The Nolans (director Chris and co-writer Jonathan), treat us to one of the grandest space adventures we've seen in awhile. It's the kind of adventure you go to the movies to see, an adventure filled with some truly heart-pounding sequences which further cement Chris Nolan's reputation as a great action director. He makes full use of the IMAX format, not only visually but audibly, too. The supersized frame and booming sound mix create an immersive experience.
Nolan also deftly navigates his actors through several exposition-heavy scenes that would have otherwise threatened to drag down the film. In addition, he and his brother came up with some very clever ways to visualize some very complicated theories of physics, theories that I'm still trying to wrap my head around. Some may complain about the movie's pacing. It weighs in with a robust running time of 169 minutes. But as I was watching it, I was in no rush for the movie to end. While Interstellar may be too derivative to be truly great, it's still quite a ride.
The film takes its inspiration from many sources. There are doses of everything from The Right Stuff to both Star Trek (exploring strange new worlds) and Star Wars (helpful droids, icy planets). But there is no doubt that 2001 is the model. Its influences are seen in everything from the slow, majestic shots of heavenly bodies, to Hans Zimmer's haunting music cues. At times, it almost seems like the Nolans decided to have their characters drop in to visit each of the worlds glimpsed in Odyssey's famously trippy "star gate" sequence.
The aspect where the movie most resembles Kubrick's is its insistence on respecting the laws of physics and treating space travel realistically. This is the rare space-based story that not only acknowledges the Theory of Relativity, but also uses it as a serious obstacle. As the crew of Cooper's ship speeds away from Earth, time starts moving more slowly for them. As they approach a black hole, the time dilation becomes even greater. Over the course of what seems like just hours to the astronauts, decades pass back on Earth. (That is not to say there are no nits to pick in the plausibility department. A healthy suspension of disbelief is still required.)
Where 2001 and Interstellar depart are their themes and points of view. Kubrick takes a cynical, detached view of humanity. He observes the characters in his space odyssey as if they were rats in a maze. The Nolans' film is far more empathetic and emotionally driven. While 2001 was about a big idea – the search for our creator and an understanding of our place in the universe – Interstellar is about something much smaller and more basic: The love between a parent and a child.
The movie's central relationship is between Cooper and his daughter, Murphy (she's played by Mackenzie Foy as a child and by Jessica Chastain as an adult - and the two actresses bear a remarkable resemblance to each other). She is the reason Cooper embarks on the journey and she is the reason he is determined to find his way home. The movie postulates that love is a force as powerful as gravity, a force that can endure unimaginable distances and infinite stretches of time, and a force that can't be defined by a simple equation.
There won't be many dry eyes in the house as the movie comes to its conclusion. That's thanks to an excellent stable of actors who allow the movie's emotions to resonate and the audience to become invested. McConaughey's everyman persona is exactly what his character required. And he's not the only Oscar winner in the cast. In fact, a past Academy Award winner (including one you won't see in the trailers) fills out just about every other major role in the film.
The only thing Interstellar reveres more than science and exploration -- is humanity. Like all great art, it is a commentary on life. It shows us that when it comes to saving our species, the only superior beings we need to look to are ourselves. And when it comes to unraveling the mysteries of our place in the universe, we need only to look inside the human heart.
Nolan also deftly navigates his actors through several exposition-heavy scenes that would have otherwise threatened to drag down the film. In addition, he and his brother came up with some very clever ways to visualize some very complicated theories of physics, theories that I'm still trying to wrap my head around. Some may complain about the movie's pacing. It weighs in with a robust running time of 169 minutes. But as I was watching it, I was in no rush for the movie to end. While Interstellar may be too derivative to be truly great, it's still quite a ride.
The film takes its inspiration from many sources. There are doses of everything from The Right Stuff to both Star Trek (exploring strange new worlds) and Star Wars (helpful droids, icy planets). But there is no doubt that 2001 is the model. Its influences are seen in everything from the slow, majestic shots of heavenly bodies, to Hans Zimmer's haunting music cues. At times, it almost seems like the Nolans decided to have their characters drop in to visit each of the worlds glimpsed in Odyssey's famously trippy "star gate" sequence.
The aspect where the movie most resembles Kubrick's is its insistence on respecting the laws of physics and treating space travel realistically. This is the rare space-based story that not only acknowledges the Theory of Relativity, but also uses it as a serious obstacle. As the crew of Cooper's ship speeds away from Earth, time starts moving more slowly for them. As they approach a black hole, the time dilation becomes even greater. Over the course of what seems like just hours to the astronauts, decades pass back on Earth. (That is not to say there are no nits to pick in the plausibility department. A healthy suspension of disbelief is still required.)
Where 2001 and Interstellar depart are their themes and points of view. Kubrick takes a cynical, detached view of humanity. He observes the characters in his space odyssey as if they were rats in a maze. The Nolans' film is far more empathetic and emotionally driven. While 2001 was about a big idea – the search for our creator and an understanding of our place in the universe – Interstellar is about something much smaller and more basic: The love between a parent and a child.
The movie's central relationship is between Cooper and his daughter, Murphy (she's played by Mackenzie Foy as a child and by Jessica Chastain as an adult - and the two actresses bear a remarkable resemblance to each other). She is the reason Cooper embarks on the journey and she is the reason he is determined to find his way home. The movie postulates that love is a force as powerful as gravity, a force that can endure unimaginable distances and infinite stretches of time, and a force that can't be defined by a simple equation.
There won't be many dry eyes in the house as the movie comes to its conclusion. That's thanks to an excellent stable of actors who allow the movie's emotions to resonate and the audience to become invested. McConaughey's everyman persona is exactly what his character required. And he's not the only Oscar winner in the cast. In fact, a past Academy Award winner (including one you won't see in the trailers) fills out just about every other major role in the film.
The only thing Interstellar reveres more than science and exploration -- is humanity. Like all great art, it is a commentary on life. It shows us that when it comes to saving our species, the only superior beings we need to look to are ourselves. And when it comes to unraveling the mysteries of our place in the universe, we need only to look inside the human heart.