SOUND OFF

Sound Off: Christopher Nolan's 'Interstellar' - What Did You Think?

by
November 6, 2014

Interstellar

Now that you've seen it, what did you think? "We must confront the reality of interstellar travel." It's time for launch. Christopher Nolan's highly anticipated space exploration movie Interstellar has arrived in theaters, opening Tuesday night in 70mm IMAX & 70mm/35mm film cinemas, before going wide this weekend everywhere else. Matthew McConaughey stars as Cooper, who commands a mission through a wormhole near Saturn that takes them to another galaxy. The rest of the crew includes Anne Hathaway, Wes Bentley and David Gyasi, along with robots TARS and CASE. So how is it? Does it live up to very high expectations? Nolan's best yet? Once you've seen it, post a comment with your thoughts on Interstellar.

Spoiler Warning: We strongly urge everyone to actually see the film before reading ahead, as there may be spoilers below. We also encourage all commenters to keep major spoilers from the film to a minimum, if possible. However, this is an open discussion from this point on! Beware of spoilers, don't ruin this movie!

To fuel the rockets for launch, of course I loved Interstellar. I've seen it three times in 70mm IMAX and it's just as spectacular to see on repeat viewings as it is to experience the first time. It starts to fit together more and more as I see the pieces he put in, and how it all plays together (this will make more sense once you've seen it). Interstellar is a big, bold, incredibly ambitious, visually astonishing spectacle of science fiction. Nolan went for it and really, really tried to deliver - and he did when it comes to inspiring us to dream big, and hitting hard with the emotion of love, and what place humans have in the grand scheme of things. It's best to see this in IMAX where the sound and screen turn this into an unforgettable cinematic experience.

In all honesty, I don't think Interstellar is perfect, there are some odd choices and minor flaws in the script. I can look past most of them, but the overall feel of everything put together just didn't leave me in awe the way The Dark Knight did. But I'd rather not compare Nolan's movies because Interstellar is an ambitious creation of its own, and should be admired for the way it emboldens realistic space exploration. Not only is it great that Nolan shot everything practical, using miniatures and giant set pieces, but the way it accurately shows space and what can/would happen (with the orbiter in the second half), and what it's really like to explore other galaxies, even beyond. He went all the way out and back, and it was exhilarating to experience.

The last few notes: David Gyasi as "Romilly" the astrophysicist is one of my favorite characters, especially what he goes through. I enjoy his performance the most, but McConaughey and Hathaway are both stellar. The two robots, voiced by Bill Irwin (TARS) and Josh Stewart (CASE), are two of the best parts of the film and integral to understanding the big picture. Overall, I like the ideas more than the script, but it's still gorgeous and inspiring and breathtaking to behold. Read my entire review of Interstellar here. Dream big.

Interstellar

What did you think of Christopher Nolan's Interstellar? Ambitious sci-fi, or boring disaster?
We will remove any comments that indicate you have not seen the movie, as this area is meant to discuss the film only once you have seen it and can talk about your thoughts. Please keep the comments civilized!

Find more posts in Discuss, SciFi, Sound Off

Discover more around the web:

