Interstellar

Realism can only do so much in the realms of entertainment. More often than not, people praise games and movies for adding a dose of realism into what should be a place of escapism and in some examples, it is deserved as including aspects that feel more authentic and honest can bring life to a project and have made for some unique games, shows and movies that have shaped how media is presented nowadays. But with that said, relying on realism can be dangerous as it can get in the way of what makes for engaging storytelling or feel like a pointless inclusion that is only included so people can call it out. The 2014 Christopher Nolan film, Interstellar is what happens when being dramatically real takes focus over basic storytelling. Set in a future where Earth is on the cusp of becoming uninhabitable due to massive dust storms, Ex-NASA pilot Joseph Cooper (played by Matthew McConaughey) lives as a farmer with his two children, Tom and Murph (played by Timothée Chalamet and Mackenzie Foy) but through an anomaly that can’t be explained, he is directed towards the location of a secret NASA facility headed by Professor Brand (played by Michael Caine) who is planning an intergalactic expedition to travel through a wormhole and research other planets that could be suitable to sustain life on. Leaving behind his children, Cooper agrees to the expedition along with other astronauts, including Brand’s daughter, Amelia (played by Anne Hathaway), and set out to discover if these three chosen worlds are the ticket to saving mankind, all the while time moves forward back on earth and their loved ones (including Cooper’s children) age past them. Interstellar, much like some of Nolan’s other work, became popular very quickly, with many critics giving it generally positive reception. It became the tenth-highest grossing film of 2014, was nominated for five Academy Awards (winning for Best Visual Effects) and eventually garnered a cult following with many believing it to be one of the greatest sci-fi films of all time. For all of its talk and grandeur, Interstellar isn’t able to completely masks its problems with scripting, character, and emotional investment underneath its visual spectacle and dramatic scale, resulting in an overall poorly delivered film.

One thing to make clear is that Interstellar doesn’t struggle from being realistic in the sense of not being fantastical enough for its sci-fi genre, as if anything the movie actually uses its grounded nature quite cleverly. While the world building isn’t particularly strong (mainly in regard to the state of the world in the opening act) and its lack of creative imagery can result in certain production and environmental aspects feeling watered down and unmemorable, its grounded nature provides for a nice contrast to when they travel to space and encounter things like wormholes and black holes; forces of nature that are real but are showcased in a manner that makes them feel otherworldly and like something out of a sci-fi story. It tows that line between authentic and theoretical in its portrayal of scientific components to create a situation that feels in line with what could realistically occur, but still takes liberties in order to have it function as a proper narrative. The premise for this film also works with this mindset; having a story about traversing to far-off galaxies through wormholes and trying to find a new habitable planet works for a science-heavy narrative, but involving the element of losing time with your children through time dilation is a nice touch that is again grounded in logical understanding, but also works as a cinematic component that carries emotional investment. So, the film does get value from being realistic, but it fails in how serious it treats itself and how much of its script is more focused on its cold authenticity and hypotheticals rather than on its humanity. Despite not being the first choice for this film (it was originally going to be directed by Steven Spielberg), Christopher Nolan’s fingerprints are all over this film’s delivery, and it sadly is all of his less-than-great aspects. The film is horribly paced, overly written with heartless dialogue that doesn’t feel the least bit human, and the story seems like it’s more interested in talking about its themes rather than letting them be felt. It feels soulless and this results in the second and third acts being really painful to get through due to how little you care about what is going on. There is a dabble of a human connection seeded throughout that keeps it stabilized enough (which makes the opening act, and the final scenes feel genuinely effective), but its sparingly felt within a very long and very direct movie.

For a story like this to work, you need your characters to be engaging. Since the plot is so focused on being dedicated to a single event that limits pretty much any time for personal growth or development, it needs to have gripping characters for the audience to get attached to in order for them to truly care about all the scientific jargon they are spouting, and sadly, this is another element that Nolan has never been able to get right. The characters in this film are very forgettable and only feel like they exist to spout exposition or over-explain the ‘’importance’’ of their messages. None of them feel human, they aren’t allowed to have desires, wants or even flaws, and because they’re all scientific individuals who have an emotional range of a chalk board, their scenes are very dry and even sometimes incredibly preachy. While performers like Anne Hathaway, David Gyasi, Wes Bentley, and Michael Caine are doing perfectly well on an acting level, they barely leave an impression as characters due to the fact of having no backstory, no personal stakes in this mission that we’ve had time to see, and barely any screen time that lets them talk as people. There’s a talking robot assistant voiced by Bill Irwin who despite being a pretty decent practical effect, offers nothing outside of background support and stupid quips (only because barely anyone else is allowed to have a sense of humor). Matt Damon is easily the worst part of this movie and showcases everything wrong with the writing style of Christopher Nolan and his brother, Jonathan Nolan (who helped write the screenplay). Every line feels manufactured and phoney like its ripped straight out of a philosophy book, he isn’t allowed to speak like a person but rather an insert to shill out mindless dialogue that leaves no impression, and the acting is so wooden and so painfully uninteresting that he feels less alive than the robots that surround him. The only actors that get out with a semblance of humanity are Matthew McConaughey, who is yucking up his persona to a strong degree in the opening act but is solid enough in the more heartfelt moments to legitimately come across as genuine, and all the actresses playing his daughter, Murphy (which are Mackenzie Foy, Jessica Chastain, and Ellen Burstyn). Anytime these two are on screen together is when they movie does really work, as you buy the connection between the two and their scenes are some of the few moments in this film that try to tug at your emotions and not be run by over-expository dialogue, it’s not enough to dramatically change the film, but it is greatly welcomed whenever its showcased.

Nolan has always been a director who favors the spectacle of his production as well as the potential of the cinematic viewing experience, and this film was one that really took advantage of that. The nice thing about his movies when it comes to them visually is that he is always trying to make things look grand and impressive for modern audiences, while not overindulging in CGI to the point where it becomes distracting and all-encompassing as he still features practical effects whenever he can. In this film, that balance can be felt with the great practical sets and the awe-inspiring visuals that demonstrate some otherworldly occurrences, made even cooler when you discover some of the shots of the ship from space are actually done with miniatures handled by production designer Nathan Crowley. This is a decision that would only be made by someone who wanted to go that extra mile, so they both get praise for that. Most of the visuals revolving around space like the wormhole and the black hole handled by effects supervisor, Paul Franklin, are visually very impressive and would’ve look even grander on the big screen through the weight and visual flair of the effect, as well as the fun cinematography done by Hoyte van Hoytema that is able to capture the scale of things very effectively, especially when showing how massive or how tiny something is. Once and a while, there’s a shot that can get a little repetitive because it would’ve look better in the cinema but not the best on the small screen (they love shooting on the side of the spaceship’s wing a lot), but it’s not overplayed too much and most of the effects are very well executed. Most of the stuff showcasing the planets is where things get visually uninteresting, as they don’t look the least bit alien and since the film spends so much time looking for and taking place on these locations, they are noticeably underwhelming (they don’t have to look like something out of Forbidden Planet, but they could at least look cool and not just ”big sea” or ”big ice mountain”). The music by Hans Zimmer is appropriately booming and grand when it needs to be, but it does also tap into this overly sentimental side that can feel a little hoaky at times, although in a film that is desperately lacking in any sense of brevity and life, a little over-the-topness is appreciated.

Interstellar isn’t a messy film because it portrays itself as realistic, it’s a messy film because it’s so laser-focused on portraying itself in cold hard reality with very little cinematic components that it sucks out the balance between that and general storytelling that comes with any movie. Realism can bring a slight punch or spice to an otherwise standard production and at first, this film does do that with its opening act, but the heavy-handed writing that is all speech and no soul becomes distracting and takes away from what could’ve been something more impactful. Much like some of Nolan’s other work, it trades engaging writing and characters for a flashy scope, an important pedigree, and a ”meaningful” script and narrative, which often result in his film’s looking and sounding great and leaving an impression for their ideas but will make audiences struggle to remember a single character or their emotional dilemmas. This isn’t the worst of Nolan (Tenet is comfortable in that spot), but it does contain a lot of Nolan’s shortcomings which are only made a little less painful due to featuring some impressive visuals and a few choice scenes between the lead and his daughter. Has its fans and features redeeming qualities but isn’t quite out of this world.