What Single Scene Killed an Otherwise Great Movie?

[Erttheking]

Any movie that does the "It's all really God's plan, and this convoluted series of terrible and horrible things happening to the protagonist, are really God's plan, and he's having these things happen to you because he loves you." Perfect example of this is Signs, by Shamalyan. Thank you oh all loving and caring god, for horribly murdering my wife, and having me witness her gasping breaths as she dies cut in half, so you can send me a cryptic warning about events that happen over a year from now. Instead of just, you know, fucking telling me directly. No, instead you kill my wife, thanks a lot, oh loving god, I now truly believe in your loving grace, and will rededicate myself to your service, so that you can murder other people's wives to send them cryptic messages.

It gets even worse when you consider A. Half of the message didn't really get through as the husband didn't understand the part about water and he had to see it happen in person to figure it out, so that was pointless, and B. the bit of advice that did get through was "Hit the attacker with a blunt instrument." Call me crazy, I THINK he could've figured that out on his own! And finally C. The point of this was to restore the husband's faith...which was only in question BECAUSE HIS WIFE DIED! Let's come up with something that makes more sense. God got drunk and killed the wife by accident and this is his way of covering up his oopsie. (Also if God exists in a world where aliens are a thing, does he not want his word to be spread to them? Or is he the God Emperor of mankind and thinks that xeno filth should be destroyed?)

OT: I can't say I have that many scenes that do this for me. Either I really like a movie or I really don't, there's not usually something that makes me go from liking it to hating it. Erm...the shrunken head in Prisoner of Azkaban was a really weird addition that didn't add much and made the Night Bus scene really weird.

Oh wait, I got one. The last ten minutes of the Departed were a real punch to the dick. Not that I can't handle bad endings, but I prefer bad endings that go for something with a little more to it than "Rocks Fall, Everyone Dies."

 

[happyninja42]

Definitely both of these. Losing someone you loved will make you want to believe in god MORE (so you can believe they are in heaven) not 'give up' on god! I think it's related to the belief that atheists secretly believe in god and just pretend because they... hate him... or something?

That's the most common reason I've heard from theists about us atheists yes. That's certainly what they've been taught is why we don't believe in a god.

Related thing I hate is when atheists are depicted as being hateful or nihilistic just because they don't believe in god. If a character is meant to not be liked they will usually include it somehow usually with some stilted dialog like: 'God Bless' - 'Pfft, God doesn't exist!' Then they either find god and repent their sinful ways or they are the among the first ones killed off to get their comeuppance.

Oh yeah, I totally forgot about this one. There is a decent sword fighting tv show "Into the Badlands", and they use this to establish the bad guy as a bad guy. It's literally the first thing he says to the audience, that the "foolish" people before the apocalypse used to believe in a god. And he of course says it with disdain and scorn. So yeah, he's obviously the bad guy becuase he doesn't believe!!

So, 98% of movies are out?

Because those are, like, everywhere.

I wouldn't say 98% of them, but yeah they're pretty ubiquitous. xD It's one reason I don't watch too many movies as a general rule. Because they use story elements that annoy me fairly often.

It gets even worse when you consider A. Half of the message didn't really get through as the husband didn't understand the part about water and he had to see it happen in person to figure it out, so that was pointless, and B. the bit of advice that did get through was "Hit the attacker with a blunt instrument." Call me crazy, I THINK he could've figured that out on his own! And finally C. The point of this was to restore the husband's faith...which was only in question BECAUSE HIS WIFE DIED! Let's come up with something that makes more sense. God got drunk and killed the wife by accident and this is his way of covering up his oopsie. (Also if God exists in a world where aliens are a thing, does he not want his word to be spread to them? Or is he the God Emperor of mankind and thinks that xeno filth should be destroyed?)

Yeah pretty much my thoughts too. If you actually look at what they're presenting, it's a pretty horrific premise. But nobody notices that part, and just smile at the end when the person "finds their faith", and they're like "Oh what a lovely story!". And I just want to look over at them, horrified.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

I'm having a hell of a time thinking of a GREAT movie that was RUINED by a single bad scene. I can think of great movies with bad scenes, but they weren't ruined. I can think of bad movies with a LOT of bad scenes, ruined by all of them in succession. But I'll be damned if I can think of a movie where I was loving it right up until one scene blew it all out of the water.

