Re "the real "lesson" being taught in this film is that humans are pretty much fucked unless some unspecified someone/something (be it alien or theistic) provides a mystical Woo Woo way to save us.":
Which, interestingly, is also the message of 2001. One big difference between 2001 and this movie (judging by your comments) is that the characters in Interstellar have emotional issues whereas in 2001 the characters have no emotional affect at all - which is what helps give Kubrick's film a hypnotic quality. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <turquoiseb@...> wrote : I've figured out one of the reasons I was not knocked out by the movie, BTW -- deus ex machina. Given the basic plot (which I will not reveal), the real "lesson" being taught in this film is that humans are pretty much fucked unless some unspecified someone/something (be it alien or theistic) provides a mystical Woo Woo way to save us. I think this is dumb, on pretty much all levels. It's like Nabby, waiting for Maitreya. It's a belief system that actually *prevents* humans from taking steps to save themselves. From: "Bhairitu noozguru@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, November 7, 2014 5:31 PM Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Movie mini-review: "Interstellar" Having seen the trailer I thought of the film as another one of Warner Brothers "agenda" movies. This may well not pan out for WB because people are getting a little sick of being manipulated by such movies. But there may be enough bored people to get a good turnout at the box office this weekend even if they don't like the movie. WB is in deep shit and having to lay off people. But that's nothing as it is happening to a lot of major corporations. The foolish elite never learned the lessons that even Henry Ford knew that if you want to sell product the public better have money to buy it. The attempt of the global elite to turn the masses into chickens in coops hopefully will fail miserably. After all who are they to dictate to us how we should live? On 11/07/2014 02:20 AM, TurquoiseBee turquoiseb@... mailto:turquoiseb@... [FairfieldLife] wrote: I'm still trying to decide whether I liked this movie or not. It was certainly a visual treat, once we got past the visions of Earth As Neo-Dustbowl About To Die and out into space. And as I'd heard, it was certainly chock full 'o homages to "2001," not the least of which is a spaceship-docking scene that really rocked the socks off of "CGI state of the art." I guess my main reservation is that Christopher Nolan seems to have spent the lion's share of the movie trying to inspire in me a profound emotional reaction to the father-daughter story he spent so long developing, and none of that effort succeeded. If I was supposed to be all teary-eyed at the end, I wasn't. If I was supposed to be all inspired, I wasn't. And I can't really tell you why yet...I must ponder the film and think about it further and maybe I'll be able to come up with an answer. A minor part of the reason may have been that so many of the actors in the film -- Matthew McConaughey, Michael Caine, John Lithgow, Matt Damon, and others -- seemed to MUMBLE their way through the entire film. I found myself constantly having to look at the subtitles (which for me were in Dutch) to figure out what they were saying. Go figure. The basic black hole plot was pretty intelligent SciFi, with few completely cringeworthy moments, but if I have to make excuses for a SciFi movie that was trying so desperately to grab me emotionally by saying that nothing struck me as terribly awful scientifically, something is just not quite right. I'll keep pondering it and try to come up with some reasons for why I'm as underwhelmed as I am... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePbKGoIGAXY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ePbKGoIGAXY
