"Just saw Interstellar" Topic

what a movie…..

The physics is gnarly, but wow…… I'm speechless….

good.

confirmed my suspicions. thanks.

speechless it's that good or speechless it's that bad….?

Thanks ! Hope to catch it on cable in 5-6 months !

Just saw it last night. Not as visually impressive as I'd hoped, but other parts, the drama surrounding man's uhh, I'll just say frailty and drive for individual self-preservation (to keep from spoilers) was more unexpected and worthwhile.

Yea, some of the physics was wonky and requires serious suspension of disbelief, overall worth a view, but I'm not getting the DVD even when it makes its way into the $5 USD bin.

I saw it on Saturday. And I didn't like it.

Here's the thing: I really wanted to. I love science fiction and was so happy to have a movie about actual science, as opposed to another comic book adaptation. But the filmmakers made a lot of strange creative decisions that ultimately sunk the experience for me. Most egregious was the sappy family story with a heavy whiff of Deepak Chopra pseudoscience. The characters didn't click for me, and again and again the filmmakers kept turning away from the space exploration to focus on the less-interesting story about what was happening on Earth.

This movie seems to be really divisive. Some people really love it. Others, like me, are "meh" at best.

That is because this movie is meant to push an agenda.

Can't go into what that is but come on over to the Blue Fez and we can.

But due to this I will never see this movie.

'Interstellar' is as much about human relationships and what it means for humanity to 'survive' as the science fiction and space exploration. I think giving the movie a measure of 'heart' and human drama to appeal to a wider demographic (i.e. the female audience) isn't such a bad thing, even if they seem a bit contrived.

And notwithstanding Mithmee's claim, not every movie of this type pushes a leftist liberal agenda. 'Interstellar' certainly did not.

Full review here: link

Interstellar definitely did not push a lib/prog agenda.

A fantastic movie from both the science fiction and human aspects.

Why do they need to leave Earth then?

? Let me repeat that: ?

Spoiler:

They had to leave earth because of a disease that was killing all the crops, which was already causing all kinds of problems (starvation, dust storms), but eventually would result in not enough oxygen to survive.
If that's a liberal agenda then I guess any movie that is post apoc in any sense is "liberal" because it suggests that bad stuff could happen to humanity and God wouldn't stop it, but I'm pretty sure that's only liberal to a 16th century theologian, and even then only the conservative ones who forgot about the Black Death ;)

Also, fantastic movie. Physics were less wonky than 99% of movies-- certainly no more than 2001. Both include "science sufficiently advanced appears as magic" but because the actual physics have developed (in part due to people like Kip Thorne, who was a producer and science advisor), the magic actually sorta follows rules we can estimate. All the relativity stuff was right (down to the rotation of the black hole being he only way for a planet to be that close and have a stable orbit), the human tech was all pretty near future accurate/believable (the space ships and robots and what not)… I really liked that when they were landing on the water world, I predicted, based on the information in the movie and my understanding of physics, that tides would be a problem…

Only thing that was wonky was the wormhole, possibly, but wormholes are theoretical enough that once you have one you can more or less allow it to follow the rules you want. Also the characters and plot were good, IMO. most complaints I've read on that front seem like they come from someone watching a different movie (the science complaints on the other hand usually seem to come from people misunderstanding the movie or the physics, or being a little anal retentive on the "sufficiently advanced tech" point).

What caused the disease?

So yes this is Hollywood pushing an agenda.

What caused the disease?

So yes this is Hollywood pushing an agenda.

The disease is nobody's fault. Sometimes s&*!@# happens that's all. Just like the meteor that had to be nuked in 'Armageddon' by Bruce Willis to prevent it from smashing into earth. Blame it on an 'Act of God' if you'd like.

So no, there is no grand liberal conspiracy here.

Sure the planet gets along fine for millions of years and suddenly bang.

The plants get a disease.

So yes there is a liberal conspiracy and Hollywood makes every attempt to help push their agendas.

So by your definition every end-of-the-world disaster and post-apoc movie arising from natural disasters, including 'Max Max,' 'Waterworld' and 'The Day After Tomorrow' among many others, would qualify as a movie by liberals trying to push their tree-hugging 'agenda' because something went wrong to create the end-of-the-world conditions (e.g., arid desert, flood, icy) in the first place.

Ohhkay.

OK, having had the advantage of actually seeing the movie and being someone who has no sympathy for lib-prog agendas, I can attest that this movie DOES NOT have a lib-prog agenda.

9 Easter Eggs From the Bookshelf in Interstellar

""Love is the one thing we're capable of perceiving that transcends dimensions of time and space," says Dr. Brand (Anne Hathaway) in Interstellar. But in Christopher Nolan's sci-fi epic, books can be transcendent too. Early in the film, Murph (Mackenzie Foy) attempts to decode meaning from the seemingly random volumes that fall from her bookshelves. She is certain that what she calls a ghost is using the books to try to communicate. Nolan, for his part, is absolutely using the books to communicate (Hello, Flatland!): The volumes he chose for her shelves relate to the characters in the film—and to his conceptual world. We asked the director about some of the featured tomes."
From here
link

Amicalement
Armand

"Sure the planet gets along fine for millions of years and suddenly bang"

Ask the dinosaurs about that. Oops, I forgot, there were no dinosaurs.

"I can attest that this movie DOES NOT have a lib-prog agenda."

That's just what they want you to think. Insidious, isn't it?