Interstellar (2014) Poster


User Reviews

Review this title
3,095 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Nolan's masterpiece, one of the best sci-fi movie
Jean-Mi Super5 November 2014
I have been a cinema lover for years, read a lot of reviews on IMDb and everywhere, and never found the right movie to write my first review. I always thought I would wait for THE movie.

And this is IT!

When I first heard that Nolan was preparing a sci-fi movie, I felt like a kid again, waiting for his Christmas gift under the tree. I knew it would become a classic. And I'm sure it will.

First of all, it is incredibly beautiful to watch. Honestly, it was so beautiful that I felt like I was sucked into the movie. The way Nolan decided to show some scenes really remind me of 2001 A Space Odyssey (actually many things will probably remind you of this movie). We can feel the talent of Christopher Nolan, just by looking at the way it is filmed. The techniques he used contribute to create that visual environment in a believable way.

The sound environment is just mesmerizing. It is a very important part of the movie, because some scenes take place in space, and Noland just found the right way to use sound. The soundtrack (made by the great Hans Zimmer) is breathtaking, epic, amazing, unreal. I could find a lot more adjectives to qualify it, but you have to hear it to understand how epic they are.

These two important parts (image and sound) create a stunning atmosphere. You will forget you are in a movie theater, and you will be lost in space, sucked into the adventures of this new Space Odyssey, begging for more. It is a truly unique experience. I can say that I have never felt something like that in a movie theater (at least not for the past ten years).

Then, of course, the cast. First of all, Matthew McConaughey. I discovered this actor in Tropic Thunder, but he didn't really convince me, though he was quite funny. Then I saw Dallas Buyers Club. Since that movie, I love him. In this movie... Well, he is the movie. I exaggerate a bit, since there are other great actors (some even unexpected with a special guest) who play extremely well. But he is just what was needed to feel the human part of the story (which is very important in Interstellar). He is capable of making us feel so many different emotions all along the story, as a father, as a human. Anne Hathaway was very convincing, all together the actors managed to create some harmony, which makes the human interactions credible. Caine, Chastaing and Affleck are a perfect choice. And then there is... The special guest, I will call him "X". His role, which could be seen as a minor role, is actually much more important than that. He proves, once again, that he is a great actor. Watch and see.

And finally, the scenario/story. I won't spoil anything here; I'll just try to convince you how great it is. Nolan is known to revolutionize everything when he tries a new genre in cinema. Well, once again he did it. With The Dark Knight he revolutionized the superhero genre. With Interstellar he's revolutionizing the sci-fi genre in cinema. From what I heard, he worked with a physicist (in gravitational physics and astrophysics) to help him with that movie. And we can feel and see it. During the fifties, Asimov laid the foundations of modern science fiction. Lucas and Kubrick did the same in cinema. Today, Nolan is laying the new foundations of the genre in cinema, proving that cinema is still at the beginning of what can be done (brace yourselves my friends, we have not seen anything yet).

Why? Well, simply because we only know a few things about space, some things can't be proved for the moment, so we can use theory, and make the best of it. That is exactly what Nolan did. He used theories that exist today, and made a movie about mankind, about pioneers, about humanity, about us.

Because, in spite of all the sci-fi aspect, it is a story about humanity. McConaughey, Hathaway, and mainly "X", will managed to convince you about that.

My rating for this movie can only be a 10, because in itself, it is a beginning for a new kind of cinema. It IS a classic. Those who say "we can't compare this movie to 2001 Space Odyssey, nor can we compare Nolan to Kubrick" are wrong. We can, and we should. Talented people don't live only in the past, some genius live today, among us. And Nolan is one of them. Many say that he is overrated. I truly don't think so. Only time will answer that.

This is the sci-fi movie of the decade, and probably the best movie Nolan ever made. Just go for it, without a second thought.
2,119 out of 3,012 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
Interstellar : An open-hearted & mastered Human Odyssey
tardieu-felix1 November 2014
The film begins by establishing at his own rhythm its ambitions: men overexploited land resources, which is why the only goal they have left is to survive. This life is not enough for Cooper, brilliantly played by McConaughey who gave body and soul to this character. But all of this wouldn't hold without the total control of Christopher Nolan, based on the languishing soundtrack by Hans Zimmer, the luminous and impenetrable photography of Hoyte Van Hoytema, and the sincerity of Nolan's directing. He manages to film the characters and to find the right cut at the right time, always in harmony with Hans Zimmer's soundtrack, to give the film an aspiring and inspiring dimension that went missing for many many years. Thus we are transported into the same cockpit that Cooper, we feel the same remorse that he can already feel, we feel the same gravity, and we feel the same fear of the unknown melted with the force of his will. All of this is brilliantly illustrated in a very simple directing choice, which from my point of view is the decisive impetus of the film: to directly jump from when Cooper leaves in his truck, leaving his family behind him, to Endurance taking off. This simple editing decision allows Nolan to give an original movement to his film, and the musical crescendo makes us physically feel the sentimental break between two parts of the film.

You don't necessarily have to understand it immediately : The film will raise questions in you, such as : what is it to be a human being, is there some physical limitations to our humanity, how far could we be willing to go to determine knowledge, is there other dimensions that we can not access to, and above all: what is the nature of this intact and immutable bond that unites us to others wherever we are in the universe ? Is this bond only intelligible, or is it also tangible ? All these questions resonate in harmony in Nolan's Interstellar.

Interstellar is itself a crescendo, increasing sensitivity and creativity. I use the term deliberately because it goes crescendo with the soundtrack by Hans Zimmer, which is one of the most beautiful music ever scored for a sci-fi movie. We are witnessing a perfect musical arrangement, a total symbiosis, a bit like the music of Gravity which had understood very well how to match the image and the rhythm of a sequence to its own musicality. Zimmer's crescendos are giving a new powerful breath to every new scene, whether it is in visually powerful & intense moments or in more intimate moments; it intrudes into our momentary feelings and sensations, and manages to extend them, sometimes almost to choking, before resting on the balance of the film frame along with our mind spell-bounded.

I have seen all the talent of the director that I knew he was outside the norm, but whom I did not know his capacity to reinvent itself. Because this is it: Interstellar is not an action movie, not really a blockbuster, and it goes not entirely but mostly again the expectations of common people. It's much more than that. This is much more than just a sci-fi movie. It is unlike any of his previous films. Some hoped to see Interstellar as Christopher Nolan's best film, and they were disappointed that this was not the case. And indeed, THIS IS NOT THE BEST FILM of Christopher Nolan. Because in a way, IT IS HIS FIRST FILM. I'm not saying that Interstellar is not as good as his other films, it goes beyond all of them. But to me Interstellar is the first film of a new stage in Nolan's filmography ; it is a masterpiece as it the beginning of a work ahead. Interstellar is the proof that Nolan has finally managed, despite all the expectations that were placed on him after the success of The Dark Knight, to move away from his own reputation to create a personal work, original, humble, sincere and deeply, meticulously, measured.

Now, in this third act of the film, it all comes to life with unparalleled strength. Nolan poses and answers questions that raise others. But he focuses his attention on the great mystery of love, that emotional bond that can unite men and sometimes separate them. But Nolan is the only one that can successfully speak of love from a being to another in a film that mainly takes place in a another galaxy. From my point of view, only Solaris by Steven Soderbergh (2002), unfortunately neglected by the audience, was able to accomplish that. Interstellar is based on a premise which is the following : from terrestrial dust to the depths of space and time, we can never be separated from who we are as individuals and as a species, as we always leave a part of ourselves "behind" us. In other words, I could say that this is a human story, and even if we go as far as we want to, if we travel through the universe believing that we can be detached of the one we are fond of, we will only get closer to them. Because the separation, and thus the distance and time, can only ultimately reinforce the relationship between the people who really love each other. Because it is going to the end of the world, when we reach the end of ourselves, that we reach the singularity of the "black hole beyond the horizon" * : it is our humanity. No, I wasn't been able to find any bad flaws in the film. Not one, and I'm still looking. After all, Interstellar is like gravity, "all it takes is a little push ! "

*you'll have to see the movie to figure that one out.

