Interstellar

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Interstellar

    Didn't see a thread for this one, but looks interesting.

    New trailer is out:

    http://www.interstellarmovie.com/index-intl.php

    Access code is: 7201969, (the moon landing date).

    At this point, anything is a nice change from another comic book film or toy franchise. This could be awesome, or it could be a bit pretentious, we'll see.

  • #2
    Re: Interstellar

    My talent-crush for Nolan just went up a notch.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Interstellar

      The Dark Lord Nolan, bending ideas and genres to his will.

      aka: Can't wait.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Interstellar

        from the trailer is looks quite generic. a man with a "perfect" family. everything is about his family. i just hate that. it's manipulative and sentimental. i hope i'm wrong, and it's good.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Interstellar

          Originally posted by Bananos View Post
          from the trailer is looks quite generic. a man with a "perfect" family. everything is about his family. i just hate that. it's manipulative and sentimental. i hope i'm wrong, and it's good.
          Actually I think dysfunctional families are far more prevalent in Hollywood movies, especially ones where the kids hate the father for whatever reason.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Interstellar

            It looks good. I'm looking forward to it.
            "Arguing that you don't care about the right to privacy b/c you have nothing to hide is no different than saying you don't care about free speech because you have nothing to say." -- Edward Snowden

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Interstellar

              I also notice the (surface?) resemblance to SUNSHINE, where the goal is to save the human race via a gigantic space project.

              The real interesting (IMO) implications of feasible interstellar travel have yet to be addressed in a movie -- and very seldom in science fiction.

              THERE IS ONE WAY TO GET TO ANOTHER STAR, THAT WE KNOW WORKS. And that's to travel really, really fast. Like 90% lightspeed fast.

              Only problem is, anything shipping any mass whatsoever that travelled that fast, if it struck a (relatively) slow-moving object, would convert 2X 100% to energy. A hydrogen bomb converts only 2-3 % of a very small mass (like, ten pounds) to energy. So you'd have an explosion, from a Space-Shuttle-size object, of upwards of a hundred billion, perhaps even a trillion, megatons.

              Ergo. Any currently feasible starship would also be a doomsday weapon aimed at any solar system it encroached upon.

              Could this be the reason for Fermi's "Great Silence." Or is the human race just so damned special in the Universe?

              Write a script about that -- at least it would be something different from the usual regurgitated pap....



              P.S. I misspoke. If one pound of deuterium is converted to energy per hundred megatons, then the Space Shuttle striking the atmosphere at 90% lightspeed wd. = about sixty million megatons, which would mean that somewhere in the vicinity of five hundred Space Shuttles would be required to get to a trillion megatons. Still, sixty million megs would be enough to blow off the atmosphere and convert the surface of the Earth to lava, if not explode the planet completely, so 'twould suffice.
              Last edited by Max Otto Schrenck; 08-05-2014, 07:43 AM. Reason: caraflication

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Interstellar

                There will be wormholes and time travel. I've read.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Interstellar

                  I intend to see INTERSTELLAR -- and at the movieplex. For sure.

                  But when a movie tosses a big slab of unlikely, very theoretical stuff at us -- for the convenience of getting themselves out of a plot bind (the protags not being able to know the human import of their efforts -- due to the constraints of physics) -- I feel that an issue is being avoided which, were it faced, might make for a better, and certainly more believable, movie.

                  Wormholes and time travel are STAR TREK stuff. Old hat, and as improbable now as they were in the '60s. It's a way of avoiding the complications of reality, so you can wrap up a plot in an hour or two.

                  Give us the real sense of what it's like to face those cryptic interstellar voids, with nothing but what we know works -- acceleration -- and you don't need to throw in a boatload of speculation.

                  Or did we learn nothing from the success of GRAVITY?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Interstellar

                    Time travel and wormholes?

                    At some point there was also supposed to be alternate dimensions. I don't see any sign of that. There used to be an older script for Interstellar written by Christopher Nolan, which was then completely re-written. Maybe some of the confusing rumors come from that.

                    Judging by the trailers, there is some kind of space-jump system in use, either by an alien wormhole, or created by human technology. This would be the giant, reflective sphere in the previous trailer, that the ship enters.

                    If you don't have any kind of space-jump system in the story, ships that are able to travel close to speed of light would still spend at least *hundreds* of years trying to find another habitable planet. Just going to Proxima Centauri and back would take 10 years at the speed of light, and it's the closest star system to us. Tracking the 10 closest star systems would take probably around 100 years, and the chances of finding a habitable planet are nil.

                    Anyway, I find it unlikely that the story has time-travel. Instead the astronauts clearly go to some kind of cyber-sleep on the trailer, and it seems obvious that their journey to other stars and back takes about 30 years, with them sleeping through most of it. I know this because the small girl and Jessica Chastain's character are the *same* character. So the father-daughter re-union, if it happens, is likely to happen when the daughter has grown to be almost as old as her father is. For the father, the story takes only months or a couple of years at most, for the small girl it takes a good 30 years. As we follow the astronauts on their journey, with them staying the same age, we also follow the little girl growing up to become Jessica Chastain, and we see the slow destruction of earth.

