this post was submitted on 23 Sep 2024
114 points (96.7% liked)

Asklemmy

43893 readers
843 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy ๐Ÿ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] stoicmaverick 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

What is your interpretation of the second half?

[โ€“] FooBarrington 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Nothing that happened in the movie could have been successful without love, it allowed humanity to do what shouldn't have been possible.

To start off, I believe there was a very narrow path that led to humanities survival - kinda like that Doctor Strange scene in Infinity War. Had things happened differently (Cooper wasn't the pilot, they didn't go to the ice planet, Cooper didn't sacrifice himself) humanity would have been doomed, and all those things happened due to love.

And only love is what allowed Cooper and his daughter to actually bridge time and space, because if she didn't love him so much, she wouldn't have attempted to decode the gravitational messages - she wouldn't have believed this to be possible. But she did believe in him, and she did believe that he would still be out there and trying to save them.

None of the things they attempted would have worked without love, and none of them would have meant anything without love. In the end, the story is all about human connections driving us to attempt the impossible, and that's a lot more powerful than some scientific MacGuffin could ever be.

[โ€“] stoicmaverick 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Yeah, I guess. I can follow you on that walk, but I feel like that kind of a plot left-turn is better suited, or at least, more expected in the realm of anime or something similar. I think it threw a lot of people off given that it went to the wonderful scientific accuracy of recreating accurate physics of a black hole inside of a supercomputer to generate the CGI, and explains relativistic time dilation to normies, and then just Deus ex machinas the whole problem with the "Power of Love" right at the end without even hinting that it was coming.

[โ€“] FooBarrington 1 points 1 month ago

I see where you're coming from, I used to hold the same perspective. But there were already a couple of "unrealistic" plot elements before that - like the gravitational anomalies in their house, or the conveniently-placed-and-magically-kept-open-and-large-enough wormhole, which doesn't seem much less Deus ex machina than the tesseract at the end.

Maybe the biggest difference in perspective is in the "power of love" - I don't think the plot is using that as a solution, that's just Coopers interpretation. The solution is the tesseract created by the future humans, which isn't that much more unrealistic than the wormhole. It was a unique and visually incredibly interesting interpretation of the supposed singularity at the center of a black hole, and sadly there's probably no way we could ever even form theories on what that might look like.

In the end, I'm not sure there's anything less unrealistic that could finish the plot, and I'm fine with the sci-fi elements. But that doesn't make your view any less valid!