A chick flick pretending to be SF. Plagiarises a good writer, too.

Rating: Null/10 (29 November 2014)

Well, Nolan's sold out. And quite spectacularly, too. From the heights of Inception, Memento, and Batman Begins, to this. It's a pretty long drop.
In lots of ways this film is good, amazing visuals etc, but what really annoys me is (a) the whining Americans whining about their families storyline and (b) the fact that he's massively ripped off two sci-fi novels by Stephen Baxter, called "Time" and "Space" respectively, and doesn't seem to have credited it.
Stephen Baxter if you can read this, sue this piece of sh*t.
*********************SPOILER ALERT *******************************
In the books, humans discover a time machine in space and Earth faces ruin within 200 years. In the story, humans discover a time machine in space and Earth faces ruin in a similar time frame. In "Time", an astronaut sends information back in time through the wormhole thingie. In the film, pretty much the same thing happens. In the other Baxter novel, "Space", time dilation plays a huge part in the plot, an astronaut returns to the Solar System still wearing his old pressure suit and is revived in an advanced space station of the future. In the film... you see what I'm getting at?
********************* END OF SPOILER ALERT ************************
Plaigiarism IS a nasty word, but basically... this film massively plagiarises Baxters' books and that makes me very angry.
The worst thing was, he took Baxters' awesome ideas and turned them into mawkish sentimental Americanized Hollywood slush. I hate to use sexist terms, but at the end of the day - this is a chick flick pretending to be SF, and we should all be insulted by it.