/script>
only 71%? what the actual fuck
This movie is complete garbage.
It's objectively true.
Interstellar is a 7/10 movie so 71% is actually correct.
This cancerous site usually gives excessively high scores to big budget flicks, but in the did right.
>>81042038
then what is not garbage for you?
>>81042029
>Awful dialogue
>Cringe worthy attempt at trying to incorporate actual science in to the story
>Absolutely terrible ending
7/10 seems generous
>>81042132
>Certified 92%
It deserves less than 7/10 imo. The film is overlong and the last third is terrible.
If they cut out the last third, that's 2 of the biggest problems sorted out.
>>81042228
This movie was keeno though. Not sure what your point is.
>>81042029
Its because the third act is retarded. "Dude, love transcends space and time!".
The explanation for love = time bullshit is shit and the bit where he's in the inter dimension, if they changed the end it'd be 10/10, also mcconaughey is 10/10 in it
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3IC5mG_h1oI GOT KIDS
>>81042029
Just watched this last night. I honestly really enjoyed it, especially with the stuff about the effects of time dilation and the slow death of the Earth, and the attempt to escape it.
Too bad they hamfisted the message about how love transcends time and space and all the stupid bollocks about the black hole. It ruined the ending.
>>81042108
Any film where "love" isn't the deus ex machina.
>>81044228
>tfw smart enough to be capable of perceiving more things than love that transcends dimensions of time and space
>>81042029
Agreed. It should be lower. WTF
Watched this for the first time a few weeks ago. It peaked around when they went to the giant wave planet then returned to see how much time passed. Afterward it got terrible when they tried to insert the feels that transcend our four dimensions or something.