With his filmography, and especially the Batman trilogy and the film "Inception", Nolan earned the reputation of one of the greatest directors of today, as well as complete freedom in shooting his next projects. I fully understand the trust placed in him by the studio, but, unlike most, I don't think he really justified it.

"Interstellar" is considered one of the best SF films of all time, and many perceive it as one of the best movies overall. From my perspective, it's not even Nolan's best. "Dunkirk", "Inception", all three Batmans, "The Prestige", ... all of his movies I've seen so far are at least a class better than this.

Its aesthetics and atmosphere reminded me a lot of Kubrick's "Odyssey", but even with half a century more modern technology, it is not nearly as fascinating and impressive. While "Odyssey" is mostly breathtaking, even regardless of the time of its creation, "Interstellar" is visually beautiful, at times even fascinating to the eye, but it did not touch me emotionally, nor did I have that gooseflesh feel along the spine that does not let you sit still while watching Kubrick's masterpiece.

Speaking of the comparison with "Odyssey", I noticed that many complain about the excessive duration of Nolan's film. No, the problem doesn't lie in the three hours duration, or even in the pace at which the story unfolds. "Odyssey" is also a long film and at a much slower pace than "Interstellar", but it has a mesmerizing atmosphere that nails you to the screen, which "Interstellar" unfortunately does not have.

While I'm still at the visual aspect of the film, I must also mention the great opportunity that this film missed. Visits to the planets in another galaxy were the perfect moment to let your imagination run wild and to engrave this movie in the memory of viewers with striking scenes of distant worlds. Instead, we've got two completely uninspiring and unoriginal scenes of the spacecraft's immediate surroundings, so there's no exploration of the new worlds and enjoying never-before-seen scenery. I don't even know why they used CGI, they could easily shot those scenes somewhere in the Arctic and get the same effect.

As for the scientific aspect of the story, I understand physics and astronomy so poorly that I am not in the least competent to judge how much the film respects known physical laws, let alone those that go into theoretical assumptions. Still, as the film progressed, this aspect too seemed more and more unconvincing, until the very end and the scene in the multiverse of the daughter's room, which, at least for me, drove the last nail into the coffin of the scientific foundation of this film.

The very end of the film is the biggest minus to me, because I think that the "happy" end (if it can be called happy at all ...) is inappropriate and breaks the atmosphere that the film had built until then. In addition, it remained unexplained how such an end came about and how it is possible at all, which is also the biggest hole in this story.

The dramatic aspect is something I can discuss and it is one of the strengths of this film, although the characters were not particularly convincing to me, and many of their actions seemed unnatural. As if they are not in line with the characters, but there only to push the story in the desired direction.

The only truly convincing character, perfectly written and acted, a character who shows the true human nature of an individual faced with the dilemma between self-preservation and the well-being of humanity, is a character masterfully played by Matt Damon. Some of us will find ourselves in his fear and submission to completely natural human instincts, others will strongly condemn him (many of them very hypocritically), but it is indisputable that he stands out among the other characters in this film as Jordan in "Space Jam".

If you want an atmosphere of space that freezes the blood in your veins or unsurpassed metaphysical depth, you can always go back to "Odyssey", for space action there is "Star Wars", and there are plenty of post-apocalyptic dramas with a stronger emotion. To be clear, "Interstellar" is far from being a bad film, it's an above-average pastime to watch, but I think its reputation and cult status are more a consequence of the name Christopher Nolan than the quality of the film itself.

7/10.