I think you're missing the satire. This seems to be more about people complaining about the critics.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Interstellar spoiler thread. All spoilers go in here.
- Thread starter SCULLIBUNDO
- Start date
- Status
Tatsumaki Senpuukyaku!
Member
What is a God if not an advanced being from a high plane of existance that works in ways we can't fully comprehend?
Is it? I thought it was referencing a number of reviews that seem to have it out for Nolan, while also producing follow up pieces to explain their position. Like the one from Slate:
http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astr..._followup_movie_science_mistake_was_mine.html
It reads more like a satire of those people who make it seem like any criticism of the movie is invalid, and dismiss it wholesale.
I do think there is an obsession with being right, and as internet fandoms become more entrenched, more and more shit is slung from each side. There is less tolerance for disagreement. Not all criticism is arbitrary, and not all the defenses for a movie are without merit. This should go without saying, but somehow it doesn't.
That Slate article is embarrassing.
SolidusDave
Member
As usual, the high quality sound standard in IMAX certified cinemas is actually the biggest advantage IMO.
The sound literally shakes you during scenes like the launch, the wormhole entering etc. It's like you feel those particles(?) raining on Cooper//the ship within the black hole.
Made it super intense for me. But yeah, the big screen plays into it as well, the wormhole flight is so trippy
Was my first IMAX non-3D movie and I really enjoyed that the experience and quality wasn't hampered by wearing those glasses. Sadly I don't get to choose here to watch the movies w/o 3D in IMAX AND in english :/
Orbis Tabula
Member
On the topic of the emotions in the movie, and Cooper's son, there was one thing that I didn't really like. One of my favorites parts of the movie was Coop watching the videos his son sent, but I really hated how much time the camera was just doing a slow zoom on Coop's face while we can only hear the audio of the son. They do show a bit of the son's videos, but that long shot on Coop's face really hurt the emotion of the scene for me. Don't show me how sad this moment is for Coop, make me sad! Don't show me him crying, make me cry!
It was still a really emotional moment, and the biggest one in the movie for me, but I wish they hadn't spent as much time showing his face. For all I know, it was only 10 seconds of footage, too, so it's a monumentally stupid thing for me to focus on, but I just thought I'd share my two cents on that bit.
It was still a really emotional moment, and the biggest one in the movie for me, but I wish they hadn't spent as much time showing his face. For all I know, it was only 10 seconds of footage, too, so it's a monumentally stupid thing for me to focus on, but I just thought I'd share my two cents on that bit.
ShaoranWright
Member
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
Yeah, I think we only disagree on the weight of that final sequence.
Oh, and that article is totally making fun of reviewers who ratchet up their standards for certain kinds of movies, like sci-fi.
Orbis Tabula
Member
That was pretty funny.
Anton Sugar
Member
Do you guys not know what Clickhole is?
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
Considering that the question is "what exactly is this satirizing?" then I think it's obvious we know.
Just got back from seeing this. Managed to stay away from spoilers for over a week, so I went in clean.
Just wow. I can't remember any movie moving me through such an emotional range as this one did. I'm still quite at a loss for words. I do think this is Nolan's best film to date. It's such a complete film that is just masterfully told. This one is going to stay with me for a long time. Bravo.
Just wow. I can't remember any movie moving me through such an emotional range as this one did. I'm still quite at a loss for words. I do think this is Nolan's best film to date. It's such a complete film that is just masterfully told. This one is going to stay with me for a long time. Bravo.
One of us. One of us.
One of us
...who love the film. A lot of people seem to dislike it here on GAF.
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
Which is a shame.
I love it. It's not without faults, but they are small compared to the ambitions and successes of the film.
That's fine. When I walked out I knew this would be a movie that would divide a lot of people. Some people thought it was going to be a new 2001, I thought that was insane. It's nothing like 2001 and that's a good thing.
