Quote:
Originally Posted by adultmobile
|
Wow pretty cool!
Quote:
Originally Posted by JA$ON
Thats really to bad, I was hoping it would be decent  |
It is, see it. It's not Nolan's best movie (I liked the first Batman and The Prestige the best) but this is certainly his most ambitious. And it's a really complex story to tell too. I plan to go see it again in a week or two.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phoenix
I thought the movie was awesome. I might even go see it again this week. Switch to Imax though i suspect some of the visuals would have been amazing on Imax
|
DEFINATELY see it in IMAX. Not only is the screen bigger, but some parts of the movie were filmed with real IMAX cameras. The movie also switches formats during some parts which is surprisingly interesting. And of course, there's the sound. I'm lucky in that the IMAX theatre near me plays movies like this with the volume control set to 11 - it's so freaking loud, I love it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relentless
There was zero reason for the son, his wife and their son to be in the film. They could easily have cut 30 minutes out of the film by deleting entirely unnecessary characters.
|
SPOILERS: I'd disagree. Remember, its his generation that would be the last to live on earth. It's also the son that is pushing Murph to forget about her Dad, which of course she can't do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relentless
The death scene with Michael Caine was a pivotal plot point and the sound editing was so bad that half his statements were inaudible in IMAX. He is a great actor and the directing marginalized his performance horribly.
|
I offer a different take on it. SPOILERS: He was dying, and couldn't talk loudly. Murph even leaned into him to hear him clearly. When he was speaking his final words, the theatre was dead quite. Everyone was listening, carefully.
This method of getting the audience to pay attention was first used in Aliens by James Cameron. When the grunts enter the station for the first time, the audience watches the action partially through video monitors which are noisy, distorted, and crackly, making the audience squint (i.e. pay attention).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relentless
Having a planet close enough to a black hole to slow time by 60,000x what it is on earth is not scifi. Scifi is an exploration of what may be possible.. Not things that are absolutely known to be impossible.
|
Agree completely, and LOVED this part.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relentless
At the end of the film, he is extracted from a black hole how? To where? When?
|
SPOILERS: "When" is approximately 70 or 80 years after he left, judging by the age of Murph. But how? Who knows...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relentless
What 'magical data' is a robot extracting from a black hole? To accomplish what exactly?
|
SPOILERS!!: While in the Tesseract, the Robot is telling Cooper about what it learned. Cooper is sending this data to Murph in the past via the wrist watch's second hand that is quivering back and fourth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relentless
His daughter sees a glitching second hand for a brief moment and instantly she knows it's an interdimensional transmission in morse code from her father who she has not seen in decades...
|
SPOILERS (ARGH!)!: No, not right away, but don't forget she also figured out why the books were falling, and she saw the lines in the dust, and Cooper figured out that the lines were binary and lead to Nasa / Norad. By this point, Murph knew that any other weirdness in the room might mean something. As soon as she saw the watch's second hand moving the way it was moving she knew it was important. She then spend what looked like years and years to figure it all out. It is also hinted that she was insane, and that she figured it all out by herself.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relentless
When in doubt, if the plot fails, just throw in words about Love and claim its part of the answer is not brilliant writing...
|
I struggled with this but only a little. Remember that Brand makes an argument that love trasncends time. You can love someone in the hear and now, and love someone even after they are dead. Weak maybe, but ok. It's plausible and makes sense for the movie. Coopers drive is his love for his family. All the levels and floors you see in the Tesseract are all his family too. Mush? Maybe, but it worked for me.
(In Inception by the way, everything that Dicaprio's character did was for the love of his family too btw).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relentless
Humans construct 5th dimensional space but can't figure out how to communicate with people that only Mcconoughey can talk to? The girl can't figure out how to communicate with herself even though she mastered the entire universe and multiple new dimensions?
|
Mmmm... well maybe, but: It's established that nothing can escape a black hole, not even light. TARS (and another scientist I think) make a point of suggesting that Quantum Data can be broadcast out. Maybe Cooper was using Quantum Entanglement to move the watch hand? Stetching, maybe but only just a little.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relentless
Good scifi like BladeRunner, District 9 and dozens of other monumental films are based in science. They explore extensions and interpretations of science. Bad scifi movies ignore science.
|
Bladerunner had flying cars and clones used as slaves. These concepts are a stretch for some people but for others not at all. In Star Trek TNG they had super slim laptops, touch screens, and music played by computer. All stretches of the imagination in the 80's but commonplace today.
Some movies of course get the physics completely wrong. X-wing fighters in Star Wars could never fly the way they do, but of course it doesn't matter. In Gravity, George Clooney should never have had to "let go". It doesn't matter. Good Sci-fi is good sci-fi. Like you, I hate it when they dumb things down for the audience, but sometimes if its not too dumb, I will just overlook it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relentless
If you liked this, go watch District 9 if you haven't seen it. One is a great scifi film, the other is a trainwreck mascarading as a movie. See if you can figure out which is which.  |
Wow that's so weird... I did't care for District 9. I thought it was long and boring. The effects were beautiful maybe. To me this was 99% social commentary and 1% sci-fi, not much more. As sci-fi movies go, Intersteller was much better. It should be compared to 2001, not District 9 I'd say...