I guess if I HAD to pick something...and this almost feels like a cheat...it'd be the inserted Jabba the Hutt scene in the revised edition of A New Hope. It comes early in the film and it is EXCEPTIONALLY bad. I could see a newcomer to the series choosing to completely abandon it as stupid camp for small children.

 

[Something Amyss]

The point of this was to restore the husband's faith...which was only in question BECAUSE HIS WIFE DIED!

And that's my complaint about the movie in a nutshell. The message I took away from it was more "God's a dick" than "God works in mysterious ways."

Oh, and yeah. He restores the faith of one man by creating an alien invasion that causes fear, mayhem and death. After torturing a family for years.

 

[Fappy]

I'm having a hell of a time thinking of a GREAT movie that was RUINED by a single bad scene. I can think of great movies with bad scenes, but they weren't ruined. I can think of bad movies with a LOT of bad scenes, ruined by all of them in succession. But I'll be damned if I can think of a movie where I was loving it right up until one scene blew it all out of the water.

I guess if I HAD to pick something...and this almost feels like a cheat...it'd be the inserted Jabba the Hutt scene in the revised edition of A New Hope. It comes early in the film and it is EXCEPTIONALLY bad. I could see a newcomer to the series choosing to completely abandon it as stupid camp for small children.

People always bring up Episode IV when complaining about the Special Edition movies, but the singing alien scene in Episode VI is the worse scene in all the movies period. It comes out of nowhere/super jarring, doesn't fit at all with the original scene it is overlapping and completely detracts from the actual relevant action in the scene. Plus, the song is just fucking awful. Makes me want to blow my brains out. The fuck was Lucas smoking?

 

[happyninja42]

Oh! I just thought of one!

The finale of Here Comes the Boom:

Spoiler

The underdog of course beats the world champion at MMA fighting, and saves the day. This is such a cliche ending, and honestly totally against the premise of the story. The whole movie, he's doing MMA as a means to an end. He didn't care about winning. The amount of money he got for just showing up to fight, was enough to pay for the kids to keep their school programs. He even had fun with it, amping up his showmanship and then just giving a good showing in the fight. But even when he lost, he'd still happily walk away with several hundred, if not a few thousand dollars, each fight. Steadily reaching his cash goal. But then at the end, he has to win, because someone stole the money. And of course he does. I would've LOVED it instead, if he had fought, and lost. And then had the champion show up a day later, giving him the prize money as a donation to the school's budget. When asked why, he could say "Hey, it's a tax writeoff, and besides, I heard why you were doing this, and wanted to help. Besides, the good PR I'll get for doing this will net me so much cash in endorsements, that I will be swimming in money!" *cunning grin and pat guy on the arm* "Good luck teach! Cya around! You've got a good right hook!" *walks out as the kids cheer, showing that you don't have to win to be victorious* But instead, I got a run of the mill Underdog Saves the Day story, which made me go from really enjoying this movie, to just, "meh".

 

[BloatedGuppy]

People always bring up Episode IV when complaining about the Special Edition movies, but the singing alien scene in Episode VI is the worse scene in all the movies period. It comes out of nowhere/super jarring, doesn't fit at all with the original scene it is overlapping and completely detracts from the actual relevant action in the scene. Plus, the song is just fucking awful. Makes me want to blow my brains out. The fuck was Lucas smoking?

Come now. Lucas's special edition changes, and the prequel films, are fine movies. They demonstrate a surfeit of imagination and directorial whimsy. Look at all the new aliens, and new planets. I bet you hadn't seen aliens and planets like that before. That is the heart of successful film making. New aliens and planets, and cool-ass light saber fights with amazing twirling.

It's become "cool" and "hip" to trash these films and the great man Lucas, because that's what hater kids do these days. Don't buy into that. Don't be a hater kid. Lucas is a visionary, and the singing scene elevated an otherwise conservative film into something the whole family could enjoy.

 

[DefunctTheory]

I wouldn't call it a great movie, but... Insterstellar.

