OriginalThinking
Member
Wait, people are arguing in this thread that the laptop was the big issue with plausibility?
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Interstellar spoiler thread. All spoilers go in here.
- Thread starter SCULLIBUNDO
- Start date
- Status
Maninthemirror
Banned
Welcome to a Nolan movie thread lol
The 2008/2009 draft had a pulsing neutron star PANTAGRUEL in the system with the ice planet though.
The ice ceiling shielded that planet's ground level from the deadly radiation of that star.
Oh well...gonna let go of that 2008 draft.
Team Filler
Member
Heh, I couldn't stop thinking of that amazing Buzz Aldrin punch when that scene played out.
For the same reasons the aliens placed the Monolith on the moon in 2001. It's likely to test mankind or gauge our technological achievements (i.e. interstellar travel).
You missed the best part where some one said kept whining that Damon's docking exploded the ship where as MM's didnt.
Yeah I saw in IMAX, same thing with audiences there too. I love it.
Maninthemirror
Banned
just saw this review on RT
Louis Proyect
rec.arts.movies.reviews November 8, 2014
Leaving aside the flaws as film (underdeveloped characters, etc.), it is worse as a message. Deriding agriculture and hyping space exploration is even more fascist than "The Dark Knight Rises".
Louis Proyect
rec.arts.movies.reviews November 8, 2014
Leaving aside the flaws as film (underdeveloped characters, etc.), it is worse as a message. Deriding agriculture and hyping space exploration is even more fascist than "The Dark Knight Rises".
LOL. Some people are insane.
Noisepurge
Member
would have been a better movie if Anne Hathaway's love confession scenes would have been cut and all of Matt Damon.
They should have just visited the planet, saw that he was dead, went back to the ship and have like a meteor shower or something to cause the spinning docking scene.
seems like the fistfights and explosions were added by producers wanting more action scenes? This would have also made the movie shorter, it really didn't need to be this long.
They should have just visited the planet, saw that he was dead, went back to the ship and have like a meteor shower or something to cause the spinning docking scene.
seems like the fistfights and explosions were added by producers wanting more action scenes? This would have also made the movie shorter, it really didn't need to be this long.
Secret Fawful
Member
I like the Mann sequence. I need to read this whole thread, but has it been discussed that, like how Murphy was a representation of Murphy's Law, that Mann may have been a representation of the evil of mankind.
There's a callback early in the movie to the idea that nature is not evil, but man is. That that is what they bring with them into space. Seems like Mann is an obvious representation of that. They basically spell it out. It's a bit Kubrick-esque, but Nolan does lower the artistic merit somewhat by not leaving things open to interpretation. Still, I liked that the movie engaged in that sort of thing.
There's a callback early in the movie to the idea that nature is not evil, but man is. That that is what they bring with them into space. Seems like Mann is an obvious representation of that. They basically spell it out. It's a bit Kubrick-esque, but Nolan does lower the artistic merit somewhat by not leaving things open to interpretation. Still, I liked that the movie engaged in that sort of thing.
Zoe
Member
Thanks to you it just clicked that Mann = huMAN. Though I did draw the connection about bringing evil with them.
Tesseract
Banned
bless nolan and company's hearts for making this movie, my science boner was off the charts.
http://www.amazon.com/dp/1783293691/?tag=neogaf0e-20
is out tomorrow, might pick it up to read while dumping
http://www.amazon.com/dp/1783293691/?tag=neogaf0e-20
is out tomorrow, might pick it up to read while dumping
David Incorporated Esq.
Member
Yep, I think it was Amelia who said nature isn't evil, the only evil is what man brings with them.
DiipuSurotu
Banned
Mann serves as a villain, but the movie didn't NEED a villain. There were well enough amazing themes and original concepts to carry the movie IMO. They didn't need to a classic, boring villain trope. Brand's father was already all the antagonism the movie needed. Not to mention the fact that mankind screwed their own planet's atmosphere to begin with in the film's backstory.
U n i o n 0015
Member
Let me just say that I really liked the movie, and totally agree with this post. As soon as Mann and Cooper started walking off by themselves, I knew what was going to happen. It just seemed unnecessary to the story, and the tension of losing the ships and space station could've been generated through other story means.
BruceLeeRoy
Banned
I don't think you can really classify Mann as even a villain.
Maninthemirror
Banned
Movie needed all facets of humanity and Mann is one of them
Secret Fawful
Member
Also, people have talked about the cliche elements of the film quite a bit, but I'm glad that they had a representation of mankind's arrogance and survival instinct over a TARS and CASE that turn eeeeevil to further Prof. Brand's agenda. I mean, it may have been better, but Alien and 2001 have done it already. Interstellar took the fresher path.
Anton Sugar
Member
Dr. Mann should have been Amelia's lover OR they should have visited Edmund's planet and found he was all crazy a la Mann.
-Better reveal for the relationship once Mann blows himself up (emotional confessional to Coop than a discussion where he calls her out)
-Better context for Amelia's love speech (aka she's feeling kinda crazy after the man she loved just abandoned her and blew himself up)
-Perfectly plays into the whole survival instinct vs. love for someone else theme
-Better reveal for the relationship once Mann blows himself up (emotional confessional to Coop than a discussion where he calls her out)
-Better context for Amelia's love speech (aka she's feeling kinda crazy after the man she loved just abandoned her and blew himself up)
-Perfectly plays into the whole survival instinct vs. love for someone else theme
My opinion is that that would have been too cheesy.
I found it better that after all that speech of her wanting to see Edmund for the slight chance of seeing him and then... being dead after all as well.
Secret Fawful
Member
I wondered if Damon was the right person to play Mann, but I was actually kind of impressed at how well he pulled off cowardly asshole. Mark Hamill would have been fun to see in that role.
I honestly didn't take Brand's speech on love as an accurate or even trustworthy theory when she gave it. She gave the speech right after being responsible for losing a crew member and losing decades worth of time on a failed mission. Getting to Edmund was a source of comfort for her to keep from going crazy, and she was making excuses to do so. However, her choice ended up being right, so not only did Coop's love save earth in a way, but her love led her to the right planet after all, ironically enough.
Tragically, if they had gone to Edmund's planet first, I wonder if they could have saved him from the rockslide. I admit to being at a loss as far as a timeline for the movie, though.
I honestly didn't take Brand's speech on love as an accurate or even trustworthy theory when she gave it. She gave the speech right after being responsible for losing a crew member and losing decades worth of time on a failed mission. Getting to Edmund was a source of comfort for her to keep from going crazy, and she was making excuses to do so. However, her choice ended up being right, so not only did Coop's love save earth in a way, but her love led her to the right planet after all, ironically enough.
Tragically, if they had gone to Edmund's planet first, I wonder if they could have saved him from the rockslide. I admit to being at a loss as far as a timeline for the movie, though.
Can Crusher
Banned
I have to give props for the movie feeling so ambitious though. It's good that we have a Nolan out there.
Noisepurge
Member
and i found it unintentionally funny everytime they said "Doctor Mann" 
"First Christopher Nolan made BATMAN, now, it's time for the vengeance of DOCTORMAN."
"First Christopher Nolan made BATMAN, now, it's time for the vengeance of DOCTORMAN."
He is serving the place of Dr. Brand in space with the notion that Plane A is a failure and Plan B has to succeed.
Not Spaceghost
Spaceghost
Mann is essential only because Brand and Coop talk about how nature isnt evil and only evil can be brought by man kind. It was a non essential theme if you ask me. There were bigger and more relevant themes at play, the theme of evil being a product of mankind, would not even really be a theme if Brand and Coop had never had that conversation. Thematically it wasn't integrated well enough or deep enough into the plot for it to have arisen on its own.
Like a few other posters mentioned, Brand Senior and the forces of time and nature are enough of an antagonist for this movie. Mann feels like he was included because Nolan didnt trust his audience to think of antagonist in a way that wasnt "IM GOING TO KILL YOU DEAD"
Back from the film. Really liked it. Doesn't beat Prestige, but it doesn't need to. Was better than Inception, and I enjoyed that too. It's definitely not a Dark Knight Rises level disappointment for me. *cough*
The worst thing about the movie was how corny some of the dialogue was. It's definitely a Nolan thing, but it was on a whole new level here. Every other line from Cooper in the first hour of the movie was a possible tag line for the movie. The endless repetition of that Dylan Thomas poem got really funny too. Almost felt like a self-parody by the time Mann used it. Nolan should definitely find someone good to do a dialogue pass on his scripts.
Now with that out of the way, I think the movie on a whole was pretty fantastic. It was emotional when it needed to be, tense at parts, but in general the way it portrayed space exploration as a calculated risk into the unknown really sold the entire narrative. Interestingly enough, this is also Nolan's most Shyamalan-esque film, and I'm not really talking about the "zomg twist" thing. In terms of how the narrative is constructed and how the story loop is foreshadowed and communicated to the audience, it's extremely similar to Shyamalan's best movies. There's a satisfaction in the story being a sort of closed loop, even if it is artificial. Is it a trick? Sure, but I think to an extent people go to big event movies to be tricked. That's part of the entertainment and there's no shame in it.
Nolan managed to make the space sequences really breathtaking too, especially in IMAX. It might not be as immersive as Gravity on a whole, but it's such a different movie there really isn't much point comparing beyond the "disaster in space" sequences. Interstellar is like Contact, Sunshine, 2001, all mixed into one in Nolan's patented bag of tricks. Om nom nom nom.
