Unreality Companion: Interstellar

In which I expand on the content from my weekly Unrealitymag.com article.

As I mentioned in this week's Unreality article, viewing Interstellar caused me to retrospect on the state of its type of film.  What better way is there to expand upon that retrospection than to turn that critical observation onto the film that caused it in the first place?

Humanity is on the brink of extinction.  Generations of waste have transformed the Earth into a  global dust bowl, while a mysterious blight gradually lays waste to the world's crops.  Only corn remains, and even that is starting to succumb to the disease.  Humanity's only hope is a last ditch exploratory mission into a wormhole at the edge of our solar system: leading a scientific crew to a new galaxy with three potentially habitable worlds to lead a planetary exodus to.

It is safe to say that Interstellar is the science fiction film of the Twenty-First Century - a century, mind you, that includes Gravity, Inception, Children of Men, Looper, District 9, Avatar and Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind.  Now,  don't get me wrong, I loved Gravity.  It's exceptional direction, phenominal lead performance, adherence to scientific realism and scene-stealing special effects easily make it a high point of its genre.  Interstellar, however, makes Gravity look like its retarded little brother drawing stick figures in the dirt.  It is hands down the better written, better directed, better acted and better visualized film by impossibly wide margins.

Interstellar is perplexingly both Nolan's most ambitious and most restrained film to date - striking a delicate balance between the obvious showmanship of Incepion and the subtle mastery of 2001: A Space Odyssey.  Its surprisingly straight-forward narrative is neither prone to expansive, scientific exposition nor blunt spectacle, preferring to sit back and let the strength of its stunning cosmic visuals, uncharacteristically subdued Hans Zimmer score and profoundly talented cast each take over the stewardship of the film in turn.

Just as the film is scientific without devolving into a dramatized science lecture, it is humane without lapsing into sap or schmaltz.  It presents a man who is forced between potentially saving all mankind and definitely raising his family to die on Earth.  He is forced to confront the heartbreaking reality of those he hurt despite his best attempts to save them, as well as the cloying possibility that his motivations were more selfish than he could ever admit to himself.

What is honestly most compelling for me is that the film has the courage to settle into its own narrative - taking its time to show the realities of its near-future Earth so as to illustrate the completeness of its plight.  We understand Murph's resentment of her father not because the film tells us, but because it shows us: shows how close they were on Earth and how desperately alone they are when seperated from one another.

In any less of a year, Interstellar would have proudly and immediately claimed the title of my favorite film of the year.  In 2014, however, is has to settle for third place (behind Captain America: The Winter Soldier and X-Men: Days of Future Past).  It is a triumph of Twenty-First Century filmmaking and a testament to the power of humanity's ambitions beyond our terrestrial home.  Even though I still prefer The Dark Knight, Interstellar is easily Nolan's most maturely and evenly helmed film to date, not to mention the one that benefits most from his unique vision.  I give the film an easy 9.5 out of 10.

If you liked what you read, please share this post on social media and subscribe to this blog in order to keep up with the latest posts.  Ask questions or share your thoughts in the comments section below.