The movie had a lot of problems... the pacing was weird, some of the dialog seems a bit 'too perfect,' and despite being on the harder side of sci-fi, some of the math was wonky. But I was liking it anyway. I was sucked in, immersed, and loving it.

Right up until the movie sits us all down to have a nice chat about how love, a chemical reaction that occurs only in high-functioning brains, is a force of nature on the same level as gravity, electromagnetism, and strong/weak nuclear forces. About 10 seconds into that one lady's speech, I was completely removed from the movie, looking around the theater to see if anyone else was as thrown off as me. It turned what was a functional space romp into a stupid, nonsensical love story, and to make matters worse, it's probably one of the worst made speeches in movie history - It's 100% babble.

And it's made even worse because while 'love is elemental' does inform the ending of the movie, it didn't have to. There's about 5 minor changes you could make to that movie to cut out the forced romantic crap.

Any movie that does the classic "Hollywood Atheist", where they don't believe in god becuase someone they loved died, and thus there can't be a loving god. Um, no, sorry, that's not why we don't believe in the myriad invisible sky father's that religion say exist. In fact, I don't know a single person who doesn't believe in god, due to a tragedy. And I've seen discussions of it online of other people equally saying they've never met any atheist that thinks that way. From people who are waaaay more active in the atheist community than me. But it's the only kind you ever see in movies.

I'll probably sounds a bit like a Reddit Atheist, but I think this is largely because

a) America is, largely, theistic
b) If the people making movies with atheist in them really understood atheism, they'd not mention it at all, because they'd know atheism doesn't really affect people on a daily basis (At least not directly)
c) Pretty much the only way to make a 2 hour film, and construct some sort of conflict that can be overcome (Conversion) or punished (Death), is to strawman the shit out of people.

 

[Fappy]

People always bring up Episode IV when complaining about the Special Edition movies, but the singing alien scene in Episode VI is the worse scene in all the movies period. It comes out of nowhere/super jarring, doesn't fit at all with the original scene it is overlapping and completely detracts from the actual relevant action in the scene. Plus, the song is just fucking awful. Makes me want to blow my brains out. The fuck was Lucas smoking?

Come now. Lucas's special edition changes, and the prequel films, are fine movies. They demonstrate a surfeit of imagination and directorial whimsy. Look at all the new aliens, and new planets. I bet you hadn't seen aliens and planets like that before. That is the heart of successful film making. New aliens and planets, and cool-ass light saber fights with amazing twirling.

It's become "cool" and "hip" to trash these films and the great man Lucas, because that's what hater kids do these days. Don't buy into that. Don't be a hater kid. Lucas is a visionary, and the singing scene elevated an otherwise conservative film into something the whole family could enjoy.

You're right, I am just filled with hate. I must let go.

You were right. You were right about me. Tell your sister, you were right.

 

[Neurotic Void Melody]

Weird, out of place sexual scenes. Most notably in The Repo Men with Jude Law and Forest Whitaker where, near the end, Jude's character and the lady who has a wealth of organs to scan in the underground (or equally hard to get to place) self-service checkout, upon locking themselves in, begin to sensually cut themselves open to what can best be described as beat-laden porn music as the whole scene unravels in an unmistakably bad attempt at some erotic direction. It continued this for the best part of ten minutes while i looked on in morbid fascination. It really did not fit with any of the film before that scene and felt like some cat had sat on the TV remote, changing the channel mid-watch. I wish i could unsee that peculiar moment.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Right up until the movie sits us all down to have a nice chat about how love, a chemical reaction that occurs only in high-functioning brains, is a force of nature on the same level as gravity, electromagnetism, and strong/weak nuclear forces. About 10 seconds into that one lady's speech, I was completely removed from the movie, looking around the theater to see if anyone else was as thrown off as me. It turned what was a functional space romp into a stupid, nonsensical love story, and to make matters worse, it's probably one of the worst made speeches in movie history - It's 100% babble.

That never happened damn it!

