word, he’s a decent filmmaker; you probably haven’t heard about this one.” Anderson joked. “Support this filmmaker.”

“But don’t fuck around, go see it in IMAX,” PTA said turning serious. “Brave the line. Do it, bite the bullet,” he stressed.

“Quentin’s much more vocal about it though,” Anderson said of his friend. “He wants to tar and feather people. It’s turned into one of his movies. ‘I’ll cut your fucking ear off.’” Jones noted some filmmakers like David Fincher feel totally different and he could “see film disappear tomorrow” and it wouldn’t make a difference. “He’s got a great articulate argument for people on the other side,” Jones said.

“I stay out of it,” Anderson said sheepishly followed by a laugh. “I know I throw my hat into the ring for what I like, but I find it difficult getting on anybody because it’s their bag,” Anderson said of individual taste. “If it’s your bag, and you’re into it…” he said sounding not unlike his laid-back “Inherent Vice” protagonist. “I wouldn’t tell you what to do, and you don’t tell me what to do.”

I resolve to fuck with IMAX whenever possible. Especially a more than capable director like Nolan. Can't wait for this and Avengers 2 in IMAX 3D. Not a fan of the Hobbit films

This Variety review is pretty accurate and I can't say anything more that hasn't been said here:

http://variety.com/2014/film/reviews/film-review-interstellar-1201338475/

http://www.comingsoon.net/news/reviewsnews.php?id=124403

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movie/interstellar/review/744059

http://www.timeout.com/london/film/interstellar

http://badassdigest.com/2014/10/27/interstellar-movie-review-ambitious-inert-beautiful-flawed/

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/reviews/interstellar-film-review-christopher-nolans-new-blockbuster-is-a-true-epic-9821264.html

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/digital/fact-vs-fiction/interstellar-review-christopher-nolan-matthew-mcconaughey-17357720?click=pm_news

http://www.indiewire.com/article/review-christopher-nolans-interstellar-is-smart-sentimentalism-as-weve-never-seen-it-before-20141027

http://www.hitfix.com/motion-captured/review-mcconaughey-gives-heart-to-nolans-ambitious-and-amazing-interstellar

"lectures on psychics." I assume that's a typo.

"There are so many frustrating flaws in this enormously cerebral, wonderfully hopeful and massively ambitious movie. If good intentions were enough to make a movie a masterpiece, Interstellar would be the greatest work of Nolan’s career. That said, even with its many flaws, Interstellar is an often gorgeous, expertly put-together movie that demands to be seen on the biggest possible screen. And while many parts of Interstellar don’t work, the whole hangs together enough to be a movie that impresses with hard sci-fi nerdiness. If only that were enough to make it the great film we hoped for."

That is, without the character limit: how they incorporated general relativity into the CGI. To make accurate images of the black holes and wormholes, they had to trace a light ray through curved spacetime for each pixel of the image, whereas ordinary CGI just traces along straight lines. As I mentioned somewhere above, this will be the first Hollywood movie ever to give us accurate images of these things.

And doing it required a major rewrite of the software and hugely more complex computations. Here's the story:

http://www.wired.com/2014/10/astrophysics-interstellar-black-hole/

Kip mentions at the end of the video that they're building two research papers out of this work. As far as the astrophysics research paper, I'm not sure what he's talking about, because these calculations have been done for decades now (just not at such high resolution using such pretty starfields). The thing about the accretion disk "tilting up" behind the hole is something that I think I already mentioned in this thread. But anyway, it's certainly an enormous advance in computer graphics methods, and it wouldn't entirely surprise me if they discovered some astrophysical effects along the way.

I'm gonna try to wait until after seeing the movie to watch this but I might not make it that long.

Also, Kip Thorne has written a book, also called "The Science of Interstellar," that will be released on November 7. I even created a diagram for it.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0393351378

>Also, Kip Thorne has written a book, also called "The Science
>of Interstellar," that will be released on November 7. I even
>created a diagram for it.

cool! what is the diagram of?

>cool! what is the diagram of?

It has to do with the generation of gravitational radiation (shaking in the geometry of spacetime) generated by oscillating black holes. Probably a minor element of the book, and even more minor in the movie. But it's my fifteen minutes of fame.

>It has to do with the generation of gravitational radiation
>(shaking in the geometry of spacetime) generated by
>oscillating black holes. Probably a minor element of the book,
>and even more minor in the movie. But it's my fifteen minutes
>of fame.

I'll be sure to check that out if/when I get the book (or at least browse through it at the bookstore - lol)

Not to be confused with "gravity waves," though, which are actually a particular type of water wave.

~ ~ ~
All meetings end in separation
All acquisition ends in dispersion
All life ends in death
- The Buddha

|\_/|
='_'=

Every hundred years, all new people

Niggas are gonna hate, hate the climax of the movie and what follows after that. Because the movie is so steeped in reality, the last 20 minutes are gonna be a hard swallow for most, but again keep in mind all that shit was till based in real science and mathematics. Add to what I loved about it was the emotional depth and I can't see how you won't get wrapped up.

The climax is a lot like a Contact/A.I. hybrid.

Also what my nigga Hans Zimmer did for horns with Inception, he does here with pipe organs giving that 2001 feel with the music. Let's see how many niggas bite the organ blast like they bit the Inception horns.

I gather a majority of America will be bored by this movie, but I was so invested in Matty getting back to his kids and to really see if they could pull off the impossible task of saving the world.

The plot twists and reversals had both of my audiences gasping.

Even more after you niggas see it.

My wife about had a panic attack in Gravity. Could you see this causing similar problems?

But there are a couple of intense Gravity type shit sequences but not as exhausting.

... I can't talk about them, but I know you know the ones I mean. Certain sequences in the final third would have absolutely been Gravity-level intense in 3D. Including the "Big One" at the end.

Obviously they didn't need to be in 3D. They still had the wow factor... but considering I usually am not a fan of 3D, the fact that I'm sitting here contemplating the possibilities of 3D here says a lot for the crazy depth of the images he creates here.

The only 3D films where I felt it helped the story and was all around awesome were:

Dredd

Pacific Rim

Hugo

Life of Pi

Gravity

How to Train Your Dragon 1 & 2

Guardians of the Galaxy

Oz (yes I liked it)

Green Hornet (yes I liked it)

smh goddamn that movie was too dope

It's got some intense scenes, but nothing like Gravity.

I'll start with Keith Phipps from The Dissolve:

"McConaughey does eloquent work in the midst of a beautiful, admirably overreaching, often ineloquent movie. His performance nails what the film around it can never quite express as well as it wants: that however far we might go in the cosmos, our humanity, with all its lovely, tragic, defining needs and weaknesses, will always travel with us."

I'll also link to Peter Labuza, whose review is definitely harsher than mine would be, but who makes a number of very good points that I wouldn't refute about Nolan and this film in particular: http://bit.ly/10i8vdv

Especially this point:

"Let’s not critique Christopher Nolan for his constant exposition. Nolan, perhaps the best-known quantity in Hollywood filmmaking of the last decade, has been continually lambasted for the tawdry dialogue delivered via his characters. But his characters are in situations that require it, whether we’re talking about the rule-bound dreamscape of Inception or amnesiac Leonard’s retelling of his condition in Memento. In his latest opus, the existential science fiction epic Interstellar, a NASA crew needs to relay a lot about quantum physics, black holes, and the relationship between gravity and time. So why do more “heady” themes, like family, survival, and love, have to be discussed like a teenager reading an anatomy textbook?"

My additional personal thoughts:

When it's in space and dealing with science, it's terrific. When it's back on earth and dealing with the earth-bound themes, not nearly as much. The visuals are spectacular, the best Nolan has ever created. McConaughey is strong, the strongest Nolan lead since Jackman and Bale faced off in The Prestige. Outside of the turn at film's end, the movie is far more conventional than some reviews may lead you to believe-- and even the turn at the end is predictable in concept, just not in execution. Which is fine, as the movie is plenty entertaining and gorgeous. It's better than Inception or the Batman films, but it still only truly grabbed me intermittently. See it in IMAX for the visuals, which are by far the best part of the film.

And, obviously, if this movie is so popular that it results in a renewed national interest in NASA and leads to further space exploration (which it could-- one of the best things about the movie is that it's essentially a love letter to NASA), then I'll gladly be the first in line for Interstellar 2 through 5. Make more. Renew the interest. Bring space travel back into popularity. Please.

Loved the ambition, acting, score & cinematography

Some of the astronomy was tough to follow but I got the gist enough to still enjoy it

Might've been the novelty of seeing so much of the movie displayed in 70mm IMAX but the running time moved a lot faster than I thought it would

Dug how a lot of the space scenes were shot in a way that pretty much puts you directly on the ship

The black/worm hole scenes felt like a Univeral Studios (sorry WB) ride

I actually wouldn't be shocked if some of the peeps who had a problem w/ Gravity also suffer some motion sickness here too w/ a few of the more tense scenes

Not sure where Nolan goes from here but as usual I'ma be there

I had some issues with the story, but McConaghey is selling the shit outta this with his performance

The effects were old-school cool, that may or may not be your thing

Zimmer's score was cool and for some reason kept reminding me of Solaris, which I'm sure is no accident

And it looked GREAT in 70MM IMAX, it's really the only way to see this

But the emotions didn't quite hit with me upon first viewing

Which means it will be seen again

________________________________________________________________________________
Niggas created aliases.

>The effects were old-school cool, that may or may not be your
>thing


please elaborate w/out giving shit away.

