Interstellar - Part 8

[MrMaooz]

Spoiler

I thought the whole Dr Mann sequence was a bit cheesy, pointless and slowed the film down. It should have been cut or rewritten IMHO.

So that's what I think about that.

[BLACKOUT]That space fist fight is the best action scene of the year. [/BLACKOUT]

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I don't rule out Interstellar having good legs but Inception good legs? Inception had July weekdays, is a more fun film and Inception didn't face a film like Mockingjay in it's 3rd weekend. We will see but I'd be shocked if Interstellar's legs were as good as Inception. I'll give it a 3.5 multiplier but as I said I'll be shocked if it has much better legs than that.

[BLACKOUT]That space fist fight is the best action scene of the year. [/BLACKOUT]

Yep it must be opposite day here folks.

 

[Quasimod0]

I thought the Dr. Mann stuff was really interesting. Because it calls back to earlier in the film when Cooper and Brand are talking about nature. [BLACKOUT]And how nature isn't evil, and that when we go to these strange worlds, we bring the evil with us.[/BLACKOUT] That was demonstrated through Mann's actions.
It was also really interesting, because[BLACKOUT] Mann lied about how fruitful his planet was, so that he would get rescued. That's a very human thing to do. If they had sent a machine, it would have told them the correct information. But because they sent humans to these worlds, there is a chance that the humans could be lying about their planet.[/BLACKOUT]

 

[jmc]

Phil Plait released an article showing the science flaws on Interstellar but it was subsequently destroyed by this guy.
https://ikjyotsinghkohli24.wordpress.com/2014/11/07/on-the-science-of-interstellar/

Guess my issues with the black hole were incorrect, happy to be proven wrong.

 

[redfirebird2008]

I don't rule out Interstellar having good legs but Inception good legs? Inception had July weekdays, is a more fun film and Inception didn't face a film like Mockingjay in it's 3rd weekend. We will see but I'd be shocked if Interstellar's legs were as good as Inception. I'll give it a 3.5 multiplier but as I said I'll be shocked if it has much better legs than that.

I'm definitely expecting much weaker legs than Inception for all of the reasons you mentioned, plus the fact that Inception is more of an action movie and that is bound to appeal to a wider audience in general. I think Paramount would be very happy if it can pull off a 3.5 like you mentioned above.

 

[Keyser Soze]

I really don't know what to make of INTERSTELLAR. My initial reaction on leaving the cinema was disappointment. I'm a huge fan of Christopher Nolan, he's possibly my favourite director, and so I went into this film expecting to see the film of the year and a masterpiece. It is neither. My mind was running with how the scope got so dizzyingly massive that I started to feel a bit disconnected from the drama of it at times, and how the third act started to feel a bit muddled, and bogged down with plot revelations that managed to be both somewhat predictable and eyeroll-inducing in an "they actually went there" way. Plus, some of the dialogue was rather clunky, and at one point I found myself thinking, "If they start reciting Dylan Thomas' 'Do Not Go Gentle into That Good Night' one more time I'm going to have an embolism!" I really wanted to be absolutely blown away by this film, so the fact that I wasn't is a bit deflating.

I was actually gonna rate the film lower than I did, but the more I thought about it, the more I started to appreciate the positives. Because once I set aside the astronomical expectations I had for INTERSTELLAR that the film failed to meet, there's actually a lot of great stuff here. The first hour or so is pretty much flawless, 5-star cinema, probably right up to the point where Matthew McConaughey's Cooper leaves behind a barren Earth and his family (particularly heartbreaking is his departure from his daughter Murphy, played by Mackenzie Foy) to go on a last-ditch space expedition to save humanity's future. There's heart, there's scale, there's immersion in a credible future world. And after that, once he ventures into space with his crew (including the talented likes of Anne Hathaway and Wes Bentley), we are treated to some of the most awe-inspiring imagery ever to grace the cinema screen. From the beautiful, haunting vast emptiness of Saturn's orbit to stunningly-realised alien worlds, you'll find your jaw dropping again and again. If you possibly can, you must go see this film in IMAX: INTERSTELLAR was made for those gigantic screens.

