a mega stellar voyage through time and space

Rating: 9/10 (22 March 2015)

The interpretations are epic, the script though pulled by the hair, does not take as sufficient random philosophical ramblings and masquerade it with a false sense (semblance) of scientific credibility. Yes,these sequences are all incredible, but convinces us of the effort and the progressed feelings as we watch the film, which does not focus on the improbability of what anyone sees, but on the identification with the adventures and tribulations that the heroes of the film undergo. It is certain that many of the action sequences implied in the film is inapplicable. The fact that someone undertakes the "job" of giving them a rudimentary explanation is not bad. The phenomenon of script plausibility, must not annoy us, who have seen all the films of James Bond, of Rambo and Indiana Jones, who shamelessly, and without any sense of logic, can kill about 129 people in various directions, with a single shot. But the fact that makes Nolan's new venture, insurmountable, is that unlike Castaneda – like INCEPTION, this Kubrick –like journey to the stars, is less annoying and certainly visually infinitely richer. In this case we are dealing with a perfectly successful synthesis of Space Odyssey, a film of impending Doom / destruction (Repent!) and a hint of Star Trek exploring movies, with puffs of quantum mechanics randomly quoted as to provide a rudimentary scientific plausibility. The philosophical implications are infinite, the notations and references scattered, the sense of exploring the unknown, is obvious throughout the film and is easily accessible to the emotional appeal of each viewer, either he is a graduate of Nuclear Physics, or merely a high school graduate. The obsession of differing from the classical,linear approach of time, is present yet again, but not to the levels of mental confusion of Inception. Time here is used with no intention to mislead, as it is presumed by science; as relevant and therefore extends, shrinks and expands, the pace imposed by the director for the benefit of spectators and not of the protagonists. But it is also crucial here, as in Shyamalan films(e.g. 6th sense),that only at the end you get to realize the relevance hiding there throughout the course of the film around the unsuspecting viewer (repeat without the intent of misleading the viewer), just to make the synthetic appearance at the end, in a wonderfully - cut finale, that would be envied by Kubrick himself, if he wanted to have consistency in the journey of his (and Arthur C.Clark's) cosmonaut at the black hole of consciousness. The sacrifice of the movie finale for the sake of happy end is not enough to nullify the strenuous effort that lasts more than two hours that passed without tiring anyone... .. This sacrifice could not be justified by the scene of daughter – father reunion or by the interstellar romance that needed more than 125 years to .. "bloom", my dear Christopher. And as you have realized, ambiguous endings which leave the viewer to choose what suits him emotionally, are not necessarily bad. Of course here we are not dealing with whether DiCaprio returns home, but whether humanity survives and certainly a Nolan film is far away from depressing Trier's melancholy ......