*Note: This actually started off as my review of Interstellar, but it quickly devolved into responding to some negative stuff I came across online in videos and IMDb message boards. I usually only passingly refer to that stuff in a review, but I feel a bit passionate about this movie, so here's 1,500+ words about it. I'll get around to a review in a bit. Also, this rant is inspired partly by the message boards for Dumb and Dumber To. I went to those boards hoping to find the kind of hate I found on the Interstellar boards. Not to disagree with, but to sympathize with as I thought that movie was abysmally unfunny. What did I find? The majority of the posts were defending the movie telling the haters (i.e. me) that we set our expectations to high and should just take it easy and enjoy the comedy. I'll explain why that situation is different than this one in my review of Dumb and Dumber To. But seriously, internet, that's the movie you defend?
 |
| Watch out, McConaughey, you might step into one of those mythical "plot holes." |
Ambitious. A technical masterpiece. Breathtaking visuals. Blah blah blah. It seems like Christopher Nolan films have
now reached a point that the review, positive or negative, has to state these
things. It always surprises me that people
who hate his films will praise Nolan’s work as much as people who love them
before they turn their sights on the “plot holes” and other “problems” the film
has. Interstellar is seemingly given this
treatment simply because Christopher Nolan directed it. Nolan, to be fair, kind of brings this on
himself. He has this super-serious
quality to him (he wears a suit nearly every day on his sets), he is very
secretive about his projects (he reportedly would not let some cast members
keep a copy of the script before filming), and he has made enormously popular
films (The Dark Knight trilogy, Inception).
He’s all but asking people to nitpick his work and hold his films to a
higher standard. That said, I am one of
those people who expect a lot from Nolan’s work, and I found “Interstellar” to
be one of the best films of the year, on both a technical and emotional level.
Interstellar is labeled as ambitious for multiple reasons.
First, it’s a film about saving the human race. Second, it mixes complex science with
emotion. Because of this second aspect,
many have labeled the film “too” ambitious, implying that Nolan is unable to
resolve any questions put forth by this film.
This is incorrect, however, because there are not that many questions in
the first place. The main query of the
film is, “How can the human race survive beyond the planet?” Interstellar provides the answer to that
question. Detractors simply don’t like
the answer given or are not following the film closely enough to pick up on
other “answers.” That is fine, by the
way, as the answer of the film is arguably cheesy and sentimental. It’s just annoying to see a word like
“ambitious” used to negatively describe something. If you don’t like it, fine. Don’t sugarcoat it to the point that it
sounds like you can’t make your mind up.
Because, honestly, what film out there is not “ambitious”? Are the rest of the movies made by a bunch of
slackers who don’t ask and answer questions, or who don’t care if their film is
successful or not?
Before I go on, let me explain my
defensive posture for this film. I
watched Interstellar over a week ago and loved it. It did leave my head spinning a bit, though. The science of the film along with some stuff
about five dimensions and whatnot had me a bit confused. So I decided to check online for thoughts and
theories about the film. I was surprised
to find that the internet movie community (at least the loud part of the
community) hated the film or were very dismissive of it. Many people point to “plot holes” as the main
reason for the film being “stupid.” I
watched a video by Screen Junkies on YouTube (not the height of criticism, I
know, but certainly a good source for the opinions of the internet movie community)
in which the majority of the participants (four out of five) disliked the movie
(though they all acknowledged that it was very pretty and ambitious). In that video, one person talks about a “plot
hole” involving a character’s evil actions.
This character turning evil was a “plot hole” to him because (SPOILER)
that person had been called “the best of humanity” by another character. So his rationale is that when it is stated on
screen by a character, it must be true.
First off, this logic is incorrect because the character is a person,
and people are often wrong when judging another’s character. Second, why do we take one character’s line
as gospel, but dismiss other characters’ lines because we think their logic is “stupid”? So only certain scientists (the majority of
the characters are scientists) are to be trusted? It’s never established which scientists are
to be paid attention to and which are to be ignored.
