Rant Interstellar = Awful - Page 2 - GoFuckYourself.com

dyna mo · 11-09-2014, 12:03 PM

50 mile high wave!

2MuchMark · 11-09-2014, 12:05 PM

Speaking of making the audience pay attention, there's another cool thing going on in the movie.

SPOLIERS!

A lot of attention is paid to the library and the books. If you look closely you can read the titles of the books. One of them is "Winters Tale" with the first words of the first page reading "I have been to another world, and come back. Listen to me". Time's Arrow is a story told in reverse (like "Momento")... Another book was The Stand of course..

Usually Nolan has lots and lots of detail in his movies. In Inception for example, the music of the movie is the same as the song by Edith Pilaf (I forget the name), but played much slower. In The Prestige, there are tons of hints shared with the viewer telling you what is really going on, that you do not normally see in the first viewing. I am wondering and hoping that there is more of this kind of cool stuff going on with Interstellar.

2MuchMark · 11-09-2014, 12:15 PM

[QUOTE=Relentless;20283601]@********** just a quick note on spoilers. I didn't mention any spoilers until after warning people early in the thread. At this point anyone reading should already have seen the spoiler warnings by now.[quote]

I hate it when people spoil movies (I didn't even click this thread until after I saw the movie), so I'm just being over protective.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Relentless

Films like StarWars and BladeRunner are distant future fantasy. Incorporating things like the force and sentient machines. Films like Interstellar are intended to be grounded in reality, much more like Contact and others in the genre. They are not the same thing. I don't expect a Guardians of the Galaxy to be scientifically accurate... And I didn't expect interstellar to be funny. Perhaps you are right. If you look at interstellar as a comedy it does do a nice job of making fun of science. Perhaps it fits more neatly in the scifi genre where you'd find Idiocracy. As unintentional comedy this film did have me laughing at the plot several times.

Trust me, I wish science-fiction movies were more scientifically accurate, and knowing Kip Thorne was involved in this movie boosted my expectations for this. At the same time, the artists behind the camera have to make creative decisions and dumb shit down sometimes, which sucks. I love Sci-fi that is grounded in reality, but I don't mind giant leaps either.

DraX · 11-09-2014, 12:23 PM

Ehhh, I believe I will be back when I watched Interstellar. No point arguing with any of you until then

FYI: I love scifi's but gravity was a big disappointment

The Porn Nerd · 11-09-2014, 12:40 PM

Methinks this thread is more entertaining (and accurate?) than Interstellar.

Sid70 · 11-09-2014, 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Relentless

@********** just a quick note on spoilers. I didn't mention any spoilers until after warning people early in the thread. At this point anyone reading should already have seen the spoiler warnings by now.

Films like StarWars and BladeRunner are distant future fantasy. Incorporating things like the force and sentient machines. Films like Interstellar are intended to be grounded in reality, much more like Contact and others in the genre. They are not the same thing. I don't expect a Guardians of the Galaxy to be scientifically accurate... And I didn't expect interstellar to be funny. Perhaps you are right. If you look at interstellar as a comedy it does do a nice job of making fun of science. Perhaps it fits more neatly in the scifi genre where you'd find Idiocracy. As unintentional comedy this film did have me laughing at the plot several times.

May I ask you, how did you manage no to be emotionally involved that you noticed something scientifically funny at all?

Relentless · 11-09-2014, 01:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sid70

May I ask you, how did you manage no to be emotionally involved that you noticed something scientifically funny at all?

Emotionally involved with who?

The irrelevant son played by Casey Afflec?

The cold but poorly established Michael Cain character?

The guy on the ship whose only purpose in the plot was to be killed by a tidal wave like a redshirt on the Enterprise?

The black genius who had to explain really basic science to the Pilot?

The daughter who is insane/psychic/brilliant/dumb all at the same time?

John Lithgow who rides a rocking chair and offers lines of dialogue that amount to nothing?

These were all poorly established cardboard cutout costars because the main character of the film was supposed to be the Universe and Science... which is what makes it's most glaring failings to abide by known reality even more significant.

Relentless · 11-09-2014, 01:50 PM

Do you know why the robot was extracting vague bits of 'quantum data' from the black hole? Because Nolan was too lazy or simply unable to bother creating any kind of plausible reason why entering a black hole would reveal information necessary to the plot.

Good scifi makes plausible assertions, builds on the known to explore the unknown, carefully constructs plot points that lead to logical conclusions that may or may not be accurate but are at least worth considering.

Bad scifi like this gets stuck in black hole sized plot errors and then burps out "Love", "Quantum Data", "Fate", or "Magic" as the vague solutions to try and fill the holes. Not only did this movie try to do that, the holes were actually too big for them to fill with special effects and metaphysical nonsense.

