Paul. said:
Not only was it probably one of the very best Pixar films, it has also entered into many charts as one of the best romance films ever.
I think your cousin is in the wrong business.
Not only was it probably one of the very best Pixar films, it has also entered into many charts as one of the best romance films ever.
I think your cousin is in the wrong business.
Thompsonuxb said:
Every sci-fi movie has script flaws, timeline issues, wonky technology of its time etc. However, you didn't say I think Interstellar is an OK or a good film, it just has issues. You said you'd rather get shot in the knee than stand to watch another minute of it. A bit excessive in your dismissall.
BTW what are the Pros and Cons of Tesseract in your opinion?
Native_bon
Well-known member
Two or three not liking it compared to everyone else liking it..? Hum.. Well . The saying, you cnt please all.*dirol*
Vladimir said:
My issues with the Tesseract - it's location on the edge of the event horizon - the 'gravity' in this region is powerful enough to theoretically crush planets, not even light can escape it - physics ignored?
But glaze over that and we still have
Cooper a 3dimensional being existing in a 4 or 5 dimensional space he still has a physical presents to move those books (across time) and why would the robot be saved?
Oh he did not send back the co-ordinates and at no point was there any suggestion he could manipulate the local magnetic field in his daughter's room to leave the co-ordinates in the dust to the secret NASA facility.
Wash over that...
The other point - his daughter had a strop for 20 odd years were she would not message him - why did he not send a message to say he was ok.
And once in the Tesseract only one single timeline was available to Cooper, his daughters.
Again time was a main play in this film how long was a second in the Tesseract - once it spat him out in 'safe space' he had not aged. Yet on the planet close to the black hole an hour cost them 20odd years.
Only 114yrs had passed when they found him - surely closer to the black hole more time would have passed and he was also spat out far away enough from the blackhole not to get sucked into it.
To many flaws makes the film hard to watch for me.
fr0g said:Thompsonuxb said:
Too many flaws makes the post hard to read for me.
On an international forum one should be flexible when reading this is not an exam for grammar - instead you choose to quibble over errors - at no point addressing any point in the post?
If you have no idea what I'm on about, move on.
The thread is clearly marked with a spoiler banner - pls do not enter or read if this impedes your enjoyment of the film.
I was only responding to Vlads post.
Thompsonuxb said:fr0g said:Thompsonuxb said:
Too many flaws makes the post hard to read for me.
On an international forum one should be flexible when reading this is not an exam for grammar - instead you choose to quibble over errors - at no point addressing any point in the post?
If you have no idea what I'm on about, move on.
The thread is clearly marked with a spoiler banner - pls do not enter or read if this impedes your enjoyment of the film.
I was only responding to Vlads post.
All your points are addressed in film, you literally have no points to make. This is what prompted his too many flaws response to you.
Thompsonuxb said:fr0g said:Thompsonuxb said:
Too many flaws makes the post hard to read for me.
On an international forum one should be flexible when reading this is not an exam for grammar - instead you choose to quibble over errors - at no point addressing any point in the post?
If you have no idea what I'm on about, move on.
The thread is clearly marked with a spoiler banner - pls do not enter or read if this impedes your enjoyment of the film.
I was only responding to Vlads post.
Sense of humour bypass when you were younger perhaps?
As to your points, I have only watched the film once, have not got a photographic memory and thus feel inadequately qualified to answer them.
I must say though, when you start picking so deeply you also start not enjoying. I guess it's similar in nature to Hifi enthusiasts rather than music enthusiasts.
fr0g said:Thompsonuxb said:fr0g said:Thompsonuxb said:
Too many flaws makes the post hard to read for me.
?
On an international forum one should be flexible when reading this is not an exam for grammar - instead you choose to quibble over errors - at no point addressing any point in the post?
If you have no idea what I'm on about, move on.
The thread is clearly marked with a spoiler banner - pls do not enter or read if this impedes your enjoyment of the film.