Loading...
  • Rembo
    oh boy did i like it, i think i was the first to order tickets at our cinema. The story was fresh, new, the robots made me laugh the space was great and de planets refreshing ;). the only thing i would like to see more is the explanation of certain things like why and how!
  • Knowing that this site is extremely pro nolan I'm going to be careful here. However i'd like to share my opinion on it since this is after all the point of a debate. I think Interstellar is a giant mess. Grand ideas, beautiful visuals and a very interesting ending still can't save it, IMO. Interstellar was the most unexciting exciting movie i've seen in a while. It tried so so hard but after 1 hour and 40 mins several people WALKED out of the arclight. No to the bathroom. They left. A few things really bothered me. Its not visually that it was lacking, to me mostly, the narrative logic is just so flawed (aside from other things). For one, this whole how he 'found' NASA was just laughable. If he was the best there is, why didn't they just go to him and convince him? I get it, it had to set up this way to get the payoff during the last act. I still didn't like it. The entire first setup was kinda nice but then it all felt like "boom thank you mam' and hes off into space. All on the same day. Everybody acted like nothing was ever special or amazing. A a new Galaxy. We just travelled a wormhole. A new planet. Not one bit of like "woaa". It felt flat to me. And that robot. I was waiting for Matt Damon to 'unzip' it and jump out HEY ITS ME MATT. Just stupid. Silly writing to suddenly broke the more serious tone. (on purpose, i get it. I still didnt laugh). Aside from other plot holes, the line goes "every hour on this planet is 7 years on earth". Ok. So please someone explain why the dude orbiting the planet waited 22 yrs? I was like what just happened? And again, everyone just acted like "oh nice this is normal". I did like the ending somewhat. It felt like finally this is getting interesting. However that 'twist' was like...so? option B seemed more 'real' anyways. I didn't see what was so shocking about it. Again, the more abstract parts were beautiful and very 2001 like, which was awesome. i dunno, im just rambling here really. My apologies if im jumping around but after months of waiting surely you understand that i want to process this movie somewhat. Maybe a 2nd viewing will clear things up a bit better. Lastly, what really bothered me was the score. It played non stop. Over dialog. The church organ is a nice idea and i liked esp. again during the ending but the entire movie felt like on long music video. It rarely paused. I still give Nolan props for trying to do something original and you def thought about the ending for a bit. But given the audience reaction last night (it was packed) not a single person was applauding and people walked out of this movie, it just wasn't executed that well.
    • OfficialJab
      Your audience was very different than mine, there was plenty of applause and happy patrons. I had problems with the time and other 'pop' science elements too. I was fine with book land - but did he get there through a black hole? How was he brought there? Would a black hole not crush you to almost nothing before you could pass through it to anywhere, anyway? I can't disagree enough about the score or the lack of excitement though. Non-action scenes were even very tense, like them deciding between Mann and Edmund's planets. The most disappointing thing about the film for me was my expectation from the initial announcement. My first hope when I heard the title and one-sentence pitch was that we would be exploring the universe, but not because we trashed Earth. I'm sick of that premise, I'm still waiting for a great sci-fi film about exploration for curiosity's sake, but I guess Prometheus kinda gave me that. This was still about an 8 or 9 for me though. They've absolutely got a bluray sale from me.
      • Alexander Scott
        Original Star Trek?
        • OfficialJab
          Original is right. I sure hope Trek 3 finally gets back to that. All of humanity/the universe doesn't need to be in peril for a good story.
          • Dominic
            ;?)) the problem is , Humanity trashing this planet IS a Reality . And it is prob the only reason stuff like this will ever get actually built , as psychologically , humans work best under pressure ...So it's easier to incorporate in a narrative ; carries its own dramas ....
          • Dominic
            And ( sorry for the dash of cold water on your theory ) but in the official ST "timeline" , it's the devastation after their World War Three ,and the Eugenics Wars ( Kahn) which SPURS not only the need for Space "exploration" ( resettlement) but the Founding of the Space Federation to govern such exploration ..... The same desperation , albeit with a Prime Directive cooked up along the way ...
  • Emdub52
    It was one of those films that was hard to talk about after it was over. I mean really hard. I was still trying to take it all in. I wanted to ask my friends what they thought, but at the time I could care less. (spoiler) I just couldn't get that 5th dimention out of my head. I kept asking myself how did the evolved human race from the future create this dimention that helped them save the remaining humans. I will admit that in 70mm IMAX, it was beautiful. Some of the shots that took up the entire screen was something to behold. Those alone were worth the ticket price. The go-pro style shots on the spaceships during the action sequences were second to none. I loved them. The IMAX sound while going back and forth built so much tension, I had to remember to breath at times. Overall, I loved the world Nolan created. I am more about a movie experience than anything else. I will overlook a lot to have a super great time at the theater. And I had a super great time watching this movie.
    • Zack Snyder
      Enjoy it! It may be the last of its kind.
      • son_et_lumiere
        jeez, i hope not. true, adventurous cinema with big ideas, big spectacle, big questions with no spoon-fed answers, fine performances, extensive practical work, and on film. i can see the last of these going, but if the rest goes, the future is bleak indeed! here's to cinema that pushes the boundaries. more, please.
    • son_et_lumiere
      well said. i was surprised how tense i got watching it. in addition, having finally caught it on true IMAX yesterday (and with SPOILERS to follow), as well as the startling visuals, i actually thought that many aspects of the interwoven narrative were great, like Coop's future self directing the library action at the start of the film, and the 'archive' footage of people speaking about the past at the beginning that turned out to be from after the main plot of the film had concluded. i won't deny Michael Caine's inability to age amused and there were a few jarring narrative jumps, but they couldn't dampen my overall enthusiasm for full on, proper storytelling and direction with more than a nod to A Space Odyssey. plus nice to see a certain well known action hero playing the complete opposite. would be happy to see it again on the biggest screen possible and it's already in the purchase wishlist.
  • Zack Snyder
    I think this is the best film of the last decade. Fans of Nolan might think this isn't his best but casual moviegoers will be converted into Nolanites after this.
    • Ryan
      I was very much, and still am on the fence with the score. Certain moments it was absolutely perfect and I couldn't imagine anything else in its place, but other times I really wish they would have just cut it out entirely. But that is Nolan's style, he likes to play through moments and increase the intensity with a dramatic score. Although Hans Zimmer is fantastic, sometimes I think the lack of a good score can be more beneficial to the tone of some scenes.
      • Like most Nolan movies, they are over scored. A few scenes, i could barely understand what was being said. And that is simply not good. At times, it felt like one long music video to me.
        • Ryan
          I totally agree, The thing I am noticing more and more with Nolan's films is that he treats them like trailers. Every chunk of dialogue is profound and impactful in its own way, every visual is a picture, and there is almost always music running through.
        • VodkaSauce
          Over-scored with some of the best music in decades. Keep on hating troll.
  • NathanDewey
    I thought it was excellent. Most importantly, I cared about pretty much everyone in it and they all had a strong purpose. The movie was filled with very tense moments and one really big jump scare that felt like someone kick me in the chest. The story was great. The performances were top notch from everyone involved. The only issue I had was with Nolan's inter-cutting. I've had an issue with his pacing whenever he inter-cuts between scenes, it feels like they need to play out more before they cut. I did not like Inception because of that issue because it drags things out too much and it kills the momentum the movie had going, but in this, it's done sparingly (during the Mann fight and the crops burning scenes) so it's really a minor complaint. I thought the movie was very strong.Visually it's spectacular. It lost a little luster at the very end after the 5th dimension sequence but other than those small complaints I walked out feeling very pleased. I may end up seeing it again.
  • superultraboy
    Christopher Nolan is a genius. This film isn't for everyone, but I loved the science and the intellectual stimulation. This is sci-fi at its core.
  • Steve Hapke
    I very big complex movie-well done by its creator and production team, best theatrical experience is quite awhile
  • Alexander Scott
    I found myself about half way through thinking 'they just don't make movies like this anymore'... It was the cinematic equivalent of tasting Wagyu beef after eating McRib day in, day out... You sort of realise that films like this are almost no longer even possible... and how malnourished we've become without even realising it.
    • That's what I loved about it - I want to support it because something like this is so rare, it deserves admiration simply for existing, for being so bold and pushing so far out into the universe. It may not be perfect, but damnit, it's amazing to see someone even try for something this exciting again.
      • son_et_lumiere
        couldn't agree more. i agree with your review above in that i don't think it's 100% perfect, but it's great to see someone (consistently) aiming for bigger and more adventurous storytelling. Nolan is not the only one, but there do seem to be far fewer directors *not* resting easy in the middle-of-the-road.
  • I knew Nolan fans will just ignore plot holes and major questions like, who put the wormhole there in the first place? If it was humans from the future, doesn't that mean, Cooper should've already known? Also, why was Romilly waiting for them for 21 years? He said "one hour equals 7 years on EARTH" yet he was in orbit of the same planet. Did i miss something? Maybe it was the music which was making it impossible to understand half of the dialog. I really wanted to love the movie but i just can't. The editing, pacing was so off in the first 2 hours. I did like the ending very much tho. Very abstract and it worked i suppose because a day later and im still thinking about it.
    • The idea was that his daughter figured out the wormhole thanks to the quantum calculations he sent back to her, then she created the wormhole in order to help him save the human race. Of course, this creates a time conundrum typical of the genre. As for Romilly, it was explained that the planet, being closer to the black hole, experienced faster time than being in orbit away from the planet.
      • superultraboy
        I don't think Murph created the wormhole. All she did was use Cooper's morse code in the watch to solve the gravity equation to help complete Plan A to save people by launching them into space. The where did the wormhole question is a good question, and maybe future humans did put it there, but that doesn't mean Cooper had to know how did it exactly.
      • Some good ideas there. As for Romily i thought he was within close proximity of the planet. Musta missed that part, most likely when the music was walking all over the dialog. :)
    • Snev De la Fontaine
      I like that you elaborate on what you mean with plotholes, rather than just mention it very smugly, leaving us that didn't notice them dangling like we're idiots for not thinking so. 1. I think it was humans from the future, yes. But why does that mean Cooper should've already known? I think the logic is a lot like the third Harry Potter film, where they go back in time and help themselves (Hermione throwing the rock to get them out of Hagrid's hut and Harry summoning the patronus) to make sure everything works out. And it all does, in a closed loop that we (audience and characters) only get once we've gone through it full circle. 2. If I remember correctly, they weren't actually in orbit around the planet, but kept the spaceship further off instead (and keeping it there, wasting fuel along with it, but less time). "One hour equals 7 hours on earth" doesn't mean that it only equals more time on earth. If the spaceship was far away enough from the black hole, its time would run equal or be close to that on earth.
