That's part of the beauty of the scene. Hopper understands he will be killed no matter what he does or says, so he goes out the best way he can. Meanwhile it shows Clarence leaves a wake of trouble everywhere he goes, no matter how unintended. You'd be better off arguing something else... finding fault with True Romance is the kobayashi maru of movie arguments.

no, I'm saying

1. You have not proven Interstellar is an awful movie.

2. You have not proven IMDB is being gamed by the studio in this instance

3. what? no, I said tarantino got lazy writing true romance, that scene highlights that. now I'm not the sort to conclude that ruins the entertainment value of it, it doesn't for me. nor do the other plot issues that movie had.

because if anything were to do that for this film, it would be christain slater.

i really like it!

Incidentally Tarantino disagrees with you... he calls this scene one of the proudest moments of his career:

oh, hopper kills it here, that's obvious he knows he's dead, it's well-played. nevertheless, that really has nothing to do with the note on the fridge. sure slater is a doof, but we already know that, due to other parts of the film being well-done/better. not to mention walken's crew stumbling upon it on top of all that.

the note reveal plays out poorly. poor writing really.

th epoint of that scene was not to have the address discovered, it was simply to have some fantastic dialogue and acting between 2 of the best. the finding of the note was just a quick wrapup to that dialogue scene/segue to the next chapter in the movie.

I don't agree.

The closest you might come to a slight of that scene is that the 'you're a cantaloupe' line by Walken was actually ad-lib and was not in the original script. It's a brilliant quip in response to Hopper calling him an eggplant with the play on words that hopper is a white guy who 'can't elope' from his predicament... but it was Walken's genius to come up with it on the fly rather than anything Tarantino originally wrote.

Basically they're both movies that would seem dreamed up by Hollywood and engineered specifically to make sales and make people go "WOW IT HAD ALL THE INGREDIENTS OF AN AMAZING MOVIE, WITHOUT THE AMAZING MOVIE PART"

Inception vs Shutter Island. Say no more.

hah, i can see that happening. for me, the scene ends abruptly, as if qt wrote the dialogue ,hi5'd himself, sat back and realized he forgot the scene was actually required in the plot for walken to continue pursuing clarence, but he'd left that out so he simply put a note on the door.

:thumbsup

that's the entire point of inception! it's an elaborate behind the scenes movie about making a movie. You're absolutely right, there's no message there. entertainment value is high though. inception can withstand multiple viewings and still be fun to watch and discuss after, which to me, is a hallmark of a good movie- just be entertaining and engaging enough to be able to chat about.

I have not seen shutter island.

@DynaMo btw check your GFY PM Box

Watched it yesterday in IMAX, good drama, I liked it.

It was't bad. I give the edge to Nightcrawler.

Here's a really cool map to help understand the movie's timeline.

http://c.fastcompany.net/multisite_f...r-timeline.png

Direct link to image: http://c.fastcompany.net/multisite_f...r-timeline.png

Same here. Saw it at a noon showing, without IMAX. Liked it a lot.

It started off slowly but once they developed the intitial characters it was a pretty good sci fi adventure.

I'm giving it an 8.5 and I plan to watch it again in IMAX. It received good reviews on IMDB and Rotten Tomatoes for a reason, because it is a damned good film.

One error there is that image says Romilly didn't go into sleep stasis for 23 years, but he actually said he slept a few stretches when Brand asked him. And then decided not to sleep his life away.

Tom a Tom fan, that being said, this movie is the widest release on IMAX ever.

Watched this the other day on Blu Ray.

Sucked.

Nolan can't direct a decent movie to save his life. He is officially the most overrated director on the planet.

The film was scientifically implausible to such an extent that I could not suspend disbelief and enjoy the film at face value. Pseudo- philosophical use of feelings with respect to the multi-dimensional time-space is simply ridiculous. The plot made no sense and never explained anything. I love how the protagonist is asked to pilot a spacecraft on a billion dollar intergalactic mission (during a time of world wide famine, no less) the very next day! Forget a physical or psychological or refreshing your memory, just show up tomorrow man!

I could go on but what's the point. Typical Hollywood tripe with cringe-worthy lines, like a top scientist saying "Love is the one thing that we?re capable of perceiving that transcends dimensions of time and space." Ugh.

It's a good science-fiction movie, that's all ...

It's not.

The fake square robots were distracting but the plot twists,FX & lofty mind bending convinced me a couple hours in that even though they bit off more then they could chew it wasn't a total wast of time.

Can someone explain why Mat Damon (A+ lister?) is being underpromoted in this movie? I mean I did not even know he was in the movie. I opened Interstellar (2014) - IMDb and he is not even there (in the firstly visible results)!

How is that possible, why not to monetize on him? I mean at least put him in visible IMDB credits...

Serious question....

Anyone here watch Event Horizon with Sam Neil and Laurence Fishburne?

The part where a scientist explains to Cooper how a wormhole works is lifted (copied) directly from that film. I mean, it's exactly the same, with the x's, the line, the folding of the paper and the pencil piercing it.

Also, does anyone else find it extremely ridiculous that this scientist is explaining to the pilot of the mission what a wormhole is only minutes before he has to go through it. LOL.

Maybe it's suppose to be a surprise. Kind of like Kevin Spacey was in Seven.

oddly enough the wiki shows the executive producer being a Theoretical physicist and acted as scientific consultant, while having the critics: 'who gave particular attention to the film's scientific accuracy'

I don't like that film, the first part of the film was interesting but the second part was boring. Save 2,5 hours in your life and do not watch it :pimp

"For a cornfield scene, Christopher Nolan sought to grow 500 acres of corn, which he learned was feasible from his producing of Man of Steel (2013). The corn was then sold and actually made a profit." IMDB

haha i'd like to see how many gfy scientists with actual credentials disprove the things discussed about in the movie. not some bullshit youtube conspiracy link or vid. someone here that is a mathematics or astrophysics or anything related to that education

Huh? I must have missed that completely. Coop's daughter is playing with model of the Lunar lander. It might be a toy you can still buy but its not like she was showing the brand of it to the camera. The model is also a key element in the film and the story. It is the first science of the "ghost", it reminds us that Coop is a pilot and believes science. It also reminds us that Murphy believes science too, which is what gets her into trouble at school.

I actually love this part because it suggests that since they teach in school that landing on the moon was faked and never happen, that the politicians behind denying science won, and they might have been the ones responsible for fucking up the planet. Subtle jab? You betcha.


Wow... !! Foxy, I urge you give Inception another watch and pay really close attention to it. The ending is one of the coolest most amazing endings I've ever seen. At the very last frame of the movie, the spinning top wobbles. If you blink, you missed it, and then poof, black screen. The top is his characters self-test to know if he is dreaming or not. You also never see the children faces until the last 30 seconds of the movie. This musical cues are also the Edith Plaif song, slowed down. Nolan is trying to tell you something very important here but he doesn't want to show you - he wants you to realize it, or at least think about it.

Cheers

Ok, I see your point. I had problems with it too (I hated the robot for one), I still love the movie. I plan to buy it on Blu ray when released.

I saw this last weekend. It was long, but I thought it was good. The end was a little strange.

everyone kept saying it was a great movie. i havent seen it something about space movies makes me want to yawn

For the most part, I tend to agree with you. I would have loved to see Coop go to the REAL Nasa in Florida, spend a year training while the story explains more about space travel and time dilation, etc. I would have loved the build up to the launch while more is revealed about the state of the planet and the shit it is turning into, etc. Sometimes things are best left to the imagination, but other times the details in extended stories really flesh things out for me.

This is why I'm really hoping for an extended directors cut. If they released a 4 hour version, I would definitely watch it.

The "Love" part of the movie is a bit of a stretch for me, but not that much.

His performance and character were kept secret by request and agreement between him and Nolan. I don't really know why. His character is good and there is a major reveal that involves him but it could have been played by just about any other actor IMHO.

Yes it was, and yes I do. This is done so that the audience knows what is going on, but yes I hated the way it was done in Interstellar. Coop and everyone else on board should know this already. This scene would have been much better if Coop would have given this demo to his daughter Murph instead. A reply of "Duh, Dad, I'm not stupid ya know!" would have been a nice touch.

If I was someone that is actually going to travel through a wormhole or into a black hole of course I'd be much more demanding in terms of scientific rigurosity ...

That's because the laws of physics don't change.

"The method of space travel in this film was based on physicist Kip Thorne's works, which were also the basis for the method of space travel in Carl Sagan's novel "Contact", and the resulting film adaptation, Contact (1997). Matthew McConaughey stars in both films." IMDB

There was a lot of that explaining shit to the audience, usually in a totally out of context way. Too much shit in this movie to enjoy it. I also thought the dialogue and acting were horrible.

It was a shot for shot copy of Event Horizon.

Let's go populate a planet orbiting near a black hole... AWESOME IDEA!

Something tells me Kip Thorne was overruled on a lot of science stuff on this film.