Christopher Nolan’s Interstellar

[Johnny Textface]

Surprised there's no thread for this here.  Just noticed the first reviews are coming in and The Guardian has given it 3 out of 5.

I'm looking forward to it but I've only recently learned that the running time is about 3 hours and that will annoy me and my bottom.

[Milverton]

I agree three hours is ridiculous. It puts me off going to the cinema, and takes longer to torrent. A few films whizz past, but nearly all drag at three hours.

I've enjoyed the trailers, but I liked the trailers for Prometheus and that didn't end well.

McC... MacC... him - is a bit po-faced from what I've seen though. He always is, of course, but I'm not a big fan. I'm not sure he's a leading man in what seems to be an action film.

I'll watch Event Horizon again tonight because I've just read about the wormholes in Interstellar. It's my second favourite wormhole-ish movie.

[Garam]

Are you seriously all so decrepit that you can't sit in a fucking chair for 3 hours?

[Garam]

what do you do if you have to get a bus or a train or a plane somewhere? drive somewhere? do you book into a travelodge every 90 minutes?

[Milverton]

Are you seriously all so decrepit that you can't sit in a fucking chair for 3 hours?

A good three hour movie doesn't seem like three hours. A bad three hour movie is a fucking nightmare.

Example: Godfather II; wonderful, Peter Jackson's King Kong (or Kingy Kongy if you are Brazilian) torture. Schindler's List; great, Magnolia; hellish.

[olliebean]

What's more, a good three hour movie has to be a shit-load better than a good two hour movie to justify the extra running time.

[Bad Ambassador]

It might only be three hours for you, but you leave the cinema and find 30 years has passed since you went in.

[Bored of Canada]

I don't have many hours left. Who does this Chrissy think he is?

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

I saw a trailer last week which said the movie isn't out for another year.

[Wet Blanket]

It looks a bit dour to me, and heavy on the sci-fi, which in not a genre I'm much keen on.

I've got a lot of time for Christopher Nolan however. Reckon this will be his Barry Lyndon; a delight for fans but disappointing box office.

[checkoutgirl]

I've only recently learned that the running time is about 3 hours and that will annoy me and my bottom.

That would annoy my bottom too. I didn't go to Wolf of Wall Street for similar reasons. It's almost embarrassing being in a theatre for that amount of time. Have we got the backlash for this film yet? I can't wait for the inevitable Nolan backlash and fans versus non fans debates.

[checkoutgirl]

McC... MacC... him

You mean Matthew McConaughey? Come on man, do you not even know actor's names? Fuck sake.

[Blumf]

It looks a bit dour to me, and heavy on the sci-fi, which in not a genre I'm much keen on.

I likes a bit of sci-fi, me, but this looks sooo fucking dull and po-faced. From what I can make out, none of the sci-fi elements are remotely innovative[nb]I'm hearing that there's a bit that'll impress dim-witted stoners, that sounds like the best we can hope for[/nb], and there's not much else to rest the film on. In essence, I don't believe Nolan has anything to say with this film, at least, not anything interesting or insightful. Three hours can fuck off with that.

[Sam]

I wish he'd stop making these overblown action films and go back to doing dramas like Memento, Insomnia and The Prestige.

[PAGATRON]

Isn't this meant to be one big homage to 2001? A film Chris is a big fan of.

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

I didn't go to Wolf of Wall Street for similar reasons.

Your loss, certainly one of the quickest funniest three hours of your life.

[olliebean]

Your loss, certainly one of the quickest funniest three hours of your life.

Really? I found most of it tedious in the extreme.

[Johnny Textface]

Re: Wolf of Wall Street

I found it generally quite enjoyable, although was constantly distracted by the ridiculously over-the-top hedonism on display (and my bottom hurting).

Anywhooo..

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

Really? I found most of it tedious in the extreme.

So what do you want me to say...?

[HupHupHup]

That's what I love about interstellar travel, man, my girl gets older, I stay the same age.

[Replies From View]

I don't have many hours left. Who does this Chrissy think he is?

I bet he's a regeneration of The Caster.


I read this yesterday; thought it was worth sharing:  http://www.theguardian.com/film/2014/nov/04/-sp-christopher-nolan-interstellar-rebooted-blockbuster

[Onken]

Another 3 star review this time from Peter Bradshaw in Guardian. I rarely go the cinema due to a lack of people who will accompany me. Following all the hype I was going to make the effort to go see this one my own one afternoon. I'll leave it till the blu-ray rip is available.

[Buttress]

This is a Nolan film so it'll be a big, ultimately empty/dumb blockbuster that has some smart moments/observations. I'm looking forward to how they integrate black holes into the plot and their CG. If its anything like the standard of Gravity it should be pretty spectacular to see.

[Replies From View]

I'm looking forward to how they integrate black holes into the plot and their CG.

Same here.  From the link I posted earlier:

The images, showing Matthew McConaughey approaching the event horizon of a black hole, are no less stunning than Kubrick's, with something of the blurred beauty of a Gerhard Richter painting. The black hole itself was generated using calculations from theoretical physicist Kip Thorne, whose work inspired the movie, and fed into software developed by Nolan's effects team using computing power so vast – each frame of film took around 100 hours of machine time – that Thorne, watching the footage for the first time, had new insights into the way light behaves near the event horizon of a black hole, which he plans to explore in a series of papers for scientific journals.

[Sam]

So anyone seen this yet? It'll be next Wednesday for me.

[olliebean]

I'll catch it when it turns up on Netflix.

[jonno]

Saw it last night at the Imax in Manchester, the immersive experience was tempered somewhat when the projector broke down half an hour from the end and the house lights came on. It was restarted 10-15 minutes later but in the 35mm print which was a bit of a shame.

On the plus side the visuals are fantastic, particularly the wormhole and black hole bits, there are some great action sequences and a powerful scene near the middle where

Spoiler alert

it is revealed that 20+ years have passed while they were on the planet for a few hours

[close]

. That bit really got to me. On the negative side, some questionable casting and a poor score/soundmix that was massively distracting. Oh, and the final act.

Peter Bradshaw's Guardian review is bang on.

[Buttress]

So I presume this is best left for the cam rip?

[kidsick5000]

Watched it for a second time, even though had some issues from the first time.
Second times the charm. Loved it. It's one of my favourites of the year.

A number of the scenes between Coop and his daughter were particularly affecting.

A good god I love a film that sets off the imagination about what kind of world this is set in.
So many hints about really dark times, nicely and naturally dropped in without having to be heavy handed exposition.

And as I've told other people, for a 3-hour film to not feel like three hours is a hell of an achievement. Good seats help too, obviously.

[Canted_Angle]

What is it with Nolan and the sound mix in his films? It's always off which is strange for such a reputed perfectionist.