It's incredibly ambitious cinema. Perhaps a bit too ambitious, as it fudges the details and the execution at various points. But there are other, ostensibly more successful films from this year I'd probably still rate a bit lower than INTERSTELLAR, because flawed as it might be, I'm still thinking about it, it reached for something profound and even in not quite grasping it achieved something highly impressive indeed. The broad emotions and ideas it covers are very powerful, and that emotional core is potently conveyed by some great acting from the ensemble cast. None are better, though, than leading man Matthew McConaughey, giving one of my favourite performances of his in what has been widely-regarded as a career-high hot streak. If not for the Academy's traditional sniffiness towards genre, I'd say he was good enough here to get a second consecutive Best Actor nomination.

So, INTERSTELLAR is a flawed film, but there's also touches of true greatness here. I'll need to watch it again, I think, to truly make up my mind about it. I'd say it's Christopher Nolan's weakest film since INSOMNIA. But since Nolan's never made a bad film, that still makes it a damn fine film.

 

[craigdbfan]

Spoiler

I'm with Spidey in that the Mann sequence just felt unnecessary if there was a section of the film that could have been cut it would have to be Mann.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Yeah it's definitely not going to be losing any money for Paramount and especially Warner Brothers.

Spoiler

I'm with Spidey in that the Mann sequence just felt unnecessary if there was a section of the film that could have been cut it would have to be Mann.

Yep craig agrees with me.

 

[Travesty]

If any section of the movie needed to be cut, it would easily be the scene where they're chasing the drone and then taking it apart. That was about 5 min of the film that could've easily been cut.

 

[DA_Champion]

If any section of the movie needed to be cut, it would easily be the scene where they're chasing the drone and then taking it apart. That was about 5 min of the film that could've easily been cut.

Spoiler

That scene helps show Cooper's technological skills, and communicates how the world is in decline. They have ancient drones flying around and nobody cares.

 

[The Shape]

Spoiler

That scene helps show Cooper's technological skills, and communicates how the world is in decline. They have ancient drones flying around and nobody cares.

Yeah, I think the drone scene had a rightful place in the film, plus the cinematography was gorgeous.

Spoiler

The scene is echoed later when Murph drives carelessly through the crops as Cooper did.

 

[DA_Champion]

Yeah, I think the drone scene had a rightful place in the film, plus the cinematography was gorgeous.

Spoiler

The scene is echoed later when Murph drives carelessly through the crops as Cooper did.

Good point !

 

[Anita18]

Re: the drone

Spoiler

That scene helps show Cooper's technological skills, and communicates how the world is in decline. They have ancient drones flying around and nobody cares.

I also like how it establishes the relationship between Cooper and Murph, and their shared love of science and tech. It's also an introduction to the extremely technological aspect of their world, because up until then, it's all talk about farming and the dust bowl. There's no indication that their world is actually all that technological until that scene.

I don't think that [blackout]Dr. Mann[/blackout] should have been cut either. The subplot just showed the extreme end of what their mission is supposed to be about. He had the same goal, but it was perverted and he refused to work with the others, only thinking about how HE was going to save the day and save his own ass in the process. Collaboration and trust was a big theme in the film too.

 

[The Shape]

And Inception has a B+, which is one of the all-time most misleading Cinemascores. Not too often that a movie with a B+ opens to $62m and then rakes in another $230m after opening weekend.

Nolan has always been a polarizing filmmaker in some ways. Inception represents the height of that polarization. It was an A or A+ movie for a lot of young people, but a C movie for a lot of older people.

Interstellar has a B+ and it is impossible to tell so early on how it will do. My immediate reaction after seeing the film was huge flop and that might be exactly what happens. We'll just have to see how it plays out.

A/A+ and C averages out to around a B+ so based on your calculation, Inception's Cinemascore was accurate...

