Christopher Nolan: ‘Interstellar’ More Akin to ‘2001: A Space Odyssey’ Than Batman Movies


The enigma that is the space odyssey “Interstellar” will get solved when the film hits theaters in November, but until then, Christopher Nolan has revealed a few clues.

The director divulged in a cover story for Entertainment Weekly that the movie is more comparable to the Stanley Kubrick classic “2001: A Space Odyssey” than his own Batman films. Unlike his “Dark Knight” trilogy, Nolan insists that “Interstellar” can be experienced on its own, independently of the characters. Matthew McConaughey, Anne Hathaway, Jessica Chastain, Michael Caine and Casey Affleck are among the actors who bring the characters to life.

“This is the first film I have made where the actual experience of the film is paramount to the audience,” Nolan told EW. “You would think that’s the case with Batman movies, but it’s not. They’re more dependent on the reaction of characters on screen. ‘Interstellar’ is different. It harkens back to the direct experience films of ‘2001,’ where you’re not just experiencing it through the characters, you are lost in it.”

Nolan also told the mag the the film is akin to “Treasure of the Sierra Madre” in the sense that it focuses on human nature.

“The film is about human nature, what it means to be human,” he said. “It sounds like a very grand statement, but I don’t intend it to be. I mean it in the way, say, ‘Treasure of the Sierra Madre’ is about dramatizing ideas of human nature. When you take an audience far away from human experience as possible, you wind up focusing very tightly on human nature and how we are connected to each other. What the film tries to do is to be very honest in that appraisal.”

“Interstellar” hits theaters on Nov. 5.

Filed Under:

Want to read more articles like this one? SUBSCRIBE TO VARIETY TODAY.
Post A Comment 14

Leave a Reply


Comments are moderated. They may be edited for clarity and reprinting in whole or in part in Variety publications.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

  1. John Gilbert says:

    Just screened the 70 mm print. The photography is breathtaking! The picture is so sharp and clear that you can count the whiskers on a man’s face! Match that digital! It was a complete privilege to see such a beautiful picture. After watching this, if you can still say digital looks good, the only taste you have is in your mouth! Long live film!

  2. Joe says:

    Chris Nolan should make Star Wars Episode 8.

    • Just Sayin' says:

      STAR WARS is the LAST thing Nolan should be allowed to touch. The world doesn’t need a darker, revisionist spin on this particular franchise.

  3. Giampaolo says:

    2001 Is a movie about the poetry translated in images. Poetry doesn’t want to be explicated, it works on a deeper level in the conscience. Interstellar, I wonder, is more akin to Solaris, or Stalker , or Tree of Life, than 2001 Odissey in the Space.

  4. PETER JAY says:

    I think 2001 is way overrated and sucks. Boring. Torturous. I saw in the theater when it first came out, and everybody was stoned in the audience. I’m not a big Kubrick fan but appreciated the beauty of BARRY LYNDON in the theater when it first came out. And PATHS OF GLORY and SPARTACUS in the theater. But don’t call Chris Nolan a pretentious hack. He’s one of the best out there, and INCEPTION was wonderful except for the James Bond bullshit in the snow at the end. And I’ve been going to the movies a lot longer than you guys, so I know more!

  5. That’s quite a bold statement. I haven’t seen Interstellar yet, but to compare it to a masterpiece like “2001” is very risky. Having seen some movies by Nolan, I think his greatest achivement so far is “Memento”, which is not even close to Kubrick’s lesser films. Overconfidence may backfire many times.

    • says:

      Nolan’s best film may not be as good as Kubrick’s best, but Kubrick’s worst films are far worse than Nolan’s worst films.

  6. Steve says:

    What a pretentious hack.

  7. Ken says:

    I think it is always dangerous to compare one’s own work with long-acknowledged masterpieces. 2001 imo is the greatest film ever made; the most influential theatrical movie-watching experience of my long movie-loving life. It should be left up to audiences, critics and historians to decide if Mr. Nolan has entered the realm of 2001-type smarts and awesomeness. I am interested in seeing INTERSTELLAR in 70 mm., as are many others I am sure. Only then will we know if Mr. Nolan’s lofty aspirations are successful.

  8. fairportfan says:

    “The film is about human nature, what it means to be human,”

    Based on his “Batman” trilogy (of which the only good part was Gary Oldman – i never would have believed that anyone could make Bane an even stupider character than he was in the comics), i have to ask: What would he know about that?

  9. John Shea says:

    An interesting and long-noted distinction. Screen experience and character are interlinked. Even if nobody appears on the screen a vital character is always present. The viewer. Stanley Kubrick deliberately made the few characters in ‘2001’ as stereotypical and low-key as possible, thereby paradoxically inviting the audience deeper into the experience, almost like an immersive game.

  10. harry georgatos says:

    This is how demanding and ambitious Brian De Palma’s disappointing Mission To Mars should have,been!

  11. John T. says:

    Interstellar for Best Pic and Best Director!

More Film News from Variety