Christopher Nolans "Interstellar" movie shines new light on black holes.

[SpaceXray]

That doesn't stop it from premiering in hollywood tomorrow, and an early release on Thursday at 8pm or at midnight. I'm going to the 8pm Thursday showing

Either way, I'll check here first to see what you have to say. If you're going to the midnight premiere then you will still beat me..

My girlfriend wanted to go to the premiere but we're both too busy with classes It would have been very cool..

haha yeah I was planning on going on Thursday evening, but I need to pay extra and the screening hall is too small to enjoy a movie like Interstellar.

[How2FoldSoup]

Agreed, I can't wait to see it in IMAX. I'll see you there(figuratively speaking)!

[Aningaaq]

That doesn't stop it from premiering in hollywood tomorrow, and an early release on Thursday at 8pm or at midnight. I'm going to the 8pm Thursday showing

Either way, I'll check here first to see what you have to say. If you're going to the midnight premiere then you will still beat me..

My girlfriend wanted to go to the premiere but we're both too busy with classes It would have been very cool..

Same here. I'm in LA but can't make the premiere. Thursday at 8 for me...or maybe the midnight showing in Southbay.

[Mr Shifty]

I've got tickets for a screening tonight on a non-IMAX screen. (All the IMAX screens in San Diego apparently use digital projectors.) I'll post a spoiler-free capsule review afterward with special attention to the science and how appealing the film might be to a KSP fan.

[How2FoldSoup]

I've got tickets for a screening tonight on a non-IMAX screen. (All the IMAX screens in San Diego apparently use digital projectors.) I'll post a spoiler-free capsule review afterward with special attention to the science and how appealing the film might be to a KSP fan.

Great! Thanks!

I'll be doing the same mentally when I see it. I'm not only a Kerbal Junkie but a phyics student as well /o\

[Mr Shifty]

Just returned from a showing:

I guess I'd give the movie an overall B. Definitely worth seeing for a sci-fi or space fan, but not as good as Gravity was. The physics seems pretty good, particularly with regard to relativistic effects in a strong gravity field. The remote solar system is potentially fascinating (at one point a character mentioned a neutron star) but the explanations of the system are a bit perfunctory; I suspect some exposition got edited out. In fact, it's a bit of a shame that the interesting science in this science fiction movie doesn't get more screen time. Some of the spaceflight is well done: there are a couple of docking maneuvers that should get any KSP fan's heart pumping. Unfortunately, as with Gravity, the orbital mechanics are a bit s**t. Surface to space transitions play out pretty much like your average space combat flight simulator: there's no sense of achieving orbit. It's much more a traditional movie sci-fi with lots of futuretech and an emphasis on accurate astrophysics; spaceflight is not the focus of the film. The acting is generally pretty strong, particularly McConaughey, Chastain, Caine and Lithgow. Oh, and I should mention that the robots are very cool.

And there are a bunch more things I'd like to discuss about the plot once the movie's been more widely seen and spoilers aren't as big an issue.

EDIT: After thinking about it, there are large problems with the astrophysics as well, particularly that there doesn't seem to be any Doppler effect due to gravitation.

I'm not sure that getting to see the O'Neil habitat at the end of the film was worth the ludicrous woo that preceded it. My most hated movie on the planet is Signs, and this movie seemed to be trying to mimic that one to a certain degree, but without the religious theme.

Edited November 5, 2014 by Mr Shifty

[zekes]

oh yeah, I NEED To see this movie.

[Halban]

Add this to the OP? Can't wait for this movie by the way. It's going to have so much stuff I can copy for my own films xD

[John FX]

If you could see a black hole close enough to make out the accretion disk the radiation would just kill you dead.

Not the nice kind you get from things on earth, nuclear bombs for example, the really really dangerous stuff made by galactic phenomena...

EDIT : I couldn`t watch Gravity it was so bad. So if this movie is `not as good as Gravity was` then it must be really really bad.

The twist must obviously be that, as he talks to his daughter as a young girl, he must return when she is older than him.

Also if the planet is short of phosphorous, why not get all the phosphorous that is at the bottom of the ocean?

Much shorter trip and you could send a robot...

Edited November 5, 2014 by John FX

[Mr Shifty]

If you could see a black hole close enough to make out the accretion disk the radiation would just kill you dead.

