Jump to content

Interstellar - Christopher Nolan Directing - Nov 2014

FishyFish

By FishyFish,
in Film, TV & Radio

 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

I've just watched this for a second time.

 

I think it's phenomenal. Though I am absolutely obsessed with black holes and the whole space/time thing.

 

Apart from the above, it's the father daughter relationship, the whole vastness of it, how irrelevant we truly are, and I suppose Matthew McConaughey. I think he's great.

 

I'm going to get An Illustrated Brief History Of Time by Stephen Hawking, and The Science Of Interstellar by Kip Thorne. I just can't think of anything that matters more, and also makes us seem so ridiculously insignificant than this topic matter. It's so mind bending yet so fascinating. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
kerraig UK

kerraig UK

Posted
Posted

There's so much I don't like about the film but there is something about it that I keep coming back to. A strange nostalgic ambience where it feels like what movies used to feel like. The grand canvas, the heightened emotion, the huge set pieces, the pontificating about life and the universe. It feels like the filmmakers really care about giving you an experience to make you think and feel. Even though in places it drops a clanger and narratively it doesn't quite hang together it's a film I can watch again and again and find it a warm blanket of comfort.

6
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 5 months later...
Tezcatlipoca

Tezcatlipoca

Posted
Posted
37 minutes ago, sandman said:

Watched this today for the second time.  It's brilliant, even better on the second watch. In fact, I think it might be a masterpiece, but I need more viewings to be sure. 

 

I think it's Nolan's most flawed film, but I love it. It's one of only two films I've seen at the BFI IMAX (the other being Gravity).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 4 months later...
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

I've still not read the Kip Thorne book on this, but I saw this today on Reddit:

 

 

There's some interesting bits in the thread too. Like Joe because of the movie at least three science papers were put together and published. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Distinct muttering

Distinct muttering

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, RB said:

I've still not read the Kip Thorne book on this, but I saw this today on Reddit:

 

 

There's some interesting bits in the thread too. Like Joe because of the movie at least three science papers were put together and published. 

Where as jumping into a black hole to rearrange a book shelf is totally fine.

4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
29 minutes ago, Hean Dog said:

Where as jumping into a black hole to rearrange a book shelf is totally fine.

 

Someone didn't read. 

 

TLDR - The most unscience science bit in the movie is the tunnel after they enter the wormhole. There wouldn't be a tunnel. Entering the wormhole would bring you through it immediately. 

 

The book shelf bit has a scientific basis, as ludicrous as it seems initially.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
K

K

Posted
Posted

The most unscientifically accurate bit of the film is the protagonist managing to get out of a black hole, which as I understand it is number one on the list of things is it impossible to do. That, and having flying glaciers and a star system with three inhabitable worlds orbiting a supermassive black hole.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TehStu

TehStu

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, K said:

The most unscientifically accurate bit of the film is the protagonist managing to get out of a black hole, which as I understand it is number one on the list of things is it impossible to do. That, and having flying glaciers and a star system with three inhabitable worlds orbiting a supermassive black hole.

 

I dunno, there are exoplanets around pulsars and vanilla neutron stars. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Unofficial Who

Unofficial Who

Posted
Posted

The Kip Thorne book is essential reading especially if you're interested in black holes. I went from not understanding them at all to feeling like I could at least understand how it would look like it did in the movie and how planets could orbit them.

 

The bookcase stuff is more fanciful. It does sort of point to an alternate post-human ending

The machines that end up surviving the mission possibly being the start of a machine race that ends up building a multi-dimensional structure to make sure their savior gets them off Earth so that they can be created.

2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted
13 hours ago, K said:

The most unscientifically accurate bit of the film is the protagonist managing to get out of a black hole, which as I understand it is number one on the list of things is it impossible to do. That, and having flying glaciers and a star system with three inhabitable worlds orbiting a supermassive black hole.

 

 

 

 

No. 

 

He doesn't just nip out because he's had enough. He doesn't slip out by chance. He is out because they wanted to let him out. Granted, there is no reason to do so besides sentimentality. But if they can, why not?