Félix Tardieu, November 1st, 2014
1,815 out of 2,635 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
A Visually Monumental And Thoughtful Sci-Fi Epic
Calum Rhys8 November 2014
I was extremely lucky to get the chance to see this film upon its first day release, before entering the cinema, my expectations were already high, after all, this was a film from the cinematic genius who brought us the likes of 'Inception' and 'The Dark Knight', to summarise the following review in a single sentence: I left the cinema in extreme awe from the visual masterpiece I had just viewed. A film that explores the psychological and emotional state of a man whose life revolves around his family, 'Interstellar' is a thrilling and thought-provoking film that boasts an intellectual story masterfully written by the Nolan brothers. Whilst there seems to have been influence from films like '2001: A Space Odyssey' and 'Apollo 13', 'Interstellar' is unique in its own way. Whilst the subject may be hard to comprehend at times, it can't be denied how visually monumental and thoughtful Christopher Nolan's epic science fiction masterpiece is, and can easily be named the best film of this year and possibly one of the greatest science fiction films to have ever graced the screen. A sheer brilliant feat of cinema.
1,220 out of 1,813 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
An Emotional, Beautiful Journey into the Unknown
slayerjmk953 November 2014
(This is both a review of the film, and an assertion of Christopher Nolan's filmmaking style)

There have been many reviewers and critics alike that have high praise for the film (the visual effects, the acting, the music), but say how it's not Christopher Nolan's best directed film. This is where i personally would have to disagree. Before i get into it, though, i'll talk about Interstellar a bit.

Interstellar is truly a sci-fi epic like no other. To compare said film to '2001: A Space Odyssey' isn't just a disservice, but unnecessary. The films are almost nothing alike, simply sharing small plot elements. Also, Stanley Kubrick's vision of Arthur C. Clarke's sci-fi epic wasn't to ponder the philosophical questions that accompanied the story, but to make art, and art is was, and is. With Interstellar, Mr. Nolan set out to make his most personal and emotional film to date about love and time (time being a recurring theme throughout all of Nolan's films). But it's so much more than that too. There are no words to express the epic journey Nolan takes us on in the film, but needless to say, it's tear-jerking and emotional throughout. The acting is top-notch, especially McConaughey, who gives (I would say) his most emotional performance yet. But the actor who stole the show in a few scenes (one in particular, when they're on an alien planet) was David Gyasi as Romilly, one of the astronauts aboard the Endurance, their spacecraft. The musical score from Hans Zimmer is, without a doubt, his best and most influential work to date, helping drive the film's bold and breath-taking vision (the church organ helped significantly). The visual effects are easily the best to date as well, and of the year. To see a black hole created through visual effects in such a way, with pages theoretical equations provided by Kip Thorne (theoretical physicist, of whom's work inspired the film's genesis); what you see in the film is the most realistic depiction of a black hole, and even offered new insight to accretion discs surrounding the anomalies. But even everything else, from the alien planets to the Endurance, the visuals always look real. Then, there's the writing. I would definitely have to say this has some of the best dialogue i've ever heard in a sci-fi movie, and the script continually pours or oozes emotion, keeping the audience tethered to the film.

Now, about Mr. Nolan. Don't just look at Nolan, but look at his films. Some say Inception would be his masterpiece, while others would say it's The Dark Knight, or Memento. But honestly, every single film Christopher Nolan has directed is a masterpiece not of its genre, but of Nolan. Following is his quiet masterpiece, not the film that put Mr. Nolan on the map as a phenomenal director, but one people visited or revisited after becoming accustomed to Nolan, after seeing Memento, what could be called his breakout masterpiece. Then, right after, he directed the remake of the Norwegian thriller, Insomnia. This, too, could be considered a masterpiece, even if a remake. Then, we were given his take on the Batman universe, starting with Batman Begins, the origin masterpiece. Then, there's The Prestige, adapted from the novel of the same name, which can be called his dark masterpiece. The Dark Knight, his bold masterpiece; Inception, his complex masterpiece, and The Dark Knight Rises, his flawed masterpiece. Now, we have Interstellar, his emotional or personal masterpiece.

This is just my looking at Nolan and his films, but whatever your thoughts are, you can't deny Interstellar is one hell of a journey. He certainly is one of the best filmmakers of our time, and of all time. I can't wait to see what he does next, but i'm not sure it will be as emotionally powerful as Interstellar.
1,429 out of 2,141 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
Tyler Miller5 November 2014
'Interstellar' was incredible. The visuals, the score, the acting, were all amazing. The plot is definitely one of the most original I've seen in a while. Most of the critic reviews have said that some bits are a little too unbelievable, but I have to disagree. Yes, there were some parts that were definitely in the "fi" part of sci-fi. But the thing is, 'Interstellar' deals with concepts that we know very little about. We have no idea what the 4th or 5th dimension is like, or what it would be like to go through a wormhole or a black hole. I don't think it's fair to call something unbelievable, when we have absolutely no idea what WOULD be believable in those circumstances. Either way, excellent writing from the Nolan brothers. The visuals were outstanding, and will no doubt be nominated for an Oscar. The performances were excellent, though nothing Oscar worthy, as is the case with most of Nolan's films ('The Dark Knight' being the obvious exception). Hans Zimmer's score was amazing and blended perfectly with the film. All in all, 'Interstellar' is an excellent movie, which I personally think is Nolan's most beautiful film to date.
930 out of 1,434 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
A Love Story Against The Backdrop Of A Grand Interstellar Travel
gstards4 November 2014
Love is the one thing that transcends time and space...

New creation of Christopher Nolan's genius, whose name is now known to everyone. His films are waiting with a special look, because it offers something that every day, unfortunately, less and less can be found in the world of mass cinema - an interesting spectacle, filled with meaning, ideas and emotions. At this time, Christopher decided to send us not to the world of dreams, and even not on the dark streets of Gotham City. No, now he send us to the journey to, and perhaps beyond the boundaries of the possible and impossible, through the curvature of space and time, in other worlds. And you won't forget this trip, this can be assured.

I was madly waiting for Interstellar's release. And then, finally, I was able to see this Beauty - at the premiere in my coutry on October, 29. It was incredibly exciting. It was a delight. It was unforgettable. It was gorgeous. Nolan once again amazes the viewer's imagination by his painting. Journey to the brink of infinity, the line where humanity has never set, acts as either the first-born purpose and a background of emotional history about the father and the daughter. A loving father who mankind need to help, but that he should leave his children, and a loving daughter who doesn't want to let her dad in the infinity darkness.

Starting from the very first frame and ending with the closing credits, a new picture of Nolan will absorb you completely, forcing stare at the screen during the whole action, because it's all so exciting and interesting that escape becomes physically impossible. No, this three hours won't fly quickly for you. You'll feel every emotion, every event, every character. You will not look how the main characters travel through the universe, because the movie experience in this film is so excellent that you will be on board of "Endurance" starship and travel between the worlds with the main characters by yourself.

The emotional core of this story is the relationship of Matthew McConaughey's character and his daughter - Mackenzie Foy' and Jessica Chastain' character. And the acting work of these three artists in "Interstellar" impress the most. McConaughey was acting really great, and this is one of the most emotional, if not the most emotional role of his life. All the drama and tragedy of the relationship of father and daughter in this film will not leave anyone indifferent. Anne Hathaway, Wes Bentley, Michael Caine, Casey Affleck, Ellen Burstyn and other actors also coped with their roles and presented the film's supporting characters very realistic. I would particularly like to note a small but important in this story role of Matt Damon, a character who has received quite memorable. If we talk about the characters, it should be noted also two robots that accompanied our heroes in this difficult journey. One of them adds a touch of humor in the film, which mitigates constantly depressing, dramatic, and sometimes really dark atmosphere.

The script of the film is very well combined the history of space exploration and the relationship between Cooper and Murph. The story is complex and complicated, is based on real scientific theories by Kip Thorne, and indeed contains a reference to the "Space Odyssey" and other sci-fi pictures. This story about true love, about loyalty, forgiveness, fraud, hard decisions, and much more. And it is designed so that leaves a lot of room for the imagination of the viewer. It's also possible to notice some structure allusion to another Nolan's work - Inception. The story and visuals are combined just perfectly in Interstellar.

