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...

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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. :winkwink:

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.

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh ...


I'm out...

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.

Super awasome movie. Really good.

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

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

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 :2 cents:

this is a movie trying to scare people green :2 cents::2 cents: nothing more

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.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

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.

These are all excellent points, I agree!

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

obvious fake review since that is your first movie review.


logic.

anyone who thinks cooper found NASA by accident fundamentally missed an entire point of the movie. umm, SPOILER:cooper sent himself the coordinates written in the sand discovered after the sandstorm

ROFL! Calm down :)

It's pretty hilarious how upset you are! :)

I always assumed you where in your early 20's from reading your posts, then you mentioned your age in a thread a while back. I was very surprised :Oh crap

Oh is it? My 8 year old IMDB account tells me otherwise.

I know you're just trolling in this thread so I'll leave you to it :thumbsup

Thanks I'm aware and understand that but does it not seem a bit absurd that he would be picked to pilot the mission? Which is my main criticism of that part of the movie

Don't forget, that the the movie is shown by Cooper's point of view. We see only what he sees. From his point of view, the farm, it his his whole world. It's the same technique used in War of the Worlds (Tom Cruise version). From a story telling point of view, this makes sense. The audience doesn't see the chaos and the shitty condition of the world but we learn it through the character of Cooper.


True, but then again it is told to us. We learn through the story about the urgency, that the world's population has maybe a generation or two left.

Yes because Cooper is an ex Nasa pilot, Because Cooper followed the coordinates and clues, because his daughter finally changed his mind and proved that something more was going on in the library.

I would have preferred a little more story here too. It would have been nice to see more of Nasa, to see more training, more build up, etc etc. Then again it's already an almost 3 hour movie so maybe this had to be trimmed out. I wouldn't mind seeing an extended cut on Blu Ray....

He didn't find it by accident (He told himself to go) and he knew the scientists at Nasa and vice-versa.


I think you're being too hard on this movie. Sure its not perfect and I have my own problems with the movie (How could they be drinking beer on the porch if all the hops are gone? Ok maybe beer is just more expensive or maybe they had a stash, but still. And where in the future is this movie? Judging by all the pickup trucks and cars it looks like "today", but these are minor.

Agreed. Inception is a freaking' masterpiece. It is so, so, so, so sooooo good. Better than Interstellar. But Interstellar is still good. (I LOVE the Tesseract scene. Then again, I also really liked Cube2 : Hypercube, so...)

Ok, but any movie can be pulled apart. Relax a little and try to enjoy the story.

Me too. I love all of his movies and I especially love GOOD "Real" [SCIENCE] Fiction and when I go nuts for a movie, holes in plot or goofs in physics can take me out of the movie.

On a side note, I love the Back to the Future movies. Sure you can argue that Doc Brown's time machine doesn't have enough energy or mass to travel through time but it doesn't matter. The Flux Capacitor and some Plutonium is all that he needs. :)

I'm not upset in the slightest. You're the one who chose to make this snobby, with your backhanded insult "any film buff" bullshit. I just called you out on that and let you know what a fuckwad snob you are.

just like your you thought i was how old then you realized comment.

gofuckyourself fuckwad. And rest assured, you have absolutely zero impact on my day.

dumbfuck film snobs are dumbfucks.

where those seriously the best examples you could find? those are all cult following movies with niche markets. In order to get into the 9's the movie would have to appeal to everyone, not just oldschool comic book nerds.

the same people who like those also think the big lebowski is a classic..

I'm trolling a troll thread?

nothing gets by you does it? :1orglaugh

dumfuck snob.

I'm so glad people agree, some class comments here. I especially like this one:
"Inception was an all time great film...when compared against interstellar. The again, any movie is great compared to this nonsense."

The things I hate most about Interstellar:
Movie beings by selling space toys to kids.
Then the movie introduces the 4x4 they're selling

Also, it's the same bullshit as inception, no actual ending, lots of mysteries, total bullshit.

Me and my lady have already had a good rant about it, so I wont bother to continue.

I still think it's lazy story telling on Nolan's part IMO

I think it's a shame that films have to last for a set amount of time,

If it takes 4 - 4.5 hours to make the film into the great film it should have been then so be it! :)

See I disagree, Christopher Nolan is an outstanding talent. Instead of praising a mediocre film I think fans should be critical if it's warranted and in the case of this film I feel it is.

I'll watch it again like I have done with all his other films, this one isn't a 10/10 and I expect that from Nolan hence the disappointment.

See I disagree, the outstanding films cannot be picked apart easily because they are of the highest quality. Perhaps I am being too harsh but it's only because I expected better from Nolan

A film has failed to impress me if I'm finding plot holes or thinking about how a scene could have been better.

Fair point :pimp

I don't see the comparison between inception and interstellar either.

Those are not cult films lol

2001 is widely regarded as the best 'space film' of all time and has been called that by the likes of Steven Spielberg and James Cameron. I'm not sure how many posts either of them has on IMDB, but I believe they do have a fair amount of street-cred between them.

Blade Runner is widely regarded as the best Sci-Fi film ever made. The director's cut is infinitely better than the theatrical release by the way, and the film does a masterful job of exploring the notion of 'what makes us human' against the backdrop of a futuristic cop thriller and exceptionally performances by an amazing cast of actors. Everyone on that film from Harrison Ford to Edward James Olmos was very good, but the script was the star of the show.

True Romance is one of my favorite movies of all time. It also happens to include the greatest single scene every filmed. Written by Quentin Tarantino and acted by Christopher Walken opposite Dennis Hopper. Watch it for yourself if you haven't seen the film... or better yet, go get the whole film and enjoy:



I get it... these three movies didn't have a meaningless chase scene to follow a guy and his kids in a pickup truck through a cornfield to down a drone that had almost nothing to do with the eventual plot. Still, they somehow managed to be three cinematic masterpieces where Interstellar is barely qualified to be a Saturday morning cartoon for six year olds. :2 cents:

DUDE. that scene has one of THE biggest plot holes in the history of cinema.

:)

A plot hole, or plothole is a gap or inconsistency in a storyline that creates a paradox in the story that cannot be reconciled with any explanation. What exactly do you consider a plot hole in that scene?

OK, good point, I type fast and brief, a better description would be plot fail. the note on the refridgerator.

we're in here destroying awesome movies btw. like they did on big bang theory with Indiana Jones.

!

That's not a plot fail in any way. It shows that they didn't even have to kill or interrogate hopper to begin with... they could have been smarter and just looked around the room but instead they took the 'all balls no brains' approach to gathering information. It sets up the kind of people who are after the protagonist and shows you they are likely to shoot first, think second... which ends up to be accurate throughout the film and gets your mind right for the Gandolfini scene, which at the time was one of the most violent depictions of a fight between a man and a woman on screen that I can recall... :2 cents:

No. You are in here finding an impossible 'fault' in the most impeccable scene ever filmed. There is not a single frame, word, lighting cue, actor or moment of that scene I would even consider changing from the masterpiece shown above.

Obviously you missed the fact he was never planning to see his dad ever again and Clarence says they'll mail him a postcard when he drives off.

it's simply lazy writing by tarantino

tarantino can do better than that.
:upsidedow

@DynaMo Here are the three main arguments you have made in this thread in order of their chance to be correct:

1 - That interstellar is a good movie 50/50 since it's a matter of taste

2 - That IMDB can not be gamed = 90% wrong since nobody has bothered to do the work of inflating reviews to prove it to you, but people capable of that work are telling you it can easily be done.

3 - That True Romance has anything at all wrong with it = 100% wrong. It's provable one frame at a time from start to finish of that film. ;)