![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I watched Interstellar yesterday. My conclusion is watch it if you want a fun movie to discuss, but don't expect a) proper sci fi, and b) respect for female characters.
The good thing about Interstellar is that it provides a lot of topics to discuss. It's set in a world where we've messed ourselves up by exceeding the Earth's resources when it comes to supporting food. The world has frequent sandstorms and crops keep failing. You could argue that the Earth is stating we've outstayed our welcome.
This is the impetus for humans to go into space. The movie then segues into prolonged space scenes including leaving Earth, swinging through the solar system and visiting new planets. It gives us new takes on space shuttles, robots, cryo-freezing and interpreting things in five dimensions. Nolan is not shy about giving us new takes on these things. Which is awesome, because having new takes is what prompts discussions.
The trouble is Nolan gives a new take on the above by having some very questionable logic, when logic is the backbone for having good sci fi. One of the "dilemmas" in the movie is to make transferring all humans to a space station a viable alternative. But the only reason why the space station is considered non-viable is because there are "gravity" problems in getting a huge space station off the surface of the Earth. Why Mr Nolan, if you had just read about the very real International Space Station you would realise that space stations are mostly built in space where they should be? Even on Earth, it would be akin to building a New York skyscraper in New Mexico and then transporting it across the US. You build what you need where it should be. And in space, gravity is a non-issue. (Now if it had been the issue of getting all the materials and all the humans up, ah, that's another matter.)
The same kind of issue occurs across most of the rest of the movie, and it doesn't help that science is supposed to prop a lot of the story up. In the end, you get "fantasy league" sci fi, the way fantasy league football resembles real football.
The next problem is with the women. We get two women scientists who do amazing things, which sounds awesome on paper. That is, until they get to act in story.
One is the main character's daughter, Murphy, who goes from a girl standing up for the truth of science to a physicist. Unfortunately, she is entirely defined by her relationship to her father, the main character. Murphy guesses correctly the means by which some signals are being sent, but it's her father who decodes it. When she does interpret another message on her own, she sits on it and only throws it out as a last ditch method of getting her father to not leave her. Finally, when she solves the problem-which-is-not-a-problem of bending the rules of gravity to get a huge ass space station off the Earth, she claims it was all her father's work since he messaged her the solution to the problem when on his mythical journey through a black hole. (Sssh it's fantasy league sci fic, sssh.)
I mean, come on. Yes, black holes might have ~secrets~ that could answer some questions we have about gravity, but recording the information that answers these questions and coming up with the solution are two different things. The narrative wouldn't have been hurt if the daughter had said, "I couldn't have done it without my dad because he sent me the data that I needed to find the solution." Just jumping to "I couldn't have done it without my dad's solution" is lazy both scientifically and narratively.
The same happens to the other lady scientist, Amelia, the "female lead" who is the same age as the main character. Her father's a physicist but Amelia went into the more "feminine" biology, which is a bit frowny but allows her to be important since biologists are kind of key in deciding whether new planets can sustain human life. But one of the key moments is when they only have the resources to check only one planet out of the three they'd planned. The main character makes it clear that they are in this dilemma because he needs enough fuel to go back to the family who loves him. Amelia makes a clear and sensible case for one of the planets based on data sent by an astronaut currently on the planet.
And then the main character declared that she only wanted to go to that planet because the astronaut sending the data is her boyfriend.
Please note that up to this point her dating status has not really come up. Also please note how incredibly hypocritical of the main character to say this when he wants to go back to Earth due to his love for his family (read: daughter). Yet all Amelia has to say in reply is a speech about how love transcends space and time.
Even Amelia being proved right in her choice of planets and that love is the solution (what it's a Hollywood movie) later doesn't wash this awful taste from my mouth. Why is love the right thing only when a man feels it?
So watch Interstellar if you want to have something with enough meat to discuss with your friends. But Interstellar is no better than most other movies when it comes to portraying women, and a lot worse than other movies when it comes to sci-fi.
In conclusion: If you can, spend your time watching Gravity instead.
The good thing about Interstellar is that it provides a lot of topics to discuss. It's set in a world where we've messed ourselves up by exceeding the Earth's resources when it comes to supporting food. The world has frequent sandstorms and crops keep failing. You could argue that the Earth is stating we've outstayed our welcome.
This is the impetus for humans to go into space. The movie then segues into prolonged space scenes including leaving Earth, swinging through the solar system and visiting new planets. It gives us new takes on space shuttles, robots, cryo-freezing and interpreting things in five dimensions. Nolan is not shy about giving us new takes on these things. Which is awesome, because having new takes is what prompts discussions.
The trouble is Nolan gives a new take on the above by having some very questionable logic, when logic is the backbone for having good sci fi. One of the "dilemmas" in the movie is to make transferring all humans to a space station a viable alternative. But the only reason why the space station is considered non-viable is because there are "gravity" problems in getting a huge space station off the surface of the Earth. Why Mr Nolan, if you had just read about the very real International Space Station you would realise that space stations are mostly built in space where they should be? Even on Earth, it would be akin to building a New York skyscraper in New Mexico and then transporting it across the US. You build what you need where it should be. And in space, gravity is a non-issue. (Now if it had been the issue of getting all the materials and all the humans up, ah, that's another matter.)
The same kind of issue occurs across most of the rest of the movie, and it doesn't help that science is supposed to prop a lot of the story up. In the end, you get "fantasy league" sci fi, the way fantasy league football resembles real football.
The next problem is with the women. We get two women scientists who do amazing things, which sounds awesome on paper. That is, until they get to act in story.
One is the main character's daughter, Murphy, who goes from a girl standing up for the truth of science to a physicist. Unfortunately, she is entirely defined by her relationship to her father, the main character. Murphy guesses correctly the means by which some signals are being sent, but it's her father who decodes it. When she does interpret another message on her own, she sits on it and only throws it out as a last ditch method of getting her father to not leave her. Finally, when she solves the problem-which-is-not-a-problem of bending the rules of gravity to get a huge ass space station off the Earth, she claims it was all her father's work since he messaged her the solution to the problem when on his mythical journey through a black hole. (Sssh it's fantasy league sci fic, sssh.)
I mean, come on. Yes, black holes might have ~secrets~ that could answer some questions we have about gravity, but recording the information that answers these questions and coming up with the solution are two different things. The narrative wouldn't have been hurt if the daughter had said, "I couldn't have done it without my dad because he sent me the data that I needed to find the solution." Just jumping to "I couldn't have done it without my dad's solution" is lazy both scientifically and narratively.
The same happens to the other lady scientist, Amelia, the "female lead" who is the same age as the main character. Her father's a physicist but Amelia went into the more "feminine" biology, which is a bit frowny but allows her to be important since biologists are kind of key in deciding whether new planets can sustain human life. But one of the key moments is when they only have the resources to check only one planet out of the three they'd planned. The main character makes it clear that they are in this dilemma because he needs enough fuel to go back to the family who loves him. Amelia makes a clear and sensible case for one of the planets based on data sent by an astronaut currently on the planet.
And then the main character declared that she only wanted to go to that planet because the astronaut sending the data is her boyfriend.
Please note that up to this point her dating status has not really come up. Also please note how incredibly hypocritical of the main character to say this when he wants to go back to Earth due to his love for his family (read: daughter). Yet all Amelia has to say in reply is a speech about how love transcends space and time.
Even Amelia being proved right in her choice of planets and that love is the solution (what it's a Hollywood movie) later doesn't wash this awful taste from my mouth. Why is love the right thing only when a man feels it?
So watch Interstellar if you want to have something with enough meat to discuss with your friends. But Interstellar is no better than most other movies when it comes to portraying women, and a lot worse than other movies when it comes to sci-fi.
In conclusion: If you can, spend your time watching Gravity instead.
Tags: