Not a Review: Interstellar (2014)

Interstellar really is the second film of 2014 to garner this much attention and discussion. Gone Girl struck most people with awe and terrifyingly great casting, performances, and storytelling. Interstellar, however, seems to elicit more conversation, more discussion, more disagreement, more studies, more generated lists of plot holes and questions and subtexts and metaphors linked to Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968).

And that’s all good and grand. Because, folks, even though Interstellar may not be Christopher Nolan’s best film, or considered his best work, it is grand, both on figurative scale to be viewed on seven different possible formats, as well as massive in its ambitious subject matter, as well as tremendous in the spark of conversation and criticism that has quickly followed its release into theaters.

I could continue talking about its reception among film critics, writers, fans, and talkers like myself, who can continue to talk and talk and talk about this film, and yet not really create anything original, or offer any new information that is going to keep you reading beyond this sentence.

It is for that reason I have decided not to review Interstellar for All Eyes On Screen. My common consensus? A great movie. My rating? THREE OUT OF FOUR EYES ON SCREEN. My thoughts in summary? Nothing that hasn’t already been said by so many people.

It’s not that I don’t want to share my opinion, or join the masses of everyone out there who has already graciously and meticulously put into words what I haven’t yet done. It’s that in this case, how I feel about Interstellar truly can’t be put into words in a way that would satisfy me, because it evoked so many feelings, included so many ideas, transcended space and time the same way it transcended my own understanding of what was taking place on screen.

I could talk about about how much I was blown away by the scene in which there is this massive wave, bigger than any wave I’ve ever seen, and how it took over the theater screen the same way it almost took out their space craft.

I could talk about Matthew McConaughey re-entering film fans’s lives with his stellar (pun intended) performance that reminded each of us once again that this man is in the acting business for a reason.

I could talk about how Hans Zimmer has the best relationship with lightning strikes, because he continues to hit them every time he produces yet another electrifying score, yet here he is, still breathing. And this time it features an organ, an instrument capable of sounding so powerful and terrifying as being imprisoned in deep space without a ride home.

I could talk about the actors who seemed like they weren’t given enough to do, or how the heck Topher Grace landed himself a most unimportant role in such an important film with such a popular filmmaker.

I could talk about the “controversy” over who younger Murphy (Mackenzie Foy) looked more like: Jessica Chastain or Anne Hathaway. I mean, I’m all Team Chastain here, but seriously, how did this make it into the top list of questions for this film?!

I could talk about scientific jargon, the plot holes that may or may not necessarily play their role in science fiction, or about how Interstellar was never set on being just a scientific film, but more a study on the science of love’s transcendence that just happened to take place in space.

Then again, I could talk and talk and talk about my observations, but at the end of the day, Interstellar has found its place in critics’s reviews and bloggers’s posts, in discussion and questions swirling around in our minds, begging for more conclusion and understanding.

And a film that could spark that kind of response is a very special film indeed.

So to conclude this totally not a review, but a mixed bag of feelings brought to you by Kristin, I kindly ask each of you who leave a comment to include one to three words to describe your overall description or feelings on this film. Because God knows we’ve all been littering the Internet with our extensive musings on a film that has so much to be said about it. And yet Nolan used only one word: Interstellar.

Advertisements

Ten Critically-Acclaimed Films I Just Don’t Like

It might sound like a bad thing, but truly, you just can’t like every movie, regardless of its popularity with critics, film buffs, or even your casual viewers. While there are positive things I could say about each of these movies (and I will!), I just didn’t care for them, and I don’t imagine I’ll revisit any of them in the future. I got this idea after reading Abbi’s post about Ten Movies People Seem to Love That [She] Just Didn’t Get, over at her site Where the Wild Things Are. She got the idea from Film Nerd Blog. I thought it was a great idea, and just turned it into a list of films most critics (and many viewers) loved (that I didn’t dig).

Here are ten critically-acclaimed films I just don’t like:

Almost Made the List . . .

The Town (2010)

Rotten Tomatoes: 94%
Metascore: 74/100

The Town nearly misses the list, even considering it’s the only movie in the list I turned off in the middle of viewing. I loved the cast, excluding Blake Lively. I think Ben Affleck has established himself as a director not to be toyed with. My issue with the film was the overabundant drug use and language. It’s not that I’m not interested in seeing a town, a group of people, realistically displayed. It just took over the film for me, overshadowing the story.


 10) Breakfast at Tiffany’s (1961)

Rotten Tomatoes: 87% RT
Metascore: 76/100

The fashion is stunning. It’s Audrey Hepburn, how could it not be stunning? I know I just reviewed Roman Holiday (1953) and loved it! There’s no doubt there are some great elements in this film that make it the memorable movie it is today. For me, however, I just didn’t feel like there was a great story there, and I couldn’t get into it. Sorry, Holly Golighty.

