re: The official Interstellar thread (spoilers)

How is the viewer supposed to understand the ghost and murph without the first 45 mins or the entire reason for taking the risk of the mission?!?

If there is any director out there who can tell a story in non-linear time, surely it is Christopher Nolan. Beginning the movie at liftoff would have made the whole movie 20x better.

Definitely, the most emotionally moving scene for me was when he saw the recordings from his kids, all grown up.

quote:

---

How is the viewer supposed to understand the ghost and murph without the first 45 mins or the entire reason for taking the risk of the mission?

---

I excepted the part re: the bookshelf/ghost; that backstory was necessary. The part about humanity being doomed could've been summed up in 2 minutes.

Otherwise, it was a huge block of the movie that was pretty useless IMO.

IMHO, there will be a professional film commentator or two that might argue that the film could have been better edited to make it shorter. I could be wrong.

IMHO, it's not a crazy idea to suggest that it could have been edited down to 2.5 hours instead of almost 3 hours.

Don't ask me how it might be done, I have no idea. I'm sure that Nolan was encouraged to seek ways of shortening the film, but, obviously he rebuffed the suggestion.

quote:

---

Do you usually get this worked up when someone disagrees with you?

---

Do you usually think that someone is worked up simply because they disagree with your opinion? That's juvenile.

I already said that this movie is based on the theoretical musings of various "scientists." I just questioned their ability to write a good movie, based on their beliefs, which are not proven, which are purely theoretical and even if they were facts, ruin the plot of this movie because of the plot structure.

If you have questions about that, I'm here to answer them. I'm not pretentious or projecting. I actually have an opinion and it involves flowery prose and kicking your willful, aggressively contentious hillbilly arse.

I just dont get people like you. It is a fricking movie. I enjoyed it and it brought some serious thought and conversation with the people I saw it with.

I rarely go to movies, and when i do, it is for entertainment.

Even though this film was inspired by Thorne, it is science FICTION. I will never understand how people get so pissy about a fiction film. It isnt real dude. Suspend belief, use your imagination and enjoy the damn film.

So you're worked up. Get over it.

quote:

---

So you're worked up. Get over it

---

im just enjoying

quote:

---

kicking your willful, aggressively contentious hillbilly arse. 

---

And laughing at incoherent dribble

quote:

---

I just questioned their ability to write a good movie, based on their beliefs, which are not proven, which are purely theoretical and even if they were facts, ruin the plot of this movie because of the plot structure.

---

quote:

---

I don't understand people like you who seem to think that if I didn't like every aspect of it, I must have hated it.

You are all defeating your own arguments. Just because a "scientist" or group thereof have contributed to or endorsed this movie does not mean that it's a good movie, or that every aspect of it is good. Scientific validation doesn't mean anything. It's a story, and this one, which I've already said is a visual and in other ways, a masterpiece, falls flat in the end, in my opinion.

---

You seem to be slightly hypocritical though. Your criticism is nearly identical to the early reviews that you made a point to post in an earlier thread. So your opinion seems to have been influenced by critics, just like their's was influenced by scientists. Your thoughts are no more independent than anyone else's; it's natural, but don't pretend otherwise.