I have had a hard time even beginning to consider writing this one, because I think I'm addicted to the film. After seeing it for the first time, I spent about seventeen hours in a daze that can only be classified as a high. Also the more times I watch it, the more I crave another viewing. So I'm not sure whether I need to write a review or have an intervention staged. I couldn't say what exactly about Interstellar caused this reaction: the sweeping space vistas, the sometimes discreet and other times dizzying pendulation between grand-scale and excruciatingly intimate scenes, the Mirror-like filming of the elements that bleeds into a Tarkovksy and Malick like editing in addition to the parallel one typical of Lee Smith and Christopher Nolan.
There is a hypnotic quality to Interstellar, one that is not readily apparent amid the dense plot, the occasional scientific jargon and some of the continuous exposition type of dialogue Christopher Nolan introduced with Inception. Part of it comes from the thick emotional texture of the film revolving around a corner of familial relationships to which Hollywood rarely looks: the father-daughter one. There is a continuum of father-daughter relationships in the film, one that merits a closer and a more in-depth reflection than the scope of this review. Around said continuum gravitates a myriad of other kind of relations that are blessedly devoid of any bullet points on the blockbuster checklist, not even a mandatory love interest. The connection that would in more standardized Hollywood fare fit this template is deliberately ambiguous, leaving it to the viewer to decide whether it's a friendship, a romantic one or just two people relying on each other under the most extreme circumstances a human being can face.
Beyond the characters, Interstellar exists in a world that is wholly tangible, whether it travels to outer space or drives a car through a corn field. Famously filmed without a green screen, the movie looks astonishingly real and palpable, the effect amplified by the best use of alternating formats and aspect ratios that I have seen all year. It's shot with a seamless blend of 35mm and 70mm with as much IMAX thrown in the mix as possible, given its limitations. The 35mm conveys the claustrophobia of cockpit scenes and graininess of recorded video, while the 70mm allows for outer space in all its wonder to encompass the screen fully. In fact, the first behind the scenes imagines astounded, as they showed DP Hoyte van Hoytema's employing an IMAX camera as a hand-held one. Speaking of which, this choice not only heightens the intimate feel of the picture and its documentary characteristic, but it is also an impressively steady use of such a device.
The technical merits of the film are equally commendable in camera, as the extensive use of practical effects allows only for a limited amount of takes and tries. That is not present in the film, however, where the generous camera pans testify to a firm-handed direction with no room for uncertainty and creative choices that go well with the overall realistic approach. To illustrate my point: there is no Star Trek or Star Wars style panning shot of the ship taking off Earth, but a more life-like approach of seemingly mounting a camera on the rocket.
I could go on for hours about Interstellar's beautiful cinematography. The movie is simply sublime on celluloid. The colors are rich, fully saturated on the textured canvas of film. The black is a real one: inky and murky. Some shots respectfully pay homage to 2001: A Space Odyssey with Kubrick's love of red replaced with warm shades of orange. (Christopher Nolan is red-green color-blind.)
Interstellar is an entirely cinematic experience with an operatic feel suitably amplified by what it is my favorite Hans Zimmer score to date. Taking cues from J. S. Bach, Richard Strauss, Eduard Artemyev or Philip Glass, Zimmer has apparently never been more himself, as his composition here is unique even within his own body of work. His use of organ packs a near physical punch. The incorporation of elemental and breath sounds is ever so delicate. There are carefully calculated parts, almost mathematical, countered by achingly emotional ones and tender ambient melodies. Shameful as it is for a long-time fan like me to admit this, it's a Zimmer I never even thought possible, which makes the score of Interstellar all the more impactful for me.
Interstellar is well-acted in way which is again atypical for mainstream Hollywood, as the performances do not feel like performances at all, rather flow naturally without any bleed-through or signs of hesitation. Not for a second have I seen the international movie stars, to whom I wasn't looking forward to, anyway, but their characters reflected with raw honesty. An unexpected surprise was the very young Mackenzie Foy showing great promise and expressiveness. One notable performance was off camera and belongs to Bill Irwin, who skillfully puppeteered and voiced the entirely non-CGI robot TARS.
Interstellar has moments of sheer lyricism: the neo-Tarkovsky-ian dust scene from the beginning, the rotating Endurance floating through the immensity of space with only the sounds of home to guide it, the tessaract. Then there is one so visceral that it is a whole different kind of poem: an epic one.
The boldest part about Interstellar is external, however: the attempt of a big-budget would-be blockbuster film without a franchise, straying far off the proscribed formula and into high-concept science fiction territory so packed with ideas, psychological and metaphysical issues, speculative science and possibilities thereof, in addition to the reliance on classic film-making techniques, use of actual locations and previously unheard of in an American mainstream film sound mixing. In fact, it has one of most unorthodox and bold sounds of the year. The film paid for all this with an extremely negative media reaction, and I'm talking in general, not reviews per se, which are a different topic, upon which I already touched. Shockingly enough, though, it managed to do strong business globally, grossing next to 550 million $ against a reasonable 165 million $ production budget in under a month of being in theaters and despite much more commercial competition. It even became something of a phenomenon in some non-Western countries. (There is an anthropology essay to be written here.) This makes it either the most commercial art film ever made or the most art film like blockbuster since Apocalypse Now, with which it shares an oddly similar reception. I believe both labels are valid.
Now if you'll excuse, I have to go book another screening. (Before you ask, it's not the local popcorn, I don't eat in the movie theater!)
My assessment: I definitely need an intervention! Er, I mean, excellent... I think. Touching on masterpiece... I think. Okay, let's try this again: I love it with a fierce yet gentle love that transcends space, time and repeated viewings. I've seen more clear-cut masterpieces this year, but I might just love Interstellar most of all.
Film details according to imdb.com:
Directed by: Christopher Nolan
Written by: Christopher Nolan, Johnathan Nolan
Cinematography by: Hoyte van Hoytema
Camera: Beaumont VistaVision Camera, Panavision Primo Lenses
IMAX MSM 9802, Hasselblad and Mamiya Lenses
Panavision Panaflex Millennium XL2, Panavision C-, D-, E-Series and Ultra Speed Golden Lenses