Brand simply speculates about love having power, which makes sense since she's emotionally distraught and desperate to return to the man she's in love with. When Cooper communicates with his daughter he's using gravity, not "love". "Love" as an element only informs both his determination not to fail, and Murph's willingness to believe/stubborn insistence that her father wouldn't have given up on her.

If you want to see a movie ACTUALLY using love as an elemental power, watch The Fifth Element.

You were right. You were right about me. Tell your sister, you were right.

You can tell her yourself, when I hump you out of this jungle so we can start a shrimping company together.

 

[DefunctTheory]

Right up until the movie sits us all down to have a nice chat about how love, a chemical reaction that occurs only in high-functioning brains, is a force of nature on the same level as gravity, electromagnetism, and strong/weak nuclear forces. About 10 seconds into that one lady's speech, I was completely removed from the movie, looking around the theater to see if anyone else was as thrown off as me. It turned what was a functional space romp into a stupid, nonsensical love story, and to make matters worse, it's probably one of the worst made speeches in movie history - It's 100% babble.

That never happened damn it!

Brand simply speculates about love having power, which makes sense since she's emotionally distraught and desperate to return to the man she's in love with. When Cooper communicates with his daughter he's using gravity, not "love". "Love" as an element only informs both his determination not to fail, and Murph's willingness to believe/stubborn insistence that her father wouldn't have given up on her.

If you want to see a movie ACTUALLY using love as an elemental power, watch The Fifth Element.

Love is a trans dimensional force. She claims its a force of nature they just can't measure.

It. Is. Absurd.

 

[Something Amyss]

You're right, I am just filled with hate. I must let go.

You were right. You were right about me. Tell your sister, you were right.

*walks in with torch* Hey Guppy, I hear you need to get rid of a body....

...what, this? I just had it lying around...in case....

>.>

Weird, out of place sexual scenes.

I enjoy both Highlander movies and the series, but the number of times they pull the "I am (Given Name) MacLeod. I am immortal" and it cuts to sex scene is kind of amusing.

 

[happyninja42]

The fuck was Lucas smoking?

Rolled up stacks of hundred dollar bills from all that Star Wars merch money. xD

Any movie that does the classic "Hollywood Atheist", where they don't believe in god becuase someone they loved died, and thus there can't be a loving god. Um, no, sorry, that's not why we don't believe in the myriad invisible sky father's that religion say exist. In fact, I don't know a single person who doesn't believe in god, due to a tragedy. And I've seen discussions of it online of other people equally saying they've never met any atheist that thinks that way. From people who are waaaay more active in the atheist community than me. But it's the only kind you ever see in movies.

I'll probably sounds a bit like a Reddit Atheist, but I think this is largely because

a) America is, largely, theistic
b) If the people making movies with atheist in them really understood atheism, they'd not mention it at all, because they'd know atheism doesn't really affect people on a daily basis (At least not directly)
c) Pretty much the only way to make a 2 hour film, and construct some sort of conflict that can be overcome (Conversion) or punished (Death), is to strawman the shit out of people.

Oh I never said I didn't know why Hollywood does it, I just stated it's a trope that annoys me in movies. I'm fully aware of the rationale of the religious on why atheists are the way we are, even when that's just simply not correct, I've lived my whole life in the American South, so, yeah, it's something I see everyday. But it's just highly annoying to me in a movie. And if you structure that plot device as the base element of your story (like Signs did), then I'm going to be baseline annoyed with your entire movie, because I know that at the climax/resolution, the movie is going to prop up that bullshit premise to make everything make sense. And it makes me want to yell at the screen. As to your part C, I would disagree that you have to strawman the shit out of things, simply due to time constraints. It's pretty easy to write a story that doesn't even bring up those subjects, if they're not relevant to the story. But of course, it's easier to just write out a cliched script with typical story elements, than to try and do something more original and engaging.

Weird, out of place sexual scenes.

I enjoy both Highlander movies and the series, but the number of times they pull the "I am (Given Name) MacLeod. I am immortal" and it cuts to sex scene is kind of amusing.