This is going to be my first IMAX experience. I can't wait.

I can tell

----------------------------



O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "

What's the visuals:melodrama ratio??

I got tix for IMAX and I'm really gonna be pissed if the visuals aren't emphasized throughout.

Also, how much crying will I have to endure?

>What's the visuals:melodrama ratio??
>
>I got tix for IMAX and I'm really gonna be pissed if the
>visuals aren't emphasized throughout.
>
>Also, how much crying will I have to endure?

It will be worth it. Space stuff in IMAX = gold. Maybe five to eight scenes of crying? Melodrama laced in throughout.

word, thx.

>Maybe five to
>eight scenes of crying? Melodrama laced in throughout.

smh

The cinematography is ridiculois and the space shots are stunning. I thought the characters all played their roles well. Mccohnaughy really crushes it though. The weight of the mission is truly displayed through him.

Some people may hate one part late in the movie but I didn't mind it. I thought it was strange and interesting.

There are some super intense moments throughout the movie which between this and Gravity I will never go to space.

I thought the run time went quick. Maybe not for everyone but I'd be shocked if anyone, at least who saw it in IMAX, didn't love it.

As usual with Chris Nolan's films you get both hit and miss. Likely a box office hit too.

I have no agenda but I'll say right now I don't enjoy Nolan's films. I am very glad he is able to make his type of films in Hollywood today I just think they are meretricious. A bit like Oliver Stone's movies I think they are overrated but I like that Olly Stone can make the films he wants too.

Okay onto Interstellar. The effects are amazing. No-one is going to dispute that. Cinematography is outstanding.

However, the dual plot lines do not work as what is happening on earth is boring. Anytime not in space is wasted, the emotional grip of the narrative is "Interstellar" so Nolan don't put the dying earth on screen when it doesn't hold the attention.

Dialogue is clunky and vapid. Hard work making astro-physics palatable and simple for the mass market but I never finish a Nolan film thinking it had brilliant dialogue.

Characters: Alright, Alright Alright does a very good job and Chastain too. However, I never enjoy Hathaway on screen nor Caine nor Damon so just by casting I'm not going to love the actors in this film. Just a personal quibble.

As Jigga said in an earlier post the film is similar to Sunshine apart from the lack of horror. That film too had potential but never fulfilled it.

Its ultimately a forgettable film which I find is the case with all Nolan's work. I realise i'll be in the minority with my thoughts.

....ill probably go back and see this over the weekend ...i love space movies and Interstellar i think is even better than my personal more recent favorites like Moon, Sunshine & Solaris

...i still have a few questions and things I'm trying to figure out about the story, and thats what i love most is when a film makes you think

Much of what others have stated is on point

if you've ever given a shit about any theories of relativity and space time expanse/contraction the ending will NOT be an "uh, what" moment.

the melodrama is very present but well acted

i actually thought the cameo conflict on that one planet was rather dumb and a bad idea to move the plot forward.

>if you've ever given a shit about any theories of relativity
>and space time expanse/contraction the ending will NOT be an
>"uh, what" momen

I don't think this is true at all. The "uh, what" moment comes from the convenience of the pieces used to illustrate those concepts. If they wrote this in without the ridiculously convenient bookshelf maguffin, the reaction would be much different.

Further, the whole "It was us the whole time! Specifically me! I was the "They" touching fingers to Anne Hathaway!" idea was incredibly lazy and boring. It would have been infinitely better to use either an entirely different race of beings, or give us an actual glimpse of our higher selves instead using a throwaway line to tell us, hey, I guess it's someone further along than we are and they created this room so we could do this!

The notion that people won't have a "wtf" reaction if they have a clue about relativity and space time expanse/contraction is an incredibly simple-minded approach. The issue is simply bad storytelling.

Can I get by with these semi IMAX screens at AMC theaters, or do I have to truck it out to an ACTUAL IMAX screen?


****************************
I don't even love life no more, my niggas I just live it.... Jean Grae

NO QUESTIONS ASKED

(Kind of spoilers within.)

A slow start, but gets live around the second act. Then even fucking crazier in the third.

All the theoretical quantum physics shit is a lot to process, but it's cool within the context of the film and as long as you don't over-analyze everything.

Nolan is a beast. The visuals are ridiculous.

Shout-out to Matt Damon out of nowhere. I had no idea he was gonna be in this shit.

Disclaimer: the joke is on me man. I hated Dark Knight... But I saw Dark Knight Returns. I loathed Dark Knight Returns...but I saw Interstellar. I've been duped again, coerced once more by Professor Nolan, our day's preeminent hack-posing-as-genius.

This flick goes down as light as Thanksgiving dinner.



Words that should NEVER be uttered more than once in a non-educational movie:

relativity
data
continuum
physics
gravity

With that in mind, I beg you to answer...who is this movie for?


- Cinema heads will deservedly criticize the bloated and pretentious dialogue and blatantly obvious plot holes.

- Actual science nerds will ravage the last 30 minutes mainly because they're incomprehensible fairy tale bullshit.

- average joes who wanna go support their man Matty Mc will hate this because it talks down to you, drags along, and ultimately makes as much sense as Rex Ryan's offenses of the last 5 years.

And McConaughey is the heart, soul, and spine of this sinking pile of leftover meatloaf. If not for him being the most undeniably charismatic actor working today this movie would be DOA.

But that's the Nolan formula now, given that he's got carte blanche from Warner Brothers.

(You know Warner Brothers right? Ya know, the studio left so desperate by their own hubris and Marvel-induced ass kicking that they've resorted to giving this egomaniacal fraud the keys to the kingdom because they have no other strategy for producing hits?

Inception's script is a piece of shit so he hitched his wagon to Leo so you ain't notice.
Prestige is diarrhea so he called in Bale and Wolverine and you swallowed it.
Dark Knight somehow made superheroes humorless, but was miraculously salvaged by Heath Ledger's hurricane of a performance.
Can you imagine what all of this shit would look like with, say, the casting budget of Guardians of the Galaxy?)


It's bogus man:

Nolan does Spielberg-esque numbers, but he never appeals to your ethos like Schindler's List or pulls at your heart strings like ET.

Nolan gets Scorcese-esque buzz, but his sterile anvil-heavy movies NEVER bite like Raging Bull or carry you to a different world like Goodfellas.

Christopher Nolan doesn't simply make movies. Christopher Nolan can't be bothered by blockbusters. Christopher Nolan makes Films with a capital F.

Funny enough, F is the letter grade this movie deserves.

I've sat through more entertaining biology lectures and I've endured more riveting Catholic masses. Fuck Interstellar and fuck Christopher Nolan two times.

I figured I'd be the only one who didn't enjoy his movies and think he is a master film maker so its reassuring I'm not the only one.

Like I said I'm glad he gets to make the movies he wants to make. They're just not for me and they probably don't reach the box office figures one might expect given he has A+ list actors willing to work with him.

I wonder if he worked from different screenplays not ones written by him and his brother if he might make more cohesive films as dialogue and at times plot and narrative structure are not his forte.

Anyway, Chris Nolan carry on.

but you're full of mad and can't even have a balanced critique. sounds like an O_E alias honestly.

the visuals alone are great

the sound design is fantastic

the acting was good to great

is a perfect movie? even great? no

and I won't even touch the anti-intellectual dumb assery of this:

>>Words that should NEVER be uttered more than once in a non-educational movie:

relativity
data
continuum
physics
gravity

>Disclaimer: the joke is on me man. I hated Dark Knight... But
>I saw Dark Knight Returns. I loathed Dark Knight Returns...but
>I saw Interstellar. I've been duped again, coerced once more
>by Professor Nolan, our day's preeminent
>hack-posing-as-genius.
>
>This flick goes down as light as Thanksgiving dinner.
>
>
>
>Words that should NEVER be uttered more than once in a
>non-educational movie:
>
>relativity
>data
>continuum
>physics
>gravity
>
>With that in mind, I beg you to answer...who is this movie
>for?
>
>
>- Cinema heads will deservedly criticize the bloated and
>pretentious dialogue and blatantly obvious plot holes.
>
>- Actual science nerds will ravage the last 30 minutes mainly
>because they're incomprehensible fairy tale bullshit.
>
>- average joes who wanna go support their man Matty Mc will
>hate this because it talks down to you, drags along, and
>ultimately makes as much sense as Rex Ryan's offenses of the
>last 5 years.
>
>And McConaughey is the heart, soul, and spine of this sinking
>pile of leftover meatloaf. If not for him being the most
>undeniably charismatic actor working today this movie would be
>DOA.
>
>But that's the Nolan formula now, given that he's got carte
>blanche from Warner Brothers.
>
>(You know Warner Brothers right? Ya know, the studio left so
>desperate by their own hubris and Marvel-induced ass kicking
>that they've resorted to giving this egomaniacal fraud the
>keys to the kingdom because they have no other strategy for
>producing hits?
>
>Inception's script is a piece of shit so he hitched his wagon
>to Leo so you ain't notice.
>Prestige is diarrhea so he called in Bale and Wolverine and
>you swallowed it.
>Dark Knight somehow made superheroes humorless, but was
>miraculously salvaged by Heath Ledger's hurricane of a
>performance.
>Can you imagine what all of this shit would look like with,
>say, the casting budget of Guardians of the Galaxy?)
>
>
>It's bogus man:
>
>Nolan does Spielberg-esque numbers, but he never appeals to
>your ethos like Schindler's List or pulls at your heart
>strings like ET.
>
>Nolan gets Scorcese-esque buzz, but his sterile anvil-heavy
>movies NEVER bite like Raging Bull or carry you to a different
>world like Goodfellas.
>
>Christopher Nolan doesn't simply make movies. Christopher
>Nolan can't be bothered by blockbusters. Christopher Nolan
>makes Films with a capital F.
>
>Funny enough, F is the letter grade this movie deserves.
>
>I've sat through more entertaining biology lectures and I've
>endured more riveting Catholic masses. Fuck Interstellar and
>fuck Christopher Nolan two times.