Cinemascore isn't always accurate and doesn't always equate to a film having legs, but it can in some instances. I certainly don't swear by Cinemascores, but as I said, you can get an idea of what people thought of the film -- just as we do with polls here at the Hype. A B+ score indicates that a good majority of the people polled rated the film high, while a small minority were less favorable with their grades. That's all.

Keep in mind that different films attract different audiences. A film like Dracula Untold is something that probably didn't attract the highest common denominator of viewers, and those viewers might be easily pleased or got exactly what they wanted out of that film. Animated films often have pretty high Cinemascores for this reason.

 

[Rocketman]

The problem with Nolan's films isn't a problem with him or his movies, it's the problem with American audiences. This is now a time where people want:

- Comedy
- Simple
- Lighthearted
- Fast-Paced
- Silly

Christopher Nolan provides NONE of these things.

The films that provide that list of criteria are Guardians of the Galaxy, Big Hero 6, anything by Marvel Studios, Transformers, Fast & Furious... That's just the world now, and that's the mass audience.

Nolan's problem is that he's trying to make big movies with mass appeal. He should stop doing that. People either don't get it, they don't care, or they're bored. He needs to make small, independent movies and reach out to a niche crowd instead of trying to please everyone in the world.

He needs to pull a Darwinism, basically: He should do his own thing, completely off the radar, and certain people will flock to it - but not everybody. You either go or you don't, and there isn't a $200 million budget at stake. That's the whole reason why Following and Memento put him on the map in the first place. Unless Nolan straight up does a big dumb comedy, his career will be in decline, and it's starting with this movie. Interstellar truly is a masterpiece, but most people don't really care about stuff like that anymore. Most masterpieces that are made anymore are released during Awards season which were made for a tenth of the budget of Interstellar, and nobody in America sees those films because they're written intelligently and treat cinematography and acting with extreme importance.

In short: Nolan is playing to the wrong crowd. He's making the wrong movies for the wrong people. He needs to make small movies for smart people instead of huge movies for the masses.

 

[nocomics]

Just to make it simple:

Likes: I thought visually it was very well done, close to gravity well done. I thought the action scenes were well done, and the acting was very well done. I thought it had good character development and it made you care for the characters. Matthew was by far the best actor in this movie he put the movie on his shoulders and carried it.

Dislikes: At first getting all the clues and the way it all came together seemed to strain the brain. Though, most of it was due to length of the movie which I found to be way too long. Least favorite sequence was the finding of Mann(Damon), it just didn't have any flow or impact to story imo. The robots, at first I hated them, but after abit they became okay.

* I don't know if they said why the Earth was dying, if they did I missed it.

 

[Anita18]

I don't think Nolan "should" do anything. If he wants to make big movies when he has the clout to do them, more power to him! He should get it while the going is good.

Intellectual blockbusters are just not done anymore. There is a market for it, even if it isn't "everyone on the face of the planet," and he's proven to be just as adept with smaller films as he is with bigger films. I think he'll be fine. He isn't Shyamalan, and studios for some idiotic reason still give Shyamalan money to make big movies. They bomb AND they suck.

 

[Rocketman]

I don't think Nolan "should" do anything. If he wants to make big movies when he has the clout to do them, more power to him! He should get it while the going is good.

Intellectual blockbusters are just not done anymore. There is a market for it, even if it isn't "everyone on the face of the planet," and he's proven to be just as adept with smaller films as he is with bigger films. I think he'll be fine. He isn't Shyamalan, and studios for some idiotic reason still give Shyamalan money to make big movies. They bomb AND they suck.

^ That's exactly why Nolan is basically our Kubrick. Most critics and audiences hated Kubrick's films.

 

[nocomics]

/bump

 

[DA_Champion]

The problem with Nolan's films isn't a problem with him or his movies, it's the problem with American audiences. This is now a time where people want:

- Comedy
- Simple
- Lighthearted
- Fast-Paced
- Silly

Christopher Nolan provides NONE of these things.

