Yes that would have been pretty interesting. Its funny that Spilberg was the first director of this, he has been trying to do this movie for years and many of his ideas i think were in the video game The Dig. It talked a lot about the 5th dimension, time and space, beings that were beyond our universe etc. Astronauts were taken to another planet as well by a spaceship the aliens brought to us. Its an old game and is difficult as hell, but its funny how some concepts of interstellar are in that game which must be almost 15 years old now. Its been Spilbergs baby for years, its a shame we will probably never see what he has in mind beyond the script
The are a great many Spielberg projects hat we'll never get to see.
There is no shame at all, Spielberg has been consistent and productive for a long time. The time he didn't put into Interstellar went to something else.
The are a great many Spielberg projects hat we'll never get to see.
There is no shame at all, Spielberg has been consistent and productive for a long time. The time he didn't put into Interstellar went to something else.
something like A.I or kingdom of the crystal skull? yeah we were so blessed LOL.
Nolan still has a long way to go to be on that level, i really think he should go back to smaller movies and recharge his creative energies. Even better i would love to see him trying to do comedy, or something more lighthearted. Not every story has to be insanely complex or intense, even Kubrik worked with comedy from time to time. If not i think Nolan will be seen as a director that can only do 1 type of tone, and i dont think thats good for any creative person
Nolan's creative voice is fine. ORIGINAL, big-budget films are a rarity in Hollywood. Adaptations and sequels are pumped out like clockwork. I loved Gone Girl and Edge of Tomorrow, but even those are adaptations.
High-concept, original blockbusters like Interstellar should be celebrated.
Nolan's creative voice is fine. ORIGINAL, big-budget films are a rarity in Hollywood. Adaptations and sequels are pumped out like clockwork. I loved Gone Girl and Edge of Tomorrow, but even those are adaptations.
High-concept, original blockbusters like Interstellar should be celebrated.
He's had two big opportunities to really take his vision to otherworldly places; dreams and alien planets. Both times he somehow managed to still "ground" the visual spectacle.
I just don't think it's in him for his imagination to play outside normal bounds.
There's plenty of fantastical directors and creative types who will set up whatever rules in the film they like that don't have any logical sense to it, Nolan wants rules that reflect real life and in real life it's not all wine and roses, it's why Batman isn't doing these incredible martial arts displays or why Interstellar has an advanced robot be nothing more than a talking slab of metal.
I reject the implication that grounded work requires less imagination, I think it's the opposite.
It actually takes more effort and aptitude to come up with solutions and settings once you uhave rules then if you don't.
Notice that the two planets in Interstellar are unlike anything we've seen on screen before. There are no dragons or aliens on them, just extrapolation of rules. Those water tides are far more imaginative than CGI office towers.
There's plenty of fantastical directors and creative types who will set up whatever rules in the film they like that don't have any logical sense to it, Nolan wants rules that reflect real life and in real life it's not all wine and roses, it's why Batman isn't doing these incredible martial arts displays or why Interstellar has an advanced robot be nothing more than a talking slab of metal.
I reject the implication that grounded work requires less imagination, I think it's the opposite.
It actually takes more effort and aptitude to come up with solutions and settings once you uhave rules then if you don't.
Notice that the two planets in Interstellar are unlike anything we've seen on screen before. There are no dragons or aliens on them, just extrapolation of rules. Those water tides are far more imaginative than CGI office towers.
You're not at all used to the worlds of Interstellar. Gravitational redshift, shallow water planets with massive tides are things you have not seen before.
You're not at all used to the worlds of Interstellar. Gravitational redshift, shallow water planets with massive tides are things you have not seen before.
The water tide planet is in orbit around a black hole and thus it is heated by the accretion disk. It is located in a region of gravitational redshift factor ~200, 000. It has a surface gravity 30% higher than the Earth's. The atmosphere is breathable and the water presumably drinkable, but the world is uninhabitable due to tides. There are huge tidal waves. While there , we saw a spaceship ride a wave like it was a surfer, along with a cool means of walking by the robot.
The second planet had ice clouds, no clear surface, nearly good temperatures, and a nearly breathable atmosphere. Its day is 67 hours long. This planet was more about the characters than the settings, we saw that Matt Damon had gone crazy from decades of loneliness which is an issue of active research and concern at NASA. The end fight between Mann and Cooper and the effort to break the helmet and use the terrain was imaginative, as was the line "those are the best odds I've had in twenty years". It was in character.
We then had Cooper fall into a rotating black hole, complete with the images of the outside universe narrowing as Cooper was falling in and a ring singularity at the centre. What he found was a three dimensional representation of the four dimensional cube. He communicated with his past self using gravity waves.
The movie ends with Cooper finding his daughter is now ~50 years older than him.
But anyway there is nothing in this movie as creative as if they had had a dragon show up ;-)
You're not at all used to the worlds of Interstellar. Gravitational redshift, shallow water planets with massive tides are things you have not seen before.
