Interstellar


When drought, dust storms and the extinction of plants lead humanity to a food crisis, a team of researchers and scientists is sent through the wormhole (which presumably connects the region of space-time via long distance) to travel to surpass former restrictions for space travel of the person and find a planet with suitable human conditions.

Director:
  • Christopher Nolan

Stars:
Release Date: 2014-11-07
IMDb icon 8.6/10
  • Country: CA, GB, US
  • Language: English
  • Budget: $165,000,000
  • Revenue: Cumulative Worldwide $677,471,339
reviews
Dionis Theodora
08 February 2020 | 03:58

Don't know where is groaning at this film Christopher Nolan. Especially comments like "the most truthful film with the point of view of physics." If the movie uses things like black hole journey space time, not mean the average viewer will climb to "a Brief history of the universe" to get a definition of these concepts. With a cinematic point of view, "interstellar" is between "Gravity" "Martian" — voltage clear video brought by the maximum, but semantic holes picked up my respect.

For science fiction there is a huge list of ideas on how can show the future of mankind. And most of the works we, like Tyler Durden, tend to self-destruction. So and here the brothers Nolan has populated the planet with corn (Nikita approves), on the starving time, from time dropping a bomb on technological progress in any sense put the bolt, and children school history on textbooks, where flight moon — nothing like a fake. In this world, and living former NASA pilot named Cooper.

Well here, Cooper the chance falls on the secret base of NASA. And him this base say — Oh, man, we you and have been waiting for! Come on, pack up, fly in space to find a new planet to resettle. And Cooper is sent in to the expedition, not even saying goodbye properly with my daughter, because she turned on the mode obizhenku and will not want to let go of dad, but had.

After the layer traveling in the void space under the masterpiece soundtrack by Hans Zimmer we are missing one detail. Of the planet for "test dwelling" are not in the Solar system, and elsewhere in the Universe, where you can get through a wormhole. The origin of the "holes" in store for an unexpected turn, there include the phenomenon that the daughter of a Cooper before leaving said a "Ghost" in their rooms with wardrobe books loose. A while the focus is on tour. In companions command of the Land given in using robots in static mode reminiscent of those of monoliths "Space Odyssey". And according to what they have a semblance of artificial intelligence, why are they could not send? Problems with data transmission would be exactly did not appear, and so NASA violated their rule selection in a team of people without families, compromising the father of two children and the daughter of the chief Professor.

When the screen shows the planet, then the question about the nature of their creation occurs. How would the universe still not really studied, so all sorts of fantastic processes on the planets is quite likely. I only I doubt that one of the planets, which is almost not the edge of a black hole, so and would remain, but not be delayed into the unknown. This planet was created, perhaps, for the most dramatic scenes of the film — when the heroes land on it, take a look around and leave on the world they spent a couple of hours. In real-world it is 23 year! And further show a crying Cooper, who views the messages from children and watching they grew up so quick about it.

I don't want to analyze the state of the characters for the sake of empathy to them, but of all the teams only the main character in performance Matthew McConaughey and it turns out to be supportive. For his adventures he faced with many, but has continuing mission of basking inside idea return. Without the emotional breakdowns Bradley is not have done, but it can be understood. is Michael Caine, Anne Hatheway, David Gyasi of the team NASA though driven by high purpose but because of the logic of their action no. going to take them seriously. With Murph, Cooper's daughter, the creators actually clocked an extra layer of drama that only worked due to the acting Jessica Chastain. I understand why a ten-year Murph was upset, but when it became a physicist and also began to explore the possibilities of salvation of mankind, but all these years to be offended on the father? The girl from the category of "offended because guy hang from army the period of mobilization".

At its core, "interstellar" is reminiscent of the response of the student from boards questions paragraph. And now I presume to criticize the painting for the failure, with this task perfectly coped Ridley Scott with its "Martian". The whole scenario of the journey of Cooper and his company was built on the scientific works of Nobel laureate for physics Kip Thorne. Intervened rather the vision of the Nolan brothers, who, despite his passion for the wrapped up the story, tried to tell the story in simple language. But it only shows that we — and the error happened on all, even called a "genius". There is nothing supernatural.

Betteanne Robinia
23 December 2016 | 10:48

"Part of what is happening in the film corresponds to a scientific truth, part — applies to reasonable assumptions, and rest — speculation."