Hans Zimmer's score, written by him on the basis of only one letter from Nolan, hold the key: "Once we become parents, we can't help but look at ourselves through the eyes of our children", deserves a special praise. On this basis, Hans managed to write just incredible soundtrack that perfectly harmonizes with the history and the visual side of the picture. And this work of the composer is really different from the previous ones. It is executed in a different style from another subject in its base. Very impressive work, which will be pleasantly listened again and separate from the film itself.

Visual range of the picture is incredibly beautiful and circuses. The "Endurance" itself, new worlds, insanely beautiful and mysterious space, wormholes, black holes, and travel through them, folds of time and space are arranged so that is simply breathtaking. I would like to thank all those who contributed to the creation of a visual of this film. It must be seen. That mastery with which this is done, not just words. In the visual pattern also has some references to the Kubrick's "Odyssey", and they are pleasing to the eye.

Many thanks to Christopher Nolan for having given us such an incredible movie, which once again proved to us that the cinema is Nolan's life.

"Interstellar" is a film that wins the hearts of the audience not only with its sci-fi splendor, but also an emotional story that lies at its very heart. This film is not only about the discoveries, space exploration and the final frontier of mankind, but also about the relationship of father and daughter, who were in a difficult situation in life when one has to leave the other in the name of a goal that can not be underestimated. So, with what Nolan's genius unfolds before us this action is beyond praise. Combining the story, filled with not only real science fiction, but the true human values ​​and emotions, outstanding and very emotional performances, breathtaking visuals, epic and dramatic soundtrack, Christopher Nolan breathed the life into this film by his directing to create something truly masterpiece again.

"Do Not Go Gentle Into That Good Night... Rage, Rage Against The Dying Of The Light."
808 out of 1,349 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
A good - not great - movie that falls apart the more you think about it.
shawneofthedead7 November 2014
Warning: Spoilers
Not many directors have the clout of Christopher Nolan. Most of them receive notes from their fretting studios: suggestions (or demands) to change plot points or highlight certain characters/actors, which must be adhered to for contractual or financial reasons. With huge, intelligent blockbuster successes like the Dark Knight franchise and Inception, Nolan has deservedly won carte blanche from Warner Bros. for Interstellar - he gets garguantan sums of money and complete autonomy to realise his artistic vision. In effect, he's making an indie movie on a blockbuster scale. Ironically, this lack of oversight might be just what keeps Interstellar - a very good, occasionally brilliant foray into the furthest reaches of our galaxy and beyond - from greatness.

Cooper (Matthew McConaughey), a former pilot and engineer, is now reluctantly scraping together a living as a farmer on a starving Earth. With sandstorms swirling and food supplies dwindling by the day, it doesn't seem likely that Cooper's children, stoic Tom and inquisitive Murphy, will have much of a world left to inherit when they grow up. While investigating a "ghost" in Murphy's bedroom, Cooper deciphers a message that brings him to a top-secret NASA base. Once there, Cooper learns from his former mentor, Dr Brand (Michael Caine), that NASA is looking for solutions to Earth's crisis in other galaxies. A recently-opened wormhole has given NASA and its scientists access to a whole new galaxy of planets. Brand appeals to Cooper to pilot the final and most important mission: to determine whether any of three identified planets can truly host human life. But it's a journey from which Cooper might never return - one that will take him away from his kids and everything he has ever known and loved.

That's not even the half of it – Nolan's narrative is a sprawling, ambitious one that asks heavy metaphysical questions about the position and role of humanity in the universe, filtered through the prism of a father and daughter whose bond transcends time and space. It's shot through with complex scientific theories about wormholes and time travel courtesy of theoretical physicist Kip Thorne (who served as a consultant on the film). Indeed, much of Interstellar plays with such philosophical gravity that one can't help wondering if it's simply too deep a subject to be effectively communicated in a movie that must also create emotional stakes and real characters.

Clocking in at almost three hours, Interstellar pulses with intelligence and occasional bursts of brilliance. The science and emotion of its story works best on each planet they manage to visit, with Nolan crafting some chillingly smart sci-fi moments amidst the human drama experienced by Cooper's crew. As badly as Cooper wants to save enough fuel to make the return trip home, Amelia Brand (Anne Hathaway) has both professional and personal stakes in visiting the planet that's furthest away from the wormhole. They trade hope for time, the minutes they use to hunt for salvation translating into the loss of decades with their loved ones. The film is at its best when the members of the Endurance - including David Gyasi's Romilly and Wes Bentley's Doyle - confront one another, and establish contact (or fail to do so) with the scouting teams that preceded them through the wormhole.

But Interstellar also suffers from a bloated and faintly silly final act. The science of it may be well-founded (who knows, after all, what miraculous answers really do lie within a black hole?) and the concept very cool, but it doesn't quite translate as such. Instead, the film hyper-blasts itself into a oddly cheerful (and confusing) ending that feels purely fictional and not at all scientific. There's no denying, either, that Nolan could have carved half an hour or more out of Interstellar without losing any of its narrative or emotional density. Instead, many scenes unfold in an almost obstinately languid fashion, including a moment when Cooper is left gasping for oxygen on the icy terrain of an alien planet. It's pretty evident, too, that Nolan really wanted to make sure his audiences knew how little greenscreen he used to make the film; for no other discernible reason, his camera lingers in extreme close-up - and far too often - on the exterior shells of the various spacecrafts designed for the film.

Nolan can afford the best when it comes to his cast as well, and it shows. McConaughey anchors the film with a gravitas and tenderness quite unknown before his career McConnaissance, and he's ably supported by a steely Hathaway, whose character, just like the film she's in, blends cold, pragmatic science with a churning wealth of emotion. Jessica Chastain and Matt Damon, in roles perhaps best left unspecified to avoid any explicit spoilers, are excellent too - the former radiates quite enough warmth and intelligence to make us believe that she can save the world, and the latter admirably treads in morally grey areas to good effect.

For months before its release, Nolan kept Interstellar firmly under wraps. Everyone speculated that it would be a game-changer - a sci- fi blockbuster as thrilling and thought-provoking as it is entertaining. In some ways, that's true of the final product: Nolan's film is brave, brainy film-making, and it looks absolutely spectacular. But, on closer examination, Interstellar loses some of its gloss and varnish - and beneath it all lies an unwieldy script that meanders a little too long and wastes a little too much of the big, breathtaking ideas that underpin its story.
241 out of 388 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
A familiar journey to the unknown, albeit a grand one
aldamayo4 November 2014
So last night I got the chance to see the early screening of Christopher Nolan's Interstellar. The film I've been waiting so much from the early days of the shooting. How did it fare? Here's my take:

To avoid any tl;dr risk, let me get this straight from the very beginning, Interstellar is one goddamnedly good film, it gets you to the edge of your seat, it soars, it warps, it rips your brain senseless. It's that good.

Interstellar is a story about the earth dying, with its soil no longer able to sustain crops other than corn, and of course, it will lead to the extinction of humanity. Our hero is an ex-NASA test pilot named Cooper (Matthew McConaughey), a typical ordinary-guy-in-an-extraordinary- situation everyman who's also a dedicated family man, especially toward his daughter Murphy (named after the Murphy's Law). In an all-too-Armageddon style our hero gets invited by the (publicly) defunct NASA to become humanity's last hope in finding a new home, for they have found a wormhole near Saturn (2001, anyone?) which will warp the astronauts to another galaxy in quest of a habitable planet. Solid and compact premise, although it's been used before.

For seasoned filmgoers, there are many similar elements (although it's understandable) with Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) and Robert Zemeckis' Contact (1997). In a sense that this is not a bang-bang-shoot-shoot-blow-em-up sci-fi, but more of a slow-burning, metaphysical sci-fi which gets you to think about your place in the universe and your exact place in time.

Similarity with 2001 and Contact is never a bad thing, but it becomes a wee bit too predictable, although Nolan is a smart enough director in providing the final (a very sentimental one, I should say) twist in the story. The visuals in this film is majestic, everything is shot to a meticulously calculated level, Nolan-style. The space scenes are serenely suspenseful just like Cuaron's Gravity, but unlike the documentary feel of Gravity, there's a real gusto and pace to these scenes. You should also be prepared for the (for some, maybe) unexpected third act, it is Nolan's most sentimental and humane moment to date. And this is why Interstellar is more than just a science-fiction, it is a human drama intertwined in space and time loop.

