This film is not recommended.

Interstellar must be renamed to 2015: A Space Oddity. Once there is lift-off, there is much gravitas and solemn beauty in its weightless universe, even if the film bogs down whenever it tethers itself to Earth, its inhabitants, and their on-going battle with global change. (Yes, you naysayers, it was real!) ￼ The film owes its whole existence to the granddaddy of all space exploration films, 2001: A Space Odyssey. Interstellar is similar in its alignment to scientific probabilities, quantum physics, and algorithms with much talk about wormholes, black holes, time travel, and anomalies. The further connection to Kubrick's masterpiece is even more evident with the episodic nature in Interstellar's plot structure, its minimal in character development (except for its lead character), and its overtly pretentious and sanctimonious tone.

More odd in its dramatic flourishes than needed, Nolan's film reaches for the heavens but never soars to any level of greatness. The film is earnest, well-crafted, and stylishly directed, but hardly emotionally involving. Blame the overstuffed script (by Nolan and his brother, Jonathan) for the lack of any real tension or satisfaction. Sections of the film just never gel, leading to an ending that is visually stunning and total nonsense. ￼ The film also owes some of its technical prowess to last year's Gravity in its overall visual look. (That film did it all so much better.) Still the visuals are Interstellar's chief asset (with a dazzling set piece set in the fourth dimension that is especially dazzling in the IMAX format). This film is a long-drawn-out sci-fi fantasy, a seriously-minded adventure film that is takes itself too seriously with scientific exposition and high-brow poetic pause that make the film too solemn and corny to truly enjoy. ￼ Now, let's discuss the story and characters a bit. It is the future and Earth is a dustbin with its population dwindling. Our only hope is what lies above. A team of astronauts is assembled to find another world from three other planets in another galaxy on which we can co-habitat. Leading this crew is a man who must have the right stuff, aptly named Cooper played by Matthew McConaughey. Coop is a widow raising two small children and obsessing with enough pangs of patriarchal guilt and crying jags to possibly earn another Oscar. Sent by old school scientist Dr. Brand (Michael Caine), who is receiving a weak signal from outer space, he bids adieu to his young wards to go space-ward, leaving the coop and his smart daughter Murph (MacKenzie Foy) and older son Tom (Timothée Chalamet) behind in order to help mankind and save his family from an ultimate death. Time passes quickly for these earthlings (and all too slowly for the audience) as 23 years pass and Murph and Tom have grown up, becoming Jessica Chastain and Casey Affleck while Coop stays forever young.

￼Of course, there will be snags in this mission. Pardon the pun: it's Murphy's Law. Also on board are other space travelers: Dr. Brand's daughter, Amelia (Anne Hathaway) who acts more Bedelia than Earhart, a nondescript Doyle (Wes Bentley), and Romilly (David Gyasi) as the token African-American astronaut and one of the few minorities on screen. Off they go on their spacecraft named Endurance, an apt title indeed! ￼ The acting is barely adequate and well, under stellar. The characters barely register as real people as they continually wax philosophically about life, physics, love, mathematics, and the pursuit of happiness. Their dialogues never resemble anything remotely convincing. Again, the screenplay's poor plotting and weak characterizations aborts their mission. With Interstellar, the sum of its parts are greater than the whole (or hole). In fact, there seem to be an overabundance of holes in Interstellar: black holes, wormholes, and plot holes, the latter being the most dangerous and unavoidable one due to the Brothers Nolans' sappy screenplay. The episodic structure of the film is unable to connect its story lines to make any logical sense.

Nolan's film is a major disappointment. In retrospect, perhaps an even better name for Interstellar might be Close Encounters of the Third Rate Kind. At times, the film is a visual pleasure, fitfully entertaining and thought-provoking in its overall production design. But more often, Interstellar is just dull, uninspiring, and a long, long journey into that good night. GRADE: C

Visit my blog at: www.dearmoviegoer.com

ANY COMMENTS: Please contact me at: jadepietro@rcn.com