Possibly the best movie of the year

Rating: 9/10 (11 November 2014)

In today's world it's really difficult to make a cool movie about space. With knowledge one click away (I'm not going to argue quality, just availability), people are more and more critical of movie tropes and with popular scientists gaining momentum, you can't get away anymore with something like Armageddon for example.
Interstellar plays its cards very well, with a producer being himself a scientists and also with the fact that with very few exceptions it deals a lot with research that's mainly theoretical (wormholes, their gravity and what happens to known dimensions inside an event's horizon). Ground in firm research, but still theoretical.
Nolan's genius manages to transpose the theory into a visually compelling story that is gripping from the start and takes you all the way without becoming confusing and sometimes spelling out things for those less science-oriented. It's nearly perfect.
I say nearly because like with every movie that plays on wits, sometimes it loses itself in details that expose the limitations of the writers. Examples:

the title characters is the best pilot they had, yet instead of making him a part of the project from the start (maybe even train others), the gets on board what seems as chance (yes, we are told that in fact he's the one that loops around in time and gets himself on track)

for a guy that gets trapped for a moment in the tesseract allowing him to swim across time he 1) fails to see the good that comes of his endeavor and 2) he starts the sequence of events, then tries to stop it and then sets on track again, like a brief stint of schizophrenia for some reason.

Brand's speech about love is so out of place in the spaceship, so out of time and out of tune with the movie that it doesn't go beyond a WTF moment. Why in the world would a scientist trained to save mankind do that? Even Romilly who supposedly spent 23 years in complete silence and solitude is able to basically shrug it off and focus, but Brand breaks down in sentimentalism for no apparent reason

the movie's premise is compelling because it's firmly grounded in reality: mankind will run out of food in less than 100 years. Yet aside from environmental changes that speak on a greater scale, there's nothing showing the effect on people's lives. Yes, their meals aren't the lavish ones Hollywood movies usually depict, but they're not poor either. Nothing speaks about the urgency of not wasting food, for example, or of all the hungry people that surely must be out there. Perhaps some wars over food? But there's nothing.

I would definitely love to see an extended version with more detail.