Interstellar rant


That's only a theory, but never the less the reason he didn't was because the advanced beings created a 5-D space inside so he wouldn't be crushed
Click to expand...
People seem to miss the fact that advanced aliens seemingly put a wormhole for the humans to escape. I think it's even mentioned in the film
We can assume aliens wanted the humans to reach the black hole and not the potentially life supporting planets.

everything that happens in the blackhole is because the aliens
 
Last edited:
Reeve said:
The opposite could also be argued, the human race would have endured without the black hole data through Plan B. Being able to manipulate mavity without being able to go to another planet in a reasonable timescale is useless. You could argue that the data would eventually allow them to make their own wormholes but creating their own wormholes wasn't suggested in the film.

The wormhole probably led there for both reasons.
Click to expand...

I just found it odd that there was a supermassive black hole. If the advanced humans can create a wormhole to anywhere, why not put it near the planet that can support life, not right next to a black hole, hence why I think the black hole was the point. Granted yes we need a planet but worm hole creation could be found as well.
 
XeNoN89 said:
The black hole bit is completely impossible though, you can't get anywhere near a black hole without being ripped apart by the mavity, let alone pass through to the centre
Click to expand...

The entire basis behind the film was that mavity could be used across space and time, thus, the future humans who had evolved to perceive more dimensions could control mavity around him. So a method of protecting him from a black hole WAS explained as part of the plot, the future beings could change the mavity around him thus allowing him and the robot to go into the black hole. Where they did the construct allowing him to perceive more dimensions may have been in the black hole, or elsewhere, they can control mavity and time and had the ability to move him through space and time.

Ultimately a story begins generally with the writer establishing some base facts about the universe, it's effectively our universe, or a alternative time line where the Nazi's won. In general 99% of stories are based in 'our' universe, often at a different point in space or time, thus we can take mavity, space, time, cars, general knowledge from our universe to be accurate. Taking Superman as an example we are also told he is from a different solar system and gains super powers under a yellow sun.

We are told explicitly take our world and add that a guy from a particular type of planet can act in this particular way here. So when he flies, that is fine, we've been told he can. When Lois falls from a building that is fine, that is normal in our universe.

Now taking Superman Returns, we are told(in more than just that film) that Kryptonite weakens and can kill Superman, and shown just being near it allows him to lose strength and get beaten up by normal humans, get stabbed and almost die.... he then proceeds to pick up a huge stinking rock filled with kryptonite and use his super strength at a level that would never have allowed him to be beaten up by those previous guys. That is an example of a film explaining how the universe within the story works, then utterly ignoring it when it wants to.


With Interstellar we are told this is our universe but A, mavity can be effected across time by beings who are able to perceive beyond the dimensions we currently can. Interstellar, afaik, doesn't 'break' those facts as established by the film, in that way the plot isn't BS or stupid and does follow science we know AND the bit that the film adds on about mavity.

Excellent film.
 
You cannot survive a blackhole. So the science is not solid.

I got the impression that the sheer vastness of blackhole was sorely understated too. I mean, no, just no. You do not simply 'orbit' a blackhole like it's nothing.

From what I've read (layman stuff), some of the physics that was initially panned (such as the tidal waves on the planet) would actually work when taking into account the fact that Gargantua is a rotating black hole, as opposed to non-rotating black hole. I forget the details on this though.

I understand that the visuals (bending of light around blackhole) is scientifically accurate too.

Time dilation is bona-fide solid science.

Also, the 5-Dimensional spacetime hidden behind the bookcase that you can float in as a tiny man, shout Murphy through and push books out - absolute bona fide science.
 
Last edited:
I've watched it 5 times now and love it. I didn't understand how mavity slows time down, so have researched that and learned something new. The only part of the movie I didn't like was the explanation around why the wormhole was there; I couldn't determine whether it was religious or whether they were alluding to the same creatures that created the construct at the end. And Jessica Chastain was just sublime as always.
 
George Hincapie said:
The only part of the movie I didn't like was the explanation around why the wormhole was there; I couldn't determine whether it was religious or whether they were alluding to the same creatures that created the construct at the end.
Click to expand...

It was put there by the humans of the future in an effort to save the humans in the present. Nothing religious.
 
Here is the interview where Jonathan Nolan states that the wormhole closes once Cooper returns through it: IGN Interview

So the idea with the film was that it was a wormhole that leads us to a place that creates an opportunity for us and then disappears. By the end of Cooper's journey, the wormhole is gone. It's up to us now to undertake the massive journey of spreading out across the face of our galaxy. Brand is still somewhere out there on the far side of the wormhole. The wormhole has disappeared entirely. It's gone.

IGN: And he has to try and get to Brand in this little ship?

Nolan: That's the idea.
Click to expand...
 
G-MAN2004 said:
^ That ruins it for me really. He's got absolutely no chance. :p
Click to expand...

And if that's the case then the logical conclusion is that the future humans comes from those that Brand has in all those test tubes...and who is going to give birth to them all?

She's going to be one busy lady! As far as she knows, she is the last human alive.
 
G-MAN2004 said:
^ That ruins it for me really. He's got absolutely no chance. :p
Click to expand...

Yeah, I don't get why they decided this was a good ending. How can he possibly get there in that little ship? And it's annoying the interviewer didn't follow up on that. And it would be a big blow to the people on the space station heading for the wormhole if it suddenly closed. It isn't actually shown closing in the film, so I guess you can dismiss it as "non-canon" but it's strange for Jonathan to say this after the film has been released.
 
Unless they can open a new wormhole using their new found understanding of mavity, I don't see how the space station, let alone coop in his tiny ship can get to the new planet, which is in another galaxy. Also, nothing in the movie indicates that the wormhole had collapsed. The teserract object inside the black hole collapsed but that was initiated by the future beings, who I assume then transported coop back to Saturn via the wormhole.

In any case, I pity the people who couldn't enjoy the movie due to these supposed flaws in the science presented by the movie. The purpose of sci-fi is to inspire awe through creative depictions of what may be possible, not present you with lecture on scientific fact. In this regard, the movie absolutely nailed it. It also happens to be one of the most beautifully shot movies I've ever seen, just majestic from start to finish.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom