Interstellar movie review 

Fax

Nah

ayy SubTheGamer I totally agree with you

Concur

Nope.

My worst review is a positive review of Interstellar. I'll take it.

***** Don't listen to these hacks, brutha. The only 2 things i liked about this movie were the organ music in certain tense scenes, and the little girl who played Murphy.

***** Personal I thought this was Christopher Nolens best film. While most of his movies are nice, they still fall victim to bad characters, dumb dialog, and god awful arks, this was his only movie of his in which I actually gave a crap about anything or any one. While the rest of his films could be worth buying on blue ray or no alcohol required, this was differently an Awsomtaculer. Still love the review thou. Keep it chill.

***** I mean, This is probably the first time i heavily disagreed with your rating, but agree with your consensus. For me this was nothing but Awesometacular. This was the closest thing to a perfect film, yet at the same time not perfect at all. I felt that whatever flaws the movie had were purely subjective. I totally get why you said what you said, but I think all those instances made me like the film even more. Interstellar is not everyone cup of tea. What I may find freaking fantastic may seem boring to others. While the film is very entertaining, I do not believe people should go to this movie expecting to be entertained. Every Christopher Nolan film needs to be watched with the right expectations. I feel like too many people are wanting his films to be something they never set out to be. And if the movie deviates ever so slightly from what people expect they just tune out and get upset. I dont think Jeremy did this, but I know several people around me did. I am curious what format ***** watched the movie in. I drive 200+ miles just to see this in 70MM Imax. BEST DECISION EVER.

You're wrong, too. In a different way.

thegreatmoustachio Exactly..This shows dat He only understands movies with simple story..God knws wht review he will give about Inception or Schindler's list..

he did review inception..awesometacular...Interstellar was the only movie I have EVERY disagreed on ..he's always spot on

thegreatmoustachio good for you. i respect your opinion. atleast you wont say he was wrong or something

If you agree with someone 99% of the time, that means you are just adopting their opinions.

You should see his review for Dunkirk. Seems like he really doesn't adore Nowlan movies

@@astrasotyeah me too did not expect you’re here too

same here,, this kind of movie is a keeper, i even prefer to buy a Bluray once they release it.. mind blowing!

in my opinion the movie had far more money than talent, like seriously, I could literally write better scenes.....I'm not even joking.......and that's not ok

Yeah, it sounds like you're simply suffering from having watched really bad movies so far.

It' a great movie, but not that much for a Top 20

Currently 20, just saw it, wasn't really as impacted by the film as by, say, Inception I'm curious, does the OP still have the same opinion all these years later (long shot but they might answer😂)

well that's not saying much for cinema then is it?Because there have been much finer movies that had more reality and real life connection then this sci-fi fantasy.

MAnnaconduit1 ya but its all depends on the individual who is watching it... it might not be the movie for u but for me and other people... this was the best movie i had ever watched.. that's why debating about the best movie is irrelevant..

Guy KC i am not talking about best movie, i am talking about how pathetic and unsettling it is for our species that movies like this are heralded far more then movies that actually deal with history, historic people and or principles etc.--things that have a real connection to our world and reality--this film was supposed to be that, dealing with a topic that is not as discussed as much as it possibly should and yet the film then takes a nose dive and turns into a inception like doctor who at the end of it.

then you haven't seen much movies...

MAnnaconduit1 I can assure you, there are much better movies than Interstellar. Always will be. I feel like a film (Or book, hell, any work of art) can only become a masterpeice given time. I do not think this movie will stand the test of time like 2001 has. Love it or hate it, 2001 will always be the masterpeice. Because it stands the test of time.

For me Interstellar A-, Gravity A but i prefer Interstellar way more tbh

I feel like Interstellar is more emotionally driven than Gravity

Interstellar was trash

@@firebird_spleen4190 r u dumb

Nukes for Dayz Nk their mind can’t comprehend what was happening probably

Its 11/10

10/10

What is the 0.5 flaws ?

I love the 95% humor in this comment.

8.9

What about when harambe died?

Who the hell cried when michael jackson died?

milie jones if he cried at the end of interstellar then he must of fucking balled in the end of one flew over the cuckoo's nest.

AsianTheDomination his dad

Damn yo papa's a real MJ fan. My respect to him.

You're 100% right. Jeremy also heavily criticised the opening establishing shots of Ridley Scott's Alien as 'slow' even though they weren't even long.

Batman i love jeremy, but he is not a person to sit through slow scenes. if he thought alien and drive was slow, 2001 must be an eternity for him.

I saw it today and the movie was just kind of an organised mess

Oke doke; we're gonna do this I guess. Well, I'm flattered that you give me credit for being "the reason cinema is spewing out overloaded action movies..." That's quite a lot of power & influence for one human being to have, so it's quite humbling that I'm viewed as such a figure of stature & influence in the powers that be of a multi-billion dollar industry. As for me getting bored if there are no "high octane scenes", I would phrase it simply that I get bored if something doesn't hold my interest. This seems like a "no-brainer" situation as most every human being on earth is like that. And while it is true that I gravitate toward the fun summer movies like "X-Men: Days of Future Past", or "The Avengers", I also LOVE movies like "Nightcrawler" and "Pulp Fiction". it may appear to some that I require "High octane" action in a movie, but for those willing to take the time to look, this is not the case. As for my comparing "Interstellar" to "2001"; I was comparing them to address that they are in fact not as alike as some have said. You see, in the weeks and days leading up to this movies release, many people talked heavily on the inspiration that Nolan took from 2001 A Space Odyssey for his film "Interstellar". I simply wanted to clear up what I considered misinformation in the comparisons of the two in saying "If you are expecting 2001: A Space Odyssey; don't". You see, you can say "Movie A is NOT movie B" without pledging allegiance or bias toward either movie. These points made don't even touch on my problems with some of the physics/logic in the movie. Like a planet being so close to a black hole that it experiences time relativity, yet doesn't get gobbled up by said black hole. However, if you paid attention to my review, I said this movie is good. I recommend this movie to people. Which I'm sure you got if you got the details of "Interstellar", otherwise the implication is Interstellar didn't go over your head, but my review did. And that couldn't be the case here....but just in case, I'll try to make my next review more accessible to you.

