# Interstellar



## Sgt_Gath

Alrighty then....


*Interstellar*

This was a good movie, but not _quite_ what I was expecting. It has some elements that really, *really* work, and a few that kind of... Well, don't.

It seemed to be aiming for something of a "2001: A Space Odyssey" vibe, but from a slightly (and I do mean 'slightly') more "Hard Sci-Fi" perspective, mixed with a healthy dose of Nolan's trademark philosophizing and sentimentality.

Frankly, I think that might have been its biggest failing. It wasn't "Hard Sci-Fi" enough, and so certain elements came off as being a bit goofy and cliche.




*- :::SPOILERS::: -


*
For example, an early plot element involves mysterious aliens only referred to as "they," who interact with the human race through gravitational anomalies. They create a wormhole for humanity to use so they can escape the solar system, and they even lead the hero (a former test pilot) to NASA by messing around with things in his daughter's bedroom in order to send him a message.

While, granted, this is explained and brought full circle in the end (and satisfyingly so at that), it's a bit of an odd choice stylistically. It also makes the first half of the film seem a bit silly and contrived.

Why not keep things relatively simple and just have NASA use an Alcubierre drive instead? They're apparently tinkering with the idea even as we speak.

NASA discusses its warp drive research, prepares to create a warp bubble in the lab

For that matter, why not simply have NASA recruit him the old fashioned way? He apparently worked for them in the past.

I'm also pretty damn sure that black holes *DO NOT WORK THAT WAY*. However, that's a different can of worms entirely, so I'll avoid details. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			








*- :::SPOILERS::: -

*


Though... Ultimately, it should be noted that these are only minor complaints. Either way, I guess it is more than worth any silliness involved simply to see a serious, thought provoking science fiction film on the big screen again.

If this film could be shown to have the same impact on the "Hard Sci-Fi" genre that Blade Runner had on film noir, or Gladiator had on historical epics, I'd pretty much "jump for joy." lol

*Overall:* 7.5 out of 10.


----------



## ChrisL

Sgt_Gath said:


> Alrighty then....
> 
> 
> *Interstellar*
> 
> This was a good movie, but not _quite_ what I was expecting. It has some elements that really, *really* work, and a few that kind of... Well, don't.
> 
> It seemed to be aiming for something of a "2001: A Space Odyssey" vibe, but from a slightly (and I do mean 'slightly') more "Hard Sci-Fi" perspective, mixed with a healthy dose of Nolan's trademark philosophizing and sentimentality.
> 
> Frankly, I think that might have been its biggest failing. It wasn't "Hard Sci-Fi" enough, and so certain elements came off as being a bit goofy and cliche.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *- :::SPOILERS::: -
> 
> 
> *
> For example, an early plot element involves mysterious aliens only referred to as "they," who interact with the human race through gravitational anomalies. They create a wormhole for humanity to use so they can escape the solar system, and they even lead the hero (a former test pilot) to NASA by messing around with things in his daughter's bedroom in order to send him a message.
> 
> While, granted, this is explained and brought full circle in the end (and satisfyingly so at that), it's a bit of an odd choice stylistically. It also makes the first half of the film seem a bit silly and contrived.
> 
> Why not keep things relatively simple and just have NASA use an Alcubierre drive instead? They're apparently tinkering with the idea even as we speak.
> 
> NASA discusses its warp drive research, prepares to create a warp bubble in the lab
> 
> For that matter, why not simply have NASA recruit him the old fashioned way? He apparently worked for them in the past.
> 
> I'm also pretty damn sure that black holes *DO NOT WORK THAT WAY*. However, that's a different can of worms entirely, so I'll avoid details.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *- :::SPOILERS::: -
> 
> *
> 
> 
> Though... Ultimately, it should be noted that these are only minor complaints. Either way, I guess it is more than worth any silliness involved simply to see a serious, thought provoking science fiction film on the big screen again.
> 
> If this film could be shown to have the same impact on the "Hard Sci-Fi" genre that Blade Runner had on film noir, or Gladiator had on historical epics, I'd pretty much "jump for joy." lol
> 
> *Overall:* 7.5 out of 10.



It sounds a bit "out there" to me.  Trailer is interesting though.


----------



## Sgt_Gath

ChrisL said:


> *It sounds a bit "out there" to me.*  Trailer is interesting though.



Yea. That'd be *one* way of putting it.


----------



## Rikurzhen

ChrisL said:


> Sgt_Gath said:
> 
> 
> 
> Alrighty then....
> 
> 
> *Interstellar*
> 
> This was a good movie, but not _quite_ what I was expecting. It has some elements that really, *really* work, and a few that kind of... Well, don't.
> 
> It seemed to be aiming for something of a "2001: A Space Odyssey" vibe, but from a slightly (and I do mean 'slightly') more "Hard Sci-Fi" perspective, mixed with a healthy dose of Nolan's trademark philosophizing and sentimentality.
> 
> Frankly, I think that might have been its biggest failing. It wasn't "Hard Sci-Fi" enough, and so certain elements came off as being a bit goofy and cliche.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *- :::SPOILERS::: -
> 
> 
> *
> For example, an early plot element involves mysterious aliens only referred to as "they," who interact with the human race through gravitational anomalies. They create a wormhole for humanity to use so they can escape the solar system, and they even lead the hero (a former test pilot) to NASA by messing around with things in his daughter's bedroom in order to send him a message.
> 
> While, granted, this is explained and brought full circle in the end (and satisfyingly so at that), it's a bit of an odd choice stylistically. It also makes the first half of the film seem a bit silly and contrived.
> 
> Why not keep things relatively simple and just have NASA use an Alcubierre drive instead? They're apparently tinkering with the idea even as we speak.
> 
> NASA discusses its warp drive research, prepares to create a warp bubble in the lab
> 
> For that matter, why not simply have NASA recruit him the old fashioned way? He apparently worked for them in the past.
> 
> I'm also pretty damn sure that black holes *DO NOT WORK THAT WAY*. However, that's a different can of worms entirely, so I'll avoid details.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *- :::SPOILERS::: -
> 
> *
> 
> 
> Though... Ultimately, it should be noted that these are only minor complaints. Either way, I guess it is more than worth any silliness involved simply to see a serious, thought provoking science fiction film on the big screen again.
> 
> If this film could be shown to have the same impact on the "Hard Sci-Fi" genre that Blade Runner had on film noir, or Gladiator had on historical epics, I'd pretty much "jump for joy." lol
> 
> *Overall:* 7.5 out of 10.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It sounds a bit "out there" to me.  Trailer is interesting though.
Click to expand...



You just need to date some nerds, they'll bring you along. Pretty soon you'll even watch Star Wars.


----------



## ChrisL

Rikurzhen said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sgt_Gath said:
> 
> 
> 
> Alrighty then....
> 
> 
> *Interstellar*
> 
> This was a good movie, but not _quite_ what I was expecting. It has some elements that really, *really* work, and a few that kind of... Well, don't.
> 
> It seemed to be aiming for something of a "2001: A Space Odyssey" vibe, but from a slightly (and I do mean 'slightly') more "Hard Sci-Fi" perspective, mixed with a healthy dose of Nolan's trademark philosophizing and sentimentality.
> 
> Frankly, I think that might have been its biggest failing. It wasn't "Hard Sci-Fi" enough, and so certain elements came off as being a bit goofy and cliche.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *- :::SPOILERS::: -
> 
> 
> *
> For example, an early plot element involves mysterious aliens only referred to as "they," who interact with the human race through gravitational anomalies. They create a wormhole for humanity to use so they can escape the solar system, and they even lead the hero (a former test pilot) to NASA by messing around with things in his daughter's bedroom in order to send him a message.
> 
> While, granted, this is explained and brought full circle in the end (and satisfyingly so at that), it's a bit of an odd choice stylistically. It also makes the first half of the film seem a bit silly and contrived.
> 
> Why not keep things relatively simple and just have NASA use an Alcubierre drive instead? They're apparently tinkering with the idea even as we speak.
> 
> NASA discusses its warp drive research, prepares to create a warp bubble in the lab
> 
> For that matter, why not simply have NASA recruit him the old fashioned way? He apparently worked for them in the past.
> 
> I'm also pretty damn sure that black holes *DO NOT WORK THAT WAY*. However, that's a different can of worms entirely, so I'll avoid details.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *- :::SPOILERS::: -
> 
> *
> 
> 
> Though... Ultimately, it should be noted that these are only minor complaints. Either way, I guess it is more than worth any silliness involved simply to see a serious, thought provoking science fiction film on the big screen again.
> 
> If this film could be shown to have the same impact on the "Hard Sci-Fi" genre that Blade Runner had on film noir, or Gladiator had on historical epics, I'd pretty much "jump for joy." lol
> 
> *Overall:* 7.5 out of 10.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It sounds a bit "out there" to me.  Trailer is interesting though.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You just need to date some nerds, they'll bring you along. Pretty soon you'll even watch Star Wars.
Click to expand...


----------



## ChrisL

Sgt_Gath said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> 
> *It sounds a bit "out there" to me.*  Trailer is interesting though.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yea. That'd be *one* way of putting it.
Click to expand...


Well, you rated it pretty high, and it is sci fi.  I must say that it looks a little . . . emotional maybe?  With the little girl doing all that crying?  Did you cry, Sgt?