Kip Thorne

As you can see, Kip Thorne, chief scientific consultant of the film "interstellar" in openly acknowledges the fact that not all this picture is absolute truth. And I say about it just because on any forums or public servers where you wouldn't discussing this film, all the views are reduced to two polar choices: either all of the truth or absolute nonsense. To read similar statements written by people, most of whom do not even have bother to open any book on physics or an encyclopedia, have a little tired. All suddenly became professors of science. Guys, this science fiction. Fantastic. Here is the key word. Just in contrast fantasy komiksoidny hits this fantastic picks for the basis of any scientifically proven facts. Not invent of planet of dinosaurs with the distant universe with the Trident and other superduperman, and comes from some known to the world of phenomena.

Of course a lot of assumptions. There is a deliberate assumption, no which would collapse the logic of the narrative, and there's outright guessing and speculation. But without the movie anywhere. To recall the great my opinion Gibson's historical epic Braveheart. When Mel filmed a battle scene at Stirling, he deliberately showed the bridge. And because the battle is called as "battle at Stirling bridge", because this bridge was an important strategic element due to which the Scots won then. It is Gibson not just some minor detail missed, and essentially removed from chess is not not much not the Board itself. Reproached him because of it? If so, very few. And more here harder. There history and here we had to show that us or known full or not know all in effect of primitive in our development. So that, Yes, fiction enough assumptions enough.

BUT! Enough also the scientific basis. I'm not going to go into details of the end review film, not a scientific treatise, but all those terms that are cursing right and left the characters, they are not the ceiling was taken, it is an integral part of the topic. If we believe that black holes exist, then concepts such as "event horizon", "gravitational lensing", "singularity", "the curvature of space-time" and other than you can stay in side. If about them. nothing said that when exactly would say that consultant no Pile of torn, and the authors came to their work very lightly. You have to use the terminology, but not the purpose to show off, distribute more abstruse words, like people shavaet. No. Just by the way. When you make a film about hackers programmers, they also everywhere is to insert words like "scripts", "refactoring", "debug" and so on. Because these people communicate. They it is close.

So no need to lash out with foam of his the makers of "Interstellar", they say, you all distorted. They took fantastic film, which, incidentally, was hatched in their plans about ten years. Not to be judged one-sided. Movie — there is a movie, it's art, not a documentary with the discovery channel. &Nbsp;by the way he Kip Thorne in his book mentioned this here moment. When project was joined by Christopher Nolan, he (in the sense of Nolan) came to thorn with his vision of a scene of the scenario. If Thorne saw that Chris proposed development is simply impossible even in theory, it is immediately reported. But Christopher Nolan was inflexible, forcing Kip Thorne as it is necessary to twist brains, in order to provide the science to this particular scene. And despite that just in such situatsii often had to invent something, Thorne tried to simulate this situation, which at least in theory, but still could be. It is I mean that part of this film is really based on certain scientific findings or reasonable assumptions. The creators really tried, did a great job, and that thanks to them. What did it happen?

The story not retell I will. Suffice it to say that is quite an interesting story with intertwining eternal values like love of father to daughter, can save the world. The story of the journey to other worlds, to other galaxies, to something unknown. And no matter how this seems plausible in the eyes of the gifted viewers. All so captures that after watching "Interstellar" I was really drawn to meet these all black holes and the gravitation closer. Sure, I'm not be one and if dozens or even hundreds of young and not so young people after this film will open the books or references physics begin to expand your knowledge in the field of science, it does is that the film was done as a minimum of one task? One, but a very serious and worthy works of art.

The cast is excellent. McConaughey is quite on the spot. The scene where his character looks at writing letters of their children who had to grow up three times while he been through a couple of hours at the Miller's planet, one of the best. Especially when Cooper saw an adult daughter. I myself almost burst into tears. And those who call the scene some snotty boring, go to the forest. You are either hypocrites, or unfeeling cynics. I not way or who of you. Anne Hathaway, too, the picture does not spoil, only the hairstyle is not much, especially if you remember what it beauty appeared in the movie "Get smart". But it is carping to appearance Dr. Amelia actress portrayed with dignity. Michael Caine, who played the father of Amelia, Dr. Brant is a regular actor in the paintings of Nolan. To see him was very nice. As well as and Matt Damon, who for recent years has been rummaged through space here twice, including "the Martian". Jessica Chastain and Mackenzie Foy, who played the daughter of a Cooper in the name Murph in 35 10 years respectively, also looked quite decent, fine girl like generally pleased.