***** Jeremy there is no real point to responding to the comments, all they want is to give you pain.

Time travel in Looper doesn't even make sense. It wasn't a criticism about science, it was about logic and common sense. How could the present version of me (Joseph Gordon Levitt) kill the future version of me (Bruce Willis), and then kill myself (the present version of me). That means the future version of me never existed because I kill myself in the past. Also, how could the future version of me survived in the past if I killed him during the present time, and then I killed myself? You didn't understand me.I know it sounds fucked up but I'm correct lol

Estivel Garcia Oh I agree. Looper is wack. But as the movie itself said, "The more you think about it, the less sense it makes." The Directors know it didnt make sense they just wanted to make a fun movie that happened to require a buttload of suspension of disbelief

"LET THE MOVIE DEFINE ITS OWN SCIENCE" You can't have hard science and then have love magic black holes at the same time

SerenGetter why not?

nmcvicker03 Because black holes aren't made by love magic.

What are you talking about? 71% is not a bad rating at all. How I see movie ratings: F: 0-20% D: 21-40% C: 41-60% B: 61-80% A: 81-100% On a normal grading system, the movie was apparently average, but how I see it, it's at least a B.

71% Isn't anything special. IMO this was a special movie. Plus compare that to the audiences 8.6/10 on IMDB

MToThe7 I know, but it still seems like a good rating for me. And I never said the rating was as good as IMDb...

that's because Nolan is popular. Most people liked this film cuz they wanted to like it.

awesome420ication I didn't even know who Nolan was before I saw this in cinema, I was blown away

baldur exactly

Let's be real if there wasn't for TDK trilogy, no one would say that.

I’m gonna be real, the script in Interstellar is dogshit lol

There are people out there who think that Nolan can do no wrong though so sometimes it might

Exactly

+BlackAera I totally agree, when I watched it I came out the cinema tearful because I realised what I just watched. The movie enlightened me in a way because it showed me the meaning of human life. Nolan really did the story justice.

It was like gazing into pure science.

Agreed BlackArea :) there are no words for how amazing it is.

Words are not good enough to describe it.

I never thought I'd say this but, I love you, like i really love you like ALOT.

Caught it again tonight at the cinema and it reignited my fire for this being one of my favourite films ever!!

i really agree with you, very interesting and strong movie, 1st time that my 8 year old son set in the theater for the in tire movie , and he even dreamed about it, wok up yesterday morning running to his dad crying saying "dad pls don't go outer space" lol.., ! fantastic movie, very disappointed of jeremys review,, he wasn't that smart after all. lol

annie countryman Dude your writing is equivalent to that of a 8 year old.

PatTheTrickster your*

Eddiexx4 ?

PatTheTrickster There you go, you fixed it. But you still need to fix "a 8 year old" to "an 8 year old".

I think you meant to say "most of our opinions on movies are the same, but since they're different on this movie, it means your wrong." Do you realize how ridiculous you sound?

Lukies "I have to disagree with you" =/= "You're wrong"

Le Phoque Bleu Thank you that's exactly what I was trying to say. Lukies is just trying to pick a fight.

Le Phoque Bleu "Normally your reviews are spot on" =This review is wrong.

Lukies By "spot on", she means "in agreement with my opinion", she cleary said it.

you would have to watch an episode of doctor who to understand it fully

yah there were only like, 2 pit stops...

***** I don't think Inception is a sci-fi

Jacob Jeffries How is it not a sci fi? Being in space isn't a qualification for sci fi. and ***** there's nothing wrong with discussion. I said discuss, not fight. Comparing two films from the same director helps us see how his style changes and helps us understand the body of his work.

***** I honestly think Interestellar was a much more meaningful movie, mostly because it dared to discuss much grander and relevant topics than inception, also (and this is not a reflection on how good inception was) I hated how people overhyped the mindfucks in inception.

Also, as far as I know, the concept for Interstellar was developed by Jonathan Nolan before the story for Inception was developed (since Spielberg was originally going to direct Interstellar years ago).

+Ana Luisa Lima who gives a shit

+Linkjoy123 It was actually Anne Hathaway that said it. And it made sense. Its just a theory, so you walking out of the movie is your loss.

Cannot what understand it?

you there got high stress value on your IQ to understand this movie. try put some foundation there. oh! you not science or engineering scholar. you no need bother to understand about it. #youstupidbitch

Real Bruce Lee FUCKK UUUUUUUUUUUUU

He does not make awesome films really no surprise.

Zvane Sunfist obvious troll is obvious

Zvane Sunfist Well his movies are really overrated, all of them.

Kristian Kjenslie I am being serious, anyone who thinks the batman trilogy must not like batman very much. I find Nolans films to either be bad or just plain good. Not amazing.

EcllipsE2510 buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuut IM BATMAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN

Big hero 6 is better than this ;D

Glauber Araujo I bet it will. I love animated movies and I'm not that big of a Nolan fan, but I did love Inception and Batman Begins.

Oh, no! An absolutely amazing movie got a higher rating than a pretty good movie! What is this world coming to?

Gravity was decent at best.

George Baum Gravity was phenomenal, period. Keep the "GRAVITY IS OVERRATED" circlejerk going if you must, but when it comes down to it, I've got 97% of professional critics and the Academy saying, yeah, it was pretty fucking great. And, well, when it comes to judging film based on their actual quality (as opposed to by going along with the internet hivemind), 97% of critics and the Academy win out over a bunch of high school to college age kids jerking themselves off over Christopher Nolan.

I also just watched it and holy shit, it blew me away. I mean some parts didn't really seem too good to me but overall they didn't bother me enough to make me say it was anything less than amazing.

I could not have said it better. Loved this film.

Critics didn't hate this movie. Critics gave the rating it deserves: 8/10 at best, watchable movie with ambitious ideas. It is the rest of the people who overhyped it because of Nolan.

+Andrew Wang I disagree. It takes getting used to the slow pace of 2001, but when you do, and you get sucked in, you really feel like you're in the vast vacuum of space. And considering that this was a movie made in 1968, that's a huge accomplishment.

***** I was more considering the two films viewed side-by-side,

+Andrew Wang Will that be enough time for everybody to forget how bad it was?

@@randolphpatterson5061 Stfu you don't know cinema

its not nostalgia , its art , 2001 is not a scy-fy action fest

It's better on drugs.

well i dont expect much from somebody who doesnt understand movies. its not all about the story acting etc. sometimes its just the beauty in movies that make them what they are. 2001 is pure cinema. You have to be a true film lover to "get" films like that

CourtCjbLand Remember that "classic" and "nostalgic" isn't very good words to use while decribing why a movie is good, because it's really just sort of an illusion that clouds your judgement of the movie as a movie, and it also changes from person to person, and when a movie gets old enough the nostalgia factor will sort of fade away, and "wow-factor" that's there because it was such a new thing when it came out will disapear entirely because for the futures people it wont be new. So yeah everytime somebody is saying classic or nostalgic I ignore it.