I was only responding to Vlads post.
Sense of humour bypass when you were younger perhaps?
As to your points, I have only watched the film once, have not got a photographic memory and thus feel inadequately qualified to answer them.
I must say though, when you start picking so deeply you also start not enjoying. I guess it's similar in nature to Hifi enthusiasts rather than music enthusiasts.?
You've only watched the film once so don't feel qualified to respond....
Would it have killed you to just say that?
My response would be a simple 'ok'....
But even so, your last paragraph makes little sense.
My opinion on the film does not have any reflection on how I enjoy watching movies nor listening to music.
Do I need a sense of humour to get the point you're trying to make. ...seriously?
Thompsonuxb said:fr0g said:Thompsonuxb said:fr0g said:Thompsonuxb said:
Too many flaws makes the post hard to read for me.
On an international forum one should be flexible when reading this is not an exam for grammar - instead you choose to quibble over errors - at no point addressing any point in the post?
If you have no idea what I'm on about, move on.
The thread is clearly marked with a spoiler banner - pls do not enter or read if this impedes your enjoyment of the film.
I was only responding to Vlads post.
Sense of humour bypass when you were younger perhaps?
As to your points, I have only watched the film once, have not got a photographic memory and thus feel inadequately qualified to answer them.
I must say though, when you start picking so deeply you also start not enjoying. I guess it's similar in nature to Hifi enthusiasts rather than music enthusiasts.
You've only watched the film once so don't feel qualified to respond....
Would it have killed you to just say that?
My response would be a simple 'ok'....
But even so, your last paragraph makes little sense.
My opinion on the film does not have any reflection on how I enjoy watching movies nor listening to music.
Do I need a sense of humour to get the point you're trying to make. ...seriously?
Quite obviously.
A sense of humour and a modicum of logical thinking.
The original reply was a joke, using "irony" as a tool. i.e. The post you did complaining about flaws was full of flaws...Understand?
The last paragraph was a general comment on the common practice of dissecting a film to unravel every plot hole or paradox. Most films have them, some worse than others, and ultimately that reminds me of when people care more about the Hi-Fi than they do about the music itself.
Anyway. As you were
fr0g said:Thompsonuxb said:fr0g said:Thompsonuxb said:fr0g said:Thompsonuxb said:
Too many flaws makes the post hard to read for me.
?
On an international forum one should be flexible when reading this is not an exam for grammar - instead you choose to quibble over errors - at no point addressing any point in the post?
If you have no idea what I'm on about, move on.
The thread is clearly marked with a spoiler banner - pls do not enter or read if this impedes your enjoyment of the film.
I was only responding to Vlads post.
Sense of humour bypass when you were younger perhaps?
As to your points, I have only watched the film once, have not got a photographic memory and thus feel inadequately qualified to answer them.
I must say though, when you start picking so deeply you also start not enjoying. I guess it's similar in nature to Hifi enthusiasts rather than music enthusiasts.?
?
You've only watched the film once so don't feel qualified to respond....
Would it have killed you to just say that?
My response would be a simple 'ok'....
But even so, your last paragraph makes little sense.
My opinion on the film does not have any reflection on how I enjoy watching movies nor listening to music.
Do I need a sense of humour to get the point you're trying to make. ...seriously?
Quite obviously.
A sense of humour and a modicum of logical thinking.
The original reply was a joke, using "irony" as a tool. i.e. The post you did complaining about flaws was full of flaws...Understand?
The last paragraph was a general comment on the common practice of dissecting a film to unravel every plot hole or paradox. Most films have them, some worse than others, and ultimately that reminds me of when people care more about the Hi-Fi than they do about the music itself.?
Anyway. As you were
Frog, stop.
This thread is about Interstellar not about me. The clue is in the title.
Just give your opinion on the movie - let's compare notes.
Explain why the films work for you. You don't even have to consider anything I have said.
