Better than 2001, and that's saying a lot

Rating: 9/10 (5 July 2015)

A sci-fi master piece.
Well... goes to show that you really never can trust any of the critics. This movie is a master piece. I would easily put it up there with the likes of 2001 a space odyssey. Why did I listen to the reviews, and not go see this in the theater? This movie blew me away. I was not expecting much, but I got so much more. The science is solid, great acting, great direction, and a great plot. If you've been to recent Hollywood blockbusters like Jurassic World, you'd almost think competent screen writing is dead. I mean come on! Weaponized raptors? But this movie is a breath of fresh air. I already liked director Christopher Nolan for his Dark Knight trilogy, and The Prestige. But I was not expecting to like this movie as much as I did.
It takes its time to build up the story, and the characters. The plot got me hooked almost immediately. But where the movie really shines is the science. When I watch a sci-fi movie, I want to be wowed by gadgets that seem credible and original. I want to see future technology, and not nonsense. I want to see the characters make competent decisions, and not act completely irrational just for the convenience of the plot. And boy, this movie surprised me with how well written the characters are, and how logical they act. The plot did not take any cheap short cuts. it cleverly avoided the typical Hollywood plot writing, by having the characters make the right decisions, while still coming up with obstacles that are credible. On top of that, during the last part of the movie it drops a huge twist on the audience, that I honestly did not see coming. I won't spoil it here.
What I also like, is how the movie takes its time to show the aftermath of all the events. It doesn't just end, but goes on for a bit longer to show us most of the things that we want to see. There were a few moments where it seemed the movie fast forwarded a bit too fast, which was confusing at times. So the movie does demand your full attention. I suspect that maybe some scenes were cut out to reduce the running time, and may have affected the pacing of some events. I would be very curious to see an extended cut, if it exists.
Regarding the aftermath and the ending, I think this is where I actually like this movie better than 2001 a space odyssey. I know that is controversial, and many people would probably yell out "heresy" at the mere thought of liking this over Kubrick's classic. To give a quick recap of my thoughts on this famous Kubrick movie, I think it's too much style over substance. The pacing is too slow and artsy-fartsy, making the movie a chore to sit through. It has its moments for sure, and the cinematography is a work of art. However, the ending while memorable, is also very vague and open to interpretation. One might even call it a bit unsatisfying or lazy. A cop out. So perhaps this provides some context to why I like the ending of Interstellar better; it answers all of your questions. I felt the sequel to 2001, called 2010, was also much better movie as well in many ways. While it didn't have the amazing cinematography of Kubrick, it was better paced, and did answer all the questions of the previous movie and of its own. Plus it was just much more enjoyable to sit through, even on repeated viewings. I cannot say the same for 2001.
So why the comparisons with 2001? Well the two movies have a lot in common, especially near the end. If you see the movie, you'll see what I mean.
But I think I like Interstellar better. Yes, I know. Scowl at me if you want. But I think Kubrick is not the holy grail of film making, and this is a better sci-fi movie that pretty much follows very similar themes. Perhaps Interstellar would have never existed if it weren't for movies like 2001, and that is a fair argument. But I think ultimately that Interstellar is just way more satisfying. It is not afraid to bring the plot full circle, and answer all of the questions.