Relentless · 11-09-2014, 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyna mo

50 mile high wave!

Nearing 500 views on this one post about the film by an inadvertent critic who saw the movie. Now ask yourself, if you had a 160M dollar movie, six months to plan ahead and a couple dozen people like me working on it... how many views and opinions might we change? How many points on IMDB ratings might we impact for opening weekend? How many extra tickets might be sold before people find out how bad the movie is... and how many sheep might actually like the movie simply because we told them they should...?

In reality, Sony/WB had more like 2 years to plan ahead and instead of dozens of people their PR Marketing Blogging and Reviews machine is likely to include hundreds of people controlling thousands of "real" accounts on sites like IMDB, MetaCritic, home spun Blogs and all the rest. In the world of marketing, human consensus often dictates reality and while reality can not be manipulated... human consensus can be manipulated much easier than many people seem to think by people who do it well... and the people who do it well happen to often be employed by the people with 160M dollar budgets

Sid70 · 11-09-2014, 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Relentless

Emotionally involved with who?

The irrelevant son played by Casey Afflec?

The cold but poorly established Michael Cain character?

The guy on the ship whose only purpose in the plot was to be killed by a tidal wave like a redshirt on the Enterprise?

The black genius who had to explain really basic science to the Pilot?

The daughter who is insane/psychic/brilliant/dumb all at the same time?

John Lithgow who rides a rocking chair and offers lines of dialogue that amount to nothing?

These were all poorly established cardboard cutout costars because the main character of the film was supposed to be the Universe and Science... which is what makes it's most glaring failings to abide by known reality even more significant.

Yes, indeed, you were not emotionally involved. The idea of the film is not any new, rather basic and simple: when the time comes one has to put his shit together to fight for what he loves if there is a minimal chance. This is called love, emotional thing.

Paul&John · 11-09-2014, 04:07 PM

I liked it

Miguel T · 11-09-2014, 06:31 PM

I just saw it, and I do admit it is one of the best movies of 2014!

Check IMDB Score: 9.1 : http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0816692/

Relentless · 11-09-2014, 07:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AbsolutePorn

I just saw it, and I do admit it is one of the best movies of 2014! Check IMDB Score: 9.1 : http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0816692/

Yes, it's currently rated a better movie than: 2001, Blade Runner and True Romance according to IMDB lol.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0062622/

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0083658/?ref_=nv_sr_1

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0108399/?ref_=nv_sr_1

I wonder how that could have happened

Relentless · 11-09-2014, 07:45 PM

Strange that the top review on IMDB is currently this one: http://www.imdb.com/user/ur50146734/...ts?ref_=tt_urv

It's a long semi-professionally written glowing review by pipoulefr. He must really love movies and be an extrodinary critic to be up voted so heavily by other IMDB accounts. I wonder why this is the First And Only review pipoulefr ever posted on IMDB about any movie. I guess he was just so moved by this one film that he suddenly decided to become an active reviewer on IMDB... and all the upvotes can easily be explained as begginer's luck.

That's much more plausible than a manufactured marketing campaign being heavily funded by people with 160M dollars at stake... Right?

mineistaken · 11-09-2014, 08:09 PM

Ok, after the debates in this thread now I want to see this movie to see for myself. And I am not a sci fi fan, just curious if it is great or shitty seeing two different opinions here

badgirlfilms · 11-09-2014, 09:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AbsolutePorn

I just saw it, and I do admit it is one of the best movies of 2014!

Check IMDB Score: 9.1 : http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0816692/

Just seen it...I loved it
well acted
well directed
good twist

2MuchMark · 11-09-2014, 09:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul&John

I liked it

Me too. 'Nuff said.

Everyone else: Hate it all you want, but trying to justify or rationalize your hate for it won't change anyone elses mind (as my like for the movie won't change yours). Just enjoy the nearly 3 hours of escapism already.

Want another good movie? "Somewhere in Time". HG Wells chases Jack the Ripper into the 1970's through a time machine that runs on pure fucking magic. Or, try "Somewhere in Time" about a guy who travels back in time by pure will just to meet the girl of his dreams. Both really good movies.

lagcam · 11-09-2014, 09:54 PM

SPOILER ALERT

For every movie that comes out, there will be people that like it and people that don't.

People take pleasure from different things.

Pretty much EVERYBODY who writes a review has an agenda of some sort. Be it to get views to a site or a sig, desire to be regarded as an authority by their peers, to boost the film's popularity, to dampen a film's popularity.... I could go on but you get the picture.

