Page 3 of 18

Re: 'Interstellar' Nolan Fans Member Reviews

Posted: November 5th, 2014, 6:21 am
by DoubleD
What part of NO DISCUSSION do y'all not understand?

Discussion needs to take place in the the Reviews Discussion thread or the General Discussion thread

Re: 'Interstellar' Nolan Fans Member Reviews

Posted: November 5th, 2014, 11:43 am
by willyjoel
Saw it last night at the Airbus IMAX Theater @ the Udvar Hazy Air & Space Museum in Chantilly, VA. The Endurance Landing Module is on display under a tent in the museum parking lot, it will open to the public on Thursday 11/6.

This movie, as with all Nolan movies, needs a second viewing to completely digest it. It is a very dense film with a lot of information thrown at you at once. For a 2 hours 49 minutes film it does feel like it could extend a bit more to completely explore the ideas and situations presented, now this is not a criticism since I think that what is presented to you "as is" is enough, I can understand some people claiming that the film feels "rushed".

Now, we must understand something, critiquing a movie now-a-days has become pretty much like critiquing a novel, there's too much emphasis on critics regarding "plot" "story" "script" etc., leaving all the other aspects of filmmaking aside. With that said, Interstellar is a work of art, the imagery, the cinematography, the direction, the acting, the visual effects, the sound (with some question marks) are top notch; the film truly delivers some of the most spectacular, jaw-dropping, emotional and inspirational space images ever put in film history, it is that great. The way computer generated imagery is integrated with live action images is impressive, proving once a gain that Nolan is a visual genius.

The story is complex, it is interesting, it is filled with exposition, but in a good way; there is however, some dialog that, for a first time viewer, might seem a little jarring, a little forced, a little superficial and somewhat "corny", the sentimentality elements of the film, in my opinion, did not work well on a first viewing basis; but that's the thing with Nolan movies to me, they don't always fit or make conventional sense at first, it's at a second or third viewing when everything falls into place for me and I can truly appreciate what the film is trying to convey.

Regarding the sound, I don't know what were the sound issues during the screening at the Chinese Theater in LA, but there were moments in my screening where the subwoofer was too loud and the LFO overpowered the dialog, creating a sort of vibrating noise that reverbed thru the entire theater, it was as if you turned up the volume of your home theater subwoofer to 10 and left the rest of the speakers at 8, specially during the earlier scenes in Cooper's farm where there were quite moments, I don't know if it was the theater audio calibration or the film itself, but it took me out of the movie for a second or two.

As I mentioned, it is rather hard to give a complete honest review at first viewing, I definitely need a second or third viewing to totally appreciated. Also, the science part of it, for some one who has read a bit about theory of relativity, quantum physics, gravitational relativity, "goldie-lock" planets, etc, the film do take some liberties while still adhering to hard scientific facts (theoretically speaking) but hey, it's science fiction not science fact and that's the beauty of it.

Overall this is one of the most visually and thematically impressive films of the last 20 years, while not a perfect film, it is a highly recommended one.


Re: 'Interstellar' Nolan Fans Member Reviews

Posted: November 5th, 2014, 11:57 am
by thegreypilgrim
Ok here are my totally irrelevant thoughts.
I uncompromisingly adored it. I've never treasured an experience in the cinema as much as this one, and it more than makes up for missing so many other great films when they were first let loose on the world. At the moment, I don't see any film rivaling it in my mind as favorite. It's technically beautiful, scientifically beautiful, and emotionally beautiful. It says something about our species and its existence that is worth hearing. And even if you utterly revile the rest of the film, see it if only to listen to what it has to say. Because it's real - and there's no amount of qualms that can dull the impact of hearing the truth.

The film is by turns awe-inducing, dryly humorous (yes, Nolan *is* funny), unbearably tense (there is a scene which is exponentially more edge-of-your-seat than the entirety of Gravity), and, most importantly, it is warm, human, depressing, heartbreaking, and finally uplifting. Nolan has slowly been allowing more of that sort of thing into his films, and here, finally, we have a complete willingness on his part to really let it all out. The result is as satisfying an emotional roller-coaster as you could hope for.

It seems pointless to talk about the film from a technical standpoint, because there's not much to say that isn't rapturous praise. It's a great story, well told, well acted, masterfully designed and visualized, and scored at a level of brilliance that surprised even me. Hans should have his second Oscar for this music, which sort of defies description. It seems that when given a story that lets him tap into his own experience with losing a parent, the results are truly extraordinary.

The degree to which the film is grounded in real science (and the new science that Kip Thorne's work on it has spawned) is impressive and lends a very valuable legitimacy to the proceedings, but far more impressive (and undoubtedly destined to be extremely divisive) is the stirring and moving boldness with which the film is willing to transcend all of that into something more. It feels wrong to talk about that point with any more specificity just yet.

And ultimately, that is the most vital thing about this film. Whether or not it will work for you depends on several things. It depends on your disposition. Are you cynical, prone to viewing any show of emotion as a Hallmark moment, or are you able and willing to accept certain simplicities for what they are, with an open heart? It depends on your age, I think. It depends on whether or not you have kids, but, whether you do or not, more on how much that affects your ability to identify with the characters. I can tell you that even if I had no other interest in this film and just happened to decide to see it, that by sitting there with family and friends, particularly the girls, seeing the emotional impact it had on them, sharing it with them, I would love the film every bit as much as I do anyway.

And ultimately, that is the most vital thing about film. Not just this one. That's the point of all art. To interest you, to move you, to touch you, to have some enriching effect on you. Interstellar succeeds, if you are the type of person that Christopher Nolan is talking to. And that's all there is to it. This is no longer about "quality". I can see no more need to defend the man and his films against criticisms. After this, it's obvious that he has truly arrived. This is no longer a promising director who is finding his footing, albeit in a very impressive way. This is a man who has mastered his craft and who knows how to use it for his ends, and who knows fully what those ends are. He's gone from three technically astute but somewhat sterile and drab films, to five with greater spiritual depth, more inviting atmosphere, and more virtuosity, to this one, which is truly mature in a way that just makes me smile for having watched that evolution.

I read in another review a sentiment that I really liked. That this isn't Nolan's best film. It's his first. But like his earlier work, I believe this one represents a real parallel to the man himself, and poses a question/challenge which applies equally to our civilization, his colleagues, and his own life and career: where do we go from here?

- Naturally, there will be an obnoxiously lengthy score analysis once it is available.

Re: 'Interstellar' Nolan Fans Member Reviews

Posted: November 5th, 2014, 2:17 pm
by TheOneWhoKnocks
I saw Interstellar in IMAX 70mm last night and here are my thoughts.

It was definitely Nolan's most ambitious and brave movie yet. Even if there are a lot of "Nolan" attributes to the movie, it didn't really feel like a Nolan film, which isn't a bad thing. The acting is probably my favourite part of the movie, surprisingly. Matthew McConaughey and Mackenzie Foy were absolutely magnificent and worthy of Oscar nominations. Caine, Chastain, Hathaway, Gyasi, and a certain other actor/actress were also spectacular. The soundtrack is by far the most unique I've ever heard from Zimmer, and was perfect for this movie. It sent chills down my spine during the very tense-filled scenes. The visuals, of course, are nothing short of masterful. The CGI was seamless. Some of the scenes looked as if it was footage taken from NASA earth orbit videos, that's just how incredible and realistic it looked.

Now the film definitely has issues. Some of the pacing and editing of this movie wasn't perfect. The first hour is somewhat slow, but greatly helps establish the characters and the family, so I really enjoyed that. There's a part of the movie that takes an odd turn which kind of ruined the pacing of the movie, but it picked up in the last 40 minutes or so. Sometimes the movie feels too convenient as the story progresses. Now a lot of people complain about the whole "Love" thing with Hathaway's character. I was fine with it. They didn't shove it down our throats. Now the last 30 minutes of the movie is where viewers will be divided. In my opinion, I thought it was a very unique "move" by Nolan and I don't think he was trying to reach too far. It was executed very well. I certainly don't understand all of it, which is why I'll be rewatching it on Thursday. (IMAX 35mm)

But wow, the movie was VERY emotional. I honestly had a lump in my throat during a certain scene involving McConaughey's character which perfectly depicts his acting skills. That man was just perfect for this movie. I can tell people in the theater were crying as well.

The movie is definitely inspired by 2001: A Space Odyssey, but I won't mention how (this is a spoiler-free review), except for the TARS robot which could be inspired by HAL. TARS was a surprisingly amazing character. He was hilarious and added a lot of comedy to an otherwise serious and emotional movie.