Oh god yeah, hah! I forgot about those. I could kind of buy it in the first movie, as it culminated after days of research on the woman's part, to uncover his secret. Highlander: The Quickening though. *stabs self in stomach* "Hey babe! I'm immortal yo! Let's bang!" "Ok!" *jumps bones* So lame. xD

I forget how it happened in the third movie, (which wasn't that bad as I recall. Wasn't great, but it was enjoyable the one time I saw it), but I'm guessing it was similar to the first movie?

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Love is a trans dimensional force. She claims its a force of nature they just can't measure.

It. Is. Absurd.

Oh good, I'm glad you linked that, because I went looking for it to make sure I wasn't mis-remembering it, and it made me even more resolute in my position than I was before.

I'll note before I begin that you're welcome to your opinion, so don't take this as me saying "you're wrong" or anything. But you're totally wrong, and I'll tell you why! =D

Brand is being philosophical. She is speculating about the nature of love and the force/pull it exerts, much like gravity. It's something you cannot see or perceive, yet feel and are compelled by. Note that is is not asserting that they are scientifically comparable, she's prefacing every statement with "maybe". She is speculating. She's also making a wild, emotional bid for a particular course of action, and being completely honest about her reasons why.

When we condemn scenes like this, or ***** about how "scientifically nonsensical" an obviously philosophical statement about the geas-like effect emotions have on organics is, we do two things. One, we establish an atmosphere of impossible pedantry. Everything is slaved to a "science first" perspective. There is literally not a science fiction film MADE that will not begin to fray when faced with this, and if there was it wouldn't be a "film" at all. It would be a two hour documentary about science, free of speculation or unproven hypothesis. It would basically be two hours of men in lab coats performing experiments and carefully checking results.

Two, we betray a complete lack of understanding about why films are made, or what they are even FOR. Films are just stories writ visually, and stories are essentially the life blood of human imagination. As Kearney said...

Telling stories is as basic to human beings as eating. More so, in fact, for while food makes us live, stories are what make our lives worth living.

They're the evolution of the oral history that shaped all our dreams and fears and aspirations. It's why some stories, like the Monomyth, have an unmistakable power, and come up time and time again in different forms. In GOOD science fiction, the science exists in service to the story, not the other way around. Interstellar is a science fiction film, yes, but it is primarily and foremost a film about human ingenuity and resilience, powered by emotion. That's a powerful story. "The science checked out" is not a powerful story. A story that was scientifically accurate in 1899 wouldn't be terribly interesting to a person in 2016. A story about human emotions literally NEVER AGES.

I honestly do not understand why people who complain about this stuff even watch films. Which is not to say they're not allowed, it's to express legitimate confusion at what they're looking for. I'm stroppy because the same issue came up during discussions of Star Wars, with bickering about "Force Power Levels" and other ridiculously idiotic minutiae. Similar issues arose with Bioshock Infinite and bleating claims of "That's not how multi-verse theory works". Over and over again there's this press to have stories slaved to science, or to game rules, or to plot machinations. The most important thing appears to be that everything is properly codified and obeys particular rules of structure. If that means the story is rubbish, so be it, but it's very important this Jedi not go past Force Power 5 for this scene, or that woman not be talking about "love" instead of bacteria or something because this is a science movie and we only do science here.

I imagine a guy writing the Bible a few thousand years ago or however long it was, and his friend being PFFT, you can't just turn someone into a fucking pillar of salt, Peter, that's not how it works. Your deity is a Mary Sue. No one is going to enjoy this. Go read Raoul's Treatise on Camels instead, it's way more grounded.

 

[DefunctTheory]

Spoiler

Love is a trans dimensional force. She claims its a force of nature they just can't measure.

It. Is. Absurd.

Oh good, I'm glad you linked that, because I went looking for it to make sure I wasn't mis-remembering it, and it made me even more resolute in my position than I was before.

I'll note before I begin that you're welcome to your opinion, so don't take this as me saying "you're wrong" or anything. But you're totally wrong, and I'll tell you why! =D

Brand is being philosophical. She is speculating about the nature of love and the force/pull it exerts, much like gravity. It's something you cannot see or perceive, yet feel and are compelled by. Note that is is not asserting that they are scientifically comparable, she's prefacing every statement with "maybe". She is speculating. She's also making a wild, emotional bid for a particular course of action, and being completely honest about her reasons why.

