nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Interstellar (Christopher Nolan) SPOILERS FROM POST 458 ONWARDS

Sad Professor

His brother has been attached to this for a while. And so was Spielberg, but it seems Nolan has now stepped in. It's a sci-fi film about explorers who travel through a wormhole into an alternate dimension. It's apparently based on real-world science. The original treatment was written by Caltech physicist Kip S. Thorne.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/christopher-nolan-talks-direct-interstellar-410616

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

JP Liz V1

Snake Plisken wrote: »

read somewhere Nolan was impressed with McConaughey's performance in Mud, thus the casting thought he was pretty good in Contact all those years ago as well! Poster has an 80's Speilberg feel to it :-)

Yes similar to Close Encounters of the Third Kind poster

Sad Professor

I find it odd that Mud was the film that made Nolan reassess him. McConaughey has been on a resurgence since The Lincoln Lawyer over 3 years ago. Before Mud he was also in Killer Joe, The Paperboy and Magic Mike.

Snake Plisken

How did Oscar-winning Dallas Buyers Club star Matthew McConaughey end up in the spotlight for Christopher Nolan's cosmos-spanning epic Interstellar? He gives the answer in an interview with Variety.

"He came up to me," Matthew explains, "and said, ‘Mud. I love that movie.’ I sat down with him for about 2½ hours at his house."

It would seem therefore that the star's newly honed indie chops are what landed him the lead role in Nolan's eagerly awaited sci-fi, a typically ambitious story of deep-space exploration.

That's according to Matthew anyway

krudler

Deleted User wrote: »

McConaughey has always been a great actor, he just took the easy money and spent a decade and a half headlining lowest common denominator trash.

That, he wa excellent in Contact, Amistad and A Time To Kill in his early career, not the most amazing movies by any means but solid and he gave good performances, then along came the rom coms and he spiralled out of a promising career, back with a back now though. I'm surprised he never did more action stuff as he was good in Sahara, I actually like that movie thought it was really underrated.

JP Liz V1

krudler wrote: »

That, he wa excellent in Contact, Amistad and A Time To Kill in his early career, not the most amazing movies by any means but solid and he gave good performances, then along came the rom coms and he spiralled out of a promising career, back with a back now though. I'm surprised he never did more action stuff as he was good in Sahara, I actually like that movie thought it was really underrated.

He is good also in Frailty and I think he will win an Emmy this year too for TD

Soft Falling Rain

I find it hard to believe anyone would be happy to phone it in and collect the pay cheques doing rom coms. Maybe that's all MMc was being offered for awhile and just became typecast, until he took a punt on a few projects.

Corholio

Great poster tagline too.

'Mankind was born on earth. It was never meant to die here'

Adamantium

Deleted User wrote: »

McConaughey has always been a great actor, he just took the easy money and spent a decade and a half headlining lowest common denominator trash.

He actually said that was the very reason he did it, so he could be financially sound for life and maybe the next generation too, and then he'd go "right now, I'm off to work on my craft with the big stuff", without any worries

JP Liz V1

Soft Falling Rain wrote: »

I find it hard to believe anyone would be happy to phone it in and collect the pay cheques doing rom coms. Maybe that's all MMc was being offered for awhile and just became typecast, until he took a punt on a few projects.

I know he gets a lot of stick for the rom coms (is it 4 in total he did?) but How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days is very good, yes it has the usual rom com clichés but Matthew McConaughey and Kate Hudson have great chemistry, even better than Meg Ryan and Tom Hanks imo and there is some genuinely funny scenes

Duggy747

3 minute trailer being attached to Godzilla

[Deleted User]

Snake Plisken wrote: »

Probably his Mrs told him to knuckle down and do some decent movies, instead of crap rom coms!
Still Intersteller will be the highlight of my movie year!

btw Darko what did you think of Wally's Transcendence? Mark Kamode did a piece defending it here http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/markkermode/posts/In-Defence-Of-Transcendence

Haven't seen it yet but is it that bad?

Have yet to see it and it's unlikely I'll see Transcendence in the cinema. Was looking forward to it, even if the whole thing sounds dumb as hell but right before Spider-man 2 there was a trailer which seemed to give away every twist and plot point in Transcendence and it really put me off the film

Sad Professor wrote: »

I find it odd that Mud was the film that made Nolan reassess him. McConaughey has been on a resurgence since The Lincoln Lawyer over 3 years ago. Before Mud he was also in Killer Joe, The Paperboy and Magic Mike.

I too found that interview to be odd. Before Mud we had The Lincoln Lawyer, Bernie, Killer Joe, Magic Mike and The Paperboy, all of which showcased McConaughey as a damn fine actor. Either Nolan doesn't watch a whole lot of cinema or it takes something truly special to impress him.

krudler wrote: »

That, he wa excellent in Contact, Amistad and A Time To Kill in his early career, not the most amazing movies by any means but solid and he gave good performances, then along came the rom coms and he spiralled out of a promising career, back with a back now though. I'm surprised he never did more action stuff as he was good in Sahara, I actually like that movie thought it was really underrated.

I really liked Sahara but it was a huge flop and the various law suits attached to it would put anyone off doing something similar. Rewatched Sahara last year and it's pretty much a rom com with added explosions and Steve Zahn as a wise cracking side kick. Good fun for what it is and I'd have no issue with McConaughey taking over as Indy based on it.

Adamantium wrote: »

He actually said that was the very reason he did it, so he could be financially sound for life and maybe the next generation too, and then he'd go "right now, I'm off to work on my craft with the big stuff", without any worries

Maybe he's like Brendan Fraser and just enjoyed the films he was doing. There is a great interview with Fraser where he is asked why he does so many big budget films between art house films and his reply is along the lines that he does art house films between the big films as a way to kill time. He goes on to say that he loves doing the big dumb films and honestly it's refreshing to have an actor enjoy their work and not try to be pretentious.

brevity

God, I cannot wait for this movie.

Looper007

Adamantium wrote: »

He actually said that was the very reason he did it, so he could be financially sound for life and maybe the next generation too, and then he'd go "right now, I'm off to work on my craft with the big stuff", without any worries

To go from those rom com's to be probably best actor around at the moment is one of those amazing shift's I've seen in any actor's career's . I think also the fact he's settle down now with a family has helped him too. I'm looking forward to this film as Nolan and Paul Thomas Anderson are the only two big directors who films feel like Events, they always push the boundaries.

Looper007

Sad Professor wrote: »

I find it odd that Mud was the film that made Nolan reassess him. McConaughey has been on a resurgence since The Lincoln Lawyer over 3 years ago. Before Mud he was also in Killer Joe, The Paperboy and Magic Mike.

He did the same with Tom Hardy when he hired him for Bane, he didn't see Bronson at all until Christian Bale told him to watch it. He wasn't even considering Hardy at all for the role. He doesn't seem like the type of director that watches film every day like a Tarantino or Anderson.

Adamantium

Looper007 wrote: »

He did the same with Tom Hardy when he hired him for Bane, he didn't see Bronson at all until Christian Bale told him to watch it. He wasn't even considering Hardy at all for the role. He doesn't seem like the type of director that watches film every day like a Tarantino or Anderson.

The thought of Nolan sitting around in the evening with a bottle of wine watching a few rom-coms. First tonight: What to expect when you're expecting.

krudler

Looper007 wrote: »

To go from those rom com's to be probably best actor around at the moment is one of those amazing shift's I've seen in any actor's career's . I think also the fact he's settle down now with a family has helped him too. I'm looking forward to this film as Nolan and Paul Thomas Anderson are the only two big directors who films feel like Events, they always push the boundaries.

Nolan has most certainly entered that realm of directors whose name alone is enough to get Joe Soap into the cinemas.

pixelburp

I'm sure in time trailers will break the mystery, but for now the marketing surrounding this film has been pretty spot-on. A slow drip feed of information, with only the merest hints and nods towards the plot and setting.

I don't know if Nolan's the type to takeover every facet of a production - marketing included - but so far the pot is being stirred just right. That tagline alone deserved a raise for whoever came up with it.

Interpreting what little I know of the film myself, I hope for once, just this once, we have a Hollywood film where science is the hero; a film that takes an optimistic view of ourselves and potential. Too often of late, Hollywood likes to portray 'science' as the amoral sometimes-antagonist and it'd be nice to go back to those days when Sci-Fi had a hopeful vision of the future. It feels like a long time since Gene Roddenberry and his ilk had their visions of humanity. I could be way off-base, but I get the sense Interstellar might be reaching for that mentality.

McGrath5

I'm heading to see Godzilla tomorrow, does anybody know if the new trailer is showing beforehand?

PunkFreud

McGrath5 wrote: »

I'm heading to see Godzilla tomorrow, does anybody know if the new trailer is showing beforehand?

I went to see Godzilla earlier today, unfortunately there was no Interstellar trailer - not even the teaser - preceding it. The rumours seem to be unfounded, on this side of the Atlantic anyways...

Banjaxed82

PunkFreud wrote: »

I went to see Godzilla earlier today, unfortunately there was no Interstellar trailer - not even the teaser - preceding it. The rumours seem to be unfounded, on this side of the Atlantic anyways...

There was a trailer tonight, and was the same voice over while flight related events from our history play out. nothing new

Duggy747

French trailer has been online for 2 or 3 days now but it's CAM quality and in French so not much use :pac:

Adamantium

The CAM trailer has this song in it and

3/4 of the trailer are on Earth, with the last 1/4 in space, so you can imagine were the space section starts is when the crescendo kicks in

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjgTFd6XAg8

Even at a blurred distance, the cinematography in the bootleg is STUNNING. I don't mince my words when I say that,

a static camera exactly as if it was installed on the hull of a real world spacecraft. The last scene, with the spacecraft entering the wormhole (I suppose so), matches those videos on Youtube showing planet Earth rolling endlessly under the ISS. And did anybody notice the wheel like spacecraft spinning like an old fashioned scifi space station? Could that be the mothership that ultimately travels through the wormhole?

Nolan said he wanted space to be shot like a documentary.

I read a book a few years ago about a doomed/dying Earth that was soon to be unliveable for humans and only now have I remembered it. It dealt with interstellar travel in a most realistic way possible and it was riveting.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ark_(Baxter_novel)

faceman

Have loved the build up to this film. The trailer is such a tease. The way it should be.

Sad Professor

Second trailer:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSWdZVtXT7E

Adamantium

Sad Professor wrote: »

Second trailer:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSWdZVtXT7E

One of the best trailers I've ever seen. It establishes the premise and characters, but doesn't blow its load. I think this should be the last trailer, and that audiences should be able to discover the rest of the film along with the characters. I think if they release another trailer revealing what lies "beyond" that it would be doing a huge disservice to the story.

That shot of Saturn and it's rings, and the scale of the wormhole reminds me of something out of the fountain, i wasn't even sure what it was for a while, truly frightening

Dustbowl, desertification is something we haven't seen in movies in years

Yeti Beast

No two ways about it - I'm excited for this.

Basq

Just a fantastic trailer.. can't wait for this!

stealinhorses

looks really awesome, saw it before Godzilla today and you can tell it's an instant classic

Burt Macklin

I normally try to stay away from trailers of films I want to see, but all this discussion is making me really curious!

Does it give away much of the plot?

FortuneChip

Burt Macklin wrote: »

Normally try to stay away from trailers of films I want to see but all this discussion is making me really curious!

Does it give much away?

Simple premise. Tees things up without showing how anything develops.