One thing that Nolan gets a bit wrong is the narrative. Nolan was never a 'warm' director, his films are filled with brilliant ideas and flair but it feels cold, it maybe suits Memento and The Dark Knight but in Interstellar he seems to have been lost in determining which of the interpersonal drama or the sci-fi that will be Interstellar's forte. The result is a rather incongruous script, intermittently cutting off the excitement of the previous scene and so on. But it is a forgivable sin, for the good is a lot more than the bad in this monumental film. At the end of the day, all I can say is that Interstellar is a grand film. It is monolithic, thoughtful, sentimental, sophisticated, visceral but also with its flaws. I wouldn't say it's Nolan's best work to date, but I daresay that this is one of the best science fiction ever released.

After watching Interstellar, do yourself a favor and get lost in space and time and go back in time to see Contact (1997) and 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) to further wonder and wander into the realms of the unknown.

Because sometimes it is the unknown that fascinates us, frightens us and brings out the best in us.
570 out of 955 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
Epic in every way!
Sanjay Haridas4 November 2014
Just watched Interstellar in imax 70mm. Science Fiction fans can read on, everyone else can skip. Movie is a visual masterpiece. Like his earlier movies, Christopher Nolan once again proved, how big a movie can be! There were some shots,which made audience go crazy..Some scenes were as epic as 2001: A Space Odyssey. Do not go into the theatre expecting an action packed cerebral thriller. This one is not for action fans. At times, movie go highly sentimental( Matthew McConaughey does what he is best in and supposed to). I recommend this movie to all the Sci-Fi fans out there, make sure you go in group of sci-fi nuts!! Do not go with the hype..Go, sit back and enjoy. Just like Inception, this movie will be known as great after few months(I know people who said Inception was a crap when it released, and after few months rating it 10/10 in IMDb :D). I don't wanna spoil anything(If you want PM me). Also, make sure you go to the best theatre close to you. (If you loved Donnie Darko, 2001: A Space Odyssey, this is the one for you, Get ready to get mind blown!!) Interstellar Movie is EPIC in all sense!!
811 out of 1,419 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
megha278 November 2014
Warning: Spoilers
I am a Nolan fan but, and perhaps that's why, I see Interstellar as a failed magic act. The multi-layered surprise and amazement that we have come to expect of Nolan's films did not deliver. I believe this particular film, like Prometheus, failed due to the maker's inherent desire to create an epic - it took on too much, tried too hard and did it all wrong.

I'm willing to suspend disbelief for the sake of artistic creativity, assume space suits and modern telecommunication systems pass unscathed through black holes (and really, who knows?) but there are things that cannot be excused with the budget and resources at the disposal of this genius film-making team (such as bad script and poor plot planning).

IDEA / PLOT The overarching idea is good, if not new. I found it hard to feel amazed by the (too many) plot twists. Ultimately the combination of all of them was tepid. We were expecting Murphy to be older than Cooper midway onwards. Murphy's brilliant solution leading to mankind's escape from earth failed to awe. Firstly - a massive stretch on the Morse code / quantum data, secondly - the two laugh-out-loud "eureka" moments - and thirdly, the "aha" factor on seeing the new, curved reality space station was completely missing that feeling - "aha, so that was it, that's what it was all about". More failures - Matt Damon segue and the very overdone "ghost" revelation.

SYMBOLISM / KEY TWIST The portrayal of the time dimension within a three dimensional world in the form of the undulating bookshelf wall was beautifully rendered. However everything else about that scene felt wrong - the space-suited Cooper - would he have stayed in exactly that form inside a singularity even if future advanced beings - them / us - have helpfully carved him a neat 3-D nook in a 5-D world? This needed exploration and some complexity. The continuation of his radio communication equipment felt way too convenient, the whole frantic scene "explained" again by the unexplained rush that's a hallmark of this film.

So, although the symbolic setup was good, I had to work hard to suspend disbelief - to get Cooper to the back of the bedroom wall and have him throw out clues using gravity and love as forces transcending dimensions - why back of the wall? Why not front? Why did the space-time continuum stop him there (that you can't go back in the time dimension, does not explain how he could gravitationally interfere with that particular room - in the past - and why he couldn't, I don't know, leave a Morse code message to himself well before all of this happened? Also, why his daughter? We get no clue in the first part of the film why this duo in particular is chosen, the only hint to Murhpy's future proclivity for the sciences coming from a penchant for decoding Morse and Michael Caine's all- forgiving view of her as a"firebrand" or something such.)

PACING / DIALOG Plot pacing was terrible (variously too slow and too fast). Dialog was terrible. It would have benefited from further revision and thought around how to present this particular story to the layman. I found myself wondering how an actor of Matt Damon's caliber did not just wave a huge red flag when he had to say why Prof Brand knew the mission would fail -"because he could not reconcile quantum physics with the theory of relativity" (not a direct quote). Even if he isn't a physicist. The only lines I can still recall liking in the film are by Dylan Thomas (also overused).

PRESENTATION I write this with only an armchair enthusiasm for physics, familiarity limited to the most dumbed-down works of Stephen Hawking. I found most of the science concepts used very trite - wormholes, black holes, relativity, time dilation - trite because of their portrayal as convenient plot tools. Having agreed in an extreme and completely unexplained hurry to leave his family behind perhaps forever, we then find out that Cooper needs to be told these concepts one at a time using, at varying moments, a folded paper pierced by a pen, oyster/pearl metaphors, and a suddenly-presented love interest for Anne Hathaway (that plot point on love being an unexplained force was particularly deeply unconvincing). I understand some of the angles needed to be explained to most people, but Nolan has done hard things more elegantly in the past. That is where one expected Nolan to deliver.

As things were it made you wonder the entire time why this crew was the best of humanity. Murphy's law, indeed.

ACTING Matthew McConaughey's drawl was sporadic and seemed unnecessary. His character did not convince me either that he was the guy who is most capable of being spontaneously recruited for an urgent NASA mission (and what if he had refused?), nor that he was the guy who loved his daughter in a unique way that transcended dimensions (or more so than anyone else), nor even as a suitable candidate to return from this odyssey with all its shenanigans through black holes, gyrating space stations and a cracked space helmet (!) We never know his history well enough. Anne Hathaway and the rest of the crew were no more impressive. Michael Caine was convincing, but ultimately confusing, as his confession left more questions asked than answered.

TARS stole the show, and should have had more lines.

EFFECTS / SCORE The effects were not comparable to Gravity. I wondered why their spacecraft was not equipped with the basic equipment to check metrics / giant waves / frozen clouds / landing conditions when any commercial satellite today will do that for you and tell you where you are to a foot's accuracy. But, details.

The score was beautiful, and one of Zimmer's best. What a waste.
584 out of 1,019 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
Oh, no!
nick_fadely8 November 2014
Warning: Spoilers
It is incomprehensible to me that I watched the same movie that the majority of reviewers of this movie on IMDb seemed to. Perhaps I was unknowingly sucked into a blackhole, wormhole, or plot hole that most of the other reviewers of this movie managed to avoid. All I know is that my hard-earned money was sucked into this monstrosity along with me and for that I am truly regretful. Like a few other commenters, I had absolutely no feelings or connection with any of the characters, even hoping at times that they would all fail in their meaningless endeavors. A ridiculous premise with outlandish and unscientific bases, very little of this movie makes any sense at all. It amazes me that Nolan was able to draw the acting talent to this waste of time, as their considerable skills are completely wasted on this drivel.

I should note that on several occasions, I actually couldn't help but laugh out loud at the absurdity, and that fact was truly telling for me.

Mr. Nolan, et al - you owe me two hours and forty-nine minutes of my life back!
522 out of 924 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
Less than stellar by at least 5 dimensions
Terry Peck21 November 2014
Warning: Spoilers
I got something out of this movie. I really did. It was 35 degrees Celsius outside the cinema and all I needed was a three hour nap in cool air-conditioning. Lucky me! The latest Nolan film, just there for the taking.