      • Are you really using Harry Potter as an example? lol ok.
        • Snev De la Fontaine
          I'm aware Harry Potter isn't the most cerebral movie to compare Interstellar to, but it's widely known and serves the purpose of explaining my argument. (And I stand by the third HP film as the only one that's actually a great film). It's a bit disappointing that that might be the only thing about my comment that struck a cord with you.
          • No no. thanks for the explanations. Makes sense in a way. Actually thats 7 YEARS not hours. Still. Who put the wormhole there in the first place?
          • Snev De la Fontaine
            Indeed, it's years, not hours. My bad. Future humans put it there, in the past, to close the loop that made them put it there. Same way Cooper put out the NASA coordinates to his daughter in the past. We never see the future humans do it, so it might be something else, but that's the presumed explanation, I think.
    • VodkaSauce
      You really expect us to believe that the guy who trolls Nolan and Inception at every opportunity actually wanted to like this movie???? LOL. Please. Nolan fans will just ignore plot holes? So I guess Nolan trolls ignore everything else including the self awareness to know that we're all laughing at you and your pseudo-objectivity. I've had to put up with your trolling here for months and months. We get it ...you don't like Nolan. Good for you...but don't for a second think we're not smart enough to realize you're hating to hate and your criticism of his work is laughable at best.
      • Troll? Your hiding behind your little computer under some fake name and calling me a troll because im critical of his work? You know whats laughable? You spending time me trying to make yourself look so smart when all you do is add NOTHING to the discussion of the actual movie, FF. I have stated several times that The Prestige is one of my FAV movies. Do you get that? Does that compute with your little brain? Yes, i go into movie hoping i will hate them. Right. Yeah! Thats it. Go watch the movie and add your own critic and leave your personal insults when you register with a real name and face. TWAT.
    • DAVIDPD
      I would explain the first question as to why Cooper didn't recall the wormhole, was that the humans that placed said wormhole are like way, way in the future so Cooper is already LONG dead. They could recognize that this moment in time was a fixed point and sought to make sure we could course correct into space. Remember that these people could control five freaking dimensions!~ As for Dr. Romilly's 23 year time dilation, he remained in orbit, so he was on the same time relativity plane as Earth. Time was only affected for those who entered the planet's atmosphere.
      • Snev De la Fontaine
        I might remember this wrong, but didn't they say they wouldn't remain in orbit because even then they'd be too affected by the time dilation? I thought they kept the ship far away enough not to be affected by the time dilation and benefit from orbit, making them waste fuel to stay near (but less so than making extra trips).
        • DAVIDPD
          That was the tragic part of it, Snev. The ship was not affected. It was the explorers who left...For Dr. Romilly time passed as normal, but for the ones who visited the planet it accelerated, but since time is relative to the user, it felt normal. They ended up wasting so much fuel because 23 years passed when they thought it would initially be a couple years.
      • #cubelife
        i dont understand how entering the planets atmosphere suddenly slows time down?
        • Snev De la Fontaine
          It's not so much about entering the planet's atmosphere. It's because the planet is orbiting a black hole, which slows time the closer you get to it. And entering its atmosphere brings you close enough to the black hole to be affected by it.
        • DAVIDPD
          Please recall how time works here on Earth, in short it is the duration of the Earth's travel around the sun. One full rotation around the sun equals one year. Planets closer to the sun have less distance to travel around and therefore experience shorter "years". It is not the atmosphere that slows time down but the effects of the black hole and the planet's proximity to the black hole. Once the explorers enter the planet's atmo. they are subject to the black hole's affect on the planet's time. In space, there is nothing to relate to, but on the planet they were subject to the planet's relative distance to the black hole.
  • Randall Miller
    We were exhausted leaving the cinema, we held on tight and knowing Mr. Nolan refused to blink. The film and the science was expiatory . After seeing the theory on the Science channel, for years, we were prepared and believed this is the answer to space travel. The performances, ( yes Mr. Nolan made us cry twice) and was indeed proud of what the school system was teaching in regard to the Apollo missions in the future. The score was breath taking ....this was an incredible experience we shall never forget. Indeed this Nolan film we walked away from knowing the answers to his questions. Bravo.
  • Angry Lester
    Hey where's Chris Groves?!?! Anyway, thanks for all the reviews, I wasn't going to the Theatre to watch this one but will now!!
  • Ryan
    I have to say, I did not like it. The visuals were amazing, the score for the most part was top notch, and the acting was on par with all of Nolan's films. But I feel like maybe Nolan focuses so intensely on making a huge breathtaking visual buffet that he loses the minutia of character development that this film so desperately needed. this is a movie, a visual medium; stop telling me about the relationships between characters and start showing me. all in all this is a fantastic movie, and I highly recommend spending the extra money and seeing it in IMAX(I still am getting chills thinking about certain scenes). But I am remiss to mention that it is lacking in certain essential departments that keep me from calling it a classic, just a little too "hollywood" for my taste. IF YOU READ ANYTHING READ THIS go see this movie in theaters, support it, tell your friends. Because we need films like this that break the mold and take money away from the blockbuster shitstorm that is destroying our Pop Culture. You WILL have a good time, I guarantee it.
    • Bo
      I've read more than a few reviews and heard from others that this movie is EXACTLY what you refer to as 'a blockbuster shitstorm that is destroying our culture'. Over the top and maudlin low brow sentimental junk with no real characters sharing any genuine intimacy or real feelings. So...if this is in fact the case...why support it?
      • Ryan
        because this movie did a lot right: the balance of CGI, the immensity, the overall aesthetic. The more money this makes, the more chance that our future will be filled with more films like this but better.
        • Dominic
          basically nowadays you don't go to movies JUST for the acting . Either the acting or the script can suck , but if a movie hit the heights like your 1st sentence indicates , then people will like it .. Alex liked the character development ....
        • Bo
          Well, perhaps. Still, there are those that think these huge and bloated and expensive CGI movies that cater to the masses or lowest common demoninator in order to make this 'more money' you talk about is what is or has ruined the aesthetics of film. It will make a lot of money though, you can rest assured of that. Anyway, thanks for your intelligent reply and comments.
      • VodkaSauce
        Those reviewers sound like idiots.
        • Bo
          Now, now...in fact, these reviewers, as you refer to them, are some of the smartest and most respected critics in the business. One might take a look at their view(s) that very intelligent people are idiots because they differ from one's own tastes; it might reveal something worth working on and changing...about one's self. Just saying...
      • Snev De la Fontaine
        If Interstellar is seen as a shitstorm that's destroying our culture, then I'm not sure I want what to be a part of what should count as culture. Don't get me wrong, I think the film is flawed and I would agree that its charachter development is a little superficial. I see the value in films that show genuine intimacy or real feelings, but I'm so glad cinema is more varied than just that. I personally enjoy seeing characters explore space, talk about wormholes, be confronted with the problems of the relativity of time and thinking about how the plot fits together. There's so many films out there that pretend to be about intimacy and real feelings, but can be reduced to sentimental junk or nothing but hollow staring in a low-saturated frame. Don't blame a science fiction film for being low on intimacy.
        • Bo
          Thanks for your reply. So shall we agree to disagree? Still, there are some that will always have difficulties with flawed films whose character development is a little superficial. Why can't these big CGI films show genuine intimacy or real feelings? Why accept superficiality? On any level in any film? Regardless if it chats about wormholes, etc. Just saying. Anyway, thanks for your polite and intelligently presented views. I appreciate that as well as your views because these 'big' films are here to stay, that's for sure.
          • Snev De la Fontaine
            Thank you as well, for the same reasons. I don't mind agreeing to disagree, though I'd like to respond to that question. I wouldn't argue that we should accept superficiality because superficiality is good enough. Ideally, films would succeed on every level. I'd love it if Interstellar handled its character development better, almost as much (less, because of personal preference) as I'd love emotionally deep films to explore a cerebral or philosophical level more. And I have to add a personal frustration that, though a film's ideas don't have to be too explicit, vagueness by itself is not enough to make a film philosophical (easy though it is to find whatever idea you'd like to project onto it). Nonetheless, directors are flawed and films generally have a primary focus. I too regret that blockbusters tend to assume that painting by the numbers or exploiting only one interesting focus will be sufficient to make money. But I honestly think Nolan tries hard to get everything right (and much of it is). His fault is a lack of skills in executing emotions and it makes his films flawed, but they don't ruin them.
          • Bo
            Good enough; as they say...one man's floor is another man's ceiling....whatever the hell that means...lol... I'm glad the lack of skills in executing emotions in his films does not ruin them for you. For me it's a lot more than that; his work just does not speak to me. So be it. Thanks again for the chat. May I suggest a film titled Calvary to you...just an excellent film with Brendan Gleeson; as well as Force Majeure. That too is an interesting film dealing with the male heroic expectations and how that has an effect on relationships and families. Take a look. Much, much different films than what Nolan makes so not to be compared on that level as they both are very much grounded in realism...which is my cup of tea. Good luck...peace!
          • Snev De la Fontaine
            I liked Calvary (and all of the McDonagh brothers' films, actually) and I'll check out Force Majeure, thanks. Did you ever see Contact by the way? Though it's quite different in how it's executed (not very Nolan-y), it's also quite like Interstellar. If you'd have seen it already, I wonder what you think of that film.
          • Bo
            Yea, glad to hear you actually saw Calvary...and then also liked it. What a great, great film. Very dark, very heavy. I was blown away at the end; just didn't think the guy would actually shoot him. Do check out Force Majeure. Very interesting film. Contact. Yes, I saw it. That was a long time ago and I only remember that I didn't think much of it...or that it was just okay. Hard to suspend disbelief on these speculative films dealing with space and aliens, etc. I hold to the only thing I know to be true is what I can experience or know myself. All else is just fantasy and speculation stemming from a dissatisfaction with the human condition. And why not...just take a look at what Clavary is about. Wow! Sorry, got a little heavy there...lol...
          • Snev De la Fontaine