----------------------------



O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "

There were some decent moments but the minute MD came into the picture, it went downhill from there on.

I dug the quantum physics, astrology and the 3rd/4th/5th dimension aspects of it but it felt disjointed.

Earth scenes were blah. It cracked me up how John Lithgow died but Michael Caine looked exactly the same but was just in a wheelchair after 23 years.

Also, how the hell did they get the wool pulled over their eyes when they got to Planet Hoth? The minute they hit that fucking ice cloud, they should have been "Naw B'. GTFO.

The score was good but the mix was bad. It was deafening at times and made it hard to hear the dialogue of the characters.
Sometimes it was so loud it was ridiculous.

>The score was good but the mix was bad. It was deafening at
>times and made it hard to hear the dialogue of the
>characters.
>Sometimes it was so loud it was ridiculous.

Couldn't hear a word that motherfucker said, asked my friend if he heard what the old motherfucker said, nope. THAT MUSIC WAS LOUD AS SHIT AT THE MOST CRUCIAL MOMENT OF DIALOGUE, lol. And this dude was whispering at the same time...smh.

I like Nolan. I loved the Batman trilogy. I dug Inception. I like his brand. I loved the premise of this and thought the cast hit homers and triples for much of it. That said, get the entire fuck out of here.

SPOILERS. There's a lot of bullshit in here, but I'll just focus on a few of them.


Uh... so... he hits a black hole. We don't know what's beyond a black hole, so there's a lot of things that could be done with that and still seem plausible while suspending disbelief. There's a lot that could have been done that could make us think, "That's wild as fuck. I dunno about all that but shit....... maybe, who knows? What the fuck do I know about black holes?"

Then Nolan took a sharp left turn. You know what? FUCK IT, I'm Christopher Nolan. I do what the fuck I want, so this black hole leads to a physical plane of time that just so happens to consist of every moment in the history of the main characters daughters bedroom, specifically behind her bookshelf. He'll be the ghost who spoke to her earlier in the movie and speak to her in morse code, while giving himself the coordinates to the NASA base that got this ball rolling to begin with! How? Why? Who cares! It'll be great!

I mean, I guess. Whatever. It's a cheap, generic, B movie twist but BOY did it look purty! I can't be the only one who telegraphed that shit from jump. Oh she has a ghost? It speaks in morse code? It's telling her "stay"? Well, I figured I was either the dead mom or they'd find a way to get dad to do it.... so hopefully they don't do either of those because they both suck, don't make much sense, are way too sentimental for the sake of being sentimental, and are kind of predictable and generic.

Oh, and Matt Damon talks about evolution and survival and attachments and takes McConaughey alone, just the two of them, on a walk when all of a sudden BAM!!! Heel turn, because why the fuck not. Another bland twist that was easy to see coming a mile away. I could live with this if this was where the annoying stupidity ended but nooooo. We still had that Lost bullshit to deal with after this.

There's more but man... the inter-dimensional ghostdad morse code bookshelf bullshit was a doozy. Just plain dumb. It transformed a great idea into a polished turd.

hated it

and i feel ya about the twist, but in the world of the film and it's theme, it worked

The "it was me all along! !!" shut doesn't fit the premise, tone, or direction of the film to me.

1. Saturn wormhole. Correct me if im wrong but i thought one of the established points throughout the movie was that there seems to be some higher dimensional "them" who are pulling some strings in order to help out the 3-dimensional Earth people. They have their own unique limitations within 3 dimensions, so the way they help is by providing prompts and physical opportunities for the 3Ds to do their part in saving mankind. The "convenient" usefulness and timing of the wormhole near Saturn and anything else "they" do (like fashioning a way to use a Matt Mc as a go-between with the bookshelf) is only sensible.

2. Let's say I'm mistaken on #1. Stories are kinda like really elaborate complex poetry. Things will rhyme and connect in ways meant to evoke an experience to enjoy or feel within your humanity, not to provide an alibi for a jury. If it was an old traditional folktale, you wouldn't complain, but modern day critics unfortunately expect movies and novels to intrinsically detach their nature and purpose away from that ages-old tradition of human storytelling. We're too jaded.

The bookshelf has a plausible explanation based on the final scene, but the wormhole has no such explanation from what I recall.

Remember, they built up the 'they/them' notion but ultimately went the 'it was us all along' route, which while now seems much more plausible than I initially thought it was, still remains an unimaginative and rather boring concept after the buildup of "they".

So, the explanation left is that "they" actually did put the wormhole there, but it rings hollow after the "it was us the whole time!" let down. The humans could not have placed it there since they would have needed it in order for humans to arrive at plans A or B to begin with. Even if we allow for the eventual access to physical dimensions of time space, humans still needed the wormhole to start the process.

If "they" put the wormhole there, that's good and well but it's just flat out lazy story telling. If humans did, it doesn't really fit the order of operations, so to speak, and that's what leads us to "they" or "god", which leads right back to lazy storytelling.

And while it's easy to chalk this up to lazy writing (because that's what it usually is when something like this shows up in a "time travel" story), I'm pretty sure in this case the apparent paradox is intentional.

Our conventional view of causality is that every event has a family of events in its "past" and a family of events in its "future", and that those two families of events can't overlap. But in general relativity the structure of spacetime is itself a mathematical solution of a family of field equations, and there are some solutions to the field equations where this simple view of causality no longer holds. In particular, in general relativity there are spacetimes where in some regions time "loops back on itself" in such a way that a person could constantly march toward the future (as we all do), but yet end up landing in what would have originally been called "the past." On the surface of the Earth, if you travel due East, then you'll eventually come back to where you started, moving in from the West. This looping of time back upon itself in general relativity is the same sort of thing.

In short, general relativity doesn't require "causes" to precede "effects" in any global sense, as in conventional experience. All general relativity requires is that the overall history of events must be self-consistent. The wormhole is there because the humans of the future placed it there, and they were able to survive long enough to construct that technology because the wormhole was there to give them a means to survive. It's all totally self-consistent as long as you don't ask "what would have happened if the humans *didn't* survive long enough to build the wormhole?" The answer to that question would be: the humans wouldn't have survived, a different but again totally self-consistent history of events.

What general relativity does NOT allow (as far as anyone can tell) is the development of a history of events that is not internally self-consistent. For example, the old paradox of someone going back in time and killing their grandparents before their parents were born. Such a scenario wouldn't make sense mathematically in conventional general relativity, and there are conjectures that the fundamental laws of physics (whatever they are) might "find ways" of prohibiting such scenarios. Some people even talk about it as fancifully as "mysterious forces never encountered in ordinary experience intercede to stop the gun from firing", or "the basic random processes at the foundation of quantum mechanics become altered in such a way that the thoughts inside the assasin's head become altered to force him into a self-consistent set of actions." It's all still very mysterious and tied up in a series of mathematical conjectures, the most famous of which is known as the "chronology protection conjecture."

Anyway, as I said, in this case I think it's intentional that they brought this paradox into things. A lot of people don't realize that even though he didn't write the script, this was Kip Thorne's movie before it was anyone else's. The vision from the beginning was for the movie to give representations of interesting issues in general relativity that are accurate (so somebody actually sat down and calculated all those time dilation factors on the planets, for example), and for which issues in general relativity are central to the plot (wormholes, time dilation, etc.). These subtleties with causality are definitely interesting issues in general relativity theory, and much of the most important work on the subject has been done by Kip Thorne.

http://journals.aps.org/prl/abstract/10.1103/PhysRevLett.61.1446
(the paper itself is behind a paywall, but if anyone insists on attempting to read it, it can be found by googling the title)

I was thoroughly impressed

Don't overanalyze

----------------------------



O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "

Shits are narcoleptic

Nodded through Dark Nights and Inception.

and hans zimmer better get a fucking oscar for that soundtrack. simply amazing

jerk

i think he was mocking your misuse of "literally"

you weren't literally glued to your seat. you were figuratively glued to your seat. the way you used the word is literally the exact opposite of its actual meaning.

hence, "What kind of glue did you use?"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-ImRMJX68s

hilarious

Hi Dula

I'm coming to Chicago and will treat you to some shitty
Chicago pizza

----------------------------



O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "

Matthew friggin McConaughey....

judging by my own gutteral/natural reactions, mr McConaughey is the best thing about this flick hands down....the FIRST thing i said, as my wife & I were walking out of the film, was "McConaughey is awesome, that dude brings it home everytime"...

then a day or so later after seeing the film, after letting it settle in a bit and thinking about the movie as a whole, the thing that comes to mind more than anything else is...