Leon Lind And aslo stuff about how it's revulutionary and changed filmmaking... Like what does that got to with the movie!? It has to do with the time, and good movies are timeless. If you saw the movie 30 years after it's relese and never herd of it and have seen plenty of simular things and have no idea when the movie was released, then you probably wouldn't have thought that 2001 was anything speciall. Like I've shown the star wars movies to alot of newcommers, mostly adults, and the usuall respons is that The prequels are better then The originals.

Can't agree more.

I agree!!!!

I'm with you on that. I went in with low expectations and was frankly gobsmacked by the emotion and scale of the film. So much so it is all I've thought about for 2 days since watching it.

Completely agree.

For the record Im not discounting Jeremy's opinion, it is valid. What Im discounting is all the morons with a very limited view of physics trying to play science.

***** Yea, using a blackhole to slingshot a ship that looked a little better than a shuttle with almost no fuel was very realistic. As well as going into the blackhole itself.

Jonnjon They addressed both of those things within the movie and within Kip Thorn's (the physicist who worked on the movie) book. A gentle black hole would allow for a ship to glide around it, staying just far enough away to no be spaghettified, and get a boost strong enough to escape, assuming they manage to counter the immense gravity (which they did by ejecting the two pods, allowing The Endurance to escape). As for surviving in the black hole, again this is theoretically possible. They wouldn't survive for long, but they would survive. If one was going sufficiently fast they would be able to bypass the horizon and enter without being crushed. beyond that however it's all just speculation, and in the words of Neil Degrasse Tyson - "we don't really know what's in a Black Hole, so take it and run with it."

***** Sure but a spaceship like that with almost no fuel left, wouldn't you need a fair and constant amount of propulsion to do that? Also a ship at sufficient speed going into a black hole seems plausible now a man in a suit? Just no... even if there's something unknown in the center we all know what gravity would do to him long before he managed to get there. Space is a dangerous place, I didn't like how Interstellar portrayed it. They were selling it as realistic and yet they don't even show the spaceship having any trouble during atmospheric entry.

Jonnjon Actually no, they only needed enough fuel to enter Gargantua's gravity well to slingshot around. Again the only reason Endurance escaped the horizon was because they jettisoned the two shuttles to get rid of weight. As for him surviving inside the blackhole. That can be explained one of either two ways. One, he had already gone through the horizon, which means he would be able to survive a short amount of time (a few minutes at most) with *or* without his shuttle, as gravity would not be bound by it's walls, having it there would just be like putting an egg in a can and crushing the can... it would still crush the egg. So if he managed to make it through as portrayed in the film he could potentially survive for a few minutes. The other explanation (and the one not addressed in the film, as they had already explained it another, more scientifically accurate way) is that the fifth Dimensional humans altered the black hole to allow him entry. Granted the second of the two is pretty much bull and is useless as the movie itself uses the first scenario perfectly. Beyond that point however it's impossible to tell what would happen next. At that point it becomes pure speculation and science completely breaks down, as the laws of physics no longer hold sway. As for the reentry... they did show the shuttle having issues with reentry, multiple times in fact. They show the Endurance breaking up upon hitting the upper atmosphere of Mann's planet, as well as Coop having difficulty slowing down the Shuttle on Miller's planet. The first time especially as he wasn't using thrusters until the last possible second to conserve fuel. they even show him having issues during the reentry, and Case (or Tars, can't remember which), asks if he would like to turn off feedback, but Coop refuses to so he can feel whats going on... so yes they addressed both of those in as realistic a way as possible.

I thought the movie was great. Yeah I would've rather had at least 30 minutes edited out, only because the URGENCY of saving the human race loses steam when the story telling slows down. If people want to poke holes in time travel logic then don't watch time travel movies cuz Back To The Future and Looper subject to chicken and the egg debate as well. McConaughey GREAT and more believable as an astronaut than Clooney in Gravity. WHIPLASH and NIGHT CRAWLER also must sees.

tommy m Well it wasn't URGENT urgent, they had like... 100 years or so? They had a while. Obviously more than 20 years lol. Not only that, but she saved Earth after 20 years... remember? lol Oh, Chicken and the Egg isn't a debate. It's the Egg. Think of evolution. There has to be a difference in species between what gives birth TO something that has to be classified as a chicken and the new chicken. So that means something (not a chicken) gave birth to something using an Egg... to a chicken. So technically, the Egg came first. lol But yes, those films are must see. Whiplash, maybe not. Interstellar is something everyone in the world needs to see at least one. Such a great movie.

tommy m dinosaurs put eggs before chicken just saying...

Cynima Rapscallion I don't think tommy m was referring to the literal chicken/egg debate. I think he was hinting at the Ontological Paradox, which is a time travel paradox describing circularity of causation (for which the chicken/egg situation is often referenced).

lyn0002 I know, but I'm using that as a metaphor, too. It's not a debate about the movie. The movie makes sense and those who get it, know there is no plot holes or leaps in logic. Also, I figured that one out, too. Because they are 5th dimensional, for THEM there is no 'first time.' They already did it, they just had to put it into motion, which they did, and past selves solved it and figured it out. Yes it is a loop, and wouldn't make sense on our 3rd/4th dimensional side, but it does on their 5th dimensional side.

You my friend, deserve a Nobel prize!!!!!

I'm in total agreement with you this is the kind of movie that needs time to process the plot,emotions, and overall creativity from Christopher Nolan. This is by far his best film.

it never introduced any parallel universe... I ain't hating on your comment, I'm just saying... Also I thought it was pretty straightforward, I never lost a beat of the movie, that said I think a STEM education background is much needed to apreciate how good and relevant is this movie and I think you are right, without the right background, particularly a bit of knowledge of relativity it seems like a regular time travel movie (which I mantain it is not, even if people want to call it that).

***** No attack there, it became one of my favorite movies too.

Black "wholes"

That’s how I felt after I left There Will Be Blood

spinz186 i dont know what you think you're saying but pacing and structural elements are precious. and furthermore this is his opinion just like you have yours. just differ and dont complain.

"I really wish people would ignore flaws, because this is a Christopher Nolan film, thus it must be perfect".

Think of it this way: the movie was so good that they HAVE to pick apart the pacing because the other elements were really well done.

Perhaps structural elements actually matter for a lot of people, which is why they bring them up?

SerenGetter exactly xD

opposite of what jeremyjahns said.

It is Nolan's INCEPTION in space. Script was everywhere and at points making no sense whatsoever. I rate it a B- bordering C

TheKayaklover inception make sense = get a brain.

