I ended up watching Interstellar a third time this weekend. I am inexorably drawn towards the grandeur, spectacle, science and story represented in this movie.
Since this is my second review of the movie, it is full of spoilers. For those who have not seen the movie, here is my first review without spoilers.
Original movie review - no spoilers:
http://agingonthevine.blogspot.com/2014/11/movie-review-interstellar.html
From, this point on, the write-up dissects the good, bad and ugly of the movie and thus is all about spoilers. So please don't read further if you have not seen the movie. [Spoilers ahead].
Fascinating aspects from Christopher Nolan's Interstellar:
Tesseract: Cooper (played by Matthew McConaughey as the pioneering astronaut) is shown in a tesseract when he reaches the blackhole. A tesseract is the geometric term for a four-dimensional cube. If a cube is the three-dimensional equivalent of a square, a tesseract is the four-dimensional equivalent of the cube (the fourth dimension being time).
The writers imagine that behind (or inside) the blackhole, quantum data is available and that future humans build this tesseract, that Cooper can navigate. The purpose is to build a bridge to his daughter to convey a key message.
I had never heard of a tesseract before and had a lot of fun looking it up and seeing visualizations of it on youtube and other videos.
Verdict: 4/5 - very cool science fiction.
Plans A & B: Do humans eventually need to find another world? This is the basic question in the movie. A depleted earth is the reason given for humans to find other habitable planets. However, there are other plausible reasons too - such as another meteor striking the earth similar to the one that wiped dinosaurs out. Besides, we are planet hunting now!
Plan A is to move humans to a different planet. Plan B is to move human embryos and grow them in the habitable planet. Plan B sounds more probable anyway, and that is what scientist Brand bets on.
Verdict: 3.5/5 - ambitious conception.
Relativity: Time moves differently for different people and particularly so when gravity is involved. I don't think another movie has incorporated this mind-bending science more integrally and more seriously than Interstellar.
One of the most fascinating aspects of Interstellar is how the passage of time differentiates exponentially between Earth and the vast outer reaches of space. In the first planet visited by the Endurance, for every hour spent on the planet, seven years pass on Earth, which explains how Coop's children Murph and Tom become full-grown adults while their father is on this mission, and why Coop wants to get off this planet as quickly as possible.
A good book to read on this topic is by Lawrence Krauss' Fear of Physics
Verdict: 4/5 - this is the heart of the movie.
Visuals: If everything else about the movie fails - plot, science, plausibility, acting etc - there is no question that the visuals in this movie are nothing short of spectacular. The images of the earth, saturn, wormhole, blackhole, the 3 different terrains of the 3 habitable worlds are breathtaking.
In particular, the conception of the wormhole and how by going around it, you can see the galaxy on the other side (like looking through a telescope in reverse) is superbly realized.
Verdict: 5/5 - one can imagine this is what is drawing the crowds to the theatre.
Story and acting: Love, human desire for survival and exploration, our current understanding and conception of the universe, our impact on the planet, reaction to desperate situations are thoughtfully explored in this movie.
Love - between father and daughter.
Exploration - of other habitable planets.
Desperate situations - the brother paralyzed by the momentous change and Dr. Mann acting selfishly to be rescued at all costs.
Verdict: 3.5/5 - these were are all wonderfully realized in the movie.
Plot holes: This is what is tripping up most of the critics, and they are right.
These include:
i) why the library, and why behind the library wall?
ii) how did he get out of the black hole?
iii) how did Cooper get there the first time?
iv) if the gravity on Miller's planet is stronger than that of the earth, how did the ship find escape velocity?
v) how did he not get destroyed by the blackhole
vi) don't planets need a sun?
vii) on a blight stricken earth can you keep the NASA project secret?
viii) how was he able to code such complex data into the second hand of the watch?
Verdict: 1.5/5 - maybe this is why the sound in the movie was so loud, that you could not think?
Bootstrap paradox: This is the single biggest problem folks have with the movie. Which is, even if you buy that Cooper, working through all the plot holes above, got to the black hole and sent messages back, how did he get there the first time?!
The bootstrap paradox, or ontological paradox, is a paradox of time travel that refers to scenarios whereby items or information are passed from the future to the past, which in turn become the same items or information that are subsequently passed from the past to the future - this creates a circularity of cause-effect such that the items or information have no discernible origin. Thus, the paradox raises the ontological questions of where, when and by whom the items were created or the information derived.
After information or an object is sent back in time, it is recovered in the present and becomes the very object or information that was initially brought back in time in the first place. Numerous science fiction stories are based on this paradox, which has also been the subject of serious physics articles.
Terminator: In the first Terminator, John Connor sends his father back in time, so that his father can meet his mother and thus give birth to John Connor. In Interstellar, Cooper sends messages to his past self so that his past self can become his own future self.
Back to the Future: Marty McFly played by the charming Michael Fox, nearly created a paradox when he interfered with his parents' meeting in 1955. He erased the existence of his brother Dave and his sister Linda, as seen in a photo, and threatened his own existence. Fortunately, he still had one week to bring his parents back together in time for the Enchantment Under the Sea dance, and averted the problem at the last moment, with his father George kissing his mother Lorraine, at the dance. Had he not done so, the paradox would be easily defined: If Marty had never been born, how could he go back to 1955 to interfere with his parents' meeting in the first place?
Time after time: It's H.G. Wells versus Jack the Ripper (David Warner) - the chase extends from the 19th century to the 20th. Wells has built a time machine in his cellar, which the Ripper uses as a means of escape. Both men find themselves in 20th century San Francisco.
Time Machine: This classic was published in 1895. Wells popularized the concept of time travel by using a vehicle that allows an operator to travel purposefully and selectively.
Physics Nobel Prize at Johns Hopkins, Prof. Adam Reiss on Interstellar (who discovered that the expansion of the universe is accelerating): "I saw it opening day and in fact took my whole research group to see it. Everyone thoroughly enjoyed the movie, including or maybe especially me. I recognized a lot of well thought out physics in the movie. It was very obvious that a lot of thought had gone into the science, especially General Relativity. It was clear that the writers used what we know about the physics of the Universe as boundaries (or at least speed bumps) for where and how the plot could evolve. The movie definitely offers teachable moments which I plan to use next year in class."
Excellent review in the NY Times by political columnist David Brooks:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/21/opinion/david-brooks-interstellar-love-and-gravity.html?_r=0
Since this is my second review of the movie, it is full of spoilers. For those who have not seen the movie, here is my first review without spoilers.
Original movie review - no spoilers:
http://agingonthevine.blogspot.com/2014/11/movie-review-interstellar.html
From, this point on, the write-up dissects the good, bad and ugly of the movie and thus is all about spoilers. So please don't read further if you have not seen the movie. [Spoilers ahead].
Fascinating aspects from Christopher Nolan's Interstellar:
The writers imagine that behind (or inside) the blackhole, quantum data is available and that future humans build this tesseract, that Cooper can navigate. The purpose is to build a bridge to his daughter to convey a key message.
I had never heard of a tesseract before and had a lot of fun looking it up and seeing visualizations of it on youtube and other videos.
Verdict: 4/5 - very cool science fiction.
Plans A & B: Do humans eventually need to find another world? This is the basic question in the movie. A depleted earth is the reason given for humans to find other habitable planets. However, there are other plausible reasons too - such as another meteor striking the earth similar to the one that wiped dinosaurs out. Besides, we are planet hunting now!
Plan A is to move humans to a different planet. Plan B is to move human embryos and grow them in the habitable planet. Plan B sounds more probable anyway, and that is what scientist Brand bets on.
Verdict: 3.5/5 - ambitious conception.
Relativity: Time moves differently for different people and particularly so when gravity is involved. I don't think another movie has incorporated this mind-bending science more integrally and more seriously than Interstellar.
One of the most fascinating aspects of Interstellar is how the passage of time differentiates exponentially between Earth and the vast outer reaches of space. In the first planet visited by the Endurance, for every hour spent on the planet, seven years pass on Earth, which explains how Coop's children Murph and Tom become full-grown adults while their father is on this mission, and why Coop wants to get off this planet as quickly as possible.
A good book to read on this topic is by Lawrence Krauss' Fear of Physics
Verdict: 4/5 - this is the heart of the movie.
Visuals: If everything else about the movie fails - plot, science, plausibility, acting etc - there is no question that the visuals in this movie are nothing short of spectacular. The images of the earth, saturn, wormhole, blackhole, the 3 different terrains of the 3 habitable worlds are breathtaking.
In particular, the conception of the wormhole and how by going around it, you can see the galaxy on the other side (like looking through a telescope in reverse) is superbly realized.
