A movie that demands your attention

Rating: 6/10 (9 November 2014)

Interstellar is definitely quite an experience, particularly in IMAX. I would definitely recommend that people seek it out in the biggest/best format, even though the film does have its share of problems. But still, here we have a nearly three-hour long event movie that is not an action movie, is not based on any existing franchises, features the biggest star of the moment, and is still one of the biggest releases of the year. How can you not check it out?
First and foremost, this film is a visual masterpiece. The IMAX photography is simply incredible and really draws you into the picture. I'd say that it's worth seeing the movie for this reason alone. One thing that I appreciated about Interstellar was its relative originality, or at least its creativity. It clearly borrows many concepts and plot elements from other sci-fi establishments (to name a few: 2001, Event Horizon, Aliens, Silent Running) but it combines them in such a way that feels news. The production design is a clear reflection of this, taking our own NASA aesthetic a few steps into the future using cues from these properties. For me, one measure of a sci-fi movie's originality can be found it its robots (in other words, to what extent are they like HAL 9000 or not?), and Interstellar's twin robots TARS and CASE are great characters that I suspect will become iconic in themselves. They have a very cool design and function in the movie; they stole the show at my screening.
As is typical of many of Nolan's recent movies, however, the Interstellar's script is a glaring weak link. In many instances, I can forgive its inattention to detail or logic because it is just a vehicle to get Nolan from one set piece to the next, which are often inventive and really engaging. Even the dubious premise washes away after as momentum builds (you might think that a society advanced enough to produce interstellar space travel, artificially intelligent robots, etc. would come up with a better way to harvest food) However, there is just so much bland expository dialogue throughout the movie (which is still explaining itself even in the final scenes) that the 160 minute running time begins to feel like a real chore after not too long. Most of it is completely unnecessary too, as the movie was just trying to be SO BIG that the script just can't manage without adding MORE, MORE, MORE! to the mix. For example, a completely expendable middle act (this plot has like seven acts) starring an un-billed mega-star has no effect on the plot and only exists so that characters can expound at length about the movie's most obvious themes ("Family is important, you guys!") for what feels like 4 hours; an expository parent-teacher conference scene in the first act contains some of the most embarrassing dialogue I've seen all year. The level of self- importance and gravitas that the direction lends to a lot of this dialogue really sucks the fun out of the picture when it boils over into cornball territory every now and then. In comparison to last year's Gravity, another space thriller with a bad script, this film comes across as something between an unfocused mess and an good try that never comes together.
Despite any problems with the script or execution, though, there is still a lot to recommend about Interstellar. I think it was definitely oversold and overblown by its exhaustive advertising and by the weight of expectations attached to the Nolan and McConaughey juggernauts, but it is still a really ambitious, good-hearted and non-franchise epic that is more than worthy of being part conversation this year.