            Then I think that confirms our preferences. I adore fantasy and speculation (although it should be a little rigorous so my suspension of disbelief doesn't go through the roof). They're like little thought-experiments or dreams about strange possibilities. They may stem from a dissatisfaction with the human condition, but I don't think that's a bad thing. Perhaps one more thing in defence of fantasy. They can work perfectly well to emphasise intimacy, real feelings or experiences. Dracula doesn't need to be a vampire to understand his seemingly eternal obsession, but the concept of vampire is a fertile one to intensify certain feelings or states of being (like being a recluse, filled with desire, ennui with having too much time, power).
          • Bo
            Okay, and well put. No, dissatisfaction with the human condition is certainly not a bad thing...however...to soothe one's self with fantasy due to a dissatisfaction with the human condition...well, that's another matter. I suppose all is well, if one, such as yourself, is aware and conscious of all this...so there is that. Myself, I subscribe to the interior journey within as of much more value than the external and exterior journey. Freedom is within; not without. And there are those that say all of life is just a dream and that everything, everything is a manifestation of the mind. Like the old sage said, you all see yourself in life while I see life in myself. Even Einstein said, ' reality is but an illusion... albeit it a persisant one'. I still chuckle at that. So, I have enjoyed our polite and respectful of one another's preferences so I thank you for that. Did you happen to see Frances Dormand in Olive Kitteridge on HBO? It's a pretty good take on the human condition and the suffering people endue with life and with each other. Worth a look. Later...
          • Snev De la Fontaine
            Thank you and until we meet again in future comments. Goodnight.
    • VodkaSauce
      The character development moved me to tears...that was the core of the movie
  • So its been like 2 days and even with its flaws, I'm thinking about it all the time. Which i guess means Nolan did his work well despite those imperfections. Maybe i will go and *gasp* see it again but in IMAX (I saw it in 70mm Arclight) at the newly remodelled chinese here in Hollywood. Its a good excuse for sure. Anyone notice how interstellar pulled a Seven on the cast? Matt D name is nowhere ever mentioned (like Kevin Spacey in seven before) so i was surprised when i did finally see him. One thing i didn't get, why did he want to make sure cooper never leaves? Because he wanted to leave himself? Oh yeah and one last thing: topher grace. Why o why. ­čśë
    • superultraboy
      Dr Mann faked the data so that he could be rescued.
    • Snev De la Fontaine
      I wonder about that part also. Why was Dr Mann crazy enough to try and steal the ship to get back to humanity, but composed enough to calmly carry on his earlier deception rather than ask or plead for his return (be it explicitly or subtly)? He could have just gone mental after they said they can't send him back.
  • Christopher
    So much for freedom of speech. You guys just go around deleting people's comments you don't like? Excuse me for just joking around and trying to get a laugh. I remember why I quit visiting your website years ago. You guys suck and I hope you go under. Go ahead and delete that.
    • Lin Group
      Freedom of speech applies to government censorship, not private sites like this.
      • Christopher
        Whatever. I live in America not nazi Germany. No one's gonna tell me what I can and cannot say.
        • Dominic
          Um yes they CAN . even in America . and you can either deal with it , or exercise your freedom to not be here
          • Christopher
            Um no they can't. They can just delete my comment after I say what I want. They'll probably just ban me eventually but that's why this site sucks. I was just trying to be funny and tell a joke but I guess this is run by a bunch of uptight assholes. So you can suck my balls. I can say whatever the FUCK I want.
          • Dominic
            Grow up , every site has their own rules Pretty obvious that you crossed a line .... we're lucky the line isn't closer than it is , here
          • Brah, can you chill the fuck out for a min? Nazi Germany? dude its been a long time, there isn't any nazi germany anymore. Im German i can attest. Freedom of speech? This is a privately held site, they can do whatever they want. Dont like it, maybe take that stick out of your ass and post something with relevance. Good day.
          • Lin Group
            You truly are retarded, this is a private site, they can do with comments as they please. You have no Rights here, the fact that as an American you don't understand that shows how little education you actually have. Trying to compare a privately owned internet site to that of Nazi Germany is outright retarded.
          • OfficialJab
            lol, Alex please don't delete these ones, they're funny.
  • Deb
    Love seeing the Diana Gabaldon book on the bookshelf in Murphy's room but am still wondering why future humans built the singularity to get Cooper to tell Murph how to get the ship off the ground on earth. I presume that initially the human race is saved because Amelia uses Plan B and populates the planet she is on and they become the future race of human beings capable of travelling through time but unable to communicate with past humans. However, why go back in time to rescue all the people on earth at that particular time...why not go back and prevent the black plague - it would have sped up technology.
  • Chris Groves
    Complete honesty: I think this is Nolan's masterpiece. I'm a die-hard fan of his work, I love every film he's made(okay, Insomnia, I just like a lot, I don't love it) and I think this is my favorite Nolan film to date. Previously, The Dark Knight was my favorite...but this just reaches beyond that. And that is part of it, few films dare to be as ambitious and reach to the heights that Interstellar aspires to. Even if it didn't hit a home-run in EVERY aspect of the film, it is full of brilliant moments, scenes, and sequences...and the shortcomings are few and far between and do not weigh down the experience of the film one bit.
    • DAVIDPD
      I really had the opposite reaction Chris. I wanted to love it so much, but I just couldn't. It completely lost me when Cooper was thrown into the Fifth Dimension. I almost laughed at Nolan's audacity. I was loving it up until that point though, I just couldn't swallow how sci-fi he went. I'm calling that moment the film's "zag" as in it was zigging and zigging, but that zag was just too much. I did appreciate the acting though, especially young-Murph.
      • Chris Groves
        Really? I think films going THAT 'sci-fi' are just too rare, too few and too far between. Full disclosure, the first time I saw the films 2001 and Contact was nearly 3 years ago...and I loved them both(2001 much more-so) and immediately wondered why there wasn't another "Big Idea" Sci-fi film made in the last decade and a half. Interstellar essentially answered my prayers, I loved how "Hard sci-fi" the film was. I had my mouth hanging open in awe for that entire sequence, for many sequences throughout the film, to be honest.
        • DAVIDPD
          Yeah I may have just been expecting something different. In fact, that is exactly what happened. It just surprised me in a way I was not prepared for mentally. Everything up until then was pretty much grounded in what is plausible. I think it will age better. // The whole time the Fifth Dimension sequence was happening all I could think about was this film:
          • Chris Groves
            I like the Abyss as much as anyone...but I kind of fail to see why the 5th dimension would trigger thoughts of that? If anything, it had me thinking back to the Stargate sequence from 2001 or the climax from Contact
          • DAVIDPD
            I related it to the audacity of the story telling. To go that far with it.
          • Chris Groves
            Fair enough, I have a personal love for movies going that 'big' with their ideas and ambitions.
          • LOL. There was zero 5th dimension elements in Abyss. You make zero sense to think of that scene? But ok.
          • DAVIDPD
            You are right in a sense, but my relation was similarity in the audacity of both directors to completely break plausible science tone so forcefully into fiction.
          • VodkaSauce
            You literally make no sense
          • DAVIDPD
            I did not mean to relate the stories, just plots kind of going off the rails they had so nicely established.
      • Disagree. This is pretty much the most interesting part of the entire movie. And its done pretty well. I felt like i was on an LSD trip...very 2001 inspired.
        • DAVIDPD
          Most interesting, yes? I will agree on that. Like I said, it was really good. That moment will just keep INTERSTELLAR from being one of my favorite Nolan films. Maybe it will become better with more viewings.
          • Jon Odishaw
            Thats the moment that truly separated it from other sci fi though. that was its new offering to the world. everything else was 2001, the abyss and contact.
          • DAVIDPD
            That's my problem. I recognize that fact. I just did not like it very much. Like a music critique who can recognize the importance of STAIRWAY TO HEAVEN, but does not care the for the record.
      • VodkaSauce
        That was actually one of the coolest scenes in the movie. Stick with Transformers...sounds more like your speed
        • DAVIDPD
          You insult yourself by acting so dumb on the Internet. Truly. You do not know me, nor do you know my taste in film. We, as paying movie goers, are entitled to our opinions. If you want to have a thoughtful discussion then please start a dialogue in a civilized way. // Breaking into the Fifth Dimension was too much for me. I really enjoyed the film up until that point. The characters were nicely set up, the story made reasonable sense and the visuals were breathtaking. But having Cooper "haunt" his daughter from the Fifth Dimension? Sorry, I just didn't really jibe with that part. But really other than that part I really liked INTERSTELLAR. // I apologize if my comment offended you, I am just trying to be reasonable.
    • That really depends where you set the bar. I didn't care for any Batman, maybe Begins had its moments but i wouldn't call this movie a masterpiece. First hour and 40 mins are just not very good, imo. Things get better later for sure but I think in general the bar is so low these days, pretty much destroyed by silly superhero movies, that of course, a new original scifi will get a lot of praise. Its good but not great IMO.
      • VodkaSauce
        Troll somewhere else please
    • Jon Odishaw
      I was disappointed I didn't get my two cents in before there were a hundred comments but I agree with everything you said(apart from fav nolan film, mines memento) Brilliant movie, not without its flaws but I think its his masterpiece.
      • Chris Groves
        Exactly, I can't/don't rate movies on "were there flaws" because if I put the right hat on, I can pick apart aspects of even my absolute favorite movies. I basically go off of the experience of watching the movie, how good the good aspects were, how bad other aspects were. The highs vs the lows. In general, if the 'good' outweighs the 'not-so-good' by a large enough percentage, than I'm perfectly satisfied. Interstellar also fulfills a demand I was having for a modern film like this. Something that could be included in the ranks of more "thoughtful, intelligent" sci-fi films like 2001: A Space Odyssey or Contact. Gravity didn't fulfill that demand, it was just a thriller set in space. Interstellar is really one of the only films of its kind in the new millennium, and for that reason, I'm going to value it more for simply being what it is. The high points were exceptional, and the weak points hardly hurt the film at all. The experience of watching it was unique and is a trip I plan to take as many times as I can before it leaves theaters.
  • DAVIDPD
    My favorite parts were "CASE" and "TARS" speaking. They were amazingly effective at providing humor. Bill Irwin (TARS) and Josh Stewart (CASE) deserve some attention. The editing was magnificent as was the acting, but that "Ghost" explanation was too much for me. Overall, 8/10.
  • Huck PS
    I enjoyed this movie a whole damn lot. McConaughey's Cooper leaving his daughter and driving off in tears, and the countdown right there and then was a really good move. Nolan it seems had a lot to tell and was not afraid to cut off parts he deemed were not necessary for the narrative to move forward. Nolan also goes back to the origami game that we've seen in Inception or Memento where he doesn't mind folding things over and over themselves and creating a very "Nolanesque" structure, as in time bending, fifth dimensions and the constant that cuts through it all, here this constant is the obvious love that drives Cooper to be the father he needs to be. - What I didn't like? Didn't care much for the iteration of Dylan Thomas' "Do not go gently into that good night". Michael Caine's last scene was powerful though, if only they had kept it at the launch and at the death bed. - What I really liked? Matt Damon as the "bad guy" you still want to forgive. The small but powerful contribution from Casey Affleck. And more importantly "Tars" and "Case" who are some warped later versions of HAL 9000 that bring a surprisingly humorous and honest addition to the movie. Bottom line is Nolan won't waste any time cutting your meat for you, he has a story to tell, and if you need to watch the movie more than once to get everything, even better. I enjoyed this movie a whole damn lot!