7.9...... ok and what tiny thing prevented you from just adding 0.1 to just give it an even 8?

TheKayaklover What makes sense to you if not Inception?

Foxcatcher was not nominated for Best Picture.

Shah Rizal No lol, Nolan fanboy

It's a good movie, but it's not as underwhelmingly amazing as people say it is, imo.

Shah Rizal Nightcrawler wasn't even nominated for best picture and best actor.. and you think Interstellar deserved those more? for real?

Arian hmn Yeah, cause screaming out "MURPH!" and neglecting your son are the traits of an Oscar winning performance/writing/directing achievement. Nolan fanbase needs to calm the fuck down and go back and watch his movies that were actually great...like Memento or the Prestige. Because those are a million times better than what I saw in this so-called "best film ever". And I agree with you. Nightcrawler was the movie more deserving of praise than Interstellar. It was one of the best of 2014, top 5 for sure.

It's confirmed them! It's going to be remembered as a classic

6Rock6God6 a classic? No...

Time will tell.

X Men 3 also had mixed reviews...

damn that's some hardcore denial

I tweeted him that as well!

This movie is kind of confusing and I have many questions like? 1. How come corn is the last food people eat? Don't cows eat corn to grow fast so there should be lots of beef too? How could there be duststorms all around the world causing a worldwide famine? 2. How come 1 hour in one of the planets is 7 years on earth? If the dark hole exerts that much pull on the planet that time slows down so much, how come the gravity is only 130% that of earth's? 3. How the hell did the protagonist survive in one piece in a dark hole. Shouldn't the dark hole tear him apart down to the atom? 4. If it's true that humans somehow survived and ascended into 5th dimensional beings, why are they trying to change to past? How do they know the beings that created the wormhole were 5th dimensional beings? Shouldn't there be a better way to communicate with the humans except through another human in a dark hole?

Xiangming Yang There is a scene in the movie where Murph visits Tom's house in the future, and is seen eating a SOUFFLÉ. I'm sure that there are livestock around, but the blight wipes them out. And because of climate change, earth is no longer able to grow certain crops; corn is the only known, EFFICIENT crop in the setting of Interstellar. The planet was in Gargantua's orbit. The gravity is 30% more of earth's, and that's a pretty significant number. Time is obviously relative around a black hole, so Gargantua is able to draw time into the singularity, not the entire planet. So nobody knows what happens when you enter a black hole. We do know that the gravity is so strong that we can't see the horizon at all, as Romily established in the movie. He wasn't ripped to pieces because after he ejected he was absorbed into the Tesseract. It was after the black hole that the movie began touching on some major philosophical points. So it gets a little tricky at this part of the movie. I find the fact that the Tesseract was constructed by advanced humans is absolute dogshit. I see it as a personification of Murphy's law (if it can happen, it will happen). And as iterated before, "love is the one thing that transcends time and space". Cooper used the Tesseract to communicate with Murph through the watch he gave her (the love that transcends time and space). I disagree with all of your points, but I understand the last one. It hinges on the theory that physics is a multidimensional force at play, and that's when the movie creates a divide. I personally loved the entire movie, even all the scientific jargon.

Bruh I was coming here to tell him that. lol

Xiangming Yang i think the cows already extinct in this movie because of the dust even cooper's daughter maybe the last generation to live on the earth dr brand say, btw u didn't see any animals do u?

Because they were better movies.

ANIRUDH MENON well 2001 was better but I enjoyed interstellar better... but gravity is not nearly as good as interstellar and I enjoyed that movie. however, the problems that 2001 DOES have are worse than the problems interstellar has. that's why it's annoying that Jeremy was complaining about them. He says the pacing is bad and he was waiting for things to happen, but 2001 is the same way, if not worse in this regard

Same opinion man, same opinion... Amazing movie !

I like Jeremy but honestly the movie was better than he made it sound. I thought it would get an AWESOMETACULAR or Buy it in blu-ray. Good time no alcohol required is definitely not what this movie deserved.

I honestly had the exact same problems with this film as stated in this review. I just felt that the film was executed extremely poorly.

I understood everything there is to be understood about this film, and in my opinion it is not a good film. It isn't a bad film, its just painfully average. I wanted so much to like this film, I wanted it to be my favorite film, but the more I think about it, the less I like it.

Well I suppose that the fact I went in without any expectations helped a lot. I didn't even know what the plot was.

Jean-Francois Joanisse I deliberatley avoided everything to do with the movie so it would be completely fresh when I saw it. When I got round to seeing it in IMAX, it blew me away. It's a phenomenal film and I would love to go again.

Ripolt Maybe that's why people were so bummed about it. I was like you and only saw the first trailer (I think?), so I had no idea what to expect from the film. Absolutely blew me away. I literally thought about this movies days after watching it.

@Stratos I There's no reason that you shouldn't be capable of suspending your disbelief for the ending of this movie (the flying through a black hole. IMO, it's our generations 2001: A Space Odyssey. And I honestly don't see much of a difference in him flying into a Black Hole and what to David at the end of 2001. A mostly accurate depiction of science throughout the movie cap-stoned by a completely scientifically inaccurate weird sci-fi ending. Both are brilliant.

This movie is more complicated and interesting than Gravity. He gave Gravity an "Awesomentacular" and Interstellar a "Good time no alcohol required". How insulting is that, huh?

I enjoyed both. But Gravity is a much different film than Interstellar is, the only similarities are that they both involve space and astronauts. Gravity is first and foremost a disaster/survival movie, the best comparison I could make would be Castaway or All Is Lost. Interstellar is more along the lines of old school space operas or traditional Epics.

#Interstellar blows #gravity out of 'Gravity'.

Gravity doesn't hold a match to interstellar. And Gravity was horribly written in comparison, there practically was no dialogue. Only thing gravity had was good special effects, the rest was pure garbage.

Estivel Garcia It's not insulting, he just liked Gravity more.

However the film isn't for everyone.

Guy Thompson I'm glad you added in your second comment. While I liked the film I can understand why others wouldn't. It's far from a perfect film, and the last act of the film requires a sudden and drastic increase in the suspension of disbelief required from the viewer. Especially considering the first 80% of the film is rooted in hard science.

Agreed however it is science fiction (emphasis on fiction) so I would allow some less believable stuff in there.

Yeah, but the first 80% is almost all Science instead of fiction. Only in the last 25 minutes does it really go into the fictional aspect. Though it does lay the groundwork early on with the 'ghost', so it doesn't catch you completely off guard.

Exactly and that's one of the beauties of this film. A lot of the faults can be explained and/or can be interpreted into the plot of the movie.

