That's pretty hard when the film, points you in that direction, as I said all along. It's still a good film, but it does detract from it.
Interstellar -- Trailer (Spoilers!)
- Thread starter Old Man
- Start date
That's pretty hard when the film, points you in that direction, as I said all along. It's still a good film, but it does detract from it.
That's funny isn't it. Someone in this very thread has claimed to have watched the movie several times and insists there was no implication of a love interest between the two, and Castiel is saying that not only was there an implication but it occured several times.
Then you have me; when I saw Cooper asking TARS about the love interest I thought "who's Edmunds?"
Haha!!
How does your theory explain these two Glaucus?
Only if you take Brands argument to go to Edmunds planet at face value, rather than consider her motives for doing that. Fundamentally she's pleading to save her love's life not stating how the universe works.
I don't know, perhaps books galling off a shelf etc, watches ticking in a very odd way. But no, you would ignore that as normal I suppose?
If it was just the speech then maybe, but it's still implied in several other areas. To me it very much came across as a terrible attempt at including it.
I think your point Glaucus is that the love element doesn't need to be included in the story.
I do agree that they could have easily removed that single 10 second scene and people like you wouldn't have had to roll their eyes. I personally thought it was yet another element that made the film fascinating, especially when you consider it in the context I expressed earlier;
I do agree that they could have easily removed that single 10 second scene and people like you wouldn't have had to roll their eyes. I personally thought it was yet another element that made the film fascinating, especially when you consider it in the context I expressed earlier;
Last edited:
my first inkling of a connection between Amelia Brand and Dr Edmund was in the first board meeting when they eventually recruited and explained things to Cooper, she was cagy about her reasons for going and looked uncomfortable when they discussed Mann and Edmunds.
Another reference was when the 12 planets were discussed, Amelia gives several references to Edmunds Planet, again when they choose Millers World it becomes apparent that Amelia has some connection to Dr Edmunds. What you and others are saying is correct as it is apparent that Amelia's underlying reason for leaving her father and going in the mission was to reunite with Edmunds, who we know from her conversation with Cooper back on Earth she worked with closely prior to his leaving and there was an emotional response when her father said they were chosen as they had no commitments.
I thought it was obvious and was surprised it took Cooper so long to realise it.
Another reference was when the 12 planets were discussed, Amelia gives several references to Edmunds Planet, again when they choose Millers World it becomes apparent that Amelia has some connection to Dr Edmunds. What you and others are saying is correct as it is apparent that Amelia's underlying reason for leaving her father and going in the mission was to reunite with Edmunds, who we know from her conversation with Cooper back on Earth she worked with closely prior to his leaving and there was an emotional response when her father said they were chosen as they had no commitments.
I thought it was obvious and was surprised it took Cooper so long to realise it.
But only because you've taken her speach as an explicit statement of how the universe works and then applied it to subsequent events. Brand actually tells you how the universe really works prior to this, the whole scene how the past being a ravine and the future being a mountain and you can go up and down between the two. It's entirely consistent with the interaction with the bedroom at the end of the film.
The film is about love or emotional connection with other people, the actual journey through space and so on is actually a just vehicle to convey that message.
Because you are taking it too literally. They're not saying that the "love" itself transcended space and time, they are saying its effect on the characters involved was so strong, that it influenced the actions they took. The actions themselves are what transcended space and time, where it was at all times at once in Murph's room sending her messages.
Again, I'm well aware of this. That speech and other parts of the film where not needed. It did not need to introduce a new theory. She can quite happily play the love card without introducing some rubbish new theory. And as that off course I have taken it for what it is, as in any other context it is surplus to requirement. She could have done a 10minute speech about love, without trying to introduce a new theory.
The scene failed hard.
Glaucus, what about Amelia?
She was denied her original choice. Her ability to make the correct decision was revoked, but she was specifically trained to be the astronaut to make that decision. If Cooper hadn't suspected the connection between her and Edmunds then he wouldn't have interfered with the element (love) that was being used to guide them to the correct decision.
During the entire film she's the rock, all about the mission and everything else is secondary but allows another element influence her decision amongst a selection of viable options.
Don't you think the love element works rather well there? Especially given the fact that Edmunds planet was the correct choice.
She was denied her original choice. Her ability to make the correct decision was revoked, but she was specifically trained to be the astronaut to make that decision. If Cooper hadn't suspected the connection between her and Edmunds then he wouldn't have interfered with the element (love) that was being used to guide them to the correct decision.
During the entire film she's the rock, all about the mission and everything else is secondary but allows another element influence her decision amongst a selection of viable options.
Don't you think the love element works rather well there? Especially given the fact that Edmunds planet was the correct choice.
Last edited:
That's making it too simplistic. The underlying message isn't that 'love' transcends space and time..but that emotional connections are not subject to physical and temporal limitations. Not just love for another human being, but the emotional connection between humanity and itself, its home world, the universe itself and most importantly humanities emotional imperative to expand and explore, not only what we see around us but what we are, who we are, why we are...and how that imperative drives humanity both as a species and as individuals...thus we see humanity striving to save itself, individuals striving to save each other, and the principle characters trying to save their family and loved ones. We also see examples of hurdles to this, the starvations, the dying earth, limitations placed on education, the revisionist history taught to children and the struggle that characters such as Cooper and his Daughter have to strive to shake off those imposed limitations, to stretch themselves, to look outward for the answers, and ultimately by doing so find answers to those inward questions. That is what the movie is trying to show us, that we are multifaceted, we will find the truth inside ourselves by seeking the truth outside of ourself.
This is not about 'love' but about humanity itself.
You may think this is all poppycock and nonsense, in which case the film isn't for you. You take from it what you can.
Last edited:
Love yes, as I said many times. I dint actually think you understand what we have been discussing. Especially as I have said love plays a role in the film many times.
And if course it was love affecting her choice. Cooper made the correct choice on the data, as he well knew.
And if course it was love affecting her choice. Cooper made the correct choice on the data, as he well knew.
Again haven't said anything different.
jokester understands, it has nothing to do with this. It has everything to do with Amelia trying to introduce some new "scientific" theory based on love and then implied/reference in several other areas, this is not needed, goes against the rest of the film, and as such detracts several points from the film, hence 7/10
Last edited:
But that's the thing. She's not introducing a new theory. She's trying to persuade two, rational thinking scientists that going to his planet is the better choice despite the evidence to the contrary, purely because she is in love with the guy that went there, she is put on the spot by Cooper revealing she's in love with him and she has to come up with something that is irrational at which point the decision is finalised.
She even tells Cooper immediately after that scene that she will expect the same rationality from him if they get in the position of him having to chose over his children or the human race.
I'm not saying that at all. You've got it into your head that it's a theory of how the universe works in the film and then applied that to subsequent scenes in the film and then found it doesn't work. There's a reason for that. It's not what that scene is about at all, it's about establishing the irrationality of love and making choices from the heart rather than the head.
We aren't going to agree on this, watching the film, I came away very much feeling that's what the director was trying to do and failing. As said it wasn't just her speach either, all though that's the part that explained it.
The reason Amelia Brand goes on the mission is because of that connection to Wolf Edmund. You are reading too much into that portion of the narrative, it is another device to underpin the multifaceted nature of human emotion, this gives a more personal perspective to human motivations, whereas others (including Coopers reasoning) give a broader scope (with Edmund himself giving up his personal emotional connection for the 'greater' connection he had to the human race)
This scene was important insofar as it underlines both her and Coopers rationalisation of their mission and the irrational nature of humanity. It is an example of that dichotomy we all live with and that is inherent in humanity.