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:

    UNTAMED + WHEN WORLDS COLLIDE – MELANCHOLIA

  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 »

“Yes, good movies sprout up, inevitably, in the cracks and seams between the tectonic plates on which all of these franchises stay balanced, and we are reassured of their hardiness. But we don’t see what we don’t see; we don’t see the effort, or the cost of the effort, or the movies of which we’re deprived because of the cost of the effort. Paul Thomas Anderson’s Inherent Vice may have come from a studio, but it still required a substantial chunk of outside financing, and at $35 million, it’s not even that expensive. No studio could find the $8.5 million it cost Dan Gilroy to make Nightcrawler. Birdman cost a mere $18 million and still had to scrape that together at the last minute. Imagine American movie culture for the last few years without Her or Foxcatcher or American Hustle or The Master or Zero Dark Thirty and it suddenly looks markedly more frail—and those movies exist only because of the fairy godmothership of independent producer Megan Ellison. The grace of billionaires is not a great business model on which to hang the hopes of an art form.”
~ Mark Harris On The State Of The Movies

How do you make a Top Ten list? For tax and organizational purposes, I keep a log of every movie I see (Title, year, director, exhibition format, and location the film was viewed in). Anything with an asterisk to the left of its title means it’s a 2014 release (or something I saw at a festival which is somehow in play for the year). If there’s a performance, or sequence, or line of dialogue, even, that strikes me in a certain way, I’ll make a note of it. So when year end consideration time (that is, the month and change out of the year where I feel valued) rolls around, it’s a little easier to go through and pull some contenders for categories. For 2014, I’m voting in three polls: Indiewire, SEFCA (my critics’ guild), and the Muriels. Since Indiewire was first, it required the most consternation. There were lots of films that I simply never had a chance to see, so I just went with my gut. SEFCA requires a lot of hemming and hawing and trying to be strategic, even though there’s none of the in-person skullduggery that I hear of from folk whose critics’ guild is all in the same city. The Muriels is the most fun to contribute to because it’s after the meat market phase of awards season. Also, because it’s at the beginning of next year, I’ll generally have been able to see everything I wanted to by then. I love making hierarchical lists, partially because they are so subjective and mercurial. Every critical proclamation is based on who you are at that moment and what experiences you’ve had up until that point. So they change, and that’s okay. It’s all a weird game of timing and emotional waveforms, and I’m sure a scientist could do an in-depth dissection of the process that leads to the discovery of shocking trends in collective evaluation. But I love the year end awards crush, because I feel somewhat respected and because I have a wild-and-wooly work schedule that has me bouncing around the city to screenings, or power viewing the screeners I get sent.
Jason Shawhan of Nashville Scene Answers CriticWire