The worst thing about the movie was how corny some of the dialogue was. It's definitely a Nolan thing, but it was on a whole new level here. Every other line from Cooper in the first hour of the movie was a possible tag line for the movie. The endless repetition of that Dylan Thomas poem got really funny too. Almost felt like a self-parody by the time Mann used it. Nolan should definitely find someone good to do a dialogue pass on his scripts.
Now with that out of the way, I think the movie on a whole was pretty fantastic. It was emotional when it needed to be, tense at parts, but in general the way it portrayed space exploration as a calculated risk into the unknown really sold the entire narrative. Interestingly enough, this is also Nolan's most Shyamalan-esque film, and I'm not really talking about the "zomg twist" thing. In terms of how the narrative is constructed and how the story loop is foreshadowed and communicated to the audience, it's extremely similar to Shyamalan's best movies. There's a satisfaction in the story being a sort of closed loop, even if it is artificial. Is it a trick? Sure, but I think to an extent people go to big event movies to be tricked. That's part of the entertainment and there's no shame in it.
Nolan managed to make the space sequences really breathtaking too, especially in IMAX. It might not be as immersive as Gravity on a whole, but it's such a different movie there really isn't much point comparing beyond the "disaster in space" sequences. Interstellar is like Contact, Sunshine, 2001, all mixed into one in Nolan's patented bag of tricks. Om nom nom nom.
Maninthemirror
Banned
Back from the film. Really liked it. Doesn't beat Prestige, but it doesn't need to. Was better than Inception, and I enjoyed that too. It's definitely not a Dark Knight Rises level disappointment for me. *cough*
The worst thing about the movie was how corny some of the dialogue was. It's definitely a Nolan thing, but it was on a whole new level here. Every other line from Cooper in the first hour of the movie was a possible tag line for the movie. The endless repetition of that Dylan Thomas poem got really funny too. Almost felt like a self-parody by the time Mann used it. Nolan should definitely find someone good to do a dialogue pass on his scripts.
Now with that out of the way, I think the movie on a whole was pretty fantastic. It was emotional when it needed to be, tense at parts, but in general the way it portrayed space exploration as a calculated risk into the unknown really sold the entire narrative. Interestingly enough, this is also Nolan's most Shyamalan-esque film, and I'm not really talking about the "zomg twist" thing. In terms of how the narrative is constructed and how the story loop is foreshadowed and communicated to the audience, it's extremely similar to Shyamalan's best movies. There's a satisfaction in the story being a sort of closed loop, even if it is artificial. Is it a trick? Sure, but I think to an extent people go to big event movies to be tricked. That's part of the entertainment and there's no shame in it.
Nolan managed to make the space sequences really breathtaking too, especially in IMAX. It might not be as immersive as Gravity on a whole, but it's such a different movie there really isn't much point comparing beyond the "disaster in space" sequences. Interstellar is like Contact, Sunshine, 2001, all mixed into one in Nolan's patented bag of tricks. Om nom nom nom.
Mine is also still prestige but this might top it if second viewing is better
Anton Sugar
Member
I wouldn't say that's his only purpose.
His "survival instinct" is the other side of the "humanityis driven by their love for each other" coin. Coop, Brand, etc. are in the spaceship, not to save themselves, but to save others. It's no coincidence that they find out about the "real" mission once they reach Mann, and are upset by it. Mann is all "oh yeah, right".
Mann is frequently referred to as brilliant, and yet he is the one the who succumbs to a sort of cowardly mania. I can't remember exactly, but I'm pretty sure he tells Coop that he doesn't have a family to look forward to when he gets back. He doesn't love anyone in the same way that Coop does (or at least they don't mention anyone).
He is "man" at its base sense of survival, with no consideration for others. Brilliance doesn't prevent that.
Back from the film. Really liked it. Doesn't beat Prestige, but it doesn't need to. Was better than Inception, and I enjoyed that too. It's definitely not a Dark Knight Rises level disappointment for me. *cough*
The worst thing about the movie was how corny some of the dialogue was. It's definitely a Nolan thing, but it was on a whole new level here. Every other line from Cooper in the first hour of the movie was a possible tag line for the movie. The endless repetition of that Dylan Thomas poem got really funny too. Almost felt like a self-parody by the time Mann used it. Nolan should definitely find someone good to do a dialogue pass on his scripts.