The films that provide that list of criteria are Guardians of the Galaxy, Big Hero 6, anything by Marvel Studios, Transformers, Fast & Furious... That's just the world now, and that's the mass audience.

Nolan's problem is that he's trying to make big movies with mass appeal. He should stop doing that. People either don't get it, they don't care, or they're bored. He needs to make small, independent movies and reach out to a niche crowd instead of trying to please everyone in the world.

He needs to pull a Darwinism, basically: He should do his own thing, completely off the radar, and certain people will flock to it - but not everybody. You either go or you don't, and there isn't a $200 million budget at stake. That's the whole reason why Following and Memento put him on the map in the first place. Unless Nolan straight up does a big dumb comedy, his career will be in decline, and it's starting with this movie. Interstellar truly is a masterpiece, but most people don't really care about stuff like that anymore. Most masterpieces that are made anymore are released during Awards season which were made for a tenth of the budget of Interstellar, and nobody in America sees those films because they're written intelligently and treat cinematography and acting with extreme importance.

In short: Nolan is playing to the wrong crowd. He's making the wrong movies for the wrong people. He needs to make small movies for smart people instead of huge movies for the masses.

Ummm, there's a ton of comedy in Interstellar. The robot was very funny.

 

[craigdbfan]

The problem with Nolan's films isn't a problem with him or his movies, it's the problem with American audiences. This is now a time where people want:

- Comedy
- Simple
- Lighthearted
- Fast-Paced
- Silly

Christopher Nolan provides NONE of these things.

The films that provide that list of criteria are Guardians of the Galaxy, Big Hero 6, anything by Marvel Studios, Transformers, Fast & Furious... That's just the world now, and that's the mass audience.

Nolan's problem is that he's trying to make big movies with mass appeal. He should stop doing that. People either don't get it, they don't care, or they're bored. He needs to make small, independent movies and reach out to a niche crowd instead of trying to please everyone in the world.

He needs to pull a Darwinism, basically: He should do his own thing, completely off the radar, and certain people will flock to it - but not everybody. You either go or you don't, and there isn't a $200 million budget at stake. That's the whole reason why Following and Memento put him on the map in the first place. Unless Nolan straight up does a big dumb comedy, his career will be in decline, and it's starting with this movie. Interstellar truly is a masterpiece, but most people don't really care about stuff like that anymore. Most masterpieces that are made anymore are released during Awards season which were made for a tenth of the budget of Interstellar, and nobody in America sees those films because they're written intelligently and treat cinematography and acting with extreme importance.

In short: Nolan is playing to the wrong crowd. He's making the wrong movies for the wrong people. He needs to make small movies for smart people instead of huge movies for the masses.

This is a very fractured and very wrong analysis of the situation I feel.

 

[redfirebird2008]

I'm with DA_Champion. Interstellar is Nolan's funniest movie.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

You gotta love the "you're dumb if you don't love Instellar" crowd. Classy.

 

[redfirebird2008]

A/A+ and C averages out to around a B+ so based on your calculation, Inception's Cinemascore was accurate...

Cinemascore isn't always accurate and doesn't always equate to a film having legs, but it can in some instances. I certainly don't swear by Cinemascores, but as I said, you can get an idea of what people thought of the film -- just as we do with polls here at the Hype. A B+ score indicates that a good majority of the people polled rated the film high, while a small minority were less favorable with their grades. That's all.

Keep in mind that different films attract different audiences. A film like Dracula Untold is something that probably didn't attract the highest common denominator of viewers, and those viewers might be easily pleased or got exactly what they wanted out of that film. Animated films often have pretty high Cinemascores for this reason.

Typically anything under an "A" CinemaScore has bad legs. Inception was a very rare situation, I mean very rare. It had the legs of an A or A+ movie and the CinemaScore of a movie with average WOM.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Can the Nolan zealots be less predictable sometime?