 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Nov 13, 2014 - 5:24 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Mike_J
(Member)
|
I just got back from what I am convinced was about three days of my life watching Christopher Nolan's latest movie, Interstellar and frankly I'm very impressed I am still alive. Why? Because somewhere about the 19th hour into the movie, I seriously considered killing myself.
Let's be clear here; Interstellar is a movie which, at a basic level, is conceptionally a good idea but is executed so poorly at just about every level it really is just stunningly bad.
I can usually find at least something positive in even my least favourite movies, but with Interstellazzzzzz I really can't think of a single thing that I enjoyed. I can however think of loads of things which I thought were utterly terrible. Here are just a few;
Zimmer's score - absurdly overstated and constantly builidng to climaxes which do not support the on-screen action (one such scene being Cooper looking out of the Endurance's porthole, with the music swirling to such a degree I expected to see the face of God or something but in fact we just see.... space. Wow!).
Michael Caine getting 23 years older but looking totally identical to how he looked at the start of the film.
The dialogue - constantly drowned out by Zimmer's score or sound effects or both.
The same shot over the hull of the Ranger, repeated over and over. seriously, it reminded me of how the original Battlestar Galactica kept using the same stock shots of Vipers taking off.
The film's denouement; I won't spoil it here for those people who into self harming and want to see this film for themselves but the climatic resolution of the film goes on for 20 minutes, which is at least 17 minutes too long and seems like 17 days.
And it doesn't end there!! Even after that scene the film goes on and on and on. And on. And on.
The overall length of the film. I honestly think my house appreciated in value by about 30% for the amount of time I spent in the cinema today. I also swear to God it was Summer when I went in and now Xmas trees are in the shops.
I could go on but I won't. To be honest I should have know it was going to be like this; I thoughht Inception was pretty dull too and that all of Nolan's Batman films went on too long. But Interstellar intrinsically sounds like a good idea so I thought I'd give it a chance. I wish I had rather been sucked into a black hole than wasting a fair percentage of my life watching this piece of shit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Nov 14, 2014 - 8:57 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Ado
(Member)
|
He has a lot of skill as a director, in technical areas planning shots and action, and getting a good cast. But being frugal with his story and the edit is not one of his skills, all of his movies run too long, and sometimes the germ of the story that was a little interesting at the start is hammered to the point that I do not care anymore. I felt that way about his second, and especially third Batman films. The third picture especially just drones on and on.
He would serve the story better to trim his movies down to 2 hours or less, but I think he falls in love with his little boutique moments of epiphanies he loves with his characters, and he cannot cut it out. His stories are a lot structured around pushing a character(s) between moments of supposed epiphany or emotional peak experience, and the effect of this cumulatively, while interesting in single moments, is rather distancing and wearying.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All together now:
