Movie Talk (New Films, Old Films... doesn't matter) (59 Viewers)

CrimsonianKing

Count Mbangula
Jan 16, 2013
27,343
But in your attempt to talk it down from being one of the best scifis ever, you made it sound mediocre.
Then you misunderstood cause i certainly didn't mean to sound like it was mediocre. And i thought i made it clear i enjoyed it. So full of shit? not really. Just that it simply isn't a mind blowing sci fi experience and far from being a masterpiece. It doesn't even begin to touch the genius that was Space Odyssey or Solaris and many other classics of the genre. So it'd go quite down in that "one of the best scifis ever" list.
 

Nzoric

Grazie Mirko
Jan 16, 2011
37,882
Dont take the full of shit comment personally :D . I disagree that its nowhere near Space Odyssey, its super ambitious and dealt with the subject in an original and, in my opinion, brilliant way.
 

CrimsonianKing

Count Mbangula
Jan 16, 2013
27,343
Dont take the full of shit comment personally
. I disagree that its nowhere near Space Odyssey, its super ambitious and dealt with the subject in an original and, in my opinion, brilliant way.

Then watch more Scifi series. I'll gladly recommend some. There's nothing original about Interstellar.

The idea of us evolving and transcending our 3 dimensional way of life/controlling space and time is an old one and already been covered by many shows in many different episodes. The control of wormholes, paradoxes... You name it. Those subjects have been around forever.

And i don't even want to begin my argument as to why there's nothing in the movie, except for it's visual grandiosity, that grants it a comparison to something so profoundly creative and innovative like Space Odyssey was and still is.

- - - Updated - - -

It's absolutely nowhere near Space Odyssey. It's not even a discussion.
Absolutely nowhere near.
 

Post Ironic

Senior Member
Feb 9, 2013
42,253
let's face it if space odyssey was released today no one would consider it a greatest of the genre. perspective is important here
And if Interstellar was made 30 years ago, maybe Nolan would have spent a little more time creating dialogue that doesn't come across as puerile and moronic for the most part. Instead he spent all his time on visuals. And that's exactly what Interstellar is, an ambitious, visual feast, with mediocre dialogue and acting, and appallingly bad sound-mixing.

Perspective is important here.
 

Nzoric

Grazie Mirko
Jan 16, 2011
37,882
Then watch more Scifi series. I'll gladly recommend some. There's nothing original about Interstellar.

The idea of us evolving and transcending our 3 dimensional way of life/controlling space and time is an old one and already been covered by many shows in many different episodes. The control of wormholes, paradoxes... You name it. Those subjects have been around forever.

And i don't even want to begin my argument as to why there's nothing in the movie, except for it's visual grandiosity, that grants it a comparison to something so profoundly creative and innovative like Space Odyssey was and still is.
All conceivable themes have been covered, what makes a movie stand out is the way it links themes witjin a story. They made the shit out of Interstellar, the feeling that dust will consume us while people just slave away, the way they simplified time relativity without dumbing it down. Especially the way they portrayed five dimensions in a three dimensional perspective - it has just not been done like that before.
 

CrimsonianKing

Count Mbangula
Jan 16, 2013
27,343
let's face it if space odyssey was released today no one would consider it a greatest of the genre. perspective is important here
Visuals, sure, will change due to ever changing technology. But the idea, the messages it tries to get across... A good story is a good story no matter when it's from. Good dialogues and uniquely creative ways to reach the viewer can only be achieved by a few. Kubrick was one of them, especially in his work in Space Odyssey.
 

Nzoric

Grazie Mirko
Jan 16, 2011
37,882
And if Interstellar was made 30 years ago, maybe Nolan would have spent a little more time creating dialogue that doesn't come across as puerile and moronic for the most part. Instead he spent all his time on visuals. And that's exactly what Interstellar is, an ambitious, visual feast, with mediocre dialogue and acting, and appallingly bad sound-mixing.

Perspective is important here.
Any scenes in particular where you find the dialogue lacking?
 

CrimsonianKing

Count Mbangula
Jan 16, 2013
27,343
And if Interstellar was made 30 years ago, maybe Nolan would have spent a little more time creating dialogue that doesn't come across as puerile and moronic for the most part. Instead he spent all his time on visuals. And that's exactly what Interstellar is, an ambitious, visual feast, with mediocre dialogue and acting, and appallingly bad sound-mixing.