 

And which three habitable worlds are you referring to? What relevance would the supermassive black hole have? Of course there is the distortion of time, but if you're there you're there, and so it matters much less. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Alex W.

Alex W.

Posted
Posted
31 minutes ago, Don Wiskerando said:

Also the most theories indicate that blackholes are in fact 'leaky' under certain conditions.

 

Leaky to, like, thermal noise and entropy. Not dudes. (Although as was just pointed out, the whole plot of the movie spins around an idea that renders these physics quibbles meaningless.)

 

Still chuffed for the SFX designer who co-authored a paper with one of their physics advisers on the back of the movie's R&D.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
K

K

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, TehStu said:

I dunno, there are exoplanets around pulsars and vanilla neutron stars. 

 

Planets, yeah. Inhabitable planets? I'm not sure I buy that. The supermassive black hole would be emitting a LOT of radiation, Matt Damon would have been cooked in minutes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
K

K

Posted
Posted
29 minutes ago, RB said:

 

No. 

 

He doesn't just nip out because he's had enough. He doesn't slip out by chance. He is out because they wanted to let him out. Granted, there is no reason to do so besides sentimentality. But if they can, why not?

 

And which three habitable worlds are you referring to? What relevance would the supermassive black hole have? Of course there is the distortion of time, but if you're there you're there, and so it matters much less. 

 

Thats kind of my problem with the film, to be honest. Removing someone from the inside of a black hole is a godlike power, it's an almost literal deus ex machina. Or deus ex cavum, anyway. It felt like they broke the laws of physics for sentimental reasons, which is a cop out if you ask me. 

 

And the three habitable worlds are the three they explore in the film. There's one with liquid water (which sounds pretty habitable to me, even if it's subject to intense time dilation), there's the one Matt Damon lives on (which is borderline, but he survives on there for several years, so it can't be that bad) and the one Anne Hathaway colonises at the end. I struggle to believe that the planets around a black hole would be anything other than cold black husks, sterilised by intense gamma and X-ray radiation. 

1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
K

K

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, TehStu said:

True. They all died of cancer a week a the film ended, perhaps.

 

Matt Damon scienced the shit out of it.

 

A week! They'd look like Emil from Robocop after ten minutes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Unofficial Who

Unofficial Who

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, K said:

 

Planets, yeah. Inhabitable planets? I'm not sure I buy that. The supermassive black hole would be emitting a LOT of radiation, Matt Damon would have been cooked in minutes. 

 

They sort of cover that in the book. The planet that he's on has a super elliptical orbit. He would have been screwed long before the radiation killed him.

 

It's been a while since I read the book but I think they suggested that at the closest part of the orbit the solid clouds would have melted and his little base / sleep coffin would have fallen into the dense gas and then end up crushed. He'd probably worked that out as well. Something a lot of people miss from the first viewing is his talk of there being solid ground with valleys and lifeforms are complete lies.

2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Unofficial Who

Unofficial Who

Posted
Posted
43 minutes ago, K said:

 

And the three habitable worlds are the three they explore in the film. There's one with liquid water (which sounds pretty habitable to me, even if it's subject to intense time dilation)

 

The water one would be difficult to live on due to there being no ground above water and the little problem of

the planet wide tidal wave that is constantly washing the face of the planet clean due to the tidal effects of being so close to a black hole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
stefcha

stefcha

Posted
Posted

Christ alive, you'd think it was a fucking factual documentary the way its being dissected*, and now we're onto the semantics and definition of the word "habitable". Suspend disbelief, enjoy film. Or not, whatever.

 

 

* and let's be honest, any mention of "scientific accuracy" in any of these things is a largely a load of bollocks to begin with, so it's hardly a surprise there are holes to be picked everywhere is it.

9
Link to comment
Share on other sites
K

K

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, kerraig UK said:

But isn't that the entire point of the movie? That love is an actual force that can manipulate and influence other forces?

 

I'll let you know when I stop vomiting. Shouldn't be long now.

 

*pukes green, then red, then black, dies*

5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.

  I accept