Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Interstellar (Christopher Nolan) *SPOILERS FROM POST 458 ONWARDS*

Options
1454648505157

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 832 ✭✭✭HamsterFace


    The only thing that I really don't like about the movie is how they can leave a planet on a small craft, eg they use a large conventional rocket to leave earth but use the little craft to leave the water planet.

    Has that little yoke got some other technology and if so why then use the big rocket to leave earth?


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,668 CMod ✭✭✭✭Sad Professor


    The only thing that I really don't like about the movie is how they can leave a planet on a small craft, eg they use a large conventional rocket to leave earth but use the little craft to leave the water planet.

    Has that little yoke got some other technology and if so why then use the big rocket to leave earth?

    To conserve the lander's fuel?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 832 ✭✭✭HamsterFace


    To conserve the lander's fuel?

    My point is that the lander is a tiny little thing but capable of leaving an atmosphere which would show technology far beyond that of rockets. But they still use a rocket similar to that of the 20th century.

    Just seemed a little Off but maybe just me


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,668 CMod ✭✭✭✭Sad Professor


    My explanation is still the same: To conserve fuel. Why waste a vehicle's valuable energy getting into orbit when you can use a rocket instead?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 832 ✭✭✭HamsterFace


    My explanation is still the same: To conserve fuel. Why waste a vehicle's valuable energy getting into orbit when you can use a rocket instead?

    I suppose, they just looked like radically different technology to me


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,996 ✭✭✭jones


    ktulu123 wrote: »
    Saw it for the 5th time last night in the IFI, still ****ing awesome! The sound system in screen 1 is great!

    Totally agree I saw it Tuesday night in cinema 1 in the IFI and the sound was amazing, there was a few moments towards the end where the score overpowered the dialog but I actually think that was Nolan's intention.
    I saw it originally in Vue and the sound bothered me through the whole film there.

    The only thing I didn't like about IFI was the seats other wise it was excellent (I wont go into the no popcorn situation :-))


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,388 ✭✭✭PhiloCypher


    I've got you all beat I watched it for the 15th time in the TGI's and I think it was a visual feast, I just ate it up :pac:

    I dare anyone to enjoy it as much as I did .


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,994 ✭✭✭Taylor365


    The only thing that I really don't like about the movie is how they can leave a planet on a small craft, eg they use a large conventional rocket to leave earth but use the little craft to leave the water planet.

    Has that little yoke got some other technology and if so why then use the big rocket to leave earth?
    Yea, if i recall, the gravity was meant to be a lot more on that planet too. (Would require more thrust than earths - meaning you need a lot more rockets).

    Magic.

    Movies ay? :pac:


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,388 ✭✭✭PhiloCypher


    Taylor365 wrote: »
    Yea, if i recall, the gravity was meant to be a lot more on that planet too. (Would require more thrust than earths - meaning you need a lot more rockets).

    Magic.

    Movies ay? :pac:

    Far as I can remember the Water planets gravity was heavier then earths and the ice planets was lighter(hence the still for my money ridiculous cloud glaciers).


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,556 ✭✭✭the_monkey


    only one Oscar for Interstellar then - visual effects.

    Nothing though for soundtrack, screenplay ... which is a shame really.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,996 ✭✭✭jones


    Was the score even nominated? I did think it was odd it was totally overlooked I thought it was amazing. Up there with Zimmer's Inception, Rush and TDK


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    I think people are as much in love with the soundtrack as the film. I wonder would people gush as much about the film it if it had no soundtrack or an inferior one.

    Obviously not. Sure the soundtrack is as much a part of a film as anything else. That's like saying I wonder if people would gush as much if it had no dialogue.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 29,094 CMod ✭✭✭✭johnny_ultimate


    I'd disagree with that, music has always been an unusually weighty element in Christopher Nolan films. His restless editing style requires an equally restless soundtrack to propel it along, and he's found that in Zimmer's bombast. Many of the most memorable sequences from his films are aggressively scored, the music dictating the tone, pace and mood as much if not more so than anything else. Obviously many, many films have music deeply embedded in their DNA and character, but in Nolan's films it's exceptionally important.

    There's several examples of this in Interstellar. Notice how a persistent soundtrack is used in the montage-like sequences that are constantly cutting back and forth between locations and characters. The docking scene would be fundamentally different in terms of mood if the soundtrack was changed. But the best example is the scene where Cooper watches his son's years' worth of messages. The soundtrack builds steadily to accompany and amplify the emotional intensity of the scene, and then it's almost a full-on shock when the music cuts out abruptly.

    That one scene to me perfectly encapsulates how Nolan has the soundtracks carry a lot of weight, and offers a purposefully startling example of what happens it's removed. And, depending on my mood and the sequence in question, I can find that massive reliance on music either captivating or frustrating. I have no doubt whatsoever that the potent soundtracking plays a significant role in people's emotional and subconscious responses to the likes of Interstellar and Inception.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,039 ✭✭✭Mister Vain


    I'd disagree with that, music has always been an unusually weighty element in Christopher Nolan films. His restless editing style requires an equally restless soundtrack to propel it along, and he's found that in Zimmer's bombast. Many of the most memorable sequences from his films are aggressively scored, the music dictating the tone, pace and mood as much if not more so than anything else.

    There's several examples of this in Interstellar. Notice how a persistent soundtrack is used in the montage-like sequences that are constantly cutting back and forth between locations and characters. The docking scene would be fundamentally different in terms of mood if the soundtrack was changed. But the best example is the scene where Cooper watches his son's years' worth of messages. The soundtrack builds steadily to accompany and amplify the emotional intensity of the scene, and then it's almost a full-on shock when the music cuts out abruptly.

    That one scene to me perfectly encapsulates how Nolan has the soundtracks carry a lot of weight. And, depending on my mood and the sequence in question, I can find that massive reliance on music either captivating or frustrating. I have no doubt whatsoever that the potent soundtracking plays a significant role in people's emotional and subconscious responses to the likes of Interstellar and Inception.

    Very well said. While I thought the soundtrack to Interstellar was fantastic and it really adds to the suspense, there is a kind of reliance on it to carry the film. There are moments where it drowns out the dialog which is frustrating. It's just a bit much at times.

    It's almost like he's playing it safe. Get the best soundtrack from the best composer and you're pretty much guaranteed to get a good result.


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,431 ✭✭✭✭Snake Plisken


    I think I'm going to orders he Blu-Ray from the U.S. As some are suggesting it will have a higher bit-rate for sound and picture while Warner will release it in Europe and will stick multiple languages on it thus reducing the bit rate for picture and sound.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,556 ✭✭✭the_monkey


    I think I'm going to orders he Blu-Ray from the U.S. As some are suggesting it will have a higher bit-rate for sound and picture while Warner will release it in Europe and will stick multiple languages on it thus reducing the bit rate for picture and sound.

    Will it be region free ?

    Edit see on amazon US it's Region: Region A/1

    Why the hell do they regionalise BluRays ? especially one's with global release dates...


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,556 ✭✭✭the_monkey




  • Registered Users Posts: 12,431 ✭✭✭✭Snake Plisken


    the_monkey wrote: »
    Will it be region free ?

    Edit see on amazon US it's Region: Region A/1

    Why the hell do they regionalise BluRays ? especially one's with global release dates...

    Reviews will be up soon some sites will say if it's region locked or not.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,091 ✭✭✭Antar Bolaeisk


    Managed to finally catch this at the cinema, apparently the largest imax in the world, which wasn't bad going and made the whole experience that much more amazing (especially the whole cinema rumbling during the more intense scenes).

    Really enjoyed the film, not Nolan's best but up there with them. Loved the robots, was expecting at least one of them to pull a hal. The story was interesting but it was let down at the end by it being a self propagating paradox. The sound mastering was a bit weird, there's no way that no-one noticed that a lot of the dialogue was unintelligible when things were getting hairy on screen so I can only assume it was meant to be that way. Can't say I was too enamoured with the score but then I generally don't like Zimmer, I will forgive him however if it leads to greater use of pipe organs.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,785 ✭✭✭jcsoulinger


    . The story was interesting but it was let down at the end by it being a self propagating paradox. .

    I'm guessing the paradox your referring to is the fact that in the original time line every one on earth would have died so who are the beings that create the worm hole that coop says came from us.

    I like to think that the computers/robots left on earth do as you say "a Hal", become completely self aware and evolve into the beings that eventually create the worm hole and save humanity. I think this is kind of foreshadowed in the scene with the drone where it had been flying around for 10 years and would have continued to do so unless some one brought it down.


  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,188 ✭✭✭DoYouEvenLift


    Managed to finally catch this at the cinema, apparently the largest imax in the world, which wasn't bad going and made the whole experience that much more amazing (especially the whole cinema rumbling during the more intense scenes).

    Really enjoyed the film, not Nolan's best but up there with them. Loved the robots, was expecting at least one of them to pull a hal. The story was interesting but it was let down at the end by it being a self propagating paradox. The sound mastering was a bit weird, there's no way that no-one noticed that a lot of the dialogue was unintelligible when things were getting hairy on screen so I can only assume it was meant to be that way. Can't say I was too enamoured with the score but then I generally don't like Zimmer, I will forgive him however if it leads to greater use of pipe organs.


