Consider Nolan's previous statement: "I don't agree with the idea that you can only achieve clarity through dialogue." Which would be more believable if Chris and his screenwriting partner (and brother) Jonathan hadn't made Interstellar so heavily wordy. Instead of telling the story visually a la Stanley Kubrick's 2001, Nolan relies on expository dialogue to spell out EVERYTHING in Interstellar - including the complexities of space-time and interstellar travel - rather than simply trusting the audience will go along for the ride minus any lecturing. It means the film can be a crushing bore, especially in the moments that the characters talk hard science with all the throwaway attitude of discussing what's for dinner later. The problem is that space travel and quantum physics are not subjects so easily spelled out in layman's terms. Nolan has rightly been praised for treating his blockbuster audience like grown-ups (Inception is virtually unparalleled in how it engages as popcorn entertainment as well as intellectually stimulating cinema), but in Interstellar there's the feeling he's having to talk down to us to get his and theoretical physicist/executive producer Kip Thorne's message across. There's no "clarity", just unintended obfuscation.
Lover of film, writer of words, pretentious beyond belief. Thinks Scorsese and Kubrick are the kings of cinema, but PT Anderson and David Fincher are the dashing young princes. Follow Brogan on twitter if you can take shameless self-promotion: @BroganMorris1