Well, for me there were aspects like Ice clouds but I wouldn't go as far to say generally that we haven't seen the types of world's before on film. Empire strikes back is famous for its iceworld planet, The ocean world with a high tide was nice but its not like we havent seen films with massive tides and waves crashing even in Star Wars episode 2 and that's just one example. If you've seen Contact for example the visuals are quite similar at some points in the film.
If you've seen alot of sci fi, alot of the visual aspects are not so original that its brand new , though it is a beautiful film. I mean , i didn't come out of the film saying," wow i've never seen anything like it before", but I did think the film was beautifully shot. I don't think the point was for the planets to be all that amazingly original .
I think the point was these planets were not that sustainable and didn't have the ideal qualities that earth had for humanity to survive.
Well, for me there were aspects like Ice clouds but I wouldn't go as far to say generally that we haven't seen the types of world's before on film. Empire strikes back is famous for its iceworld planet, The ocean world with a high tide was nice but its not like we havent seen films with massive tides and waves crashing even in Star Wars episode 2 and that's just one example. If you've seen Contact for example the visuals are quite similar at some points in the film.
If you've seen alot of sci fi, alot of the visual aspects are not so original that its brand new , though it is a beautiful film. I mean , i didn't come out of the film saying," wow i've never seen anything like it before", but I did think the film was beautifully shot. I don't think the point was for the planets to be all that amazingly original .
I think the point was these planets were not that sustainable and didn't have the ideal qualities that earth had for humanity to survive.
The second planet has very little in common with Hoth. Hoth has animal life, is covered in snow rather than ice/rock, it has breathable air, a flat terrain, clear skies. The set designs and psychological issues on the planet were totally different.
That point itself that you bring up is interesting. Most scifi assumes thay Earth like planets are common. This movie showed us that "nearly-Earth" like planets are possibly more common. Even in the solar system we have Venus and Mars. This makes space colonization difficult and is an issue either ignored in most scifi, or handwaived away with terraforming.
Iceland has become the go-to fantasy/sci-fi backdrop. It has been on movies screens every four months or so for the last two years, as well as once a week on Game of thrones.
I caught this film for the second time but this time in digital IMAX.
I have to say, the IMAX aspect ratio really ads to the impact of the film. The first time around, after seeing it in 35 mm one of my main complaints was that the film did not do enough to sell the grandure of space. Not so in IMAX!
IMAX does have a bit of a weird drawback with this film though. As we all know, not everything was filmed in IMAX for a variety of reasons. This is the same as with past movies that have integrated the IMAX format.
In other films though, particularly Nolan's there has been a lot of care given as to exactly when the aspect ratio changes though. In the films where IMAX was used more sparkingly, like the Dark Knight, it was primarily used for just action scenes and establishing shots, but over all the aspect ratio would change for whole scenes or chunks of the movie. I thought the Dark Knight Rises in particular had a few genius uses of the aspect ratio change, doing things like changing ratios when a gate get slammed shut, etc.
This film though, the use of IMAX is nearly random. There are dialogue scenes shot partially in the standard format and then suddenly in IMAX. There are shots of a truck driving that are partially in IMAX for just a moment. There are moments in which it would have been nice if they were in IMAX but were instead in the standard format. The film often quickly cut back and forther between IMAX footage and regular footage, the screen jumping back and forth between being full screen and black-barred.
I think a bit more planning and care should have been taken with this aspect of the film.
That said though, if you haven't seen this in IMAX, even if you have to settle for a digital IMAX, see this in the best IMAX you can! The extra screen space, and the extra visual it allows allows for one of the most intense viewing experiences I've ever encountered.
Nolan's creative voice is fine. ORIGINAL, big-budget films are a rarity in Hollywood. Adaptations and sequels are pumped out like clockwork. I loved Gone Girl and Edge of Tomorrow, but even those are adaptations.
High-concept, original blockbusters like Interstellar should be celebrated.
Even adaptations are a problem and sign of un-originality now?
Adaptations are hardly part of the same kind of trend as endless remakes and sequels. They are often the source of new elements in the cinematic landscape.
Even adaptations are a problem and sign of un-originality now?
Adaptations are hardly part of the same kind of trend as endless remakes and sequels. They are often the source of new elements in the cinematic landscape.
These specific shots sure but each of these movies includes more of the iceland setting. The the "Ice and Black Rock Landscape" has become really rote and hardly something "we've never seen before." For scifi-fantasy films of the last 3 years, Iceland has become like Monuments Valley in Westerns.
The argument can be made that dreams can very much feel real and don't always contain elements that defy the laws of physics. I will say Inception did provide some justification for keeping dreams real in that it was meant as a way to make extracting information easier, it made sense for levels 1 and 2 in the finale although you can make the case that when they hit level 3 there really was no need to keep the realistic aspect anymore, if anything changing physics in level 3 could have provided much need protection for the characters.
The argument can be made that dreams can very much feel real and don't always contain elements that defy the laws of physics. I will say Inception did provide some justification for keeping dreams real in that it was meant as a way to make extracting information easier, it made sense for levels 1 and 2 in the finale although you can make the case that when they hit level 3 there really was no need to keep the realistic aspect anymore, if anything changing physics in level 3 could have provided much need protection for the characters.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
