I'd say I've seen far more positive reviews than negative. It's been very well received IMO
Interstellar | SPOILERS! | Keep out unless you've seen it
- Thread starter okLaptop1
- Start date
Fecking hell, you haven't seen enough movies then.When I call it average I mean I did enjoy it but it wasn't particularly great, it could've been a lot better. I've a huge interest in astronomy and astrophysics and I was really disappointed they focused so much on theories that are largely implausible to fuel the story when there's so many other proven and not remotely as silly stuff they could've focused on instead. I also think they didn't manage to convey the vastness of the galaxy and universe either which was really disappointing.
To be fair, I don't think it was rubbish. I liked parts of it and till the Dr.Mann part I liked it on the whole as well. After that though, I thought it was a mess.
Your opinion. Just because you didn't connect with it doesn't mean anybody else can't.
Also, the planets. How utterly disappointing. A giant wave was apparently the only interesting bit on mankinds first visit to planets of a new galaxy.
It's your opinion and that's fine, but some opinions are best left not shared, cause they define other people's opinion of you.
Like at this stage RIP's opinions have made me realize he's just the absolute worst.
You're entitled to your opinion (you shouldn't be but that's the world we live in), but I'm surprised at those few sentences of criticism to be perfectly honest. A few other opinions I've read from some guys interested in science and astrophysics were much more glowing and the elements the Nolans and Kip Thorne put in their script were quite challenging, according to them. But of course, to each their own.
When I call it average I mean I did enjoy it but it wasn't particularly great, it could've been a lot better. I've a huge interest in astronomy and astrophysics and I was really disappointed they focused so much on theories that are largely implausible to fuel the story when there's so many other proven and not remotely as silly stuff they could've focused on instead. I also think they didn't manage to convey the vastness of the galaxy and universe either which was really disappointing.
Concerning it being Berbaclass's favourite film, to be perfectly honest I can understand that. When I watched Sunshine, I was absolutely blown away, and despite it not being objectively as good as classics such as the Godfather or others, for ages I was absolutely fascinated by it, by the themes it talked of and what it tried to convey (and yes zombie Mark Strong Nilsson). Sci-fi and space exploration films can leave quite a strong print on someone as they sometimes just hit a sensitive chord for anyone fascinated by those subjects.
Ffs.
I really liked it.
But Sunshine has a great script, is really well acted and is a brilliantly directed movie!
Yeah Sunshine's a way better film than Interstellar.
Did anyone else think of the claw crane soft toy game during that scene?
I would watch it again. I wouldn't watch Sunshine again. I thought it was dull.
I liked Sunshine, Interstellar is better, much better.
If Nolan had directed Sunshine, people would be wanking themselves silly.
Sunshine also doesn't have Jessica Chastain throwing papers in the air and yelling Eureka - which definitely counts in its favour.
Sunshine also doesn't have Jessica Chastain throwing papers in the air and yelling Eureka - which definitely counts in its favour.
And it has zombie Mark Strong.
Just watched it. Very nice. I think the fact that I like reading books like the Rama series (i went woah when i saw the colony ship at the end) and the Night's Dawn trilogy plays a part in me liking it.
Its probably not for people who want instant gratification or casual movie goers.
Its probably not for people who want instant gratification or casual movie goers.
First other person I've seen mention that, loved that reference.
I thought Sunshine was better than this. Moon however was superior to both.
Fo' shizzle. Incredible film.
Moon was a nice little film but wasn't as ambitious as the other two. Very enjoyable though.
I loved that reference. Was watching it with the missus, and she's clueless about things like these so I was fanboying the moment alone.
Thought it was brilliant, but then im a sucker for sci fi epics. If anybody played the old lucas arts touch and click game "the dig" its the closest anythings ever going to get to that, gave me the same vibes.
Yes, but, they managed to find a large area where the water was only 6 inches deep to land in, on a water planet that is VERY impressive!
Not seen 'Moon', but Sunshine is one of my favourite sci-fi movies and I think it wipes the floor with Interstellar.
Yes, but, they managed to find a large area where the water was only 6 inches deep to land in, on a water planet that is VERY impressive!
I got the impression that was what the whole planet was like - with one or several huge waves doing the rounds constantly.
I thought the huge wave was a pretty good concept. It's the rest of the planet having 6 inches of water and no other features that struck me as highly implausible.
Can't really say the rest of the planet had that much when they landed in a single spot for a couple of hours. If you've got 200-odd foot waves as standard from orbiting a black hole, it's going to make the rest of the ocean recede somewhat. They probably wouldn't be so tsunami-esque though, but artistic license and all that.
My only gripe with the movie was it had me thinking how they were able to receive those video messages from Earth through the worm hole. Is that theoretically possible?
Nothing wrong with the giant waves. The issue is when it's the only thing worth remembering about three planets in a new galaxy.
It was just so basic. One had WAVES. The second was GREY. The third was BARELY SHOWN.
The gravity form the blackhole made huge and regular tidal waves. The tidal waves eroded all the features on the planet and made it almost uniform. That was the reasoning.
It made me think of being so hammered it becomes an epic struggle just to get it in.
I've explained the first one.
The second one isn't that unusual when you're on a landscape that's devoid of life. Not only on planetary bodies (Mars is RED, the moon is GREY) but also on tundra here on earth. It's organic life that's responsible for much of the diversity in the way our planet looks. Life appears to be rare from humanity's observations, so it's no surprise when 2 of the 3 planets are that way.
What would you have wanted? An Avatar planet?
Brand says later in the film that in her opinion, being so close to the black hole wouldn't facilitate life as most unexpected life building blocks wouldn't get to the planet. It had the most basic element (water) which was fecked up due to the proximity to the blackhole.
The second planet was just cold but visually I don't know why you have such a problem with it, it looked very good. Also, I don't know why the planets necessarily needed to be more exotic/original. That wasn't the point of the film.
Or that.I didn't say it was inexplicable. It was lame. It's a film about inter galactic travel and what have you. Give those planets some sense of personality even if they don't have 50 foot panda's walking around and mushrooms for hills.
Because going and landing on a planet is one of the most fascinating things about space travel. It doesn't even need to be the point of the film. I just would liked those worlds to be a bit more memorable.
The most fascinating thing about space travel is space sex. There wasn't enough of that. I'm going to change my rating of the film because it didn't coincide exactly with what I wanted to see.
I wanted to see alien dongs and martian minge.
I wanted to see alien dongs and martian minge.
Why hasn't no one made this movie yet?!
Rick And Morty isn't far off that.