    • DAVIDPD
      I really dug that scene with the baseball game. Very cool. Also, dat wave. Thumbs up!
  • Really love this film. The "everything that can happen, will happen" message was awesome and inspiring. If you ever feel afraid of doing something, just do it. The most mind boggling aspect of the film to me is the "chicken or the egg" dilemma. If we follow along with Cooper's explanation and believe that future humans put the wormhole there, where did the first instance of the wormhole come from? Unless that wormhole wasn't put there by future humans. Or maybe it's explained by this movies interpretation of Murphy's law: everything that can happen, will happen. Meaning it's all a closed circle without a beginning or an end. Interestingly there are some that say the Cooper waking up part might not be real, and it's all up to Brand to safe humanity from extinction by using the "population bomb". Or maybe the ending shows two different timelines? Amazing visuals, amazing score, amazing acting, some flaws along the way, but all in all an incredible experience! I've seen the film twice now in IMAX and am contemplating a third visit.
    • Snev De la Fontaine
      I think the fact that Cooper sends his past self the coordinates to NASA suggests that it's all part of a closed loop. There is no "first instance of the wormhole" like there is no first instance of something else sending the coordinates to NASA. Every cause and effect is part of that same timeline. And strange though that is, I think it's the only plausible way in which something like timetravel would work.
  • jay
    As a fan of many earlier Nolan films and a massive fan of 2001, I hate to say, I only liked it some. I just saw it last night so its hard to say, my opinion usually moves around one or two points after a few days, but as of right now its sitting at a soft 7. I just had way too many problems; technical problems, narrative problems, character problems, etc.--i noticed things like those which took me out of the film way more times than i noticed something which made me say 'wow, that was awesome.'
    • Huck PS
      Jay, Elaborate please.
      • jay
        Ha, if you say so. Fasten your seatbelt. Spoilers, obvi. On a narrative level, and this is an issue Ive had with all of Nolan's post-Dark Knight films, I was really struggling with the pacing and exposition. Many sequences felt way too long without advancing the plot or way too short, leaving me with questions. For example, what was the point of the sequence where Wes Bentley's character docks the shuttle on the larger spaceship after they first take off? The music and atmosphere was obviously there to add tension, but clearly we knew he was going to make it, it was like an hour into the film. It felt long and out of place to me. I guess you could argue that we needed that docking sequence to help us understand the docking sequences later in the film, but I really dont think we needed any sort of help understanding how that system worked. Another one, and I realize this will be a bold statement for many, was the entire water-planet sequence. Why was that even in the movie? It did advance the plot in that it created the time warp dynamic, but that could have easily been written into the plot with only two planets. This sort of thing happened several times for me, and its not so much that I felt the movie needed to be shorter, it was that other parts of the film felt so truncated that I felt these unnecessary sequences should have been shortened. The whole sequence from when Cooper accidentally stumbles into NASA to being launched into space felt so rushed for me. I did love the jump cut from Cooper's truck with the launch countdown to the shuttle launch, but that whole sequence just felt like in what was apparently under 24 hours so much had been decided by so many characters and I had no time to take in any of it. Also, I experienced several moments throughout the film which felt like plotholes, many of which im not certain about, but still took me out of the movie in the moment. Why did NASA go ahead and let cooper pilot the shuttle? I realize he was being led by his future self so there's this inevitable time loop happening, but the people on earth didnt know that. It felt like Cooper literally just showed up at NASA, and after some confusion by every character, apparently they all decided that this guy should man the most important space mission in history, which apparently was either planned to launch the next day without him, or they literally just decided to launch it the next day because the pilot they needed showed up on the front doorstep. Either way it was confusing, and just felt so hurried. Where was Cooper's training? Im not saying I needed some Rocky montage and I realize he was a pilot before, but once on the shuttle, he needed constant exposition to help him know what the mission was even about! One crew member had to give him the most basic explanation of wormholes ever, and apparently, right before they were all about to go into a two year hibernation, Cooper decides it might be nice to ask Anne Hathaway what the planets they are going to even look like??? Which apparently no one explained to him before he took off to explore them?? Another more minor one was the confusing geography during Matt Damon's betrayal sequence. We are given the impression that theyve been walking on this planet for maybe a couple hours, but when Hathaway flies around to come save Cooper, it seems like shes flying for miles, how the hell far did they walk?? Also, and this is related to my problems with the scene stated earlier, but can someone explain to me what the hell that water planet sequence was?? Apparently, they need to go explore this planet see if it was habitable. Cool. But apparently the way to do that is to fly to the planet, immediately fly into the atmosphere and land without any higher exploration whatsoever, find out that a maybe 10 mile area of the planet is uninhabitable, and just leave, no further exploration needed. What?? They could have been in the middle of the planet's pacific ocean! Every planet is bound to have some inhabitable parts, apparently the astronaut who landed there first tragically died before exploring any further, it seemed like they did very, very little exploring to deem the planet uninhabitable. Yes, theres the time warp problem, but they could have at least circled the planet for land masses, yeah?? Oh and fuel is a problem? Well maybe they just should have taken some more time to create a more fuel efficient mission instead of literally taking off one day after assigning their miracle pilot?? Heres another one, me being nitpicky. So at the climax of the film, we find that humanity has ascended into fifth dimensional beings, who manipulate time-space in order to save ourselves from extinction. Yes. I am all about that, that's awesome. My problem lies in the fact that it seemed like they banked on so much. It seems like the 5th dimensional humans had a lot of power at their disposal, but their way of saving themselves?? Pop a little wormhole (Out by Saturn?? They could get that close but not ANY closer?? Really??) in our galaxy, get cooper to fly out on the mission and get himself eventually stuck in a weird time loop dimension where he will manipulate dust, wristwatches, and falling books to save the entire species. Now this gets into some weird inevitable time loop-paradox stuff, so its hard to really say, but all of that just really seems like a far cry for me. It just stretched me too much. A lot of these problems can probably be explained logically and with further viewings, I admit that, but the fact is that they took me out of the film and made me scratch my head in the moment. I went with several friends, and most of us agreed about most of these moments as being confusing or removing us from the narrative, even for a moment, and that is something I just ave a hard time tolerating from as competent a director as Nolan this many times in one movie. I had a few technical issues with the movie as well. I thought it was just me until I walked out of the theatre and my friend confirmed my suspicions, but what was with the soft focus throughout?? Some of it was obviously intentional, but there were several moments when characters were sitting on screen with their shirt in focus but their eyes not! Thats like, basic, unacceptable stuff. I realize seeing this film in IMAX is only going to highlight these issues, but all the more reason to hire a competent focus-puller. I was also visually frustrated with the look of the on-earth scenes. They had this beautiful color palette of browns, yellows, and greens, but I felt like so often half the screen was black! That farm was absolutely stunning, and was so annoyed when they would opt to show us less green in lieu of crushing half the blacks on the screen! Thats just a personal preference, but it really bothered me. My last gripe for now was the lack of solid philosophical implications. So many of Nolan's movies have pretty explicit philosophical themes, I found this one's to be very confusing. So, love transcends time and space, or does it? Really the fifth dimensional humans transcend time and space, and just let Cooper do his thing, love didnt really seem to have any transcendent power. And the movie had that theme about the inherent evil of man, but that was never really dealt with? We landed on a new planet at the end, I guess were just going to corrupt that one as well? I dont know, I need to see it again before I rail on that aspect too much. All that said, it was a good movie. One of the better ones Ive seen this year for sure, there was plenty I liked about it. Many of the space scenes were stunning. The performances were really fun. I loved the almost constant 2001 shoutouts. I just know how skilled a director Nolan is, so I hold him to a pretty high standard.
        • Snev De la Fontaine
          I generally agree with what you've said and since you've taken some time to share this, I'll respond to some things (mostly what I disagree with): The pacing seemed a little strange to me as well. Some parts could've gone faster (not necessarily cutting things, but just picking up the pace) whereas other moments would have benefited from filling in some of the blanks. Or handling it differently so it doesn't feel that rushed. Like his preparation to go in this mission. Even if putting him on the shuttle happened in a rush, that could've been shown onscreen as part of the story. The docking scene in particular didn't really bother me though. I think that was drawn out a bit to emphasize the beauty of it all, a bit like the docking in 2001. The wormhole-explanation: I thought that was cleverly done, because he didn't ask what a wormhole was. He didn't understand why the wormhole was a sphere rather than a circle, so the guy responded in a way that explained that while at the same time keeping the audience who don't know what wormhole is up to speed also. The water planet: The data from the pod would've helped them, so Brand tried to save it, but if they just stayed there, they would have wasted way more time than humanity had left, so leaving for another planet + the rush of the moment do seem like fair reasons to me to do what they did. The fifth-dimension help: I think there's a practical and a thematic objection to this. The practical one is that we just don't know what powers these future humans have at their disposal. Probably not god-like. So the fact that it's all just a little messy seems very plausible to me. Thematically, I'd say that, because this film is so much about how human beings are explorers, dreamers of bigger things, I think an argument could be made that even if the future humans could've made it easier for past humans, they might not have kindled that exploring spirit in humanity enough to get them to be the future humans they need to be to help their past humans in the first place. Closing a time-loop is tricky. I kinda hate the fact that Cooper brings up love transcending time and space again in the end. It would've been a nice little piece of irony at the end, because obviously love turned out to be a big (though indirect) part of it. But now it seems like he was confirming some very bullshitty message, like love is one of the fundamental forces of the universe. One last thing. There's something I loved that's kind of a minor thing, really. Usually when there's a mention of ghosts in films, there's really only two ways these things will go. Either it's dismissed as unscientific (usually by a boring scientist without any inch of scientific method inside of him) or it's glorifying some New-Age message because they embrace that we don't know anything and scientists don't. I loved the fact that the response turned out to be: "Well, study it then". Although I have to add: What made him go "it's not morse code, it's binary and they're coordinates"? You know it's not morse code because the message will be random gibberish, but coordinates are pretty random anyway, so how would you even recognise them as such? For the plot, I guess.