When we condemn scenes like this, or ***** about how "scientifically nonsensical" an obviously philosophical statement about the geas-like effect emotions have on organics is, we do two things. One, we establish an atmosphere of impossible pedantry. Everything is slaved to a "science first" perspective. There is literally not a science fiction film MADE that will not begin to fray when faced with this, and if there was it wouldn't be a "film" at all. It would be a two hour documentary about science, free of speculation or unproven hypothesis. It would basically be two hours of men in lab coats performing experiments and carefully checking results.

Two, we betray a complete lack of understanding about why films are made, or what they are even FOR. Films are just stories writ visually, and stories are essentially the life blood of human imagination. As Kearney said...

Telling stories is as basic to human beings as eating. More so, in fact, for while food makes us live, stories are what make our lives worth living.

They're the evolution of the oral history that shaped all our dreams and fears and aspirations. It's why some stories, like the Monomyth, have an unmistakable power, and come up time and time again in different forms. In GOOD science fiction, the science exists in service to the story, not the other way around. Interstellar is a science fiction film, yes, but it is primarily and foremost a film about human ingenuity and resilience, powered by emotion. That's a powerful story. "The science checked out" is not a powerful story. A story that was scientifically accurate in 1899 wouldn't be terribly interesting to a person in 2016. A story about human emotions literally NEVER AGES.

I honestly do not understand why people who complain about this stuff even watch films. Which is not to say they're not allowed, it's to express legitimate confusion at what they're looking for. I'm stroppy because the same issue came up during discussions of Star Wars, with bickering about "Force Power Levels" and other ridiculously idiotic minutiae. Similar issues arose with Bioshock Infinite and bleating claims of "That's not how multi-verse theory works". Over and over again there's this press to have stories slaved to science, or to game rules, or to plot machinations. The most important thing appears to be that everything is properly codified and obeys particular rules of structure. If that means the story is rubbish, so be it, but it's very important this Jedi not go past Force Power 5 for this scene, or that woman not be talking about "love" instead of bacteria or something because this is a science movie and we only do science here.

I imagine a guy writing the Bible a few thousand years ago or however long it was, and his friend being PFFT, you can't just turn someone into a fucking pillar of salt, Peter, that's not how it works. Your deity is a Mary Sue. No one is going to enjoy this. Go read Raoul's Treatise on Camels instead, it's way more grounded.

Except she's not being philosophical. The entire scene (Which I can't be bothered to link right now) makes it clear - She really thinks she's being called to her dead boyfriend by the universe. She really thinks love transcends dimensions. And the movie makes it clear that's exactly what happens. Cooper is pulled into another dimension to exploit this - While gravity is how he talks to his daughter, its clear that his love somehow allows him to find her, guiding him through a dimension where all time is compressed to a single 'moment.' Brand finds the planet love has driven her to is livable. Brand makes a claim that love is a force of nature (Again, not philosophical), and the end of the movie bends over backwards to prove she's right.

As for 'why would you watch a movie if you don't like this...' love and emotions are fine thematically devices. But it doesn't mean it fits in everywhere. Ridley doesn't escape from the Nostromo because the love for her daughter and her cat guides her to the escape ship. Interstellar's usage of love is bizarre and jarring because it goes from 'loose but generally realistic sci fi film where love is a motivation' to 'love isn't just a motivation, it's a god damn universal fact that can be exploited by physics we'll understand one day' in about a 2 minute time span.

 

[Frostbyte666]

Oh god yeah, hah! I forgot about those. I could kind of buy it in the first movie, as it culminated after days of research on the woman's part, to uncover his secret. Highlander: The Quickening though. *stabs self in stomach* "Hey babe! I'm immortal yo! Let's bang!" "Ok!" *jumps bones* So lame. xD

I forget how it happened in the third movie, (which wasn't that bad as I recall. Wasn't great, but it was enjoyable the one time I saw it), but I'm guessing it was similar to the first movie?

Hssss - Don't speak of the 2nd and 4th movies. The 2nd where immortals are actually aliens and the 4th where the quickening is reduced to power levels based on the number of heads taken...instead of you know, skill, with a sword...

