Articles

INTERSTELLAR
By Jonathan Nolan and Christopher Nolan

Do not go gentle into that good night,

Old age should burn and rave at close of day;

Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

It is just not about the science. It is just not about the effects. It is just not about the effort undertaken to write and direct, to ensure factual accuracy. It is just not about the acting. It is just not about the background score. It is about everything put well in place together, making a masterpiece. The idea was to show the series of events which may unfold if the most exotic events in the universe suddenly become accessible to humans. And in the effort and journey undertaken to do that, the writers and directors ended up creating a masterpiece and an epitome of what I call the ‘Art of Filmmaking’ (I will come to this later).

Enough of the generic praise. Below, I will give you four/five pointed answers to the question - "is Interstellar, in my opinion, one of the greatest movies of the decade?"

Themes and Writing

Depiction of Human Behavior 

Humans think and react to different situations differently. The film explores human behaviour and links it to age and time quite well. When you see Tom's monologues, you see how, with time, his belief that Cooper will return changes. Murph's acceptance of Cooper's absence from her life increases with her age and, in fact, you see in the end that she asks him to get back out into space, to look for Brand. Most importantly, you see Dr. Mann, a man, who had set out on the self-less goal of saving the planet, becoming extremely self-centered with time and loneliness.

Another significant feature of the film is the depiction of human relationships. I will only discuss one here, that of Cooper and Murph. Most of the film shows Murph being angry at Cooper for leaving. However, when she gets to know about the lie from Dr. Brand, the nature and extent of her love for her father, which got buried deep inside from a young age, comes out. She couldn't believe that her father would have intentionally abandoned her and that disbelief or belief, as I may call it, makes all the difference in the end.

The Science

The writers and directors of the film undertook a lot of effort to ensure factual accuracy. I would rather refer to it as conceptual accuracy, since a lot of it has not really been experienced by anyone before.

Kip Thorne, a gravitational physicist and Nobel Laureate, was one of the executive producers and, in fact, was the one who floated the idea of doing this kind of a film. The film was praised for its science. But, for me, more than the science, it was the link that was drawn between the science, the imagination of the writers and the plot. The magnificent weave of the concept of a ‘ghost’ with the concepts of gravity, future and a supposed fifth dimension is an example of stellar imagination and implementation of that imagination on paper (in the script) and on screen.

And, of course, gravitational time dilation. So, I did not see the movie in the theatre in the first week, even though it was Nolan. You know why? I asked a friend of mine (who went on the first day) how it was. He said, and I will re-iterate, “If you really want to appreciate it, then you need to read the science behind it first.” And that is why I saw this movie in the second week. Prepared. The concept of gravitational time dilation and how it would be in practice, was so well explained that it made us all think and ponder about our existence and our place in the universe.

Filmmaking Style

We all know Nolan and his team are perfectionists. You would not know whether to appreciate the script and the story more or the way it is showcased. Interstellar is the perfect example of what I call the ‘Art of Filmmaking’. In short, what I mean by the ‘Art of Filmmaking’ is the artist’s perception of a particular event, his own version of how a particular event should be portrayed and showcased to make it look better, more aesthetic, appealing and artsy. This sense of art varies from artist to artist.

I would like to digress a bit to explain this by way of an example. A cyclist stops his cycle on the side of a lane, with an old and artsy looking red (brick) building in the background. While one artist may spin the wheel and take a closeup shot of the spinning wheel with the building and the lane in the background (bokeh), the other might just capture a portrait of the cyclist with the cycle and building in the background. But each will use their own sense and art and shoot accordingly. Both shots will be exemplary in their own way.

That is the Sense and Art of Filmmaking. You apply yourself and add your own aesthetic sense to a particular event while showcasing it (I will discuss this concept again when I will talk about Sacred Games, in the near future). That is why we call it filmmaking and not event-capturing. And this is what Interstellar does best. Each and every scene, every single plot point and every single sequence is so well showcased, that you couldn't think of a better way of showcasing it. You couldn't. And I really have a habit of looking at scenes and thinking that this scene could have been shot in 'this way' or ' that way'. But, with Interstellar, I just couldn't come up with a better shot or portrayal of any scene. I was really surprised. Pleasantly though.

