Interstellar: A Visual Masterpiece with Disappointing Writing and Physics

[Algr]

Agreed.

We are Super Movie Defender Force! Protecting films against the evils of overzealous deconstruction!

 

[julcab12]

... I had to shutdown some of my science noodles to be fully entertained :L.. And still better than any sci-fi movies nowadays.

 

[Monsterboy]

'They' could have simply led humans to a habitable planet orbiting a medium sized star , in our own galaxy ,why find a planet orbiting a super massive black hole in some other galaxy and all the unnecessary complications with time ?

Mars and some of the moons of Jupiter and Saturn would be as bad or as good as any of those planets.

 

[hankaaron]

A lot of the "explanations" in this thread are eeriely similar to explains for Noah's ark, Creationism and

'They' could have simply led humans to a habitable planet orbiting a medium sized star , in our own galaxy ,why find a planet orbiting a super massive black hole in some other galaxy and all the unnecessary complications with time ?

Even though I find the screenplay dumb and poorly written, I'll say that the intent of "They"was to lead someone from Earth directly to the black hole, and not to find another planet to live on. However, how Cooper comes to the quick conclusion that "They" are future humans is beyond me. When he said that I wished that smart-ass robot would have something like- "Oh yeah, what makes you think that Coop? Still it's just a dumb, dumb movie.

 

[RoundEarVulcan]

Hi guys,

I hope everyone doesn't choose to gang up on me for this, but I actually really enjoyed the movie. It wasn't perfect, but not many movies are. If the physics behind it were 100% accurate, then it would be almost impossible to carry a storyline (or for the audience to understand). I enjoyed it - the visuals were good, the story was interesting enough and other than Matt Damon, I thought most of the characters were decent. I thought it was the most enjoyable big screen movie I've seen since Inception.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[DaveC426913]

However, how Cooper comes to the quick conclusion that "They" are future humans is beyond me. When he said that I wished that smart-ass robot would have something like- "Oh yeah, what makes you think that Coop?

It was a deduction. Obviously he can't be sure, but it makes sense. That was what his epiphany was, afterall - realizing that someone is leading them to safety from the future, just as he' doing with his daughter.

 

[Monsterboy]

Hi guys,

I hope everyone doesn't choose to gang up on me for this, but I actually really enjoyed the movie. It wasn't perfect, but not many movies are. If the physics behind it were 100% accurate, then it would be almost impossible to carry a storyline (or for the audience to understand). I enjoyed it - the visuals were good, the story was interesting enough and other than Matt Damon, I thought most of the characters were decent. I thought it was the most enjoyable big screen movie I've seen since Inception.

Just my 2 cents.

Yes ,as a source the motivation this movie is good , it reminds us that NASA and other space agencies are absolutely essential for us in the long term and we shouldn't spend our lives in a dull boring way without taking any risks but we should risk everything to get what we want. I hate people who say that interstellar travel will never be possible(simply because it is not be possible in our life time) and all we can do is just hang around in low Earth orbit and come back.
Forget about interstellar travel ,all i hope is that we build a human base on the moon and Mars within my lifetime.

 

[QuantumPion]

I presume the Saturn V was needed to launch the Endeavor craft with all of its supplies and fuel. But the ranger spacecraft were able to land and return to orbit repeatedly using what looked like jet engines if they were something akin to the SABRE design.

 

[QuantumPion]

'They' could have simply led humans to a habitable planet orbiting a medium sized star , in our own galaxy ,why find a planet orbiting a super massive black hole in some other galaxy and all the unnecessary complications with time ?

Mars and some of the moons of Jupiter and Saturn would be as bad or as good as any of those planets.

Maybe They needed a supermassive black hole to create the wormhole, and the nearest SMBH with habital planets in orbit was said galaxy?

 

[Pete Cortez]

Indeed, seeing as it produced the most accurately detailed depiction of a black hole geometry in history.

 

[Pete Cortez]

Hi guys,

I hope everyone doesn't choose to gang up on me for this, but I actually really enjoyed the movie. It wasn't perfect, but not many movies are. If the physics behind it were 100% accurate, then it would be almost impossible to carry a storyline (or for the audience to understand). I enjoyed it - the visuals were good, the story was interesting enough and other than Matt Damon, I thought most of the characters were decent. I thought it was the most enjoyable big screen movie I've seen since Inception.

Just my 2 cents.

