 |
|
I like to think of myself as an open movie viewer who's willing to watch anything, even if the material is bad, indifferent or just plain interesting. Curiosity is my vice, I can't help it. Take Christopher Nolan, for example, who has yet to make a bad movie, in my opinion. I'd like to think of him as the blockbuster avant-garde who tries things that people who are more concerned with not changing up ways of making movies. Some appreciate his unconventional methods, while others think he's overbearing and overly meticulous. Someday, that streak of critically acclaimed, blockbuster draws will bite him one day, but, for now, he can add this masterpiece to his exceptional career. When coming into Interstellar, I knew very little about the project other than that it's a space movie with top-notch actors and the usual Nolan idiosyncrasies. Even for him, this is his most ambitious project, since, it covers something that fairly complicated, which is the concept of space. Time was a big part of Inception and its being put to use once more here. Set in the near future, Earth is no longer able to sustain humanity, because of an occurrence called "blight." A phenomenon so substantial, it causes all kinds of irregularities like dust storms and burning crops. Jobs desired by many, are merely dreams of a time long ago. Farmers of any creed, race or gender are needed to preserve anything organic. Cooper, played by Matthew McConaughey is an ex-NASA pilot who is among those keeping the population healthy since his last mission for NASA. Eventually, he discovers the issue along with his daughter, Murphy to investigate possible solutions. What he discovers, could be something that could save mankind from its pending extinction. It could take years, eons, even. Professor Brand is the one who's been searching for answers to find life elsewhere, but he doesn't have the right formula to finish it. His crew consist of 2 robots (TARS & CASE) and 3 other crew members. One of them being Professor Brand's daughter Amelia Brand, played by Anne Hathaway.
Initially, there was a moment where I was like, "this could be the one that fails for Nolan". Even for director Christopher Nolan, this is an ambitious project, more so than Inception, which shares some plot cues from this movie. Gladly, I can say he hasn't made a bad film yet, and this is easily in the discussion for one of his greatest films. Now, I was expecting a good movie here, just not one that has me appreciating it more after seeing a day after I watched Big Hero 6 before I saw this not even a day after. Never have I been so anxious towards seeing a nearly 3 hour film in its various formats that aren't just digital. It's also shown in 35 and 70 mm in select theaters if you still have a thing for film projections. As of this review, I've only seen it in IMAX 70 mm, but not the 35 mm version. I'll probably put an update on how these versions compare with one another to add to the style of direction; otherwise, it's looks great on the format that I watched it in. Visually, it's a distinctive looking film from ground to air. A lot of attention went towards the space scenes and the look of the space ship, albeit from its interior than the exterior. Since Nolan is known for not relying on Computer Generated Imagery, he's very practical in the way he does a movie. For example, the robots are based on a mathematical philosophy. The design of them seem basic at a close glance, but are rather versatile in action. As for the various planets visited throughout the film, then too, are also spectacularly design, giving each of them their own characteristic. Nolan does a great job at letting a story build from beginning, middle and end and Interstellar meets every act. The payoff in each segment can take a while due to length.
As for the acting? It's first-rate from start to finish. The core performances are really the selling point here. McConaughey continues his acting rebirth with yet another excellent performance. Hathaway as well is great. Both of them allow themselves to be extremely vulnerable in some key scene, which depicts the condition of their mission is going on-board the Endurance. Before I mention other known actors on this project, I have to give a call to David Gyasi's Romilly. Now, he was the MVP for probably being the most interesting character on-screen. Bill Irwin and Josh Stewart are effective as TARS and CASE, respectively. Matt Damon was the only surprise here, cause, I wasn't expecting some kind of swerve coming along. Things change when his character becomes a pivotal role. The actresses that play Young (Mackenzie Foy), Adult (Jessica Chastain) and Elder (Ellen Burystn) Murph are great, too. Michael Cain is, well, his usual self in these movies, which is great. Some characters are undercooked and could've used some further explaining, but it wasn't much of a distraction from the bigger goal here,
Another problem Interstellar has is, its long length could make even some of Nolan's most devoted fans skeptical to sit through 169 minutes of this film. Weird, considering a good portion of his nine motion pictures are over 2 hours long (134 minute average). Depending on what theater you venture to, there could be some problems with the sound mixing, as one could miss spoken dialogue. My suggestion? Listen very carefully. Of course, explaining time and relativity can be a little much because these a lot to mentally digest, then again, there was a reason why I said this film was Nolan's most ambitious to date.
In a year filled with great movies, I'm proud to put this somewhere among my top five of movies of this year. It's emotionally draining, wonderful, elegant and deep. Even as I'm typing, I just want to go and explore more into the deep hallows of space, regardless of the state of humanity and all. I just don't want to get choked up again. Because if I see that ending again? Maaaaan listen.....
Good: Visually alluring, powerful performances, Nolan's direction
Bad: Could be lengthy for some, some barebone characters
The perfect: Hans Zimmer's use of the organ player. So good.
5 of 5
PROJECTOR UPDATE: During my review of Interstellar, I was going to assess the various formats of the film, which uses 6 different camera types (35mm, 70mm, Digital, D4K, IMAX, & IMAX 70mm). Basically, if you're into old film strips, go for the 35 or 70 without the digital gimmicks. If you want the higher-end experience, you'll have to spend a good penny to get the best experience. I caught 3 versions of the film and, as for a discernable difference? IMAX 70mm is one I enjoyed the most, since, I found it to provide the most immersive experience. Soundwise, I had a bit of a hard time listening to the dialogue in moments, but it wasn't anything that would cause me to lower my grade of this film any further. IMAX Digital is as good as its 70mm counterpart, but that's it. Digital 4k holds it own well and is in high-resolution. Clear picture and sounds clearer than its IMAX brethren, but I wouldn't trade it for the IMAX ones.
Before I discuss any praise for Michael Keaton, it's good to see Edward Norton back on the grind where he rightfully belongs. He's had a rough outing with films that didn't fit a man of his talent. Now, he was fine in Grand Budapest Hotel, but he was basically a supporting character in a movie that featured a bevy of other great performers. Here, he's grabbing scenes, even overshadowing Keaton. Birdman is really at how your past isn't your best benefit. Keaton plays Riggan Thomson, an actor who used to play Birdman for three successful films (Keaton was once Batman from 1989-92). As with all actors, he decided to venture into a different direction, so he goes to do Broadway shows and creates a production, in which, he stars, writes and directs. Unbeknownst to him, he's able to levitate and use telekinesis, something his alter ego was able to do.
Having known very little about it, I was pretty much able to pick up many of the elements here to understand what was going on here. The casting is outstanding, especially the key actors in this production. A big round of applause, once again, to Emma Stone. I don't think there's anyone in Hollywood who uses their facial muscles in the way that she does. There's one scene where she and her father, Riggan's, are arguing over careers and other things, and the way she emotes her lines really added to the depth of her character. You can't say that about a lot of actors, and that speaks strongly of her strengths. Naomi Watts, Andrea Riseborough, Zack Galifianakis, and Amy Ryan are all strong for their roles. As for Keaton? This is probably his best role in years. He was fine in this year's Robocop reboot, but here, he owns the portrayal of an actor trying to stray away from his past. I don't know if he'll get an Oscar nomination, but I hope he gets one. Same for Norton.
.jpg)