Verdict: 5/5 - one can imagine this is what is drawing the crowds to the theatre.
Story and acting: Love, human desire for survival and exploration, our current understanding and conception of the universe, our impact on the planet, reaction to desperate situations are thoughtfully explored in this movie.
Love - between father and daughter.
Exploration - of other habitable planets.
Desperate situations - the brother paralyzed by the momentous change and Dr. Mann acting selfishly to be rescued at all costs.
Verdict: 3.5/5 - these were are all wonderfully realized in the movie.
Plot holes: This is what is tripping up most of the critics, and they are right.
These include:
i) why the library, and why behind the library wall?
ii) how did he get out of the black hole?
iii) how did Cooper get there the first time?
iv) if the gravity on Miller's planet is stronger than that of the earth, how did the ship find escape velocity?
v) how did he not get destroyed by the blackhole
vi) don't planets need a sun?
vii) on a blight stricken earth can you keep the NASA project secret?
viii) how was he able to code such complex data into the second hand of the watch?
Verdict: 1.5/5 - maybe this is why the sound in the movie was so loud, that you could not think?
Bootstrap paradox: This is the single biggest problem folks have with the movie. Which is, even if you buy that Cooper, working through all the plot holes above, got to the black hole and sent messages back, how did he get there the first time?!
The bootstrap paradox, or ontological paradox, is a paradox of time travel that refers to scenarios whereby items or information are passed from the future to the past, which in turn become the same items or information that are subsequently passed from the past to the future - this creates a circularity of cause-effect such that the items or information have no discernible origin. Thus, the paradox raises the ontological questions of where, when and by whom the items were created or the information derived.
After information or an object is sent back in time, it is recovered in the present and becomes the very object or information that was initially brought back in time in the first place. Numerous science fiction stories are based on this paradox, which has also been the subject of serious physics articles.
Terminator: In the first Terminator, John Connor sends his father back in time, so that his father can meet his mother and thus give birth to John Connor. In Interstellar, Cooper sends messages to his past self so that his past self can become his own future self.
Back to the Future: Marty McFly played by the charming Michael Fox, nearly created a paradox when he interfered with his parents' meeting in 1955. He erased the existence of his brother Dave and his sister Linda, as seen in a photo, and threatened his own existence. Fortunately, he still had one week to bring his parents back together in time for the Enchantment Under the Sea dance, and averted the problem at the last moment, with his father George kissing his mother Lorraine, at the dance. Had he not done so, the paradox would be easily defined: If Marty had never been born, how could he go back to 1955 to interfere with his parents' meeting in the first place?
Time after time: It's H.G. Wells versus Jack the Ripper (David Warner) - the chase extends from the 19th century to the 20th. Wells has built a time machine in his cellar, which the Ripper uses as a means of escape. Both men find themselves in 20th century San Francisco.
Time Machine: This classic was published in 1895. Wells popularized the concept of time travel by using a vehicle that allows an operator to travel purposefully and selectively.
For using this century old science fiction and cinematic technique , we cannot lay the burden of answering the question on Christopher Nolan's feet. This is the edifice of science fiction.
Verdict: 5/5 - hey, if H.G. Wells can use it, so can Christopher Nolan!
Physics Nobel Prize at Johns Hopkins, Prof. Adam Reiss on Interstellar (who discovered that the expansion of the universe is accelerating): "I saw it opening day and in fact took my whole research group to see it. Everyone thoroughly enjoyed the movie, including or maybe especially me. I recognized a lot of well thought out physics in the movie. It was very obvious that a lot of thought had gone into the science, especially General Relativity. It was clear that the writers used what we know about the physics of the Universe as boundaries (or at least speed bumps) for where and how the plot could evolve. The movie definitely offers teachable moments which I plan to use next year in class."
Overall verdict: 4/5. Landmark movie! I am glad I saw it 3 times in the movie theatre.
(Benchmark: The Godfather is 5/5 for me)
Additional Notes:
Excellent review in the NY Times by political columnist David Brooks:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/21/opinion/david-brooks-interstellar-love-and-gravity.html?_r=0
Cosmologist Neil DeGrass Tyson explains the movie this this short video:
Interstellar plot timeline Explained in a chart:
Interview with Kip Thorn, Caltech Physicist and advisor to the movie, about the Blackhole depicted in the movie (he is going to write two new papers based on this):
No comments:
Post a Comment