Stunning Visuals And Epic Sci-Fi That Lacks Scientific Authenticity in Some Areas

Rating: 8/10 (28 December 2014)

Being a scientist, I've heard a lot of mixed reviews about Interstellar. Some of my colleagues have said it was a disgrace to the astrophysical society, while others have said that it was a sci-fi masterpiece. The only way I could see for myself was to go and watch this movie, so I went in with very high expectations. When I came out, I understood why I heard mixed reviews about Interstellar - because I have mixed feelings about it too and can't make up my mind about whether it's seriously awesome or just another sci-fi movie with some scientific authenticity.
To start off, this movie contains a lot of science. You've got astrophysics, theoretical physics, geology, biology, ecology and more. It is literally a sci-fi jackpot. If we ignore all the scientific accuracy behind the movie and just focus on the plot, it's a strong and powerful one that definitely moves the audience. Just seeing the Earth's declining hospitality and trying to find an alternative planet to live on is a journey worth watching on the big screen. The graphics and CGI are absolutely amazing, and the new planets they explore are imaginative and in fact, quite realistic given the data presented about them. Even the black whole and its space-bending qualities are captured beautifully on screen.
To be honest, I really enjoyed this movie even though it was a whopping three hours long. I believe it could have been cut a bit shorter to around 2.5 hours, but the pacing was decent and the plot moved along enough that the audience had time to ponder about the impending journey into the unknown. And this journey was written so well, interwoven with drama, emotion, romance, and a drive to save humanity.
Apart from the movie itself, the score by Hans Zimmer fit in well with the events going on in the movie. It was certainly a bit repetitive and had hints of tones from his previous work (Inception and the Dark Knight Trilogy), but it was done well enough to help elicit specific emotions from the audience during the astronauts' travels through space. Some pieces of music had you at the edge of your seat while others had a deeper tone that reflected humanity's last hope at finding salvation on a new planet.
If you don't care about the authenticity of the science, then Interstellar is an amazing sci-fi moving that will go down into your list of modern classics. It's got a whole bunch of science, stunning visuals, and a great storyline. If you put all those together, you get a great movie.
Now, I'll go into a little rant about the scientific authenticity behind Interstellar without giving away too many spoilers! There were some things that were explained nicely in the movie, such as relativity and the wormhole. But there were other key parts that did not make scientific sense. Let's start with the black hole. When an object approaches a black hole, it experiences what most scientists call "spaghettification", because the black hole's gravitational force is so strong that small distances within the object experience different amounts of "pull" from the black hole. As a result, if you were approaching a black hole feet first, your feet would be pulled into the black hole before your knees, elongating your feet, then calves, etc. until your entire body was a strand of spaghetti. You definitely would not survive, but it would certainly be a cool way to go out. However, the fact that the spaceship and astronaut came out unscathed from the black hole encounter...that's very far off from known astrophysical and mathematically-defined theories about the black hole's gravitational pull.
The next part is Mann's planet, which is completely composed of ice and ice clouds. Scientifically speaking, the density of ice would not be able to sustain such movements and structures seen on that planet. This is a minor detail though, and not as significant to complain about.
Another issue was the amount of fuel the shuttle had to hop from planet to planet. Even though they tackled the question of fuel capacity in the movie, there would certainly not be enough fuel from today's knowledge to be able to travel so much back and forth between the planet and the station.
Finally, what I didn't like about the movie, in terms of its scientific relevance, was the method of study for science itself. In the opening scenes, they mentioned gathering data, providing evidence, then making statements...this is true. However, a key part they are missing here is sharing data. All scientists communicate with each other in order to advance science and propel scientific breakthroughs. The lead professor in this case was withholding information from the entire human race, and another was willing to commit multiple counts of murder to steal the spaceship for himself when he was rescued by the crew. Those were some iffy parts to the story that I think were illogical and unnecessary.
As a result, because of the portrayal of scientists and some contradictions between the movie and the scientific background, I give this an 8/10. In all honesty though, it's one of the best realistic space movies in the past few years and much more purposeful and powerful than Gravity. Whether or not you care about the science, I think everyone should watch this film if they can withstand the 3 hours.