It started off as I hoped it would, all dusty on the porch of some ranch in the middle of the U.S. otherwise known as nowhere, the end of the world syrupy American-style, little kid tugging at the heart strings - my eyelids already beginning to droop even before Coop and his daughter Murph wind up at some place that some old cockney and his very Jewish daughter inhabit (guess it only happens in movies with a blind casting director), but that was fine, I was almost in REM sleep - not having been able to process a word of dialogue from McConaughey in over 20 minutes. Pure bliss.

And it got even better from an insomniac's point of view. Thanks to an absurd plot and woefully unimaginative CGI effects, my chin was almost on my chest when they landed on the first planet the other side of... well, let's just call it credulity. I don't sleep this well at home! Wait! We're going through another Kubrick-style time dimension - didn't we just spend half an hour on this planet re-using some special effects, this time made to look like giant waves, left over from Inception? I think so, but time warps so nicely when you're practically snoring.

I think we lost an astronaut somewhere. Maybe that's the game. Who's next? I hope it's the astrophysicist who explains wormholes with a moebius strip he forgets to twist. Either that or it was origami for dummies. Maybe that *was* the guy we just lost - hard to tell, they all act the same. Flat as the dialogue. Thanks guys. Anyway, we can only pray it will be Hathaway soon. She's starting to keep me awake. How can a head bob about so much in weightlessness? But I'm being unfair; I think I remember her trying to act some of this script. Brave move from an Oscar winner. I'm starting to want my money back.

Anyway, I'm roused a bit now and thus a bit grumpy. We're in another galaxy's version of Antarctica minus the faintest signs of life - this despite (because of?) the unzipping of a new bad actor. Fortunately, this actor goes even beyond his usual leaden deadness and I'm soon starting to lose consciousness again and time travel merrily back to the land of nod. I think there was a plot twist involved because this astronaut is trying to do a Dave and HAL routine. He must think he's in a good movie. Poor sod.

Did I mention there must have been yards of Inception on the cutting-room floor last time because I'm watching more and more outtakes? Gotta save a few million here and there.

I had a dream. I dreamed that Nolan would come up with a slew of insanely bizarre plot twists right at the end that would explain the entire reason for watching this flick. But they carried me out on a stretcher before I found out if it was true. Apparently, I was having a nightmare screaming "Morse Code! No! No! No! Not Morse Code! That's Spielberg!" at the top of my lungs and disturbing the other patrons' naps. I was obviously paying too much attention even comatose.
386 out of 678 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
Got tricked by paid reviews
neojav14 November 2014
Warning: Spoilers
I watched this movie yesterday. I was very excited after reading so many perfect 10 star reviews for this movie so I was expecting a perfect movie, really!

Before I continue, I must say I really love sci-fi movies, and I am deeply interested in black holes, time travel, wormholes, interstellar traveling. Wow, I couldn't think twice, this could be the perfect fit for me! I had really high expectations.

For the entire movie I was feeling like: "the best part of the movie should soon", but never came. I had hard time understanding what was really happening, and too many minutes of the movie were badly wasted in dramatic scenes of love, confusing speeches, formulas. All I wanted to see was the wormhole travel, spacetime and gravity distortion, galaxies, nebulae, etc. I mean, I wanted to see what is in the deep space, and what could be human life in a planet million light years away from us.


Maybe the movie drove me nuts, or I lost interest, but after they crossed into the new galaxy, all I felt was confusion. I never understood what was really happening, what were they rescuing, what were those 3 planets and how they knew too much about them, why was there a black hole? Even I tried hard connecting every scene and plot in the movie, I failed.

What I disliked the most was the fact that the feeling of discovering something AMAZING and new was not successfully transmitted to us. I wanted to feel that great emotion of discovering deeps space but I failed. Instead the characters talked about crazy physics and plans to save humanity. Not to mention the multi-plot scenes after the fight, totally no sense.

Please don't get tricked by this website and fake reviews ad I did. This is reason I signed up at IMDb (first review), to warn others. The idea of the movie is fantastic, but poorly developed and acted, totally confusing, too much cliché. Watch it but don't have high expectations as me, you will be disappointed.
336 out of 592 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
Grand ideas don't make great movies
Andrei Popov7 November 2014
Warning: Spoilers
It is beyond me how people can claim the movie to be 'brainy', 'intelligent', 'well written'... With all the things I read about the movie prior to seeing it makes it the biggest disappointment I've experienced from cinema in years. I give 1 star to bring balance to the current rating, in reality this movie is of course not that bad. The whole idea behind the plot is that McConaughey ended up in this blackhole where 5 dimensions were compressed into 3 dimensions and stuff, and where he was able to manipulate gravity by sending his daughter the message which was imperative for saving humanity. So what in fact happened is through this ridiculously improbable chain of events McConaughey ended up inside this blackhole. All this was apparently the result of a bigger plan all along. Was there really no easier way for (future humans/aliens) to transmit this data, and if they built this time-space warping machine inside the blackhole - means they had access to the data all along? And also means they chose McConaughey daughter on purpose? So I don't understand, what was this purpose? Could they not have connected their portal to professor's office a long time ago, or go for one of the ten billion more rational alternatives? On a side note: is it not funny how McConaughey ignored the message NOT TO GO from the same 'ghost' yet followed the rest of the directions? While in the end of the movie he idiotically repeats his feeble attempt. Had he added 'it's you dad' or any other sensible hint he would have saved his daughter years of suffering (and maybe a lifetime for himself when he realises this). And I don't even want to get into how ridiculous it is that he transmitted data by moving the hands on the watch, which was unaffected after being picked up, meaning it was hardly gravitational manipulation was it? What was the point of trying to be scientific and trying to explain it in this way then. If he could do that, he ought to have found a better solution that did not require his daughter 25 years to figure out. And anyway, they saved humanity by building this massive station named after his daughter (by that time they knew what he went through and they still named it after her?). Why couldn't they have done the same thing on Earth? Just build the same goddamn station on Earth without needing to harvest their gravitational energy bullsh*t, bam, humanity saved in the same way. Grand ideas don't make great movies if you can't deliver them properly... It is atrocity to compare this to Kubrick's masterpiece...
818 out of 1,496 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
Dumb, dumber, dumbest!
Max18 November 2014
Warning: Spoilers
This is without exception one of the dumbest films I have ever sat through. Or perhaps it's a masterpiece and I'm too dumb to understand it? Anyway .....

Here are some of the things (the list is not exhaustive) that I could not get my head around.

There is a catastrophic failure in most of the crops of the world. And the entire scientific community simply shrugs and says, 'Oh well. Dem's the breaks' and does nothing. Seriously? Apart from that one dude in the 'super secret' NASA compound? Okay then.

A super intelligent, super advanced alien civilization has been watching us. They see that the planet is in peril. That more than six thousand million people will die from starvation. So they offer a solution. Not by curing the blight mind. No, that would be far too easy.

They construct a wormhole (they being five dimensional creatures 'n' all) close to Saturn ('cos Kubrick had already used Jupiter in 2001). The film makes a big deal about corn being the only viable crop still resisting the blight (cornmash beer anybody) but it's only a matter of time before that too succumbs. So It's a matter of great urgency that the astro-heroes get to the ol' wormhole as quickly as possible.

So the far side of the Moon would be a handy place to put it.

No, no, noooo.

They place the wormhole beside Saturn. So distant from Earth that it takes two years just to fly there.

And all the while any poor kids unfortunate enough to be called Dusty are getting the crap beaten out of them at Pharming College. Anybody for cornflakes?

Now NASA have already explored the wormhole. They know that it opens into another galaxy, beside a black hole and an assortment of potential new worlds. Because of the proximity of the planets to the black hole, time will be distorted and a couple of hours exploring these new worlds will translate to decades back on Earth. While back on ol' Planet earth the corn crops fail and the dust storms gather pace. So this was the plan?

By the super intelligent aliens? Is someone taking the p*ss? There were no planets anywhere that were ... um ... NOT right beside a black hole? Super intelligent? Doh!