                    All this you can piece together from the footage in the trailers. And by sci-fi movie standards, it's a fairly realistic approach to space travel, IMHO. I think it's cool that the film actually considers the time issues of space travel, the relative aging, and all that.

                    I think the film looks pretty awesome. It's a mega-budgeted, star-laden, spectacle-driven event film which is actually serious and ambitious about the ideas and concepts it has. There are only a couple of people in the world who are in a position to make a film like Inception, or Interstellar. I'm glad Nolan is making these films, because almost nobody else is.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Interstellar

                      Besides, FTL travel is pretty much a big unknown entity at the moment. Some particles and waves actually DO travel faster than light, and nobody knows what is the universal speed limit, if there is any.

                      But FTL for human travel would probably mean use of quantum mechanics. Classical mechanics will never take us that far. And in quantum mechanics, the line of possible and impossible is a blurry one. Classical mechanics and quantum mechanics are often directly contradictionary. Scientific community agrees that both exist, yet in many cases they can't theoretically co-exist. Trying to fit the classical mechanics together with the quantum mechanics is one of the central challenges of modern science. There is no proper unifying theory for both.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Interstellar

                        Originally posted by tuukka View Post
                        I'm glad Nolan is making these films, because almost nobody else is.
                        I think it's because he is one of the rare few who has the budget and backing to produce them.

                        Another notable one is Cameron, but he's has been wrapped up in his avatar sequels for like a decade. What a shame.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Interstellar

                          Originally posted by Max Otto Schrenck View Post
                          THERE IS ONE WAY TO GET TO ANOTHER STAR, THAT WE KNOW WORKS. And that's to travel really, really fast. Like 90% lightspeed fast.
                          Agreed. I'm a big fan of hard sci-fi.

                          But one thing that you notice when you read hard sci-fi from the 1800s is how small and limited most of their views of the future were. Look at Poe for example. His horror (where his imagination ran wild) is still remembered and read fondly today. But his hard sci-fi? How many people even remember Poe for his hard sci-fi?

                          Of the sci-fi from the 1800s that is worth reading today - how much of it was 'hard sci-fi' .. which limited the imagination to technology that was totally predictable ? How much of it would have passed your test?

                          If a film-maker wants to create a story that would stand the test of time ... is hard sci-fi a good choice?

                          Mac
                          New blogposts:
                          *Followup - Seeking Investors in all the wrong places
                          *Preselling your film - Learning from the Experts
                          *Getting your indie film onto iTunes
                          *Case Study - Estimating Film profits

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Interstellar

                            I'm not saying that ONLY hard sci-fi should be made, I'm saying that, to keep perspective, and to provide artistic challenge, it helps to have hard sci-fi elements in your script or story.

                            At least now it does (IMO). I firmly believe that the STAR TREK/STAR WARS/AVATAR approach of taking fantastic elements such as FTL, (intelligent) aliens, transdimension/transtemporal mechanisms, teleportation, etc., and treating them as if they're ordinary events like turning on your computer or driving your car, has run its course.

                            There's something bracing about playing tennis with a net. And science facts, incontrovertible and apparently unbreakable -- such as NO FTL, no teleportation, no time travel, etc -- provide a structure all in themselves to keep your story from dissolving into sheer fantasy.

                            In answer to the last point -- time will decide what stands the test of time, if anything. Nobody sits down to write something with the aim of standing the test of time. Scratch that. Maybe John Milton and James Joyce. But, even to them, standing the test of time was far down the list of goals.
                            Last edited by Max Otto Schrenck; 08-06-2014, 06:33 AM. Reason: add-on

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Interstellar

                              Sorry guys, but it sounds to me like you guys are about 40 years late with your "hard sci-fi". As an avid, long-time reader of all kinds of sci-fi literature, I find it wildly inaccurate to propose that "hard" sci-fi couldn't have FTL travel.

                              Writers of hard sci-fi often tend to follow the latest developments in the scientific community.

                              As a result, nowadays the novels are often filled with highly advanced nano-tech, crazy biological modification, quantum physics, super A.I's, etc. And it's been like this for about 20-30 years now. The resulting stories and scenarios can be quite more crazier and far out there than what you can find in the vast, vast majority of purely fantasy-driven literature.

                              What you are describing is more like the "classic" hard sci-fi rules that were established in the 50's. Rules that were then broken and revised, endlessly, for the next 60 years as real world science kept on advancing far beyond what scientists knew back in the 50's.

                              BTW, Avatar is pretty much hard sci-fi on movie terms. It's a complete opposite of Star Wars, when it comes to creating a realistically functioning, scientifically accurate imaginary world. There is no magic in Avatar, only science, which is based on natural science and biology observable on Earth. If you take away the colorful fantasy visual look of the film, and only concentrate on what happens in the film, and what is the logical underlying scientific explanation behind different events and details, it's really a remarkably well thought out film, with an exceptionally firm basis on real, proven science. Quite exceptional for a scifi movie.
                              Last edited by tuukka; 08-06-2014, 08:15 AM.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X