I know that PIE isn’t supposed to be in this rotation, but I
saw “Interstellar” this weekend and was wowed.
I was surprised to discover that the reviews in places that
are “pro-science” were pretty harsh. Attacking everything from science to
character development, they typically pointed out that while the movie was
visually stunning, it was very weak on character development with logic
loopholes all over the place.
Let’s start with the movie perceived to be “the best science
fiction movie ever made” (as opposed to the best science fiction novel ever
written – 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY is the former; DUNE is the latter. I’d like to
point out that the novel by Arthur C. Clarke has not been judged the “best SF
novel ever written”. It won no Hugo; Nebular; British SF Award (though it hadn’t
been invented at that time...); and didn’t make the New York Times Best Seller
List. Conversely, DUNE has gotten all of those awards, but movies attempted
from the book have been...poor substitutes at best.)
I saw “2001: A Space Odyssey” when I was young. I thought I
was 13 at time, but unless they rereleased it to the theaters, I would have
been 11 and I doubt that my parents would have let me go to a movie alone at
that age. So...let’s say I was 13 and watching a re-release.
I didn’t get it.
I stumbled into SF by myself, though I guess my dad read it.
I started with SPACESHIP UNDER THE APPLE TREE and WODERFUL FLIGHT TO THE
MUSHROOM PLANET in elementary school. In 7th grade, I discovered THE
WHITE MOUNTAINS. After that, I was hooked. Around the same time, my dad started
watching Star Trek (at the time, there was no appellation added to the end. It
was the only Star Trek around). After seeing the hideous “Yog: Monster From
Space” (1970), I eagerly anticipated seeing "A Space Odyssey".
I STILL didn’t get it.
In fact, I wasn’t the only one. Despite the implication in
the reviews of “Interstellar” that “2001” was an instant critical and popular
hit, the truth is somewhat less crystalline: “Upon release, 2001 polarized
critical opinion, receiving both ecstatic praise and vehement derision.” As
well, “Eminent historian Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr. deemed the film ‘morally
pretentious, intellectually obscure and inordinately long ... a film out of
control’.” Science fiction writers Ray Bradbury, Lester Del Ray, and even
Samuel R. Delany disliked the movie and thought the dialogue “banal”. Asimov
liked it, and James P. Hogan liked it but didn’t understand the ending – enough
so to steal the story and write a novel with a different ending.
The fifty-seven-year-old me still isn’t sure about how “2001:
A Space Odyssey” ended. But I loved “Interstellar”, I understood the ending,
and while there were parts I would have liked seeing strengthened (Murph’s and
her dad’s relationship); the movie as a whole had a powerful effect on me.
No other review I’ve read has pointed out the metaphor of
the shallow ocean on Miller’s world – all of their relationships were shallow
and all of them were nearly swept away by the consequences of that shallowness.
That was immensely meaningful to me at this time in my life.
I am also a sucker for the reconciliation of parents and
their children. No matter how many times I see “October Sky”, I always choke up
when Homer’s dad puts his arm around his shoulder during the final rocket
launch. Even though “Interstellar”’s parental reconciliation is decidedly
science fiction-y, it is, nevertheless powerful. Matthew McConaughey weeping
uncontrollably when he views Murphy’s message twenty years after it was sent
seemed either real or the result of a superior actor’s submersion in his role,
and their final scene together is both humorous and touching. I found it
especially poignant that Cooper’s descendants had no idea who he was. The fact
that Anne Hathaway’s character does NOT get to reconcile with her father made
me weep as well for personal reasons I don’t need to go into here. The fact
that Cooper is estranged from his son – the one he was closest to at the
beginning – is a further slice of reality that I could have done without, but realize
is realistic on many levels.
I will return to my analysis of “Interstellar” in the
future, but for now that’s all I have to say.
Resources: http://io9.com/interstellar-is-the-best-and-worst-space-opera-youll-ev-1654807305,
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/space_20/2014/11/interstellar_science_review_the_movie_s_black_holes_wormholes_relativity.2.html,
http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/great-movie-2001-a-space-odyssey-1968,
http://blogs.indiewire.com/shadowandact/review-interstellar-is-not-quite-the-2001-a-space-odyssey-youre-looking-for-20141107,
http://www.timeout.com/london/film/the-100-best-sci-fi-movies
(Leading sci-fi experts, filmmakers,
science fiction writers, film critics and scientists pick the best sci-fi
movies ever made), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001:_A_Space_Odyssey_(film), http://io9.com/stop-putting-new-age-pseudoscience-in-our-science-ficti-1656432047?utm_campaign=socialflow_io9_facebook&utm_source=io9_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow
No comments:
Post a Comment