----------



## Sgt_Gath

ChrisL said:


> Rikurzhen said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sgt_Gath said:
> 
> 
> 
> Alrighty then....
> 
> 
> *Interstellar*
> 
> This was a good movie, but not _quite_ what I was expecting. It has some elements that really, *really* work, and a few that kind of... Well, don't.
> 
> It seemed to be aiming for something of a "2001: A Space Odyssey" vibe, but from a slightly (and I do mean 'slightly') more "Hard Sci-Fi" perspective, mixed with a healthy dose of Nolan's trademark philosophizing and sentimentality.
> 
> Frankly, I think that might have been its biggest failing. It wasn't "Hard Sci-Fi" enough, and so certain elements came off as being a bit goofy and cliche.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *- :::SPOILERS::: -
> 
> 
> *
> For example, an early plot element involves mysterious aliens only referred to as "they," who interact with the human race through gravitational anomalies. They create a wormhole for humanity to use so they can escape the solar system, and they even lead the hero (a former test pilot) to NASA by messing around with things in his daughter's bedroom in order to send him a message.
> 
> While, granted, this is explained and brought full circle in the end (and satisfyingly so at that), it's a bit of an odd choice stylistically. It also makes the first half of the film seem a bit silly and contrived.
> 
> Why not keep things relatively simple and just have NASA use an Alcubierre drive instead? They're apparently tinkering with the idea even as we speak.
> 
> NASA discusses its warp drive research, prepares to create a warp bubble in the lab
> 
> For that matter, why not simply have NASA recruit him the old fashioned way? He apparently worked for them in the past.
> 
> I'm also pretty damn sure that black holes *DO NOT WORK THAT WAY*. However, that's a different can of worms entirely, so I'll avoid details.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *- :::SPOILERS::: -
> 
> *
> 
> 
> Though... Ultimately, it should be noted that these are only minor complaints. Either way, I guess it is more than worth any silliness involved simply to see a serious, thought provoking science fiction film on the big screen again.
> 
> If this film could be shown to have the same impact on the "Hard Sci-Fi" genre that Blade Runner had on film noir, or Gladiator had on historical epics, I'd pretty much "jump for joy." lol
> 
> *Overall:* 7.5 out of 10.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It sounds a bit "out there" to me.  Trailer is interesting though.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You just need to date some nerds, they'll bring you along. Pretty soon you'll even watch Star Wars.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


It is useless to resist, Chris. 

It is... *Your destiny!!!!




*

MUAHAHAHAHA!

lol


----------



## Sgt_Gath

ChrisL said:


> Sgt_Gath said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> 
> *It sounds a bit "out there" to me.*  Trailer is interesting though.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yea. That'd be *one* way of putting it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, you rated it pretty high, and it is sci fi.  I must say that it looks a little . . . emotional maybe?  With the little girl doing all that crying?  Did you cry, Sgt?
Click to expand...


No. I just had something in my eye. *sniff*

LOL


----------



## Gracie

What irritates me about this concept of finding another planet that is habital for earthlings to go to is...we fucked up with one so now everyone is supposed to bail it and go fuck up another one with the same o same o?

A bear shits in the woods but doesn't bring it home. This whole planet has been shit on and brought home. Instead of cleaning it up, another one is being sought.


----------



## Sgt_Gath

Gracie said:


> What irritates me about this concept of finding another planet that is habital for earthlings to go to is...we fucked up with one so now everyone is supposed to bail it and go fuck up another one with the same o same o?
> 
> A bear shits in the woods but doesn't bring it home. This whole planet has been shit on and brought home. Instead of cleaning it up, another one is being sought.



Well... Ultimately, we're going to have to leave this planet one way or another if we want to survive.

Between super volcanoes, asteroids, comets, climate shifts, solar flares, and all the rest, the odds are basically 100% that some kind of catastrophe will eventually hit this planet, and wipe us all out regardless of how well we treat the environment. 

It's happened several times before. Just look at the dinosaurs, for instance.

Besides which, the potential resources that can be exploited outside of this planet are basically *limitless*. If we ever manage to make asteroid mining feasible, for example, it'd probably make the Industrial Revolution look like a mere footnote. lol


----------



## ChrisL

Sgt_Gath said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sgt_Gath said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> 
> *It sounds a bit "out there" to me.*  Trailer is interesting though.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yea. That'd be *one* way of putting it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, you rated it pretty high, and it is sci fi.  I must say that it looks a little . . . emotional maybe?  With the little girl doing all that crying?  Did you cry, Sgt?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No. I just had something in my eye. *sniff*
> 
> LOL
Click to expand...


  Sure, that's what it was.


----------



## Gracie

Ok. EVERYONE can leave earth and I'll just stay here and try to caretake my little section.

"On earth as it is in heaven". I'll stay put.


----------



## ChrisL

Rikurzhen said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sgt_Gath said:
> 
> 
> 
> Alrighty then....
> 
> 
> *Interstellar*
> 
> This was a good movie, but not _quite_ what I was expecting. It has some elements that really, *really* work, and a few that kind of... Well, don't.
> 
> It seemed to be aiming for something of a "2001: A Space Odyssey" vibe, but from a slightly (and I do mean 'slightly') more "Hard Sci-Fi" perspective, mixed with a healthy dose of Nolan's trademark philosophizing and sentimentality.
> 
> Frankly, I think that might have been its biggest failing. It wasn't "Hard Sci-Fi" enough, and so certain elements came off as being a bit goofy and cliche.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *- :::SPOILERS::: -
> 
> 
> *
> For example, an early plot element involves mysterious aliens only referred to as "they," who interact with the human race through gravitational anomalies. They create a wormhole for humanity to use so they can escape the solar system, and they even lead the hero (a former test pilot) to NASA by messing around with things in his daughter's bedroom in order to send him a message.
> 
> While, granted, this is explained and brought full circle in the end (and satisfyingly so at that), it's a bit of an odd choice stylistically. It also makes the first half of the film seem a bit silly and contrived.
> 
> Why not keep things relatively simple and just have NASA use an Alcubierre drive instead? They're apparently tinkering with the idea even as we speak.
> 
> NASA discusses its warp drive research, prepares to create a warp bubble in the lab
> 
> For that matter, why not simply have NASA recruit him the old fashioned way? He apparently worked for them in the past.
> 
> I'm also pretty damn sure that black holes *DO NOT WORK THAT WAY*. However, that's a different can of worms entirely, so I'll avoid details.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *- :::SPOILERS::: -
> 
> *
> 
> 
> Though... Ultimately, it should be noted that these are only minor complaints. Either way, I guess it is more than worth any silliness involved simply to see a serious, thought provoking science fiction film on the big screen again.
> 
> If this film could be shown to have the same impact on the "Hard Sci-Fi" genre that Blade Runner had on film noir, or Gladiator had on historical epics, I'd pretty much "jump for joy." lol
> 
> *Overall:* 7.5 out of 10.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It sounds a bit "out there" to me.  Trailer is interesting though.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You just need to date some nerds, they'll bring you along. Pretty soon you'll even watch Star Wars.
Click to expand...


I've seen Star Wars before.  Hasn't everyone seen that movie?  It was a good movie, but I think some people get a little too excited about it.    I don't know of any movie that I have or would have such an obsession over.


----------



## Sgt_Gath

ChrisL said:


> Rikurzhen said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sgt_Gath said:
> 
> 
> 
> Alrighty then....
> 
> 
> *Interstellar*
> 
> This was a good movie, but not _quite_ what I was expecting. It has some elements that really, *really* work, and a few that kind of... Well, don't.
> 
> It seemed to be aiming for something of a "2001: A Space Odyssey" vibe, but from a slightly (and I do mean 'slightly') more "Hard Sci-Fi" perspective, mixed with a healthy dose of Nolan's trademark philosophizing and sentimentality.
> 
> Frankly, I think that might have been its biggest failing. It wasn't "Hard Sci-Fi" enough, and so certain elements came off as being a bit goofy and cliche.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *- :::SPOILERS::: -
> 
> 
> *
> For example, an early plot element involves mysterious aliens only referred to as "they," who interact with the human race through gravitational anomalies. They create a wormhole for humanity to use so they can escape the solar system, and they even lead the hero (a former test pilot) to NASA by messing around with things in his daughter's bedroom in order to send him a message.
> 
> While, granted, this is explained and brought full circle in the end (and satisfyingly so at that), it's a bit of an odd choice stylistically. It also makes the first half of the film seem a bit silly and contrived.
> 
> Why not keep things relatively simple and just have NASA use an Alcubierre drive instead? They're apparently tinkering with the idea even as we speak.
> 
> NASA discusses its warp drive research, prepares to create a warp bubble in the lab
> 
> For that matter, why not simply have NASA recruit him the old fashioned way? He apparently worked for them in the past.
> 
> I'm also pretty damn sure that black holes *DO NOT WORK THAT WAY*. However, that's a different can of worms entirely, so I'll avoid details.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *- :::SPOILERS::: -
> 
> *
> 
> 
> Though... Ultimately, it should be noted that these are only minor complaints. Either way, I guess it is more than worth any silliness involved simply to see a serious, thought provoking science fiction film on the big screen again.
> 
> If this film could be shown to have the same impact on the "Hard Sci-Fi" genre that Blade Runner had on film noir, or Gladiator had on historical epics, I'd pretty much "jump for joy." lol
> 
> *Overall:* 7.5 out of 10.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It sounds a bit "out there" to me.  Trailer is interesting though.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You just need to date some nerds, they'll bring you along. Pretty soon you'll even watch Star Wars.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I've seen Star Wars before.  Hasn't everyone seen that movie?  It was a good movie, but I think some people get a little too excited about it.    I don't know of any movie that I have or would have such an obsession over.
Click to expand...


Honestly, I'm kind of sick of it.

George Lucas is such a merchandise whore that it's sort of turned me off on the whole thing.


----------



## ChrisL

Sgt_Gath said:


> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> What irritates me about this concept of finding another planet that is habital for earthlings to go to is...we fucked up with one so now everyone is supposed to bail it and go fuck up another one with the same o same o?
> 
> A bear shits in the woods but doesn't bring it home. This whole planet has been shit on and brought home. Instead of cleaning it up, another one is being sought.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well... Ultimately, we're going to have to leave this planet one way or another if we want to survive.
> 
> Between super volcanoes, asteroids, comets, climate shifts, solar flares, and all the rest, the odds are basically 100% that some kind of catastrophe will eventually hit this planet, and wipe us all out regardless of how well we treat the environment.
> 
> It's happened several times before. Just look at the dinosaurs, for instance.
> 
> Besides which, the potential resources that can be exploited outside of this planet are basically *limitless*. If we ever manage to make asteroid mining feasible, for example, it'd probably make the Industrial Revolution look like a mere footnote. lol
Click to expand...


Damn . . . I need a planet that has trees and grass and flowers, and all that good stuff.  When we talk about inhabiting another planet, all I can think about is a barren desolate wasteland.


