10 Reasons why I will go see Interstellar Again

It's been two weeks since the movie came out, but it is still scratching around in the back of my mind. There seemed to be a torrent of inexplicable criticism that lashed the Net the weekend Christopher Nolan's latest epic, Interstellar, was released.

This criticism was in fact rather bizarre considering that most other major movies being made today are actually based on comic books. Christopher Nolan took time to develop an intelligent story and had his brother, Jonathon, on the project working the script. The Nolans went so far as to reach out to several physicists including Kip Thorne. Interestingly, this Fall seems to be the season for Black Holes given the recent release of the Stephen Hawking biopic, "The Theory of Everything."

Suffice it to say, a lot of thought went into this movie, and not just thoughts about how to create the next funky visual effect or thoughts on viral marketing. This movie is in a sense the true heir to the 2001 Legacy (which didn't quite play out as expected with 2010 - although fun fact - John Lithgow was in that movie and this one).

The criticism leveled at the movie called it preposterous and attacked the science. It also attacked the philosophical stand within the science presented, which is even more disappointing. Physicists have some humanity too - although to combine the two topics seems to be taboo for many critics who perhaps understand neither too well.

One thing is certain, great movies provoke strong feelings - often times those feelings are negative. There are parts of the science presented in Interstellar that I don't fully agree with, yet that in no way diminishes the experience of the movie or its greatness - this is a film that will stand the test of time.

I for one, will demonstrate my support for Interstellar by going to see it in the theater (in IMAX) again. Here are ten reasons why:

1. Because, as stated, this film is a classic and seeing it while it is still in theaters helps to demonstrate my support for more intelligent films. I'm sick of all the comic book crap lowering the general IQ - this movie proves that intelligent cinema can be entertaining and successful.
2. Because the night I went, the movie sold out and I had to sit in the front two rows. Seeing Matthew McConaughey's ten foot nose for two hours took a little something away from the experience and a return trip with the proper aspect ratio would be nice.
3. Because it is great seeing Matt Damon as a bad guy (can't get enough of it).
4. Because I need to learn that gravity watch manipulation trick.
5. Because this is the first of dozens of wormhole movies and TV shows that actually considers what a wormhole might be like (as opposed to just driving through it).
6. Because the smart-talking robot is the most interesting AI on screen since HAL - and the retro aspects are a nice touch.
7. Because Interstellar shows that even with the planet dying, NASA is poised to save us (as long as we don't cut all their budget).
8. Because being stuck on a deserted planet with Anna Hathaway might not be so bad.
9. Because time isn't always on our side, but sometimes it works out pretty well.
10. Because I'm hoping Nolan will make more movies like Memento, Inception and Interstellar and never sell out to the comic book mafia again.

copyright 2014, Stephen Lahanas

Read More

Looper Dooper?

It had all of the elements of possible science fiction classic; Bruce Willis, time travel, Philip K. Dick and yet somehow this movie failed to achieve its desired paradox. But before we delve into the movie itself we must describe the strange dimension we were transported to when our local theater decided to sell beer and wine at the concession stand. Never before (at least not since the days when people used to sneak in their own refreshments to drive-ins) were we exposed to interactive cinema like this. 

Let's all go to the Lobby - and get plowed

So, during the film, there were these two guys behind us - we knew they had been drinking because at several points during the movie they discussed whether or not to go back out and buy more wine. They decided to engage in an interactive dialog between themselves and the movie. The first comments ranged from - "I can't follow this, what's happening here" and quickly degenerated into - "Oh my god this is the worst movie ever - what the hell is going on - how could anyone understand this - it's impossible." This went for nearly the entire film.

Now we could spend a lot of time dissecting the movie, but why bother, we'll never remember it as well we will as the theater dialog about it. Let's do a quick overview on Looper anyway:

• The near-future looks really depressing
• The distant-future looks worse
• Bruce Willis and Robin really don't look much alike
• Bruce Willis with long stringy dark hair is just not something you want to see (5 seconds onscreen was 4 seconds too long)
• That little kid really needed a time-out (no time travel puns intended)
• There was lots of gratuitous violence towards the end - but where were the laser guns ???!!!!

 I'm not working for Batman one minute longer!

Anyway, enough of that, what we really need to address is time travel and paradoxes. This is what seemed to be troubling our intoxicated fellow movie-goers. The basic premise is this; if you change something in the present it effects not just the future but any future travelers who happen to be visiting your own temporal neighborhood. Now just to be clear for all you doubters out there - time travel is in fact possible - we all do it every day - only it's one way - forward. This movie assumes that there is a device which looks like a cross between an iron lung and a vacuum cleaner that can somehow send people back in time (the other way). To help better understand how this might be possible we've brought together the world's two foremost experts on time travel and physics, Albert Einstein and Stephen Hawking...

 Time Travel is simple, don't believe us, just ask Einstein and Hawking

So, now it's all perfectly clear now right? Still don't get it. We'll this isn't a science blog, but we will provide a checklist to determine whether or not you should attempt to watch complex, alternate reality and time travel movies.

The Sci-Fi IQ Test:

• Jean Luc Picard is the guy who directed The Fifth Element. (T or F)
• If you go back in time and kill your grandfather the only thing you miss out on is Christmas presents. (T or F)
• In the show Sliders, there was an alternate Universe where the Bengals actually made it to the Superbowl and won! (T or F)
• In the original planet of the Apes, the three guys and 1 girl were supposed to repopulate the human race (T o F)  and BTW who came up with the math on that?
• In the Matrix, it was the Machines who scorched the sky or was that the Terminator series? 
• How many levels of dream reality (Inception) can you sink into without getting lost?

Does all of this seem too complicated, perhaps you should just head to the concession stand and get liquored up.

Read More

Source Code triggers the Blue Screen of Death

There's nothing more exciting than watching the same people do the same thing over and over and over again, right? That's why bowling is such a big hit on TV and why people love putting those repetitive motion screen savers on their desktop. But what if it wasn't exactly the same thing but just mostly the same thing - would the changes impact the future - would they result in the birth of a parallel universe - would they help us finally get Jerry Springer off the air? Who Knows.

We were however thinking of all this while we watched the new Jake Gyllenhaal movie Source Code. We were also thinking he'd make a lousy detective if he had to get killed about 9 times before discovering anything meaningful in an investigation. We were also wondering why a would-be terrorist would blow up a train just before nuking the entire city where that train would be traveling through - why not just let the atomic bomb take care of both the city and the train. It was obvious though that we think entirely too much for Hollywood's tastes.

The little bomb had to be on the train so Jake could stop the nuke, get it? We also needed the time to watch his character unravel and gradually work towards the movie's punchline - let's just say Jake is half the man we thought he was.

What if you had to live this day over and over and over again - what if the Groundhog blew up instead of seeing its shadow?

The 'time travel to the past leads to paradox, possible correction and parallel universe creation' theme is becoming a bit of a cliche these days - check the Terminator series as another popular example of this growing sub-genre of Science Fiction. We were definitely grateful that Jake didn't bring along with him the wacky British accent he sported in Prince of Persia, although he did retain the razor stubble. As such movies go this one wasn't altogether bad - it just didn't seem as new or exciting as it might have otherwise been given a better script. And there were some aspects of the movie that we found a bit silly, most notably the evil professor guy with cane. His performance seem destined to land him a spot in the cartoon hall of fame.

Was Microsoft involved in suppressing this ad, did they help build the 'Way Back machine' seen in the movie Source Code, we may never know.

Ultimately, both the plot device and alleged Air Force technology came crashing down as the movie sank into further cliches and the inevitable happy ending or Blue Screen of Death that marks the final moments of a failed concept. Stephen Hawking said it best; "“I think computer viruses should count as life. I think it says something about human nature that the only form of life we have created so far is purely destructive. We've created life in our own image."

Well maybe the quote didn't have much to do with the movie - but our expectations on this film certainly crashed after suffering many fatal errors and we doubt the concept can ever be rebooted.

Copyright 2011, Raving Reviews™

Read More