Perspective is important here.
:agree: Exactly my thoughts.
 

Post Ironic

Senior Member
Feb 9, 2013
42,253
But even then it's a matter of perspective. Some of the most beautiful cinematography of all time exists in films made decades ago.

Kubrick made a perfect film, regardless of era. The only reason people might argue it holds less value today, is Special FX, that's it. But that's not what Kubrick relied on in the making of his film.

The same thing with Tarkovsky's film Stalker. If it had been filmed and released this past year, it would still be one the best films ever made. Special FX and modern technology wouldn't make it better.
 

CrimsonianKing

Count Mbangula
Jan 16, 2013
27,343
All conceivable themes have been covered, what makes a movie stand out is the way it links themes witjin a story. They made the shit out of Interstellar, the feeling that dust will consume us while people just slave away, the way they simplified time relativity without dumbing it down. Especially the way they portrayed five dimensions in a three dimensional perspective - it has just not been done like that before.
Everything in this movie was dumbed down. There was no need to use your brain and try to understand the concept. The movie would just draw it for you. Lazy. The movie was lazy, but then again, it was made for lazy people. It's a blockbuster anyway.

It has in the original Twilight Zone series from the late 50's, now THAT was a creative show. I'm not gonna remember which exact episode but gives you an idea of how long ago this subject has been covered in an almost identical way.
 

Post Ironic

Senior Member
Feb 9, 2013
42,253
Any scenes in particular where you find the dialogue lacking?
The entire film. From dumbed down space-time jargon that is over-explicated all the time to "maudlin truisms and increasingly New Age mumbo-jumbo about the power of love" as one reviewer put it.

There's idiotic stuff like Romily explaining to genius Nasa pilot Coop what a wormhole is as there about to fly into one. There's way too much expository dialogue that gives complete lie to the "show not tell" rule that is especially important in film. The dialogue comes across as a bunch of explanatory monologues, cut up into short little bits to make conversation, often with random and ridiculous questions attached so as to give it a semblance of the natural. Nolan seems to think most of the audience is rather stupid and won't notice just how silly this is, by trying to sneak it into conversation wherever he can, but it just comes across as clunky and irritating, and as though we're sitting through some sort of strange hybridized blockbuster film/really shitty science lecture.
 

CrimsonianKing

Count Mbangula
Jan 16, 2013
27,343
The entire film. From dumbed down space-time jargon that is over-explicated all the time to "maudlin truisms and increasingly New Age mumbo-jumbo about the power of love" as one reviewer put it.

There's idiotic stuff like Romily explaining to genius Nasa pilot Coop what a wormhole is as there about to fly into one. There's way too much expository dialogue that gives complete lie to the "show not tell" rule that is especially important in film. The dialogue comes across as a bunch of explanatory monologues, cut up into short little bits to make conversation, often with random and ridiculous questions attached so as to give it a semblance of the natural. Nolan seems to think most of the audience is rather stupid and won't notice just how silly this is, by trying to sneak it into conversation wherever he can, but it just comes across as clunky and irritating, and as though we're sitting through some sort of strange hybridized blockbuster film/really shitty science lecture.
I couldn't have said it better. Btw ever watched the original Twilight Zone series?
 

Nzoric

Grazie Mirko
Jan 16, 2011
37,882
:lol:

I agree on the wormhole thing, the rest isn't substantial. You might not like Nolan's style, whereas I like the way he writes dialogue. For instance, I loved Matt Damon talking to Coop while he is dying, emphatically explaining what Coop is going through. The part about "love" is far from mumbo jumbo, it's taking a feeling that is impossible to explain and interpreting it as a connection that transcends time and space - the discussion is key to the climax.
 

CrimsonianKing

Count Mbangula
Jan 16, 2013
27,343
Not a lot of it. A bit here and there. Worth spending a bit more time on?
Most definitely. One of the best series ever. People have no idea how many movies have shamelessly ripped off many of it's ideas and concepts, it was really ahead of it's time. It's the German Expressionism of America in a way. And the score... So eerie... It's simply the best.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 52)