----------



## ChrisL

Sgt_Gath said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rikurzhen said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sgt_Gath said:
> 
> 
> 
> Alrighty then....
> 
> 
> *Interstellar*
> 
> This was a good movie, but not _quite_ what I was expecting. It has some elements that really, *really* work, and a few that kind of... Well, don't.
> 
> It seemed to be aiming for something of a "2001: A Space Odyssey" vibe, but from a slightly (and I do mean 'slightly') more "Hard Sci-Fi" perspective, mixed with a healthy dose of Nolan's trademark philosophizing and sentimentality.
> 
> Frankly, I think that might have been its biggest failing. It wasn't "Hard Sci-Fi" enough, and so certain elements came off as being a bit goofy and cliche.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *- :::SPOILERS::: -
> 
> 
> *
> For example, an early plot element involves mysterious aliens only referred to as "they," who interact with the human race through gravitational anomalies. They create a wormhole for humanity to use so they can escape the solar system, and they even lead the hero (a former test pilot) to NASA by messing around with things in his daughter's bedroom in order to send him a message.
> 
> While, granted, this is explained and brought full circle in the end (and satisfyingly so at that), it's a bit of an odd choice stylistically. It also makes the first half of the film seem a bit silly and contrived.
> 
> Why not keep things relatively simple and just have NASA use an Alcubierre drive instead? They're apparently tinkering with the idea even as we speak.
> 
> NASA discusses its warp drive research, prepares to create a warp bubble in the lab
> 
> For that matter, why not simply have NASA recruit him the old fashioned way? He apparently worked for them in the past.
> 
> I'm also pretty damn sure that black holes *DO NOT WORK THAT WAY*. However, that's a different can of worms entirely, so I'll avoid details.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *- :::SPOILERS::: -
> 
> *
> 
> 
> Though... Ultimately, it should be noted that these are only minor complaints. Either way, I guess it is more than worth any silliness involved simply to see a serious, thought provoking science fiction film on the big screen again.
> 
> If this film could be shown to have the same impact on the "Hard Sci-Fi" genre that Blade Runner had on film noir, or Gladiator had on historical epics, I'd pretty much "jump for joy." lol
> 
> *Overall:* 7.5 out of 10.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It sounds a bit "out there" to me.  Trailer is interesting though.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You just need to date some nerds, they'll bring you along. Pretty soon you'll even watch Star Wars.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I've seen Star Wars before.  Hasn't everyone seen that movie?  It was a good movie, but I think some people get a little too excited about it.    I don't know of any movie that I have or would have such an obsession over.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Honestly, I'm kind of sick of it.
> 
> George Lucas is such a merchandise whore that it's sort of turned me off on the whole thing.
Click to expand...


I just can't understand such an obsession with a movie.  People who go around dressed like characters from the movie and go to those conventions.  It's more than a little odd, IMO.


----------



## Sgt_Gath

ChrisL said:


> Sgt_Gath said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> What irritates me about this concept of finding another planet that is habital for earthlings to go to is...we fucked up with one so now everyone is supposed to bail it and go fuck up another one with the same o same o?
> 
> A bear shits in the woods but doesn't bring it home. This whole planet has been shit on and brought home. Instead of cleaning it up, another one is being sought.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well... Ultimately, we're going to have to leave this planet one way or another if we want to survive.
> 
> Between super volcanoes, asteroids, comets, climate shifts, solar flares, and all the rest, the odds are basically 100% that some kind of catastrophe will eventually hit this planet, and wipe us all out regardless of how well we treat the environment.
> 
> It's happened several times before. Just look at the dinosaurs, for instance.
> 
> Besides which, the potential resources that can be exploited outside of this planet are basically *limitless*. If we ever manage to make asteroid mining feasible, for example, it'd probably make the Industrial Revolution look like a mere footnote. lol
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Damn . . . I need a planet that has trees and grass and flowers, and all that good stuff.  When we talk about inhabiting another planet, all I can think about is a barren desolate wasteland.
Click to expand...


Well, to be fair, we probably could make other planets more like Earth with the proper technology.

Terraforming - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia






Hell! For all we know, there might even be a few planets like Earth out there already. We'd just have to find them. 

(And hope no one else was already living there  ).


----------



## Sgt_Gath

ChrisL said:


> Sgt_Gath said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rikurzhen said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sgt_Gath said:
> 
> 
> 
> Alrighty then....
> 
> 
> *Interstellar*
> 
> This was a good movie, but not _quite_ what I was expecting. It has some elements that really, *really* work, and a few that kind of... Well, don't.
> 
> It seemed to be aiming for something of a "2001: A Space Odyssey" vibe, but from a slightly (and I do mean 'slightly') more "Hard Sci-Fi" perspective, mixed with a healthy dose of Nolan's trademark philosophizing and sentimentality.
> 
> Frankly, I think that might have been its biggest failing. It wasn't "Hard Sci-Fi" enough, and so certain elements came off as being a bit goofy and cliche.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *- :::SPOILERS::: -
> 
> 
> *
> For example, an early plot element involves mysterious aliens only referred to as "they," who interact with the human race through gravitational anomalies. They create a wormhole for humanity to use so they can escape the solar system, and they even lead the hero (a former test pilot) to NASA by messing around with things in his daughter's bedroom in order to send him a message.
> 
> While, granted, this is explained and brought full circle in the end (and satisfyingly so at that), it's a bit of an odd choice stylistically. It also makes the first half of the film seem a bit silly and contrived.
> 
> Why not keep things relatively simple and just have NASA use an Alcubierre drive instead? They're apparently tinkering with the idea even as we speak.
> 
> NASA discusses its warp drive research, prepares to create a warp bubble in the lab
> 
> For that matter, why not simply have NASA recruit him the old fashioned way? He apparently worked for them in the past.
> 
> I'm also pretty damn sure that black holes *DO NOT WORK THAT WAY*. However, that's a different can of worms entirely, so I'll avoid details.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *- :::SPOILERS::: -
> 
> *
> 
> 
> Though... Ultimately, it should be noted that these are only minor complaints. Either way, I guess it is more than worth any silliness involved simply to see a serious, thought provoking science fiction film on the big screen again.
> 
> If this film could be shown to have the same impact on the "Hard Sci-Fi" genre that Blade Runner had on film noir, or Gladiator had on historical epics, I'd pretty much "jump for joy." lol
> 
> *Overall:* 7.5 out of 10.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It sounds a bit "out there" to me.  Trailer is interesting though.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You just need to date some nerds, they'll bring you along. Pretty soon you'll even watch Star Wars.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I've seen Star Wars before.  Hasn't everyone seen that movie?  It was a good movie, but I think some people get a little too excited about it.    I don't know of any movie that I have or would have such an obsession over.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Honestly, I'm kind of sick of it.
> 
> George Lucas is such a merchandise whore that it's sort of turned me off on the whole thing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I just can't understand such an obsession with a movie.  People who go around dressed like characters from the movie and go to those conventions.  It's more than a little odd, IMO.
Click to expand...


Yea. I like the original movies (the new ones suck lol ), but I've never been "obsessed" with them.


----------



## ChrisL

Sgt_Gath said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sgt_Gath said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rikurzhen said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> 
> It sounds a bit "out there" to me.  Trailer is interesting though.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You just need to date some nerds, they'll bring you along. Pretty soon you'll even watch Star Wars.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I've seen Star Wars before.  Hasn't everyone seen that movie?  It was a good movie, but I think some people get a little too excited about it.    I don't know of any movie that I have or would have such an obsession over.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Honestly, I'm kind of sick of it.
> 
> George Lucas is such a merchandise whore that it's sort of turned me off on the whole thing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I just can't understand such an obsession with a movie.  People who go around dressed like characters from the movie and go to those conventions.  It's more than a little odd, IMO.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yea. I like the original movies (the new ones suck lol ), but I've never been "obsessed" with them.
Click to expand...


I only saw one Star Wars movie, and that was the original version.  How many movies are there?


----------



## Rikurzhen

ChrisL said:


> Rikurzhen said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sgt_Gath said:
> 
> 
> 
> Alrighty then....
> 
> 
> *Interstellar*
> 
> This was a good movie, but not _quite_ what I was expecting. It has some elements that really, *really* work, and a few that kind of... Well, don't.
> 
> It seemed to be aiming for something of a "2001: A Space Odyssey" vibe, but from a slightly (and I do mean 'slightly') more "Hard Sci-Fi" perspective, mixed with a healthy dose of Nolan's trademark philosophizing and sentimentality.
> 
> Frankly, I think that might have been its biggest failing. It wasn't "Hard Sci-Fi" enough, and so certain elements came off as being a bit goofy and cliche.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *- :::SPOILERS::: -
> 
> 
> *
> For example, an early plot element involves mysterious aliens only referred to as "they," who interact with the human race through gravitational anomalies. They create a wormhole for humanity to use so they can escape the solar system, and they even lead the hero (a former test pilot) to NASA by messing around with things in his daughter's bedroom in order to send him a message.
> 
> While, granted, this is explained and brought full circle in the end (and satisfyingly so at that), it's a bit of an odd choice stylistically. It also makes the first half of the film seem a bit silly and contrived.
> 
> Why not keep things relatively simple and just have NASA use an Alcubierre drive instead? They're apparently tinkering with the idea even as we speak.
> 
> NASA discusses its warp drive research, prepares to create a warp bubble in the lab
> 
> For that matter, why not simply have NASA recruit him the old fashioned way? He apparently worked for them in the past.
> 
> I'm also pretty damn sure that black holes *DO NOT WORK THAT WAY*. However, that's a different can of worms entirely, so I'll avoid details.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *- :::SPOILERS::: -
> 
> *
> 
> 
> Though... Ultimately, it should be noted that these are only minor complaints. Either way, I guess it is more than worth any silliness involved simply to see a serious, thought provoking science fiction film on the big screen again.
> 
> If this film could be shown to have the same impact on the "Hard Sci-Fi" genre that Blade Runner had on film noir, or Gladiator had on historical epics, I'd pretty much "jump for joy." lol
> 
> *Overall:* 7.5 out of 10.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It sounds a bit "out there" to me.  Trailer is interesting though.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> You just need to date some nerds, they'll bring you along. Pretty soon you'll even watch Star Wars.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I've seen Star Wars before.  Hasn't everyone seen that movie?  It was a good movie, but I think some people get a little too excited about it.    I don't know of any movie that I have or would have such an obsession over.
Click to expand...


No, my wife went through her entire childhood without seeing it, same with her sister and their dad is in the SV tech industry, so how that was allowed to happen I still can't get my head around. I nerdified her when we started dating and she introduced me to all the golden oldie romance movies. Ask me anything about Doris Day movies.


----------



## ChrisL

Sgt_Gath said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sgt_Gath said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> What irritates me about this concept of finding another planet that is habital for earthlings to go to is...we fucked up with one so now everyone is supposed to bail it and go fuck up another one with the same o same o?
> 
> A bear shits in the woods but doesn't bring it home. This whole planet has been shit on and brought home. Instead of cleaning it up, another one is being sought.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well... Ultimately, we're going to have to leave this planet one way or another if we want to survive.
> 
> Between super volcanoes, asteroids, comets, climate shifts, solar flares, and all the rest, the odds are basically 100% that some kind of catastrophe will eventually hit this planet, and wipe us all out regardless of how well we treat the environment.
> 
> It's happened several times before. Just look at the dinosaurs, for instance.
> 
> Besides which, the potential resources that can be exploited outside of this planet are basically *limitless*. If we ever manage to make asteroid mining feasible, for example, it'd probably make the Industrial Revolution look like a mere footnote. lol
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Damn . . . I need a planet that has trees and grass and flowers, and all that good stuff.  When we talk about inhabiting another planet, all I can think about is a barren desolate wasteland.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, to be fair, we probably could make other planets more like Earth with the proper technology.
> 
> Terraforming - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hell! For all we know, there might even be a few planets like Earth out there already. We'd just have to find them.
> 
> (And hope no one else was already living there  ).
Click to expand...


Interesting!  That sounds rather difficult and super expensive though.


----------



## Sgt_Gath

ChrisL said:


> Sgt_Gath said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sgt_Gath said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rikurzhen said:
> 
> 
> 
> You just need to date some nerds, they'll bring you along. Pretty soon you'll even watch Star Wars.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've seen Star Wars before.  Hasn't everyone seen that movie?  It was a good movie, but I think some people get a little too excited about it.    I don't know of any movie that I have or would have such an obsession over.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Honestly, I'm kind of sick of it.
> 
> George Lucas is such a merchandise whore that it's sort of turned me off on the whole thing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I just can't understand such an obsession with a movie.  People who go around dressed like characters from the movie and go to those conventions.  It's more than a little odd, IMO.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yea. I like the original movies (the new ones suck lol ), but I've never been "obsessed" with them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I only saw one Star Wars movie, and that was the original version.  How many movies are there?
Click to expand...


Six in total; three made in the late 70s and early 80s, and three made in the late 90s and early 2000s.

The new ones pretty much blow, and ruined George Lucas' reputation in the process. The old ones are good though.

I'd suggest watching at least the first three. The second one is actually the best in the whole series. 

Star Wars Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back 1980 - IMDb


----------



## Sgt_Gath

ChrisL said:


> Sgt_Gath said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sgt_Gath said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> What irritates me about this concept of finding another planet that is habital for earthlings to go to is...we fucked up with one so now everyone is supposed to bail it and go fuck up another one with the same o same o?
> 
> A bear shits in the woods but doesn't bring it home. This whole planet has been shit on and brought home. Instead of cleaning it up, another one is being sought.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well... Ultimately, we're going to have to leave this planet one way or another if we want to survive.
> 
> Between super volcanoes, asteroids, comets, climate shifts, solar flares, and all the rest, the odds are basically 100% that some kind of catastrophe will eventually hit this planet, and wipe us all out regardless of how well we treat the environment.
> 
> It's happened several times before. Just look at the dinosaurs, for instance.
> 
> Besides which, the potential resources that can be exploited outside of this planet are basically *limitless*. If we ever manage to make asteroid mining feasible, for example, it'd probably make the Industrial Revolution look like a mere footnote. lol
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Damn . . . I need a planet that has trees and grass and flowers, and all that good stuff.  When we talk about inhabiting another planet, all I can think about is a barren desolate wasteland.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Well, to be fair, we probably could make other planets more like Earth with the proper technology.
> 
> Terraforming - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hell! For all we know, there might even be a few planets like Earth out there already. We'd just have to find them.
> 
> (And hope no one else was already living there  ).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Interesting!  That sounds rather difficult and super expensive though.
Click to expand...


Yea. It's certainly something we won't be doing any time soon. 

I can tell you that much for sure.


----------



## ChrisL

Sgt_Gath said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sgt_Gath said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sgt_Gath said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've seen Star Wars before.  Hasn't everyone seen that movie?  It was a good movie, but I think some people get a little too excited about it.    I don't know of any movie that I have or would have such an obsession over.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Honestly, I'm kind of sick of it.
> 
> George Lucas is such a merchandise whore that it's sort of turned me off on the whole thing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I just can't understand such an obsession with a movie.  People who go around dressed like characters from the movie and go to those conventions.  It's more than a little odd, IMO.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yea. I like the original movies (the new ones suck lol ), but I've never been "obsessed" with them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I only saw one Star Wars movie, and that was the original version.  How many movies are there?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Six in total; three made in the late 70s and early 80s, and three made in the late 90s and early 2000s.
> 
> The new ones pretty much blow, and ruined George Lucas' reputation in the process. The old ones are good though.
> 
> I'd suggest watching at least the first three. The second one is actually the best in the whole series.
> 
> Star Wars Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back 1980 - IMDb
Click to expand...


That's different from the original one?  Hmm.  I had no idea.  Lol.  I'm a terrible nerd.


----------



## Sgt_Gath

ChrisL said:


> Sgt_Gath said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sgt_Gath said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sgt_Gath said:
> 
> 
> 
> Honestly, I'm kind of sick of it.
> 
> George Lucas is such a merchandise whore that it's sort of turned me off on the whole thing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just can't understand such an obsession with a movie.  People who go around dressed like characters from the movie and go to those conventions.  It's more than a little odd, IMO.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yea. I like the original movies (the new ones suck lol ), but I've never been "obsessed" with them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I only saw one Star Wars movie, and that was the original version.  How many movies are there?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Six in total; three made in the late 70s and early 80s, and three made in the late 90s and early 2000s.
> 
> The new ones pretty much blow, and ruined George Lucas' reputation in the process. The old ones are good though.
> 
> I'd suggest watching at least the first three. The second one is actually the best in the whole series.
> 
> Star Wars Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back 1980 - IMDb
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's different from the original one?  Hmm.  I had no idea.  Lol.  I'm a terrible nerd.
Click to expand...


----------



## ChrisL

Sgt_Gath said:


> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sgt_Gath said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sgt_Gath said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> 
> I just can't understand such an obsession with a movie.  People who go around dressed like characters from the movie and go to those conventions.  It's more than a little odd, IMO.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yea. I like the original movies (the new ones suck lol ), but I've never been "obsessed" with them.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I only saw one Star Wars movie, and that was the original version.  How many movies are there?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Six in total; three made in the late 70s and early 80s, and three made in the late 90s and early 2000s.
> 
> The new ones pretty much blow, and ruined George Lucas' reputation in the process. The old ones are good though.
> 
> I'd suggest watching at least the first three. The second one is actually the best in the whole series.
> 
> Star Wars Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back 1980 - IMDb
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's different from the original one?  Hmm.  I had no idea.  Lol.  I'm a terrible nerd.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


Okay, just don't talk like that, or I might have to slap you.   

  J/K!  Have a good night!  TTYL, Sgt!


----------



## Sgt_Gath

ChrisL said:


> Sgt_Gath said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sgt_Gath said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ChrisL said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sgt_Gath said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yea. I like the original movies (the new ones suck lol ), but I've never been "obsessed" with them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I only saw one Star Wars movie, and that was the original version.  How many movies are there?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Six in total; three made in the late 70s and early 80s, and three made in the late 90s and early 2000s.
> 
> The new ones pretty much blow, and ruined George Lucas' reputation in the process. The old ones are good though.
> 
> I'd suggest watching at least the first three. The second one is actually the best in the whole series.
> 
> Star Wars Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back 1980 - IMDb
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's different from the original one?  Hmm.  I had no idea.  Lol.  I'm a terrible nerd.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Okay, just don't talk like that, or I might have to slap you.
> 
> J/K!  Have a good night!  TTYL, Sgt!
Click to expand...


TTYL!


----------



## Rikurzhen

ChrisL said:


> Sgt_Gath said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> What irritates me about this concept of finding another planet that is habital for earthlings to go to is...we fucked up with one so now everyone is supposed to bail it and go fuck up another one with the same o same o?
> 
> A bear shits in the woods but doesn't bring it home. This whole planet has been shit on and brought home. Instead of cleaning it up, another one is being sought.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well... Ultimately, we're going to have to leave this planet one way or another if we want to survive.
> 
> Between super volcanoes, asteroids, comets, climate shifts, solar flares, and all the rest, the odds are basically 100% that some kind of catastrophe will eventually hit this planet, and wipe us all out regardless of how well we treat the environment.
> 
> It's happened several times before. Just look at the dinosaurs, for instance.
> 
> Besides which, the potential resources that can be exploited outside of this planet are basically *limitless*. If we ever manage to make asteroid mining feasible, for example, it'd probably make the Industrial Revolution look like a mere footnote. lol
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Damn . . . I need a planet that has trees and grass and flowers, and all that good stuff.  When we talk about inhabiting another planet, all I can think about is a barren desolate wasteland.
Click to expand...


Planet? Who needs planets?


----------



## Delta4Embassy

Sgt_Gath said:


> Gracie said:
> 
> 
> 
> What irritates me about this concept of finding another planet that is habital for earthlings to go to is...we fucked up with one so now everyone is supposed to bail it and go fuck up another one with the same o same o?
> 
> A bear shits in the woods but doesn't bring it home. This whole planet has been shit on and brought home. Instead of cleaning it up, another one is being sought.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well... Ultimately, we're going to have to leave this planet one way or another if we want to survive.
> 
> Between super volcanoes, asteroids, comets, climate shifts, solar flares, and all the rest, the odds are basically 100% that some kind of catastrophe will eventually hit this planet, and wipe us all out regardless of how well we treat the environment.
> 
> It's happened several times before. Just look at the dinosaurs, for instance.
> 
> Besides which, the potential resources that can be exploited outside of this planet are basically *limitless*. If we ever manage to make asteroid mining feasible, for example, it'd probably make the Industrial Revolution look like a mere footnote. lol
Click to expand...


We're actually overdo for a mass extinction. Looking at past ones they fall within a span of time we're far in excess of. By what's come before, we shouldn't be here.