Not the nice kind you get from things on earth, nuclear bombs for example, the really really dangerous stuff made by galactic phenomena...

I don't know. Black holes themselves emit Hawking radiation, which is miniscule (many orders of magnitude less than micro-Watts.) The accretion disk does emit radiation which can be X-ray energies. I can't find any sources I can understand that detail the radiation they emit, but it does seem like larger black holes have less energetic accretion discs than smaller ones. The black hole in Interstellar must be much larger than stellar mass, since it is bigger, at least, than the planet shown orbiting it in production stills. (A stellar mass black hole would have an event horizon at a radius of about 3km from the center.)

The real issues are at least twofold: 1) if you are close enough to a black hole to notice significant relativistic effects, you're very very unlikely ever to escape, since your escape velocity is quite close to the speed of light. 2) There is a radiation problem, but it's not from the black hole or its accretion disk. Radiation coming to you from outside the gravitational field will be blue-shifted. Since in Interstellar, there is some sort of star near the black hole, the light from that star could become deadly.

[SpaceXray]

Join the live hangout of the cast!http://t.space.com/home/17933-nasa-television-webcasts-live-space-tv#1/media/1

[KSK]

Just returned from a showing:

I guess I'd give the movie an overall B. Definitely worth seeing for a sci-fi or space fan, but not as good as Gravity was. The physics seems pretty good, particularly with regard to relativistic effects in a strong gravity field. The remote solar system is potentially fascinating (at one point a character mentioned a neutron star) but the explanations of the system are a bit perfunctory; I suspect some exposition got edited out. In fact, it's a bit of a shame that the interesting science in this science fiction movie doesn't get more screen time. Some of the spaceflight is well done: there are a couple of docking maneuvers that should get any KSP fan's heart pumping. Unfortunately, as with Gravity, the orbital mechanics are a bit s**t. Surface to space transitions play out pretty much like your average space combat flight simulator: there's no sense of achieving orbit. It's much more a traditional movie sci-fi with lots of futuretech and an emphasis on accurate astrophysics; spaceflight is not the focus of the film. The acting is generally pretty strong, particularly McConaughey, Chastain, Caine and Lithgow. Oh, and I should mention that the robots are very cool.

And there are a bunch more things I'd like to discuss about the plot once the movie's been more widely seen and spoilers aren't as big an issue.

EDIT: After thinking about it, there are large problems with the astrophysics as well, particularly that there doesn't seem to be any Doppler effect due to gravitation.

That sounds OK to me. Gravity (for me) fell into the uncanny valley of 'almost but not quite right'. I understand the reasons for doing that, but it did make the wrong bits stand out all the more. Whereas I can enjoy "traditional movie sci-fi with lots of futuretech" for what it is, any nods to realism just being a nice bonus. A bit like the end of Iron Man 2 where Stark makes himself a brand new element for his chest reactor. I liked the way it was done 'feasibly' with a particle accelerator, to the extent that I could overlook the fact that the accelerator was put together in a few hours and managed to make sufficient new element in a matter of minutes.

[KerikBalm]

So can anyone post a full plot summary, of course, using spoiler tags?

[Mr Shifty]

So can anyone post a full plot summary, of course, using spoiler tags?

It's here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstellar_(film)

[Mr Shifty]

Phil Plait on the science. Spoilers abound:

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/space_20/2014/11/interstellar_science_review_the_movie_s_black_holes_wormholes_relativity.html

[PakledHostage]

Phil Plait on the science.

Sorry guys. Phil's review pushed me over the edge. I'm just gonna wait for it to show up on Netflix... Which is sad because it had so much potential to be a great movie. I was looking forward to it when I saw the first trailer.

[DunaRocketeer]

I'm out too. I'm a little more forgiving when it comes to the science (only a little, though), but the dialogue Phil Plait quoted.. that's just bad. Actually it sounds awful, I can't stand films that try to be 'deep' but in the end are just a load of bull.

Edited November 7, 2014 by DunaRocketeer

[Sky_walker]

Interstellar is the most realistic space movie you will ever get, so stop with your nonsense predictions and appreciate that a great director like Nolan created this masterpiece

And a few days forward we got this:

Phil Plait on the science. Spoilers abound:

http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/space_20/2014/11/interstellar_science_review_the_movie_s_black_holes_wormholes_relativity.html

Which pretty much is the last confirmation we'll ever need to cross it from the list of candidates for "the most realistic space movie".

