MovieChat Forums > Interstellar (2014) Discussion > Was this movie really better than Kubric...

Was this movie really better than Kubrick's?

posted 7 years ago by deanswift67
4 replies | jump to latest

I don't think so (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0062622/?ref_=nv_sr_1), but according to user ratings, yes.

I can't see this movie enduring 49 years (as of 2017).

Too sentimental also.

[–] Metatron_Fallen 7 years ago

Kubrick's version of Interstellar was a lot different than this remake. It's hard to compare.

[–] barodabulldog 7 years ago

Nope. 2001 I liked. This movie, sucked.

[–] tastytomatoes 7 years ago

Too sentimental also

After reading the negative comments on the imdb message board I came to two major reasons why some don't like Interstellar, which to me was more than a film but an immersive experience.

1) Too emotionally evoking
2) The science depicted is challenging their current understanding

Hopefully when you revisit this film some years later you may fall in love with it :)
_______________________________________
RIP my signature -February 20, 2017-

[–] Urogy (176) 7 years ago

It could have been but for 2 reasons! #1~ there is NO COMPARISON to Lord Stanley Kubrick
#2~ Anne Hathaway...... she ANNOYS ME! That short haircut "butch" look only made it worse! At least keep her long black hair long w/bright red lipstick! See Linda Harrison in planet of the apes...... and she was only a cave girl!