What’s it about?
With humanity facing a ticking clock on earth, a band of scientists launch a mission to space to find a way to expand into the universe.
What did we think?
Anthony Sherratt says: During Interstellar I occasionally found myself reminded of the strong emotional impact that 2001: A Space Odyssey had on me as a child which was wonderful. It took me awhile (luckily we had almost three hours) to realise that while it was emotive it was actually a little light on substance. Sure there are some interesting themes and thought provoking concepts (despite some highly theoretical science) but Interstellar’s greatest failing is its obvious US target demographic.
With WAY too much exposition and Nolan’s inexplicable and incessant need to wrap every little end up neatly, what starts out as a majestic movie capturing both the wonder and terror of being in space sadly finishes feeling like a cliched film from just about any genre. Is it good? Yes. Are the effects impressive? Hell yes. Will you enjoy it? Probably. Will you rush out to see it a second time? Doubtful.
However you feel about Nolan’s previous films (e.g. Inception, the Dark Knight trilogy) is bound to be reinforced here. It has the visual gusto, elaborate plotting and awesome set pieces we’ve come to expect from him, though this time with a wonderfully tactile depiction of time-bending space travel. McConaughey makes for an affable lead even in its strangest moments, shining bright while other big names make do with disappointingly trivial roles. Unfortunately, the film is often dull, either dumping exposition or flatly delivering characters’ emotions, or both. It’s a sufficiently captivating experience in a cinema, but post-viewing reflection will likely just inspire you to watch the many similar, better space films (e.g. 2001: A Space Odyssey, Moon).