Now with that out of the way, I think the movie on a whole was pretty fantastic. It was emotional when it needed to be, tense at parts, but in general the way it portrayed space exploration as a calculated risk into the unknown really sold the entire narrative. Interestingly enough, this is also Nolan's most Shyamalan-esque film, and I'm not really talking about the "zomg twist" thing. In terms of how the narrative is constructed and how the story loop is foreshadowed and communicated to the audience, it's extremely similar to Shyamalan's best movies. There's a satisfaction in the story being a sort of closed loop, even if it is artificial. Is it a trick? Sure, but I think to an extent people go to big event movies to be tricked. That's part of the entertainment and there's no shame in it.
Nolan managed to make the space sequences really breathtaking too, especially in IMAX. It might not be as immersive as Gravity on a whole, but it's such a different movie there really isn't much point comparing beyond the "disaster in space" sequences. Interstellar is like Contact, Sunshine, 2001, all mixed into one in Nolan's patented bag of tricks. Om nom nom nom.
Agreed 100%.
Death Metalist
Member
I can confirm on multiple viewings it gets better because you aren't thinking about past details in the story or trying to guess where the movie is going. You simply know how everything is going to end so the general flow of the narrative is much, much better than the first time. I certainly appreciated a few other scenes much more than before.
Tesseract
Banned
awesome, can't wait for the bluray.
Team Filler
Member
After two viewings for me I think Interstellar has, at the least, equaled The prestige.
Ignatz Mouse
Banned
This is a nice write-up of how I feel about it. Mann's part in the movie is 100% essential.
If anything could be trimmed from this movie, it would be the anti-NASA stuff at the beginning, or some of that world-building that didn't lead anywhere. I get that it was necessary to paint the situation as dire, but a lot of the specifics (like the dust) were overdone and didn't make that much sense.
Anton Sugar
Member
Second viewing definitely helped me, or rather made the highs higher. At the same time, I was less blinded by the awe and the lows got lower. Still ranks very high on my Nolan list, though.
I saw it a second time with my friend, and it was his second time, too. After his first viewing, he said it was his least favorite Nolan movie, but he ended up liking it a lot more the second.
Maninthemirror
Banned
Scenes missing from the movie from another forum
Inferno313
Banned
Probably just other shots, none of those look like completely cut scenes.
Maninthemirror
Banned
And Cooper called her out on the BS like any man of science would
I am confused by what Mann's overall plan was. Was he trying to fulfull plan B or was he trying to get back to Earth? Knowing his ultimate intentions actually gives his crying scene more ambiguity. Is he really crying because he is so happy to see people? Or is he crying because he can now complete his mission? Is he crying because he knows what he is about to do to these people?
The way the pit stop played out was really a fault of the direction. The fight scene was goofy and the pull back revealing the two of them fighting alone on the barren landscape was more funny than it was terrifying. Nolan didn't get that scene right. He got many others down perfectly though.
The way the pit stop played out was really a fault of the direction. The fight scene was goofy and the pull back revealing the two of them fighting alone on the barren landscape was more funny than it was terrifying. Nolan didn't get that scene right. He got many others down perfectly though.
David Incorporated Esq.
Member
Looks like the docking scene made it to youtube in grainy phone-o-vision! Get it while it's hot!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3sozCdGX4Y
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3sozCdGX4Y
Now with that out of the way, I think the movie on a whole was pretty fantastic. It was emotional when it needed to be, tense at parts, but in general the way it portrayed space exploration as a calculated risk into the unknown really sold the entire narrative. Interestingly enough, this is also Nolan's most Shyamalan-esque film, and I'm not really talking about the "zomg twist" thing. In terms of how the narrative is constructed and how the story loop is foreshadowed and communicated to the audience, it's extremely similar to Shyamalan's best movies. There's a satisfaction in the story being a sort of closed loop, even if it is artificial. Is it a trick? Sure, but I think to an extent people go to big event movies to be tricked. That's part of the entertainment and there's no shame in it.
I liked this a lot. People go on about how the twist was obvious but the story wasn't trying to outthink its audience like so many narratives do now. It was a properly foreshadowed twist and so doesn't come out of left field. I like authors who take the time to set things up even if they give away the twist moment a bit. I think that will help it in rewatches, compared to most of Shyamalan's crappier works for example(that and it's better film).
He's leaving his planet to carry out plan B on another world. He was crying because he was happy to see another person for the first time in years.
I don't believe Zimmer did any of the trailer music.
Atraveller
Banned
The first teaser trailer was his work.
Maninthemirror
Banned
first teaser and IMAX trailer
Anton Sugar
Member
You sure? It wouldn't make any sense to maroon Coop/Brand if he was just going to carry out Plan B, would it? I thought he was going to try and return home.
This is gonna go down as one of the top ten sci-fi scenes of all time, bros. Calling it.
I do think the fight scene had some very weird tonal/mood shifts that were bad decisions, but I don't get the problem with the pull back to the wide overhead shot. I really liked it.
- Status