"Damn, McConaughey was friggin great, that cat just pulled me IN to this one."

more than the visuals (which were very nice in big ol IMAX.)
more than the main 'concept'/main 'twist' (which was kinda 'relatively' predictable)

more than anything else...McConaughey is the REAL star/gravitational-pull in this film...THAT dude is SO magnetic and , and charismatic and overtly/subtly talented as an actor that HE is the main thing that lingers after you've left the film...

the REST of the movie was ok, i didnt hate the rest, it was decent enough for me to be entertained and not feel cheated. Not 'great' for me by any means, but you know, it was the 'it was alright' kinda flick. The rest of the film just didn't 'linger' with me so much afterwards...and thats usually how i judge em....

McConaughey's stellar performance in this space flick is what its all about for me. That cat is on a roll....

(for the record, on Nolan flicks: I really liked the Prestige & Batman Begins...those two i dug. Momento was eh, Inception was visually a blast but nothing else lingered that long for me. Other than Ledger, i didnt really think The Dark Night was so good and i thought Dark Night Rises was really really bad. And for comparisons sake, not that you should HAVE to compare because i dont think you have to do that, but for those that like that comparisons sperspective, as far as the recent big space movies go...in the FULL MOVIE sense, i liked Gravity much more than this one. in storrytelling, tension, visuals etc..Gravity 'lingered' for me where this one, oustide of McConaughey, just didnt so much for me. )

way too much time spent talking about space logic mumbo jumbo which nobody understands anyway, not enough character building to ensure that the drama actually works. I didn't get any of the emotion that this movie was trying to manufacture.

Ultimately a pretty forgettable experience.

Redeeming qualities: the score was cool (but pretty obnoxious at times), the acting was fine, watching videos of his aging kids from space was a pretty cool idea.

can't wait. gonna see Birdman Monday or Tuesday. Just saw Boyhood and GotG, so this has been a great week in movies for me. most movies ive seen in a theater maybe in my life.

I don't think they presented it well but you can't really do that in a blockbuster movie without it turning into a Physics lecture.

My only issue with the science of the film (and I may have missed something) is that they correctly stated that wormholes that large aren't naturally occurring, so who put it there and why?

They also glossed over how Mat Mc made it home, but whatever. I was enthralled by the film overall and it will get repeated viewings.

Oh yeah, Contact better though.

Another dimension filled with thousands of rooms tgat sll lead to different moments in my daughters bedroom? How sound is that particular science?

http://www.nbcnews.com/science/space/after-cosmos-neil-degrasse-tyson-dives-science-interstellar-n243796

not that specific, but Mr. Tyson does a better job of explaining it then I do, he also criticizes the choice by the way

for me. I posted about it below, but (SPOILERS) I'm satisfied with the notion that future generations evolved to a level that they were able to intervene in this way. I completely forgot that Amelia survived and colonized the other planet, so the bookshelf scene isn't the fairy dust it initially seemed to me.

I'm still wondering who put the wormhole there

exceeded my expectations


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
instagram:
http://instagram.com/0kayndc

"There is much temptation to use what has worked before,
even when it may exceed its effective scope."

"Roll me further bitch"

Honestly, there is so much in the final act that I would normally hate but for some reason I was able to grin and bear it with this one.

The space exploration parts made me wish that it was a miniseries so I could see them check out all of the planets and see who made it or what was there. Tars was a great character.

It's one of those films that I can understand why people hate it (and personally, the more I think about it, the less I understand the ending) and I get why people love it. I fall in between on this one. Matty Mc was great and pulled me in and there were enough emotional moments that really landed that it carried me through.

>
>The space exploration parts made me wish that it was a
>miniseries so I could see them check out all of the planets
>and see who made it or what was there. Tars was a great
>character.

agreed

>
>It's one of those films that I can understand why people hate
>it (and personally, the more I think about it, the less I
>understand the ending) and I get why people love it. I fall in
>between on this one. Matty Mc was great and pulled me in and
>there were enough emotional moments that really landed that it
>carried me through.
>

yup

and whatever complaints there are about the science, the characters, the story,


it never lost me. I never didn't care what was going on, which is pretty much what I ask for

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

Nah, sike, Hi Rj

Can I get a job as an intern in your office?

Oh, and your taste in movies is doggie doo

Doggie poo

Doggie poo stew, in fact

----------------------------



O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "

I also saw it in 70mm, which I don't think I've ever done in my life. very satisfying "experience" movie.

Sure the ending was nonsensical and some. Of the different plot points didn't stick together, but I appreciate the concepts, ambition and world building. The late stage oe downs were never going to be enough to flip my opinion,

And I'm not really a Nolan guy, but more a spac movie fanboy so looking at it from that lens

Grow a pair

Just admit it

----------------------------



O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "

SPOILERS






Remember, Amelia made it to the other planet and began colonizing. The logical conclusion then is that the the colonization effort worked future descendents of that planet intervened to save the current civilization on earth. Both Plan A and Plan B worked, but ONLY because Plan B worked for Amelia. Amelia would have knowledge of who Cooper was and that would be information used to tailor the tesseract to him specifically. I have no clue how they'd know to show him the bookshelf in his daughter's room though.

There's still the problem of who created the wormhole. It couldn't have been anyone from earth because they never would have survived without it, thus never evolving physically or technologically advancing far enough to perceive and interact in more than three dimensions. They would have died out.

I don't necessarily need an explanation of who put it there but I'd like one, especially given the general sense that everything else came at the hands of more highly evolved humans and the wormhole is just sort of left as an unsolved mystery to my remembrance.

is that the Plan B colony evolves past humans simply because they start off in a different galaxy. Eventually they'll run into a peril all on their own (perhaps in a sequel?) and realize that the only way they can save themselves is to get help from the lower dimension. They create the wormhole which allows them to be saved when Matt returns for Anne.

>is that the Plan B colony evolves past humans simply because
>they start off in a different galaxy. Eventually they'll run
>into a peril all on their own (perhaps in a sequel?) and
>realize that the only way they can save themselves is to get
>help from the lower dimension. They create the wormhole which
>allows them to be saved when Matt returns for Anne.


That's the key

----------------------------



O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "

goes off the rails in the third act. The visuals (particularly the spaceship stuff) are top notch and the performances are solid but you just feel like Nolan is machine-gunning explication at you for most of it.

Nolan makes these big ass bombastic movies that take themselves super seriously but crowds still seem to eat 'em up. I'm historically not a fan of his shit. I can't point to a single Nolan movie that I absolutely love or even think is great. That said, I liked this one at least as much as any of his others.

A huge part of that comes from the *experience* of watching it projected via 70mm IMAX film on basically the largest screen possible. That helps take it to another level for me. Nolan's decision to shoot in this massive format matches the massive ambition of the movie and helps elevate it. It's far from perfect but the largeness and boldness and vividness of it went a long way. It's loud as fuck. In this format, it's easy to get swept up. I thought Gravity was just an OK movie too, all things considered, but the very act of watching it on a massive screen in 3D was a special movie-going experience. I kind of felt the same thing here. (And for the record, I'd take large-scale true IMAX over 3D any day of the week.)

It takes itself seriously. It pains a bleak (and pretty believable) picture of what life on earth might look like someday. It's very earnest and, ultimately, optimistic. It's corny and sappy, but that goes back to the earnestness. I think Nolan probably believes what he's selling. There are "plot holes" (which I personally don't really care about). At the end of the day, it's a simple (and kind of simple-minded) parable about love and family and the unique traits that make us human. Worrying about scientific accuracy and plot logistics kind of fails to see the forrest through the trees in this case. There are also some genuinely awe-inspiring moments (especially in true IMAX).

Also, McConaughey was perfect for the lead in this. Works his ass off the whole time, and definitely earned his paycheck. Lastly, bonus points for very sparing use of CGI. That's a gripe I usually have with big-budget adventure movies. They look like computer-animated cartoons. Not the case here.

Matt Damon comes in a long line of characters in space who end up sabatoging the mission...from Hal & Ian Holm all the way down to Fassbender acting weird as fuck in Prometheus. I thought it was a, for a lack of a better term, cute nod towards the space thriller/horror genre.

The problem was how badly Nolan easily telegraphed what was going to happen. I remember my reaction was like, "Oh shit, Matt Damon. Nice!" to a minute later. "oh, he's the crazy character thats gonna betray them all" the second he gave that half assed excuse about why he tore his robot apart. The actor playing the archtype was more of a surprise then the character itself

The character itself wasn't bad and it was nice to have a 'solid' badguy as opposed to a spreading dustbowl on earth or time constraints. I loved his, "How's your family" (c) Morris Day creepy taunts/inquiries while he left Mcconaughey to die. The movie needed him, he was just oddly written in.