        • Glad to see some people seeing past the "Nolan hype" and as good as Interstellar is also make note that it isn't perfect by far. "The whole sequence from when Cooper accidentally stumbles into NASA to being launched into space felt so rushed for me." IMO, the biggest flaw of the movie and at that point, so early on, i already asked myself "WTF" just happened. It was a bit of an eye roll moment. Ir broke the otherwise good pace early on so I thought. And of course, if he IS the best pilot, why the fuck didn't they just go and ask him in the first place? Its the same narrative lazy writing that in a way Prometheus had (I know not a Nolan movie). And yes, it all felt it happens within a 24 time frame and to me that already took me out of the experience after 35-40 mins. And NO ONE seemed to care that: - they were the first humans to travel into Interstellar space - landed on a alien planet - when the Romily waited 23 yrs for them it was like "whats the big deal", when it should be a big deal. It all felt like a routine mission. Later on, from the point when Matt D shows up the movie just tumbles into a mess, IMO. It picks up at the end during the 5th Dimension sequence but i personally felt more confusion then excitement. My biggest complaint is the music video syndrome that Nolan has with Zimmer. As much as i love Zimmers work (and i do) it played non stop, walking over dialog all the time. I think i agree with you on the 5th Dim part. I thought Nolan leaves too many questions unanswered. I dont want someone to answer everything but when you try to be so scientifically accurate and then just go all out with the 5th dimension, I would've liked to see some explanation for it, aside from "love". Still I think Alex said it best. Despite its flaws its still daring and we should be glad that someone is making original scifi at all so I do give a lot of credit to Nolan for this and i will sure watch it again.
          • VodkaSauce
            Our resident Nolan troll strikes again.
        • dvt
          extremely well written, thanks for that. It goes appreciated trust me <3. xD
          • jay
            Haha, im glad someone thinks so, i reread that and realized i was generally losing clarity as my frustration rose, lol.
  • Payne by name
    I have to agree, it really wasn't very good. It tries to be cerebral with bigger world problems and then has that silly bad guy nonsense with Damon. We're supposed to be talking about the end of humanity and you feel the need to throw in a tokenistic bad guy, so that bad things happen and hence someone has to make a sacrifice that 'surprise, surprise' leads to enlightenment. One minute it's all about science faction and demanding the audience pays attention and the next pulling out nonsense like Caine not aging when everyone else has, like the gravity pull of the black hole being literally minutes from that planets atmosphere or Cooper ejecting into the debris field that is tearing chunks out of his spaceship yet doesn't affect him. A lot of noise, a lot of money and a lot of self important 'look at me, I'm directing an epic here' posturing whilst forgetting simple storytelling.
    • Paxstor
      Silly bad guy nonsense? How is it silly or nonsense? Are you saying all bad guys are silly nonsense? I don't understand you.
      • dvt
        Yeah but I think he was more or less complaining that his character wasn't necessarily >needed<. Why couldn't he just be an awesome scientist and have the plot not stray away from the awesomeness that is space travel? Instead we get a mini side story of him being a douchebag and well, it sort of messed with the whole feng shui of the movie at that point in time lol. That can't be argued, seeing as how he's literally the only "bad" guy that we've ever met. Before and after that it's all about the vastness of space exploration baby. I can definitely agree with that. The token bad guy was not truly necessary, and I did not like him solely because he took away from screen time that could have been used for an extra extension of what could have been an amazing space feat.
        • VodkaSauce
          Because he represents evil...a reminder that man will never be able to leave that behind...pride and ego are a part of who we are. In 2001 Kubrick showed us a new kind of evil....in Interstellar Nolan reminds us where evil truly lies...in the hearts and minds of human beings and not machines.
    • VodkaSauce
      Agree with whom? It's a Fresh at RottenTomatoes...It's #11 all time at IMDB. It got a 9.5 from this site...the majority of the posts here are positive. SO who are you agreeing with?
    • Edward Booth
      lmao this guy must be in love with mat damon, basically the only reason he didnt like the film was because damon was cast as a grey character. Oh btw, Caine did age, clearly so.
      • Payne by name
        Wow, no wonder you enjoyed the film if all you could take from my thoughts was that I love Matt Damon.
        • Edward Booth
          Well your other criticisms had no basis in reality and it appears you stopped watching when you found out Mat Damon was the grey character of the piece, ie. you didn't notice Caines character aging.
          • Payne by name
            That's funny because when they showed that Michael Caine hadn't really aged (bar putting him in a wheelchair) was some time before they revealed Matt Damon. Sounds to me like you were the one not really watching the film.
          • Edward Booth
            You're wrong, that wasn't/ isn't funny, bored of you now. Stupid is as stupid does.
          • Payne by name
            The humour comes from you lecturing me on not watching the film when you can't recollect it's chronology.
          • Payne by name
            The humour comes from your fumbling grasp of the film's chronology.
  • denmich1997
    Don't let bad word of mouth keep you from seeing this movie and see it in IMAX if possible. Yes it has problems but what film doesn't. It was a very emotional and thought provoking film for me and my family. We talk about it for hours after seeing it. It was some of the best space visuals I have seen.
    • VodkaSauce
      The word of mouth has been extremely positive...the negative opinions have been coming from a minority of reviewers. The movie is #11 on IMDB's top 250 list. How is that for word of mouth.
  • Lagoya
    I must say I really, really enjoyed Interstellar. Yes there are issues with pacing, and some small plot holes as many have already pointed out, but once it gets going it really gains momentum and takes you on an incredible epic adventure. It does take a while for the story to really kick in but then it builds all the way to the end. It is a typical Nolan film in the way that events at the beginning are intertwined with events at the end, and If you are a Nolan fan you will see it coming, although there is no way you will entirely predict the ending. I would have liked to see more of Connors preparation for the space mission, rather than him just turning up at NASA and being offered to pilot the most important space mission ever, that was kind of unbelievable. I also would have loved to see more of the worlds they explored, Nolan didn't seem to dwell on showing us much of the planets they visited (I was hoping to see some interesting Flora and Fauna), he focused more on the hard science of space travel and the story of the characters. One thing I will point out is that the idea of 'love' being a fundamental force of nature, transcending time and space was more or less lifted from the Dan Simmons Hyperion Cantos (Literally the greatest, most epic Sci-Fi book I have ever read!). In the fourth book 'Rise of Endymion' we learn about this concept of 'love' being a universal force. There are also many similarities with Arthur C Clarke's Rendezvous with Rama - the sense of discovery mystery and adventure, the appearance of the wormhole just outside of Saturn, who created it? and also the cylindrical design of the space ecosystem orbiting Saturn at the end. I will give Interstellar a solid 8/10, but don't let the inconsistencies stop you from going to the this epic adventure, I would love to see it again to pick up all the bits of dialogue I missed during the first watch. Amazing!
    • jay
      I also was reminded of hyperion with the saving-ourselves-from-the-future business
  • III
    At the end of the movie we see that the third planet Brand lands on is habitable and she put Plan B into action; the fertilized human embryos. I believe Brand and the human embryos are "They" (future race of humans who created the wormhole and placed the tesseract inside the black hole for Cooper). Only human to know that Cooper had went into the black hole would be Brand. Meanwhile they found a planet habitable like Earth but they are 2 different planets-who knows the limitations on that planet? Hence letting them toil with 5 dimension physics. x That is where Nolan's nonlinear style comes into play because the very end of the movie (last shot of Brand) is actually the beginning for it all. "Murphy's law means whatever can happen, will happen" So not only did they find a habitable planet but was able to travel back in time to ensure that present human race's survival. The movie has its flaws like all movies, whether it be technical or narrative, but I thoroughly enjoyed it. I loved its optimism, and the score is everything (I cried). Waited 2 years for it and it did not disappoint. No one make films that's ambitious or huge in scale anymore. As a filmmaker I only hope to make films like Interstellar. x Yes Christopher Nolan is my favorite filmmaker! May I add I only saw it once-seeing it again today for sure!
    • carlos
      you blew my mind
    • ari
      Thanks for clarifying cause i was lost on that part. I understood how it came together with the coordinates and the hand shake but what was that space station?
      • III
        The space station at the end was the Cooper Station, a space ark to get the remaining of the human race to leave Earth. Which is possible with the singularity equation given to Murph
    • Armitall
      Based on your idea Coope landed, after exiting the black whole, in a paralel universe. It's the only logic conclusion, but don't ask me how I got there. It's quite a long equasion.
      • III
        No, it is all one universe. After Cooper exited the black hole, he entered further in time of that same universe. Just simply by giving the singularity equation to Murph, he altered the events which lead the humans to leave earth and a have future in that same universe. When I think of parallel universes I see it as 1 universe with a optimistic Cooper (the one we had in the film) 1 universe with a pessimistic Cooper (which would be bad)
        • Armitall
          If Hathaway's embrios evolved into a civilization with the capability to explore the fifth dimension mileniums would need to pass by. The same for Cooper. Blackhole slowly swallows matter around itself into singularity. By your explanation two Coopers existed. One is still in the blackhole and the other already returned back to Hathaway and is by now long dead, yet their descendands are still working on the tesseract to save him from the blackhole. Maybe I'm complicating it too much, but something here does not make the conncection.
        • Armitall
          According to the inflationary theory which was tested there would be (are) infinite universes out there. In every each one of them we would see all the different versions off our lives possible.
      • III
        An example of parallel universes is in Justice League the cartoon. One universe there was the Justice Lords who killed the villains. Our universe the Justice League did not!
  • Paxstor
    unfvcking believable. We finally get an original somewhat hard science fiction movie from one of the few directors that gives a $h!t about the genre. Not a superhero movie or a reboot and instead of carrying the entire family to see it a dozen times we get all sorts of complaints about pacing and focus and plot issues etc. I guess I'm just a zealot but my love for this genre is reaching out and begging all you critics please, please please dial it down and ask others to see it. This genre needs all the help it can get.
    • Charter
      Yeah it kills me how these idiots go into a sci-fi MOVIE expecting a fvkcing physics dissertation from MIT. Well damn, let's just write-off all movies then because absolutely NO movie is 100% factual/accurate. No such thing as superheroes, may as well scrap Avengers 2 now. There's critics complaining about what happened once Cooper was inside the black hole, as if we already know what's in there. It's a circle jerk of dîckheads finding bullshît to complain about.
    • Kaitain
      I know. It's like listening to a pack of spoiled, whining babies.
  • Jace
    Wow 90+ comments? Pretty clear sign this film has had quit an impact on people.
  • jonnyb61
    I'm really not hating here. But every Nolan film I've seen since the Dark Knight I have truly despised. He is changing as a film maker. He is becoming pretentious, narcissistic and dare I say lazy. This film makes that evident. The music of the great Hans Zimmer became annoying. No one should think a Hans Zimmer score is annoying. Then there is the editing. This film is so poorly edited that the story leaves many questions and plotholes. I guess thats what happens when you surround yourself with yes men. Then comes the acting. The best of which came from the robots. This could have easily been an hour shorter and been much better. Im not saying it was terrible. It just fell a bit flat and did not exceed expectation.
    • VodkaSauce
      hahahahah...Nolan haters are the best
      • QCCubsPerspective
        You appear to be a Nolanite. They're just as bad.
        • Snev De la Fontaine
          They're annoying too, but I'd still say needless hate is still worse than needless love.
    • dvt
      I love how you just throw out insults with no real backing. I can do that with your beloved TDK as well. I'm not a hater of TDK. But the film was just so poorly edited and the story leaves so many questions and plotholes. Nolan was pretentious, narcissistic and dare I say lazy in making that film. Then there was the acting. The best came from the Joker. This could have easily been 40 minutes shorter and much much better. I'm not saying it was terrible, it just fell flat and did not exceed expectation. Wow! Look at that! I think I'm smart and have value in my words but in actuality, I'm not really fooling anyone and I just make myself to kind of look like a dumbass xD
      • Randy Miller
        Ha ha. And of course no one else is allowed an opinion without a nasty comment.. ummm just a movie. BTW jonnyb61 gets to have his opinion as well as you. "I just make myself to kind of look like a dumbass ".. well, yes, you did.
    • Randy Miller
      The best acting WAS from the robots. They spent probably 10 minutes at the begining of the film between the father and daughter. Then he leaves and she cries and who cares?? No one. They needed to flesh the characters out more.
      • Kaitain
        Yeah, it's hard to empathize with a child being separated from a parent. We needed at least another hour of character development before we could see why that would be traumatic.
    • Kaitain
      The score is probably my favourite from the last ten years. It was just IMMENSE and suited the narrative perfectly. Normally I find Zimmer a bit dull.
  • VodkaSauce
    Another masterpiece from Nolan. I saw it again today. Easily in my all time favorite list.
  • Simon Shaw
    It was a really good film, paid a nod to real science as much as something like this can. Very enjoyable and worth paying for. However - the audio was terrible. Booming bassy bits overrode the audio dialogue in places making it impossible to make out some of the conversation.
  • JBrotsis
    One of the few times I didn't get to see one of my anticipated movies, opening weekend. Really bummed; just too busy. That said, I won't read any of the spoiler territory comments. What I would like to know though is what trailers did they show? Did they show Avengers? And I'm assuming the rumor of Jurassic World trailer was false, or it'd be online already?
    • Lagoya
      nope, no Avengers, no Jurassic World. The most interesting trailer was probably 'Exodus: Gods and Kings', It looked pretty cool but after watching 'Noah' I'm not taking anything for granted!
    • Titanic
      My cinema showed an Avengers trailer
    • VodkaSauce
      I had to sit through an Avengers trailer...it's like the antithesis of Nolan. Formulaic garbage...the cinematic equivalent of a happy meal
  • CHRISLNY
    An amazing original Space opera. Totally loved it... and want to see it again.
  • Armitall
    I don't know what all the critics are yelling about, I thought it was awesome! Emotional, engaging, technical, beautiful... Not perfect by any means, but up there with Inception at least! I will have to see it many more times to make out what it really is and how good.
    • Pluckin' Strings
      There is a "Neil deGrasse Tyson gives a surprise review" article with accompanying video on Salon within fingertips reach (Google). The critics that didn't like it probably sat through the movie looking exactly like the talking head does in the above video when the camera first cuts to him during Tyson' s wormhole explanation.
      • Armitall
        I guess there are reviewers that didn't get the science behind it and think of relativity as a theory, which might have been one of the reasons they were thrown off. I thought all the sciency stuff was well done. The one problem it has, is dumbing it down as it was posted in an article a while ago. It shows in the ending with all the unnecessary exposition dialog that was bordering on being silly.
      • Kaitain
        I have wondered this myself: if you can't keep up with the mechanics in play, maybe you just get confused and turn off. I thought it was terrific fun.
    • Randy Miller
      Yes the science of the movie was technically well done and the effects excellent. The characters sucked. Evreyone I was at the cinema with liked the robots more than the people. Emotional?? How?? The characters were like cardboard. You must be the kind of person who cries at an empty pizza box.
  • Titanic
    The first half of this movie was incredibly enjoyable, to the point where i couldnt wait to recommend it to my family. However, it completely crapped itself in the second half. Laughably crapped itself at that. The DEFINING moment where I knew that the movie was about to take a nosedive was the moment Love was brought up by Hathaway to somehow justify her need to go to the planet. I swear my eyes rolled so hard that it hurt. Im all for looking outside the box (I am a scientist/engineer so I usually love that stuff), but that entire love scene just wanted me to jump off my seat and slap the character. For someone who was quite rational, and somewhat relatable, her character did a complete 180 in approximately 5 seconds. This movie, minus the incredibly annoying and totally unnecessary inclusion of the "ghost" and "gravity science" would have been very enjoyable. He goes out, gets into the same shennanigans to save earth (going to the planets etc...) but then finds the planet that is habitable, and creates the colony leaving behind his daughter (which could have taken the time given to the "ghost" part to develop emotionally) would have been a incredible story. (anyway the daughter doesnt seem like she really even likes her father in the story, regardless of how potentially dead he might happen to be). The movie REFUSED to end. For 30 minutes i was waiting for a conclusion, oh and a conclusion i got. Shoved so hard in my face for so long that i couldnt wait for it to finally be over. Its just kept getting more a more ridiculous. (rant over). Just to be clear, the movie was not awful. It just wasnt great First half 9/10, second 4/10. It even felt like the actors gave up at the end (one scream from Cooper at the end [bookcase part] made the cinema laugh because of how badly it was acted).
    • VodkaSauce
      Your review laughably crapped itself
    • Pluckin' Strings
      I rolled my eyes more when she threw out Murphy's Law. They had an exclusive choice when it came to the planet they were going to land on; they only had fuel to reach one. She put her vote in explaining her scientific reasoning, and then Cooper called her out on being emotionally biased. She admitted she was, but then tried to quantify something that we have yet to quantify, and to do so in a very interesting way. My initial response wasn't an eye roll, but it was anger at her letting emotion possibly taint her scientific outlook. Her reasoning softened me on that a little. At that point in the film, I agreed with you and Cooper, but look how wrong the choice was. Mann was a lunatic and almost ended humanity. Turns out she might have been on to something, one of the major themes of the movie.
      • Paxstor
        Quite honestly i think the whole spiel Brand did about love fits quite nicely with the plot. Perhaps Wolf, the scientist Brand was in love with, was dead and in the tesseract(sp?) nudging her to make the better choice. It would seem as though love was the only thing that permitted a 5th dimensional connection. And quite honestly when you think about it scientifically, if we were to build such a device with that sort of power, it makes sense to let only those in love wield it towards their loved ones. Imagine Mann getting a go in there and he can do whatever the ef he wants to whomever he wants. OH BOY. So yeah, being a technical kind of guy I was upset when the whole love thing started but at the end I was pretty impressed how it all came together. In fact it actually got me thinking about the design decisions behind certain aspects of human psyche architecture. If indeed there is an intelligent designer, the varying parts of our psyche that seem like errors that take away from logic and reason might very well be clues to how we can build some interesting things in the future. OK enough from me. I really loved the film and I guess it shows.
        • Ricardo_PT
          Very nicely said!
    • Lagoya
      You are wrong, the first half was boring filler, the second half is where it really kicks ass.
      • Randy Miller
        Yes. The first half was extremely boring. They needed to focus on the relationship between father and daughter WAY more. DUH.
  • cs
    Overall, a disappointment. Nothing felt fully fleshed out, neither the science or the relationships. There were a few things I liked but not enough to warrant a second viewing. A missed opportunity on many levels.
    • Pluckin' Strings
      There's an infographic floating around that will explain the science to you.
      • cs
        I've seen it. It doesn't change the fact that the film wasn't very good. most of it is still just theory and guesses. The film wasn't very focused.
        • VodkaSauce
          And it's because of dults like you we can't have nice things...in no universe is this a bad movie.
          • cs
            I'm glad my opinion offends you. What are dults? I've heard of dolts before. Maybe you have trouble with words. What do you mean, because of me you can't have nice things? If you're referring to interstellar as nice things then you're not making any sense. The movie, interstellar, exists and you can have it. So guess what? You have nice things. Get a grip. I didn't like the movie. You did. End of story. You'll live. There has been plenty of great sci fi this year already and interstellar didn't match up. If you want a good example of great sci fi storytelling, check out Dawn of the Planet of the Apes. It's a phenomenal movie.
          • Nash Alvarado
            Bravo, sir!
        • Randy Miller
          It wasn't focused and I think that people that loved it were not focused on anything except the special effects.
    • VodkaSauce
      oh please
    • Randy Miller
      Exactly right. The relationships were about as exciting as watch bread mold. They spent almost no time building the characters and every 10 minutes one of them was crying and because they hadn't built up the character, no one cared.
  • Jim
    Yes, it was a terrific movie... even though it borrowed familiar themes from "2001: ASO," "Mission to Mars," and "Gravity." The only part I found to be grating was the robot, TARS: they should have named him "Jar-Jar."
    • Pluckin' Strings
      TARS and CASE ruled. You must be a robotist.
      • Randy Miller
        The robots were the best part of the movie. We cared about them more than the humans.
    • VodkaSauce
      I'm embarrassed for you
    • Perry Pijnenburg
      Nope. Nope. Just... nope.
  • ExJax
    Loved the music, and so did Chris Nolan obviously, he drowned out half the dialogue with it! I thought it was a problem in my theater until I saw that people all over the world were complaining about it. Also the ending has a seemingly big hole in it...remember information was only going one way!
    • VodkaSauce
      That's not a hole.
    • Kaitain
      No, I don't see the hole.
      • John
        How would future humans be able to give Matt Mcconaughey's character the "formula to solve gravity"? How did future humans survive the Earth ordeal? They wouldn't have been able to because no one saved them. There was no legitimate explanation for something that was very central to the film's plot. Otherwise, the movie was great. Boy, was that a bad ending, though.
        • Kaitain
          Okay. It's hard work explaining a B-theory hypercube structure to people who are locked into conventional 3D+time thinking. This isn't a criticism, btw. It is literally hard work. You need to help them move towards a gestalt shift. Hard to do in a few paragraphs. It is not an intuitive way of thinking because it is outside of the boundaries of everyday experience. Your assumption is that 2050 must become before 2150, right? That when 2050 comes around, 2150 has not yet happened, and has never existed. Not yet. According to the B-theory of time, this simply isn't the case. The whole of history exists at once, as one giant 4D hypercube. (Where "at once" implies time at a higher dimension than the time inside the hypercube.) The events of 1914, 2014 and 2114 are equally real. From the point of view of an agent in 2014, the events and entities of 2114 are inaccessible. But they do exist at another point in the hypercube. From the POV of a higher-dimensional being, they are all equally real and accessible. (This is what the tesseract represents, in an inevitably unsatisfying way.) It may help to think about calculus: calculus is really about shifting up and down dimensions. Something that seems like dynamic variable pre-shift can become a constant post-shift, and vice versa (if the shift is in the other direction). As a practical example, imagine you have drawn a sine wave on a piece of paper. The wave does not move: you can stand back at it and look at it, and it clearly does not change at all. But if you trace your finger along it, it feels like it's in constant motion up and down. You shifted down a dimension, and the static has become dynamic. What was once a spatial dimension left and right (X) has become time, and the Y position becomes a dynamic value in a one-dimensional world. Most of the time, logical relationships only hold between adjacent slices of the hypercube, wrt the fourth axis (what we conceive of as being time). But according to Interstellar's rules, there CAN be information flow between non-adjacent slices, via gravity. And the information flow can indeed exist in a loop with no obvious starting point. The logical loop supports itself. There is no inconsistency. But how did the universe with its loop come to exist in the first place? Well, to answer a question with a question, how did OUR universe come to exist in the first place, and why? If you can't answer the latter, maybe the former isn't much less plausible. One possibility is that all possible hypercubes exist (inside some larger multiverse), including ones with loops. Indeed, there may be a strong nod towards this with Murph and Murphy's Law: "If something can happen, it WILL happen." Interstellar is a perfectly coherent B-theory time loop movie. It keeps good company with e.g. The Terminator and 12 Monkeys.
  • Randy Miller
    OGM.. The characters were about as fleshed out as cardboard. BORING. The BEST part of this movie was the end credits....
  • Oriyan J. Ovadia
    Am I the only one who's excited to read Alex's "Fuel the fire.." lines?
  • Nash Alvarado
    I read "2001 A Space Odyssey" when I was ten years old. Loved it and understood it. The movie was good too. The wife and I, saw "Interstellar" last Monday, 10th November 2014. She fell asleep as soon as the lead actor started speaking, I fought to stay awake. A few scenes looked good but led to nothing. The momentum of the film, kept promising something wonderful but never delivered. On the plus side, my wife was full of energy after a restful sleep. Beautiful sets for sure, but very boring and empty. Oh well.
  • Mike
    Fantastic and fun movie. Can't wait to see it again.
  • liyanc
    Saw it this weekend and I loved it. When it ended, I just kept thinking: "This is why I love movies". The best films leave you something to chew on, and in that sense I'd consider Interstellar as one of the best.
  • Goodfella
    Watched it and loved it, people should stop complaining.
    • EJon
      Oh, because you loved it everyone else should stop having an opinion? Idiot!
    • superman827
      you should change your name to Shitfella cause you give Goodfellas a bad name.
  • dumb
    what does S.T.A.Y. stand for ?
  • syntaxterror
    I personally was disappointed. It was all very long winded and muddled without really making me care about any of the characters. I thought it had some great ideas tossed around in sf but didn't really execute them in an entertaining way. The pacing was terrible for me and I thought this could've been cut down to a maximum of 2 hours and would have engaged me more than 3. It's a shame because I've really enjoyed all of Christopher Nolan's past films.
  • Tony Gordon
    I really liked it, but the end was a little weird. So Cooper Station is sitting next to the worm hole. They have a bunch of small space craft that are seen coming and going. But where are they going? Murph says Brand is on the planet all alone. Why is no one taking the small ships to help Brand? If her time goes more slowly being closer to a black hole they theoretically could have been sending help immediately after she landed. Also just imagine how short the movie would have been if they would have skipped Mann's planet. I'm also a little confused about the fuel situation and the distance these planets are apart. It takes two years to get to Saturn so they sleep. Once through the worm hole it takes a couple hours, but a ton of fuel to visit two planets. Then it takes a few minutes to fly around the black hole (which is supposed to be super massive.) Do you really want to live on a planet that is a few hours away from a black hole? Shouldn't there be I don't know a star nearby? The science kind of breaks down when you look at it closely, but it was immensely enjoyable. TARS was the best.
  • thejon93rd
    This was a very interesting film with a few frustrating moments. Overall though, the film is fantastic, visually-amazing, brilliantly-scored and occasionally very well-acted. My problem with the film is largely due to all of the stuff taking place on earth throughout the film, it felt cold and somewhat distant majority of the time, and the fact that they would cut from the compelling space travel to this boring earth "conflict" was somewhat annoying, it was very annoying actually. Usually I really like Jessica Chastain (she was fantastic in films like Take Shelter, Zero Dark Thirty and Lawless), but she was pretty awful in this film. While Matthew McConaughey delivered a wonderful performance during the scene where he's crying while watching the years of messages sent by his family (a great performance that he maintains for the rest of the film), Jessica Chastain suddenly pops up as middle-aged Murph and is supposed to cry but can't quite sell it because her character is so poorly-written. Early-on in the film is really irritating too, I found myself rolling my eyes during the scene where young Murph is angry with her dad and screaming at him to go because it's a scene where I knew the ending as soon as it started, and, surely enough, it happens (the generic scene where she runs out of the house in pursuit of her dad, but he's too far gone in the truck; I did like the subtle touch of the sand getting in the way of both their views though, as Coop would have easily turned the truck around to make a better send-off with his daughter). Another part I didn't enjoy was how Casey Affleck suddenly became the bad guy for no reason other than "we're not leaving this house even though my son is clearly sick and needs help". What is this a sequel to The Shining or something? I didn't understand his motivation and I was worried when Murph came running out of the house with the watch that he would do something completely ridiculous (like kill her in a fit of rage or destroy the watch because he's angry that she was trying to help his family), that actually had me on the edge-of-my-seat while she went in and hugged him. Of course the library scene is a big controversy (I guess) with the film, a lot of people feel it's out of place and confusing, though I really liked the scene for it's arresting visuals, I'm just about as confused as everyone else is. This would have been a perfect time to have the film shut up and just let the audience try and figure out what the hell is going on, instead Cooper has to explain it and the more he explains the more the confusion seeps in. How in the hell did he perfectly align that sand to convey that message to his past self and Murph? Plus, why would he relay messages that he already sent? Wouldn't it have made more sense to alter the past rather than simply orchestrate it? So many questions, so much confusion, but that's one of the main reasons why I thoroughly enjoyed this film, it's just a shame that I couldn't "love" the film (which is the central theme of the film). A lot of problems could have been fixed with simple adjustments, there should have been little-to-no dialogue for the "virtual library" scenes and young Coop shouldn't have been present at all during the scenes (making the library scenes more intense as Coop can only communicate with his daughter but not to himself, as when he knocks the book off the shelf before he leaves). It would have been interesting if time was running out for Coop in the black hole/ghost scene so that you would see the various rooms slowly disappear, eventually leading towards nothing but darkness (conveying death), I think that would have been interesting. Another problem I had with that scene was how they found Coop as soon as he's exited the black hole/ghost experience, how is that possible? Space is, to put it lightly, FREAKING HUGE! There is no way in hell of finding somebody randomly floating amongst it all of a sudden like that, it's like losing a pin into the ocean, once you've dropped it, it's pretty much gone for good (as in, good luck finding it). This film sort of reminded me of Prometheus, it's a film that leaves you with more questions than it's willing to answer. Why was Matt Damon playing a James Bond villain? Why did that guy not get on the ship before Anne Hathaway (did he really need to stand there to guide her in while TARS did all the work to begin with)? Why is Casey Affleck so punchy and angry for no reason (did the Nolans just watch The Amazing Spider-Man 2, loved how Electro's main motivation for hating Spider-Man was that he didn't remember his name and then decided "you know what we need in our film, weak villain motivations")? What were My Cocaine's last words before he died (I could literally hear everyone in the theatre completely silent, and afterwards asking each other "what did he say")? And the time travel/ghost question is obvious, but I liked Looper's explanation of it ("fries your brain like an egg").
  • Just watched it and actually quite enjoyed it. Weird.
  • superman827
    This movie was awful, worst of all it was boring. And long. It felt like a confused jumble of cliches ripped off from several other movies that have already been done to death. The parts in space were nothing special at all, if you've ever seen/read Star Wars, Star Trek, Mission to Mars, Enders Game, Gravity, Avatar, guess what, there's nothing new here. The whole "Earth dying in the future and recolonize somewhere else" concept is unoriginal to say the least, and even with all the potential of that premise, Interstellar still manages to execute it in a way that is boring. Particularly when the only discoveries our "pioneers of a mysterious infinite universe" make are of a large, brown rock with no signs of plant or animal life, no weather, no interesting atmosphere. But for some reason there's a bunch of retards that think that's just some goddamn genius, Oscar worthy brilliance. The story is highly implausible, as NASA does a 180 and instead of arresting a man, decides last minute to place the fate of mankind in his hands. Lastly, the fight between the man and his daughter, was so unoriginal I almost didn't watch the rest of the movie. That moment should have made me give a shit about the success of our "hero" but all it did was make me hate the movie for resting on a tired and lazy cliche. Visually amazing? Not even close. Transformers was more "visually amazing" than this garbage. You idiots who blindly love this movie are the kind of people South Park makes fun of.
    • Mike M
      Did? Did you mention Star Trek in the same breath as Interstellar? Ugh
  • Mike M
    How did Cooper transfer the Morse code data to the watch? And better yet, make it persistent so Murph can work it out at her leisure. I need that bit explained to me.
  • Kevin VandeWettering
    Boring. And where did they get the dweeby gals?

FEATURED POSTS

POPULAR COMMENTS

LAST YEAR'S TOP 10

Alex's Top 10 - 2016
1. La La Land
2. Paterson
3. Arrival
4. Captain Fantastic
5. 20th Cent. Women
6. Pete's Dragon
7. Jackie
8. Kubo & Two Strings
9. Everybody Wants
10. Wilderpeople
Click Here for Thoughts

Jeremy's Top 10 - 2016
1. Moonlight
2. The Handmaiden
3. High-Rise
4. Elle
5. Arrival
6. Kubo & Two Strings
7. 13th
8. Jackie
9. Toni Erdmann
10. The Witch
Click Here for Thoughts

FOLLOW US HERE

Subscribe to our feed or daily newsletter:
Follow Alex's main profile on twitter:
For the news posts only, follow this acct:
Add our feed to your Feedly: follow us in feedly

FS.NET ON FACEBOOK