 

[thebobmaster_v1legacy]

It wasn't necessarily a great movie, and there were several moments that weakened the movie before this, but the point where I just threw up my hands and said "nope" was in The Hobbit: Battle of Five Armies. It was the scene where Legolas was fighting an orc on a stone bridge, and the stone bridge collapsed. What does Legolas do?

HE HOPS UP THE STONES AS THEY ARE FALLING TO GET BACK UP TO WHAT'S LEFT OF THE BRIDGE! Not only is that an idea that has worked in serious live-action approximately never, the effects for it looked quite dodgy, which is only worse when the movie has had amazing effects up to then.

 

[Thyunda]

The ending of Now You See Me was a pretty low point in an otherwise enjoyable film, but I'll spoiler-tag it because it's pretty much the twist.

Spoiler

Basically, the bad guys win. I know they're not meant to be bad guys - they're supposed to be Robin Hood style super-criminals by this stage, but the fact is, they're the bad guys. Just in case there's any doubt, the film straight up and tells you that the reason they bankrupted a safe company was because the Chessmaster's father locked himself in one of their safes and had himself thrown into the ocean so he could escape, but apparently this safe company cut corners on manufacturing. The safe warped, the magician couldn't escape, and so he died. So his son arranges for a bunch of famous magicians to rob everything the safe company owned - all 'cause his dad wasn't using their safes for their intended purpose.

Anyway, that's not the big problem for me. The Chessmaster's identity is. The FBI agent entrusted with the investigation and capture of the rogue magicians is actually the Chessmaster. All of the conflict in the film? Nah. Staged. Sure, the magicians didn't know he was the one giving them their orders, but in hindsight it makes every chase scene or tense interrogation pointless. Yes, it was impressive that Jesse Eisenberg handcuffed Mark Ruffalo to a table. It's less impressive knowing that Ruffalo's character was basically playing along. It also makes the Interpol cop thoroughly pointless - why make this big deal out of the FBI agent's cynicism and refusal to believe in magic if he was an actual fucking wizard all along? Why was she there to persuade him to have faith in what he couldn't explain? There wasn't even a gratuitous sex scene to cynically explain it. She was a pretty good character who clearly served a role in whatever the film was before somebody decided to make the least-fitting character into the big twist.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Except she's not being philosophical. The entire scene (Which I can't be bothered to link right now) makes it clear - She really thinks she's being called to her dead boyfriend by the universe. She really thinks love transcends dimensions.

AccursedTheory, I am surprised at you. This is fundamentally untrue, and actually dis-proven by the youtube video you have JUST helpfully provided for us. She's rambling, and even in her rambling prefacing everything with "maybe". When she's eventually over-ruled, she goes along with it. She doesn't turn into a true believer, gibbling about "Love" at every opportunity. She proffers a fuzzy theory in a wild defense of a preferred course of action, because she's a human being operating under tremendous emotional stress.

And the movie makes it clear that's exactly what happens.

It does no such thing!

Cooper is pulled into another dimension to exploit this - While gravity is how he talks to his daughter, its clear that his love somehow allows him to find her, guiding him through a dimension where all time is compressed to a single 'moment.'

How is that clear? The entire tesseract sequence is anything but clear, and it's actually one of the science bits that checks out. It was overseen by a physicist. You know which part he hated? The planet with the ice clouds. He says there was too much artistic license taken there. Tesseract scene? He's FINE WITH IT. It was his favorite sequence.

As for 'why would you watch a movie if you don't like this...' love and emotions are fan thematically devices. But it doesn't mean it fits in everywhere. Ridley doesn't escape from the Nostromo because the love for her daughter and her cat guides her to the escape ship. Interstellar's usage of love is bizarre and jarring because it goes from 'loose but generally realistic sci fi film where love is a motivation' to 'love isn't just a motivation, it's a god damn universal fact that can be exploited by physics we'll understand one day' in about a 2 minute time span.

Well, it primarily appears to be "bizarre and jarring" because a portion of the audience had absolutely no idea how to read a theme. A character said "love" at one point and pocket protectors were flying everywhere in apoplectic rage.