Overall, Interstellar is a movie that definitely needs to be viewed at least twice to fully understand it and critique it. I can't think of a rating to give at this moment, but if I was forced to, I'd say a 9.5 or a 10. My ranking for Nolan's films:

1. The Dark Knight - 10
2. Memento - 10
3. Inception - 9.5
4. The Prestige - 9
5. The Dark Knight Rises - 9
6. Batman Begins - 9
7. Insomnia - 8.5

I'm honestly not sure where to place Interstellar. After I view it again on Thursday I think I'll be able to place it somewhere. Right now, I think it stands between Memento and Inception. After multiple viewings it may even be above The Dark Knight. None of Nolan's films are perfect, but I think Interstellar has potential to be Nolan's masterpiece. He's done what 99% of directors can't do. It is his most ambitious and daring project yet, and it was executed very well. Is it a successor to Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey? Maybe. Who knows. Time will tell.

Stanley Kubrick would be proud.

Re: 'Interstellar' Nolan Fans Member Reviews

Posted: November 5th, 2014, 5:07 pm
by MiracleSleeper2
9.99/10 (I just wish it was longer!)

Interstellar is by far my favorite Nolan film as of now. It might change over time though.

Re: 'Interstellar' Nolan Fans Member Reviews

Posted: November 5th, 2014, 7:16 pm
by ras_al_deacon
Inception was a film about the head, that dazzled with its myriad of mental labyrinths. Interstellar is its counterpart a film that hits the heart so viscerally that only after the fact does your head begin to catch up.

I've seen the film twice: once at a special screening at ILM on Monday and then again last night. I am now ready to put my thoughts to paper.
This may be the purest 'Nolan' film, next to the Prestige and Memento. I say pure because his other films are genre films: Inosmnia is a noir, Inception is a heist, and the Dark Knight Trilogy are super hero movies. In each case Nolan brilliantly bends the genre to his fancy and in doing so shows us more about those genres. But where is the genre comparison for the Prestige? For Memento?

And that brings us to Interstellar.

In this film, Nolan makes the bold proclamation that 'love is the one thing that transcends time and space.' The entirety of the film's technique is dedicated to this pledge.

We have several instances of bold filmic technique that advance the film's core idea. In order to make a film about love, we have to be inside the hearts of the characters, and one character in particular: the protagonist. To accomplish this, Nolan uses editing -- the very essence of film as an art form -- to brilliant effect. He manages to use a singular editorial decision to place the sorrow of leaving with the coming adventure. How many times in a hero's journey do we see the cost of leaving?

Another technique Nolan uses are first person subjective shots in the midst of action. In IMAX, these shots present the purity of the experience: a camera rushing towards water, underneath a wave, beneath frozen caves... all of these are used to push the viewer to the edges of visceral experience.

The film uses silence in bold ways that highlight the danger of space as well as refocus the audience to the frame. As a result, when silence is interspersed in the midst of ongoing sequences, it develops the rhythm of morse code, conveying meaning in the midst of action.

"Time as a resource" is another major component of the film's ideas. Nolan posits that time and love related, if not altogether connected. The film features several motifs of clocks and time. Consider that the Endurance itself, a circular ship with TWELVE pods, is constantly rotating, and in silhouette bears strong resemblance to a watch. That the Endurance is constantly rotating conveys to the audience subconsciously the notion of time... ticking and ticking as we move farther from home. The climactic sequence involving the Endurance signifies a shift in how time is being used in the film, in that the characters' constant fear of it has now given way to a stronger desire -- the desire to reach through time, to command it through connection with the Other. This gives way to a new visualization of time -- ironically a place that is of complete and utter silence.

So we have motifs of clocks, silence acting as morse code, and visceral editing that draws us deeply into the emotions of the experience. But none of this would work without Zimmer's score, which I view as the composer's crowning achievement to date. I say this because a composer's job is not simply to make beautiful music, but to harmonize his music with the images the director has managed to put upon screen. There are elements of this synchronicity of image and sound that are truly astounding, terrible and terrific in their power. In the climactic sequence involving the Endurance, the score becomes pure emotion, displaying chord progressions heretofore unglimpsed. It is not an accident that the whole movie seems to stop spinning and reach a moment of profound stillness at this point. All things: gravity, time, sorrow, and evil, converge upon this singular point. As the Endurance rotates, the Ranger synchronizes with its motion, and the two ships in silhouette appear to be the hands of a watch.

