Interstellar (2014)

Looks exciting. Hopefully it'll be a huge step-up from the superhero shit he's been working on.

I fear this might turn out to be something of a disaster.

Yeah. Visuals look great. Story, though, seems parsed together with a lot of particularly unimaginative sci-fi tropes.

Jack Wade wrote:

Yeah. Visuals look great.

A good omen for Bond 24, since they share the same cinematographer.

Agreed on the story though. It looks and feels like CONTACT PART II...

So, after Hauer, Bowie, Roberts, Berenger, and Modine, who's supposed to be the washed out 80s icon in this flick?

I'm going into this with reserved expectations. Not sold 100% on Nolan.

Well, Ellen Burstyn and John Lithgow are starring, but neither of them are exclusively 80s, iconic or washed out.

v

Quote :

It’s hard to think of a mainstream Hollywood film that has so successfully translated complex mathematical and scientific ideas to a lay audience (though Shane Carruth’s ingenious 2004 Sundance winner “Primer” — another movie concerned with overcoming the problem of gravity — tried something similar on a micro-budget indie scale), or done so in more vivid, immediate human terms."

Hmm, I have seen "Primer", and it deals with the complexities of time travel.

Xenia93 wrote:

I'm going into this with reserved expectations. Not sold 100% on Nolan.

Neither am I. I loved "Inception". "The Prestige" and "Memento" were worthwhile.
I didn't care much for his Batman trilogy, bar the first one (which wasn't a masterpiece but at least had a coherent plot).

Sounds like this will be closer to 2010 than 2001, which is fine by me because I think we'd be incredibly lucky to get any science fiction film close to 2010 in this era. More of that, less of PROMETHEUS.

Makeshift Python wrote:

Sounds like this will be closer to 2010 than 2001, which is fine by me because I think we'd be incredibly lucky to get any science fiction film close to 2010 in this era. More of that, less of PROMETHEUS.

Casting Lithgow in his movie (if it is indeed meant to be an homage/reference to 2010) would be typical for Nolan

Salomé wrote:

Neither am I. I loved "Inception". "The Prestige" and "Memento" were worthwhile.
I didn't care much for his Batman trilogy, bar the first one (which wasn't a masterpiece but at least had a coherent plot).

I'm of a similar opinion. I'll see this, but I'm not going in with a raging hard-on like oh so many moviegoers. At the same time, I'm not going in with a pissed off mindset determined to actively hate it like many Nolan haters. I'm somewhere in the middle.

As for the Batman trilogy they just didn't feel like Batman films enough for someone like me who loves the comics. It was just Nolan making a crime trilogy with Batman in it. Batman Begins at least feels the most like a Batman film.

b

I thought this was a good read.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/02/magazine/the-exacting-expansive-mind-of-christopher-nolan.html

Quote :

Nolan, whose eight movies over 14 years have together generated just more than $3.5 billion in revenue, puts an extraordinary amount of time and effort into engineering believably ample worlds. He tries to build maps the size of the territory, whole cities from the ground up in disused airship hangars (as he’s done for four of his movies at a former R.A.F. facility outside London), even if he’s going to shoot just a few street-corner scenes. Sue Kroll, the president of worldwide marketing for Warner Bros., told me she once got actually lost in the ersatz rain falling on an ersatz Gotham. Nolan learned the value of such sweep from Ridley Scott. The genius of “Blade Runner,” he told me, is that “you never feel like you’ve gotten close to the edge of the world.”

v

Erica Ambler wrote:

Xenia93 wrote:

I'll see this, but I'm not going in with a raging hard-on like oh so many moviegoers. At the same time, I'm not going in with a pissed off mindset determined to actively hate it like many Nolan haters. I'm somewhere in the middle.

A semi?

Sounds about right.

I saw it tonight. It's an odd mix of hard science fiction and metaphysical soft science fiction and they don't really mesh together that well, perhaps because each serves as a plot device for the other. It's a film that really needs to be seen on the big screen, but if you do, make sure the sound balance is good. The bombastic soundtrack slips into a cacophony of noise if the sound system isn't up to it.

Saw it last night. Nice visuals (obviously) but messy as all hell and Nolan's attempts at mushy gushy parts are either saved by McConaughey or fall flat.

Poor writing in all facets (dialogue and otherwise) and the second half of the film starts at "troublesome" to "downright awful" by the last 20 minutes or so. Also found Zimmer's score overbearing and obnoxious.

I like Nolan. I don't love him or hate him but I like him. All in all - I didn't really care for it. First half is alright but the exposition isn't fun like it was in Inception, it's just unnecessary. Probably my least favorite Nolan film.

v

Erica Ambler wrote:

A huge fucking mess. Don't believe the hype. Interstellar is shit.

It even has a bug-eyed monster with a Hitler haircut.

Yeah, the more it sits in my head the more I realize just HOW messy it is. I mean, when I left the theater I was declaring the second half of it a mess (and the MASSIVE problems still lie in the second half) but the more I think about it the more the whole thing feels messy.

It is sloppy at its core. It was confused concerning its own themes. And that fucking score just pissed me off. Every decent cue ruined by piles of layering.

Erica Ambler wrote:

A huge fucking mess. Don't believe the hype. Interstellar is shit.

It even has a bug-eyed monster with a Hitler haircut.

I honestly had bad feelings about this feature from the moment the first teaser trailers were released.

Xenia93 wrote:

It is sloppy at its core. It was confused concerning its own themes. And that fucking score just pissed me off. Every decent cue ruined by piles of layering.

That sums up a lot of my thoughts.

Salomé wrote:

I honestly had bad feelings about this feature from the moment the first teaser trailers were released.

I had too, then curiousity won, but the film did nothing to change my initial feeling.



Having said that, I really liked the cast and the humor.

boldfinger wrote:

Having said that, I really liked the cast and the humor.

The cast was alright. McConaughey was good. The humor surprisingly worked. But some of the stunt casting I could do without.

Just back from it. A giant POS. Liked the cinematography, score and McConaughey, but not much else.