sviato
macrumors 68020
Feel free to ask them, the thread title disclaims that there are spoilers in the thread.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Interstellar Movie 2014 (SPOILERS)
- Thread starter Huntn
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Feel free to ask them, the thread title disclaims that there are spoilers in the thread.
dannyyankou
macrumors Pentium
I'd rather not spoil it for anyone that accidentally reads it and hasn't seen it yet. I'll just go see it again.
This entire thread is marked/tagged as a spoiler thread. See the title. Reading this thread is voluntarily reading spoilers. It is intended for people who have seen the film to discuss it, so ask away! 😀
dannyyankou
macrumors Pentium
Nah, I think the best way to clear up confusion is to see it again. Besides, I think I figured the answers to my questions after thinking about it.
And when I say spoiler tag, I mean there's a code that some forums use that hides the content with a button you have to press in order to see it. It's
content
Too long, too much gravity. I suspect the only reason Nolan kept mentioning the word gravity was because of the success of the other movie by the name of Gravity. It really didn't do anything for me.
2 stars out of 5... Not even pass worthy in my books for a second watch, yawn, wake me up when it's over.
2 stars out of 5... Not even pass worthy in my books for a second watch, yawn, wake me up when it's over.
To clarify: Paradoxes are contradictions because they violate rules or our impressions of reality, while considering their possibility. 🙂 This link, Temporal Paradox offers 14 suggestions of the effect time travel would have on the universe and why it might be/seem impossible.
One of the points to consider is how time is viewed. It we believe that only the present can be changed, the past is an indelible history, and the future is yet to occur, then stories like these would be impossible. However, quantum mechanics might just make one reconsider, or blow one's mind. 🙂
For myself the more I read about quantum mechanics, without really understanding the mechanics, if I can accept the outcome of experiments, there may be no single linear paths of anything. There are many possibilities. One good read is The Grand Design by Hawking, specifically the double slit experiment shooting photons though a couple of slits. There is evidence that photons don't pass from point A to B in a straight line, but sample all paths...simultaneously... including traveling around the universe before arriving at their destination. Things are not as they seem to be in what is called the real world. 🙂
Last edited:
A discussion thread regarding a specific movie by default will/must include spoilers. There is no purpose served to be forced to uncover spoilers among those who have seen the film. And those who have not seen it, should not be there unless they want to be exposed. This is differentiated from a review thread where the intent Is to offer a review of a movie without spoiling it such as the "What Movie Are You Watching?" thread. However, when spoilers appear there on occasion, contributors are expected to adequately mark them or cover them (white text is the usually method).
obeygiant
macrumors 601
Saw it in IMAX last night. Great film, a grand space opera for sure. If any one has ever read The Forever War by Joe Haldeman, the love story versus the time dilation effect is nearly identical to Interstellar. Still it was amazing to see it translated onto the screen.
What I don't get is why some viewer get so wrapped up in the physics/continuity aspect. Its a story about how love can transcend space and time, its not a documentary on space travel. To me that is losing the forest for a few trees.
What I don't get is why some viewer get so wrapped up in the physics/continuity aspect. Its a story about how love can transcend space and time, its not a documentary on space travel. To me that is losing the forest for a few trees.
I want to know if I'm watching something grounded in science or fantasy land. 🙂
a nice timeline of Interstellar:
spoilers here duh
That is outstanding. So how did the future Cooper know the coordinates of the NASA base to send to the present day Cooper? That's a paradox is it not? 🙂
In one of the alternate parallel universes, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is real, not fictional. In its "Trivia" section it has the coordinates. It also has a self-referential entry (i.e. "Trivia in HGTTG", see: Trivia in HGTTG), because knowing about the Trivia section is itself trivia, given the far more useful non-trivia information it contains.
The means by which this trivia entry crossed the pan-dimensional and infinite-possibility timelines is uncertain, but it may have something to do with a whale and begonias. Or possibly trans-timeline email (aka "hearing voices in one's head"). Yeah, probably one of those. Or not.
obeygiant
macrumors 601
To me its both
TARS relayed the coordinates to Cooper. Sure it could be a paradox but inside the black hole time is nonlinear.
ravenvii
macrumors 604
I love both this and Prometheus, there's just no accounting for this anomaly! 😉
Sold! 🙂
Really this is the only answer. The present day Cooper had no idea, so he had to pick it up in the future to send back.
However one question remains- Why do the future people who made it into the future, have to save the present day people by offering this kind of help? 😀
Last edited:
impulse462
macrumors 68020
Rotten Tomatoes doesn't do much anyway, it tells you how many critics gave it a + review vs how many gave it a - review, but not the individual ratings. So 50 critics could rate a film 6/10 (and since 6 is defined as a positive score), and rotten tomatoes would show a 100%.
This film was nothing like Gravity. Filming my **** flushing down the toilet would be a better movie experience than Gravity was for me personally.
Renzatic
Suspended
BenTrovato
macrumors 68040
Saw it in IMAX - brilliant.
