It's taken me a few days since seeing "Interstellar" in the theater to be able to digest it enough to sit down and write out this review. It's a long movie with a lot going on, and it leaves the viewer with a lot to think about. This is good inasmuch as the plot is intriguing and engaging. However, while the plot of the film was engaging, the big question that I left the theater with was "Did I like this movie?" And that's a question that I've not yet really been able to answer affirmatively.

Without writing a spoiler review, let me say that I had read several Facebook and Twitter comments which compared the film to "2001: A Space Odyssey". I tried to ignore those comments and not let them color my take on the film, but the simple truth is that "Interstellar" does borrow somewhat heavily from "2001"--albeit subtly. "Interstellar" is stylistically a very different film from Kubrick's masterpiece. Whereas "2001" is an abstract and mind numbing sci-fi film that blends cinema and the visual arts , "Interstellar" is much more of a drama film that happens to be set in space.

That said, though, anyone who has ever seen "2001" will quickly note the similarity in its basic aspects and the journey that Matthew McConaughey undergoes. At times, it's hard to know whether "Interstellar" is attempting to not-so-subtly nod to "2001" (such as the use of cryogenic hibernation, a trip to an anomaly near a planet in our solar system, a trip beyond the anomaly that ultimately leads to a strange and fascinating place, etc.), or if the film is simply plagiarizing Kubrick. At other times it's impossible not to compare the film to that other Matthew McConaughey movie with space-time travel, "Contact". One might even say that "Interstellar" is a stylistic amalgamation of those two films.

What this amounts to is an extraordinary tale of a space mission replete with both action, suspense, and a dramatic back story. What is less sure, however, is how well all of these elements come together into an enjoyable movie going experience. As noted, there's not a lot of new material here. Even if the back story is somewhat unique in its own right, it's nevertheless a dystopian tale of an alternate future that leads to a dramatic journey that has been done in other films. On top of that, the film is a bit exhausting--it clocks in at 2 hours and 49 minutes, and while that time is well used, it's also a very overwhelming film that drags one's attention in all sorts of emotional directions, all while engaging complex topics such as climate change, apocalypticism and relativity.

Taking all of that into account, I've decided that I'm less enthused with "Interstellar" than I hoped I might be. The film stands on its own two feet as a good film overall. It's well made, and it has an all star cast with good acting throughout. And yet it fails on the likability factor and borrows heavily from films that came before it.

Thus my 6/10 stars.