One guy called it a masterpiece

Harate San I'm one of those guys.

Jogwheel Where was your advanced screening located?

Harate San Salisbury, MA... why?

Jeremy fucks a lot of reviews up. Remember he gave Elysium a Awesometacular.

***** right because 2001 excels at making sense /sarcasm. You fell asleep during the movie so that's probably why it didn't make sense to you.

no its more like a C and good time if you're drunk is C- and dog shit is D-Z

I think this movie was a C tbh

Whoshotmyrifle Nahhh, to me it was a B+. Up until the last 20 minutes, the movie was close to perfect. But then, it went a little too crazy and nonsensical, thus bringing the score down to the one mentioned above.

Interstellar was... smart? Yeah, sure. For casual moviegoers maybe.

George Baum Christopher Nolan is not a God.

Every director has their dark horse.

LarryBonson I know, I'm just surprised seeing how he and many others geezs their pants over him.

John King Yeah but after TDKR, having another horse ? lol

Glauber Araujo I thought TDKR was good, not TDK good, but good.

Go See It For Yourself, Now That Your Expectations Are Set

just. because. it. doesn't. have. a. super. high. grade. doesn't. mean. its. a. bad. movie. I swear people nowadays, you basically just said "Oh this game got an 7.8/10 on *insert game review site here*? Wow, must've sucked.."

I was going to comment something very close to this but you beat me to it. About halfway through I was bummed it wasn't going to be awesometacular then I got to the end and I was like "Whaaaat?"

Dude... this was ONE person's opinion...

ReflexEight I definitely know that it's just I usually share an opinion with Jeremy. Let's hope this time I'm wrong.

I've been obsessed with sci-fi since I was 6. You name it, I've seen it. And while there are many other movies that come close, this one takes the cake for me. It really is a masterpiece. And based off that one emo music video you have on your page, it seems like you'd be more akin to Beauty and the Beast? Or maybe Maleficent? Please don't take your pain out on interstellar fans. We mean you no harm. We are here for you!

Same, this kinda stopped my hype in its tracks. Still gonna see it and judge it for myself, though!

Even if it is bad, it doesn't mean Nolan is a bad director. One bad movie doesn't mean he lost his style. This movie is still 76% on RT so if that's anything to go by, it still is pretty good.

TytanyxGames I totally agree without a doubt. I just hope that this is worth the wait.

Same here, Nolan may have been overly ambitious. We'll see.

dear lord, you are all so influenceable vulnerable creatures. you start doubting because someone elses opinion? did you people never learned to go figure out things and make up your mind yourselves no matter what someone else think of it? I like jeremies reviews as hes very well informing and just fun entertaining, but i disagree with his taste with almost half of the movies...why? because im another person with different taste :) and my sentiments will never change a bit how others think about it. so dont feel sad you might not like it that much because jemery says so :)

Ya see, I love this!

***** This is the first time I have seen u being so active in the comments section(in the recent times).. You must be curious about everyone's reaction..Anyway, nice review.. Where did u see the movie though?

***** Hey, I've been watching your channel for about a year and a half now and have been loving your reviews ever since! Keep'em coming Jeremy!

+Paul Tino nope

+Paul Tino i didn't really think it was so great. :( Glad you enjoyed it. :) Sorry i just said no, felt like i should have said this instead, sorry.

+nogamename 11 i personally liked the martian better

same

+nick In my opinion, The Martian is the best space movie of the decade

Absolutely! The first time I watched this movie I ended up disappointed. Then I watched it again - and it literally felt like a completely different movie. It's definitely a film that benefits from repeated viewings.

Beefjerky007 i definitely agree

Rances 0ok I've seen it 4 or 5 times and it gets better each time

true

Saw it twice... still hate the bookshelf tesseract

hahah ''Nolanites'' hahaha i love it, sound like extraterrestrial race. xD

Im a Nolan fan, but yeah, fair reasons to give the Nolan movie bad ratings

Epic Wolf Luis Cotto Mostly because they are...they have the most unhealthy obsession with the dude, it's kind of creepy how in love they are with his mediocrity, TBH.

So, the people who say Nolan makes good movies are Nolanites. But the people who say Fincher makes good movie, are not Fincherites? Or what ever you'd call them.. Can't people just like Nolan's movies and not be called Nolanites. To me, "Nolanites" are the ones who can't see his bad sides. And every director has them. Jeremy's called a Nolanite here. And he's not. He's like most of us. He just admits the guy makes good movies. If this is his worst movie, then why are some people still calling him "overrated"?

I wanna be called Spaghetti

Cheeky Nandos People comparing Gravity and Interstellar are fucking idiots. Those two films don't compete, except for idiotic fan boys. One is a film about travelling through time and dimensions, saving mankind, drama etc. The other is a thriller that shows an emergency situation in space. Go and fuck your X film is better than Y.

Gravity is way better

+Sealand Nah, gravity was short and sweet. Interstellar was overlong, convoluted, had WAY too many plot conveniences, and the last 10 minutes were completely unnecessary. Did it have great acting and fantastic visuals? Hell yes. Was it a bad movie? No. Is it as good as Nolan fanboys say it is? Hell no.

Completely agreed. 100 better film than 2001. It has an actual plot with a begin, middle, and end. Plus left me thinking for hours about the movie. Great movie.

ciao wutang What were the plot holes?

ciao wutang Awfull dialogue? Really, you're going to open with the one thing people know Nolan can do, which is have smart people convey complex information with ease. And a plot hole is when something in the plot could have been done easier or logically some other way. Please, tell me what could possibly have been done another way considering the situation as presented in the movie. -Dr.-Mann-? A guy who went insane after 10 years of isolation in a sterile planet?

ciao wutang They have several conversations, and "kinda cheesy conversation" is a far cry from "awful dialogue". Micheal Caine never aging? Can you tell the difference between a 70 years old and a 90 years old? Visually, there isn't much, but he couldn't walk anymore and he died of old age. The world going to waste for no reason? I also disliked the vagueness, but it is not the first "disaster" movie to not explain very well the nature of the disaster. "The Road" never explained it either. But in Interstellar it was heavily implied it was a mutating plague taking most plant life. Cooper never went into space, it is true, but he was the closest thing they had to someone who did. The movie itself explains that the other candidates for pilot HADN'T EVEN FLOWN in their lives, only having experience with the simulator. He was sent exclusively to pilot, not to give scientific input. It is really not required that a pilot know some borderline fringe physics concepts, but even then he never said he didn't know what a wormhole is. He had only shown ignorance of what a wormhole looks like. You are really reaching for your justifications of plotholes, either complaining about cosmetic problems or complaining about stuff the movie actually explains...

