Films/DVD Asylum

Movies from comedy to drama to your favorite Hollyweird Star.

Use this form to submit comments directly to the Asylum moderators for this forum. We're particularly interested in truly outstanding posts that might be added to our FAQs.
You may also use this form to provide feedback or to call attention to messages that may be in violation of our content rules.

You must login to use this feature.

Inmate Login

By default, logging in will set a session cookie that disappears when you close your browser. Clicking on the 'Remember my Moniker & Password' below will cause a permanent 'Login Cookie' to be set.

Moniker/Username: The Name that you picked or by default, your email. Forgot Moniker?	Examples "Rapper", "Bob W", "joe@aol.com".
Password:	Forgot Password?
	Remember my Moniker & Password ( What's this?)

If you don't have an Asylum Account, you can create one by clicking Here.

Our privacy policy can be reviewed by clicking Here.

Inmate Comments

From:
Your Email:
Subject:

Message Comments

Original Message

SPOILERS: "Interstellar." Films should be about a lot of showing and a little telling. At least,

Posted by tinear on November 10, 2014 at 10:46:39:
Hollywood spectaculars should be.
This one has the usual convoluted plot that is meant to convey gravitas: this IS NOT a delivery vehicle for "wow!" FX!
But it is, isn't it? They're wonderful, perhaps worth the money (though perhaps not the 3 hours….).
I won't bother to get into all the plot inconsistencies, though there are plenty. Or the slightly ridiculous coincidences, i.e. a brilliant scientist (he alone gets to do all that--- there are no others to curb his secrets?) has a brilliant helper that happens to be the daughter of earth's greatest pilot? And on and on…
Matt Damon is the worst casting mistake. He doesn't convey malice very well and, unfortunately, the first thing that springs to mind is, "Bourne!"
Anyhow, no matter the 130-decibel soundtrack, the well-spaced FX fireworks, the "what the hell does that mean?" plot convolutions--- I eventually became bored.
Ghosts in the bookcase. Watches that were so prominently featured in the earlier part that a 7-year old knew would become a key.
Complexity doesn't equal depth.
Is it a good popcorn film?
I'd say so-so. It's length and over-the-top FX repetitions eventually exhaust. There was little suspense, no true villain, nothing really to take away.
Some here and elsewhere are comparing this to "2001."
Please.
I won't dishonor the memory of Kubrick by taking the time to discuss that silliness.
This doesn't bear comparison to "Prometheus," either.
One image that reoccurs does have meaning: this film is corny.