I don't have any issue with the movie or any questions about it really. The only time things become confusing is when we use our definitions of time. Since we created time, we created a frame of reference to view things by. So we are looking at earth and ourselves through linear time. That's one way to view the universe. If another being (or us) is brought up, raised, taught etc. to view the universe without time then what they see will be different than how we perceive things. In essence you can say we created a frame of reference that limits us from seeing things beyond three dimensions.
With our limiting scientific views we are beginning to grasp that there are more than 3 dimensions. These dimesions exist right now, we just aren't able to see them based on the limitations we have imposed upon ourselves.
I don't have any issue with the movie or any questions about it really. The only time things become confusing is when we use our definitions of time. Since we created time, we created a frame of reference to view things by. So we are looking at earth and ourselves through linear time. That's one way to view the universe. If another being (or us) is brought up, raised, taught etc. to view the universe without time then what they see will be different than how we perceive things. In essence you can say we created a frame of reference that limits us from seeing things beyond three dimensions.
With our limiting scientific views we are beginning to grasp that there are more than 3 dimensions. These dimesions exist right now, we just aren't able to see them based on the limitations we have imposed upon ourselves.
You're right it was nothing like gravity. It was boring and a waste of a good 2 and a half hours I'm never going to get back. Nolan hasn't really hit the jackpot in any sense since Inception.
- If the story was about a man in a book case it should have been told way more succinctly then what it was.
- If it was about interstellar space travel and other worlds/beings it wasn't nearly as effective as Prometheus.
- If it was about the fate of the world after a dust storm it wasn't nearly as effective as gravity and that wasn't even its point.
I'm being generous by giving it 2 stars. In the end its just not that visually engaging and didn't do much to tell a story that wasted at least the first hour of the movie doing nothing. It felt stilted and that I could have walked into the movie half way through and still gotten the point of what was going on. Overall it was a waste of my time.
I kept pondering for half of the movie why Christopher Nolan tried to make Mathew Mcconaughey look like Christian Bale and why Alfred was trying to be a scientific genius that by the time Coop got stuck in the bookcase I thought I may as well have watched 2001 a space Odyssey for the same black hole effect. The most dramatic part of the movie went to waste...
On another note, Michael Caine also had the lack of intelligence to ruin one of of my favourite poems also, which didn't help the cause...
Last edited:
bobob
macrumors 68040
Heh - in this thread, you're that one smart lad who declares the emperor has no clothes!
Interstellar is an very stupid movie based on some very intelligent science.
It was like a couple of 12 year olds watched Frequency and 2001: A Space Odyssey one weekend and decided to try and write a screenplay combining the two. The lame melodrama in Interstellar would be the pride of any pubescent writer!
What a freakin' waste of some good practical special effects. I would love to see a sci-fi movie that truly explores interstellar colonization without all the trite angst and ridiculous plot points. Perhaps the footage will be remixed by some enterprising young director into an exciting and coherent film one day...
As it stands, Interstellar gets my vote for second worst movie of the year (just behind Godzilla).
1 star out of 5.
(The most entertaining aspect of Interstellar is watching the Nolanites turn themselves inside out doing fifth dimensional justifications of why the movie isn't as bad as it really is. 😉 )
The naysayers have arrived! (Not quoted)! 😀
I have a hard time with deciphering both critics and audience ratings but give the audience more weight. The critics hated Star Wars (the original).
George Clooney's right-stuff, monotone, lack of any perceptible emotion, old-hand killed this film for me, although it was a visual thrill ride, but once you've seen spoiler-> the space shuttle and ISS blow up, you've seen the meat of the movie. 😉
I consider that movie visually and atmospherically powerful, to be cinematic art. 😀😀
You would agree that our perception of time, not something we created persee, in the model we exist within, before we could see beyond the curtain of quantum mechanics is based on how we experience our reality in the Newtonian world? We've view it as linear since the beginning because from a practical standpoint, outside of the realm of theoretical, it is experienced as linear. We are trapped in the present always on the cusp of the future...
I have a hard time with deciphering both critics and audience ratings but give the audience more weight. The critics hated Star Wars (the original).
George Clooney's right-stuff, monotone, lack of any perceptible emotion, old-hand killed this film for me, although it was a visual thrill ride, but once you've seen spoiler-> the space shuttle and ISS blow up, you've seen the meat of the movie. 😉
I consider that movie visually and atmospherically powerful, to be cinematic art. 😀😀
You would agree that our perception of time, not something we created persee, in the model we exist within, before we could see beyond the curtain of quantum mechanics is based on how we experience our reality in the Newtonian world? We've view it as linear since the beginning because from a practical standpoint, outside of the realm of theoretical, it is experienced as linear. We are trapped in the present always on the cusp of the future...
bobob
macrumors 68040
Bub, I put a big smiley on that statement. Naysay away. 😀 <- Indicates smiling, happy, humorous, not intolerance. 😛