Spoilers.

My critique held much of what yours was in that it was easy to telegraph, but even without that obvious turn it just rings hollow. The story didn’t really need a villain IMO, considering the potential extinction of the entire human race is about as menacing as you can possibly get. We don’t really need the Company Man sabotaging the Hero anymore, do we? It’s such an a played and annoying trope that needs to die. Armageddon had it with Fitchner’s character, ID4 had it with Rehborn’s character, and now we got Matt Damon playing that generic role. I love surprise cameo’s and have no beef with Damon’s presence, but *that* character needs to go.

It’s a lazy way to generate tension IMO. He written just fine until the heel turn. It would have had far greater emotional impact, for instance, for them to discover that he’d lied in order to be rescued, resulting in a group debate on whether to rescue him or leave him stranded based on his selfish actions. We’d see a true test of humanity, of making a hard choice, of three scientists being faced with the task of being judge, jury, and executioner for a guy who put the entire human race at risk for his selfishness. By having him ultimately become just another generic “guy who attacks central character and sabotages the mission”.

If you need a device to split everyone up, then brainstorm that next piece. It shouldn’t have been hard considering the fuel issue. You don’t need the weight of Coop tricking Amelia because we’ve already experienced a significant emotional moment just prior to this point in the story, and so leaving her to head to the remaining planet alone to enact Plan B while Coop tries to salvage Plan A still makes sense and holds emotional weight.

>It’s a lazy way to generate tension IMO. He written just
>fine until the heel turn. It would have had far greater
>emotional impact, for instance, for them to discover that
>he’d lied in order to be rescued, resulting in a group
>debate on whether to rescue him or leave him stranded based on
>his selfish actions. We’d see a true test of humanity, of
>making a hard choice, of three scientists being faced with the
>task of being judge, jury, and executioner for a guy who put
>the entire human race at risk for his selfishness.

Not only was it projected from a mile away, it would've been gloriously refreshing to have a movie like this without a "villain" mucking things up. They were facing about a hundred different types of interesting adversity without One-Note Greedy Human Archetype making an appearance.

Plus, as a hundred uninteresting thinkpieces have already astutely pointed out, at that point in the film, Cooper just wanted to go home to his kids. Why would the guy who just wants to go home have to try to murder the other guy who just wants to go home, other than "this movie needs a scene with its hero fighting a villain"? There are a dozen or so interesting choices the film can make there, and it took the neatest, most familiar, and most linear plotwise choice. Which is disappointing.

>Not only was it projected from a mile away, it would've been
>gloriously refreshing to have a movie like this without a
>"villain" mucking things up. They were facing about a hundred
>different types of interesting adversity without One-Note
>Greedy Human Archetype making an appearance.

Perhaps the cynical bastard in me wanted to see more human conflict after Caine's "We melted down bullets to build humanity's last hope" speech on the scafolding.

But in hindsight you're right...cutting him out would have made a stronger movie.

.

>Plus, as a hundred uninteresting thinkpieces have already
>astutely pointed out, at that point in the film, Cooper just
>wanted to go home to his kids. Why would the guy who just
>wants to go home have to try to murder the other guy who just
>wants to go home,

But you're absolutely right about this

>other than "this movie needs a scene with
>its hero fighting a villain"? There are a dozen or so
>interesting choices the film can make there, and it took the
>neatest, most familiar, and most linear plotwise choice. Which
>is disappointing.

my inner-space geek got upset, took me back to Armageddon. There are no explosions in space Nolan, with all the astro-_______ folks onboard try and get the basics down. When Damon's airlock decompressed I guess they needed that fire for effect, and that's when I fell back in my chair...

I can buy into everything else, even the theory that the Plan B race of humans placed the worm hole there, and built the 5-dimensional arc for McC... but not that damn explosion...


****************************
I don't even love life no more, my niggas I just live it.... Jean Grae

in this case the pressurized air/oxygen within a container (station) and the oxygen itself being a fuel. the explosion was realistic in that it didn't make noise since there was no air to transmit the sound, and the flames died out immediately as the oxygen was expelled into space.

>my inner-space geek got upset, took me back to Armageddon.
>There are no explosions in space Nolan, with all the
>astro-_______ folks onboard try and get the basics down. When
>Damon's airlock decompressed I guess they needed that fire for
>effect, and that's when I fell back in my chair...
>
>I can buy into everything else, even the theory that the Plan
>B race of humans placed the worm hole there, and built the
>5-dimensional arc for McC... but not that damn explosion...
>
>
>****************************
>I don't even love life no more, my niggas I just live it....
>Jean Grae

that fire didn't start and stop in that tank, it traveled up and around that airlock in the vacuum of space. And that will not happen.


****************************
I don't even love life no more, my niggas I just live it.... Jean Grae

The ship, and a section of the bigger ship, both blew open and depressurized. There was plenty of oxygen for a split-second fire.

This movie seems to bring out people's "little bit of knowledge" problems.

>This movie seems to bring out people's "little bit of
>knowledge" problems.

and it's very funny.

>This movie seems to bring out people's "little bit of
>knowledge" problems.
>

----------------------------



O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "

.

Meh.. Just saw this @ IMAX. What a clusterfuck. Some of the visuals were really cool. Soundtrack was great.

As far as sci-fi/space movies go, I enjoyed Gravity way more.



Nolan gets full side eye treatment though from here on out.

the first screening in Aus.
Inception at 9.05, then a 20min break, then Interstellar at 12.05.
at the 3rd largest screen in the world.
over 6hrs worth.
ive never consumed so much popcorn and coke in one sitting lol.
it was definitely amazeballs.
but im chagrined that i enjoyed Inception more (a flick that gets so much better with repeat viewings, and possibly Nolan dawg's 2nd greatest movie).
Interstellar tho...for all its scope.
and epic...ness?
was missing something.
it wasn't an all-out expository-fest as per the Nolan style, but it also didn't take the premise to any kind of NEXT level.
it felt like the experience of watching it, at IMAX, trumped the reach of the film itself. as in it fell short.

any ANYone trying to compare this to 2001 needs to shut thee entire fuck up. cos thats kinda my point above, that it had potential to reach and exceed familiar human settings and...FEELS lol, that NOLAN had potential to get real freaky with it. apart from some trippy visuals near the end and the potential planets they visited, we got a plot that could've been made for the small screen. in fact Battlestar Galactica coulda made this entire flick a 3-episode arc and have it pack more of an emotional wallop while still maintaining visual beauty and mining the depths of humanity, psychology, spirituality and beyond. WAY beyond.
Interstellar, i think, is being sold as that kinda film, but it's really a small-scale feature made with a ginormous budget. its interests are micro in nature. the space stuff isn't meticulous or detailed, which is why we jump straight into the action i guess and we circle right back around to Coop and his family.

ALSO, and this is the big one, everything from wormholes to black holes to gravity to the fucking big bang theory are all just that: THEORY. it's ALL guesswork, and most of it is probably WRONG. so anyone claiming this is "scientifically accurate" is blowing smoke up your and their ass.
simultaneously.
doesn't matter if Kip Thorne is a consultant on the film to ensure its "accuracy", he's a 'theoretical physicist'. which means he's basing his prognostications on bullshit. true science is discovering the universe doing absolutely weird shit every single day that doesn't adhere to any of these so-called standards. therefore the film is still wholly science FICTION. just wanted to say that before ppl start getting boners about the films depiction of anything in space being "accurate".

overall, im on the fence. i enjoyed it for it was, for sure, the IMAX experience kinda makes it hard NOT to enjoy. but i could see what it COULD'VE been, and that disappoints me somewhat. in the end, Nolan made the flick he wanted to make, not the one i *wanted*, so for that i dug it.

V.

Not to postjack, but this is just funny:

>ALSO, and this is the big one, everything from wormholes to
>black holes to gravity to the fucking big bang theory are all
>just that: THEORY. it's ALL guesswork, and most of it is
>probably WRONG. so anyone claiming this is "scientifically
>accurate" is blowing smoke up your and their ass.
>simultaneously.
>doesn't matter if Kip Thorne is a consultant on the film to
>ensure its "accuracy", he's a 'theoretical physicist'. which
>means he's basing his prognostications on bullshit.

There is a black hole in Cygnus. There's a supermassive black hole (similar in many ways to the one in this movie), in Sagittarius, at the core of our galaxy. There are similar supermassive black holes at the center of most galaxies in the observable universe. This is a totally uncontroversial observational fact. But we knew about black holes through theory for over fifty years before we were able to detect any of these.

We knew about neutron stars, for decades, through theory, before anyone realized that the pulsars they were observing were neutron stars. I could give you a list of thousands of these things, each discovered through theory.

We knew about the big bang, through theory, for half a century before it was directly observed in the cosmic microwave background.

We predicted the Higgs boson, the top quark, the neutrino, dark matter, all through theory long before they were observed directly.

The planet Neptune was discovered through theory.

