"Interstellar" - movie

[Bromptonboy]

Rico, is this out in 3D or Imax?

[Rico]

Rico, is this out in 3D or Imax?

Imax - no 3D. I don't think Nolan does 3D (which is one more reason to love his work).  :)

[Bromptonboy]

I'll have to gather the family and try to get to this today.

[Rico]

I'll have to gather the family and try to get to this today.

It's a fairly deep movie, younger kids might not quite get everything involved.

[Bromptonboy]

12 and 13?  Think it is too much?

[Rico]

12 and 13?  Think it is too much?

Depends on the kid.  If they would enjoy something along the lines of "2001", then take them.

[Bromptonboy]

Well, family is out today - I might take a little comp time and leave work early on Monday and catch this on my own.

[MARKO]

I think i will do the same .

[moyer777]

I need to see this.

[M-5]

I'm going tomorrow.  Can't wait.

[Bryancd]

I agree it had heart..at least initially. But the emotional aspect seemed to degrade into schmaltzy as the film wore on. Coop saying goodbye to Murph really got me, but later their interactions less so. It also had "science" but only when it was convenient to the story. The as is often the case, the actors to be seen as interesting and engaging to the audience don't come across as real scientists. They come across less as professionals and more like ordinary people flailing about who know how to push buttons and make magical stuff happen on their spaceship. I would give this a B-, I was really expecting an experience and felt it landed short.

The Robots seemed WAY to advanced for their tech but they were really fun. And the acting was very good, I think Nolan just swung for the fences and hit a ground rule double.

[Rico]

Don't really agree. I know a lot of real scientists (heck I am a trained scientist) and they vary a lot in terms of personality, approach, attitude, quirks and so on. I never found the movie schmaltzy in any places. As far as the robots, machines can pretty much do most of what they showed right now in the present and this takes place in the future. I just really got into the film and found it refreshing and interesting and made you think in ways most movies don't. But of course, that's my opinion and reaction to it.

[Bryancd]

It was thought provoking but just seemed too contrived. The twist in act three was fun to watch but really contrived. Everyone is praising this film as the next 2001 but I find that comparison lacking. But it's good movie, but not the "experience" I was hoping for.

[davekill]

I liked it! It was good sci-fi, about humanity and the future and the possibility of hope. Not that typical postmodern "science is only an idea and we'd all be better off dead" kind of claptrap.
It has its flaws and didn't reach me emotionally like 2001 did - but then again, that's my favourite sci-fi movie, so the comparison is unfair.

It's a good film, despite its flaws, and worth seeing.

[Bryancd]

I liked it! It was good sci-fi, about humanity and the future and the possibility of hope. Not that typical postmodern "science is only an idea and we'd all be better off dead" kind of claptrap.
It has its flaws and didn't reach me emotionally like 2001 did - but then again, that's my favourite sci-fi movie, so the comparison is unfair.

It's a good film, despite its flaws, and worth seeing.

In 2001, Dave and Frank were as cool as cucumbers even facing extreme obstacles. I appreciate that insofar as they are trained professionals. "Open the pod bay door, HAL" line is delivered with such control and calm that I would expect form an astronaut. Interstellar has a lot of histrionics and yelling among the crew even before stuff starts to go tits up. Thats what bugs me about modern films trying to do near future space films grounded in science. It's why I find Armageddon borderline offensive. :)

It's a good film, but Gravity was better. Ending set up well for a sequel.