Interstellar is both loved and hated among audiences. It interests me. How can the same film be both praised and derided so intensely? Is it a masterpiece with some obvious flaws, or is it a mediocre film that is propped up by fanboy-ism and bandwagon-ing? For starters, I would just like to say my opinion. I think the movie is fine. It's a little too drawn-out and has bizarre elements, and I think that the message of love is way out of place in such a film.

Some people have pointed out glaring flaws in the story and characters, and for them, they are confused and angry that such a film could be considered one of the greatest of all time.

So, how did Nolan do it? Well, I believe he tapped into Zeitgeist, or the 'spirit of the times.' He made a perfect storm of a movie, using elements that, on their own are not very special, but combined, they reflect the values of this age.

Let's break it down. First off: space. The works of Neil deGrasse Tyson and Bill Nye have fired up new interest in space, and people loved the realistic take on the genre. Second: the message of love. Western Culture almost pivots now around the fulcrum of love, and hate crimes are now considered the most abominable atrocity one could commit.

Layer on top of this the cinematography, direction, and style of Nolan, which fanboys have been eating up since Memento. And while I like almost all Nolan films, I think Interstellar is his worst, featuring Nolan-isms dialed up to 11, with philosophical stances on love, life, time, destiny, and humanity's position in the universe.

Everyone has a right to like this film if they so choose, and there are reasons to like it. Just please, don't deny the fact that it's pretentious, overly long, and contrived. Recognize that but say that that didn't stop you from enjoying it.