Uh.....I Just Don't Get This At All.

Rating: 2/10 (13 December 2014)

How this travesty of a "sci-fi" movie has garnered so many gilded reviews is proof that either A) I am way out of step with the great, unwashed movie-going masses or B) the aforesaid masses have never seen a truly great "sci-fi" flick. This movie was interminable; I almost walked out 38 minutes into the run, when Mathew was still just a former test pilot trapped in the body of a corn-huskin' farmer.
Which leads me to my first problem with Interstellar: would you "hire" a corn-huskin' farmer and devoted Dad of 2 to be the pilot of an intergalactic space mission? Aside from 1 or 2 very brief allusions, there is ZERO explanation / justification for Matt to be selected for this mission. And strangely enough, Michael Caine ages not 1 day in the 23 years since Matt blasts off for "strange new worlds".
He is still in the same pants and shirt as he was when Matt blasted off (23 years before); the directors did give Mike a wheelchair for good measure. Before I proceed, there were 2 or 3 somewhat interesting plot twists, and the CGI / special FX were very good (just like "Gravity", another recent "sci-fi" disappointment); although the robot was utterly ridiculous; more like a walkin', talking' 21st century soda machine or a "Gen 12" Robbie the Robot.
Of course, CGI and special FX alone do not a classic "sci-fi" film make. I cannot disclose 2 major plot disappointments due to the "spoiler" clause but suffice it to say the powers behind this film have tried to fuse an entry level class in quantum physics with an action film; and it just didn't work.
I have now accepted, grudgingly, that for enough money you can get the finest actors to play in the most ludicrous films. Read the cast list; scratch your heads in disbelief, along with me. And if you want a classic "sci-fi" movie? Try 2001, Blade Runner, and Alien.