Chapter 1929

San Francisco Chronicle, 50.

Los Angeles Times, 40.

"Voice of the village", 60 points.

Guardian, 50.

When I saw the failure grade, I couldn't believe that it was the cooperation project of "Nolan garhall", which was beyond my eyes.

In addition, there is "variety" magazine, they also gave 60 points of evaluation.

"The film can be unfolded in many ways, but it's a pity that Nolan chose the most boring and stingy way to present this ambitious theme project, completely lost in the vastness and insignificance of space, and even Hall's advanced performance failed to save the mediocrity and vulgarity of the core theme.

Is Nolan's understanding of kinship just like this? Or is Nolan's film language not enough to show the complexity and depth of human nature? Is the director who shot the Dark Knight still there? The only thing to be thankful for is that those who talk to themselves in space can't be heard on earth. "

From the beginning of the serious bad comments on the "play list", Star Trek has been besieged by film critics, and there are endless severe criticisms. You can clearly feel the hatred of the people in the industry, and you can't agree with the core of Nolan's story and the main direction.

If you look at the film reviews carefully, you can see that the criticism mainly comes from disappointment and gap.

"2001 Space Odyssey", "blade killer" and other sci-fi films can withstand the test of time, and eventually become classics in film history. The main reason lies in the discussion of human nature. Under the background of sci-fi, the exploration of human nature between human and clone, human and machine, undoubtedly promotes the ideological core of the film to a new height.

However, "interstellar crossing" focuses on "generating electricity with love". From the perspective of depth and breadth of thinking, this is definitely a serious failure. Although at the end of the film, Langley once again uses the performance to pull back a city, giving the theme more extension possibilities; However, from the reunion of Cooper and Murphy, the whole story has lost the possibility of deep thinking, let alone withstanding the test of time, and now we can see the essence of its "soap opera".

This is definitely not the space epic that people expect.

It seems that this is the most severe critical attack on lanli's works since "detached". To be exact, even "detached" has not faced such a fierce attack - at least, "detached" is a film by the author, and critics know that the director is not trying to please the audience whether they like it or not; But "Star Trek" is a commercial film, the communication with the audience is undoubtedly the most important, which also makes the film critics fire.

So, does this mean that the "Waterloo" of Langley appears like this?

Unfortunately, the haters need to wait.

The ferocity of the poor reviews, the stranglehold and disappointment of the middle reviews were all drowned in the cheers and applause of the good reviews. Thirty eight good reviews sounded the clarion call of the "star crossing" media comprehensive review!

The New York Times, 100 percent, "is it another '2001 Space Odyssey'? Obviously not! " Star Trek just tells a very light and personal story, focusing on the theme of love and sacrifice, which brings the heaviest and deepest emotional collision in 2014! Nolan brings a more sincere emotional experience than inception. "

"Hollywood Reporter", 100 points, "I can predict that many people will put this film next to '2001 Space Odyssey' for comparison. In fact, this is a kind of praise; Unfortunately, this is not another Odyssey, and Nolan is not another Kubrick. Nolan tells a story of returning to his homeland in his own way. He goes through the obstacles of time and space, abandons the discussion of human nature and divinity, and sincerely tells the truest and closest fetters of human beings. "

The original English name of "2001 Space Odyssey" is "2001: Space Odyssey"; Now, "Star Trek" also tells an odyssey like story of going home, so "Hollywood Reporter" has such a view.

"Chicago Sun", 100 points, "undoubtedly, this is the most outstanding science fiction film in the new century. It uses a soul stirring space adventure to think about the meaning of life and the meaning of family, and even further explores the relationship between human beings and society, giving space science fiction film new vitality from another perspective! The actors, led by hall, Hathaway and chastan, gave wonderful performances, which made the story full of countless charms and worthy of careful study. There's no doubt that it's a masterpiece

"Empire", one hundred percent, "one of the most wonderful movies in the new century! Full of wisdom! Full of special effects! Also full of reflection and precipitation! Almost equivalent to Stephen Hawking's "Star Trek": a space opera that takes place in the brain, and then deduces the changes of the soul in the shuttle of time and space, perfectly combines science and human nature! The most surprising part is still Langley hall. His unique touch gives the characters and movies amazing charm. Who else can say "no" to him

"Daily Telegraph", 100 points, "this is Nolan's most ambitious and outstanding work so far! The combination of technology and thought! Really all the scientific theory and shooting skills all serve the emotion, role! Character! Character! This is the core of the whole film, and then gives full play to the unique charm of the powerful cast CASS, which is absolutely enough to rank among the best in the new century and a masterpiece that can't be missed! "

One hundred.

One hundred.

It's still a hundred.

As many as ten media have given full marks, including the "New York Times" and "Hollywood Reporter", which are absolutely authoritative media in the industry. With an unswerving attitude, they have laid the foundation for the comprehensive evaluation of "Star Trek" media. The full marks of ten professional media are just the same as the number of media giving medium reviews, in other words, How many dissatisfied media are there? How many media give perfect praise without reservation.

It can be clearly seen that the most dissatisfied part of the media is the "emotion". The continuous rendering of too much soap operas and too much sensationalism completely destroys the profundity and massiveness of science fiction films. In fact, this can also be seen as the difference between "hard science fiction" and "soft science fiction". Hard science fiction always has more possibilities to explore in the technical level, so in the field of artificial intelligence Human nature and divinity have the possibility of extension.

"Gravity" can be regarded as half an example. This work can not be regarded as hard science fiction, but the discussion of the origin of life in the core has the possibility of sublimation and deduction, so it has been unanimously praised by film critics“ "Interstellar crossing" is just the opposite, it can be said that the gods have returned to the world.

The full score media just recognized the part of "soft science fiction". They thought that this was Nolan's exploration of human nature. Although it was a bit conventional and simple, it also completed the transition from science fiction to emotion. This is not a sublimation, but a return, so that the audience can find resonance.

Is "2001 Space Odyssey" a classic? Yes! But it doesn't mean that all science fiction films need to move in the direction of "2001 space odyssey.".

The same factors, in the eyes of some people, are disadvantages, while in the eyes of some people, they are advantages. This is the difference.

In addition to 10 media with full marks, 28 other media gave good comments, and the rating range continued from 70 points to 95 points. You can still feel the fierce debate caused by "Star Trek" from the big span. The ambiguous viewing experience is really mixed with good and bad.

"Vanity Fair", 95 points, "unexpectedly," Star Trek "has become a fierce beast in the primitive jungle of Hollywood. The magnificent picture presents an epic sense, while the delicate emotion awakens resonance. The seemingly light and simple shackle narrative has caused a lot of reflection. Although I know it's a clich é, but... Langley hall is still the core of the whole movie, his performance lights up the big screen again

"New York Post", 90 points, "like all the successful sci-fi movies in the past, Christopher Nolan used powerful image language and visual effects to create a space adventure, and finally reflected all the images on human beings, and looked at himself through sci-fi. Although Nolan's discussion topic is a little narrow this time, the depth and complexity are surprising, which is more sincere than any previous works. "

"Complete movie", eighty-eight points, "although the movie make complaints about the length of time, and third parts are completely reduced to soap operas. But it still can't hide the fact that "Star Trek" is a space opera. It deserves all forms of praise. It really touches the inner softness and deep thinking of the soul through images. It's about human nature and time. The most interesting thing is about the fetters and loneliness between individuals and families.

The film's brilliance and brilliance make people think again: should we take all the directors and producers of science fiction films to a screening hall, and then collectively watch the split shot of Stanley Kubrick - it's a manuscript light years ago, but it's still the top one in the industry. Nolan has only learned half of his skills, He has already offered the best science fiction film of the new century. "

"Independent Telegraph", 83 points, "full of wisdom and surprise." "Star Trek" is just the kind of work that Hollywood industry needs most urgently. No matter how much critics hate soap operas and sensational parts, it is undeniable that it has found a balance between business and art. Nolan has transformed the mysterious space into a playground for children, But every picture of visual effects and sound effects can arouse the audience's thinking. At least, it encourages you to think about time, family, loneliness and yourself. "