Fell asleep in this movie. Bunch of crap which didn't male no sense to me like time and worm holes and the main actor complaining about how we dream so small today (blame the liberals for that one). The farm part scared me because they had replaced all the humans with robots and drones.and computers.
LOL I genuinely didn't remember seeing any Ultron trailers where I went! I'm not in Houston. Do trailers vary by location? Or am I just dumb? Probably the latter. My bad!
Some IMAX movies do not come with trailers. TDKR I saw in IMAX did not, neither did Ghost Protocal except for the TDKR prologue that was already attached.
I'd like to hear about the inaccuracies, please share. I took quantum mechanics in college but it's all to fuzzy now. Would like to see an experts critique.
This one is okay, but he's a little sloppy here and there. Dude writes very fast. Also, *contains spoilers*. http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/space_20/2014/11/interstellar_science_review_the_movie_s_black_holes_wormholes_relativity.html EDIT: now that I've seen the movie, this review is *really* crappy. It has some physics mistakes in it for sure, just trying to be cranky. Bleh.
GREAT movie. Its supposed to be SciFi...yea there is no way it can be 100% scientifically correct but you take it for what it is...entertainment.
Serious question? k. I'll bite. We have been deprived of a good SciFi movie for so long....hollywood continually slings **** onto our faces and makes us pay top dollar. When they do come out with a SciFi movie worthy of being called...well...SciFi...it makes some of us happy.
While I didn't enjoy Interstellar too much (definitely entertaining, but not a well crafted movie), the Sci-Fi genre has been sorely lacking. At least Nolan was ambitious. Better than watching some rehashed comic book stuff that we see every 2 months now...
I can't. Nope. I just can't hand out gold stars for effort. His defenders are basically giving him an E for effort. Not for writing a thought provoking film, or directing an awe inspiring technical marvel, or coaxing some damn fine performances... it's basically 'at least he tried.' Sorry I'm just not down with that millennial everybody gets juice boxes and we don''t keep score bullsh-t.
Nope I'd give him an E for everything you mentioned. But it's also not that he tried, but that he takes chances. And there's a difference there. Nolan's films get picked apart maybe a little too much imo. At least sine DKR.
Maybe I worded it poorly, but I'm hardly a Nolan defender. I actually think he's one of the more overrated directors out there right now. His films almost always underwhelm me, outside of a couple. All I'm saying is that I always will appreciate seeing something different. I'll always be more interested in a unique story with unique special effects than rehashed sequels/remakes/reboots/adaptations. Whether or not the movie is good is up in the air, and in Interstellar's case, I didn't think it was a great movie either, but I do like seeing new and interesting movies be put out. The originality doesn't make the movie good, just something I enjoy seeing attempted.
The more massive the black hole, the more likely you are to survive your decent into one. It's counterintuitive but true.
I really liked the movie. It is science fiction so they do take liberties but you know what it wasn't that far from the plausible and brought new angles to the genre. Gravity really hasn't been explored like it has here. I love how special relativity is the star. Spoiler I thought the reason they had to use a multi-stage rocket was because technology had become more primitive. The space ships were older and built when civilization was more advanced. It had devolved and they were back to more primitive technology.
Before going back and re_reading this thread, let me give my input as I am leaving the theater. Top 5 movies I have ever seen along with the performances. Never has a movie made me more into it nor cry like a baby.
Finally saw it last night and was expected to be underwhelmed, but I actually really loved it. Yes, there are a few clunkers of dialogue. But it's much more than an E for effort movie, it's balls-out ambitious in the way that very, very few large budget films have been (especially these days). Yes, there is cheese. Yes, there are science mistakes (more like science stiff-arms, as in, we have to shake this off for now). I think what I love and respect most about that film (other than the score, which is phenomenal) is that its effects are not there to overwhelm you, sell tickets, or serve as technical milestones. They just are there to tell the story, and that's showing incredible restraint. I think the special effects are to be applauded for being in many cases understated, just part of the backdrop. When needed, they are flawless, but again, only as parts of the story. I understand people may hate the story, but I think the point about effects (which are often these days put in front of the story, or as the rulers of the story, as per Michael Bay, et multi alia) stands. will say more about the physics when I have time (harr! time, get it). No but seriously I will.