I promise you, people aren't just making shit up.

you more that Ara tho

anytime i see the phrase 'they're all just theories!" i feel like the scientific method that is the basis for the majority of human invention/discovery is being shitted on

(snatched from http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/just-a-theory-7-misused-science-words/)

"...the word "theory" means something very different in lay language than it does in science: A scientific theory is an explanation of some aspect of the natural world that has been substantiated through repeated experiments or testing. But to the average Jane or Joe, a theory is just an idea that lives in someone's head, rather than an explanation rooted in experiment and testing."

TARS: Obviously your trust factor is higher than mine...

that may not be accurate, but damn that was perfect timing. His level of smart ass-ness kept this film moving for me.


****************************
I don't even love life no more, my niggas I just live it.... Jean Grae

One of my favourite actors, so glad to see him get positive reviews even if its only a voice role.

>TARS: Obviously your trust factor is higher than mine...
>
>that may not be accurate, but damn that was perfect timing.
>His level of smart ass-ness kept this film moving for me.
>
>
>****************************
>I don't even love life no more, my niggas I just live it....
>Jean Grae

the time disparity between Romilly (orbiting Miller's Planet) and Cooper/Brand (on surface of Miller's Planet)

I don't understand why there was such disparity in time between the ship orbiting the water planet, and the people on the planet's surface. Essentially 2 hours on the planet was roughly the equivalent of 201,614 hours orbiting the planet.

Would simply being in a solar system orbiting a BH create this much of a variance?

If so, do these same rules not apply while in Gargantua's solar system relative to the Earth's solar system? It seems as though people on earth only age more rapidly when the crew is either on a planet and/or passing through a black hole, but not while they are in orbit.

Did Cooper's daughter grow old while he passed through the BH or was it during his time on Mann's planet? Or Both?

was the gravitational pull of the black hole made time on the planet move at a much slower rate than elsewhere. That's why they purposely put the ship at an orbit to keep it out of that time warp. But their estimates were way off, about 10 years off.


****************************
I don't even love life no more, my niggas I just live it.... Jean Grae

okay so I got this off reddit and it's probably the best explanation I've seen thus far:

"The speed up is only relative to places very close to Gargantua. If you are far away from it - like they are most of the time - like planet 2 and planet 3 are - then in the parameters of the film time dilation is negligible. It makes sense because gravity follows the inverse-square law as explained.

When is time dilation not negligible?

When Cooper and Miller go on planet 1. They 'lose' 23 years during that attempt. Meaning they literally travel 23 years into earth's future. Yes, time travel is possible.

In the whole time once they regroup with Romilly you can neglect time dilation for the entire movie until

They leave Mann's planet and do a sling-shot along Gargantua. During that scene they are really close to the black hole. Closer than before. Time dilation is massive. However, they also are really, really quick in terms of orbital mechanics. Both Cooper and Brandt 'lose' 60-70 years during that maneuver.

So what you can get from this, there is no significant disparity between Cooper and Brand (at most the order of magnitude of a single decade). The only difference in trips they experience is Brand leaving orbit around Gargantua. Brand instead travels toward the singularity. You can assume what happens in the Tesseract is beyond time dilation. At that point he is in a place where time does not behave like in our space-time anymore.

So in essence, they share the same time development + a decade or so of time dilation after they separate. Cooper from traveling into the singularity, Brand from traveling away from the singularity.
The whole time travel involved is
23 years + ~60 years

The 60 years are the time that Murph's 35 year old actress ages until she lies as a grandma in bed. During those 60 years, Cooper and Brand literally only had an hour or so pass.

So Brand is also of Cooper's age when earth is 85 years in the future. But thousands if not millions of light years away."

Not with the time travel, but just a smart and well explained sci-fi movie. The cast and direction were top notch too.

how the hell did they survive that skyscraper-sized tidal wave. I could almost believe everything else before this.

.
.
.
"In God's Kingdom, your greatness isn't measured by how much you gain and keep. No, true Kingdom greatness is measured by how much you give way."

it's presented in the movie always perplexed me.

but as I was beginning to type out what my issue was with the movie, i realized how that could be explained away. but i do wonder if Time Dilation existed on Mann's planet because it seems to me that they were there for a significant amount of time (over an hour at least), and I don't think Cooper would have really gotten back in time to see his daughter before she died. They found him an hour before he would have ran out of oxygen and she's old, something like 60 plus years have passed? I feel like they would have Cooper, but she should have already been dead.

However, the whole thing with Mann's planet wouldn't have happened if it were me...like we would have landed and I would have been like "y'all see all this snow? NAH." Even Mann himself tells Cooper, "I knew when we landed here this wasn't the right planet" and he lied because he knew it wouldn't work so I have no clue why they even entertained anything once they got there. Once they got there, he should have straight up been like "I lied, i was scared, let's just go" and they could have either returned to Earth (not likely honestly) or go on to Edmunds planet (the logical choice). Mann was lying but it was piss poor at best. We gonna live on frozen tundra? NAH.

..saw it in imax (deservedly so).

solid plot & script, great performance by mcconaughey. interesting that nolan chose to ignore the typical parameters of time stamps & settings.

my only gripe in this film: topher grace was annoying.

beautiful imagery, although i was a bit disappointed by the rings of saturn.




*skatin' the rings of saturn*


..and miles to go before i sleep...

I struggled to care about any of those people back home on the range. Humanity, sure but individual people...nah Joe.

TARS (or whatever his name was) was just perfect.

At first you wonder why they would design such an ungainly thing, but damn, the moment I saw him in full flight I was hype.

************************

====================================
when cannibal confronts missionary, who is religious and who insane..the one eating people, the other converting them... (c) James Hillman

I really did enjoy the movie and the experience...MM killed it (no surprise), very well shot, the score may have been a bit extra but still resonated pretty effectively with me. I thought Nolan did a much better job of integrating the exposition into the film rather than having it disjoint the film. Very well shot, did a much better job with transitions than he did in TDKR (some of those were just jarring). From everything I've read about the visuals of the black hole and the subject matter regarding time as another plane in a higher dimension rather than a continuum, I thought it was executed pretty damn brilliantly. The scenes in which MM saw the growth of his kids definitely hit me (i'm always a sucker for anything related to growth though lol) and lastly, thought the robots were very well integrated into the film, really well written and personalized.

The one major issue I had with the film, as many others have noted, is the inclusion of Matt Damon as an antagonist. Considering the scope of the movie, the focus on exploration, and the odds that the crew were already facing (and the fact the movie had spent so much time to show us just how bleak those odds were), I felt it completely unnecessary and almost cheap to throw in this "villain" to cheaply ramp up the drama in such an over-wrought manner. I wish he would have kept the focus on the search, on the bleakness of the mission, on how these established characters deal with that context because that was more than compelling enough to have me completely immersed in the film. It completely jarred the focus and pace of the film...the film went from it's aspiration of reaching higher on this inter-stellar journey to a base, over-done "villain" framework.

All in all....I certainly enjoyed it, completely immersed...except for the one major mistake. Will watch it in IMAX once I'm back to LA, that's for damn sure lol.

Matt Damon's character was attempting to do the right thing. MM's character wanted to go home to his family thereby putting the entire mission in jeopardy.

other than to get home

a rescue.

he didn't have a viable planet, but he said he did, so someone would come.

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

----------------------------



O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "

I am confused now. I thought Mathew's character wanted to abort mission and go home, and Matt's character wanted to continue to the next planet.

If they all wanted to go home, what would be the purpose of him attacking Mathew in the first place?

admittedly, I was never really clear on his motivation.

but I don't think he was ever supposed to go home at all.

like that was never in the cards. so he was trying to jack the ship so he could leave them there instead.

www.engadgethd.com - the other stuff i'm looking at

He then specifically says to Coop that he can't let him leave with the ship because they have to carry on with the mission.

He said that in all of his bravado, he never thought that his planet wouldn't be the one. He assumed that he would find the livable planet, people would come to him, and he'd help restart civilization.

Instead he landed on a dead planet and realized he would never see anyone ever again. So instead of killing himself, he sent out messages saying that his planet was great and people should come check it out.

Where Nolan screwed things up is that, instead of having Damon's character hear that people wanted to go to a third planet, a trip that would use all of their fuel and leave them no shot at returning to Earth, he has Matt Damon actually telling Matty Mc to not focus about getting home to his family and to stay focused on the mission.

It's a horribly botched section of the film because you can see it coming from a mile away yet it still leaves you somewhat confused and the climax is a limp fist fight.

The kind that binds the strands of hair in the locks
of Jesus

The love in the strands of Rick James' perm



----------------------------



O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "

Was that placed there by aliens as they stated..it wasnt naturally occurring?

I ask this because they made it seem like it was placed there by aliens because of the knowledge that the earth was doomed in due time

was that a bullshit story to go along with Caine's?

They make a point of saying wormholes aren't a naturally-occurring phenomenon, and that's the real science. Wormholes are allowed in general relativity, but large ones don't form spontaneously, and any that might exist will have a finite (and normally rather short) lifetime until the connection "pinches off" and both sides collapse into black holes.

The statement in the movie is that the wormhole was built by the five-dimensional beings, and at the end of the movie McConaughey guesses that those five-dimensional beings are actually humans from the incredibly distant future.

