One of Nolan's best, but watch out Chris.

Rating: 8/10 (12 November 2014)

"Interstellar" is truly an epic, not in the sense of what we initially think of as an epic, for example "Ben Hur" or perhaps even "2001: A Space Odyssey" (a film which it is worth pointing out I haven't seen), but more in the sense of how when I think back to "Interstellar", I think of those visually captivating shots of black, of the unknown and of those desolate landscapes made of water and ice, and how I found myself in awe of them. It is these that come to define "Interstellar". Set in the near future, Earth cannot sustain humanity anymore, and it's worth praising Nolan's subtle view of it, be it seeing the New York Yankees playing on an amateur field or discovering that the Apollo missions were faked to bankrupt the Soviet Union, which Cooper (played by Matthew McConaughey) denies. This scene, whilst allowing for a sense of character development in regards to Cooper, in retrospect seems to be Nolan emphasising how he sticks to the traditional elements of film and he does so more than ever in this film, from building several rooms of a spaceship from scratch to using five industrial fans to create a dust storm, thus attributing even more of the credit for the film to him. Yet as I expected, it proves very difficult for members of this all- star cast to break through both the visually stunning shots and the label of Christopher Nolan, and be noticed. Only McConaughey succeeds in doing so, although Mackenzie Foy (playing a young Murphy) and Bill Irwin (voicing the robot, TARS) deserve mentions, as does to an extent Michael Caine (playing Professor Brand) and his recital of Dylan Thomas' "Do Not Go Gentle Into That Good Night", although I still don't entirely understand its inclusion, leaving big names such as Casey Affleck (playing Tom) and even Jessica Chastain (playing Murphy) "down in the dirt". Interstellar is a quintessentially Nolan film, meant to be seen on IMAX, imposing those classic Nolan themes of love and family whilst asking questions that I have not seen asked before, in this case winding up the scientists, although it is interesting to note that Nolan answers them by playing with several theories, instead of just getting the science completely wrong, as is so common. Yet the film is so Nolan that it takes that extra unnecessary step that Nolan always has present in his work, be it taking the audience to Limbo in Inception or by adding the twist of Miranda Tate (played by Marion Cotillard) turning out to be Talia al Ghul in The Dark Knight Rises. Before I conclude, I think it is important to make this point in regards to Nolan and his (future) works. He has begun, whether he means it or not, to dwarf his own cast and to an extent his own themes and his commitment to traditional film elements. The amount of hype that goes into his films is widespread and if he isn't careful, his future works could take a turn for the worse. As I have already said, Nolan always takes that extra unnecessary step, one that I don't think I would be so sympathetic with if it was another director, yet the brilliance of what comes before it makes up for it, often leaving me in that No Man's Land of whether the film was worth 9 or 10 stars.