Reviewers have differing takes over the merits of a film, and the New York Times is ON IT. However the “sharp disagreement” over Christopher Nolan’s Interstellar is less about the quality of the movie, or even the movie itself, than about the refraction of the film through its award buzz, itself a compendium of marketing and star power and such that more surrounds a movie than comprises it. This leads to ridiculous passages like the following:
Mr. Poland, a Nolan fan, called the film’s first act “insufferable” …And Mr. Poland’s Gurus O’ Gold survey had only shortly before ranked “Interstellar,” sight unseen, as No. 5 in the best picture race.
In other words “the movie was good until I watched it.” Would anybody care to judge the film rather than the dream of one?
“I think we still need to wait,” added Mr. Tapley, an editor at large, who has watched the film twice and has yet to decide whether it is a miss or a masterpiece. “Remember, the major critics still need to review it.”
Do they? We seem to be getting along just fine without seeing the movie at all.