----------



## Delta4Embassy

Sgt_Gath said:


> Alrighty then....
> 
> 
> *Interstellar*
> 
> This was a good movie, but not _quite_ what I was expecting. It has some elements that really, *really* work, and a few that kind of... Well, don't.
> 
> It seemed to be aiming for something of a "2001: A Space Odyssey" vibe, but from a slightly (and I do mean 'slightly') more "Hard Sci-Fi" perspective, mixed with a healthy dose of Nolan's trademark philosophizing and sentimentality.
> 
> Frankly, I think that might have been its biggest failing. It wasn't "Hard Sci-Fi" enough, and so certain elements came off as being a bit goofy and cliche.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *- :::SPOILERS::: -
> 
> 
> *
> For example, an early plot element involves mysterious aliens only referred to as "they," who interact with the human race through gravitational anomalies. They create a wormhole for humanity to use so they can escape the solar system, and they even lead the hero (a former test pilot) to NASA by messing around with things in his daughter's bedroom in order to send him a message.
> 
> While, granted, this is explained and brought full circle in the end (and satisfyingly so at that), it's a bit of an odd choice stylistically. It also makes the first half of the film seem a bit silly and contrived.
> 
> Why not keep things relatively simple and just have NASA use an Alcubierre drive instead? They're apparently tinkering with the idea even as we speak.
> 
> NASA discusses its warp drive research, prepares to create a warp bubble in the lab
> 
> For that matter, why not simply have NASA recruit him the old fashioned way? He apparently worked for them in the past.
> 
> I'm also pretty damn sure that black holes *DO NOT WORK THAT WAY*. However, that's a different can of worms entirely, so I'll avoid details.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *- :::SPOILERS::: -
> 
> *
> 
> 
> Though... Ultimately, it should be noted that these are only minor complaints. Either way, I guess it is more than worth any silliness involved simply to see a serious, thought provoking science fiction film on the big screen again.
> 
> If this film could be shown to have the same impact on the "Hard Sci-Fi" genre that Blade Runner had on film noir, or Gladiator had on historical epics, I'd pretty much "jump for joy." lol
> 
> *Overall:* 7.5 out of 10.



How'd they do the black hole that you didn't like it? Was reading about that the other day and how they did it spawned scientific papers in fact.


----------



## Sgt_Gath

Delta4Embassy said:


> Sgt_Gath said:
> 
> 
> 
> Alrighty then....
> 
> 
> *Interstellar*
> 
> This was a good movie, but not _quite_ what I was expecting. It has some elements that really, *really* work, and a few that kind of... Well, don't.
> 
> It seemed to be aiming for something of a "2001: A Space Odyssey" vibe, but from a slightly (and I do mean 'slightly') more "Hard Sci-Fi" perspective, mixed with a healthy dose of Nolan's trademark philosophizing and sentimentality.
> 
> Frankly, I think that might have been its biggest failing. It wasn't "Hard Sci-Fi" enough, and so certain elements came off as being a bit goofy and cliche.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *- :::SPOILERS::: -
> 
> 
> *
> For example, an early plot element involves mysterious aliens only referred to as "they," who interact with the human race through gravitational anomalies. They create a wormhole for humanity to use so they can escape the solar system, and they even lead the hero (a former test pilot) to NASA by messing around with things in his daughter's bedroom in order to send him a message.
> 
> While, granted, this is explained and brought full circle in the end (and satisfyingly so at that), it's a bit of an odd choice stylistically. It also makes the first half of the film seem a bit silly and contrived.
> 
> Why not keep things relatively simple and just have NASA use an Alcubierre drive instead? They're apparently tinkering with the idea even as we speak.
> 
> NASA discusses its warp drive research, prepares to create a warp bubble in the lab
> 
> For that matter, why not simply have NASA recruit him the old fashioned way? He apparently worked for them in the past.
> 
> I'm also pretty damn sure that black holes *DO NOT WORK THAT WAY*. However, that's a different can of worms entirely, so I'll avoid details.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *- :::SPOILERS::: -
> 
> *
> 
> 
> Though... Ultimately, it should be noted that these are only minor complaints. Either way, I guess it is more than worth any silliness involved simply to see a serious, thought provoking science fiction film on the big screen again.
> 
> If this film could be shown to have the same impact on the "Hard Sci-Fi" genre that Blade Runner had on film noir, or Gladiator had on historical epics, I'd pretty much "jump for joy." lol
> 
> *Overall:* 7.5 out of 10.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How'd they do the black hole that you didn't like it? Was reading about that the other day and how they did it spawned scientific papers in fact.
Click to expand...


*- :::SPOILERS::: -

*
They treated the whole thing a lot more casually than I would have preferred.

They literally "skim the surface" of the black hole's horizon at one point, and suffer no ill impacts for it whatsoever besides time dilation. I'm sorry, but I'm fairly positive that this is simply not how a "black hole" actually works.

They honestly shouldn't have even been able to get anywhere near the thing without getting at least trapped, and probably sucked in. The gravity would simply be too strong for their engines to counter act.

If they somehow _had_ managed to make it that close, they probably would have been torn apart anyway.


----------



## Delta4Embassy

Sgt_Gath said:


> Delta4Embassy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sgt_Gath said:
> 
> 
> 
> Alrighty then....
> 
> 
> *Interstellar*
> 
> This was a good movie, but not _quite_ what I was expecting. It has some elements that really, *really* work, and a few that kind of... Well, don't.
> 
> It seemed to be aiming for something of a "2001: A Space Odyssey" vibe, but from a slightly (and I do mean 'slightly') more "Hard Sci-Fi" perspective, mixed with a healthy dose of Nolan's trademark philosophizing and sentimentality.
> 
> Frankly, I think that might have been its biggest failing. It wasn't "Hard Sci-Fi" enough, and so certain elements came off as being a bit goofy and cliche.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *- :::SPOILERS::: -
> 
> 
> *
> For example, an early plot element involves mysterious aliens only referred to as "they," who interact with the human race through gravitational anomalies. They create a wormhole for humanity to use so they can escape the solar system, and they even lead the hero (a former test pilot) to NASA by messing around with things in his daughter's bedroom in order to send him a message.
> 
> While, granted, this is explained and brought full circle in the end (and satisfyingly so at that), it's a bit of an odd choice stylistically. It also makes the first half of the film seem a bit silly and contrived.
> 
> Why not keep things relatively simple and just have NASA use an Alcubierre drive instead? They're apparently tinkering with the idea even as we speak.
> 
> NASA discusses its warp drive research, prepares to create a warp bubble in the lab
> 
> For that matter, why not simply have NASA recruit him the old fashioned way? He apparently worked for them in the past.
> 
> I'm also pretty damn sure that black holes *DO NOT WORK THAT WAY*. However, that's a different can of worms entirely, so I'll avoid details.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *- :::SPOILERS::: -
> 
> *
> 
> 
> Though... Ultimately, it should be noted that these are only minor complaints. Either way, I guess it is more than worth any silliness involved simply to see a serious, thought provoking science fiction film on the big screen again.
> 
> If this film could be shown to have the same impact on the "Hard Sci-Fi" genre that Blade Runner had on film noir, or Gladiator had on historical epics, I'd pretty much "jump for joy." lol
> 
> *Overall:* 7.5 out of 10.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How'd they do the black hole that you didn't like it? Was reading about that the other day and how they did it spawned scientific papers in fact.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *- :::SPOILERS::: -
> 
> *
> They treated the whole thing a lot more casually than I would have preferred.
> 
> They literally "skim the surface" of the black hole's horizon at one point, and suffer no ill impacts for it whatsoever besides time dilation. I'm sorry, but I'm fairly positive that this is simply not how a "black hole" actually works.
> 
> They honestly shouldn't have even been able to get anywhere near the thing without getting at least trapped, and probably sucked in. The gravity would simply be too strong for their engines to counter act.
> 
> If they somehow _had_ managed to make it that close, they probably would have been torn apart anyway.
Click to expand...


Didn't you see "Wing Commander?"  Point of No Return is where gravity pulls so hard you can't escape.  Short of that point you can approach to however close your vehicle can then escape back away from.


----------



## Sgt_Gath

Delta4Embassy said:


> Sgt_Gath said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Delta4Embassy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sgt_Gath said:
> 
> 
> 
> Alrighty then....
> 
> 
> *Interstellar*
> 
> This was a good movie, but not _quite_ what I was expecting. It has some elements that really, *really* work, and a few that kind of... Well, don't.
> 
> It seemed to be aiming for something of a "2001: A Space Odyssey" vibe, but from a slightly (and I do mean 'slightly') more "Hard Sci-Fi" perspective, mixed with a healthy dose of Nolan's trademark philosophizing and sentimentality.
> 
> Frankly, I think that might have been its biggest failing. It wasn't "Hard Sci-Fi" enough, and so certain elements came off as being a bit goofy and cliche.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *- :::SPOILERS::: -
> 
> 
> *
> For example, an early plot element involves mysterious aliens only referred to as "they," who interact with the human race through gravitational anomalies. They create a wormhole for humanity to use so they can escape the solar system, and they even lead the hero (a former test pilot) to NASA by messing around with things in his daughter's bedroom in order to send him a message.
> 
> While, granted, this is explained and brought full circle in the end (and satisfyingly so at that), it's a bit of an odd choice stylistically. It also makes the first half of the film seem a bit silly and contrived.
> 
> Why not keep things relatively simple and just have NASA use an Alcubierre drive instead? They're apparently tinkering with the idea even as we speak.
> 
> NASA discusses its warp drive research, prepares to create a warp bubble in the lab
> 
> For that matter, why not simply have NASA recruit him the old fashioned way? He apparently worked for them in the past.
> 
> I'm also pretty damn sure that black holes *DO NOT WORK THAT WAY*. However, that's a different can of worms entirely, so I'll avoid details.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *- :::SPOILERS::: -
> 
> *
> 
> 
> Though... Ultimately, it should be noted that these are only minor complaints. Either way, I guess it is more than worth any silliness involved simply to see a serious, thought provoking science fiction film on the big screen again.
> 
> If this film could be shown to have the same impact on the "Hard Sci-Fi" genre that Blade Runner had on film noir, or Gladiator had on historical epics, I'd pretty much "jump for joy." lol
> 
> *Overall:* 7.5 out of 10.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How'd they do the black hole that you didn't like it? Was reading about that the other day and how they did it spawned scientific papers in fact.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *- :::SPOILERS::: -
> 
> *
> They treated the whole thing a lot more casually than I would have preferred.
> 
> They literally "skim the surface" of the black hole's horizon at one point, and suffer no ill impacts for it whatsoever besides time dilation. I'm sorry, but I'm fairly positive that this is simply not how a "black hole" actually works.
> 
> They honestly shouldn't have even been able to get anywhere near the thing without getting at least trapped, and probably sucked in. The gravity would simply be too strong for their engines to counter act.
> 
> If they somehow _had_ managed to make it that close, they probably would have been torn apart anyway.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Didn't you see "Wing Commander?"  Point of No Return is where gravity pulls so hard you can't escape.  Short of that point you can approach to however close your vehicle can then escape back away from.
Click to expand...


Frankly, Wing Commander probably isn't the best source to be taking cues from on these kinds of things. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




I'm not denying that there is a "point of no return." I'm simply saying that, in reality, that point isn't going to be right on top of the thing, like the movie seemed to show. The gravitational influence of the black hole is going affect a rather broad area.

Think about the surface of the sun, for instance. Sure, it's the hottest part of the star we are capable of observing, but that doesn't mean you could fly a space ship right next it without being incinerated. lol

The heat gets worse the closer you get.


----------



## 2aguy

> The new ones pretty much blow, and ruined George Lucas' reputation in the process. The old ones are good though.



Actually, just stop at the first Star Wars....lucas slowly destroys the original with each one he made....for example....spoiler for those who haven't seen the movie since it's release in the late 70s....(considering it is almost 2015)

The movie starts with Luke having a puppy crush on Leia....by movie 3...we find out he was having those funny feelings...for his own sister.....

Thanks george....nice work.....


----------



## 2aguy

And another point about Star Wars....despite lucas's attempt to redefine the Han Solo character...in the Cantina...Han Solo actually shoots Greedo first....but keep in mind...Greedo made it clear he was going to kill Han Solo....so Solo just beat Greedo to the draw...even though Greedo had his weapon out and pointing at Solo...

And yet...Lucas has actually spent lot's of money changing that scene...and trying to change the formational scene of the Solo character....


Yeah...I loved the first Star Wars when I saw it as a kid.......


----------



## Delta4Embassy

Sgt_Gath said:


> Delta4Embassy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sgt_Gath said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Delta4Embassy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sgt_Gath said:
> 
> 
> 
> Alrighty then....
> 
> 
> *Interstellar*
> 
> This was a good movie, but not _quite_ what I was expecting. It has some elements that really, *really* work, and a few that kind of... Well, don't.
> 
> It seemed to be aiming for something of a "2001: A Space Odyssey" vibe, but from a slightly (and I do mean 'slightly') more "Hard Sci-Fi" perspective, mixed with a healthy dose of Nolan's trademark philosophizing and sentimentality.
> 
> Frankly, I think that might have been its biggest failing. It wasn't "Hard Sci-Fi" enough, and so certain elements came off as being a bit goofy and cliche.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *- :::SPOILERS::: -
> 
> 
> *
> For example, an early plot element involves mysterious aliens only referred to as "they," who interact with the human race through gravitational anomalies. They create a wormhole for humanity to use so they can escape the solar system, and they even lead the hero (a former test pilot) to NASA by messing around with things in his daughter's bedroom in order to send him a message.
> 
> While, granted, this is explained and brought full circle in the end (and satisfyingly so at that), it's a bit of an odd choice stylistically. It also makes the first half of the film seem a bit silly and contrived.
> 
> Why not keep things relatively simple and just have NASA use an Alcubierre drive instead? They're apparently tinkering with the idea even as we speak.
> 
> NASA discusses its warp drive research, prepares to create a warp bubble in the lab
> 
> For that matter, why not simply have NASA recruit him the old fashioned way? He apparently worked for them in the past.
> 
> I'm also pretty damn sure that black holes *DO NOT WORK THAT WAY*. However, that's a different can of worms entirely, so I'll avoid details.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *- :::SPOILERS::: -
> 
> *
> 
> 
> Though... Ultimately, it should be noted that these are only minor complaints. Either way, I guess it is more than worth any silliness involved simply to see a serious, thought provoking science fiction film on the big screen again.
> 
> If this film could be shown to have the same impact on the "Hard Sci-Fi" genre that Blade Runner had on film noir, or Gladiator had on historical epics, I'd pretty much "jump for joy." lol
> 
> *Overall:* 7.5 out of 10.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How'd they do the black hole that you didn't like it? Was reading about that the other day and how they did it spawned scientific papers in fact.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *- :::SPOILERS::: -
> 
> *
> They treated the whole thing a lot more casually than I would have preferred.
> 
> They literally "skim the surface" of the black hole's horizon at one point, and suffer no ill impacts for it whatsoever besides time dilation. I'm sorry, but I'm fairly positive that this is simply not how a "black hole" actually works.
> 
> They honestly shouldn't have even been able to get anywhere near the thing without getting at least trapped, and probably sucked in. The gravity would simply be too strong for their engines to counter act.
> 
> If they somehow _had_ managed to make it that close, they probably would have been torn apart anyway.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Didn't you see "Wing Commander?"  Point of No Return is where gravity pulls so hard you can't escape.  Short of that point you can approach to however close your vehicle can then escape back away from.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Frankly, Wing Commander probably isn't the best source to be taking cues from on these kinds of things.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not denying that there is a "point of no return." I'm simply saying that, in reality, that point isn't going to be right on top of the thing, like the movie seemed to show. The gravitational influence of the black hole is going affect a rather broad area.
> 
> Think about the surface of the sun, for instance. Sure, it's the hottest part of the star we are capable of observing, but that doesn't mean you could fly a space ship right next it without being incinerated. lol
> 
> The heat gets worse the closer you get.
Click to expand...


One of the docs on Science Channel about black holes mentioned something amazing, the pull of gravity from black holes is so much that the effect of their pull is never zero no matter how far you are from them. Amount might be minute light years away but still not zero.


----------



## Mr. H.

Saw this today, and I think it totally kicks ass. 
Best sci-fi flick I've seen in a very long time. 
Very impressed. Highly recommend.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Time magazine had an excellent article on it.  We will see it on Tuesday.

I like the idea of space as the unknown and as a cathedral for the spirit in which we are grasping at who we are and what we should do and be.

Mankind will have to leave this home eventually if we wish to survive.

The history of man is exploration, using up the resources, and moving on.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Yeah, the greater the gravity the bend in light slows down.  Time slows down.  Wow!


----------



## Mr. H.

I don't pick apart the science in these types of movies. It is science "fiction" after all. But they made it "appear" credible- at least to the characters. This was a no-nonsense movie, unlike that ridiculous Gravity flick. And my favorite part... no sound in space, folks. Got that, Lucas?


----------



## Rikurzhen

Just saw it. Funny, when I posted those illustrations of space colonies I had no idea that they actually appeared in the movie.

I was disappointed with this movie. Why can't anyone make an intelligent movie anymore? Why does drama have to be born from smart people doing stupid things? Arghhh.


----------



## JakeStarkey

We are going to see it tomorrow, so I will see if I see it your way, Rik.


----------



## Rikurzhen

In addition to what I wrote above, try to recall the movie "The Right Stuff" and all of the training that took place in that movie.


----------



## NoNukes

Sgt_Gath said:


> Alrighty then....
> 
> 
> *Interstellar*
> 
> This was a good movie, but not _quite_ what I was expecting. It has some elements that really, *really* work, and a few that kind of... Well, don't.
> 
> It seemed to be aiming for something of a "2001: A Space Odyssey" vibe, but from a slightly (and I do mean 'slightly') more "Hard Sci-Fi" perspective, mixed with a healthy dose of Nolan's trademark philosophizing and sentimentality.
> 
> Frankly, I think that might have been its biggest failing. It wasn't "Hard Sci-Fi" enough, and so certain elements came off as being a bit goofy and cliche.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *- :::SPOILERS::: -
> 
> 
> *
> For example, an early plot element involves mysterious aliens only referred to as "they," who interact with the human race through gravitational anomalies. They create a wormhole for humanity to use so they can escape the solar system, and they even lead the hero (a former test pilot) to NASA by messing around with things in his daughter's bedroom in order to send him a message.
> 
> While, granted, this is explained and brought full circle in the end (and satisfyingly so at that), it's a bit of an odd choice stylistically. It also makes the first half of the film seem a bit silly and contrived.
> 
> Why not keep things relatively simple and just have NASA use an Alcubierre drive instead? They're apparently tinkering with the idea even as we speak.
> 
> NASA discusses its warp drive research, prepares to create a warp bubble in the lab
> 
> For that matter, why not simply have NASA recruit him the old fashioned way? He apparently worked for them in the past.
> 
> I'm also pretty damn sure that black holes *DO NOT WORK THAT WAY*. However, that's a different can of worms entirely, so I'll avoid details.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *- :::SPOILERS::: -
> 
> *
> 
> 
> Though... Ultimately, it should be noted that these are only minor complaints. Either way, I guess it is more than worth any silliness involved simply to see a serious, thought provoking science fiction film on the big screen again.
> 
> If this film could be shown to have the same impact on the "Hard Sci-Fi" genre that Blade Runner had on film noir, or Gladiator had on historical epics, I'd pretty much "jump for joy." lol
> 
> *Overall:* 7.5 out of 10.


I found it too long and pretty boring.


----------



## American Horse

Sgt_Gath said:
_" - They treated the whole thing a lot more casually than I would have preferred.
They literally "skim the surface" of the black hole's horizon at one point, and suffer no ill impacts for it whatsoever besides time dilation. I'm sorry, but I'm fairly positive that this is simply not how a "black hole" actually works.
They honestly shouldn't have even been able to get anywhere near the thing without getting at least trapped, and probably sucked in. The gravity would simply be too strong for their engines to counter act.
If they somehow had managed to make it that close, they probably would have been torn apart anyway. - "_

Actually it's possible to orbit a black hole without being disrupted just as its possible to orbit a super massive star without being disrupted. Only an increase in velocity is needed to prevent falling in.  A black hole is only a defunct super massive star. 

But contemplating exploring for settlement a planet spiraling into a black hole makes no long term sense. 

A saving grace of a man surviving a fall into a black hole is Steven Hawking's belief as presented in a scientific confab that "information" is preserved and retrievable from material having fallen into a black hole.

That is important if we and matter are information, for what else could he have meant? 

Anyway, as to the movie itself, as I said to my son as we entered "I don't hold out much hope in seeing a really good science fiction flick here, since the best I ever saw was sixty years ago, and I don't classify "2001" as a really good Sci-Fi flick."

That movie I saw sixty years back was "Forbidden Planet," a movie that was a precursor and set the meme for decades to come including tthat was Star Trek.


