gftChris Posted November 17, 2014 Report Share Posted November 17, 2014 If you haven't seen it, don't read! Oh my god, that was terrible. It was also at the same time very good, with a solid script, acting and production and all the rest, but there were just too many plot holes and contrivances for me to take it seriously. From the 'maybe love put the wormhole there' moment to the massive internal paradox of Coop necessarily having found the NASA coordinates before being able to go to NASA, through the wormhole, in to the black hole and back in time and give himself the NASA coordinates. And while we're on the subject, no, you don't survive going in to a black hole. And why does he think he'll survive better outside his spaceship - that's being destroyed by all the floating debris which should also be destroyed - and eject? And how does the robot survive the black hole? Why, having waited 80 years to see her father again, does Murph just immediately send him away again to find Anne Hathaway? Whose planet may or may not be habitable - we can't send data back, apparently - and may or may not also have the other guy she's in love with on? It could have been so, so good and still was a very enjoyable film if you're willing to suspend a whole lot of disbelief, but there were too many plot holes that had me tearing my hair out to really enjoy it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted November 17, 2014 Report Share Posted November 17, 2014 I need to post my review but from a quick skim of yours I think we're on the same page. Christopher Nolan has a tendency to do that... WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Osiris Posted November 17, 2014 Report Share Posted November 17, 2014 If you haven't seen it, don't read! Oh my god, that was terrible. It was also at the same time very good, with a solid script, acting and production and all the rest, but there were just too many plot holes and contrivances for me to take it seriously. From the 'maybe love put the wormhole there' moment to the massive internal paradox of Coop necessarily having found the NASA coordinates before being able to go to NASA, through the wormhole, in to the black hole and back in time and give himself the NASA coordinates. And while we're on the subject, no, you don't survive going in to a black hole. And why does he think he'll survive better outside his spaceship - that's being destroyed by all the floating debris which should also be destroyed - and eject? And how does the robot survive the black hole? Why, having waited 80 years to see her father again, does Murph just immediately send him away again to find Anne Hathaway? Whose planet may or may not be habitable - we can't send data back, apparently - and may or may not also have the other guy she's in love with on? It could have been so, so good and still was a very enjoyable film if you're willing to suspend a whole lot of disbelief, but there were too many plot holes that had me tearing my hair out to really enjoy it. My thoughts below: I just saw it the other night, and generally agree with you. The two low-points in the movie for me were a: the "love put the black hole there" conversation that immediately made me discredit Anne Hathaway as a brilliant scientist., and b: the fisticuffs on the ice planet between Coop and Dr. Mann, which cheapened a movie that seemed at times to aspire to the erudition of 2001: A Space Odyssey and Contact. As for your other concerns, I'll play devil's advocate a bit: The internal paradox you mentioned is indeed very hard to reconcile. The only excuse I can make for the movie is that perhaps as they imply they within the black hole, time is a physical dimension that can be manipulated the same way you move a book from one shelf to another. I think the movie stipulates that the linearity of time (and the events you laid out in linear fashion) is circumvented by entering this black hole and the 'teseract' within that allows Coop to manipulate events. I had to wonder why he ejected, too, but ultimately I don't see a big problem with it. If he is in the ship when it breaks apart, he is most certain to die immediately. If he ejects, maybe he buys himself a minute floating around in space in his space-suit. As for both him, and the robot, surviving the black hole, I also questioned that. They made some argument earlier in the movie that if an object were to pass into the hole quickly enough, they may survive. We could also speculate (and I think the movie hints at this) that the teseract he finds himself in while inside the black hole was created by a future human race (I speculated that it was the humans that Ms. Brand seeded on the desert planet). Perhaps this teseract mitigates the gravity of the blackhole to some extent, allowing both Coop and the robot to survive the journey. I was not at all bothered by Murph's decision to let her father go. She was on her death bed and at that point probably had a deeper connection with the family that surrounded her. She understood after all the years that her 'father' was not a natural one. His reason for being was to explore uncharted territory, and she let him go be who he is. In all, the movie