Question for those who voted this 7 or higher
-
cthulhulurks — 9 years ago(February 07, 2017 01:33 PM)
Interstallar s one hell of a flick, this one aint bad either.
my vote history:
http://www.imdb.com/user/ur13767631/ratings -
jinkerTsun — 9 years ago(February 06, 2017 08:09 AM)
I'm an admirer of Amy Adams and like her as an actor. However, whilst I wouldn't go along with everything you say I did think this film wasn't for everyone. It's slow mostly and needs an open mind about what the film was trying to convey. I especially liked the time travel sequence when she was talking to the Chinese General and was getting what to say directly from the source. Yes, there were plot holes but this was definitely a solid 6 or 7 for my money. Probably a 7 thinking about it.
-
wesolmon — 9 years ago(February 06, 2017 11:58 PM)
You need to not think of time as a linear object like we do in the real world. Her time, like the sentences of Abbot and Costello, had no beginning or end. So while the General was experiencing this moment as his past, Louise was experiencing it in her present.
Another example of this (tho it could be argued otherwise) is when she does not know the "scientific term" for the win-win scenario when her daughter asked her. Then we go to the meeting where Ian says they are at a zero-sum game, and she then tells her daughter the term. -
laurentiu-v-1 — 9 years ago(February 07, 2017 02:02 PM)
She would have experienced the event already for the first time 18 months ago. no matter how you consider time to be her brain after 18 months should have had the memory imprint of the phone call.
Plus, that's not the idea of the movie, the idea is that you experience/see every moment at the same time. -
ithinkimdeck — 9 years ago(February 06, 2017 11:00 PM)
I think what's so special about it is what the movie is really about, and that is language. The film offers a vision of what humanity could be if humans learned to respect one another and not be ready to jump to violence when disagreements inevitably arise.
With the means of communication we have today, violence is primitive and driven by fear (see: the soldiers who planted the bomb). Louise understands this and learns to overcome her fear and look at the situation in front with her understanding and compassion, and what happens? She not only transcends anything humanity has ever been able to do, but influences everyone around her to do the same and humanity gets that much closer to literal world peace.
You see because when you have advanced means of communication, you are no longer in survival mode. The problem is, humanity likely won't see such an intervention and likely will never learn. -
serenity159 — 9 years ago(February 07, 2017 12:55 AM)
This movie just isn't for everybody. People who are more philosophical are probably the ones giving this higher rank.
I gave it 9. I can explain why in detail but considering this board is about to be shut down I don't feel like investing that much time in this. (and it will require a lot of time to explain).
~Luca Brasi sleeps with the fishes~ -
Sashquash — 9 years ago(February 13, 2017 06:58 AM)
I like the science of the movie:
1-In physics, the equations about space and matters work with time going forward and backward as if time is the invention of man. People use to think that time was circular (like the alien language) and men thought about their own body aging as a tool degrading over time. It's only been around 100 year that we invented stories about time travel.
2-This in turn present a problem about free will. If your actions are only reaction to what you have lived then none of your choices are truly yours. If you don't have free will and already know what will happen to your life the only thing making you humain is your inner life, what you feel and how you respond to outside stimulus. (Or you can argue that our emotions is the sources of our free-will.)
3- The ships are designed with the form of a comet, wise directorial choice, and we can deduct that the ship can control his mass on a cellular level to affect gravity and travel through space. The aliens seams to come from a oceanic world (europa?) they are non symmetrical and have not a clear face to convey emotion.(Alien don't have to convey emotion like us. smiling, frowning, etc.) They also have their own linear language and a non linear writing.
4-On social science even if the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis (learning a new language change the way we think) is pretty much debunked, it makes a great anchor for the rest of the story. The linguist side of the story is spot on.
Paranoia is contagious, and openness can ease tense situation. (Desescalation)
This is what i found im sure there is more to find in a second viewing. The movie don't teach us "science" but use science to make a story and you have to know some of it prior to seeing it.
This is why i like Arrival.