And so finally, after a number of silly subplots, our hero finally descends onto the event horizon of the black hole (My God! It's full of stars?). And experiences time as a physical construct. But is he shown the origin of the blight that is wiping out the planet so that he might alert the scientific community? Hell no. He is shown his daughter's bedroom on the day that he left on his 'weekend getaway.' We see him getting really upset that his daughter isn't picking up on his STAY ...... STAY! gravity assisted message, even though he should remember that she shouted STAY .... STAY! to him on that day, and he left anyway. Sheesh!

And Zimmer's soundtrack? I hadn't heard about the soundtrack request came to him via email, without him ever seeing the movie. Explains a lot really. Presumably the email went something like 'If you produce anything orchestral like Kubrick, you're off the project.' So the soundtrack consisted almost entirely of ponderous bass heavy synth driven (in the cinema where I watched it) piercingly loud quasi classical discordance. Bear in mind that Kubrick chose the pieces by Strauss, etc., to assist him in editing the movie,and then realised that they actually fit perfectly, and so discarded the original soundtrack that he had commissioned.

Not Nolan.

NoSirreeBob! Email it in, Hans.

Who listens to the music anyway? Deeply, deeply disappointing.

And I loved Inception!
322 out of 575 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
#11 All-Time. . .Seriously?
vinceb-310 November 2014
Warning: Spoilers
The universe is full of fascinating facts. It's mind-bending to contemplate, for example, the awesome size of our galaxy. Light travels 186,000 miles per second and yet it takes 100,000 years for a single beam of light to cross the entire Milky Way Galaxy. And our galaxy, to quote Carl Sagan, is only one among billions and billions. The vastness of space truly is stunning.

But thanks to a "worm hole" the folks in Interstellar leave the Milky Way in a cosmic snap of the fingers. And yet, having just achieved this most amazing of all feats, our heroes are pretty much bored to tears. Instead, everybody is more concerned with some father/daughter relationship that wasn't developed in the first place.

Look, if you're going to make a movie that purports to explore the fascinating mysteries of the universe, then do it! Have some wonderment in the story. Dazzle me not only with visuals, but with amazement at the astonishing scope of our universe. And why not produce a script that obeys the laws of astrophysics, or at least some theories thereof?

This movie takes something that would dwarf the Apollo lunar missions and turns it into some ridiculous "Plan A/Plan B" tediousness. I suggest instead watching "Through the Wormhole" with Morgan Freeman or re- watching "2001: A Space Odyssey." Heck, even "Contact" with Jodie Foster is far more entertaining and imaginative than Interstellar.

And yet. . .9.2 stars!

I'm not saying 10-star reviews on this site are phony; after all, major film critics also are raving about Interstellar. Unfortunately, I find most professional film critics about as credible as the physics in this movie.

Frankly, Interstellar is a boring movie! And if that puts me in the vast minority of reviewers, fine, I can live with that. Because I have minimum standards when I pay $11 for admission and $8.50 for large popcorn.

Stay home and read a good book instead, or just gaze out at the night sky and reflect on our amazing universe.
1,097 out of 2,042 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
Waste of money...
kagan gokturk18 November 2014
Warning: Spoilers
My honest rating would be 6 for that movie but I rated it 1 to balance the "emotional" ratings. Cast and the part with Matt Damon were good. The rest was a bad combination of Gravity, 2001: A Space Odyssey, a bit Mr. Nobody in the wrap of a lot of useless drama... If you have a thinking mind which does not surrender to the dirty drama games of the commercial script writers then your brain cells will hurt like a b... after seeing that much nonsense. Unfortunately, that is the destiny of almost all movies playing with the time concept except the Back to the Future trilogy. What concerns me more than the quality of the movie itself is the number of blown-up ratings threatening the credibility of IMDb, which I always trust. Who are you people? Some fake rating generator AI? Thousands of people voting for 1$ per day? Last words: Don't go! They don't deserve your money because they did not put enough effort to create a meaningful story and I would accept any meaning in its own logic.
266 out of 482 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
What a massive disappointment
Balthazar-513 November 2014
Warning: Spoilers
Though I am not a Bat-person, and do not wish to become one, I have admired Christopher Nolan for his early films and 'Inception', though, with the exception of 'Insomnia', I always regarded them as, in the immortal words of Andrew Sarris 'less than meets the eye'. I do not like to call films pretentious, but with 'Memento' and 'Inception' the word certainly came to mind. They seemed shallow pretending to be deep.

The same is, in my opinion, certainly true of 'Interstellar'. Yes, it carries you along for a ride, and yes the special effects are great, and yes, it might give us pause to think what will, in fact, be the destiny of our species. But, my dear Mr Nolan, surely you must realise that our species will not survive by planting American flags on distant planets. And, like 'Gravity' before it, the search for a happy ending has totally destroyed any shred of credibility of what might have gone before. The image of Cooper floating around Saturn without his spaceship, waiting to be picked up by a passing probe (just before his oxygen runs out, of course) is so ridiculous that if Stanley Kubrick were to be told that it is a respectful reference to the 'starchild' at the end of '2001', he'd punch you in the nose.

'Interstellar' - for all of its attempts to incorporate relativistic time dilation and very clever (I do not use that word in a derogatory sense) visual representation of multi-dimensional string theory towards the end, is void of any real cultural insight.

The film simply extends 'The Wizard of Oz' into the space age and decides at the end that there is really somewhere better than home. It is TOSH! Great films tell us something memorable about the human condition, or the nature of cinema itself. This film, for all its quotes from Dylan Thomas does neither. It is for people who think that the word 'awesome' has some profound meaning and not, as is the case, an excuse for not finding a more appropriate and restrained reaction.

Any suggestion that it deserves a Best Picture Oscar is a sad comment on the way that those awards have become debased in recent years.
126 out of 220 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
Confused and shaky in delivering the message
kambizpa-156-64769610 November 2014
Warning: Spoilers
In the opening night, I walked out from the movie theater, totally disappointed to see one of my favorite directors has diminished himself to such a low lever of performance.

Poorly developing plot, immature explanation of astrophysics, unbelievable and unrelated events and characters, especial effects leveled to a Disney comedy, and horrible music are only parts of my negative impression.

Even Mathew McConaghey did not seem believable looking at her daughter, older than himself. Mat Damon probably did his career's worst acting. The robot was another annoying part. What did Anne Hathaway and two other guys add to the story?

Using a laptop to bring down a drown and control an inter-galaxy spaceship??? Finding a livable planet after passing through the worm hole, in "another galaxy" seemed easier than finding an ATM machine in a US interstate highway.

Why would a director hire a "Black-Hole-World-Expert" as an executive producer to explain a worm hole function by drawing a line on a paper and punch it with a pencil? Just reading the worm hole article in Wikipedia would give you much more sophisticated knowledge.

Mr. Nolan looked completely confused in delivering a solid message: Awareness of climate changes, saving human species, teaching relativity theory to common movie goers, or the power of love. Each of them bold and superficial.
279 out of 508 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
Unmatched visuals and writing, yet sentimentalist and most definitely not Nolan's best directorial work
gonzaloltovilla29 October 2014
I will keep this short for the sake of not spoiling anything.

Right off i should say I love Nolan. I adore most of his movies, and Interstellar is no exception. It is a marvelous piece of work whose visuals will be hard to forget. His shots of space and the way he played with colors is rather masterful. Maybe i expected it to be greater than what i saw, but even though i was moved by the movie i did not quite feel like he created something great with 'Interstellar.' This could be attributed maybe to his overuse of sentimentalism in the father-daughter relationship he creates. Nolan really tries to make you cry with this one. I have never seen him use such powerful emotions in his movies; however that is not necessarily a good thing for this movie, given that he uses his time trying to develop a family relationship at the expense of flow and congruency. Again, the Visuals are completely off the charts. The visual imagery is truly beautiful and something that Nolan has always excelled at. Given that the most visually stunning movie in recent years, Gravity, recently came out, Interstellar does not lag behind and shows you a spectacle of Visual effects.He will most likely win Visual effects at the Oscars. The Hans's score is marvelous and will most likely earn an Oscar nomination. Matthew Mcconaughey's acting is good, but nothing stellar, especially coming off the best acting role of his career. He plays the character like it should be played, but Nolan's characters never being truly drawn out or rounded does not help him any.The same can be said for the rest of the cast. The little girl was marvelous though. I do not want to reveal any piece of the story whatsoever, but i have to say, it is one of the most original scripts i've ever seen.