Coming to specifics. I would praise three things - the cinematography, the background score and the 'Wrap'.

By the ' Wrap' I mean the whole way the film and the scenes were connected. Everything just fell into place. Examples - Cooper is falling through the black hole and holds Brand's hand, the coordinates to the NASA facility being fed into the dust by Cooper himself and his realization that he brought himself here, the last scene in the re-created house with Murph's interview playing on the screen, and many more. It was like once the principal filming and development was done, the filmmakers sat together, and made a whole flow diagram to see if everything was falling into place and made sure it did.

From an aspiring filmmaker’s perspective. If there's any film an aspiring filmmaker should watch to see every aspect of filmmaking done right in a single project, this is the one. And it's a masterpiece.

When the movie came, some people immediately drew comparisons with 2001: A Space Odessey. Some said it may not be the best space film. Well, for a film, in its very first week of release, to be compared to an all-time classic and a pioneer of its time, is a feat in itself.

The Fountainhead 

by Ayn Rand

The Fountainhead is the story of an architect Howard Roark, a perfectionist and modernist, who struggles in a difficult work environment and a conservative society which constantly challenges unconventional thinking and modernistic thought. The story deals with his life of struggle as he manages to survive amidst architectural firms which discourage innovation, critics which thrive on the criticism of the Davids of the world, a strong negative public opinion and, most importantly, a girlfriend who is conflicted about whether to support him or not. The story ends with Roark finally fulfilling his vision of designing an unconventional building, a design which is eventually accepted and, in fact, praised by the society.

At the outset, I would like to praise the way the story is written. Every character is so well developed and the story arch is so well woven and binding, that, by the time you reach half-way reading it, you start visualizing and understanding each situation, each character and each element of the story arch. If you really agree with the theme, you start putting yourself in Roark’s shoes and start feeling the pain and the struggle. Though I have read a couple of books on struggle, but, the portrayal of struggle in this book is the most realistic I have found so far.

Coming to the theme, or themes I might say. Due to the way the story is written, it is true that every person reading it will have different interpretations. I will share my bit.

The struggle to gather support

I learnt that the most difficult thing for an artist is to think out of the box, break the convention and to have mass support. The society, at any point of time in history, is used to the conventional form of art and thinking. This mainly emanates from the fact that human beings, by nature, are sheep-like. This is further worsened by the lack of courage and motivation among artists, at large, to undertake the painful struggle in making people see things in a new light.

If one person agrees with an idea and appreciates it, and if that person is a person of some standing (let’s call him the Head), the others just end up following the Head without applying their own sense of appreciation. Now, if another person (let’s call him the Thinker) challenges that conventional way of thinking, the Head will do everything in his wits to undermine the Thinker. This is because of two reasons – one, out of jealousy and second, if the Thinker actually gathers mass support, the Head will go out of business (in most cases, quite literally so).

And that, is the true struggle that the Thinker has to undertake. It may happen while the Thinker is still alive or it may happen after his time. Lastly, and this is my personal belief, even though an artist may not have set out to seek approval or gather mass support, but, unless the society (preferably at large) sees his work, either while he is alive or afterwards, there is no point of creating art.

There are numerous real-life examples of this struggle and the Fountainhead portrays this struggle well and in a realistic manner.

Internal conflict and faith

I learnt that when an artist sets out in this world, he has his own way of thinking and his own ideas and expressions. He may or may not follow them to the core throughout the course of his struggle. People do adjust, and the extent of such adjustment depends on a number of factors. Perfect rigidity may not be the best approach, especially if you are preaching something unconventional. The conflict becomes internal to every artist and in those times, all he should do, is keep faith. The Fountainhead is truly inspiring in this sense. People find the individualistic portrayal of Roark to be a bit extreme. But without depicting this extremity, I think Rand would not have been able to show a man who had nothing else but faith in himself and his art, at a time when the society out rightly rejected his art. He kept his faith, against all difficulties he faced from people at large, the Head and even his own girlfriend. I find this extreme portrayal of individualism quite alluring and inspiring.

All in all, the Fountainhead is a must read for anyone who has unconventional ideas and who has or plans to set out to portray his ideas in this world. And the lessons of this book will always remain relevant, true and realistic, in every age and era.