Now, this sets up a bit of a paradox: if the humans of the distant future were the ones who built the wormhole, and the wormhole was needed for humanity to survive into that distant future, then how did they survive long enough to build it? The answer is that the humans of the distant future built it, and they survived long enough to build it because it was there, and it was there because they survived long enough to build it, and they survived long enough to build it because it was there, ...

It's intentionally paradoxical, but this is how time works in general relativity (as far as we know). If every moment you march toward the future, you can eventually come out in what you would have ordinarily called the past. Or if you trace history long enough into the past, then you might eventually land in what you would have ordinarily called the future. The technical term for this is a "closed timelike curve", and they're a topic of much discussion in theoretical physics. I'm sure that this one was inserted intentionally into Interstellar because one of the people who founded the study of these closed timelike curves was Kip Thorne. (I linked to a paper in post 146, above.)

>They make a point of saying wormholes aren't a
>naturally-occurring phenomenon, and that's the real science.
>Wormholes are allowed in general relativity, but large ones
>don't form spontaneously, and any that might exist will have a
>finite (and normally rather short) lifetime until the
>connection "pinches off" and both sides collapse into black
>holes.
>
>The statement in the movie is that the wormhole was built by
>the five-dimensional beings, and at the end of the movie
>McConaughey guesses that those five-dimensional beings are
>actually humans from the incredibly distant future.
>
>Now, this sets up a bit of a paradox: if the humans of the
>distant future were the ones who built the wormhole, and the
>wormhole was needed for humanity to survive into that distant
>future, then how did they survive long enough to build it? The
>answer is that the humans of the distant future built it, and
>they survived long enough to build it because it was there,
>and it was there because they survived long enough to build
>it, and they survived long enough to build it because it was
>there, ...
>
>It's intentionally paradoxical, but this is how time works in
>general relativity (as far as we know). If every moment you
>march toward the future, you can eventually come out in what
>you would have ordinarily called the past. Or if you trace
>history long enough into the past, then you might eventually
>land in what you would have ordinarily called the future. The
>technical term for this is a "closed timelike curve", and
>they're a topic of much discussion in theoretical physics. I'm
>sure that this one was inserted intentionally into
>Interstellar because one of the people who founded the study
>of these closed timelike curves was Kip Thorne. (I linked to a
>paper in post 146, above.)

but look at reply 110 from C Truth

how could humans have put it there even if evolved...

>but look at reply 110 from C Truth
>
>how could humans have put it there even if evolved...

They were able to put it there because they survived long enough to put it there, and they survived long enough to develop that technology because it was there. There's no contradiction.

Thanks.

>


----------------------------



O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "

dont need no credit card to ride this train

agitation propaganda, This film was designed to be divisive.

Ambitious? I don't really think so. Imo this movie is all about promoting the environmental agenda. I don't care for this movie.

I like Nolan but let's be real. NOLAN IS A COMPANY MAN. Y'all know what i am talking about.
Grade C

Couldn't he have sent that message through a laptop and not a watch? He did have a laptop at the beginning of the movie.
Or could he only communicate through analog devices.

This is the real science of the so-called "braneworld" scenarios that they're assuming. Gravity lives in the higher-dimensional universe (meaning gravitons, the carriers of the gravitational force, can propagate in all five dimensions), but all other matter (including the electromagnetic field and all other nongravitational interactions) are confined to the 4-dimensional subspace. (In these braneworld scenarios, this is the explanation for why gravity is so much weaker than electromagnetism. We'd never even feel gravity if we didn't have this enormous rock right beneath us.)

So it's only gravitational signals that are able to propagate through the five-dimensional bulk and into the past of the four-dimensional slice. It's straightforward, through gravitational interactions, to get a hand on a broken wristwatch to twitch. It's much more difficult to use gravitational interactions to alter electrical signals in a computer.

How did MM's character pass through the black hole and end up conveniently by Saturn?

Was he placed there by Human Beings from the distant future?

That is, it fell in after McConaughey but at a higher speed and eventually caught up to him. The way this kinda thing works, it could have fallen in years later.

At any rate, he definitely traveled through the wormhole back to our solar system. That explains why he was "conveniently" near Saturn.

I thought the movie committed itself to present love as the force of gravity. All throughout there were speeches and references to love, between people, between humanity and life, between human beings and discovery/knowledge.

The ending didn't make sense to me unless you consider that love was the force that brought MM's character back to wormhole.

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2014/11/10/love-physics

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/21/opinion/david-brooks-interstellar-love-and-gravity.html?_r=0

http://www.tor.com/blogs/2014/11/love-in-sci-fi-interstellar-speech

There were specific references to love as the force of gravity between people.

It creates binds where there are none

And its better when it has avocado in it

----------------------------



O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "

Its connects us all, leaves us with something after
the experience is done

----------------------------



O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "

Enjoyed it even more the 2nd time...obviously already knew the plot and drama so could just readily digest the details and of course the visuals + sound in legit IMAX was just such an experience.

Anyone who likes this shit has NO taste.

NONE.

Miley Cyrus fans have more integrity than you all

I'm serious

http://giant.gfycat.com/UnfortunateLikableEastrussiancoursinghounds.gif

Love creates wormholes

and doo rags

and butt plugs

and posters with shitty tastes in movies

You guys are so pathetic

This movie was such trite, unimaginative horseshit

And Mcadfagdahfgdh was terrible

LOL @ Matt Damon's stupid ass cameo

----------------------------



O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "

Bwahahahahahahaha

Dude obviously didn't read the script AT ALL before he
got on set

LMAO @ that performance

Some of the most grating several minutes of acting in
the history of film

And BWAHAHAHAH @ his character

So we just HAD to have a classical "conflicted, well-intentioned
but flawed" villain? In a movie about ghosts and love and wormholes
and shit?

What a dogshit movie

Jesus Chris

----------------------------



O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "

And I saw that Keanu Reeves shit, several other bad films

McCogn's character's development was rushed, and he kinda
botched the role because of it...he's not that kind of actor.
He's the kind of who needs to be able to work his charm into

This wasn't it

It was a rush job and he ended up looking dumb and out of
place for 90% of the movie

LOL @ him stumbling on a major space project, and then
dude just asking him to fly it right away like "we're trying
to save the human race'. BTW, how about you fly that ship"

Bwahahahahahahahaahahahahahaahahahahahahahahahahahahahah

LOL @ the whole poltergeist angle, corn chips

LOL @ "Love." How stupid and trite can you fucking be?
Seriously? Either deal with love, or don't. Don't throw
bones to dumb people with this shit because it was forced,
corny, didn't work

LOL @ the vague, dumb allusions to a future civilization
who plants wormholes

LOL @ the sequel baiting...dude legitimately baits unintelligent
people into seeing his movies again/coming back for sequels

LOL @ the dumbass ending

LOL LOL LOL LOL @ Matt Damon...someone need to cut him out,
Jar Jar Binks style....that's from the Two-Face school of
Christopher Nolan OVERDOING shit

The little girl was a pretty good actor, and Chastain as an
adult was a good actor....LOL @ her wasting all that acting
on that stupid ass movie...she was mad overqualified up in
that movie

I asked you which movies you consider to be good. Thanks for the uninvited rant though.

But only for people like me who don't appreciate the LOVE
in our world


----------------------------



O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "

Its pretty rad

It unifies the forces of sex with quantum theory, and
opens up wormholes to unseen galaxies of bliss and
joy



----------------------------



O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "

Probably the most "Nolan ass Christopher Nolan" movie in his body of work.

I don't know if it was because I just had dinner and was full or what but I was having a horrible time in that seat for the last hour.

It was gorgeous but at the end I was exhausted. Stumbling through that third act was brutal. By the end, I sat there and realized I had aged like bruh when they went down to that wave planet.

It didn't help that I had some woman directly behind me that cried LOUDLY during those father-daughter heartbreak moments. She was fucking blubbering, man. I did a full 180 to make sure she wasn't being physically abused or something. It was crazy how loud she was. My girlfriend loudly said (because IMAX is fucking loud anyway) "I HOPE SHE SHUTS THE FUCK UP SOON".

I wish Matt Damon was billed on this. Because when his face popped up on the screen everybody on the screen was like "Matt Damon?". It felt like those spoof clips they do for the MTV Movie Awards or something. Took me out of the whole experience, really.

Honestly I liked the world building and most of the first two acts until inconsequential Damon's character showed up. That third act totally ruined it for me. I would absolutely LOVE this flick if that third act wasn't so drawn out.



i'm out.
_____________________
"WHOLESALE REUSABLE GROCERY BAGS!!"
@etfp

>I don't know if it was because I just had dinner and was full
>or what but I was having a horrible time in that seat for the
>last hour.

It was a bad movie.


----------------------------



O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "

and does she pick out roles with the absolutely dumbest writing, or do you think she comes up with the dialog on her own?