Ultimately this movie is entertaining. There is no way Nolan can miss that. Another great thing that Nolan excels at is INSPIRING. By the time the credits rolled and people walked out, I sat there still in awe at the strong sense of human will the movie conveys. Personally, I don't think this is Nolan's best. I believe Memento stands as his masterpiece. But with Nolan, everyone has their own favorite movie. Maybe for some, Interstellar will be their favorite movie, for it is really Nolan's most ambitious and visually-striking work.

By the way, Anyone else who even tries to compare Interstellar to "2001: A Space Odyssey" is out of their mind. Kubrick's mission was to create art. Nolan in "Interstellar" sets to awe and inspire its audiences. It is truly a great piece of work.
784 out of 1,494 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
Boring Hollywood SOAP OPERA
Teh Pwn13 November 2014
Warning: Spoilers
I am wondering if the people who write "intertstellar" 10-star reviews are actually sane, or if they base their opinion on a movie library completely deprived of everything that is sci-fi. Basically if the sic-fi component - most of which does not really happen until the end - is removed from the plot the movie by and large is a classic Hollywood soap opera. The worn-out rag of cliché family relations, all- American-dad, "complicated" love affair, unruly and a classic tomboy-girl, co-workers (more like co-idiots) who rebel and despite all common sense act irrationally, you know, to "up the ante"... it really makes up 90% of this movie. Up until half- way trough I honestly considered walking away from this boring tragedy which is the lack of creative talent on the part of the script writers and director. There are also very obvious holes in the plot, and not just irregularities but direct contradictions that even the most obnoxious sic-fi movies at least try to amend somehow.

I can not help but think that after watching Automata which was a breath of fresh air in many regards, this movie is like walking into a small toilet where someone just took a huge dump. It is literally that bad. What saves this movie by the skin of its teeth is the ending. So just watch that instead, because until then you could have just as well been watching an episode of Santa Barbara.

Spolers about ridiculous plot holes (as if the soap part of the movie is not stressed enough): 1) The stupid Dust Bowl recycled. Seriously? I am not even going to try to explain this because I'd need to re-post have of Wikipedia here, but it does not work that way. Not in the past - not in the future. 2) The moment NASA abducts the main character and daughter and questions them. Seriously? Maybe they should also have shot them on sight? 3) NASA's facility is top secret! Right... in the age supposedly after the present, when there are drones and google maps, they manage to hide a huge facility in some old James Bond villain fashion. 4) "LET'S GO TO ANOTHER GALAXY!". OK if the movie shows a fairly conventional rocket, carrying a futuristic "shuttle", WHY for the love of all holy would anyone risk going there - instead of looking in our own? What, they really expected to have better luck there - than in our own? They already searched the entire Milky Way? And what's even better - it "just so happens" there is a planet like a stone's throw away from the black hole and is NOT being consumed by it, and somehow a black hole which is now proved to be a collapsed star is anything BUT a collapsed star? Why... let's just start diving down toilets, because you know, they are not full of s*** but are actual doorways to different dimensions! Like dimensions of dementia perhaps! 5) Saving the best for last - I did like the ending. Despite its absurdity I did like it. Almost cried - if I were a 14 year old girl with especially fragile psychology, but I digress. The "machine" that allows the main character to conviniently contact his daughter in the future- past, is built by... the very humanity he is trying to save, that survived, and built the machine in the future. Lord have mercy, I will try to explain this... So basically if we consider all major theories about time travel, in order to change the future one must go there and change it, right? But here the future changes the past, and that past is what changed the future with the help of the future that is changed in the past with the changed future's help. Mind >>> blown!
174 out of 315 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
why everybody is wrong and this is a really bad movie
melkurion7 November 2014
Warning: Spoilers
OK, this is a rant. For perspective: I love movies/see everything in the theater/can enjoy almost all movies/love scifi. But I hated Interstellar! This movie makes nooo sense. Technoscience babble on Star Trek knows is makes no sense, Interstellar tries to make you belief it has a scientific bases, it does not! It rapes hearsay on about a dozen theories, but it's like a five year old read Hawking and then explains it to a retarded dog! I'm not even gonna say spoilers ahead, because spoiling something inherently means ruining something good, no chance of that here! First of, apparently there was a world war, people many died... but somehow with a reduced world population there was still not enough food, so everybody had to become a farmer.... seriously? that alone is a crappy premise that makes no sense. Bcs it's not like they are doing it manually! They have frigging robot harvesters. Also, no MRI scanners, but apparently we still harvest fossil fuels to keep 50 year old trucks going. There is a plague that kills crops....but apparently not tress/grass/bushes/ and other assorted plant life, just the edible ones. A dust bowl you say.... really bad production when in the shot the window still is full of dust, the wall boards 10 cm next to it are clean.... Also, in the car: masks on, in an old wooden rickety house, take them off... Man shows up at secret NASA base...oh what a coincidence, you used to be a NASA pilot , we're your old buddies! By the way TOMORROW! we are launching our only rocket. You can pilot it bcs our crew has only done simulators where as you flew it...once....10 years ago.... WTF!?!? This crew and you will spend 10 years together on a mission, but we don't need to do a medical check, psych profile OR even refresh our memory, just show up tomorrow dude! We launch into space, OK we need to dock with the big ship, switch to manual...uhhm, why would you do that????? Well we've been in technological dark ages for 50 years, but hey look we did happen to invent cryostasis! how convenient! We're on a spaceship with limited room, but your cryochamber for some inexplicable reason has to go down into the floor , why? we'll it looks cool of course! At this point we're only like 45 minutes into the friggin thing! So I'll speed up: Planets orbit a black hole, or only one does? where is the sun that is providing light, why doesn't it get sucked in? It's not OK to have the ship experience 7 years time delay, but the shuttle is OK. Big wave smashes shuttle on rocks, no damage! You were gone for 23 year, I didn't think you were coming back, but instead of continuing the mission I decided to sit on my ass and watch the black hole. Frozen floating clouds. Homicidal Matt Damon. Robots that are absolutely ridiculous.... really really really lost in space ORIGINAL TV did it better. Robots walk in way that is not possible, take 4 pieces of wood and find out for yourself. Nothing escapes a black hole, not even light, but we can send in the droid and it can send out a signal... Also, black hole does give of light apparently. Somehow girl's part is bad acting both as a kid as well as an adult. CONSISTENCY AT LAST! We don't have enough fuel to visit 2 planets, but now we do, so everything is OK. Many years time delay,wake up on space station. Go back to help new colony, also time delayed, don't worry bcs we didn't bother to send anybody else the the last 100 friggin years. BLLEERGGHHHHH
255 out of 471 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
Pretty disappointing...
Cack Jolburn20 November 2014
Warning: Spoilers
Like many other reviewers, I'm giving this a 1 in a feeble attempt to balance out all the unwarranted 10s I keep seeing, even though I really think it deserves a 5, or maybe a 6. I actually created an account just to do this, so I figured I might as well include a review along with my rating.

Many will say try to tell you that you shouldn't attempt to compare this movie to 2001, that they are two totally different movies, etc. This is ridiculous; they are quite similar on multiple levels, with Interstellar obviously taking many cues and inspirations from Kubrick's masterpiece. I feel that if we compare the two, we can get a good idea of where Nolan's film went wrong. The main reason 2001 has remained so powerful and held up so well is that it doesn't try to explain and rationalize everything that happens. We see the events of the movie unfold, but as the movie nears its psychedelic conclusion, we are really left to our own guesswork as to what is going on. Has he entered another dimension? An alternate universe? An alien spacecraft? Is he just dead? The mere fact that we have no idea whether this scene depicts something spiritual, something scientifically quantifiable, or a mix of the two makes it so much more moving than if Kubrick had tried to explain it through the available science of his time.