Shot pretty good. Pavilion shooting inside the vehicle or in the house on the farm nothing special he struck, and the Miller's planet and Mann was nothing. And so the scenes in space, all these flights are in a black hole, inside and outside, along the wormhole at warped space inside the sphere, — that's cool. Music Zimmer many do not like, show some kind of painful and depressing. Not agree, the soundtrack is just great. What the result?

A good science fiction. Entangled plot, good acting, good staging, coupled with great music, a little science and a little bit of fantastic fiction, — a great result on the output. Of course the event in the world of cinema. To viewing recommended.

Mellicent Battista
19 November 2014 | 01:44

"To understand the true about Us forget about That the Master just says difficult and Apprentice — things about the simple."

I don't be original if I say that Christopher Nolan one of the best Directors of our time and the most interesting factor in its success is not cash and ability in simple language to talk about a very deep and the same time, subtle things, couching them in action and phrases heroes such phrases that can only go from the heart, truthful, at times naive but most importantly sincere.

But about all order.

The film is not claim the particular originality. Planet earth is on the brink of extinction, a group of astronauts is sent on a quest to save humanity and then the list. I personally like such stories a priori, and already set up for an increased element of presence. But in this film there is one plus, so that needed "Oblivion" and for example, "Prometheus", and it is the craftsmanship and my opinion competent and relevant philosophical subtext, allowing to sincerely empathize with the heroes, turning a blind eye to the possible scientific or the scenario is not exactly. It with love, if someone like purposely turn a blind eye to the shortcomings. And in the movie a question of love is one of the key, but not a series of banal arguments about the needs men and women, and about the force that pervades all of us allowing you to Wade through the obstacles of banality and rationalism, betraying the life of the paint and meaning the main driving somewhere its unknown way.

And craftsmanship adds such moments when you forget all category assessment, internal dialogue stops and you just look for the action with bated breath, knowing that there the screen now life. But when the scripts there are twists and turns forcing you to fidget nervously on the stool is a course aerobatics (spoilers — can not to celebrate the waves and the time of joining, it was then something).

The acting is predictably above average, Matthew McConaughey and Jessica Chastain gave a complete spectrum of emotions, although my opinion emotions were predictable and linear that in spite of my sincere desire to sing the praises of, I wanted more intrigue. The actors played very and very good, but where there's a blind adherence to the Canon, there is a place for creativity and it's probably the the case. The woman of my dreams — Anne Hathaway, Garik Kharlamov, Matt Damon, and Michael Caine all of course  ... but the ball is ruled by the Director and that affects the courage manifestations.

The special effects and the visual part of the film, combines a healthy balance between the naturalism and monumentality. It is not exactly the dizzying "gravity". Here like everything in life a little grey, but if you look at playing with colors and sometimes breathtaking.

Summarizing say that personally I have these 3 hours flew by not obviously, it just this is a case when the visual range combined with music stop time and forced to enjoy the moment. The questions raised leave food for thinking a few days in advance and a strong desire to go to the cinema again, to enjoy the moment and raise the bar of what really sincere/smart/strong.

10 of 10

and cons of sleeping on the inevitability of being)))

PS

Special thanks for the explanation of peculiarities of existence in the five-dimensional space, I like the science I do not claim to be an expert was very interesting to hear this point of view.

faq
How much has Interstellar made?
Commercial tv-show fees worldwide today are Cumulative Worldwide $677,471,339.
How much did it cost to make Interstellar?
According to various sources, the cost of producing the tv-show was at least $165,000,000.
Who is the director of the movie Interstellar?
This tv-show was directed by Christopher Nolan.
What is the genre of Interstellar?
The tv-show belongs to the genres of Sci-Fi, Adventure, Drama, Best movies 2014.
Who starred in Interstellar?
Many famous actors starred in this tv-show, here are the names of the most famous: Ellen Burstyn, Matthew McConaughey, Mackenzie Foy, John Lithgow, Timothée Chalamet.
What is Interstellar IMDB Ranking?
At the moment, the rating is 8.6.
When was Interstellar released?
The start date for this tv-show on USA TV is 2014-11-07.