|
It's just another example of the internet echo chamber exaggerating or changing things as people talk about them with each other. It's like "Superman destroyed Metropolis" or "welcome to earf," and it's generally the same people who seek out those types of crowds/discussions that show up and repeat the exaggeration/fabrication later on in discussions, when you look at post histories and stuff.
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 03:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 15:16 |
|
|
Kull the Conqueror posted:It does if you consider theory of a dyad. I think it works both thematically and on scientific grounds, although it would have been fine if it didn't too. No, there is no causal mechanism for love as a physical force. Love is a construct stored in the brain. It modifies behavior towards others.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 03:56
|
|
|
Presenting love as a multidimensional force is hackneyed and people are justified in calling it out as such.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 04:06
|
|
|
temple posted:Presenting love as a multidimensional force is hackneyed and people are justified in calling it out as such. The bit everyone quotes was specifically shot to make the speaker look like a crazy person.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 04:16
|
|
|
computer parts posted:The people who say this probably watched the trailer too many times because it only shows up like twice in a 3 hour movie. One of the primary characters has a whole extended soliloquy about how love is the one thing that travels faster than light, which initially seems like kinda an nonsensical hallmarkism that's supposed to be awkward and then it turns out you're meant to take it 100% seriously and the film does in fact make a plot point of harnessing love as a form of FTL communication You don't have to interpret the whole climax and denoument as literally powered by love magic, although you easily could, but the association is pretty direct and overt and it is clear that more than anything else the movie really wants you to walk away with the knowledge that love travels faster than light and at the end of it all I'm still not really sure what that is supposed to mean, either literally or metaphorically, or why it should matter. People aren't really talking about love all the time in the movie but it is a central theme that is handled in such an incredibly bizarre manner that it sticks out and is one of the major things that people walk away with from the movie, alongside 'haha the robot has a jokes dial'.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 04:22
|
|
|
The film is about the Absolute. Capital 'A'. "What is the Absolute? Something that appears to us in fleeting experiences – say, through the gentle smile of a beautiful woman, or even through the warm, caring smile of a person who may otherwise seem ugly and rude: in such miraculous but extremely fragile moments, another dimension transpires through our reality." -Zizek "Maybe it's some evidence, some artifact of a higher dimension that we can't consciously perceive." -Anne Hathaway's character
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 04:38
|
|
|
temple posted:Presenting love as a multidimensional force is hackneyed and people are justified in calling it out as such. That's true but this movie doesn't do it. Coop uses his knowledge of his daughter's life to target gravity manipulation across space and time. A Wizard of Goatse posted:One of the primary characters has a whole extended soliloquy about how love is the one thing that travels faster than light, which initially seems like kinda an nonsensical hallmarkism that's supposed to be awkward and then it turns out you're meant to take it 100% seriously and the film does in fact make a plot point of harnessing love as a form of FTL communication The reason love is important to the ending is the same reason it's important to anything else: Coop's special, particular knowledge of his daughter lets him understand where to intervene to make a difference. He doesn't write LOVE = GRAVITY on a chalkboard or anything. I think Brand's speech is important as characterization. It shows that she's basically driven by sentiment, like everyone else in the film. I have a hard time thinking of a character in this movie who doesn't compromise an important decision for emotional reasons. General Battuta fucked around with this message at 14:41 on Jun 20, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2015 14:36
|
|
General Battuta posted:I think Brand's speech is important as characterization. It shows that she's basically driven by sentiment, like everyone else in the film. I have a hard time thinking of a character in this movie who doesn't compromise an important decision for emotional reasons. Tars.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2015 06:00
|
|
|
TARS' big funny moment is getting his emotions compromised, though!
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2015 15:23
|
|
|
I just watched this movie again on a whim and liked it way more than the first time I saw it. After I understand the whole gravity-time thing now it makes the movie more satisfying.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2015 18:12
|
|
|
swampcow posted:Any kind of exposition that a character makes about her own or anyone else's motivations is always pretty lame. It shows that the director couldn't make the same point without words. It's kind of like explaining a joke. It may be true, but it's really boring. After all, Shakespeare was a huge chump.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2015 01:58
|
|
|
Jewmanji posted:After all, Shakespeare was a huge chump. If your dialogue is entirely in iambic pentameter and the female roles are all given to prepubescent boys you can have your characters deliver as many soliloquies as you like.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2015 03:19
|
|
|
People are missing the point here. Catwoman has the right basic idea, but is still wrong. She believes that they can (and should) just skip the whole 'jumping into the black hole' thing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2015 03:48
|
|
|
One thing is for sure, and that is Nolan likes his exposition. I love his films but his exposition is often cringe worthy. Like that fat guy in Batman 'if train gets to the center of the city, then THE WHOLE THINGS GUNNA BLOW!!!!'