Interstellar answers far too many questions, which, as is often the case, ends up raising infinitely more. Nolan makes it clear from the get go that this film is supposed to function on more of an emotional level than a scientific one. Then why even bother have the film "fact checked" by a astrophysicist? Why create this confusing mixture of real- and pseudo- science in the first place? To me, in a lot of scenes this kind of shatters the air of mysticism Nolan seemed to be going for. The "floating bookcase in a black hole" sequence, for instance, seemed really magical until Cooper suddenly has a bunch of epiphanies and becomes positive that the structure was created by future humans, not aliens, that they created it specifically for him so he could navigate 5D and communicate with his daughter, and that he can save the world only by manipulating a watch with gravity. BOOM. There goes all the mystery. And lets assume his theory is correct, and this structure was indeed constructed by mankind from the future. Hmmm, guess it turns out that we didn't perish from constant dust storms after all—instead we survived hundreds of thousands of years into the future and went on to create mind-blowing, interdimensional space technology. Then what exactly is future us so worried about? They seem to be doing just fine without any alteration of the past. This is just the tip of the iceberg as far as far as all of the inconsistencies and unanswered questions you'll find in this movie. If you have a very analytical mind, steer clear of it—I am not a mathy or science-y person by any stretch, yet even I struggled at times to put my logic in the backseat and just enjoy the ride.

That's what I'd advise you to do if you want to have a good time watching this movie: DON'T OVERTHINK IT. If you can just do that, you'll find an entertaining film with truly stunning visual effects, a great (if maybe a LITTLE too over the top) score from HZ, and very convincing performances from the actors. I found some scenes very moving. I liked the concept of a future that, as a result of a technological lull, doesn't look very different from our present. There are a lot of positive things to say about this film, and yet the end result is, sadly, maybe just a couple pegs above mediocre.
105 out of 185 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
Svetoslav Grigorov16 November 2014
Warning: Spoilers
Interstellar by Christopher Nollan

Reviewed by Svetoslav Grigorov

First, I had to look at the score on to confirm that all the rumors were true (9 out of 10): me and Paul were the only ones who didn't like this movie and left 45 minutes before it had finished. Whatever that means I can assure you that I was/am still sober and I am not a zombie like the rest of the crowd in the Kettering Odeon cinema. Secondly, I would like to ask how all these critics made the comparison(s) with Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey and thirdly, please you who now read this review tell me that I am not the only one in my dullest disappointment for the year. Tell me that I haven't lost my marbles, tell me that you were enthralled from this copy of a House On The Prairie and if you think that this is the best movie of your life (or at least 2014), the only answer I can think of is: that's why so many rubbish movies have been released lately. Because the level of the quality has fallen drastically and the conveyor belt of the movie industry is catastrophic for the senses.

OK, so straight to the point. First 45 minutes we are introduced to the farming, dust and the coming famine problems, nitrogen on the rise in the atmosphere, Earth is doomed, father and daughter found a super-secret location that NASA strategically placed for their eyes only. We see a lot of corn and even the nineties Children of The Corn was a better shallow slasher while this one turns out to be an American clichéd space marmalade, and my best fitting comparison for it is Armageddon which is not really a movie, but a joke. Wormholes, saving of the human kind, bringing resources, planting/replanting, Plan A /Plan B, frozen embryos to colonize a distant world, overcoming gravity, scientists and even a quantum physics and so much camera- philosophy that Kubrick will turn in his grave, daddy-please-don't-go-to-space-cause –I'm- gonna-cry, bam the watch on the floor (I don't wanna see you anymore), counting while going into the stratosphere, Lego-robot which somehow was better acting than the rest of the actors or at least was more fun. Wait, wait, did I say actors? Matthew McConaughey, Anne Hathaway and Michael Caine (The rest of them are not worth mentioning apart from the crying daughter Murph who did her best job).

Matthew McConaughey has one of the most annoying twangs ever and his jaundiced bad- version-face of Paul Newman cannot contribute to any script lately (let's not forget that without the help of Jared Leto and his masterful transformation in The Dallas Buyers Club his Oscar was going to hell). His mumbling could be understood only from the villagers in Kentucky and what he is on about…Seriously, I needed subtitles to comprehend his actor's efforts in such a "serious" movie. How serious this movie was! I pushed myself to read couple of the 'serious' critical reviews and they had the audacity to call it "scientific"??? Oh man, poor Anne Hathaway who looked sometimes at the camera and was likely apologizing for the mess she was in. I felt sorry for her.

The script was the hell of the hells. Such nonsense with no credibility and no creativity at all. Total zero or even below the zero. As I said we left long before the end because my time is precious. I will open Isaac Asimov's (or Stanislaw Lem's) short stories and will be engulfed in characters and situations, so my brain will be given food for thought while all these poor people are going to see Interbol..cks and will be exposed on the radiation of a mediocrity (yes, I felt cheated like someone was trying to insult me). Well, if you who now read this review respect yourself and really like Kubrick, Moon, Gravity (and even Contact) and other good sci-fi don't waste your time and save your money. Today we wasted £40 including the drinks, the popcorn and the tickets and the only thing that I was inspired for was my generated anger for this text. My verdict on the scale from 1 to 10 is to give ONE for the director Christopher Nolan who needs a little encouragement and I am hoping he will not slip into the shoes of M. Night Shyamalan who have crafted a lot of rubbish lately as you know. God forbid that never happens.

P.S.Don't tell me that I have sat there for 2 (it's actually 169 minutes) hours of a film and it had a great ending cause I don't want know.
116 out of 206 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
Massively overrated (or over-retarded)
madint900017 November 2014
Warning: Spoilers
I liked Inception a lot and was expecting something similar from Nolan brothers, but Interstellar turned out to be massively disappointing. It's too long, too boring, too sloppy and too hard to believe what all fuss is about.

Earth is overpopulated and plants are dying from drought, dust is everywhere and starting to be a problem. This is all what we were told by a movie, everything that we should know (they think). So instead of trying to solve these problems by inventing new food forms, by ocean water demineralization or just soft decreasing of population to numbers Earth can sustain best minds came up with ingenious plan - go through suddenly discovered wormhole and see what happens. Instead of sending drones they sent bunch of people through to a no-return mission, three having reported of habitable planet each.

It is when things started to become interesting. NASA picks up some random guy pilot (McConaughey) to lead mission to these three planets, all of them coincidentally in the same system, orbiting a black hole. COME ON, three planets orbiting a black hole? If you want to live here, you might be insane. However, in a retarded fashion he decides to leave his young daughter on dying earth to pursue his all-life-mission. Some more absurd plot decision happens when he then decide to land planet with such twisted space-time (because it is near blackhole, remember - we are watching movie pretending to make sense scientifically) that it has time accelerated 60000 times comparing to earth.

Nothing very interesting happens next, three non-essential persons just die, Matt Damon being one of them by going nuts for absolutely no reason. In the end McConaughey diving into a black hole (finally making sense sequence) leaving only one woman in a mission (Hathaway) to land a planet she wanted first were her supposed lover landed previously. And while soundtrack plays loudly to draw attention from following absurd plot twist, main hero spends 60 years in another dimension translating quantum equations to his daughter on Earth which will solve all problems and allow six billions people to escape. By the way all these years everyone was just waiting, absolutely no one bothered to send more expeditions so busy they were all solving Einstein equations.

Why so silly? With so many numerous big and small plot holes this can't be serious movie. Main hero acting like a retard (or actually he is), his daughter soon-big-girl solving biggest scientific problem in history, two absolutely useless crew members with funny robot as a company and a woman supposed to be main-hero's girlfriend, a lier as main scientist and a bunch of another useless people. Even CGI can not save the day. We were told that black hole CGI supposed to be most realistic than ever, but it was pictured in roughly 1.5 scenes at best. Soundtrack is fine, but it is played so loudly, in disharmony with deep space atmosphere and in some scenes being unnecessary as well.

So what we have in the end? It just looked like they tried to make big, really BIG move about space travel and physic phenomenons, but somehow missed big picture and not really payed attention to the details, ignoring common sense which eventually led to a failure. Sadly, good opportunity to create such movie in the uncharted territory was wasted.
111 out of 197 found this helpful. Was this review helpful?
Report this | Copied to clipboardCopy link
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews