The dilemma at the center of Interstellar is that Cooper has to leave to save humanity without any indication of when he will return. The time dilation gimmick means that Cooper may never see his children again, and he is haunted throughout by the promise he made to Murph to return one day, something he remains dead set on doing. The movie's trailers sell the film on a line from Brand to Cooper, that "You might have to choose between seeing your children again and saving the human race", but really, is this much of a choice at all? It would suck to never see your family again, but when the entirety of humanity is at stake, is there really any dilemma to speak of? Surely most people would agree that it's worth never seeing your family again to keep humanity going? Though it may well be commenting on the fact that people don't tend to care much about things that happen outside of their own lifespans, it paints scientists and engineers as uncharacteristically emotional, overwrought people (combined with Brand's aforementioned weakness), when they're much more likely to be level-headed and appreciate the utilitarian value of saving humanity. Your average person might not, but then Cooper is not an average person: he is a smart man, a pilot and an engineer, and in reality, this probably wouldn't be a decision he would agonise over, even if it would hurt to never see his kids again. Basically, Nolan vastly oversells something that isn't much of a dilemma in the first place, just as he did in The Dark Knight (the civilians would have blown the prisoner ship sky high in an instant) and Inception (when Cobb could just fly the kids to another country, where are the stakes?).
Stay at home dad who spends as much time teaching his kids the merits of Martin Scorsese as possible (against the missus' wishes).
General video game, TV and film nut. Occasional sports fan. Full time loon.