Let's talk about the movie.
Thompsonuxb said:fr0g said:Thompsonuxb said:fr0g said:Thompsonuxb said:fr0g said:Thompsonuxb said:
Too many flaws makes the post hard to read for me.
On an international forum one should be flexible when reading this is not an exam for grammar - instead you choose to quibble over errors - at no point addressing any point in the post?
If you have no idea what I'm on about, move on.
The thread is clearly marked with a spoiler banner - pls do not enter or read if this impedes your enjoyment of the film.
I was only responding to Vlads post.
Sense of humour bypass when you were younger perhaps?
As to your points, I have only watched the film once, have not got a photographic memory and thus feel inadequately qualified to answer them.
I must say though, when you start picking so deeply you also start not enjoying. I guess it's similar in nature to Hifi enthusiasts rather than music enthusiasts.
You've only watched the film once so don't feel qualified to respond....
Would it have killed you to just say that?
My response would be a simple 'ok'....
But even so, your last paragraph makes little sense.
My opinion on the film does not have any reflection on how I enjoy watching movies nor listening to music.
Do I need a sense of humour to get the point you're trying to make. ...seriously?
Quite obviously.
A sense of humour and a modicum of logical thinking.
The original reply was a joke, using "irony" as a tool. i.e. The post you did complaining about flaws was full of flaws...Understand?
The last paragraph was a general comment on the common practice of dissecting a film to unravel every plot hole or paradox. Most films have them, some worse than others, and ultimately that reminds me of when people care more about the Hi-Fi than they do about the music itself.
Anyway. As you were
Frog, stop.
This thread is about Interstellar not about me. The clue is in the title.
Just give your opinion on the movie - let's compare notes.
Explain why the films work for you. You don't even have to consider anything I have said.
Let's talk about the movie.
Indeed.
Why it works?
Well, I was transfixed both by the visuals and the excellent acting. I love a sci-fi more than any other genre and I like theoretical and risky subjects. Toying with time dilation and black holes, multiple dimensions and non-linear time is fascinating. The style of the film was majestic and grand and there was a beautiful message about human love and the willpower to survive come what may.
All in all a tour de force in film-making in my opinion.
Yes, there were aspects that could be construed as paradoxical, but then I think the physics of black holes, quantum mechanics and such like is on the face of it, paradoxical. So I let any worries like that slide.
It was bold, beautiful and mesmerising. I'll be watching again this week as I have the blue ray.
fr0g said:Thompsonuxb said:fr0g said:Thompsonuxb said:fr0g said:Thompsonuxb said:fr0g said:Thompsonuxb said:
Too many flaws makes the post hard to read for me.
?
On an international forum one should be flexible when reading this is not an exam for grammar - instead you choose to quibble over errors - at no point addressing any point in the post?
If you have no idea what I'm on about, move on.
The thread is clearly marked with a spoiler banner - pls do not enter or read if this impedes your enjoyment of the film.
I was only responding to Vlads post.
Sense of humour bypass when you were younger perhaps?
As to your points, I have only watched the film once, have not got a photographic memory and thus feel inadequately qualified to answer them.
I must say though, when you start picking so deeply you also start not enjoying. I guess it's similar in nature to Hifi enthusiasts rather than music enthusiasts.?
?
You've only watched the film once so don't feel qualified to respond....
Would it have killed you to just say that?
My response would be a simple 'ok'....
But even so, your last paragraph makes little sense.
My opinion on the film does not have any reflection on how I enjoy watching movies nor listening to music.
Do I need a sense of humour to get the point you're trying to make. ...seriously?
Quite obviously.
A sense of humour and a modicum of logical thinking.
The original reply was a joke, using "irony" as a tool. i.e. The post you did complaining about flaws was full of flaws...Understand?
The last paragraph was a general comment on the common practice of dissecting a film to unravel every plot hole or paradox. Most films have them, some worse than others, and ultimately that reminds me of when people care more about the Hi-Fi than they do about the music itself.?
