MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Trailer: Interstellar

11 Responses to “Trailer: Interstellar”

  1. leahnz says:

    eeee i’ve learned to never trust trailers so grain of salt and all, but has Nolan recently gone grey by chance? looks like another case of ‘RSS’ – maudlin, heavy-handed, overwrought (perhaps, much like Fincher, Nolan should stick to the dark, unseemly places and give a wide berth to sentimentality, not a strong suit – don’t ‘ben button’ it nolan, good lord don’t ben button).

    and dear beloved (not) new-school trailer-cutters, you little minxes: tears must be EARNED, not forcibly dribbled down the throat, this thing just raises my ‘i wouldn’t cry in your boo-hoo movie if YOU paid ME’ hackles, geeze

    which brings me to something perhaps more genuinely troubling about this: i don’t feel matt mcC in ‘super serious straight-up drama’ mode, there’s something missing, some spark/charm/charisma/wonder that’s lost when he’s not allowed to somehow incorporate and engage his natural impish smarm in a role — not to the degree of his early work obviously – he seems to have evolved and progressed from his early smarm to more well-rounded, complex realms – but rather to use that natural energy inherent to his sensibility to shape a complete character, like he does so effectively and compellingly in ‘mud'; when that part of him is completely supressed, like it appears here, he feels a bit of an empty vessel, i don’t approve. but again, trailers – can’t live with em, can’t shoot em.

  2. Nick Rogers says:

    As you’ve said, I think it’s impossible to intuit from 2 1/2 minutes of footage whether any of these things are a problem. I certainly didn’t think Man of Steel was going to be an interminable slog based on its triumphant trailer.

  3. leahnz says:

    yeah, for sure, kind of a bizarro-world example — but in a way that has me even more taken aback with this rather long slog of an ‘interstellar’ trailer, so dour and bereft of any excitement or energy or suspense, if it’s a case of bait-n-switch for a movie that’s actually not a dirge it’s a strange strategy

  4. movieman says:

    “Signs” + “Close Encounters” + “2001”- “Interstellar”?

  5. Eric says:

    This is strangely… untwisty? There has to be more going on than the trailer lets on, right?

  6. Bodhizefa says:

    It’s a weird trailer in that it’s fairly maudlin but also with hints of Nolan time distortion/panache.

  7. leahnz says:

    ” “Signs” + “Close Encounters” + “2001″- “Interstellar”? ”

    + the AT&T ad from ‘dumb and dumber’

  8. SamLowry says:

    Thanks for posting this here, Dave; I tried to watch this on the official website days ago but even with the “secret” code it still didn’t work.

    So, I’m predicting the sun’s turning into a red giant–a tad prematurely–and if everyone isn’t moved off-world in a few years then they’re all going to fry. It would be much easier to move everyone someplace closer that isn’t habitable now but will be afterward, but since they’re not doing that then maybe something even more dire is happening with the sun.

    Or maybe it’s just a secret remake of FLASH GORDON.

    Anyway, here’s my equation:


  9. Pete B. says:

    Nick, I think you got your movies mixed. Prometheus was an “interminable slog” after a “triumphant” trailer.

  10. Mariamu says:

    I’m excited.

  11. Nick Rogers says:

    Pete: I didn’t get them mixed. “Prometheus” was just the 2012 edition of the same problem.

Leave a Reply

The Hot Blog

Quote Unquotesee all »

“We now have a situation where audiences very often prefer commercial trash to Bergman’s Persona or Bresson’s L’Argent. Professionals find themselves shrugging, and predicting that serious, significant works will have no success with the general public. What is the explanation? Decline of taste or impoverishment of repertoire? Neither and both. It is simply that cinema now exists, and is evolving, under new conditions. That total, enthralling impression which once overwhelmed the audiences of the 1930s was explained by the universal delight of those who were witnessing and rejoicing over the birth of a new art form, which furthermore had recently acquired sound. By the very fact of its existence this new art, which displayed a new kind of wholeness, a new kind of image, and revealed hitherto unexplored areas of reality, could not but astound its audiences and turn them into passionate enthusiasts.

Less than twenty years now separate us from the twenty-first century. In the course of its existence, through its peaks and troughs, cinema has travelled a long and tortuous path. The relationship that has grown up between artistic films and the commercial cinema is not an easy one, and the gulf between the two becomes wider every day. Nonetheless, films are being made all the time that are undoubtedly landmarks in the history of cinema. Audiences have become more discerning in their attitude to films. Cinema as such long ago ceased to amaze them as a new and original phenomenon; and at the same time it is expected to answer a far wider range of individual needs. Audiences have developed their likes and dislikes. That means that the filmmaker in turn has an audience that is constant, his own circle. Divergence of taste on the part of audiences can be extreme, and this is in no way regrettable or alarming; the fact that people have their own aesthetic criteria indicates a growth of self-awareness.

Directors are going deeper into the areas which concern them. There are faithful audiences and favorite directors, so that there is no question of thinking in terms of unqualified success with the public—that is, if one is talking about cinema not as commercial entertainment but as art. Indeed, mass popularity suggests what is known as mass culture, and not art.”
~ Andrei Tarkovsky, “Sculpting In Time”

“People seem to be watching [fewer] movies, which I think is a mistake on people’s parts, and they seem to be making more of them, which I think is okay. Some of these movies are very good. When you look at the quality of Sundance movies right now, they are a lot better than they were when I was a kid. I do think that there have been improvements artistically, but it’s tough. We’ve got a system that’s built for less movies in terms of how many curatorial standard-bearers we have in the states. It’s time for us to expand our ideas of where we find our great films in America, but that said, it’s a real hustle. I’m so happy that Factory 25 exists. If it didn’t exist, there would be so many movies that wouldn’t ever get distributed because Matt Grady is the only person who has seen the commercial potential in them. He’s preserving a very special moment in independent film history that the commercial system is not going to be preserving. He’s figuring out how to make enough money on it to save these films and get them onto people’s shelves.”
~ Homemakers‘ Colin Healey On Indie Distribution