Real scientist are not explaining to each other constantly how relativity or worm holes work, with a "science for dummies" speech. I mean, they are scientist, they can use technical language to talk about those topics, they don't need to be explaining those things to each other that way... or better, they don't need to explain those things, they're supposed to already know. I understand that those explanations are for the people watching the movie, but... Nolan should have found another way to explain things, putting the characters to talk about what should be obvious for them is stupid. That's why 2001 is superior to Interstellar, scientist in 2001 are real scientists, they act like scientists, Interstellar scientist act like the Prometheus scientists.

I loved the first 2 acts, it's the third one that bothered me. It broke with the film's consistent rational tone, with ideas that "love is interdimensional", and bullshit like that. Also, the main character surviving was way too convenient. Like really, being thrown in the middle of space and found it's not a needle in a haystack, it's a needle in one of gazillions of haystacks. It went from science to pure fantasy and weak philosophy.

This movie was too much hyped and just as bad as I thought it would be. the drama was bad and too long. the plots were too simple, the special effects were good enough. They did not even go in depth about relativity and space-time continuum. only a simple flat explanation about the wormhole and gravity. Again too much Hollywood drama which is indeed bad for your common sense in general. So for the simple minded sheeple, it should be a mind opener with tons of wows. For the people who can think, it was just another Hollywood shiite with tears, while it could be one of the best sci fi's of modern time. It reminded me of Prometheus, while 1. Annunaki was cancelled due to some strange stopped fundings, Prometheus could contain much of 1. Annunaki's script and claims. Has to be the Hollywood sheeple censure. just jump folks, they will say how high.

+legbreaker Relativity and space-time continuum? I don't see why it WOULD go in-depth. We barely know anything about space. Hell, we've never even landed on Mars. Yet humans come up with these presumptions that we know how relativity and space-time works. We're all simple-minded. Don't try to make yourself sound superior. No one on earth has even seen the inside of a black hole, so why must presumptions be attacked, when you, yourself, follow presumptions from one of us, the flawed, humans? Until the truth may be proved, no one can say for sure how space-time works. The Universe is infinite, so little we are to fight over whose idea is more reliable.

Der Herp oh.. he wants full blown out seminar about relativity and space-time continuum.. but odds are, considering he already bitched about it, the move would be way too long..

TheBongSauce True.

his redemption arc is complete

yeap here from there, now i'm going to the spoilers review and see "THE COMMENT", see you there

I'm looking for the comment he's talking about but I can't find it

Advertising works lol

+Octavian Revolution That's what I think, a lot of people were expecting a science-fiction movie, instead of a depiction of an almost... diabolically bittersweet story/analogy of human interpretation, nature, and perseverance told from the perspective of our two main characters Cooper and Murphy. Honestly thought this movie was a masterpiece, probably because it provided a LOT of room to think, contemplate and analyse. And those 3 things allow for a perhaps ignorantly over-zealous understanding of things that may or may not be intended, but regardless, for my own enjoyment I'd call it a masterpiece.

+Octavian Revolution I actually went into it expecting an emotional core to be the centrepiece of the movie, but my biggest problem with it is how little time Nolan actually devotes to it. Of the nearly 3 hour run time, I think just about 45 minutes is dedicated to Murph and Cooper. Character performances also suffer in this movie, from the obvious (Anne Hathaway, Casey Affleck) to the more subtle criticisms that can be made about the way many of the relationships developed - it felt wooden, forced - and I found that by the end of the movie, although it was a bit sad, I just didn't really...care? Nolan didn't spend nearly enough time crafting beautiful, multi-faceted characters and believable, painful relationships that was reflected not only in Cooper but the other characters for it to really be poignant.

Octavian Yes, I agree, the movie was more character based and one of the main focuses/points the movie makes is whether or not someone would sacrifice seeing their loved ones again and the future of the human race which was cool...the soundtrack will always be my favorite part, I downloaded it on Spotify and that shits fire bro😂 My favorite scene in the movie is when Coop takes off and u see the back and forth camera shots of Murphy watching the car drive off and the dust kick up, and Coop crying in the spaceship 😫 kills me every time

Ever see The Tree of Life? It's a fantastic movie, and it's been compared to 2001. You might like it. Not really sci-fi, but it's similar in other ways.

I have seen it. Very good film, although it is a bit flawed for my liking. Not as good as 2001 in my opinion.

Watch out, soon you'll see Nolan fanboys claiming Interstellar is superior to 2001: A Space Odyssey and that Stanley Kubrick is a mediocre director compared to THE GREAT AND POWERFUL CHRISTOPHERRRRR NOLAAANN. Wait, what? Someone who doesn't like our lord and savior? DBFRLEIGBWEURGNDFSMG[ORSNEGPINSDFHDH,SHFDOESNOTCOMPUTEF;USAIBPFASF;OSDJFJDOF;JDSAJFOEAFJIAJS....

2001 is probably my favourite Science fiction film of all time

Blaaz101 Thanks for being honest and I'm not like one of those people who thinks you're an idiot for not liking something as we are all different. I totally get where you're coming from. While I will admit there are many scenes where no extra story is given, I feel like these scenes are put in there to add to the overall experience of being in space and I felt that watching these scenes. Obviously, it won't work for everyone, but I do feel like that's what Kubrick was going for. The story can be quite abstract but it did make me think and even when I was confused, I was still intrigued and in awe of the mystery and wonder of it all. That's my opinion anyway. :)

You should see more than one movie in your life.

SerenGetter these kind of people piss me off so much

Same here, it was not a movie it was an experience :D

fanzeldadaniel exactly its not about any of critic bullshit i dont care about different ending or anything it was simply the best experience i'v ever had while watching a movie simple is that.These fools won't understand that.

Aagon Aryan i can ingest a couple of shrooms and get a similar "experience", what makes you sound credible is not letting emotion cloud your opinion, as much as i dislike critics they are people who usually can do that and that is important, your comment was clearly all Pathos and no substance, and i hate that, that's why we have things like Michael bays transformers and other by the book, mass produced generic action shlock cluttering up our theaters rather then actual interesting pieces.

I completely agree. For me, those moments in the film when the screen faded to black were precisely the moments when Nolan was paying tribute to 2001. You don't see those fadings in cinema anymore. Today people want everything spoon-fed and fast-paced. Most of the hatred in the comments come from this. I'm very happy they allowed Nolan to take his own artistic freedom.

I don't mind slow movies, or slow moments in movies, but they have to be compelling to keep me interested. I think it's bs to say if you don't like a slow movie like 2001, then you must have ADD or something... It has nothing to do with audiences wanting to be "spoon fed". I'm sure in its time 2001 was a revolutionary movie, showing audiences things they'd never seen before and that was super interesting... that's not so much the case today, and I don't think people should be flogged for wanting a bit more action, or have faster paced movies.. nothing wrong with that at all.

apparently its not enough for children to enjoy ... www.ign.com/articles/2014/12/01/the-prestige-author-slams-nolans-the-dark-knight-trilogy

Don't bring Kubrick into this. He was smarter than 10 Nolans

While I agree that some movies are treated unfairly by younger viewers due to their attention span, it's unfair to say that if they don't enjoy the pacing, they're the problem, not the movie. Sometimes a movie is slow and that's all there is to it. I personally loved this movie, and most of 2001 (except the last act).

Watched it after hearing this review. I have no idea what he is talking about. The ending was foreshadowed the whole way though the movie.

Chuck C exactly!!!! From the ghost in murph's room to the watch, it was all planned by Nolan.

Obviously it was planned. Jeremy didn't say anything in order to not spoil the film.

Lego movie and GodZilla 2014 was a bluray rating too, but I recall man of steel being no alcohol required thou... Mos was iffy but it was the superman movie the fans of dc needed but not the one they deserved! It was a "coming of age" movie at most

If you want the movie on Blu-ray, buy it on Blu-ray. So what is your problem exacly?

Oculus was fucken amazing

Or maybe he just has different opinion than you do.

I guess the 8000 and something people who clicked "like" to your review are less "noisy" about it than the few hundreds that complain about it at the comments. Anyway, this movie was "complicated" to review, to say the least so you cant make everybody happy I guess.

That's kind of the reason why some people are complaining about this review. A detailed and accurate review would need to be at least 10 minutes long for a movie of this caliber and even though he didn't want to spoil anything the review still felt somewhat rushed.

*GASP* What do you mean "You people"!?

***** Hey Jeremy, how are you today? I'm a big fan. Love your reviews. Keep up the great videos.

*****​ I meant anyone who reviews movies. Most of the time I hear about pacing in a movie.

gunbling50 hey fuckhead you don't like it? ,then fuck off ya puppet. you're just butt hurt that this movie isn't great.

Carlo Martini have you seen the movie? i heard it doesn't come out till friday.

canegemen tuna the rest of us have open minds.

ya i agree. its like he's dogshitting it

Have you seen the movie? Anyway, it's his opinion man.

Who are you to say it's his worst review ever? Not everyone has to kiss the ass of Christopher Nolan the Kubrick wannabe.

You do understand this is why he doesn't use a number rating system right? Just because those movies & this have the same "rating" doesn't mean they are equal. All it means is that it is a good movie to go see in theaters without being drunk but not quite good enough to buy on blue-ray.

mkrulz77 Ha! Zing.

My exact opinion

Leo it does have a better score

Yes, I find the discourse on Interstellar is a lot more positive compared to 2014. It was mostly positive for 2014, but not to sound pretentious, Nolan movies do often benefit with a few extra viewings or at least some analysis videos.

i never understood the Nolan hype. The only movie i really love from him is Memento. I didn't like Batman Begins nor did i like The Dark Knight. i thought that TDKR and Inception were complete shit. Prestige was ok. Insomnia was pretty good. Didnt see Following. idk for some reason his movies do not speak to me. And noone was ever able to explain to me what is so special and good about Nolan.

inception was garbage. pretty garbage. how dreams worked changed from scene to scene.

***** Special and good about Nolan? Everything, he takes a seed, plants it, makes it grow into a huge apple tree and gives the apples to people. There are few points why he's a good director 1. His use of dark tone is perfect, its sucks the audience in, its perfect for the story. 2. His choice of actors are great. He makes mediocre actors better, less known actors greater. 3. He works with Hans Zimmer, that tells a lot. 4. He doesn't use explosion, slow motion, or even CGI for that matter, to make a action scene look cool. He uses real life environments and supplies to make a real life action scene. That really makes it better 5. He is the kind of director that says: People think I'm good, but I think Spielberg is god compared to me. 6. He respects the original material he's about to print to the screen. 7. Unlike Shyamalan, he leaves the audience with valid questions.

what garbage reasons. some aren't even his achievements. get out of his ass.

KainScion Oh yeah, you're murican, what did i expect

Don't worry it won't .

Steven O'Brien I know?!? This was Kubrick's space odyssey of 2014, IMO

fady wadie Uh,yes it will

How the fuck was it underrated when it came out you dumbass? It grossed 47million in the opening weekend. Stop calling "underrated", things that aren't underrated.

but what if he hadn't make that code with the dust? what would have happened?

Ramix09 If he didn't made that thing with the dust he never would have been able to go to space in the first place, if he doesn't do it he is basically denying his own existence which will make that universe seize to exist

xstoofpeer ooh the classic paradox xD

It's a paradox. He couldn't have been there to leave himself the message unless he had already been there to leave himself the message. It's also rather hugely convenient that his daughter pursued a career in science (which the movie made abundantly clear was an undesirable occupation in that society) and got a job at NASA.

he isn't the one who gave the nasa coordinates...that was the other beings

Where in this review do you take home the fact Jeremy didn't like it?

Pashow yeah made a mistake ... i've edited it now

I made the same mistake you've made in the past, where I would watch/read reviews before a movie came out and developed this preconceived notion before watching a movie (Can't remember which one it was). And I actually ended up liking it. Now I prefer to watch a movie and then watch my favourite reviewers opinions on it. Just my two-cents.

ironmaiden2841 lets hope what you're saying applies to me for Interstellar

Finally, someone who thinks the way I think! 1 of my most embarrassing and shameful memories of myself, is from middle-school. My math teacher knew that I was really into time travel, and so he set aside a day where the whole class would watch Interstellar. He told me the movie was all about time travel and Sci-Fi, and said he thought I'd really like it. I was looking forward to it, but felt incredibly disappointed, and almost betrayed, when the entire first hour of the movie, as you just said, was kind of boring. The point is, I insulted the movie by claiming I rated it a zero, and the teacher got quite upset at me, for my: 'Whining and Moaning.' It's okay, because we made up afterwards, and had a good laugh about it. But it still hurts to think back on it, even as I tell you right now. Still, I'm glad to know that I wasn't the only one who felt that way. :)

Bruh finish it, greatness awaits!

No you don't

My biggest mistake was not watching this and gladiator in theaters

an*

TDKR was crap to me. I hope this is waaaay better then that.

What are yo going off of? I know you need to hate on Nolan, but can you use some logic? Jermany gave TDKR an awsomtacular and his favorite film of 2012. So, if you are going off of his reviews how can both movies be "okay" oh so you can sleep at night??? Got-ya.

whygotherehuh Jeremy is a Batman/Nolan fanboy. TDKR is no Batman and Robin but it still has a fuck ton of plot holes. It doesn't meet the hype it gets.

Well if the worst movie a director has made was just OK, that's a pretty good director

TheRedman790 I like Nolan since he actually makes creative movies, instead of the dumb remakes we see all the time nowadays

Dark Knight movies don't count as remakes? A lot of people also compared Interstellar to 2001 A Space Odyssey as well but I haven't seen that in years. Only watched it once so dunno.

The Dark Knight movies aren't remakes, lol. And people compare it to 2001 because they both deal with space travel. Nolan didn't copy with Dark Knight and didn't steal anything from 2001

yup. pretentious out the ass.

+Davis Kay Adaptations aren't all that creative either, he is still using someone else's property

Sorry nogla's evil brother, but its not :p

pablo valdez lee yes it is pablo

translation: this is a movie for smart people. I know because I am very, very smart. it has quantum physics concepts, so you'll only like it if you're smart like me.

+Sp0rk my brother and dad got bored because they wanted action but I loved the movie. they just dont know what a good movie is.

This movie was not amazing though

I agree, though I'd swap BB and Inception places.

I would say - Somewhat poor- 7) Inception (honestly I just don't get the appeal for this movie) 6) Insomnia 5) The Dark Knight Rises Good- 4) The Prestige 3) Batman Begins Brilliant- 2) Memento 1) The Dark Knight

I don't know if you guys know about the show Rick and Morty, but they sorta did a parody of Inception. In my opinion, it made Inception seem kinda stupid because everyone in there takes everything so seriously. Pretty unfortunate though because I saw that episode before I watched Inception, so I had the wow-factor from the movie ruined :(

Pretty late to update this, but I'd put Interstellar at number 3 under "Great" above The Dark Knight.

Like how convoluted? because I understood Inception first time viewing it. Do I have a better chance of understanding it or is it just not possible to follow at all?

it's just messy at some point and got super ludicrous I lost focus because that was nearly 3 hours of heavy scientific stuff. However they all talk about scientific stuff making it super believable yet I doubt that our human bodies can withstand some of the things happening in the movie. It's all theory but if I remember my physics lessons in high school well (nearly 10 years ago) we are limited by our bodies therefore some events happening in space prevent us to do certain stuff happening in the movie.

***** The plot is actually fairly simple to follow. It's just still stupid at times, and purposely breaks it's own logic at several times. It's a good movie, with some great moments, and some dumb scenes

I feel the same way, bro! \o

I understand what you're saying, but in the name of social fairness, and in a world where I didn't direct Interstellar, I'd argue that the only way I could have "let you down" is if I gave the movie a higher rating than I felt it should get due to the fact that Nolan directed it.

***** I mean I figured at some point he's going to make a film that will really shake up the opinions of his fan base. Interstellar seemed like the film to do that. I'll still see it, and plus you didn't say it sucked, still fresh on the tomatometer as it were, I guess I'll see where it ranks amongst his other films. To me the all of Nolan's films up until now are at least "Buy on Blu-Ray".

***** Well said, I'm a fan of Nolan, but I haven't seen the movie yet, so I don't have an opinion yet. But honestly, the main reason I really want to see it, is because of the fact that Nolan directed it. But I agree that you shouldn't give a movie a higher score just because you're a fan of Nolan. To be honest, I do find your reviews useful, but I still find my own opinion a lot more important than anyone else's especially when it comes to movies. I am excited to see it though!

GB Strelok No because I respect Jeremy's opinion and if he says that a Nolan film is merely "OK" then there is some merit to that statement. I could like it a lot more, but Jeremy's opinion is usually one I gauge as a good barometer for my own.

This is my problem with the film going audiences today. Some of us (myself included) complain that there isn't enough originality in film today, that the present studio system has become oversaturated with superhero films and franchise films and reboots and remakes. Along comes Interstellar, a film that IS original, not based on any existing IP, not a reboot, not a remake, not a sequel, something we've never seen before. Yes we've seen time travel stories and sci-fi stories, but never have we had a story attempt to blend hard sci-fi with human drama quite like this, and while the film isn't perfect, it's ambitious, the type of project that combines the scope and scale of some of these blockbuster films, with some more original and sophisticated ideas and premises that you don't see in more franchise pictures, and yet, people still complain about it, rather than appreciate what it is trying to do. Hollywood gives the viewers something original, and they still complain, and meanwhile a film like Transformers 4 will make a billion dollars at the box office. Now admittedly, I am a fan of a few franchise films myself, Captain America: The Winter Soldier and Dawn of the Planet of the Apes were two of my favorite films of 2014, so I'm not blameless in the fact that my going to the theater to see these movies is an indication to Hollywood that they should still keep making these. I love superhero films, The Dark Knight, the aforementioned Winter Soldier, Iron Man and Days of Future Past among my favorite, but I won't be lying when I say I'm worried that TOO many superhero movies and franchise movies will eventually wear me down and the oversaturation will sour my liking towards these types of films. I guess what I'm saying is that there are critics and film goers who complained about every little thing in Interstellar and yet many of these people are the same ones complaining about the lack of originality in Hollywood. This seems like a Catch-22 to me. I'd rather a filmmaker, such as Nolan, aim high, aim for high ambition and stumble here and there getting there but still turn in a film superior to a film that just aimed low and achieved that low mark. I liked Guardians of the Galaxy, but that movie to me is a film that aimed low and exceeded its low expectations. Interstellar aimed high, missed the mark, but my opinion still reached a higher level than Guardians did exceeding its expectations. This is just my opinion though, Christopher Nolan films may be the single most nitpicked group of films I've seen, and I think the success of his films will only fan the flame of backlash against them. I guess we'll see in 10 or 20 years whether Interstellar holds up to all the criticism, after all, 2001: A Space Odyssey wasn't universally loved when it first got released either. Interstellar isn't my favorite Nolan film, and maybe it's a film that's easier to appreciate than to really embrace, like or love, but to me I hope Nolan still makes films like these, and that other filmmakers get the chance to make films like these to balance out the plethora of franchise films. I believe in the blockbuster film, and I wish to see more blockbuster films that are original rather than adapted from some pre-existing IP.