Interstellar is such guff. It could have been interesting, but it disappeared up its 5th dimension.
What film did you watch last night?
- Thread starter Richeh
- Start date
Interstellar is such guff. It could have been interesting, but it disappeared up its 5th dimension.
Couldn't of put it better myself...
The stupid monolithic robots ....desperate to make a 2001 intertexual reference was just cringe...
I could go on and rip it apart more but I won't...interstellar doesn't deserve such wasted energy
Give me (Gravity spoiler)
Sandra Bullock using a fire extinguisher as a rocket
Any day of the week
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 22 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 28,398
- Location
- Boston, Lincolnshire
Lego Batman.
Both me and the daughter loved it. Visuals impressed me the most. You really do think it is stop motion. 9/10
Also the trailer for Cars 3 got me pumped.
Both me and the daughter loved it. Visuals impressed me the most. You really do think it is stop motion. 9/10
Also the trailer for Cars 3 got me pumped
.
La La Land
Other than Emma Stone's acting (which is the only part in Kermode's review I agree with - "she's terrific"), I didn't find anything else of note in it at all. Gosling looked out of place and was completely showed up by Stone opposite him. There were the occasional snippets of dance (although nothing new or original on this front) and just when you thought any of these snippets would turn in to something great they simply ended. The jazz / piano work was mostly lethargic and standard fare as was the tale itself, which was six bags of sugar sweet. It constantly gave nods back to the golden days of dance musicals, but for me it was more like the nods you make when you fall asleep accidentally.
3/10
Other than Emma Stone's acting (which is the only part in Kermode's review I agree with - "she's terrific"), I didn't find anything else of note in it at all. Gosling looked out of place and was completely showed up by Stone opposite him. There were the occasional snippets of dance (although nothing new or original on this front) and just when you thought any of these snippets would turn in to something great they simply ended. The jazz / piano work was mostly lethargic and standard fare as was the tale itself, which was six bags of sugar sweet. It constantly gave nods back to the golden days of dance musicals, but for me it was more like the nods you make when you fall asleep accidentally.
3/10
Caporegime
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 76,060
- Location
- Wish i was in a Ramen Shop Counter
The choose life speech was good, however I felt that they did that because they had to or something that the 1st film did so successfully and they ought to do it again but updated.
To be fair...I was pretty bored for the first half hour of the movie.
Last edited:
It really is not that poor, I very nearly wrote a paper about it, but passed and gave a presentation (to academics) on 2001.
It has faults, but it is certainly not a bad film.
It was always on a hiding to nothing being compared to 2001, as most science fiction films are though.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
I understand this, but ultimately to me that is not a full story, that is the precursor to another film in which there is a real 'story' going on.
Like I said, it just felt like it was missing the next part. We gave you the code, now we need you to build a machine or, something. Maybe if you compare it to say Contact, it felt like the whole thing built up to giving Foster the code... then forgot what the code was for. Can you imagine Contact if they added a bunch of ridiculous brink of war crap as 12 nations fight to unravel the code, then in the end she is the only one who could unravel the code and instead of an actual message... she was told this code will help humans help the aliens 3000 years later, the end? Here's a code, break the code, the code opens up the rest of the story but here, the code was the story, it opened up to... the ending.
It just felt completely empty to me. There didn't seem to be any reason for the aliens (if they obviously know the humans and will interact with them later to help each other) acted in such an obviously mysterious, scare the population, almost cause a war kind of way. TO me it felt like that bad writing, where they had the idea of aliens delivering a code and decided that wasn't enough so lets make the aliens idiots and almost cause war and almost get themselves killed by acting in an obviously antagonistic way for the sake of it.
Rather than the code being one of several major plot points, and just the first of them, it became the entire plot and it felt like needless noise added around it to turn it into a feature length story.
Even stuff like the whole religious nut(presumably?) soldiers who tried to destroy the ship, just happening to work for the story, the army had no eyes on the machine at all times. They couldn't just go hey, you know that camera we have on the machine, the area underneath it and everything else all the time, can you have a look at that and see what is going on? How was everything not checked before being taken to the ship, etc. It was another this makes no sense but we wanted to make this idea work for the story so apparently security around the aliens suck and no one is watching the ship all the time.
It just felt completely empty to me. There didn't seem to be any reason for the aliens (if they obviously know the humans and will interact with them later to help each other) acted in such an obviously mysterious, scare the population, almost cause a war kind of way. TO me it felt like that bad writing, where they had the idea of aliens delivering a code and decided that wasn't enough so lets make the aliens idiots and almost cause war and almost get themselves killed by acting in an obviously antagonistic way for the sake of it.
Rather than the code being one of several major plot points, and just the first of them, it became the entire plot and it felt like needless noise added around it to turn it into a feature length story.
Even stuff like the whole religious nut(presumably?) soldiers who tried to destroy the ship, just happening to work for the story, the army had no eyes on the machine at all times. They couldn't just go hey, you know that camera we have on the machine, the area underneath it and everything else all the time, can you have a look at that and see what is going on? How was everything not checked before being taken to the ship, etc. It was another this makes no sense but we wanted to make this idea work for the story so apparently security around the aliens suck and no one is watching the ship all the time.
It was though. In 3000 years time they need earths help, and they must have seen that by then the human race would've been extinct.
The aliens landing and giving louise the power to see into the future so she could see a time when the whole planet was getting along and not wanting to kill each other about bs because of a phone call she made to the chinese general, to me was the whole point of the film, but I dunno maybe I missed the meaning of it entirely.
The aliens landing and giving louise the power to see into the future so she could see a time when the whole planet was getting along and not wanting to kill each other about bs because of a phone call she made to the chinese general, to me was the whole point of the film, but I dunno maybe I missed the meaning of it entirely.
Any many more films tackle the subject matter in much more effective ways imo.
Remove the aliens the time shifts....what have you got? Not a lot.
Yes, you missed the point of story entirely!
It's essentially about doing things even if you knew the outcome ie she still had a child even though she knew she would suffer the ultimate heart break of losing her and her husband.
The alien/sci-fi story is just the vehicle to ask the question, generally, would you still lead your life the way you did if you looked back. That's why critics love it. Superficially it's an average film if you remove her child from the story (and Amy Adams performance).
The alien/sci-fi story is just the vehicle to ask the question, generally, would you still lead your life the way you did if you looked back. That's why critics love it. Superficially it's an average film if you remove her child from the story (and Amy Adams performance).
No, I got all that...But it just failed to deliver it. Something far more powerful could have been achieved by another method. The film was just daft. The army, the tents the USA peace propaganda, The bumbling silly husband who's miscast and is not a mathematician, the wasted time spent on stuff that just doesn't matter to the actual plot. Amy Adams pointy nose,
Train to Busan
ohh **** off
What about it?
That's because all you want Is LaLa Land.
I personally have not seen it but after all the hype it better be bloody fantastic.