certainly does attempt to apply a liberal dose of what many writers call "handwavium." We never see or get an explanation for how Coop gets out of the teseract (or maybe I missed it). Still, I enjoyed it well enough. I don't think it deserves the 9+ rating it is getting on IMDB. It was more of a 7-8 rating movie for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted November 17, 2014 Author Report Share Posted November 17, 2014 If people have got this far without realising this thread will be spoiler-laden it's their own fault. "I think the movie stipulates that the linearity of time (and the events you laid out in linear fashion) is circumvented by entering this black hole and the 'teseract' within that allows Coop to manipulate events. " Yes, I'm ok with that. But in order to be able to enter the teseract, he needs to have already entered the teseract. He's in a time loop that works fine once it's in place, but there's no logic way for him to start it. For example, the 'first' time he lives that part, future him hasn't existed yet and hasn't been through the wormhole. I could buy that he goes back to give himself more information (like don't visit Dr Mann, he's a nutcase that will try to kill you?) but to give the information he needs to give in order to be able to give the information, just doesn't cut it for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted November 17, 2014 Report Share Posted November 17, 2014 I'm not reading the spoilers. Was it worth seeing or not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted November 17, 2014 Report Share Posted November 17, 2014 I didn't like it. But that doesn't mean others may not love it. Don't take my word for anything... WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted November 17, 2014 Author Report Share Posted November 17, 2014 It's worth seeing, if you don't mind a few scientific inconsistencies and tear-your-hair-out moments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted November 17, 2014 Report Share Posted November 17, 2014 Or if you don't mind a multi year trip through space seeming like it was shot in real time... WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Osiris Posted November 17, 2014 Report Share Posted November 17, 2014 I'm not reading the spoilers. Was it worth seeing or not? Yes, just don't raise your expectations. My friend warned me of the inconsistencies and I think that prepared me to enjoy the movie more than I would've had I gone in unwarned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted November 17, 2014 Author Report Share Posted November 17, 2014 Yes, just don't raise your expectations. My friend warned me of the inconsistencies and I think that prepared me to enjoy the movie more than I would've had I gone in unwarned. I went in unarmed, because geeky friends of mine (that should know better) said it was so good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axe Posted November 18, 2014 Report Share Posted November 18, 2014 Doesn't Sci-Fi require a leap of faith because obviously we haven't gotten there yet? And, Is it worse than Charlize Theron dieing because she couldn't fucking turn left? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted November 18, 2014 Author Report Share Posted November 18, 2014 Doesn't Sci-Fi require a leap of faith because obviously we haven't gotten there yet? And, Is it worse than Charlize Theron dieing because she couldn't fucking turn left? Sci-Fi requires some suspension of disbelief, but there are certain things that we know to be the case - like the fact that you can't enter a black hole and hope to survive, among other things. Check the spoilers for the full list of gripes, some of which are scientific, others are more plot oriented. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted November 18, 2014 Report Share Posted November 18, 2014 Hey I'm sure there are some people out there that will be really bothered if the shit in a science fiction movie isn't pure science. Oh well. Keep in mind that 50% of the words in the term science fiction is fiction. And over the decades there've been all sorts a ridiculous things that actually come to pass. I'll give you an example. I can still enjoy a Western even though the good guy is shooting the gun out of the hand of the bad guy at 500 feet with a pistol on horseback. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Osiris Posted November 18, 2014 Report Share Posted November 18, 2014 Sci-Fi requires some suspension of disbelief, but there are certain things that we know to be the case - like the fact that you can't enter a black hole and hope to survive, among other things. Check the spoilers for the full list of gripes, some of which are scientific, others are more plot oriented. Just a bit more devils-advocating... things known for certain have been proven wrong before. They get proven wrong when additional data comes to light or when advances in technology make the impossible possible. Within the movie, the teseract is the product of some advanced technology. What is to say it doesn't somehow mitigate the gravitational forces at the center of the black hole? That's the speculative part of