Physics itself isn't 100% accurate, so don't worry about it. I also enjoyed the movie, and based on my single viewing I can't think of a single physically incorrect or implausible aspect to the story. Most of the criticism surrounds the depiction of Gargantua and her planetary system. Most of said criticism relies on gross generalizations sourced from pop-sci, attributing vague properties to black holes that apply everywhere and anywhere regardless of scale. Also, I suspect most people are used to the rather crude visualizations from Vancouver produced science shows to the point where they dismiss the photorealistic depiction of Gargantua.

 

[DaveC426913]

Also, I suspect most people are used to the rather crude visualizations from Vancouver produced science shows to the point where they dismiss the photorealistic depiction of Gargantua.

I saw an article recently about how the research for the film to produce a plausible BH actually turned up some new, unexpected finding about BHs.

 

[MattRob]

I saw an article recently about how the research for the film to produce a plausible BH actually turned up some new, unexpected finding about BHs.

Heh, I remember reading that Kip did a lot of his original work when he was asked to check the science for the first draft of "Contact," and started wondering how to make a traversable wormhole. Same sort of thing, I guess.

It's kind of funny, you know... A scientist is supposed to study and learn about the natural world, while engineers are supposed to make something specific happen. It seems like a lot of interesting developments come about when you throw physicists into an engineer's role, though.

Funnily enough, both the examples above involve Kip Thorne...

Anyways, any links to the new findings about BHs? I'm certainly interested.

 

[Fredrik]

'They' could have simply led humans to a habitable planet orbiting a medium sized star , in our own galaxy ,why find a planet orbiting a super massive black hole in some other galaxy and all the unnecessary complications with time ?

Mars and some of the moons of Jupiter and Saturn would be as bad or as good as any of those planets.

I think what they really needed to find was the black hole. They didn't know this from the start, but they needed to fall into one, just to improve their understanding of gravity. I wish the movie had explained these things more clearly. I think there was a comment about how he helped her understand how gravity can be controlled, and then they started using that to save the world somehow. Probably just by building a bunch of farms on space stations. The new knowledge enabled them to put those stations in space, and to get things to and from them without too much cost.

 

[DaveC426913]

I think what they really needed to find was the black hole. They didn't know this from the start, but they needed to fall into one, just to improve their understanding of gravity. I wish the movie had explained these things more clearly. I think there was a comment about how he helped her understand how gravity can be controlled, and then they started using that to save the world somehow. Probably just by building a bunch of farms on space stations. The new knowledge enabled them to put those stations in space, and to get things to and from them without too much cost.

Oh yeah! That's right. They covered that, just very quickly.

It was indeed the dive into the black hole that got "The Quantum Data" they needed to solve the gravity problem.
Earlier in the film, Caine's character had said they still hadn't reconciled relativity with QM. They needed to get a look at a singularity that might give them clues.
And it was the solution to the gravity equations that brought Earth back from the brink, by allowing us to expand into space..

 

[sunrah]

One message is “Stay”. It’s a message for him not to accept the mission and leave Earth and his family. But the other message is the coordinates to the secret NASA base. But he wanted to send messages to stay on earth, then why the hell would he also send himself the location to NASA.

I completely agree with your assessment, but just on this one point. At first, he does try to make himself stay by sending a message coded in morse. Then the robot TARS tells him that they're not there to change the past. That's when he changes his mind and asks TARS to give him the NASA coordinates in binary.

 

[StatGuy2000]

Let me turn this discussion around, since I have not seen Interstellar yet so can't comment as to its scientific accuracy. Can any of you here on PF actually a single science fiction film which presents the science realistically and accurately? I can't name a single one apart from 2001: A Space Odyssey, and even that film has issues with accuracy.

 

[nsaspook]

That a good science 'fiction' film should present the science realistically and accurately seems an unnecessary requirement. A classic film like 'Forbidden Plant' has all the elements of science like space travel, alien civilizations, robots and god-like computers without any pretext of rigid physics reality but it still manages to tell a smart story about a possible future that is good science fiction (A sense of wonder and awe) because of the writing and origins of the story (The Tempest).

 

[Mr.CROWLER]

I think what they really needed to find was the black hole. They didn't know this from the start, but they needed to fall into one, just to improve their understanding of gravity. I wish the movie had explained these things more clearly. I think there was a comment about how he helped her understand how gravity can be controlled, and then they started using that to save the world somehow. Probably just by building a bunch of farms on space stations. The new knowledge enabled them to put those stations in space, and to get things to and from them without too much cost.

