"Interstellar" is deep and a wonder to behold
Keith’s 4 Nov note: I saw “Interstellar” this evening – in 70mm IMAX on the largest screen in Virginia. I saw “2001: A Space Odyssey” in Cinerama – the IMAX of the day – when the film first came out and was stunned by the experience. That happened again this evening. Interstellar is deep and a wonder to behold. It is profound and loud and yet sublime and simple – simultaneously. I am going to have to think carefully about what I write so as to not spoil it for anyone. Let’s just say that you take away from Interstellar what you bring to it.
Keith’s 6 Nov update: I saw the film again last night at a really nice reception and showing at the National Air & Space Museum’s IMAX theater sponsored by Northrop Grumman. The cast and director were there too. The “Ranger” spacecraft will be on display starting tomorrow at the NASM Udvar Hazy facility along with an Oculus Rift demonstration of the fictional “Interstellar” world.
.@Badastronomer hates #Interstellar Word has it that @neiltyson does too. Geeks want all their movies to be illustrated textbooks w/CGI.
— NASA Watch (@NASAWatch) November 6, 2014
Well @NASAWatch offers @neiltyson an apology – reports of his opinion of #Interstellar were incorrect – see http://t.co/meBLWiLKG6
— NASA Watch (@NASAWatch) November 8, 2014
I saw 2001 when I was 7 in London and a 70mm print at the Gaumont Grand Ecran in Paris in the early 90s which was as close to a religious experience as I’ve had. I think we only have a choice between IMAX Digital and 4K Digital here locally (South Bay Area). I hope Interstellar is as awesome as you say it is.
Im going this Sunday to see it in 70mm IMAX. I hope its good. There is actually a page on the official Interstellar website that gives you locations based on the projection technology.
https://interstellar.withgo…
I found the IMAX in Dublin, CA has the 70mm print. We can’t go until the 23rd so I hope they don’t pull the film before then. The 70mm print must be pretty expensive so I expect it will be there for a while.
From what we were told just before the film started, Interstellar is probably the last 70mm print film to be made. Guess this genre goes digital after this?
This movie goes a step or two beyond today’s politics.
I’m looking forward to it this Saturday. Nolan got so much right well beyond the popcorn flick expectations of the Dark Knight (an amazing mix of entertainment and deep mythos). Still, having seen the Intersteller trailer I’m reminded I have co-workers who got red faced over Avatar, or Wall-E, and their themes of human excess and folly. So never under estimate the ability of people to take politics (and ignorance and biases) into movies that go well “beyond politics”.
I hope it’s better than Gravity. I hated that novie from the first irresponsibly space-bungie-jumping astronaut, physics-defying and untethered MMU scene.
Heh, the Indians sent an orbiter to Mars for less than Gravity cost to make.
Yea I wonder about the numbers they through around for ISRO. Haven’t seen any deep examination anywhere yet.
I don’t necessarily disagree about Gravity. What did it for me, though, was make me glad again to see a Shuttle in orbit.
Saw Interstellar at Space and Rocket Center in 70mm on Tuesday night. Very entertaining… Visuals are beautiful….brand new interpretations of worm holes/black holes vs what Disney did back in the late 70s or early 80s. But don’t think it’ll inspire anyone to support NASA or space travel in general.
Saw the movie with a PhD in particle physics…he hit the palm of his hand on his forehead several times during the film.
All in all, though, very entertaining. Would recommend to any Sci-fi fan.
Gotta say it: I loved Gravity. I mean: Sandra Bullock?
As to the orbital monkey-business that are detectable only by rocket scientists and may I say the informed public: So what? Artistic license. Lots of scenery for groundhogs. Oh. And Sandra Bullock.
I have to mention that the last scenes with Ms. Bullock pulling herself from the water made me wonder just how the hell did this woman go from 17K MPH to zero? And didn’t that scene remind anyone of Planet of the Apes? Early scenes where the spaceship is landing and they are crawling out of the water?
Trying to read the tea leaves on this one
This earth destroying “plague” sounds kind of like the GMO anti science gibberish.
The preview clip with the teacher asserting the moon landings were faked appears to connect the plot to the discredited Cook et al paper falsely alleging that rationalists skeptical about global warming are more likely to believe the moon landings are faked.
Interviews with the stars after the London premiere were infested with green anti human babble. On the one hand brainless actors riding the fashion hobby horse of the day may have nothing to do with the plot. However actor ideologues tend to pick projects that align with their lame beliefs
Notorious anti scientist Matt Damon is lurking un-previewed in the film somewhere.
More data needed, but not gonna pay $10 to sit through 3 hours of Anti science propaganda. Its not like the profits from this film are going to be spent lowering the costs to Low Earth Orbit
I saw it myself here in Houston last night, the green agenda wasn’t there. The plague (they actually called it “The Blight”) was not given a causation, it just was, and it was the existential threat the characters had to confront.
Also, as Cessna discusses below, the moon hoax interlude was meant to squarely hit the greenies in the eye, pointing out their status as propaganda bots for extreme nonsense.
I had posted a reply, but somehow didn’t pass moderation muster, I’d love to know why…
ETA: Sorry, I must have jumped the gun. 🙁 Thank you.
Based on your comment you are already engaging in some conspiracy. The answer is simple – you are not on the auto-approve list and I had not looked at incoming comments for 10 minutes or so.
I appreciate you posting it, I was impatient I admit.
I REALLY enjoyed this movie, and let my eagerness to sing its praises get the better of me.
Oh, and I didn’t mean to imply any conspiracy, I just thought I had said too much in some way. You said you were trying not to drop spoilers, and thought perhaps that I had somehow.
As a biologist all I can say is take a botany class. As for the film being anti-science – QUITE THE CONTRARY
Damon must have liked filming in that spacesuit. He’s signed on to star in “The Martian” based on Andy Weir’s book.
Thanks Keith. Can’t wait to see it! Did you see Syfy is doing a mini series: 3001.
They’re also doing Childhood’s End. Of course, they’re SyFy Channel, keep your expectations modest.
When you see the movie you will understand.
I have to admit, it’s good to see a “review” thru the eyes of someone with similar interests, instead of professional movie reviewers. Most pros that have posted so far have been mediocre on the flick, praising the effects but panning the directing and/or acting, particularly in the second half (wow, 3 hours?). Thank you, Keith.
I saw it in 5-D. It was much shorter, but looked blurry around the edges.
And it was 100,000 years long …
4th and 5th dimensions were smell and taste? haha
THAT’S the spirit. 🙂
I first saw this film in the exact same theater I saw Interstellar in last night – very possibly in the very same seat.
I read the Bad Astronomy review and thought he explained his opinions well – especially since he went in wanting to like it.
Catering to a wider audience has unfortunately led to the current sad state of several TV networks such as Discovery, Science, and National Geographic that are all reality shows and sensationalized explosion fests. They used to have better programming.
http://www.theonion.com/art…
Keith: Your second tweet? I saw it float by my iPhone yesterday and wondered what you meant?
WHAT appeals to the wider audience? It sure isn’t NASA spin-offs.
(No, I haven’t see it yet–waiting for my globe-trotting spouse to return from Bombay).
I almost fainted when I first saw “The Dream Is Alive”, at the IMAX in LA. The impact was staggering, visceral. I could feel the blood flow in my ears changing, honestly. I wish I could see it 16 times, as I have seen “2001” (well, when I lost count). Both deserve to be celebrated and honored. Looking forward to seeing “Interstellar”.
I used to own “The Dream is Alive” on Laserdisc. I had seen it on IMAX at KSC and just had to own it. I remember being disappointed they had edited some of the footage out of the Laserdisc edition. Still, a great disc to own!
That was a truly inspiring movie. I believe I saw it at the NASM. Kind of tragic how it all turned out in the real world though.
Saw it Tuesday night in IMAX 70mm. Passed it around the school but no one aside from a few teachers is interested in it. There is an interesting allusion within the film toward a curriculum book (The Grapes of Wrath).
Overall, a great movie. There are a few legitimate literary related issues (issues spotted out of the trailer isn’t resolved with context, ex the dialogues about love and NASA spinoff are still out of place,etc) but still a solid movie.
I enjoy reading all the uplifting comments. BUTTTT, the new republican leadership will be too busy dismantling Obama legislation, and most certainly too busy trying to politically destroy Hilary Clinton. Republicans have never been a fan of space exploration.
During Bush 43 years in the White House, my colleagues and I would joke as to how we could convince republicans that Al Quada was building a lunar base of attack.
Overall I thought the movie was pretty good. I had not read any of the hype for the movie, so I was not expecting anything particular when I saw it. I found myself very irritated at the teacher when they were talking about the moon landings. I could see the science behind the movie in a lot of areas but don’t know enough about GR to see too many of the problems. I will buy it on DVD or Blueray when it is released.
IMHO…not gonna happen. Can’t say too much more without revealing some of the plot…but there were reasons why the film’s characters did what they did. We don’t have those same reasons today…and most likely never will.
I wound up inadvertently seeing Interstellar twice in less than twenty-four hours (not that that’s a bad thing) in the exact same theater, first in Digital IMAX and then in 70mm IMAX so I can give a first-hand report on the difference between the two. To cut to the chase – yes 70mm IMAX is far superior, and Plan A is if you have a 70mm IMAX theater showing Interstellar within say two hours driving distance it is definitely worth it. However if you don’t, then Plan B is to find a Digital IMAX presentation, as you will still have a great filmgoing experience. However there is no Plan C, if at all possible you should not cut corners with this movie and see it in anything less than Digital IMAX.
Contrary to what you may be hearing it is not true that only the last hour of Interstellar is displayed in 70mm IMAX. It is true that most of the film was shot in 35mm and only about one hour of the 170 minute running time was filmed in 70mm IMAX. But it alternates back and forth throughout the movie. For IMAX presentations the 35mm sequences are “blown up” to IMAX width although they don’t fill the top and bottom of the IMAX screen. Most of the special effect sequences as well as most of the outdoor (on the Earth) action sequences were filmed in 70mm IMAX, and are readily identifiable as they fill the entire IMAX screen and are quite stunning. Even within a scene it will switch back and forth, which is not disconcerting at all, at least not to me. As the film builds towards its climax the amount of IMAX footage goes up, but it’s all throughout the film not just at the end.
For Digital IMAX (aka the IMAX Experience) they alternate between regular widescreen for 35mm segments and a bigger “IMAX like” size for the 70mm segments, although it is not quite as big and not quite as stunning as true IMAX. But still much better than no IMAX at all. I know because I went into a non-IMAX showing and watched for about ten minutes (of course not disturbing or stepping in front of anyone) and while it would still be a great movie, you really don’t get quite the impact of the great special effects. Also IMAX sound is much, much better and you want the best sound possible for this movie..
As to how I wound up seeing it in both 70mm IMAX and Digital IMAX, when I went to see it last night there was a twenty minute delay starting the movie, and when it finally did come on I could tell it was digital not film. This morning I called the theater and they confirmed that the IMAX projector had gone down for that particular showing, and they offered that I could come in today and see it again at no charge. Not wanting to pass up the opportunity I went to an afternoon showing today in 70mm IMAX and the difference even compared to Digital IMAX was striking. Definitely worth a two-hour drive, maybe more.
I too was blown away by the full screen IMAX, it was pretty seamless, I heard complaints about it being distracting, but didnt find it at all. In fact, it added alot of wow factor
I saw it tonight and was more impressed than I thought I would be. The movie sought to connect the dream and passion of exploration and the technology of exploration with the nature of the human spirit and emotions. All in all it was a good movie, but I do think it had many plot holes, mostly due to being a 12 hour movie compressed into ~3 hours. The first one and the most minor one that comes to mind (I will not state the rest so as not to give plot spoilers) was how they sat on the porch of the farm every night while drinking what most assume was beer, while at the same time talking about the fact that no more wheat or barley can be grown. I wonder where the beer came from then, maybe it was honey mead? However, if you have not seen it and have a passion for space, as I think most on this site do, I would highly recommend seeing it.
I liked the movie. I’d call it ‘good’ to ‘very good’ but not ‘great’. It was at least a half hour too long. The business with the drone was totally unnecessary, for example. So was pretty much the entire subplot featuring [insert unbilled Hollywood star here]. Both seemed to have been added to the movie by the studio, which demanded “action! this movie needs more action!”. It reminds me most of 1998’s “Deep Impact”, a movie that at its heart is about how people react to the imminent end of the world, but the studio tacked on an action sequence or two which feel like an entirely separate movie. “Interstellar” didn’t need such distractions. They detract from the movie. My opinion, of course. Your mileage may vary.
The space advocacy community always hopes space films will ignite public support for the real space program. The best of them may show a momentary blip on the public’s radar, but none have generated any significant support, and, with the exception of 2001: A Space Odyssey, few have left a sustainable impression.The public will be more aggressive in its support once space activities area associated and aligned with national priorities such as economic growth and national security.
Well said.
Indeed. Find a critical element in short supply here on ‘downside’, preferably something needed in widely used consumer goods. Then find it in space rocks- the Belt or wherever, and develop SLS to bring it home.
Or something like that. And space will take off.
This is one reason why I support that seemingly-crazy plan to relocate an asteroid. It’s a first, early step.
There are riches beyond measure out there- the raw materials abundance is incalculable.
Work it in space or bring it downside. Each has huge technology burdens yet even defined. It’s one way to make space pay.
At the same time, introducing a new and limitless source of raw materials will have fundamental implications for earth side economies and could improve the lives of billions on earth.
“whoa…what’s that, Pa? I’m a-dreamin’ agin, ain’t I?”
I’ve now seen Intersteller. Yes, quite well done. The suspension of disbelief was quite easy (even knowing my physics quite well, and being adept in things space travel) – given the combination of good characters and good story telling. Highly recommend. Get lost in the awe of what could be of us.
Really disappointing in my opinion.
First of all, two main actors are not the better choice for an inspiring role, better for a comedy. Chastain good (as ever, love her), young Murph best actor.
The mission for the Endurance crew is confuse and confusing (that’s clear if you keep in mind that’s not the core of the movie plot).
The spaceship Cooper takes at the end is ridiculously similar to one in Star Wars.
Nice the idea and the development of whole tessaract scene, one of the best conceived and seen in scifi movies, in my opinion.
But, all in all, the movie is disjointed and too ambitious.
And I left the movie theather almost deafened.
I saw Interstellar this weekend. Good movie, better than Gravity… not great, but good to very good. Not in the same class as 2001, more like Forbidden Planet. Some spectacular visuals, and the physicality of the special effects is a relief from current CG effects, but boldness is lacking, and it doesn’t have (for me) the same inspirational quality as 2001. The visuals and plot devices borrow from many past sci fi movies… 2001, Planet of the Apes, Alien, Avatar, and even a little Battlestar Galactica (2004 series) at the end. The movie does have some emotional depth and the acting is good for the most part. I wouldn’t say it’s deep philosophically, and some of the astrophysics is a little silly, but if you get into the movie it doesn’t detract. Joe Bob says check it out.
Good movie. Worth seeing. New ideas based on traditional science fiction concepts, believable characters, good visuals, nail-biting plot. Except the part about NASA being efficient. Sorry, that’s not even in the realm of fantasy.