Movie Debate #29: Interstellar

[RH | 5,246]

I finally saw it, maybe, a year ago?  I re-rated it as "Good, but not quite great".  Maybe it deserves another point, and I could see myself watching it once more.  However, I doubt I'd watch it more than that.

[Splain | 2,725]

Heh, I finally saw it too. It was supposed to be super "scientifically accurate" or whatever, but it's absolutely loaded with movie logic and fake science. It's not a bad movie I guess, but it was presented to me as one thing and it turned out to be another.

Whoa this thread is old.

[RH | 5,246]

19 minutes ago, Splain said:

Heh, I finally saw it too. It was supposed to be super "scientifically accurate" or whatever, but it's absolutely loaded with movie logic and fake science. It's not a bad movie I guess, but it was presented to me as one thing and it turned out to be another.

Whoa this thread is old.

I kind of agree.  I think it was a mix of both.  I know that, as I mentioned, they did put a lot of time in the math to properly develop the look of a black hole, if one were to get "close".  That was neat.  However, it started to go off of the realism-rails rather quickly once the team got into space.  In a way, it reminded me of 2001: A Space Odyssey.   That was a really cool, accurate-for-it's-time film... until it went coocoo.

[FireHazard51 | 2,105]

8, possibly 9.  I recently re-watched it in 4K.  For a Sci-fi film it was pretty good in terms of science FOR A MOVIE!!!  I think we forget how god awful some sci-fi films are so when a movie tries to make some things realistic.  Especially when it's REALLY sci-fi.  The Martian was basically a movie about what could happen, right now.  Not about what could happen in hundreds to thousands of years in the future.

Anyways, I was really impressed with the characters and their stories in the film.  Definitely heart breaking at the end for me.  Movie was nominated and won many awards for it's sound and visuals.  It's one of my go to movies to really highlight a sound system.  

[wongojack | 327]

The movie didn't really leave a great memory the first time I saw it.  Felt like a couple of different movies squished together, and I think it still is that, but I think my impression of it has actually improved since release.  Don't know if Ive sat down to watch the whole thing since the first time, but I've caught segments on planes or in hotels.  I end up thinking about little details here and there every once in a while, so I'm giving it . . . . 8 out of 10.

Edited July 22 by wongojack

[Andy_Bogomil | 866]

Didn't do it for me. Had some amazing visuals but overall I thought it went on too long. Some cool parts and theory with the planets but a lot of fluff and a little melodramatic for me.  I recently just saw this for the first time a few months ago.

[Dr. Morbis | 2,121]

Really great movie UNTIL it completely jumps the shark and has the protagonist enter God mode and all that shit for the last twenty minutes or so.  Take all that crap out and you've got the most realistic interpretation of what it might look like for humanity to move on from earth that we have ever seen in a movie... 7/10

[avatar! | 1,948]

18 minutes ago, Dr. Morbis said:

Really great movie UNTIL it completely jumps the shark and has the protagonist enter God mode and all that shit for the last twenty minutes or so.  Take all that crap out and you've got the most realistic interpretation of what it might look like for humanity to move on from earth that we have ever seen in a movie... 7/10

I think the most realistic interpretation is without doubt The Martian, which by the way is a better movie than book

For the record I loved 2001, which I thought was much better than Interstellar. I enjoyed Interstellar, it's visually beautiful. However, it gets ridiculously corny, and this whole notion of "love" as a force and being able to construct some sort of paradox-involved tesseract at the center of a black hole is fantasy. Not that fantasy is "bad" but Interstellar is set-up so that it wants you to believe that it's somehow based on actual science, when most of it is not.

 

[TDIRunner | 2,927]

Originally, I voted that I was "interested" since I hadn't seen the movie at that time.  Since then, I finally got around to watching it, and I was a little surprised that I didn't love it, despite the fact that it had all of the makings of a movie that I should love:

• I love realistic sci-fi movies
• I've loved every Christopher Nolan movie that I've ever watched
• Nearly everyone was in agreement that the movie was a masterpiece

It's possible that because of those factors, I went into with with the wrong expectations.  The movie was definitely good, no question.  But I felt it was a weak movie by Nolan standards.  I felt the entire first third of the movie to be really rushed, while the second third was full of character actions that made no sense, except to move the plot in the intended direction.  The final third was obviously pretty unique, and while I felt like I was able to follow it, it never made me say "wow."