    The Darling harbour one? It must have seemed huge lol


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,091 ✭✭✭Antar Bolaeisk


    The Darling harbour one? It must have seemed huge lol

    Yeah, it was absolutely ginormous. Hard really to put a scale on it from the inside but it's meant to be about 36 x 30m! When the imax scenes kicked in it felt almost like you were there.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,188 ✭✭✭DoYouEvenLift


    Yeah, it was absolutely ginormous. Hard really to put a scale on it from the inside but it's meant to be about 36 x 30m! When the imax scenes kicked in it felt almost like you were there.


    Lmao ridiculous, I saw it in Manchester which is 26 x 18 and I thought that was massive so it's hard to imagine being near the Sydney one. It's honestly sad how unused this technology is in modern cinema though, hopefully more directors got influenced by interstellar to go the extra mile for future blockbusters.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,563 ✭✭✭Adamantium




  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 216 ✭✭theboy1


    I'd disagree with that, music has always been an unusually weighty element in Christopher Nolan films. His restless editing style requires an equally restless soundtrack to propel it along, and he's found that in Zimmer's bombast. Many of the most memorable sequences from his films are aggressively scored, the music dictating the tone, pace and mood as much if not more so than anything else. Obviously many, many films have music deeply embedded in their DNA and character, but in Nolan's films it's exceptionally important.

    There's several examples of this in Interstellar. Notice how a persistent soundtrack is used in the montage-like sequences that are constantly cutting back and forth between locations and characters. The docking scene would be fundamentally different in terms of mood if the soundtrack was changed. But the best example is the scene where Cooper watches his son's years' worth of messages. The soundtrack builds steadily to accompany and amplify the emotional intensity of the scene, and then it's almost a full-on shock when the music cuts out abruptly.

    That one scene to me perfectly encapsulates how Nolan has the soundtracks carry a lot of weight, and offers a purposefully startling example of what happens it's removed. And, depending on my mood and the sequence in question, I can find that massive reliance on music either captivating or frustrating. I have no doubt whatsoever that the potent soundtracking plays a significant role in people's emotional and subconscious responses to the likes of Interstellar and Inception.

    Yes the soundtrack plays a massive role in Nolan's movies, nothing wrong with that.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,556 ✭✭✭the_monkey


    I'm guessing the paradox your referring to is the fact that in the original time line every one on earth would have died so who are the beings that create the worm hole that coop says came from us.

    I like to think that the computers/robots left on earth do as you say "a Hal", become completely self aware and evolve into the beings that eventually create the worm hole and save humanity. I think this is kind of foreshadowed in the scene with the drone where it had been flying around for 10 years and would have continued to do so unless some one brought it down.

    Been mentioned before but I like to think of it as that cooper always transmitted the data ... on ever iteration - like a circle with no beginning, it's the same paradox in the Terminator films - what were the "first" terminator's CPU based on ?

    Still the T-800 that was sent back to 1984 LA ... for all iterations ... forever

    But up to you of course :D it's still a nice idea !


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,796 ✭✭✭Calibos


    the_monkey wrote: »
    Been mentioned before but I like to think of it as that cooper always transmitted the data ... on ever iteration - like a circle with no beginning, it's the same paradox in the Terminator films - what were the "first" terminator's CPU based on ?

    Still the T-800 that was sent back to 1984 LA ... for all iterations ... forever

    But up to you of course :D it's still a nice idea !

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predestination_paradox


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,556 ✭✭✭the_monkey




  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,668 CMod ✭✭✭✭Sad Professor


    There’s no paradox in Interstellar.

    A paradox in time travel is when casualty is violated. The classic example is the Grandfather paradox. Man travels back in time and kills his own grandfather, which is impossible because if he did kill his grandfather he wouldn’t have been born and couldn’t have travelled back in time and killed his grandfather.

    What happens in Interstellar is a causality loop. Causality itself is never violated, it’s just circular. The only problem is lack of a first cause. But first cause is a problem anyway. What caused the big bang? And what caused the thing that caused the big bang? And what caused that? It’s endless. The only solution is God (who apparently isn’t tied to causality because he’s God) or time isn’t the straight line that our experience of it leads us to believe.

    In the film, Nolan suggests that to a fifth dimensional being time may be just another spatial dimension. Brand describes the past and future as valleys and mountains that these beings can traverse with ease. This reminded me of Stephen Hawking’s concept of imaginary time, which (mathematically) solves the problem of first cause in the universe by making the big bang the north pole of time.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,556 ✭✭✭the_monkey


    ^^ exactly, just as I said ... :P


Advertisement