9) The Graduate (1967)

Rotten Tomatoes: 87%
Metascore: 77/100

The Graduate – another classic I just didn’t care for. It’s one of the first coming-of-age stories that explores a territory not yet tackled in film. Dustin Hoffman gets famous off of The Graduate. The music is great, and the end scene is emotional. But for me, watching it decades later, I just didn’t connect with the film at all.

8) 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968)

Rotten Tomatoes: 95%
Metascore: 86/100

Considered a must-see by anyone who considers him/herself a film buff, I know some heads are shaking as they see this one on my list. It’s a highly influential science fiction film crafted by Stanley Kubrick. I should like this. I should want to watch this, include it on my top ten lists, boast of its greatness. But I missed it . . . even knowing that this film is a work of art, I don’t care for it.

7) The Exorcist (1973)

Rotten Tomatoes: 88%
Metascore: 82/100

Now we enter the horror genre. A movie that I watched in high school, The Exorcist scared the crap out of me. It’s a mark on the horror film genre, and I can understand why. But I don’t feel apologetic for disliking this movie. It’s not that I think it’s bad; I just don’t like movies that deal with devil/demon possession. It’s not a fun movie for this film fan.

6) Pulp Fiction (1994)

Rotten Tomatoes: 94%
Metascore: 94/100

Perhaps one of the most controversial films on my list, Quentin Tarantino’s film Pulp Fiction wasn’t a fun ride for me. I won’t say there weren’t moments when I laughed, or thought I had witnessed something very cool in the film. It’s certainly a well-made piece of cinema; I, however, struggled to enjoy it amidst the overt sexual scenes and language, even knowing it was a Tarantino film.

5) Lost in Translation (2003)

Rotten Tomatoes: 95%
Metascore: 89/100

Yet another one of the more controversial films on this list, Lost in Translation is a deep film that does succeed to tell its story. I’m not arguing that. It’s just one of those movies I watched and was done with. It includes one of Scarlet Johansson’s best performances, and the movie shows how you can strike up a friendship with the unlikeliest of people. But this movie depressed me to the degree that I have no need to see it again.

4) Avatar (2009)

Rotten Tomatoes: 83%
Metascore: 83/100

James Cameron brought us Titanic (1997), and of course, he had to bring another enormous budget, technologically ground-breaking film called Avatar. It’s not that I don’t respect the art, the technology, the scope of the film. It’s a feat in movie history. But for all of the special effects and millions of dollars poured into the project, I felt like maybe they could have had a shake down in the writers room and come up with a more original, engaging story. According to my Intro to Film teacher, Avatar was just a rip-off of Dances with Wolves (1990). I haven’t seen it, so I couldn’t tell you. But the movie never stayed with me, no matter how many sequels Cameron’s team has promised.

3) The Tree of Life (2011)

Rotten Tomatoes: 84%
Metascore: 85/100

Jessica Chastain was in four movies in 2011, and this was the only one I really didn’t like. It wasn’t that the cinematography wasn’t gorgeous, because it was. I can’t think of a movie in this decade that is more beautiful to watch unfold on screen. But the idea of being metaphorical doesn’t hold up for me in this movie. I know The Tree of Life aimed to be deep, but Terrance Malick’s film didn’t win me over. To this day, I still don’t understand the appeal. Perhaps I just wasn’t meant to understand.

2) Melancholia (2011)

Rotten Tomatoes: 78%
Metascore: 80/100

Perhaps the must unmemorable movie on this list for me, Melancholia bored me to no end. I distinctly remember forcing myself to sit through this film just so I could watch all of the Oscar-nominated films that year. Like The Tree of Life, it offers some of the most beautiful scenes to watch. But I missed out on watching an actual story. I just remember Kirsten Dunst getting angry, and Kiefer Sutherland popping up in a movie after his 24 (2001-2010) run.

1) Prisoners (2013)

Rotten Tomatoes: 82%
Metascore: 74/100

It’s difficult for me to find words for how much I disliked Prisoners, especially considering how big a fan I was of the cast. Jake Gyllenhaal, Wolverine, and Viola Davis – it’s got to be good, right? The plot is interesting: someone’s kidnapped children. But it was painful for me to watch Hugh Jackman torture Paul Dano. From start to finish, it was disturbing for me to watch, and I have no desire to revisit it ever again, regardless of its critical success.

It’s your turn now. What critically-acclaimed movies do you not dig? Which ones on my list do you think I need to watch again to consider otherwise? Please join the discussion below, because I would love to know your thoughts.