Am I being nitpicky with my
mini-rant above? Absolutely, and that’s
the point. It is okay to hate a movie,
but to judge it based on the director or how it is being presented to the
public is ridiculous. There is no reason
why Interstellar should be picked apart to this degree. Some claim that since the film is serious and
asks big questions, then it should be held under a magnifying glass. I agree if that scrutiny is for the science
that the film almost brags about. But no
one is making any substantial claim to the science being wrong (and people like
Stephen Hawking support the film).
Instead, they take issue with the plot.
They question why the characters are going to a risky planet, even
though the characters discuss such issues at length on screen! They complain about the blight in the film
and wonder why they don’t just fix the blight when the film has established
there is no solution (that information
they ignore). The equivalent of this
would be like watching Star Wars and taking issue with Luke leaving with Obi
Wan after his aunt and uncle are killed.
“Shouldn’t Luke stay home and deal with the funeral and estate of Owen
and Beru?” “Is he really just going to
take off with some crazy hermit on a space adventure?” Both of these are questions you can certainly
ask. You can even dislike the movie for
Luke’s decisions. But you don’t get to
claim it’s a “plot hole” that makes the movie stupid. Disagreeing with a character’s actions is not
a “plot hole,” it’s just something you disagree with.
The other problem (internet) people
have with the movie is the time paradox created by the ending. (SPOILERS, obviously) So it turns out that the wormhole they go
through was actually created by humans in the future, but how do the humans of
the future exist without the wormhole?
There is no explanation for this, which is why the word “paradox” exists
in the first place. Nearly every movie
with time travel has this element (see Terminator). It just comes with the territory of
science-fiction and time. But I would
argue that this film at least tries to explain it (Terminator never does; we
just accept it) with all the fifth dimension stuff after McConaughey goes
through the black hole. He enters a
place where time is a physical object that can altered. Still, how does he get to this fifth
dimension without the wormhole? I don’t
know…science? Seriously, though, when
you start nitpicking films that feature time travel/alteration you’ve entered
troll land. It is science-fiction, after
all. Sure, Nolan wears a suit, and his
films are usually super-serious, but he’s still not claiming to be making 100%
realistic movies. He’s trying to make
entertaining, interesting films grounded in
reality and science. If you don’t find
them entertaining or interesting, fine, but don’t spout off about “plot holes”
and paradoxes in this film while you sing the praises of whatever Marvel movie
comes out next. Full disclosure, I love
the Marvel movies, but they get a pass because they are meant to be “fun,” and
Nolan’s films get picked on because they don’t feature enough comedy. Speaking of which, when is the internet going
to turn on the Marvel universe, anyway?
Now that it’s beloved by seemingly everybody, isn’t it time for the
internet to despise it? That seems to be
what’s going on with Nolan these days.
He makes a movie the internet loves (The
Dark Knight), and his next few movies receive more hatred than any other
films in the genre.
To finish up this messy response to
internet hatred of a film I obviously really liked, let me just state that
maybe we should be more thankful of Nolan’s films and less nitpicky. Everyone goes on and on about the lack of
originality in Hollywood, yet here’s Nolan directing films based on original
scripts. Sure, he is obviously
influenced by other films, but at least Interstellar
wasn’t a comic book or old TV show first.
I want him to continue to make “ambitious” sci-fi movies about new
things that I don’t already know about.
I love all of the comic book movies coming out, but is anyone truly
surprised by anything that happens in them?
Were you shocked when the Avengers put their differences aside and saved
the world? I had no idea what Interstellar was really about until I
watched it. I knew the ending of The Avengers before they even announced
the movie: the good guys win. Once
again, I’m okay with the Marvel movies, but why heap so much fun-loving praise
on them while we try to destroy one of the only big studio film’s not tied to
Disney or some other existing property?
As I’ve been saying, it’s fine by me if you hate Interstellar, just hate it for the right reasons (not that I would
agree with any of those reasons…).