- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: The official Interstellar thread (spoilers)
Posted on 11/10/14 at 10:07 am to jeff5891
Posted on 11/10/14 at 10:07 am to jeff5891
quote:
kip thorne has a whole chapter in his book "the science of interstellar" about the bootstrap paradox. You should read it before you call it lazy story telling.
I think Nolan fell into the trap many other writers have fallen into: he mixed two opposing time traveling philosophies in the same movie.
Primer or Lost - not both.
Y'all are arguing for the "Primer" approach whereas the movie actually shows and supports the "Lost" approach (ie bookshelf - you were always my ghost) until the very end - where a multi-dimensional approach became necessary to complete the story.
1
Posted on 11/10/14 at 10:10 am to theunknownknight
quote:you should write kip thorne a letter explaining your side
I think Nolan fell into the trap many other writers have fallen into: he mixed two opposing time traveling philosophies in the same movie.
Primer or Lost - not both.
Y'all are arguing for the "Primer" approach whereas the movie actually shows and supports the "Lost" approach (ie bookshelf - you were always my ghost) until the very end - where a multi-dimensional approach became necessary to complete the story
Posted on 11/10/14 at 10:12 am to jeff5891
I should. Except Kip didn't write Interstellar.
Posted on 11/10/14 at 10:13 am to rebeloke
I'm in the theater, movies starts in 18 minutes 
Posted on 11/10/14 at 10:14 am to Pilot Tiger
Take some Adderall, put in some ear plugs, turn your brain off, prep the feels, and report back
Posted on 11/10/14 at 10:26 am to jeff5891
quote:
exactly, I roll my eyes every time someone says Mann was a waste of time
This goes back to the conversation Cooper had with Brand about there not being any evil where they were going. Sure, nature can be frightening, but not evil. The only evil they encounter was the evil they brought with them, in this case, Dr. Mann's survival instincts.
One of my favorite themes of the movie.
This post was edited on 11/10/14 at 10:30 am
Posted on 11/10/14 at 10:30 am to MasterBetty
Great point.
Posted on 11/10/14 at 10:32 am to MasterBetty
Well if you wanna go all out with philosophy, the movie was gnostic at its core.
Nature is not evil. It just is. Humanity, through partial knowledge and self awareness has become evil thereby making the incomplete journey of self-awareness inherently evil.
True goodness is taking the next step, transcending this base knowledge with love - leading to the highest level of self awareness and completely conquering nature - thereby surviving.
ETA: which I might add is more than slightly pretentious and mildly stupid.
Nature is not evil. It just is. Humanity, through partial knowledge and self awareness has become evil thereby making the incomplete journey of self-awareness inherently evil.
True goodness is taking the next step, transcending this base knowledge with love - leading to the highest level of self awareness and completely conquering nature - thereby surviving.
ETA: which I might add is more than slightly pretentious and mildly stupid.
This post was edited on 11/10/14 at 10:34 am
Posted on 11/10/14 at 10:34 am to theunknownknight
Not reading the thread because I haven't seen it yet but what is the boards overall opinion of the film.
Posted on 11/10/14 at 10:35 am to BOSCEAUX
good to great
I think it fell just short of being great, but it left me emotionally drained though
I think it fell just short of being great, but it left me emotionally drained though
Posted on 11/10/14 at 10:36 am to BOSCEAUX
People who are pretty objective have rated it in the 70's out of 100.
You can ignore the rest - mostly "greatest ever rabble rabble" nonsense
You can ignore the rest - mostly "greatest ever rabble rabble" nonsense
This post was edited on 11/10/14 at 10:36 am
Posted on 11/10/14 at 10:36 am to theunknownknight
quote:
theunknownknight
Posted on 11/10/14 at 10:38 am to BOSCEAUX
The only imperfection (for me) was the pacing towards the end. Other than that, great movie.
N.D. Tyson seemed to enjoy it and was complimentary of the science and the scientists portrayed.
N.D. Tyson seemed to enjoy it and was complimentary of the science and the scientists portrayed.
Posted on 11/10/14 at 10:38 am to Salmon
Any nominations going to come from it?
Posted on 11/10/14 at 10:41 am to BOSCEAUX
special effects maybe
Mcconaughey may get a nomination, but he shouldn't win
Mcconaughey may get a nomination, but he shouldn't win
Posted on 11/10/14 at 10:42 am to BOSCEAUX
Jonathan Nolan will win an oscar for exceptional nepotism.
Posted on 11/10/14 at 10:42 am to BOSCEAUX
quote:
Any nominations going to come from it?
Cinematography
Posted on 11/10/14 at 10:45 am to Fewer Kilometers
quote:The love people have for this public figure is hilarious.
N.D. Tyson seemed to enjoy it and was complimentary of the science and the scientists portrayed.
Posted on 11/10/14 at 10:48 am to BOSCEAUX
I thought it was fantastic, but I guess you can ignore me because I liked it more than unknowknight.
Posted on 11/10/14 at 10:49 am to TreyAnastasio
quote:
I thought it was fantastic, but I guess you can ignore me because I liked it more than unknowknight.
Yeah, this dude is trying really hard to make sure that anybody that liked it too much should feel bad about themselves.
This post was edited on 11/10/14 at 10:51 am
Page 26 of 86
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News