Napoleonthechimp
Member
Why are people criticising this film specifically and not the thousands of others that have fantastical concepts in them? The negativity around this film is really starting to puzzle me.
because this one was promoted as hard sci-fi. based on concepts developed by Prof. Thorne, leading to new scientific discoveries etc.
Napoleonthechimp
Member
Are you referring to the new "how designing the blackhole in Interstellar" led to new scientific discoveries? Because that is the title of the article I saw a few hours ago.
This is a movie with 5 dimensional beings creating wormholes and an astronaut hanging out in a 3 dimensional construct inside a blackhole. I don't really care what the marketing guys got up to, this movie is a complete fantasy and should be seen as such.
Also, the fact that people praise Inception (which is a bloated mess) and criticise this one so heavily is beyond me.
Maninthemirror
Banned
its not hard scifi, its a fantasy scifi based on theoretical physics which are speculation. if it was based on science it would be labelled drama and action, not scifi
SCULLIBUNDO
Banned
Now Interstellar isn't hard sci-fi? Make up your mind, bros.
Maninthemirror
Banned
I meant hard science , correction. you only blame the science if its science based on sound theory. when you know its based on speculation of theories, you cannot blame the science which is fiction.
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
It's hard sci-fi with a few (fundamental) fantastical elements.
It's more hard sci-fi than not.
It's more hard sci-fi than not.
Orbis Tabula
Member
I think it got more science right than most other mainstream sci-fi movies. And I like that a lot. Even when it does things wrong or silly, I don't care too much, because science should definitely be secondary to story. Any nitpicking I do about science stuff is just because I enjoy doing that to movies, even ones I love.
of course it isn't, but it was promoted as such - hence the critizism is vaild. promises were made and broken. I really like Interstellar, booked IMAX tickets this saturday and will get the BR asap, but it serves everyone involved right, if the faulty science get's picked apart - after "they" earned a shitload of money making wrong claims.
Napoleonthechimp
Member
You knew the premise going in, did that not once raise an eyebrow and make you wonder that perhaps this wasn't going to be an accurate portrayal of space travel?
I mean they show them travelling through a damn wormhole in the trailer, racing to escape a mile high wave, and discussing time dilation due to a nearby black hole. Not to mention they showed a ridiculous looking robot in it.
Meanwhile in real life the ESA has landed a lander on a comet. That is reality.
Maninthemirror
Banned
What promises were made and broken exactly?
they earned money making wrong claims? lol wow
Death Metalist
Member
This could be an Exploitation film at this point for all I care, It's not like the haters are going to say " Wow, I have seen the light now, I didn't know this movie was labeled as this genre! Now i'll be able to love the film " lol, those who hate or don't like the film will forever do so because it was not their cup of tea, who cares? What genre it is was never relevant in the grand scheme of things.
EDIT: One thing is for sure that the film got more science right than other mainstream space/sci-fi movies while also dabbling in complex, fascinating theories.
EDIT: One thing is for sure that the film got more science right than other mainstream space/sci-fi movies while also dabbling in complex, fascinating theories.
FLUXCapacitor
Member
If this was 100% purely hard science we wouldn't be going anywhere out of our own solar system, let alone going through wormholes, black holes and the 5th dimension. Talk about being boring.
I don't have a problem with the science at all.
Sure some of it is stretching but that doesn't really matter. We know so little of so much that taking liberties is fine in my opinion.
The movie HAD to do something beyond our understanding.
Would this be better? Go to space, try to travel through a wormhole, end up dead. 30 minute movie. Nice.
The movie plays on our lack of knowledge. It may not take the stuff we know 100% seriously but that doesn't make much difference when you have blackholes leading to a 5th dimension. The whole movie is stretching exciting theories.
Sure some of it is stretching but that doesn't really matter. We know so little of so much that taking liberties is fine in my opinion.
The movie HAD to do something beyond our understanding.
Would this be better? Go to space, try to travel through a wormhole, end up dead. 30 minute movie. Nice.
The movie plays on our lack of knowledge. It may not take the stuff we know 100% seriously but that doesn't make much difference when you have blackholes leading to a 5th dimension. The whole movie is stretching exciting theories.
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
Are people really claiming the nitpicking is due to a bait and switch?
What movie, exactly, *is* hard sci-fi if this isn't?
And it's a pretty sad thing if making hard sci-fi means that you get criticism that other movies don't get, just for daring to be more grounded in reality.
What movie, exactly, *is* hard sci-fi if this isn't?
And it's a pretty sad thing if making hard sci-fi means that you get criticism that other movies don't get, just for daring to be more grounded in reality.
i'm not going to repeat me AND you.
i was expecting it to be self-consistent in it's logic. a physicist's logic. which is what I was told it would be. now I still enjoy the movie, but I'm not going to defend it's flaws. one of them being not what it claimed to be.
Maninthemirror
Banned
you said promises were made and broken. you didnt specify which. its a scifi movie based on theory and speculation. what exactly were you expecting
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
How is it *not* consistent with its own rules?
If anything, they telegraph plot points by making sure the rules are clear ahead of time.
If anything, they telegraph plot points by making sure the rules are clear ahead of time.
Napoleonthechimp
Member
Europa was a movie that emphasised reality, but even that was based in a speculative future where we could lead a manned mission to land on Europa.
Interstellar is off-the-wall mental compared to that.
Interstellar is off-the-wall mental compared to that.
I agree. It's not a really hard scifi film but it's still a good scifi film.
Also, there are levels of scifi rigor: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MohsScaleOfScienceFictionHardness
I'd say Interstellar is One Big Lie or Speculative Science.
Which is also fine. See the wiki link. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_science_fiction
Anton Sugar
Member
8.5 minutes=1 year!
Orbis Tabula
Member
If you went to that planet and watching Interstellar, 21 years would pass on Earth. You'd be done just in time for Interstellar 2!
YesNOnoNOYes
Member
XD
I agree that sci-fi flicks are not supposed to be treated as doco. They are movies, after all.
Interstellar's science is robust, though.
I also think it's been received pretty well here in GAF. The ones that are questioning aspects of it are doing so not because they didn't enjoy it, I think...
Also. just want to say that I like that little bit where Coop let the other astraunaut borrow his headphones/music. I like that it turned out to be the sounds of Earth. Crickets, the sound of rain, etc. That's very ... i donno, very nice characterisation of Coop's character. He was well prepared to be away from Earth, basically.
Touching bit.
I mean seriously, 2001's ending alone makes it complete fantasy and yet it's very very highly regarded. Tbh I think the heavy exposition takes the grace out of this film a little. Still loved it though.
Saw it, was incredible. Will post more thoughts later but at lunch after the movie I have this question:
How much time passed for the black guy that was in the space station when Coop, Brand and that other guy were on the water planet? I thought it was 23 years on Earth, not necessarily 23 years for him on the main ship.
How much time passed for the black guy that was in the space station when Coop, Brand and that other guy were on the water planet? I thought it was 23 years on Earth, not necessarily 23 years for him on the main ship.
This is actually a legitimate question, because velocity and gravity affect time dilation and earth's orbit speed is most likely different from the space vessel's speed and obviously its gravity as well.
I think they should be different, but the movie seems to treat them as the same.
Anton Sugar
Member
One thing I forgot about was how Cooper changes his "I won't make promises I can't keep" gameplan when he tells Murph he's leaving.
His father-in-law told him to not make any promises he can't keep, which he seems committed to until he actually faces his daughter. He then promises her "unrealistic" things like "I'm coming back" and "I love you, forever".
Not sure why I'm pointing it out. Just a nice little human touch.
His father-in-law told him to not make any promises he can't keep, which he seems committed to until he actually faces his daughter. He then promises her "unrealistic" things like "I'm coming back" and "I love you, forever".
Not sure why I'm pointing it out. Just a nice little human touch.
- Status