If we ever had drive-in movies in the UK, they kept it pretty quiet. The whole concept of taking your car into a cinema is very much an American one, and even here it’s dying. In fact, there are only 340 such theatres left in the whole of the USA, and this week I visited one.
Despite being rather run down and sparsely attended (the latter presumably responsible for the former) it’s still a remarkably evocative experience. With a speaker clamped to the passenger window and a hot-dog oozing with mustard and onions, it’s easy to believe you’re in a Cadillac and it’s 1955. Of course, if that was the case, you’d probably be watching ‘Rebel Without A Cause’ and not ‘Interstellar’ – the movie I’ve come to see. After all, what better film could there be to fill a giant screen in a misty field in Florida, the land of the space shuttle and Cape Canaveral? In truth, ‘Rebel Without A Cause’ would be one.
"This is a key release; but creatively it’s problematic."
‘Interstellar’ is certainly an important picture. It’s the work of Christopher Nolan, the director of the best-regarded Batman iterations, the Oscar-winning ‘Inception’, and the guy on which Hollywood has pinned its hopes for a 2014 box-office boom. Commercially and strategically, this is a key release; but creatively it’s more problematic.
One has to admire a film which embraces technology, time, climate change, space travel, parenthood and quantum physics. But it’s difficult to ignore its pitfalls. There’s so much for cast and director to wrestle with, just to keep a reasonable narrative on the screen, there are casualties all over the place; credibility, plotting and depth of character being three of the more obvious victims. Interestingly, given the budget, the visual effects are somewhat patchy too. Of course, all this could be forgiven if there was a compelling emotional intensity to draw us in, something about which to care, but there’s a disappointing coldness to ‘Interstellar’, and that may be its biggest flaw. Somehow, a classy cast including Michael Caine, Anne Hathaway, Matthew Mcconaughey and Matt Damon, fail to engage us in any meaningful way. Astonishing things happen to these people, and yet our interest in their lives is fleeting at best.
Beyond all this, there is an enormous cosmic elephant in the room. Intentionally or otherwise, throughout his picture, Nolan constantly references Stanley Kubrick’s 1969 work, ‘2001: A Space Odyssey’. Indeed, at times, the similarities bypass tribute and homage, and flirt dangerously with liberal and lazy copying. For fans of that earlier (and much warmer) film, it’s an issue that requires a supreme effort to overcome.
This is a long watch too. If you’re going to see this at a drive-in, you’re going to need a very comfy car, and a parking space near the lavatories. I suppose it’s two hour, forty nine minute running time is designed to indicate its profundity and saga-like qualities, but it simply goes on too long, with too little to say.
If all we were asking of Nolan and his team was ambition, ‘Interstellar’ would be a triumph. The sheer scope of the screenplay and the scale of its themes, are gargantuan. Set on several planets and in interweaving time zones, ultimately one has to respect Nolan’s reach, while regretting his failure to convince. In drive-in terms, I’m afraid Interstellar is little more than a very long journey to nowhere in particular.
Magnus Shaw is a copywriter, blogger and consultant