----------



## Sgt_Gath

American Horse said:


> Sgt_Gath said:
> _" - They treated the whole thing a lot more casually than I would have preferred.
> They literally "skim the surface" of the black hole's horizon at one point, and suffer no ill impacts for it whatsoever besides time dilation. I'm sorry, but I'm fairly positive that this is simply not how a "black hole" actually works.
> They honestly shouldn't have even been able to get anywhere near the thing without getting at least trapped, and probably sucked in. The gravity would simply be too strong for their engines to counter act.
> If they somehow had managed to make it that close, they probably would have been torn apart anyway. - "_
> 
> *Actually it's possible to orbit a black hole without being disrupted just as its possible to orbit a super massive star without being disrupted. Only an increase in velocity is needed to prevent falling in.  A black hole is only a defunct super massive star. *
> 
> But contemplating exploring for settlement a planet spiraling into a black hole makes no long term sense.
> 
> A saving grace of a man surviving a fall into a black hole is Steven Hawking's belief as presented in a scientific confab that "information" is preserved and retrievable from material having fallen into a black hole.
> 
> That is important if we and matter are information, for what else could he have meant?
> 
> Anyway, as to the movie itself, as I said to my son as we entered "I don't hold out much hope in seeing a really good science fiction flick here, since the best I ever saw was sixty years ago, and I don't classify "2001" as a really good Sci-Fi flick."
> 
> That movie I saw sixty years back was "Forbidden Planet," a movie that was a precursor and set the meme for decades to come including tthat was Star Trek.



True. However, I remain fairly skeptical that you could do so at so close a distance as was portrayed in the movie, or that they would have thrust anywhere near powerful enough to pull such a thing off.

I could buy the U.S.S. Enterprise doing something like that, *maybe*.

That thing, however, was basically just the ISS with a couple of rocket engines strapped to it. lol


----------



## Rikurzhen

Sgt_Gath said:


> American Horse said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sgt_Gath said:
> _" - They treated the whole thing a lot more casually than I would have preferred.
> They literally "skim the surface" of the black hole's horizon at one point, and suffer no ill impacts for it whatsoever besides time dilation. I'm sorry, but I'm fairly positive that this is simply not how a "black hole" actually works.
> They honestly shouldn't have even been able to get anywhere near the thing without getting at least trapped, and probably sucked in. The gravity would simply be too strong for their engines to counter act.
> If they somehow had managed to make it that close, they probably would have been torn apart anyway. - "_
> 
> *Actually it's possible to orbit a black hole without being disrupted just as its possible to orbit a super massive star without being disrupted. Only an increase in velocity is needed to prevent falling in.  A black hole is only a defunct super massive star. *
> 
> But contemplating exploring for settlement a planet spiraling into a black hole makes no long term sense.
> 
> A saving grace of a man surviving a fall into a black hole is Steven Hawking's belief as presented in a scientific confab that "information" is preserved and retrievable from material having fallen into a black hole.
> 
> That is important if we and matter are information, for what else could he have meant?
> 
> Anyway, as to the movie itself, as I said to my son as we entered "I don't hold out much hope in seeing a really good science fiction flick here, since the best I ever saw was sixty years ago, and I don't classify "2001" as a really good Sci-Fi flick."
> 
> That movie I saw sixty years back was "Forbidden Planet," a movie that was a precursor and set the meme for decades to come including tthat was Star Trek.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> True. However, I remain fairly skeptical that you could do so at so close a distance as was portrayed in the movie, or that they would have thrust anywhere near powerful enough to pull such a thing off.
> 
> I could buy the U.S.S. Enterprise doing something like that, *maybe*.
> 
> That thing, however, was basically just the ISS with a couple of rocket engines strapped to it. lol
Click to expand...


OK, if we're going to have a nerd fight about imaginary spaceships, no the USS Enterprise is a shoddy design. Those nacelles up on the spars are madness from a structural engineering perspective, especially when facing large tidal forces from a black hole. The Borg Cube (stupid because you never see square pressure vessels) would likely be better because they don't have a significant point of failure. Oh yeah, and the whole saucer section cantilevered out like it is on the Enterprise is going to cause problems when encountered strong tidal forces.

The best design would be one of those old spaceships from the 50s films, a long cylinder. The very best would be a sphere.


----------



## Sgt_Gath

Rikurzhen said:


> Sgt_Gath said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> American Horse said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sgt_Gath said:
> _" - They treated the whole thing a lot more casually than I would have preferred.
> They literally "skim the surface" of the black hole's horizon at one point, and suffer no ill impacts for it whatsoever besides time dilation. I'm sorry, but I'm fairly positive that this is simply not how a "black hole" actually works.
> They honestly shouldn't have even been able to get anywhere near the thing without getting at least trapped, and probably sucked in. The gravity would simply be too strong for their engines to counter act.
> If they somehow had managed to make it that close, they probably would have been torn apart anyway. - "_
> 
> *Actually it's possible to orbit a black hole without being disrupted just as its possible to orbit a super massive star without being disrupted. Only an increase in velocity is needed to prevent falling in.  A black hole is only a defunct super massive star. *
> 
> But contemplating exploring for settlement a planet spiraling into a black hole makes no long term sense.
> 
> A saving grace of a man surviving a fall into a black hole is Steven Hawking's belief as presented in a scientific confab that "information" is preserved and retrievable from material having fallen into a black hole.
> 
> That is important if we and matter are information, for what else could he have meant?
> 
> Anyway, as to the movie itself, as I said to my son as we entered "I don't hold out much hope in seeing a really good science fiction flick here, since the best I ever saw was sixty years ago, and I don't classify "2001" as a really good Sci-Fi flick."
> 
> That movie I saw sixty years back was "Forbidden Planet," a movie that was a precursor and set the meme for decades to come including tthat was Star Trek.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> True. However, I remain fairly skeptical that you could do so at so close a distance as was portrayed in the movie, or that they would have thrust anywhere near powerful enough to pull such a thing off.
> 
> I could buy the U.S.S. Enterprise doing something like that, *maybe*.
> 
> That thing, however, was basically just the ISS with a couple of rocket engines strapped to it. lol
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> OK, if we're going to have a nerd fight about imaginary spaceships, no the USS Enterprise is a shoddy design. Those nacelles up on the spars are madness from a structural engineering perspective, especially when facing large tidal forces from a black hole. The Borg Cube (stupid because you never see square pressure vessels) would likely be better because they don't have a significant point of failure. Oh yeah, and the whole saucer section cantilevered out like it is on the Enterprise is going to cause problems when encountered strong tidal forces.
> 
> The best design would be one of those old spaceships from the 50s films, a long cylinder. The very best would be a sphere.
Click to expand...


To be fair, I wasn't talking about design, but durability and raw power. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




I'm just kind of skeptical that the puny little engines on that ship could have overpowered a black hole. lol


----------



## Rikurzhen

Sgt_Gath said:


> Rikurzhen said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sgt_Gath said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> American Horse said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sgt_Gath said:
> _" - They treated the whole thing a lot more casually than I would have preferred.
> They literally "skim the surface" of the black hole's horizon at one point, and suffer no ill impacts for it whatsoever besides time dilation. I'm sorry, but I'm fairly positive that this is simply not how a "black hole" actually works.
> They honestly shouldn't have even been able to get anywhere near the thing without getting at least trapped, and probably sucked in. The gravity would simply be too strong for their engines to counter act.
> If they somehow had managed to make it that close, they probably would have been torn apart anyway. - "_
> 
> *Actually it's possible to orbit a black hole without being disrupted just as its possible to orbit a super massive star without being disrupted. Only an increase in velocity is needed to prevent falling in.  A black hole is only a defunct super massive star. *
> 
> But contemplating exploring for settlement a planet spiraling into a black hole makes no long term sense.
> 
> A saving grace of a man surviving a fall into a black hole is Steven Hawking's belief as presented in a scientific confab that "information" is preserved and retrievable from material having fallen into a black hole.
> 
> That is important if we and matter are information, for what else could he have meant?
> 
> Anyway, as to the movie itself, as I said to my son as we entered "I don't hold out much hope in seeing a really good science fiction flick here, since the best I ever saw was sixty years ago, and I don't classify "2001" as a really good Sci-Fi flick."
> 
> That movie I saw sixty years back was "Forbidden Planet," a movie that was a precursor and set the meme for decades to come including tthat was Star Trek.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> True. However, I remain fairly skeptical that you could do so at so close a distance as was portrayed in the movie, or that they would have thrust anywhere near powerful enough to pull such a thing off.
> 
> I could buy the U.S.S. Enterprise doing something like that, *maybe*.
> 
> That thing, however, was basically just the ISS with a couple of rocket engines strapped to it. lol
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> OK, if we're going to have a nerd fight about imaginary spaceships, no the USS Enterprise is a shoddy design. Those nacelles up on the spars are madness from a structural engineering perspective, especially when facing large tidal forces from a black hole. The Borg Cube (stupid because you never see square pressure vessels) would likely be better because they don't have a significant point of failure. Oh yeah, and the whole saucer section cantilevered out like it is on the Enterprise is going to cause problems when encountered strong tidal forces.
> 
> The best design would be one of those old spaceships from the 50s films, a long cylinder. The very best would be a sphere.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> To be fair, I wasn't talking about design, but durability and raw power.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm just kind of skeptical that the puny little engines on that ship could have overpowered a black hole. lol
Click to expand...


Oh, in that case, yeah, dilithium crystals are the shit.


----------



## American Horse

Sgt_Gath said:


> Rikurzhen said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sgt_Gath said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> American Horse said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sgt_Gath said:
> _" - They treated the whole thing a lot more casually than I would have preferred.
> They literally "skim the surface" of the black hole's horizon at one point, and suffer no ill impacts for it whatsoever besides time dilation. I'm sorry, but I'm fairly positive that this is simply not how a "black hole" actually works.
> They honestly shouldn't have even been able to get anywhere near the thing without getting at least trapped, and probably sucked in. The gravity would simply be too strong for their engines to counter act.
> If they somehow had managed to make it that close, they probably would have been torn apart anyway. - "_
> 
> *Actually it's possible to orbit a black hole without being disrupted just as its possible to orbit a super massive star without being disrupted. Only an increase in velocity is needed to prevent falling in.  A black hole is only a defunct super massive star. *
> 
> But contemplating exploring for settlement a planet spiraling into a black hole makes no long term sense.
> 
> A saving grace of a man surviving a fall into a black hole is Steven Hawking's belief as presented in a scientific confab that "information" is preserved and retrievable from material having fallen into a black hole.
> 
> That is important if we and matter are information, for what else could he have meant?
> 
> Anyway, as to the movie itself, as I said to my son as we entered "I don't hold out much hope in seeing a really good science fiction flick here, since the best I ever saw was sixty years ago, and I don't classify "2001" as a really good Sci-Fi flick."
> 
> That movie I saw sixty years back was "Forbidden Planet," a movie that was a precursor and set the meme for decades to come including tthat was Star Trek.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> True. However, I remain fairly skeptical that you could do so at so close a distance as was portrayed in the movie, or that they would have thrust anywhere near powerful enough to pull such a thing off.
> 
> I could buy the U.S.S. Enterprise doing something like that, *maybe*.
> 
> That thing, however, was basically just the ISS with a couple of rocket engines strapped to it. lol
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> OK, if we're going to have a nerd fight about imaginary spaceships, no the USS Enterprise is a shoddy design. Those nacelles up on the spars are madness from a structural engineering perspective, especially when facing large tidal forces from a black hole. The Borg Cube (stupid because you never see square pressure vessels) would likely be better because they don't have a significant point of failure. Oh yeah, and the whole saucer section cantilevered out like it is on the Enterprise is going to cause problems when encountered strong tidal forces.
> 
> The best design would be one of those old spaceships from the 50s films, a long cylinder. The very best would be a sphere.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> To be fair, I wasn't talking about design, but durability and raw power.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm just kind of skeptical that the puny little engines on that ship could have overpowered a black hole. lol
Click to expand...

You are correct; the ship in the movie was notably without fuel tanks so where was the power for the thrusters to come from?  That would've ostensibly been, due to that fact that it was only equipped to do attitude changes and certainly not  maneuver against a high grav object.

Perhaps it was equipped with some kind of grav or anti grav engine and for the sake of brevity that detail was omitted?


----------



## Mr. H.

I'll definitely rent this as soon as it hits the video stores. 
If this movie isn't nominated for some awards, I'll be pissed.
That piece of shit "Gravity" actually won awards.


----------



## Mr. H.

Probably my favorite scene... illegally filmed in the theater LOL. And in a foreign language.


----------



## American Horse

Mr. H. said:


> I'll definitely rent this as soon as it hits the video stores.
> If this movie isn't nominated for some awards, I'll be pissed.
> That piece of shit "Gravity" actually won awards.


Even though I just saw it on the big screen I will rent the DVD; if only to get the other 80% of audio dialogue that was lost to me in the theater; I.E. I'll engage the closed caption feature for subscripts.


----------



## ChrisL

Mr. H. said:


> I'll definitely rent this as soon as it hits the video stores.
> If this movie isn't nominated for some awards, I'll be pissed.
> That piece of shit "Gravity" actually won awards.



I thought it looked pretty good in the trailer, but for the little girl who incessantly cries.  That seems like it could get annoying.    Just during the trailer, I was like "okay, stifle it now!  Enough with the crying!"  Lol!


----------



## Mr. H.

American Horse said:


> Mr. H. said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'll definitely rent this as soon as it hits the video stores.
> If this movie isn't nominated for some awards, I'll be pissed.
> That piece of shit "Gravity" actually won awards.
> 
> 
> 
> Even though I just saw it on the big screen I will rent the DVD; if only to get the other 80% of audio dialogue that was lost to me in the theater; I.E. I'll engage the closed caption feature for subscripts.
Click to expand...

Yeah, that was a bit of an issue for me too. That's why I brought the wife along.


----------



## American Horse

I was bothered by the speed with which "endurance" rotated to yield 1-gravity out at the rim. It seemed entirely too fast for a wheel, say 480' in circumference (allowing for each segment to be 30' in width with 30' between them gets my estimate for size). It seems it was revolving much faster than a rev per second amounting to something like 325-mph for a minimum out at the rim if only one rev per second.

I'm sure there is a formula for figuring that.

Does anyone know what that would amount to?

I'm not trying to nit pick here but it seems to be a blatant irregularity to me...

I'm certain all the theoretical stuff has been well developed for accuracy but some of the more mundane practical stuff was found wanting.  How about how people had to turn their saucers cups  and plates upside down to keep dust from settling in them and there was clearly a huge amount of dust on the table where they sat but all the shelves holding the books in the hallway were conspicuously clean as were the books resting there.

Small item, true, but not very realistic. When Cooper knocked the books off the shelf from his place in the black hole there should've been tracks in the piles of dust gathered around them and all of it was immaculate while it was presented as being unendurably dusty because of the dust supposedly penetrating every crack and cranny.


----------



## Mr. H.

American Horse said:


> I was bothered by the speed with which "endurance" rotated to yield 1-gravity out at the rim. It seemed entirely too fast for a wheel, say 480' in circumference (allowing for each segment to be 30' in width with 30' between them gets my estimate for size). It seems it was revolving much faster than a rev per second amounting to something like 325-mph for a minimum out at the rim if only one per second.
> 
> I'm sure there is a formula for figuring that.
> 
> Does anyone know what that would amount to?
> 
> I'm not trying to nit pick here but it seems to be a blatently irregular to me...
> 
> I'm certain all the theoretical stuff has been well developed for accuracy but some of the more mundane practical stuff was found wanting.  How about how people had to turn their saucers cups  and plates upside down to keep dust from settling in them and there was clearly a huge amount of dust on the table where they sat but all the shelves holding the books in the hallway were conspicuously clean as were the books resting there.
> 
> Small item, true, but not very realistic. When Cooper knocked the books off the shelf from his place in the black hole there should've been tracks in the piles of dust gathered around them and all of it was immaculate while it was presented as being unendurably dusty from dust penetrating every crack and cranny.


I like to sit back and let the script, cast, score, and visuals wow me. And I was wowed. 
This is why I'm a huge fan of Dune 1984 - IMDb while others scoff at it and pan it. I've watched Dune probably 30 times and it still blows me away. 

This was a very consistent film in terms of staying in character throughout. I was surprised at the length and kept wondering "ok- when are they going to drop the goofy-shoe"? I never saw it happen. 

Again, if a piece of nonsensical slap-stick Sci-Fi like "Gravity" can win awards... this film is a shoe-in.


----------



## Mr. H.

SPOILER... (don't look down!)






Matt Damon showed up fairly late in this film. And, like George Clooney, he died. 

Unlike George Clooney, Matt Damon didn't come off as some mis-placed goof-ball schlep. 

Interstellar is some sobering Sci-Fi. 

I go to a movie, I eat popcorn. I don't annotate every scene.


----------



## Mr. H.

But to be fair, I'm not without criticism of this flick. More spoilers...




The transition from when Matty Mac stumbled upon NASA to the moment he blasted off was hurried and assumed. 

The robot thing was a bit lame at times. . 

That is all.


----------



## Judicial review

Id rather watch playboy tv. Wouldnt you?


----------



## Mr. H.

natrualgas said:


> Id rather watch playboy tv. Wouldnt you?


Get yourself some bitch-slap, s0n.


----------



## Judicial review

Mr. H. said:


> natrualgas said:
> 
> 
> 
> Id rather watch playboy tv. Wouldnt you?
> 
> 
> 
> Get yourself some bitch-slap, s0n.
Click to expand...

I dont like the idea of being married to 1 vagina for the rest of my left.


----------



## Mr. H.

natrualgas said:


> Mr. H. said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> natrualgas said:
> 
> 
> 
> Id rather watch playboy tv. Wouldnt you?
> 
> 
> 
> Get yourself some bitch-slap, s0n.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I dont like the idea of being married to 1 vagina for the rest of my left.
Click to expand...

Vaginas are like cars. After 10 years they call it quits. 

While the penis keeps on going and going and going...


----------



## Judicial review

Mr. H. said:


> natrualgas said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mr. H. said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> natrualgas said:
> 
> 
> 
> Id rather watch playboy tv. Wouldnt you?
> 
> 
> 
> Get yourself some bitch-slap, s0n.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I dont like the idea of being married to 1 vagina for the rest of my left.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Vaginas are like cars. After 10 years they call it quits.
> 
> While the penis keeps on going and going and going...
Click to expand...

Since im wealthy id only get married to someone who agrees to sign a prenuptial agreement. Im scared shed take my shit


----------



## Politico

Mr. H. said:


> natrualgas said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mr. H. said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> natrualgas said:
> 
> 
> 
> Id rather watch playboy tv. Wouldnt you?
> 
> 
> 
> Get yourself some bitch-slap, s0n.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I dont like the idea of being married to 1 vagina for the rest of my left.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Vaginas are like cars. After 10 years they call it quits.
> 
> While the penis keeps on going and going and going...
Click to expand...

They're like classic cars. Lots of maintenance and once a month you have to throw down an oil pan.


----------



## Judicial review

Politico said:


> Mr. H. said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> natrualgas said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mr. H. said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> natrualgas said:
> 
> 
> 
> Id rather watch playboy tv. Wouldnt you?
> 
> 
> 
> Get yourself some bitch-slap, s0n.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I dont like the idea of being married to 1 vagina for the rest of my left.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Vaginas are like cars. After 10 years they call it quits.
> 
> While the penis keeps on going and going and going...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They're like classic cars. Lots of maintenance and once a month you have to throw down an oil pan.
Click to expand...

Man im a terrible influence...


----------



## B. Kidd

I liked it. Saw it in a X/D Digital theatre. Very immersive experience, if you dig space-time continuums, compressions, and infinity.


----------



## Delta4Embassy

Infinity's pretty scary when you think about it. If the universe had a beginning, how can it be infinite?


----------



## Mr. H.

Talk to the Legos...


----------



## Igrok_

Absolutely empty film, as for me. Don't like such film, where under the picture there is nothing to think about. Like a clip.


----------



## JakeStarkey

I suggest that says more about you than the film, Igrok.

But . . . that's just my opinion.


----------



## Igrok_

JakeStarkey said:


> I suggest that says more about you than the film, Igrok.
> 
> But . . . that's just my opinion.


Of course about me. And I think in a good way.


----------



## Jameson

I liked it but perhaps because I expected it to be much worse. I had quite a nice surprise. I am not very a good physicist and all that science space theory is too much for me to even start thinking if it's right or wrong. I just accepted director's vision. However the movie had a few major flaws in a plot. But I liked the ending. Or the ambiguity of it. <spoiler> If you like happy endings - just believe what you see. If you like more realistic ending - understand it just like that <spoiler> Overall - good movie. Oh and the main cast wasn't annoying and that's a good stuff too.


----------



## Rocko

Best movie I've seen in a long time. No sound in space was terrifying. Great story, acting, directing. I highly recommend this movie.


----------