speculative fiction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted November 18, 2014 Author Report Share Posted November 18, 2014 Perhaps. But then you can come up with all kinds of bullshit and not even attempt to justify it beyond saying 'well, even though it's impossible, it's still possible' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Osiris Posted November 18, 2014 Report Share Posted November 18, 2014 Perhaps. But then you can come up with all kinds of bullshit and not even attempt to justify it beyond saying 'well, even though it's impossible, it's still possible' Half-way decent writers will try to justify it, that's Sci-Fi Writing 101, and the movie does attempt to do so with the whole future advanced technology slant. It's just for you not an acceptable justification. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted November 18, 2014 Report Share Posted November 18, 2014 Let me quote the theme song from Mystery Science Theater 3000. "if you wonder how they eat and breathe and other science facts, repeat to yourself 'its just a show I should really just relax'" WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axe Posted November 19, 2014 Report Share Posted November 19, 2014 We saw it today.. Not bad.. Too long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gipper Posted November 21, 2014 Report Share Posted November 21, 2014 I will use a paraphrase from the movie itself: It was 90% boring, 10% interesting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VaporTrail Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 Saw it over the weekend. Watched 2001: A Space Odyssey for the first time a week before. 2001 was better, and the book by Arthur C. Clarke is the best piece of sci-fi ever, without question. That said, I liked how they implemented relativity, but I have no idea why the quantum gravity readings in Gargantuan allowed Murphy to get the spaceship off the earth. Just one of those Chris Nolan loopholes, I guess. Things I didn't like: "Love is the answer." So fucking corny. "Evolving into a 5-dimensional species." Um. Right. The beings who put the wormholes there were actually humans from the future? So the humans that existed because Murphy got them off the planet put a device back in time to allow Murphy to get them off the planet. That's some grandfather paradox shit right there. I mean, I let shit like that pass in Terminator, because I'm not watching Terminator for the story, but in a movie like Interstellar, it just doesn't fit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 I always prefer my Science Fiction movies to be reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VaporTrail Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 I always prefer my Science Fiction movies to be reality. This is going to sound so conceited (and it probably is), but having learned all the STEM stuff I know makes it very difficult for me to enjoy lots of movies. For example, Cowboys and Aliens - ship of an alien species with very powerful directed energy weapons uses ancient rocket technology on their spaceship Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted January 6, 2015 Report Share Posted January 6, 2015 How's Medical School going? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted January 7, 2015 Report Share Posted January 7, 2015 This is going to sound so conceited (and it probably is), but having learned all the STEM stuff I know makes it very difficult for me to enjoy lots of movies. For example, Cowboys and Aliens - ship of an alien species with very powerful directed energy weapons uses ancient rocket technology on their spaceship My kids were watching the latest execrable transformers movie and a similar thought struck me. What kind of giant transforming alien made of organic metals fires a lame ass missile? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VaporTrail Posted January 7, 2015 Report Share Posted January 7, 2015 How's Medical School going? Keeping me busy. I think I actually might be interested in rocket surgery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted January 7, 2015 Report Share Posted January 7, 2015 Keeping me busy. I think I actually might be interested in rocket surgery. Hey is that a euphemism for Urology? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nickers Posted January 12, 2015 Report Share Posted January 12, 2015 I thought it was hohum... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
larryfine Posted January 22, 2015 Report Share Posted January 22, 2015 After Dumb and Dumber, this is the best movie I ever saw. Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miktoxic Posted January 24, 2015 Report Share Posted January 24, 2015 big bang nerdism. i'd rather watch a turd drop in the toilet than half the sci fi movies i've seen. thank god we have intelligent people like this but i won't waste 3 hours watching them manipulate some fantastic theory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted January 24, 2015 Report Share Posted January 24, 2015 Gene Roddenberry once said "Good science fiction must first be good fiction. " WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.