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2015 11:17
|
|
|
I wish that guy was his signature old guy instead of Michael Caine. Like Takashi Shimura to Akira Kurosawa. I'd have loved to have had cuts to the same guy in his water tower management station being like "SO THE JOKER HAS A BOMB IN BOTH FERRIES AND IF EITHER ONE DOESN'T MAKE A CHOICE THEY'RE BOTH gonna BLOW!!!" Like just cut to him for everything in between intense scenes. TARS helping them dock in Interstellar, Angiers' last performance in The Prestige, whatever, I love this guy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2015 17:04
|
|
|
Myrddin_Emrys posted:One thing is for sure, and that is Nolan likes his exposition. I love his films but his exposition is often cringe worthy. Like that fat guy in Batman 'if train gets to the center of the city, then THE WHOLE THINGS GUNNA BLOW!!!!' and that fat guy was the audience
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 15:21
|
|
|
Interstellar: More like plan gAy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2015 16:08
|
|
|
Well, I don't have TV and pretty much skipped the hype-train on this one, but I finally got around to watching this. It took a couple false starts - I found the movie really boring the first time and stopped watching after 20 minutes, but part of that was that I had no clue whatsoever what the plot was going into watching (except that it's called Interstellar and it's about humanity going into space to survive or something) and I had absolutely 0 expectations, other than it being a Chris Nolan film meant I would probably at least like it. Anyway when I watched it a second time and got to the part where Coop and Murph first discover "secret NASA" and the movie had its hooks set drat well into me by then. I really regret missing the chance to see this on the big screen, though, I must say. But anyway, I really loved and adored it in a really basic, simple way. Some of it was a bit on the "silly space adventure" side, and I didn't respond to all of the movie (a lot of stuff with Matt Damon's character didn't really work too well for me and the same pretty much goes for Michael Caine's character) but the major thrust of the film and the Coop/Murph dynamic I thought was really well done and was, to me, really quite profound. I am very glad I watched it spoiler-free with no expectation. Even knowing that Coop and Murph would *probably* get reunited at the end, I literally had tears pouring off my face when they were because I am an absolute loser like that and a scene like that one will never fail to make me weep. And of course TARS was great and the best robot sidekick we've had come along in quite some time. I do wish the stuff that hadn't worked so well in the movie... uh... had, because it could have been truly great. But it feels like a sort of half-developed script. Like I said, a lot of stuff with Matt Damon's character and Michael Caine's character did not sit right with me, and that whole aspect of the film was kind of a boondoggle. What worked in this film was the more elemental stuff going on with Coop and Murph and the time-folding, and that's what I really responded to.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2015 18:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 15:16 |
|
|
Finally had a chance to see this. Thought it was really really good with a few hiccups. I felt like a lot of the exposition and "we need Quantum Data from beyond the event horizon" was really rushed and just kind of vomited at us. It just felt a little too vague and hand wavey. Like "ehh... we just need some data don't think too hard about it." But I want a little more from a 3 hour epic. Ultimately though it's just a small complaint. I, too, felt the Love stuff was a bit hokey. Yes it only appeared twice but in very critical moments. For Brand it was a little forgivable, but the big problem (as I feel it is with a lot of people), is when Cooper starts talking about it's the reason he was chosen and it's quantifiable and blah blah. That felt like a pretty big eye roll moment. However, again, it didn't ultimately detract from the movie, but I thought it was really unnecessary. General Battuta posted:That's true but this movie doesn't do it. Coop uses his knowledge of his daughter's life to target gravity manipulation across space and time. This is a good post, but again it's Coop's dialogue that makes it annoying. Whoever said "The Nolan's don't trust the subtext" kind of nailed it. I think it just happening on screen would have been great, but the need for Coop to literally say "love is a quantifiable force" I think caused a lot of eye rolls. Again, not even close to a deal breaker but I just think it could have been handled with a bit more subtlety. Overall though an amazing movie and one of the few I'll actually purchase on disc. And goddamn that score.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2015 16:25
|
|