Anyway. As you were
?
Frog, stop.
This thread is about Interstellar not about me. The clue is in the title.
Just give your opinion on the movie - let's compare notes.
Explain why the films work for you. You don't even have to consider anything I have said.
Let's talk about the movie.
Indeed.
Why it works?
Well, I was transfixed both by the visuals and the excellent acting. I love a sci-fi more than any other genre and I like theoretical and risky subjects. Toying with time dilation and black holes, multiple dimensions and non-linear time is fascinating. The style of the film was majestic and grand and there was a beautiful message about human love and the willpower to survive come what may.
All in all a tour de force in film-making in my opinion.
Yes, there were aspects that could be construed as paradoxical, but then I think the physics of black holes, quantum mechanics and such like is on the face of it, paradoxical. So I let any worries like that slide.
It was bold, beautiful and mesmerising. I'll be watching again this week as I have the blue ray.
Ok
I have to admit I missed all that. Watched it again and I see were he sent back the co-ordinates now. I still cannot work out how he put the solution of the quantum equation on the second hand of the watch using binary.
And is daughters realisation it was him who was trying to contact her was hokum .
Still seeing potholes in the film and the 'acting' sound,effects and picture were meh.
The end was still silly imo.
But where intelligent sc-fi is concerned I'm more a District9 kinda person. So I'll put it down to taste
eggontoast
Well-known member
Well, I finally got around to watching this. All I can say is, that's three hours of my life I'll never get back.
Pretty average, bordering on silly by the end. Acting was good, special effects OK, story started off well and gradually got worse (bordering on laughable) as the film progressed. Shame really, could have been really good.
Pretty average, bordering on silly by the end. Acting was good, special effects OK, story started off well and gradually got worse (bordering on laughable) as the film progressed. Shame really, could have been really good.
What I liked best was the story how we wish to escape our evolutionary chains by spreading our wings in the cosmos. However, the protagonist learns that evolution exists beyond the savanna, beyond our imagination and the capability of our senses, beyond time and space.
And Matt Damon's cameo made me chuckle.
And Matt Damon's cameo made me chuckle.
bigboss
Moderator
Remember it's a Christopher Nolan film. That's his style of film making, of leaving viewers a bit perplexed and figuring things out themselves.
Copy pasting from a website which could answer some of your questions:
The first and most important question people might still have after only a single viewing of Interstellar is how did this happen again? As it turns out, the beings that sent Cooper and NASA on this quest across the stars were not the hinted extraterrestrial (or divine) life that the characters all expected them to be, but rather human beings from the future. While we never see the fifth-dimensional “they,” it is helpfully (perhaps too much so) explained via telecommunication between Coop and TARS that they are humans from our very distant future who will one day master the use of gravity and the quantum mechanics needed to time travel with the ease that you use your phone to jump around your musical library.
Through whatever gravitational method imaginable, they have built for Cooper this visual representation of a “library” with only one special collection: the life of his daughter Murph.
The purpose? So, that he can pass along the data required for Murphy to save humanity. She realized earlier on Earth that Professor Brand’s equation was flawed, but the schematics that TARS took on the internal quantum mechanics of the black hole—when he first plunged into darkness—will fill in the gap. With this missing information, Murph will have what is necessary for mankind to technologically master gravity (and presumably time travel one day). Cooper shares this intelligence with her via Morse Code first through her bookshelf and eventually in the watch he gave her before he left Earth.
Thematically, the real importance of this scene is Cooper realizing, much to his belated sorrow, that he has become a true “ghost” in his daughter’s life and that in his drive to do something important, he missed his daughter’s childhood, not to mention everything else. In a sort of nifty reversal of the “third dream state” in Inception—the endless dream space where Leonardo DiCaprio and Marion Cotillard spent an eternity in the blink of an eye—Cooper in a few days missed decades of his daughter’s life. Whether as a husband or a father, the rules of time always end up seeming to devastate the best intentions of Christopher Nolan male protagonists.
Still, Interstellar is a far more hopeful movie than his previous work, as it is implicitly a validation of the power of love between a father and daughter. This mission was never about finding another habitable world, at least not fully. The futuristic humans knew that it was Murphy Cooper who saved them with an equation, and they made sure that she could do it by communicating with her in the only language that is universal: a parent’s love. Cooper was brought here, so that he and TARS could traverse the black hole, and share its secrets with the brilliance of his daughter.
Granted, there is a time travel paradox in this, like so much with science fiction, which ultimately suggests that humanity only survived because Cooper was sent by future beings into this black hole to communicate with Murph, thereby necessitating Cooper having already made the journey before “they” first summoned him with gravitational anomalies, but…does your head hurt yet? In the end, another Matthew McConaughey character from premium cable may have been right all along: time is a circle.
Copy pasting from a website which could answer some of your questions:
The first and most important question people might still have after only a single viewing of Interstellar is how did this happen again? As it turns out, the beings that sent Cooper and NASA on this quest across the stars were not the hinted extraterrestrial (or divine) life that the characters all expected them to be, but rather human beings from the future. While we never see the fifth-dimensional “they,” it is helpfully (perhaps too much so) explained via telecommunication between Coop and TARS that they are humans from our very distant future who will one day master the use of gravity and the quantum mechanics needed to time travel with the ease that you use your phone to jump around your musical library.
Through whatever gravitational method imaginable, they have built for Cooper this visual representation of a “library” with only one special collection: the life of his daughter Murph.
The purpose? So, that he can pass along the data required for Murphy to save humanity. She realized earlier on Earth that Professor Brand’s equation was flawed, but the schematics that TARS took on the internal quantum mechanics of the black hole—when he first plunged into darkness—will fill in the gap. With this missing information, Murph will have what is necessary for mankind to technologically master gravity (and presumably time travel one day). Cooper shares this intelligence with her via Morse Code first through her bookshelf and eventually in the watch he gave her before he left Earth.
Thematically, the real importance of this scene is Cooper realizing, much to his belated sorrow, that he has become a true “ghost” in his daughter’s life and that in his drive to do something important, he missed his daughter’s childhood, not to mention everything else. In a sort of nifty reversal of the “third dream state” in Inception—the endless dream space where Leonardo DiCaprio and Marion Cotillard spent an eternity in the blink of an eye—Cooper in a few days missed decades of his daughter’s life. Whether as a husband or a father, the rules of time always end up seeming to devastate the best intentions of Christopher Nolan male protagonists.
Still, Interstellar is a far more hopeful movie than his previous work, as it is implicitly a validation of the power of love between a father and daughter. This mission was never about finding another habitable world, at least not fully. The futuristic humans knew that it was Murphy Cooper who saved them with an equation, and they made sure that she could do it by communicating with her in the only language that is universal: a parent’s love. Cooper was brought here, so that he and TARS could traverse the black hole, and share its secrets with the brilliance of his daughter.
Granted, there is a time travel paradox in this, like so much with science fiction, which ultimately suggests that humanity only survived because Cooper was sent by future beings into this black hole to communicate with Murph, thereby necessitating Cooper having already made the journey before “they” first summoned him with gravitational anomalies, but…does your head hurt yet? In the end, another Matthew McConaughey character from premium cable may have been right all along: time is a circle.
eggontoast
Well-known member
bigboss
Moderator
bigboss
Moderator
There have been experiments on particles that have been done that suggest actions taken in the future can directly change events in the past/present.
Retrocausality
Retrocausality
Native_bon
Well-known member
Your very patient to explain all, & good job at it. Everything that happens now, has happened before & will continue to happy for eternity. *man_in_love*bigboss said:
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram