As far as the hardness of science fiction is concerned, the place where "Interstellar" can pick is to bow down. As long as you don't want to use it to learn astrophysics, it doesn't make much sense to get entangled in these trivialities. But there is one thing Interstellar struggles to tell the difference, and that is the fundamental difference between Plan A's gravity-controlled colonization and Plan B's interstellar colonization, but unfortunately, it doesn't make it too clear in the end.
From the perspective of implementation alone, the only difference between the two plans is the feasibility. Plan A cannot be done because of the absolute horizon of the black hole. Plan B, although the probability is very small, always has a chance, so it becomes an infinitesimal inequality that is greater than zero in short. This The choice does not require much of a person's mathematical ability. But the reason these two plans must exist at the same time is precisely because man is not a mathematical animal after all. The core of Plan B is actually to require all individuals (except for the astronauts who went to sow seeds) to sacrifice voluntarily and work together for the continued existence of mankind as a species, but if there is no illusory saving of all mankind The plan A is there as a decoration, and this plan is bound to fail. After all, few people will rush to "Rage, rage against the dying of the light" in the face of death like Dr. Brand. So this involves another seemingly bizarre but in fact very correct inequality: Humans are individual animals, not a population with spiritual connections-the sum of individual people does not equal all human beings. Therefore, for the individual man, "even if the flood is terrifying after I die" is a very rational choice, although this would lead him to choose the zero of his own absolute death mathematically instead of the infinitesimal chance of being a population - because the subject does not Again, the two numbers are actually incomparable. Dr. Mann's response is the logical practice of this logic as an individual person. Although he seems extremely cowardly, sending out false signals of success for people to save lives first, he first protects his own individual safety, and then finds a way to save his own species.
However, the relationship between individuals and populations is not the only one involved in these two choices. Although Plan A recreates the earth in form, its essence is still "left behind", and the "home" where people live has been maintained. On the surface, Plan B is just moving a little farther, colonizing a little harder, and eventually settling down in a suitable place. But the point of the problem is that there is nothing incomprehensible about the two independently, but there is an insurmountable gap between the two - the dislocation of time and space.
The fundamental of the theory of relativity is that quantitative change leads to qualitative change. Due to the huge gap between distance and gravity, the observation and the observed will no longer operate in the same time dimension. To put it simply, it is "one day in the sky, ten years on the ground". The reason why people can form a link is a common world sharing is an indelible premise. This common world can be language, ethnicity, blood, religion, history, culture, location, political faction... But it is It cannot be "none". Conversely, when the basic space-time relationship that constitutes all the world is dislocated, the relationship between people will of course face an unprecedented major crisis. Returning home from a business trip for a month, it’s hard to say that it’s “a little better than a new marriage”, maybe it’s sweeter; when you return home after 40 years away from home, you may only have “the youngest leave home and the boss returns”, and there is only infinite melancholy left; If you are chatting with someone, and when you are tired and smoke a cigarette, you can only go to the historical archives to study the date of death of this person, then the establishment of any relationship is impossible. Of course, it is impossible for the film to be so extreme. Otherwise, after the dislocation reaches a certain level, sadness will give way to absurdity, which will not only fail to move the audience, but may also make the audience riot. But logically this is not impossible, and the core of the problem left to the film has not changed: when time and space can be dislocated, how to grasp the survival pulse of the people at both ends, and how to bridge the cracks in their lives.
The answer Nolan gave was "love". This answer looks quite cliché at first glance, but it is a good choice to filter it out by means of exclusion; after all, the "reasons" that most people can understand cannot transcend the time and space of this world, so once the time and space are dislocated, it will collapse directly. Only "love" exists in the present, and because of its romantic nature, it can transcend time and go to eternity. It is neither related to the location nor because of changes in the state of motion. It can be seen in the objective world as an objective fact. It has been widely recognized, and it is essentially personal and cannot be shared. It can be said that it is tailor-made for linking time and space.
Further, the film fixed the object of love as the affection between father and daughter. There is a tricky factor in this choice, because love without object and indiscriminate, or the love of the universe itself, is difficult to convey through movies. Terrence Malick may be more interested, and Nolan wants to make money after all. Of course, ability is also a problem. Nolan's narrative skills are first-rate, but he is simply not good at this. The most important thing is of course the audience's acceptance. Most audiences have limited appetite after all, and they always like movies that can give them "some" inspiration. If there is too much inspiration, they can't fit in and digest it, and riots will be the only one. choose.
Of course, after choosing family love to save the world, all the stories will of course be arranged around this. Of course, in this arrangement, due to the huge size of the giant system, there will be some problems. For example, Cooper's urgency in the singularity is completely meaningless. Hurry or not will be the same strange. But these can be ignored, just follow the director's arrangement to feel it together. In the end, the ending was good, let Cooper go to the little girl Brand: People who leave the earth home, even if they come back, can no longer find the corresponding position, and can only embark on the cosmic journey again. The step of flying to the sea of stars is never the point of return. The dislocation of time and space is absolute, the past cannot be recovered, and history cannot be rewritten. Love can save mankind and let father and daughter see each other for the last time. The super level has been played, and people still have to come back to face the fact that all mortals are mortal and the sadness of the father sending his daughter. Cooper is still young, his journey has only just begun, and it is natural to leave. After all, his love for his daughter can only be so much.
View more about Interstellar reviews