I have found many movies that had great reviews to be crap and I have found many movies with crap reviews that I thought were actually good.

Moral of the story? Take reviews with a pinch of salt and always make up your own mind.

Phoenix · 11-10-2014, 09:34 AM

Funny...Neil Degrasse Tyson..seems to enjoy it
http://www.hugecool.com/2014/11/inte...d-twitter.html

Relentless · 11-10-2014, 09:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phoenix

Funny...Neil Degrasse Tyson..seems to enjoy it
http://www.hugecool.com/2014/11/inte...d-twitter.html

You mean the guy whose entire career is based on getting people to take an interest in science happened to like a scifi film that put some space travel concept on screen? And the fact that one of his close friends was a producer of the film didn't factor in at all I'm sure.

If you read his comments, he like some of the science in it and completely avoids the plot, pacing or directing of the film. It's as if a giant black hole swallowed his opinion of the story.

PR_Glen · 11-10-2014, 09:54 AM

I'm not sure what is funnier. Arguing about the accuracy of the science involved in a sci-fi movie or gfy'ers claiming they have a 'basic understanding of science'...

For the record. If you use the term 'flick' when referring to a movie or film? You have just told everyone that nobody should listen to what you think about it.

John-ACWM · 11-10-2014, 10:12 AM

I am not going to miss this movie! Interesting thoughts in this thread. As for your IMDB 'conspiracy' idea, Relentless, that is definitely possible.

dyna mo · 11-10-2014, 10:59 AM

the imdb conspiracy theory is completely preposterous.

as if either imdb doesn't scrutinize reviews to keep organized tainting of their database from happening or they are in on the bamboozle means they could not give 1 shit re: their own integrity as the premiere, go-to movie database?

right.

next, if this movie needed to propped up this way, why aren't the movies that really suck propped up this way?

I could keep going. but really an imdb conspiracy where the movie studios budget marketing dollars to pay out $100s of thousands of $$$$ to people to upload fake reviews?

Relentless · 11-10-2014, 02:02 PM

DynaMo, the #1 review of the film is written by an account with 0 other reviews, being upvoted by hundreds of other accounts. That doesn't seem dubious to you? Any idea how easy it would be to create a few hundred IMDB accounts and create an upvote circle-jerk among them to impact ratings and perception of a film?

Now, imagine how easy it would be with 2 years planning, 160M budget and WB/Sony backing you...

mineistaken · 11-10-2014, 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Relentless

DynaMo, the #1 review of the film is written by an account with 0 other reviews, being upvoted by hundreds of other accounts. That doesn't seem dubious to you? Any idea how easy it would be to create a few hundred IMDB accounts and create an upvote circle-jerk among them to impact ratings and perception of a film?

Now, imagine how easy it would be with 2 years planning, 160M budget and WB/Sony backing you...

Your conspiracy is possible. Like it is possible that fans liked the movie hence they upvoted that review made by new member (every member had first reviews at some point).

You sound like conspiracy is 100% certain and genuine review is 0% possible. It is not the case. And you base that mostly on the fact that YOU did not like the movie.

CaptainHowdy · 11-10-2014, 02:11 PM

pornguy · 11-10-2014, 02:14 PM

Seeing it Tuesday.

I have learned one thing. Make my own choices of movies and dont trust others opinions.

Relentless · 11-10-2014, 02:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mineistaken

You sound like conspiracy is 100% certain and genuine review is 0% possible. It is not the case. And you base that mostly on the fact that YOU did not like the movie.

No. I base the fact that I didn't like the movie on my opinion that the movie sucked.

I base my understanding of 'how reviews, ratings, upvotes, social media, and blogs work on the internet' on many years of practical experience making a living online in the niche (in mainstream and adult). There is a good reason why Mountain Dew almost ended up with a new flavor named "Hitler Did Nothing Wrong" and the Danube almost had a bridge named after Steven Colbert.

http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/08/14/...orribly-wrong/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megyeri_Bridge

If you believe the public controls perception on the internet... you are in the wrong line of work.

DWB · 11-10-2014, 02:32 PM

I love it. Watched it twice. I didn't go expecting it to be perfect and 100% factual, it's a movie, not a documentary. I went to be entertained for a few hours, which I was. I will see it again in IMAX before it comes to DVD, and then I'll buy the DVD.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Relentless

Yes, it's currently rated a better movie than: 2001, Blade Runner and True Romance according to IMDB lol.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0062622/

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0083658/?ref_=nv_sr_1

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0108399/?ref_=nv_sr_1

I wonder how that could have happened

Because it was better than all of those movies.

Quote:

Originally Posted by CaptainHowdy

One of my Chinese girls waited on the movie actors tonight at her restaurant in Shanghai. Tonight is Hathaway's birthday and the cast was in China for the opening of the movie there. She said Hathway is a vegetarian, is super skinny in person and has a really loud mouth. lol

Relentless · 11-10-2014, 02:36 PM

DWB you think Interstellar was a better film than 2001, Blade Runner and True Romance?
Say yes and we can move on... because if you really believe that we will never agree anyway ;)

mineistaken · 11-10-2014, 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Relentless

No. I base the fact that I didn't like the movie on my opinion that the movie sucked.

I base my understanding of 'how reviews, ratings, upvotes, social media, and blogs work on the internet' on many years of practical experience making a living online in the niche (in mainstream and adult). There is a good reason why Mountain Dew almost ended up with a new flavor named "Hitler Did Nothing Wrong" and the Danube almost had a bridge named after Steven Colbert.

http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/08/14/...orribly-wrong/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megyeri_Bridge

If you believe the public controls perception on the internet... you are in the wrong line of work.

You base "the fact" that reviews were rigged on:
a) the fact that you did not like the movie
b) the fact that rigging happens

That only says that it was POSSIBLE that reviews were rigged. While you present it as a fact.

What's more - lets say you liked the movie and thought it was great, greater than 2010 odyssey etc. Then you would not advocate rigging that much because you would agree with the rating higher than oddysey (because you yourself would think that).
So yeah, fact that YOU did not like the movie has a big part in your thinking that reviews were rigged. You completely ignore possibility that people could actually like the movie that YOU personally did not like...

fetishwealth · 11-10-2014, 02:42 PM

I thought I was on /tv/ for a second.

There aren't many comfy enough theaters around here for a 3 hour long movie, so fuck that noise, gonna get the bluray and sit on my comfy ass couch when it comes out.

DWB · 11-10-2014, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Relentless

DWB you think Interstellar was a better film than 2001, Blade Runner and True Romance?
Say yes and we can move on... because if you really believe that we will never agree anyway ;)

2001 and Blade Runner were fantastic movies, but I don't own them on DVD nor have any intention on buying them. However, I will buy Interstellar when it is released.

That said, if 2001 were to be released today, or perhaps when the new Blade Runner is out, I may think differently. But as it stands, yes, Interstellar is better.

dyna mo · 11-10-2014, 02:56 PM

confused matthew's 45 minute long scathing video dissection of 2001: a space odyssey.

http://confusedmatthew.com/2001%3A-A-Space-Odyssey.php it's worth checking out bits, he rips apart 2001 like Relentless shredded interstellar.

DWB · 11-10-2014, 02:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fetishwealth

I thought I was on /tv/ for a second.

There aren't many comfy enough theaters around here for a 3 hour long movie, so fuck that noise, gonna get the bluray and sit on my comfy ass couch when it comes out.

For the soundtrack alone, you are missing out.

Relentless · 11-10-2014, 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DWB

For the soundtrack alone, you are missing out.

On that I agree. The soundtrack was well done. I'd rather have had Interstellar on an instrumental CD than on a video Blueray.

Though the sound mixing was terrible, often drowning out dialogue and doing it on Michael Caine's dying words was very misguided.

Relentless · 11-10-2014, 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyna mo

confused matthew's 45 minute long scathing video dissection of 2001: a space odyssey. http://confusedmatthew.com/2001%3A-A-Space-Odyssey.php it's worth checking out bits, he rips apart 2001 like Relentless shredded interstellar.

The fact someone is trying to 'shred' 2001, a movie from 1968, says a lot about the esteem of that film. 40 years from now, nobody will be shredding Interstellar... the same way nobody is now shredding http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0061592/ or a long list of other badly made unimportant films from 40 years ago.

dyna mo · 11-10-2014, 03:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Relentless

The fact someone is trying to 'shred' 2001, a movie from 1968, says a lot about the esteem of that film. 40 years from now, nobody will be shredding Interstellar... the same way nobody is now shredding http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0061592/ or a long list of other badly made unimportant films from 40 years ago.

I actually found some negative reviews of 2001 from 1968, before, as confused matthew points out, it was against the rules to not like 2001.

are you also stating that someone cannot not like 2001 for the very same reasons you are not liking interstellar?

seems that way based on that 2001 shredding, I found it very similar to your's.

Relentless · 11-10-2014, 03:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyna mo

I actually found some negative reviews of 2001 from 1968, before, as confused matthew points out, it was against the rules to not like 2001. are you also stating that someone cannot not like 2001 for the very same reasons you are not liking interstellar? seems that way based on that 2001 shredding, I found it very similar to your's.

Anyone can like or dislike anything and be right, as it's a matter of taste. However, anyone who thinks IMDB can't be 'gamed' is wrong as a matter of fact.

2MuchMark · 11-10-2014, 04:12 PM

Lol everyone, take a step back already.

Not everyone will agree that any movie is good. Or bad. People either like a movie or they don't.

2001 is a long dull and boring movie but I still liked it. And don't forget, the original audiences hated the movie too until they re-relased the movie posters with the tagline "The Ultimate Trip".

Bladerunner was a good and beautiful movie for sure, but don't forget the voice-overs which people loved or hated (I liked), the visible wires lifting the cars, the strange dubbing of some of the voices (The snake guy), the obvious stunt double (girl crashing through the grass), the Horrible addition of the Unicorn while Deckard plays the piano, etc etc. There are about 5 different versions released over the years with director Ridley Scott shitty attempts to fix his movie.

Finally, I care more about the artists behind the movie than what armchair critics on IMDB have to say. You should too.

CaptainHowdy · 11-10-2014, 04:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DWB

One of my Chinese girls waited on the movie actors tonight at her restaurant in Shanghai. Tonight is Hathaway's birthday and the cast was in China for the opening of the movie there. She said Hathway is a vegetarian, is super skinny in person and has a really loud mouth. lol

...

I'm out...

Pryda · 11-11-2014, 05:23 PM

Awesome movie, loved it!
Not perfect, but still very very good.
Best movie of the year so far for me, together with Edge Of Tomorrow.

C4W · 11-12-2014, 01:01 AM

Super awasome movie. Really good.

nico-t · 11-12-2014, 02:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Relentless

It's what Gravity would have been if someone wiped their ass with the script and then made Bullock and Clooney say only the parts they could still read through all the brown streaks and stains.

i havent seen interstellar yet, but gravity was a big letdown. Overhyped feel good crap.

The Heron · 11-12-2014, 09:01 AM

I disliked it. Previews led me to believe it was action/adventure movie with them exploring new worlds. Reality, new worlds sucked nothing happened.
Robot was fucking idiotic.
Apparently 'love' is important, I disagree

Paul · 11-12-2014, 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dyna mo

it's classic conspiracy theory logic, all the good reviews are faked because they contradict this one negative review.

Relentless is correct, IMDB is exceptionally easy to manipulate and their system is a joke. It wouldn't take much effort to incorporate a number of flags to prevent companies manipulating the ratings and reviews but IMDB don't seem to care.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Relentless

Strange that the top review on IMDB is currently this one: http://www.imdb.com/user/ur50146734/...ts?ref_=tt_urv

It's a long semi-professionally written glowing review by pipoulefr. He must really love movies and be an extrodinary critic to be up voted so heavily by other IMDB accounts. I wonder why this is the First And Only review pipoulefr ever posted on IMDB about any movie. I guess he was just so moved by this one film that he suddenly decided to become an active reviewer on IMDB... and all the upvotes can easily be explained as begginer's luck.

That's much more plausible than a manufactured marketing campaign being heavily funded by people with 160M dollars at stake... Right?

Other reviews on the first page with accounts less than 1 year old or little user activity

http://www.imdb.com/user/ur51785825/
http://www.imdb.com/user/ur40285567/
http://www.imdb.com/user/ur54142477/
http://www.imdb.com/user/ur47633581/
http://www.imdb.com/user/ur36545996/

For anyone who is a film buff/heavy IMDB user, this stuff is blatently obvious

brassmonkey · 11-12-2014, 10:48 AM

this is a movie trying to scare people green

nothing more

dyna mo · 11-12-2014, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul

Relentless is correct, IMDB is exceptionally easy to manipulate and their system is a joke. It wouldn't take much effort to incorporate a number of flags to prevent companies manipulating the ratings and reviews but IMDB don't seem to care.

Other reviews on the first page with accounts less than 1 year old or little user activity

http://www.imdb.com/user/ur51785825/
http://www.imdb.com/user/ur40285567/
http://www.imdb.com/user/ur54142477/
http://www.imdb.com/user/ur47633581/
http://www.imdb.com/user/ur36545996/

For anyone who is a film buff/heavy IMDB user, this stuff is blatently obvious

no, relentless is not correct. and neither are you. You can't provide one single fucking iota of proof. fucking film snobs go fuck yourself.

for any film buff? what a fucking snob.

your big proof are users with 1 review? that's about as 3rd grade level logic as it gets.

dyna mo · 11-12-2014, 11:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul

For anyone who is a film buff/heavy IMDB user, this stuff is blatently obvious

dear fuckwad film snob, for anyone who actually saw this movie and read the imdb reviews, it's blatantly obvious they are representative of a large swath of people who enjoyed the movie.

gofuckyourself.

Paul · 11-12-2014, 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Relentless

Emotionally involved with who?

The irrelevant son played by Casey Afflec?

The cold but poorly established Michael Cain character?

The guy on the ship whose only purpose in the plot was to be killed by a tidal wave like a redshirt on the Enterprise?

The black genius who had to explain really basic science to the Pilot?

The daughter who is insane/psychic/brilliant/dumb all at the same time?

John Lithgow who rides a rocking chair and offers lines of dialogue that amount to nothing?

These were all poorly established cardboard cutout costars because the main character of the film was supposed to be the Universe and Science... which is what makes it's most glaring failings to abide by known reality even more significant.

These are all excellent points, I agree!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Relentless

Bad scifi movies ignore science. This movie was nonsense with ridiculous leaps in the plot like her knowing her dad is communicating with her, a poorly paced story, a string of useless characters, terrible sound mixing and worse. It wastes performances by great actors like Lithgow and Caine to focus on weak performances and takes 2+ hours to tell a 45 minute story.

The pace of the film was all over the place!

The viewer is given pretty much zero back story about the mess the world is in, the first 10 - 20 minutes should have given the viewer a graphic insight into how desperate the situation had become. Resource wars, mass riots, martial law etc - I'd imagine if this was mankind's last generation on earth it would look a lot like the scenes in Elysium (2013) or District 9 that show scenes of abject poverty and despair.

No no we get none of that, Nolan didn't even bother painting a bleak picture at all so we get no sense of urgency about the impending doom for mankind.

Then we go from a very slow pace with a lame ass backstory for the first 30 minutes to Cooper and has daughter finding this super secret NASA compound and within the next 15 minutes Cooper is flying the space mission with the fate of humanity in his hands, seriously?

This is a critical part of the film and needed at least 20 - 30 minutes for the pace of the story to flow, they fast forwarded and glossed over one of the most critical parts of the film!

Also the idea that Cooper would find the NASA base by accident and then 5 minutes later they'd pick him to pilot the mission is beyond absurd, it's fucking retarded!

I'd expect this type of ridiculous writing from some idiots creating some low budget rubbish but not the Nolan Brothers, not 2 of the most talented screenwriters of our generation!

I'm glad there are people slating the film because it does not justify it's current ranking on IMDB. Chrispher Nolan set the bar with Inception (2010) which was his masterpiece, I expected something at least near this standard and it fell short.

Anyone who thinks Interstellar (2014) is a masterpiece belongs to the blockbuster action movies crowd who leave their critical thinking at the door.

It's a great film until you start thinking about it...

I'll watch it again before making a final judgement but atm I think the film is probably a 7/10. It's a shame because I was really looking forward to this film, I'm a massive fan of Nolan but he really has let himself down with this film

11-09-2014, 12:05 PM	#52
2MuchMark Videochat Solutions Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Canada Posts: 48,650	Speaking of making the audience pay attention, there's another cool thing going on in the movie. SPOLIERS! A lot of attention is paid to the library and the books. If you look closely you can read the titles of the books. One of them is "Winters Tale" with the first words of the first page reading "I have been to another world, and come back. Listen to me". Time's Arrow is a story told in reverse (like "Momento")... Another book was The Stand of course.. Usually Nolan has lots and lots of detail in his movies. In Inception for example, the music of the movie is the same as the song by Edith Pilaf (I forget the name), but played much slower. In The Prestige, there are tons of hints shared with the viewer telling you what is really going on, that you do not normally see in the first viewing. I am wondering and hoping that there is more of this kind of cool stuff going on with Interstellar. __________________ Custom Software \| Server Management \| Integration and Technology Solutions https://www.2much.net

11-09-2014, 12:23 PM	#54
DraX Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: In wonderland.. Posts: 7,147	Ehhh, I believe I will be back when I watched Interstellar. No point arguing with any of you until then FYI: I love scifi's but gravity was a big disappointment __________________ Deposit Today With BTC - Play With Bitcoins

11-09-2014, 12:40 PM	#55
The Porn Nerd Living The Dream Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Inside a Monitor Posts: 19,524	Methinks this thread is more entertaining (and accurate?) than Interstellar. __________________ My Affiliate Programs: Porn Nerd Cash \| Porn Showcase \| Aggressive Gold Over 90 paysites to promote! Now on Teams: peabodymedia

11-09-2014, 01:50 PM	#58
Relentless www.EngineFood.com Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 5,697	Do you know why the robot was extracting vague bits of 'quantum data' from the black hole? Because Nolan was too lazy or simply unable to bother creating any kind of plausible reason why entering a black hole would reveal information necessary to the plot. Good scifi makes plausible assertions, builds on the known to explore the unknown, carefully constructs plot points that lead to logical conclusions that may or may not be accurate but are at least worth considering. Bad scifi like this gets stuck in black hole sized plot errors and then burps out "Love", "Quantum Data", "Fate", or "Magic" as the vague solutions to try and fill the holes. Not only did this movie try to do that, the holes were actually too big for them to fill with special effects and metaphysical nonsense. __________________ Website Secure \| Engine Food ICQ# 266-942-896

11-09-2014, 04:07 PM	#61
Paul&John Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: YUROP Posts: 8,601	I liked it __________________ Use coupon 'pauljohn' for a $1 discount at already super cheap NameSilo! Anal Webcams \| Kinky Trans Cams Live \| Hotwife XXX Tube \| Get your Proxies here

11-09-2014, 12:03 PM	#51
dyna mo The People's Post Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: invisible 7-11 Posts: 64,040	50 mile high wave!

11-09-2014, 06:31 PM	#62
Miguel T ♦ Web Developer ♦ Industry Role: Join Date: May 2005 Location: Full-Stack Developer Posts: 12,470	I just saw it, and I do admit it is one of the best movies of 2014! Check IMDB Score: 9.1 : http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0816692/ __________________ Full Stack Webdeveloper: HTML5/CSS3, jQuery, AJAX, ElevatedX, NATS, MechBunny, Wordpress

11-09-2014, 07:45 PM	#64
Relentless www.EngineFood.com Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 5,697	Strange that the top review on IMDB is currently this one: http://www.imdb.com/user/ur50146734/...ts?ref_=tt_urv It's a long semi-professionally written glowing review by pipoulefr. He must really love movies and be an extrodinary critic to be up voted so heavily by other IMDB accounts. I wonder why this is the First And Only review pipoulefr ever posted on IMDB about any movie. I guess he was just so moved by this one film that he suddenly decided to become an active reviewer on IMDB... and all the upvotes can easily be explained as begginer's luck. That's much more plausible than a manufactured marketing campaign being heavily funded by people with 160M dollars at stake... Right? __________________ Website Secure \| Engine Food ICQ# 266-942-896

11-09-2014, 08:09 PM	#65
mineistaken See signature :) Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: ICQ 363 097 773 Posts: 29,656	Ok, after the debates in this thread now I want to see this movie to see for myself. And I am not a sci fi fan, just curious if it is great or shitty seeing two different opinions here

11-09-2014, 09:54 PM	#68
lagcam Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 2,892	SPOILER ALERT For every movie that comes out, there will be people that like it and people that don't. People take pleasure from different things. Pretty much EVERYBODY who writes a review has an agenda of some sort. Be it to get views to a site or a sig, desire to be regarded as an authority by their peers, to boost the film's popularity, to dampen a film's popularity.... I could go on but you get the picture. I have found many movies that had great reviews to be crap and I have found many movies with crap reviews that I thought were actually good. Moral of the story? Take reviews with a pinch of salt and always make up your own mind. __________________ Working Cam site for sale - NOT affiliate.

11-10-2014, 09:34 AM	#69
Phoenix BACON BACON BACON Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Poems everybody, the laddie fancies himself a poet Posts: 35,457	Funny...Neil Degrasse Tyson..seems to enjoy it http://www.hugecool.com/2014/11/inte...d-twitter.html __________________ Skype Phoenixskype1 Telegram PhoenixBrad https://quantads.io

11-10-2014, 09:54 AM	#71
PR_Glen Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Canada Posts: 9,058	I'm not sure what is funnier. Arguing about the accuracy of the science involved in a sci-fi movie or gfy'ers claiming they have a 'basic understanding of science'... For the record. If you use the term 'flick' when referring to a movie or film? You have just told everyone that nobody should listen to what you think about it. __________________ webmaster at pimproll dot com

11-10-2014, 10:12 AM	#72
John-ACWM Work Work Work Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: EU Posts: 20,060	I am not going to miss this movie! Interesting thoughts in this thread. As for your IMDB 'conspiracy' idea, Relentless, that is definitely possible. __________________ Video Chat Forum

11-10-2014, 10:59 AM	#73
dyna mo The People's Post Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: invisible 7-11 Posts: 64,040	the imdb conspiracy theory is completely preposterous. as if either imdb doesn't scrutinize reviews to keep organized tainting of their database from happening or they are in on the bamboozle means they could not give 1 shit re: their own integrity as the premiere, go-to movie database? right. next, if this movie needed to propped up this way, why aren't the movies that really suck propped up this way? I could keep going. but really an imdb conspiracy where the movie studios budget marketing dollars to pay out $100s of thousands of $$$$ to people to upload fake reviews?

11-10-2014, 02:02 PM	#74
Relentless www.EngineFood.com Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 5,697	DynaMo, the #1 review of the film is written by an account with 0 other reviews, being upvoted by hundreds of other accounts. That doesn't seem dubious to you? Any idea how easy it would be to create a few hundred IMDB accounts and create an upvote circle-jerk among them to impact ratings and perception of a film? Now, imagine how easy it would be with 2 years planning, 160M budget and WB/Sony backing you... __________________ Website Secure \| Engine Food ICQ# 266-942-896

11-10-2014, 02:11 PM	#76
CaptainHowdy Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Happy in the dark. Posts: 93,114	__________________ FLASH SALE INSANITY! deal with a 100% Trusted Seller Buy Traffic Spots on a High-Quality Network 1 Year or Lifetime — That’s Right, Until the Internet Explodes!

11-10-2014, 02:14 PM	#77
pornguy Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Homeless Posts: 62,911	Seeing it Tuesday. I have learned one thing. Make my own choices of movies and dont trust others opinions. __________________ PornGuy skype me pornguy_epic AmateurDough The Hottes Shemales online! TChicks.com \| Angeles Cid \| Mariana Cordoba \| MAILERS WELCOME!

11-10-2014, 02:36 PM	#80
Relentless www.EngineFood.com Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 5,697	DWB you think Interstellar was a better film than 2001, Blade Runner and True Romance? Say yes and we can move on... because if you really believe that we will never agree anyway ;) __________________ Website Secure \| Engine Food ICQ# 266-942-896

11-10-2014, 02:42 PM	#82
fetishwealth Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Miami, FL Posts: 1,424	I thought I was on /tv/ for a second. There aren't many comfy enough theaters around here for a 3 hour long movie, so fuck that noise, gonna get the bluray and sit on my comfy ass couch when it comes out.

11-10-2014, 02:56 PM	#84
dyna mo The People's Post Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: invisible 7-11 Posts: 64,040	confused matthew's 45 minute long scathing video dissection of 2001: a space odyssey. http://confusedmatthew.com/2001%3A-A-Space-Odyssey.php it's worth checking out bits, he rips apart 2001 like Relentless shredded interstellar.

11-10-2014, 04:12 PM	#90
2MuchMark Videochat Solutions Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Canada Posts: 48,650	Lol everyone, take a step back already. Not everyone will agree that any movie is good. Or bad. People either like a movie or they don't. 2001 is a long dull and boring movie but I still liked it. And don't forget, the original audiences hated the movie too until they re-relased the movie posters with the tagline "The Ultimate Trip". Bladerunner was a good and beautiful movie for sure, but don't forget the voice-overs which people loved or hated (I liked), the visible wires lifting the cars, the strange dubbing of some of the voices (The snake guy), the obvious stunt double (girl crashing through the grass), the Horrible addition of the Unicorn while Deckard plays the piano, etc etc. There are about 5 different versions released over the years with director Ridley Scott shitty attempts to fix his movie. Finally, I care more about the artists behind the movie than what armchair critics on IMDB have to say. You should too. __________________ Custom Software \| Server Management \| Integration and Technology Solutions https://www.2much.net

11-11-2014, 05:23 PM	#92
Pryda Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 903	Awesome movie, loved it! Not perfect, but still very very good. Best movie of the year so far for me, together with Edge Of Tomorrow. __________________ Babepedia

11-12-2014, 01:01 AM	#93
C4W Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 699	Super awasome movie. Really good. __________________ Boost your site with these quality deals. Buy Quality Links Deal 1 - Buy Quality Links Deal 2 - Buy Quality Links Deal 3

11-12-2014, 09:01 AM	#95
The Heron Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Apr 2001 Location: Michigan Posts: 4,487	I disliked it. Previews led me to believe it was action/adventure movie with them exploring new worlds. Reality, new worlds sucked nothing happened. Robot was fucking idiotic. Apparently 'love' is important, I disagree

11-12-2014, 10:48 AM	#97
brassmonkey Pay It Forward Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Yo Mama House Posts: 77,032	this is a movie trying to scare people green nothing more __________________ TRUMP 2025 KEKAW!!! - The Laken Riley Act Is Law! DACA ENDED - SUPPORT AZ HCR 2060 52R - email: brassballz-at-techie.com