Interstellar is a film about huge ideas but those ideas constantly resolve to the simplest version of their execution. Its visual effects are seamless. How many people are discussing how this film literally NEVER gives you cause to doubt its reality? Not one shot. In Gravity there are shots that on repeat viewing appeared to be a bit shaky, but that's because it is really a giant animated movie. Interstellar is a reality of heightened intensity and the director has summoned all of his collaborators to the highest essence of their skill to achieve this.

A marvel of cinematic execution, the film's quality is revealed to be high above all current cinema when one considers what it is about. This film owes so much of a debt to one of Nolan's favorites, Koyaanisqatsi.

Nolan on Koyaanisqatsi:
An incredible document of how man’s greatest endeavors have unsettling consequences. Art, not propaganda, emotional, not didactic; it doesn’t tell you what to think—it tells you what to think about.
John Lithgow's character comments that "it's about the Why... don't trust the right thing done for the wrong reason." Nolan invites us to ponder the film's reality -- of science awry, of our culture's preoccupation with apps and gadgetry over what really needs to be done. When we look at this reality, of dust and corn, we have to ask, "why?" How did we get here? What is this reality telling us about our own?

An implicit answer is the divorce between science and the supernatural. Not supernatural in terms of bogeymen and vengeful gods, but super-natural, a word literally meaning that which is above nature. As a race, we proceed underneath the myth that we can master nature, that we can take it apart like a watch, learn its true names, and build something better in its stead. We use this myth to justify the harm we've done to the world, much of which comes from the wasteful production of those gadgets.

Is science to blame?

No, says Nolan. It is us, "what we bring into it." We as a society have divorced science from its super-natural origins, and because of that science is unable to answer the "why." This dark vision of modern day humanity is present in every single villain's viewpoint in the Dark Knight movies, and is far from optimistic.

But it's not enough to bring up old ideas for Nolan. He has to make it extraordinary. So rather than do what he has done before, he tells us that this is just one half of the equation, literally. One half IS the investigation of the material world. But the other half is that mysterious force that binds us together, which originates from a source we cannot glimpse. Again, we return to the word supernatural, which is used at choice moments during the film. This is not mindless superstition, but a movement towards the Platonic notion of philosophy, in which before we act we must consider the 'why' of a thing. For Plato, there was a Prime Mover and First Cause that existed outside of the sensory realm, and this is by definition supernatural.

So Nolan shows us a world ravaged by ourselves. He gives us an Interstellar journey across time and space. We literally transcend time and space with Cooper. And in the end, it's the simplest form of the idea. What can seize hands of a watch? What can rage, rage against the vicious onslaught of time? What can reverse the dying of the light?

Love. A promise. A father. A daughter.

Best of all is that Nolan uses the story, the formal elements of the film, and our own place and time to cause us to reflect. In this he has achieved a film of pure and utter excellence. As I lay awake in bed last night, the film's meanings slid into firm place, where after the first viewing my brain was an amorphous pile of emotionally charged white matter. Each successive contemplation unsheathed another layer of the film. I was unable to sleep. Like the characters, I was unable to go gently into that good night.


Re: 'Interstellar' Nolan Fans Member Reviews

Posted: November 5th, 2014, 10:11 pm
by ABadJoke
Saw it last night in 70mm IMAX. Incredible visuals. Fantastic story and resolution. Absolutely should be seen on the biggest screen possible. Also, Zimmer's score is superb.
"My dad promised me" will become a historical line IMO. The tension during the reattachment scene with the Endurance spinning is amazing. I think Damon was the weakest link.
I like to give concrete ratings after 2 viewings sooo

1st viewing ~ 8.5/10
2nd viewing - ???

Re: 'Interstellar' Nolan Fans Member Reviews

Posted: November 5th, 2014, 10:54 pm
by LaRose
I can't believe how much I loved Interstellar,especially the Acting and Nolan's attention to detail. The last hour is incredible and we will all go broke from multiple Imax Screenings, I think it's Nolan's best hands down 10/10 :o

Re: 'Interstellar' Nolan Fans Member Reviews

Posted: November 6th, 2014, 1:28 am
by rickfox
just came back from cinema, a great film indeed,very touching and a visual feast , but personally speaking, they can cut out 4-5 mins

need bit time to digest it, ready to head back for second viewing tonight/tomorrow


I only have watched 3 of Nolan's works so far--- DK trilogy(three as one,don't want to separate them),inception, Interstellar

to me they are equally great
it feels good when Mann got killed

Re: 'Interstellar' Nolan Fans Member Reviews

Posted: November 6th, 2014, 1:32 am
by LeoCobb
I saw... I'm totally "raved".