Interstellar (Christopher Nolan) *SPOILERS FROM POST 458 ONWARDS*

Mr. Loverman

I enjoyed this, but:

1. The Matt Damon thing was totally unnecessary. I was really enjoying the movie up until that point, and felt this messed with the pacing. I get the feeling the producers were worried the plebs watching in the cinemas need explosions, death and karma.
2. Don't get me started on the quantum physics stuff being sent by morse code.
3. Why didn't they send more spaceships to the planet with yer on on it (at the end) in the proceeding 80 years or whatever?

But as I say, it was enjoyable and I'm glad I saw it!

stevenmu

Hyzepher wrote: »

Not sure I buy into this time differential due to gravity/velocity. From the articles srsly78 linked to it seems that a lot of this is theory based on some fundamental assumptions

1. Gravity and/or velocity doesn't affect the time recording devices themselves while they are experiencing the changes in gravity or speed.
2. The assumption that the speed of light is constant and therefore can be used to determine the duration of time under certain conditions.
3. That both parties involved in the time differential i.e the guys on Miller's planet and the guy left in the spaceship orbiting, continue to experience time, relatively speaking, exactly as before. With no extreme changes to that differential as they come back together. For example, if time slows down as they approach the planet and spend some time on it then why wouldn't it speed up as they come away from that planet.

Hyzepher wrote: »

My point on 1. was more about how do we know that it's time that's affected and not just the devices that record it

1. That's a very good question, and touches on the what the actual nature of time is. I'm not an expert, but my understanding is that time is really just a measurement. Time isn't actually a thing, which can speed up or slow down, like water for example.

If we send a space ship near a black hole, and the hands on a clock move slower, the emissions from atoms used in an atomic clock are slower, the cells in our body age slower, and the electrons running around the neurons in our brains are slower so we think and perceive things slower, our measurement and perception of time is slower. If our measurement and perception of time is slower, then everything that time is has slowed down (relative to observers further away from the black hole). Or it might be more accurate to say that the passing of time has slowed down.



3. The passing of time did speed back up as returned to the ship, but only from the rate it passed when they were on the planet up to the rate it passed in the orbiting ship. It never exceeded the rate that time passed on the orbiting ship. So when they returned to the ship more time had passed there.

Ipso

Sad Professor wrote: »

Neil deGrasse Tyson on the end of the film, specifically how time (as the fourth dimension) would be viewed from a fifth dimension.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R1cexcjdyIE

And here’s Carl Sagan explaining basically the same thing and the concept of a tesseract in a scene from Cosmos, which I assume was Nolan's inspiration for the ending.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0WjV6MmCyM

Great stuff from amazing communicators, love Tyson using an appointment as a metaphor.

the_monkey

Well I saw it for the 2nd time last night, I wanted to leave some time between my first viewing.

W0W!!

I got so much more from it with this 2nd viewing, It was like I could enjoy it with no pressure, the tesseract scene which I had a problem with in the first viewing was simply amazing.

I found the scenes between him and his daughter much more emotional this time round , and the scenes in space with silence - where it was deafening were incredible.

The launch sequence from Earth and the Dylan Thomas poem recited by Brand Senior - hairs on my neck!!

Funnily enough the scenes I found amazing first time round were merely enjoyable this time - surprise element I guess .

So happy I finally got what I wanted from this film.

Upgraded my score - 10/10. 11 even. :P



I saw it in digital, I'd love to see the 70mm IMAX , maybe in a few years when it's shown again in London.

Jackie_Green

masterpiece movie

Mister Vain

I'd imagine moving to a new planet would be extremely difficult psychologically. Just imagine the home sickness.

the_monkey

Mister Vain wrote: »

I'd imagine moving to a new planet would be extremely difficult psychologically. Just imagine the home sickness.

No more then emigrating to America or Australia was back in the day...
It meant you never saw Those people you left ever again basically

Mister Vain

the_monkey wrote: »

No more then emigrating to America or Australia was back in the day...
It meant you never saw Those people you left ever again basically

Not exactly the same thing though.

MakeEmLaugh

SPOILER ALERT.

Can anyone tell me the name of the track when Cooper (Mathew McConaughey) is in the hospital with Murphy (Ellen Burstyn) at the end of the film?

It's a very soft piece with a repetitive organ motif reminiscent of Koyaanisqatsi-era Philip Glass...

Sad Professor

Where We’re Going.

nix

I can't stop thinking about this movie, three times now and i enjoy it more on each viewing, heck id go again and probably will..

Heat_Wave

What on earth was all that about?

danrua01

Well, on earth they were facing starvation and suffocation, but most of it happened off the earth.

the_monkey

nix wrote: »

I can't stop thinking about this movie, three times now and i enjoy it more on each viewing, heck id go again and probably will..

I've seen it twice and was saying the next time will be on BluRay, but maybe ill go for a 3rd viewing now ..

Grudaire

One question that popped into my head is how moving planet will solve the blight problem?

Surely the same diseases will just be transported to the new planets?

Bacchus

Grudaire wrote: »

One question that popped into my head is how moving planet will solve the blight problem?

Surely the same diseases will just be transported to the new planets?

It was the nitrogen building up in the atmosphere that was enabling the blight to spread and flourish. It was a sideways way of delivering a global warming message without being too on the nose about it.

Thargor

Should have just engineered one of those nitrogen fixers that farmers plant every now and then to grow in the desert or the oceans, boom.

beardo81

I saw this today and tbh was a little disappointed. The pacing off the film was a little off for me, with no real emotional connect with MMcC's adult children in the later parts of the film.

Also, I just saw this in a regular cinema, thought it would look better, more....epic?? Or am I totally missing out on not setting imax?

Good movie, some excellent parts and Murphy Jr a highlight for me, excellent young actress. Soundtrack excellent too.

3/5 for me, I'll get the bluray and give it another go next year no doubt.

ktulu123

Yes hugely missing out not seeing it in IMAX

DoYouEvenLift

ktulu123 wrote: »

Yes hugely missing out not seeing it in IMAX

Hopefully with the recognition IMAX and film got for this we'll see a proper IMAX screen setup in Ireland with the expansion that the actual company seems to be making. Even just a museum that does some movie screenings like a couple of the UK ones would be sweet.

the_monkey

OK , I've no doubt on 70mm IMAX is the dogs bollix, but I found it incredible and I saw it on Digital - screen was big .. sound was clear and LOUD!

EPIC - check

To say one is "hugely missing out " --- I dunno seems a little exaggerated.

the_monkey

beardo81 wrote: »

I saw this today and tbh was a little disappointed. The pacing off the film was a little off for me, with no real emotional connect with MMcC's adult children in the later parts of the film.

Also, I just saw this in a regular cinema, thought it would look better, more....epic?? Or am I totally missing out on not setting imax?

Good movie, some excellent parts and Murphy Jr a highlight for me, excellent young actress. Soundtrack excellent too.

3/5 for me, I'll get the bluray and give it another go next year no doubt.

I'll just say I found it waaay better the 2nd time around ...

DoYouEvenLift

the_monkey wrote: »

OK , I've no doubt on 70mm IMAX is the dogs bollix, but I found it incredible and I saw it on Digital - screen was big .. sound was clear and LOUD!

EPIC - check

To say one is "hugely missing out " --- I dunno seems a little exaggerated.

Depends on the individual I'd say. Some people will think it's a small bit better than normal cinemas and others will think its way better. In the Manchester IMAX I went to the entire screen is all you see ahead of you, your entire field of vision is filled with the screen and when I looked up at the speakers I saw what looked to be a speaker the size of a small car hanging from the ceiling on each side, like what you'd see at a concert and I also know there are a load of others behind the actual screen. It was the most immersive cinema experience I've had and when the 70mm scenes came on and filled the entire screen during space scenes it was honestly incredible. All I could think when I walked out of the cinema was "I'll probably never see Interstellar in that way again", which is why I turned around and queued up to see it again lol. Think of how loud normal cinemas are and then think how loud this must've been, probably could've squeezed an air horn and nobody would even notice during scenes like the launch lol.


More blockbusters need to use the full potential of all this too.

the_monkey

Rust explains some of the science in Interstellar :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1ztQMr7VqA&feature=youtu.be

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1ztQMr7VqA&feature=youtu.be

beardo81

the_monkey wrote: »

I'll just say I found it waaay better the 2nd time around ...

I'm quite sure that will be the case but it might be on bluray next time I see it.

Now to convince the wife I need a 60" TV.....

danrua01

beardo81 wrote: »

I'm quite sure that will be the case but it might be on bluray next time I see it.

Now to convince the wife I need a 60" TV.....

Unnecessary...

I have a 55" and it does the job just fine.

jones

Its always necessary to get the biggest tv possible its the law ;-)

really looking forward to seeing Interstellar again it will definitely be a bluray purchase

DoYouEvenLift

danrua01 wrote: »

Unnecessary...

I have a 55" and it does the job just fine.

People used to say the same about 42" screens. I've a 55" also but when they're cheaper I'll be getting a 65" or 75", hopefully OLED

jones

64" here and I love it when I look at my old 40" it looks like a toy.

danrua01

a new manly measurement that makes me feel inadequate









:{