Thanks for that...cuz I was trying to figure out why "they" would put a wormhole near a black hole if "they" wanted to save the human civilization, but it makes sense that it wasn't the new planets "they" were leading them to it was the black hole. But what I don't understand or didn't catch was how did cooper get out of the black hole? And cooper and his daughter saved the world, but the female astronaut at the end must've found a habitable planet because she was walking aground without a helmet.

 

[hankaaron]

... but the female astronaut at the end must've found a habitable planet because she was walking aground without a helmet.

More stupidity. Now of course since anything is plausible in this movie, there could be an explanation. But one of the core problems with Interstellar is that the filmmakers can't or are unwilling to work within a framework.

 

[DaveC426913]

More stupidity. Now of course since anything is plausible in this movie, there could be an explanation. But one of the core problems with Interstellar is that the filmmakers can't or are unwilling to work within a framework.

Can you elaborate?
The intent of the scene was clearly to indicate that the atmo was breathable. Other than merely being unlikely and very lucky, what is stupid about it?

And I'm not sure what your final sentence means. What framework?

 

[RoundEarVulcan]

Can you elaborate?
The intent of the scene was clearly to indicate that the atmo was breathable. Other than merely being unlikely and very lucky, what is stupid about it?

I agree, I don't understand the fuss. I love Star Trek, but let's face it.. they go on (unlikely) missions on new planets without extra gear all of the time. But no one talks about how unrealistic Star Trek is (because it's awesome). It's show biz.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

I agree, I don't understand the fuss. I love Star Trek, but let's face it.. they go on (unlikely) missions on new planets without extra gear all of the time. But no one talks about how unrealistic Star Trek is (because it's awesome). It's show biz.

My understanding which may be incorrect was that the movie was advertised as scientifically sound? Star Trek never attempts to be such.

 

[PeroK]

My understanding which may be incorrect was that the movie was advertised as scientifically sound? Star Trek never attempts to be such.

Yes, Matthew McConaughey turned up on British TV to tell us how much physics he'd had to study to play his part! It was laughable.

 

[OmCheeto]

My understanding which may be incorrect was that the movie was advertised as scientifically sound? Star Trek never attempts to be such.

I disagree. From what I remember from the movie, was that the worm hole technology was developed by an advanced human race in the future. So certain parts of the movie are still "Science Fiction". And as RoundEarVulcan pointed out, Star Trek was awesome. And how much of that "Science Fiction" have we now exceeded? They originally used flip phones, as I recall. Ha! So last millennia.

I may be wrong, but has anyone confirmed the physical properties of a singularity? Black holes can easily calculated by the Schwarzschild radius around a neutron star. That's a no brainer. But I think that's what one message was from the "iffy" stuff; "We need to figure out this part of how things work".
aka, quantum gravity mumbo jumbo.

 

[OmCheeto]

Yes, Matthew McConaughey turned up on British TV to tell us how much physics he'd had to study to play his part! It was laughable.

I'd like to watch that. Do you have a link?

 

[Rive]

I agree, I don't understand the fuss. I love Star Trek, but let's face it.. they go on (unlikely) missions on new planets without extra gear all of the time. But no one talks about how unrealistic Star Trek is (because it's awesome). It's show biz.

That's where that 'framework' kicks in. There should be at least some self-imposed rules otherwise the movie would be a fantasy with spaceships, not a sci-fi - and when the framework is set, we can start searching for the flaws.

For Star Trek there are so few real rules that I watch it for the story, not for the sci-fi: but this movie was supposed to have a solid foundation/framework, so I bought the tickets because I wanted to see more sci- than -fi.
Well, I got what I wanted. The 'big sci' was superb, the 'small sci' was more or less acceptable. Clearly beats most of the recent scifi movies.

I can barely recall the acting and some parts of the story. That's not a good sign.

 

[PeroK]

I'd like to watch that. Do you have a link?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-29929730

Watch and learn (or laugh).

 

[nsaspook]

Once you cross the threshold of FTL flight with 'wormholes' and "exotic matter" what is scientifically sound? Scientifically sound in Hollywood means someone not falling of the edge of disc-shaped planet due to the planets gravity because kids would laugh at how stupid it would look.

 

[OmCheeto]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-29929730

Watch and learn (or laugh).

O.M.G.
I did not laugh once.
"...everything we do... in the film, is based on the plausible theories, in astrophysics".

And he got to spend a day with Kip Thorne!
Ok. I'm laughing now. But only in a very Pythonesque; "You lucky, lucky, *******" [warning! strong language!]