I definitely regret not watching it in the theaters early on before having the opportunity to set my expectations too high, but sometimes that happens.  I was in the same boat with Inception.  I didn't watch it for the first time until about 5 or 6 years after its release.  The difference was that I absolutely loved that movie.  

I updated my vote to a 7.

Edited July 24 by TDIRunner

[avatar! | 1,948]

2 hours ago, TDIRunner said:

Nearly everyone was in agreement that the movie was a masterpiece

Really? Again, I thought it was entertaining, but not sure I'd watch it again. I think somewhere between a 6-7 is where I would rate it. In 50 years I think Interstellar will be a footnote and people will still be watching 2001

[TDIRunner | 2,927]

15 hours ago, avatar! said:

Really? Again, I thought it was entertaining, but not sure I'd watch it again. I think somewhere between a 6-7 is where I would rate it. In 50 years I think Interstellar will be a footnote and people will still be watching 2001

Well, obviously not everyone, but in general, there was, and still is, a consensus that the movie is very good. I just didn't fall in love with it the say that many other people did. 

[wongojack | 327]

Totally agree @avatar!2001 and Interstellar are not even close.  

[JamesRobot | 6,049]

Surprised I missed this one. Interstellar is pretty much a high meh.  I'll never really choose to watch it again.  I wanted to like it, but found it a little pretentious for hard sci fi.  Maybe I just don't get it.

[Tulpa | 3,735]

24 minutes ago, JamesRobot said:

Surprised I missed this one. Interstellar is pretty much a high meh.  I'll never really choose to watch it again.  I wanted to like it, but found it a little pretentious for hard sci fi.  Maybe I just don't get it.

Could have used more lightsabers.

 

[DefaultGen | 5,727]

Dang this is probably my favorite sci movie since 2000 next to Primer and we bumped this old thread just so more people can call it okay and I can be reminded Gloves hasn’t seen it.

Edited July 25 by DefaultGen

[Reed Rothchild | 9,971]

I've suddenly realized I like the softest sci-fi possible.  Fury Road and Back to the Future please 

[avatar! | 1,948]

1 hour ago, DefaultGen said:

Dang this is probably my favorite sci movie since 2000 next to Primer and we bumped this old thread just so more people can call it okay and I can be reminded Gloves hasn’t seen it.

Have you seen the new Dune movies? I have them on my list, heard they are excellent. I'll be honest, I thought the first Dune book was also excellent, but far from my favorite sci-fi book of all time. As an example, I think Hyperion and Solaris are both better than Dune, but of course it comes down to taste. Also, the classic Dune games are really good

[DefaultGen | 5,727]

48 minutes ago, avatar! said:

Have you seen the new Dune movies? I have them on my list, heard they are excellent. I'll be honest, I thought the first Dune book was also excellent, but far from my favorite sci-fi book of all time. As an example, I think Hyperion and Solaris are both better than Dune, but of course it comes down to taste. Also, the classic Dune games are really good

I thought they were okay. Dune II is literally the single highest rated sci fi movie on Letterboxd so clearly I’m out of the loop. They made me want to read the book(s) more than anything.

[avatar! | 1,948]

1 minute ago, DefaultGen said:

I thought they were okay. Dune II is literally the single highest rated sci fi movie on Letterboxd so clearly I’m out of the loop. They made me want to read the book(s) more than anything.

First book is worth reading. The other books I would not recommend.

[Brickman | 4,216]

5 hours ago, DefaultGen said:

Dang this is probably my favorite sci movie since 2000 next to Primer and we bumped this old thread just so more people can call it okay and I can be reminded Gloves hasn’t seen it.

Don't worry, it's still a great movie. This site just has some insanely critical people here. You'd think some of them wrote for a newspaper or something  I do think the last part of the movie wasn't so well done though, some people loved it though.

3 hours ago, avatar! said:

First book is worth reading. The other books I would not recommend.

You should watch the movies then because they do a great job recreating the first book. Denis Villeneuve is a huge Dune nerd and tried to create the atmosphere and followed the book as best as he could. Some shots are absolutely breath taking and completely immerse you in the world. I don't go to the cinema very often these days but this was a movie I'm glad I saw in the cinema and in IMAX.

In the age of recycled Marvel movies, it was great to see that old school Sci Fi can sometimes still get made. The level of detail is insane and you really can see the love put into the movies.