Just let it be man.

we believe in the GRAVITY OF LOOOOOOVE and its
ability to make dumb people think stupid movies are good

This movie was a horseshit farce with several of the worst
acting performances of 2014




----------------------------



O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "

him watching the messages from his adult children hit me hard...and he acted the hell out of that scene...i loved everything about this film. I like Chris Nolan's movies, with Memento and Inception being my favorites

d

some cool visuals

some good acting, not Hathaway and Alfred, but MM did his thing and I actually liked the Damon part, his plot made sense. The gravity, nother dimension room where he watched his daughter, etc, shit was all over the place.

I don't know what the fuck was happening really, and way too long to care about trying to re-watch it cuz Im sure it still won't make sense

Those robots were the most ridiculous things I've ever seen in a sci-fi movie along with the voices. That shit was stupid

Prometheus is 100 times better movie and it had a shit ton of flaws too

Movie was terrible

unless you are familiar with a few scientific concepts like time dilation, relativity, etc.

also, the robots are ingenious.

dude from myth busters explains:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UoOhdvQYmo

ooooooh the robots were ingenious, that's it!!

But hardly to try and enjoy it

You better than me


----------------------------



O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "

apparently there is a debate over the ending

i'm fine with that too
every movie doesn't need to be depressing
~~~~
When you are born, you cry, and the world rejoices. Live so that when you die, you rejoice, and the world cries.
~~~~
You cannot hate people for their own good.

http://nerdist.com/jonathan-nolans-ending-to-interstellar-made-a-lot-more-sense/

JONATHAN NOLAN’S ENDING TO INTERSTELLAR MADE A LOT MORE SENSE
POSTED BY KYLE HILL
MARCH 19, 2015

Speaking to a theater full of curious physicists, engineers, and students, Jonathan Nolan quietly let slip that his original ending to Interstellar was “much more straightforward.”

Yesterday in Pasadena, California, as a part of a media event surrounding the impending Blu-ray release of the sci-fi blockbuster Interstellar, co-writer Jonathan Nolan and science adviser/producer Kip Thorne addressed a packed theater at Caltech’s Jet Propulsion Lab (JPL). After going though much of the science of the film, the floor was opened to questions. One of the first was probably the one on everyone’s mind: What actually happened at the end of Interstellar?

“You’ve got the wrong brother,” Nolan quipped.

At the end of the film , we see Matthew McConaughey’s character jettison himself into the singularity of the black hole Gargantua. He makes the deadly journey in the hopes of characterizing gravity acting at the smallest scales inside, and to send that data back to Earth. He survives the descent, but then finds himself inside a 5th-dimensional “tesseract,” which he uses to peruse the timeline of his life and contact his daughter’s younger self.

That’s the ending that has had audiences and scientists alike scratching their heads. I have my own (probably incorrect) theory of what the heck happened, but I was eager to hear it directly from the script’s original writer.

Jonathan Nolan’s much more straight-forward ending “had the Einstien-Rosen bridge collapse when Cooper tries to send the data back.”

So no tesseract (that was Christopher’s idea), no time manipulation, and no return home. Nolan didn’t elaborate on this point, but we might speculate that the original end to the movie was as dark and unforgiving as space.

If the wormhole collapses, that means there is no way for Cooper to get home (though the data maybe made it back to help the dying Earth), no way to find Anne Hathaway’s character, and likely a one-way trip into a black hole. It would be a classic hero’s sacrifice, which admittedly bends fewer physical laws than gravity waves ripping across worldlines embedded in a 5th-dimensional cube by some “bulk beings.”

That wasn’t the only major change from the script’s initial drafts. The gravitational anomalies that pointed Cooper and his daughter toward the remnants of NASA were initially supposed to be gravity waves emanating from the destruction of a neutron star via black hole. Since the waves could only be produced by something so catastrophic, and we know nothing like that exists in our solar system, the waves detected must be coming out of some wormhole close to us, Kip Thorne explained to the audience.

The waves were also supposed to be detected by the Laser Interferometer Gravity-Wave Observatory or LIGO, the construction of which Kip Thorne spearheaded. “That was very near and dear to me,” Thorne said, “but Chris thought it was too much science for the public to digest at once.”

Despite these compromises, at least the Interstellar remained accurate enough to generate scientific papers. Alright^3.

The movie was well done like all of Nolan's movies, but I wish the movie was less about the metaphysics of physics than about the physics of metaphysics of love. That seemed to be a more intriguing idea to me, at least personally. The notion that love was the force which would have allowed for the success of the mission, over threat of loss (Cooper's family or Matt Damon's fear of loneliness. I guess it could be argued that both Cooper and Damon's character's fear attracted them to one another, but that idea wasn't explored.

It would have been interesting if Spielberg would have made this. I think he would have gotten the love story's angle across better.

The special effects were great. One thought. I think the time stretch idea could have been explained better through a visual - drawing or computer model. I liked that aspect of the story, but at times I wasn't able to keep track of the causes for the shifts in time.

The ending where Cooper goes to visit Branch was horrible. In other words, he spent the whole time trying to save his family, often times against their will, but can't stay until his daughter dies? And he goes to be with Branch without them having any real chemistry?

All in all a good movie. Probably the best sci-fi director in the biz right now. Will see his next movie sight unseen.

>The ending where Cooper goes to visit Branch was horrible. In
>other words, he spent the whole time trying to save his
>family, often times against their will, but can't stay until
>his daughter dies? And he goes to be with Branch without them
>having any real chemistry?


Daughter waited decades to meet her pops and was like, I am good.

I feel like it had to be that way because it is uncomfrotably weird for a dad to be young and see his daughter looking like his grandma but didn't see why they just didn't reunite them and let her die soon after.

Also I don't he chased branch out of love. He was an explorer and its in his nature to pursue and find this earth colony. Didn't get the sense that it happened by the movie's end. Seems like they were setting up a sequel.



**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson


"One of the most important things in life is what Judge Learned Hand described as 'that ever-gnawing inner doubt as to whether you're

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lZMzf-SDWP8&t=12

is able to create a wormhole above Earth, place a Tesseract inside of a black hole which leads to an infinite array of moments behind one specific bookshelf in Nebraska but can't quite figure out how to deliver one page of notes to Michael Caine.

I appreciate the attempt to celebrate NASA and science in general, but my god is this a pedantic, ridiculous, pseudo-intellectual, overlong pile of horseshit.

cool spaceship, though.

That is a good point, tho.

Does anyone know if filming began before the script was finished?

millions or even billions of years from now. Long enough to become an entirely different kind of being, living in an entirely different kind of spacetime. Them trying to communicate with us would be like us trying to communicate with an amoeba. We wouldn't be able to communicate with them directly, we'd just have to coax them into doing what we need them to do.

Yes, it's a Macguffin, but nothing out of the ordinary for adventure movies.

yet they know the exact right "amoeba" to place at the exact right time and place to maybe (fingers crossed) deliver the exact right message.

I also love how Murph figures out that her Dad has used the power of Love to travel through time and space to tap out morse code on her watch (awesome how it continues to tap out in a perfect loop even when Ghost Dad stops interacting with it) to deliver the secrets of the physical universe as That 70s Show is begging her to escape a burning corn field.

horrifically embarrassing writing.

>I also love how Murph figures out that her Dad has used the
>power of Love

Not the power of love, the power of gravity. Specifically, the class of gravitational theories that she herself was studying.

Yes, the "love" shit was overblown, but they really only mentioned it two or three times, and never in the objective sense that people are taking them to.

>to travel through time and space to tap out
>morse code on her watch (awesome how it continues to tap out
>in a perfect loop even when Ghost Dad stops interacting with
>it)

The robot was sending the Morse code signal, and we didn't see any of that. We don't know where (when) that signal got communicated to.

>to deliver the secrets of the physical universe

Well, not the secrets of the physical universe, just a few parameters in a theory that she'd otherwise already worked out.

>as That
>70s Show is begging her to escape a burning corn field.
>
>horrifically embarrassing writing.

Anyone can say that, and it's definitely not everyone's cup of tea. Yes, there are a lot of silly monologues, but you know that going in when it's a Christopher Nolan movie. Yes, there's a lot of theoretical physics that doesn't interest most people, but that much was advertised heavily. It's totally fine not to enjoy the movie.

But people blame plot holes that really aren't there. Just say you aren't interested and leave it at that.

I'm a geek too. We feel the need to defend it because
we think it's all we have.

We don't have to defend this dogshit.

It sucks.

----------------------------



O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "

We're all aware you were hoping for an M. Night Shyamalan picture. We can all be geeks in our own way.

It was awful



----------------------------



O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "

n/m

The best point in the movie was when the team was on the other side of the worm hole trying to find the right planet. That could have been the entire movie.

At the same time, I can't see how people hated the ending because how could you NOT expect that everything after entering a black hole to be hokey, magical, mystical. Didn't see why there was any obligation for it to be rationale or even "make sense". We can't make sense of the inside of black holes and 4th dimensions.

That was true of 2001. Same true for this movie.

My big regret was not seeing this in IMAX.


**********
"Everyone has a plan until you punch them in the face. Then they don't have a plan anymore." (c) Mike Tyson


"One of the most important things in life is what Judge Learned Hand described as 'that ever-gnawing inner doubt as to whether you're

Humanity's last hope apparently did zero pre-planning, is surprised by everything they encounter and is amazed when Top Gun recommends turning left at the black hole instead of right.