This is either sci-fi brilliance or a melodramatic self-promotion...I'm on the fence

Rating: 8/10 (24 November 2014)

Do you remember when Chris Nolan wasn't CHRIS NOLAN!! Batman Begins and The Dark Knight were amazing examples of redefining old material and creating a world as profoundly unique as Tim Burton did in the 90's. Memento and Inception are two of the smartest, most profound films I have ever seen. But what happened with the Dark Knight Trilogy is Nolan had been stroked so much that he thinks he can do anything. He thinks everything he touches is gold and that isn't quite true. Now all that being said I am so completely confused as to whether Interstellar is yet another example of his sheer brilliance as a film maker and creative mind or if its just him thinking he's great and carbon copying other material to make some sort of deeply profound sci-fi films. It did definitely have some plot holes (though not nearly to the extent of The Dark Knight Rises or Man Of Steel) but a lot of that can be explained away using hypothetical science. It is not exactly your typical mainstream sci-fi film because it is definitely thought provoking but then you think about it too much and the film starts to lose merit. The characters for the most part are surface deep and while the film is visually stunning (as far as I'm concerned its ten times the over-hyped Gravity was visually and story wise) the story makes sense and goes from being a little out there to total science fiction/hypothetical physics.) There is a lot to like about Interstellar and to call it epic is an understatement. Nolan inflates his content to the point where there is so much good and so much bad that you're left confused as to whether you loved it or hated it so I think most people want to love it.
Who is a hotter star right now than Matthew McConaughey? Not many! I wouldn't call him my favourite actor by any means but I definitely enjoy him. He has an undeniable star quality on screen. Many reviewers call his performance as brilliant mind/astronaut turned farmer a little laid back and perhaps it is. Does that bother me? No. He still gives a very emotionally charged performance and he is believable in his role. He is a commanding presence and he is good at it. Although some reviewers speak highly of her performance I was a little disappointed with Anne Hathaway...only a little. She is certainly one of my favourite actors and as many have pointed out she is very emotional in this film. She cries...a lot. She is believable in her role and she is very stoic and almost brooding at times but she has reason to be and like McConaughey she just has this amazing chemistry on screen. The two of them together are okay. Its not a romantic relationship which is fine but I think I still expected just a little more chemistry between them. Mackenzie Foy is brilliant as the young daughter "Murph." Her brief scenes are some of the best and she is really great at it. The supporting cast are all decent including the always amazing John Lithgow, Michael Caine (who was okay in his role but a far step down from his usual gravitas performances), Casey Affleck (a character that was left very underdeveloped in the big picture...and another supporting role by a surprise actor who I had no idea was in the film. Don't look!! Don't find out unless you already have because its kind of a nice surprise and in today's day and age you don't get a lot of surprises. He is also quite good in a very different role for him. And Jessica Chastain...oh my evil little nemesis. I can't stand her. Her entire persona in any film drives me insane. I don't know what it is. Her look, her voice, her acting...literally my most hated star in Hollywood. And yet critics rave about her every time and they do the same in this. Well I can say without too much bias that she was actually okay in this. There I said it. Believe it or not. She is tolerable and gives a decent performance. She doesn't have a huge role but she shows the proper range for the part. I also give hats off to Nolan and his team for bringing Tars and Case to life...the two robotic entities that are major players in the story. Both of them are terrific and add a little bit of appropriate humour, some great action and are sure to be memorable by future generations as much as other famous robots.
I'm not sure I've ever seen Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey and yet as I was watching this I felt like that was exactly what he was channelling/copying. Maybe that's okay but it just really kept reminding me of that and Nolan deserves to be known for his own style and world. I would have also liked some more depth to the world that they lived in and what was happening to the earth. My biggest beef with the film though is how it ends. Yes it wraps up nicely and everything makes sense and its not ambiguous like Inception was but there was a glaring plot hole to me. After everything they go through out there in space...they learn nothing. There is no information that they bring back and give to earth. So how do they "save" humanity? Just a thought to ponder. The truth of the matter is I wasn't disappointed. It was thought provoking, visually impressive, beautifully made...perhaps a little (or a lot) more melodramatic than it needed to be but it is what it is. Fans of smart science fiction will love it and the rest of the world will like it or hate it or be somewhere in the middle. It wasn't an Oscar contender for me but I'm glad I saw it. 8/10