I feel I must dispute this.

Science fiction is amongst the deepest literature and literary concepts that exist in all human creation... Just not the pap that gets written now, especially not for cinema.

As for interstellar.. it may be thought provoking on some levels, but that's certainly not the same as deep, and if you start thinking about it more than on a surface level it all falls apart, further indication of it's lack of depth. I remember the same claims for Inception, more pap for the masses, is just unfortunate that people mistake, confusing and muddled for a sense of depth..

Rule of thumb, anything recognised as deep by the masses, tends not to be, because in general the masses don't have the brain power to be able to distinguish depth collectively and just tend to reiterate invalid opinion as a justification for their own perceived intelligence.

EDIT.. However this doesn't invalidate it as an enjoyable piece of entertainment.

Yeah, you're right.

Interstellar was just about as deep as your above average sci-fi short story. Which is fine. The storyline was a little convulted, but I'm fine with that for a change - I sort of enjoy filling gaps in any storyline, so meh. At any rate, and that's the most important thing, it reminded me why I fell in love with sci-fi genre, which is just amazing to me.

And it got my wife asking about relativity. Coool.

I would never dare to use sarcasm!

Say what you will about Nolan, but he always manages to make his movies very engrossing. My favorites of his are The Prestige and now Interstellar. Inception was pretty cool, too, though I think the whole concept went a little too far for its own good. While I quite enjoyed the Batman trilogy, I think some people praise those films a wee bit too much.

Interstellar was really the perfect movie to see at the cinema. I don't do that very often anymore since I don't think most movies are worth the price of admission. This one though totally was. Sure, the plot-twist towards the ending was more than a little far-fetched as far as I am concerned, but it sure didn't diminish from the movie as a whole. Visually speaking, it was quite a breathtaking experience.

Just noticed I've actually never watched Insomnia. Hm. Off you go on my library hold list.

From a "filmic" point of view, this movie is a masterpiece: I **was** in Saturn, as much as I **was** in deep space while watching 2001: a Space Odyssey.

But then comes Nolan, or what has become of Nolan since The Prestige (by far, his best movie): he sets up a wonderful and very precise clock, each gear engaging perfectly the others, and spends the whole movie explaining it. Of the whole cast, just two or three of the characters were "real" characters, the others were just leaflets for the plot or the scientific components of it. Synthesis, man! You have music and visuals, don't need all those words!

In the end I enjoyed the movie. Or at least I would have, if it weren't for my girlfriend grabbing and twisting my little finger during every dramatic scene.

Saw it yesterday. I thought it was kinda flawed and it felt a bit like a very chatty 2001 remake, he really stuffs his movies with exposition.... but i actually liked it for the most part. Probably most out of all the Nolan films I've seen. Just not a big fan of the camera work, it felt kinda "small scale" most of the time for me.

Actors and effects were fine, story was a bit of a conglomerate of many sci fi cliches, i kinda hoped to see something actually new, but it was ok.

Talking purely in visual terms (not that there's plenty of other stuff that deserves discussion!), Gravity still holds the title for having my favourite action sequence in film. Specifically, when the debris orbiting Earth hits the space station for the first time. Wow!

However, I embarrassed myself in the cinema by unconsciously saying "that's amazing!" with almost sexual groans and moans during the tidal wave sequence. It was a visceral experience, filled with both fear and awe. I'd watch it again just for that moment :D

I also really liked the visual representation of 4 dimensions in 3 (well, actually 2 because it's a film). I've always struggled to picture the 4th dimension with my puny monkey brain and I thought the film did it quite elegantly.

Post-viewing, I've really enjoyed watching YouTube videos explaining the physics of Interstellar; including what was done well, and what was done not so well :)

I think it's a masterpiece and one of the greatest sf movies ever made. Yes, it is a little flawed at times, but I will take flawed ambition, talent and vision over perfect mediocrity that most big movies today represent. It is visually stunning (practicall effects, models, actuall sets), yet the effects are never more important than the characters and story. In fact, although the scale of the movie is amazing, a lot of it is shot in just a few humble locations- house on a farm, a few rooms in NASA. It is perfectly paced, the music is unique and fits the movie like a glove. It's a grand adventure. The acting is also superb, even Ann Hathaway's performance is very good, Nolan is realy helping become a fine actress.

nolan seems to be getting better as a director yet regressing as a screenwritter nowadays.This movie was very much like The Dark Knight Rises for me-visually stunning,yet nothing but frustrating from storytelling perspective.

I thought the movie was merely okay. It has a lot of stuff in it I'd cut out and this is coming from some one who thinks 2001 is the best movie ever made.

The space stuff in it was very well done and enjoyable, but I did have some issues with the overall script, which brings the movie down a bit.

One of the most stupid films I have ever seen. Seems something like "Michael Bay in Space", starting as a spectacular sci-fi story and then turning into your usual USA-centric crap with family, honor, flags, famous and worthless actors, "home-coming" bullshit and the likes.

When I leaved the cinema the only idea I retained from this waste of time and money was: "the most important thing in the universe is pussy. A romantic one, though". We are not explorers, we are just dumb.

Really, Hollywood should disappear in a black hole and NEVER come back again....

Spoiler ahead More minor spoilers ahead:

Given that we know very little about the actual "blight". I suppose it was on purpose left for the audience to wonder on their own.

Don't forget that close to the end; we saw an O'neill habitat with lot of greens.

Discussion boards. My post. Subjectivity kind of implied ;-) At any rate, I did say it's not particularily deep. Your above average sci-fi short story is not particularily deep, which was my point that I didn't quite bring across all too well.

I'm not writing up a review, just summing up my thoughts you know.

Oh yeah, I bloody loved the pacing - "here, we'll spend 45 minutes on presenting characters now." It was a beautiful change from the modern trend of jumping right into the action.

Yea, i like the jumping in trend, it is there so that people can tell they have just sat down to a movie and not an episode of 'Days of our Lives'.