[SpaceXray]

Actually the movie was much better on science than Gravity. Also, WHY DON;T YOU JUST SHUt UP AND GO SEE IT?

Forget about Phil Splat for a minute and just go and see it. You will be blown away, "I'm asking you to trust me".

Also, my little spoiler-free review after seeing it tonight:

I just returned from the cinema and all I can say is......wow.

No, that is not enough to express in how much awe I am. Chris has just proved to us that he is still one of the most talented directors alive.

Honestly, even though I sorta knew the plot from the trailers, I was surprised by how much I wasn't spoiled.

What Chris did was show us that space movies don't need constant booming soundtracks or fancy CGI, OR 180 explosions in 169 minutes(Michael Bay I am looking at you). We don't need Star Wars-like physics to make the movie the least bit entertaining. All we need is a moving plot which will spin your brain on the turntable, great acting and creative ways to place the camera. Everything that could've been done proper was done. The fact is: Chris is a genius. The movie is incredibly fresh and original and I haven't spotted a single cliche. Go see this movie on the biggest screen you can and with the biggest speakers you can to enjoy the fantastic visuals and Hans Zimmer's great soundtrack.

Edited November 7, 2014 by SpaceXray

[SpaceXray]

Just read Phil's sh**ty review. Apparently he wasn't even paying any attention to the movie at all. Everything was logical in the movie. His review is just a Mish mash of brings you most likely forgot in the movie but were explained well.Ignore his terrible review which was made just to direct you away from the movie. Go watch it-thank me later.BTW, the planets do get heat and light, they mention a neutron star in the system, duh. Phil decided to completely ignore that.

[How2FoldSoup]

Haven't read any reviews on it yet but I saw it last night. I absolutely loved it! Don't listen to the reviews..go see it for yourself and judge it then! I thought it was absolutely fantastic. The plot was great, the acting was great, the shots were great. Imo it was all great. I'm a stickler for science and there were only a few times where I really felt that it was wrong. The explained the rest of the concepts that might be needed to know.

All in all, it was GREAT. It immediately become one of my favorite movies and I feel as though it will be the 2001: ASpace Odyssey for this generation.

10/10

[vger]

Just go see Interstellar. And tell everyone you know to go see it too. This film is probably doomed to wind up under-rated by critics, but it's marvelous.

IMDB is giving it 9.2/10 right now though.

[Discovery173]

I just saw the movie and still am awestruck. Despite some errors in the physics and the orbital mechanics, I loved the story, the characters, the acting, the visuals, the music, everything. Whether you like science fiction or cinematography in general, Interstellar is really recommendable. A must see.

[Sky_walker]

Actually the movie was much better on science than Gravity.

I disagree.

Also, WHY DON;T YOU JUST SHUt UP AND GO SEE IT?

I have seen it.

You will be blown away, "I'm asking you to trust me".

Hardly. It's a flawed movie in many ways (especially ... ending nonsense) but it was a good movie regardless. It's worth watching if someone is into sci-fi movies, but I wouldn't recommend it for a plot alone.

Just read Phil's sh**ty review. Apparently he wasn't even paying any attention to the movie at all.

I very much disagree. His review is very good - he pretty much nailed vast majority of problems in a movie. Pretty much the only big problem I find with his review is that bit where he talks about a black hole in solar system - they call it wormhole in a movie, not a black hole.

Everything was logical in the movie.

Buahahaha, ok, here I'll end this discussion here, cause we have obvious pathological case of a blind fanboism here.

BTW, the planets do get heat and light, they mention a neutron star in the system, duh. Phil decided to completely ignore that.

BTW: [spoiler warning] This star isn't visible anywhere in the movie outside of a mention in one scene. And it apparently doesn't produce any light - everywhere they show system illuminated by the matter spinning around a black hole (which creates it's own set of problems considering how close that matter would be to the event horizon - by far closer than the first planet - which has it's own set of BS if you try to calculate how far away it is from the horizon and what effects it'll have - but Phil's review already covers that) - the same matter that later shows up as an ice-alike dust - dust that miraculously avoids windows and humans o_O

[Kryten]

BTW, the planets do get heat and light, they mention a neutron star in the system, duh.

Heat and light? From a neutron star?